The Samaritan Woman & (the older article) The "Samaritan" Leper (Updated)

By on

[Note: These two articles have been refined and expanded and are available in a 46-page booklet for 4.50 + P&H.]


The Samaritan Woman

John 4

3He [Christ] left Judaea, and departed again into Galilee.

4And He must needs go through Samaria.

5Then cometh He to a city of Samaria, which is called Sychar, near to the parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph.

There is no letter ‘y’ in the Greek alphabet.  Why the translators transliterate any Greek words with a "y" is a mystery.  Whenever a ‘y’ is seen in a Greek name in the English translation of the New Testament, it should be a ‘u’.  The capital upsilon (letter u) in Greek looks like the letter “Y”.  However, scholars and translators knew it was not a “y”, but a “u”, so that does not explain their multitudinous blunders in every name (whether of person or geographic location).  This Suchar (soo-khar) is of Hebrew origin (Shekar [shey-kawr]) and means “intoxicant, strong drink” or possibly “falsehood”.  That parcel of ground that Jacob gave to Joseph was Shechem (Josh. 24:32).  Suchar and Shechem were part of the same settlement, though a short distance apart, and the well was about a mile from Suchar.

6Now Jacob’s well was there.  Jesus therefore, being wearied with His journey, sat thus on the well: and it was about the sixth hour.

The sixth hour of the daylight portion of the 24-hour period of day (which begins at sundown), which daylight portion would begin at sunrise, and thus the 6th-hour would be roughly noon.

7There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water: Jesus saith unto her, "Give Me to drink".

Notice that Scripture does not say that she was an alien.  She is called “a woman of Samaria”.  Similarly, the “woman of Canaan” (Matthew 15:21) is more-specifically revealed to be “a Greek a Surophenician by nation” in a parallel account (Mark 7:26).  The original Greeks (not the eventually Turkized people living in Greece, and not the modern inhabitants) were descendants of the Israelites (and the Romans were descended from the original Greeks).

8(For His disciples were gone away unto the city to buy meat.)

Meat does not mean animal flesh specifically, though of course it can include it.  “Victuals”, “nourishment”, “food” or even “meal” would be a better translation than meat.

9Then saith the woman of Samaria unto Him, “How is it that Thou, being a Judean, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Judeans have no dealings with the Samaritans.”

Again, she is referred to as a “woman of Samaria” and calls herself “a woman of Samaria”.  She is not referred to as, neither does she call herself an alien or a nonIsraelite.  No Hebrew or Greek word for “alien” has any racial connotation at all.  They are all generic words that can be used by any group concerning any other group that is not specifically the same as they are.  They can refer to aliens of a different race, or they can refer to kinsmen who have become estranged or who were raised in foreign lands, even speaking another language.  Christ specifically later informs His disciples (in the First Great Commission, there in the Land of Israel, under His physical supervision) “5...Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 6But go rather to the lost sheep of the House of Israel” (Matthew 10).  The Second Great Commission did not change the "target", only the scope (the lost sheep of the House of Israel worldwide, not merely "locally").  However, this is not to say that all persons living in Samaria were nonIsraelites.  It is sort of like considering Miami or Los Angeles or any major U.S. city that has been overrun with aliens.  Few white people are left, and those who still live there are usually ultra-liberal (or those who are poorer or whose property values plummeted before the realized they needed to sell, and thus the only way they could leave would be to abandon their property, and then they would have no resources with which to buy a house somewhere among their own people).  Their faith is usually corrupt, because had they true faith it would demonstrate itself in obedience in “coming out” and being “separate” as God commanded (which is part of the faith of Abraham).  While some may still be pure and have pure faith, it remains for them to “come out” if they want to be received by God.  Thus it was with any Israelites living in Samaria.  If they wanted opportunity to hear the truth, they had to “come out”.

10Jesus answered and said unto her, "If thou knewest the Gift of God, and Who it is that saith to thee, ‘Give Me to drink’; thou wouldest have asked of Him, and He would have given thee Living Water".

Here is even greater evidence.  Christ poses this question as a means of eliciting the woman’s response to then request that Living Water.  Christ, in other words, directed the woman, “Ask Me for Living Water (Eternal Life) and I will give it to you.”  How is this "evidence" that this woman was an Israelite, most probably descended from the residue of Manasseh...?  Christ is not a liar.  He is the Truth.  Christ emphatically declared, “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel.”  Clearly this woman and her kin were of those sheep or Christ would not have so directed her (knowing that she would ask, and knowing that she would go and gather her kindred and bring the to Him).  If you remember, when the Remnant of Judah returned from captivity in Babylon to Jerusalem under Zerrubbabel with the High Priest Joshua and other elders, the local mixed-blooded peoples (Ammonites and others), wanting to corrupt the Israelites from within, claimed that they wanted to help build the Temple.  These superstitious peoples had even sent to Babylon / Persia and asked for someone to come and teach them the manner of the God of land, because God had sent lions among them to devour them.  They did not forsake their other gods, but had put the God of Israel into their shrine as One of the many panoply of their gods.  However, at the request of these mixed peoples to help rebuild the Temple to Yahweh, the elders sterlingly declared without apology, “Ye have nothing to do with us to build an House unto our God; but we ourselves together will build unto the LORD God of Israel” (Ezra 4:3). 

11The woman saith unto Him, “Sir, Thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast Thou that living water?

12Art Thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle?”

Here is evidence that many of the people in this town of Samaria were Israelites.  Christ does not challenge her claim.  Jacob gave the well to his children (not to aliens or illegitimate offspring).  Jacob, in fact, had given this specific parcel of land to Joseph (which of course passed to the descendants of Ephraim and Manasseh, after the Exodus and Conquest).  It is very interesting that Shechem (and Suchar) are both in between Mount Ebal and Mount Gerizim (the Mount of Blessing and the Mount of Cursing) upon which the Law was read aloud and even carved, and the tabernacle (and God’s Shekinah Glory that abode over it) was stationed there after the Conquest.  This was in the south of the Territory of Manasseh, right near Ephraim’s northern border.  It was where the bones of Joseph were buried after being brought out of Egypt.  Clearly this woman was not a Samaritan by race.  The whole middle third of the post-exilic Land of Israel was known as “Samaria”.  It received its name from the hill and castle that King Omri of northern Israel built and made his capital, which was called Samaria.  The city of Samaria was about 7 miles northwest of Shechem / Suchar.  Since this woman drew a distinction between herself and her people and the Judeans, it seems likely to me that this woman was of the tribe of Manasseh!  In II Kings 25:12 we are told that Nebuchadnezzar’s general (captain) left the poor of the land around Jerusalem to be vinedressers and farmers (husbandmen).  It is quite likely that the Assyrian kings who conquered Northern Israel did the same thing.  Surely, a “land flowing with milk and honey” would not be let to go to waste.  The olive trees would produce oil, the vineyards raisin cakes and wine, and the fields grain and other crops—the surplus of which all would be shipped to the conquering nation.  She claims that Jacob gave the well to them and she calls Jacob “our father”!  Christ does not correct her and say that what she said was not true.

13Jesus answered and said unto her, "Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again:

14But whosoever drinketh of the Water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into Everlasting Life".

15The woman saith unto Him, “Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw.”

Here we see that Christ’s words produced the desired effect.

16Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither.

Christ now “sets the hook” in this woman, being one of womanfolk of the kind of “men” for whom He trained His disciples to fish.

17The woman answered and said, “I have no husband.”  Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, ‘I have no husband:’

18For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly.

19The woman saith unto Him, “Sir, I perceive that Thou art a prophet.

20Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.”

Again, this is the area in which the Tabernacle was originally set up—centuries before Jerusalem was made the capital, centuries before the split of Israel from Judah.  While some devout Israelites of the Northern Federation may have travelled to Jerusalem for the feasts and for sacrifice, most probably did not (and it is really a simple matter of math and physics and geography, that 13 million Israelites could not all fit into tiny Jerusalem even for a moment, let alone a week-long feast).  While some may have retained the true faith in the north, without travelling to Jerusalem, most apostatized and absorbed the paganism and idolatry of the Canaanites who were not driven out (or who had crept back in) or invented their own hybrid religion.  However, this woman and her family and ancestors seem to be those who retained the purity of their faith, though they did not perfectly understand it (just like most “Christians” today—gone are the days of early America when people actually studied the Bible and knew more than the alleged Christian masses today who know mere “Sunday School stories” perpetually stuck in “Kindergarten Theology”).  She did not refer to the names of "pagan" gods, but in the same breath in which she calls Jacob her father, she refers to her ancestors worshipping God—the true God: the God of Jacob.  Again, these would have been Israelites of the tribe of Manasseh.

21Jesus saith unto her, "Woman, believe Me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father".

“This mountain” would refer to Mount Ebal, at the foot of which was situated the town of Suchar.  Christ is not denying the importance of Jerusalem in the Millennial Kingdom.  However, with Christ, the Perfect Lamb of God, in the soon-coming sacrifice of Himself, and the veil of the Temple being torn opening up the way of the Holy of Holies to all the elect of God’s people, the Levitical Priesthood would still exist, and the Festivals would still be observed, but for salvation the individual would not need to go through a Levitical priest, but directly through Christ Himself.  It seems these Israelites of Samaria offered sacrifices and worship atop Mount Ebal and Mount Gerizim.  Clearly, this was in violation of what God had established.  The bulk of Israelites (north and south) since after the days of Joshua, followed pagan practices of worshipping in certain groves and on the top of mountains (assuming that they were closer to the gods of the heavens on a mountain top) where they offered sacrifices and burnt incense.

22"Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Judeans".

See Romans 9:4,5.  See also my S.T.E.C. on Romans.  Notice here that Christ does not say “I am only sent unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel” as He did to the Greek-Israelite woman of Surophenicia who was asking for her mixed-race daughter to be delivered of a demon.  Christ is not here calling into question the woman’s identity, but rather, He is calling into question her method of worship; even as He called into question the method of worship of the majority of Judeans!  The Judeans were the self-imagined “faithful” son (of Christ's Parable), who claimed to be serving the father, but who gave only lipservice (and did not have the father's interest at heart, nor the welfare of his wayward brother, but only cared about himself); whereas, the elect of the Israelites of the diaspora (the so-called “Gentiles”) were the Prodigal son, whom the Father in His insurpassable Lovingkindness drew in repentance back to Himself.  This likewise is parallelled in Christ’s parable of the man with two sons whom he told to go work in the field.  The one said “I go sir”, but did not (those in Judea who gave lipservice, but whose hearts were far from God); the other said, “I will not”, but later repented and did (and this is also the Prodigal).  As Christ explained of the woman forgiven of many sins: He who has been forgiven much, is able to love much.  Love = obedience / self-sacrifice.  Thus, this "woman of Samaria" knew even less than the Judeans who were currently entrenched in Phariseeism (Talmudic corruption of the true Israel faith).  However, those who  know less have less error to “unlearn”.  As Thomas Jefferson said, “Those who know nothing are closer to the truth than those whose minds are filled with falsehood and error” (which is true, only to a limited degree; but not without validity).  The disciples were later so fervently caught up praying for Peter’s deliverance from prison (before Herod had the chance to execute him) that they were not even prepared for God’s deliverance to recognize it was really Peter who was knocking asking to be let into the house.  Likewise, those Israelites (of Judea and the dispersion) who had remained pure in their faith—were so fervently looking for the Messiah that they did not recognize Him when He actually arrived.  They were caught up in doing their best to obey God; though many were deceived into thinking that obedience itself saved them; which it did not.  Those who were truly imbued with faith made the transition—not abandoning the Law itself, but realizing that Christ, the Perfect Lamb of God, fulfilled in His Sacrifice of Himself the rituals of sacrifice for sin (and no other part of the Law).  Those whose hearts and minds and eyes and ears that God did not open, clung to their humanism (as the vast majority of Christians do today).  Understand also, the other 11 tribes of Israel had conflict with Judah or each other (sibling rivalry) even before the Kingdom split, after David had recovered the nation after his son Absalom’s conspiracy and evil (II Samuel 19:40-20:2).  The Ephraimites, likewise, had an attitude problem against their brethren (Judges 10:9; 11:1-12:7) as did the Benjamites toward the rest of Israel (Judges 19,20,21) and in both cases, sadly, it led to battle and many thousand deaths.  For more details on either event, see my article on Jephthah and his sinful vow ( and my S.T.E.C. on Genesis and Judges.  We also know that in times past, the Israelites of the land of Israel misunderstood an altar that the transjordan Israelites (of Manasseh, Gad, and Reuben) erected and it nearly led to battle.  However, the transjordan Israelites had erected the altar, not to sacrifice upon to false gods, but as a memorial to their brethren in the land of Israel to remind them that even though the tribes transjordan were not within the Land of Israel Proper, the Promised Land, that they were still Israelites their brethren.  This is significant and I discuss it in detail in my S.T.E.C. on Ruth: The Truth About Ruth—Ruth the Israelite.  Much later in history, as I show in S.T.E.C. on Romans and Apologetic Expositions on Acts 13, 15, Galatians, and II Corinthians, the Israelites of the dispersion are the “Gentiles” to whom Christ was preached, and yet (again, like the parable of the Prodigal and the self-imagined “faithful” brother who stayed at home), the Israelites in the land of Israel imagined themselves “more Israelite” than their brethren of the diaspora.  This is a similar dynamic and sibling rivalry to which Christ is referring, which was already evident in David’s day, and then after Rehoboam’s greedy departure from the ways of God which resulted in the split of the nation.  After that point, those Israelites of the Northern Federation, for the most part, wanted nothing to do with Judah.  However, Jerusalem was the place that God had chosen as the center of government and worship, and that was not abrogated.  Those who were devout and zealous in obeying God travelled to Jerusalem for the Feasts and to have sacrifices offered.  Christ then is referring not to the issue of dealing with an "alien", but an alienated kinsman of the House of Israel, and he reveals that although they worshipped the true God, they were greatly ignorant in worshipping God as He commanded.

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".

God is Creator of all men, but He is only the Father of Adam-Israel.  “17‘Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate’, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing [people]; and I will receive you, 18And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall [indeed] be My sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.” (II Corinthians 6)  This of course is quoting (in different words) Isaiah 52:11 and 43:6; which were spoken only to Israel.  See also Jeremiah 31:10.  See also my S.T.E.C. on Jeremiah 31. It is not that they had not been His sons and daughters.  However, having gone astray (as the Prodigal) they had become estranged, and only those true, legitimate sons and daughters who are obedient, are sons and daughters indeed (“in deed”; not merely in word).  See John 15:10 (but understand, obedience to the Law of God / good works do not play any role in salvation, they are the by-product of true regeneration).  This is the difference between the wheat and the chaff, or the sheep and the goats.  The chaff is the dead, unless portion of the wheat; the goats are rebellious (lawless) sheep.  Of course the tares, dogs, and swine are entirely different people.  The Father seeketh such of His children to worship Him, because He chose them before the foundation of the world to be conformed into the Image of Christ.  God told us that there is none good no not one and none even seek after Him.  The only ones who seek after Him are the ones whose ears and eyes and hearts and minds He has opened, whom He draws unto Himself to seek Him.  See Psalm 65:4.

24"God is a Spirit: and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth".

The indefinite article "a" here is not in the Greek text; it was mistakenly added for presumed clarity by the translators.  God is not “a” Spirit—He is Spirit.  Similarly, my saying, “I am human” is entirely different in scope and meaning than my saying, “I am a human”.  Even as God is called the “Father of Lights” (in James 1:17) so also in Hebrews 12:9 He is called the “Father of spirits”.  Even as God is Light, not “a light”; so also He is not “a” spirit, but Spirit.

25The woman saith unto Him, “I know that Messias cometh, which is called ‘Christ’: when He is come, He will tell us all things.”

Here, again, we see that this woman knew the Hebrew Scriptures of Israel!  Not only that, she looked for the Messiah, Christ to come and instruct her!  Here, Christ does not tell her, “it is not proper to give the children’s bread to the dogs”, but rather, He declares and reveals to her—

26Jesus saith unto her, "I that speak unto thee am He".

Those who do not get chills or teary-eyed at reading such declarations don’t have a love for God or the Truth; and to them, all such things are “mere information”.  They merely read through the chapter to fulfill the requirement of their conscience, without truly meditating upon what the words actually mean; to them, they are just words; they read over the words so fast that the words do not have time to penetrate or sink in, but merely roll like water off a duck’s back.  They are not about their Father’s Business (if He is their Father) or even comprehend that He has a business or what it is.  They do not have His Mind and do not comprehend in such passages the import of the meaning of truth and the fulfillment of God’s Promises and the Eve of Deliverance from Judgment and a wicked, filthy, perverted world.  This is not something that can be taught.  One has it or one does not.  If one is truly in love with another, when he sees her photo, his heart melts; when he hears her voice, his heart skips a beat; when he hears her name, his ears perk up and her image flashes before his mind!  [—and when that love is betrayed and abandoned, and left unfulfilled his heart is irreperably and ceaselessly shattered until he is delivered, healed, and restored.]  Those whose hearts are dead don’t respond.  Even at this suggestion, they merely shrug their shoulders and go on, never giving it another thought.  The only solution for those who realize that they don’t respond as they should, is to submit to Christ as LORD (“MASTER”) and realize that they are not their own and that God’s Ways are Perfect, and “29Take My Yoke upon you, and learn of Me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.  30For My Yoke is easy, and My Burden is light.” (Matthew 11).  Most "Christians" (both male and female) are “Christian Feminists” who want to be “Liberated Women Christians” want independence from their Lord/Husband, and thus, their heart is dead because it is wrapped up in self, delusion, and rebellion.  While they may not realize this consciously—and would never confess to it even if they realized it—that is how they act.  By their fruits ye shall know them.

27And upon this came His disciples, and marvelled that He talked with the woman: yet no man said [unto Him], “What seekest Thou [from her]? or, Why talkest Thou with her?”

[Brackets mine added for clarity.]  The disciples knew and obeyed God’s command to “come out” and “be separate”; that is why they marvelled.  Christ ordained and chose men who were pure-hearted, devout, who studied the Scriptures, and who looked for God’s Kingdom (except for the one vessel of wrath, whom He chose for a different purpose; Matthew 18:7).  However, clearly Christ, able to save to the uttermost of His people, deigned to pause here and gather some wayward sheep, to glean some of the wheat that had fallen by the wayside.  Later, when they were passing through another village of Samaritans, and Christ’s disposition was clear to the inhabitants that He was not going to spend time among them, but was just passing through on His way to Jerusalem, treated Him coldly and did not show Him any hospitality.  James and John, in their fiery zeal (and zealous rashness—which may be why they and Peter got along so well: being so much alike) ignorantly asked Christ if they should call down fire from Heaven to devour them, as Elijah had once done in a far-different situation (II Kings 1).  Christ chided them, reigning in their zeal and re-introducing their minds to reality, that they knew not what manner of spirit they were (Luke 9:51-55); and for this, it seems, thereafter, Christ christened (as a humorous reminder) the sons of Zebedee, the brothers James and John, “the sons of thunder” (Mark 3:17).

28The woman then left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith to the men,

“The men”—that is, her menfolk: her kinsmen.  This shows her anxiousness in running to find and tell them that she had found the Messiah! even as Andrew did Peter (1:40,41); even as Philip did his brother Nathanael (1:45-49; and again, shivers and chills and tears should well up just reading this moment of long-awaited revelation; those who don’t are part of the world and don’t understand true life).  She left her waterpot as to not be slowed down by the weight and cumbersomeness of it: her having a single-minded mission of far-greater importance than either the water she had gone to retrieve, or even the value of her waterpot which could have been stolen or broken in her absence.  Those spoiled in our day of luxury and excess and gross, irrational, irresponsible materialism cannot comprehend her abandoning her task and her waterpot.  One would need to try to envision her day and time, or even very early frontier life in America.  Nothing was wasted.  Very little was owned.  Everything was important.  It cost a lot of money to replace every item.  Money was scarce.  Jobs were scarce.  To earn enough money to buy another waterpot (in early America), one might have to spend weeks hunting and trapping and skinning and curing hides and pelts of rabbits or other desirable fur, and then travel several days to sell them, to then be able to buy another waterpot.  Irresponsible people today, without a thought, lose something or break it or even grow tired of it, wanting a “new” one and abandon it or throw it out as indifferently as they would a used tissue.  Also, the woman of Samaria may have been working for an employer (not having merely been casually about town on her own time and business), or she may have been drawing water for her father, brethren, and adulterer.  They may not have been the kindest or most understanding of menfolk.  Thirsty children, siblings, etc., who wanted a drink, or who needed to wash their face, cook, etc., may have been eagerly waiting on that water and would certainly not have been happy with her having come back not only without the water, but without the waterpot!  None of that mattered to her!  She had true faith!  Faith is a gift of God to the elect of His people whereby they believe unto salvation.  

29“Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?”

First of all, again, these words have an electrical reaction to a heart and mind that is “hard wired” to the things of God.  Hearing such a revelation should be like stepping out through the back of C.S. Lewis’ wardrobe into another world!  The hair on the back of your neck should tingle, your heart flood with hope!  Also note here a clear example in which the words “all” as used in the Old (Hebrew) and New Testament (Greek) are not “universal” terms that mean “every last one”.  The word “all” refers to “the all” of the specific, limited intention in the mind of the person speaking.  Clearly Christ did not tell her every single thing that she had done since she had been born.  To recount a lifetime of words, thoughts, and deeds would itself require a lifetime.  Of all the things that Christ told her that she had done and was now doing, what He told her was truth and correct, even though He did not know her and was a stranger passing through—and He claimed to be the Messiah!

30Then they went out of the city, and came unto Him.

Here we see that her menfolk were also not mingled pagans.  They did not reply: “What’s a ‘messiah’...? what jibberish are you talking about woman—and where’s our waterpot and water...?”  Like Peter and John when Mary came and told them that the tomb was empty: that the Body of Christ was not there, but He had risen from the dead! these men left what they were doing and ran with her to find Him.  This can only mean that they were awaiting the Messiah too.  If they were awaiting the Messiah, they knew the Hebrew Scriptures—and they also obeyed the Law of God: for if they did not obey the Law of God, they would not eagerly look for the Messiah’s Advent, but they would fear it!  These men certainly had jobs or responsibilities, yet like the woman, they felt that the Advent of the Messiah was more important than anything else!

31In the mean while His disciples prayed Him, saying, “Master, eat”.

32But He said unto them, "I have meat to eat that ye know not of".

33Therefore said the disciples one to another, “Hath any man brought Him ought to eat?”

34Jesus saith unto them, "My meat is to do the will of Him that sent Me, and to finish His Work.

35Say not ye, ‘There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest?’  behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest.

36And he that reapeth receiveth wages, and gather-eth fruit unto life eternal: that both he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together.

Here, Christ likens His evangelization of these specific people living in Samaria to a wheat harvest.  God said that He scattered His people like a farmer does wheat—and that He would regather whom He scattered.

37And herein is that saying true, ‘One soweth, and another reapeth’.

38I sent you to reap that whereon ye bestowed no labour: other men laboured, and ye are entered into their labours."

39And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on Him for the saying of the woman, which testified, “He told me all that ever I did.”

Again, these were “Samaritans” of this specific city.  They claimed Jacob as their father (however, when some Edomite imposters claimed to be Abraham’s children, Christ exposed them and said that they were not of Abraham and not of God; 8:39-40,47—and interestingly, they insulted Christ calling Him a “Samaritan” and declared that He was possessed of a demon: even though they themselves were children of the Devil, Christ having already so exposed them in v.44).  Clearly they were Israelites, the residue of Manasseh (and possibly some of Ephraim) whom the kings of Assyria had left in the land.  Faith is a gift of God to the elect of His people for whom Christ came, whereby they believe unto salvation, whether those in the land of Israel, or those in foreign lands even being called by other names in their dispersion.  God promised to regather WHOM He scattered: His people.  That is the Gospel.  God chooses.  He told us whom He chose.  Christ told a parable (Matthew 13:47-50) of a net of fish, in which “every kind” was gathered into the net—but the good were kept and the bad (putrid) were cast away (which we are told face the same fate as the tares).  God did not choose "of every kind" to be His people.  The “His people” of the New Testament is the same “His people” of the Old Testament, even as the God of the New Testament is the very-same, unchanging God of the Old Testament.  God is not a liar.  Adoption pertaineth to Israel for whom Christ came (Romans 9:4,5).  It is Israel who is "adopted" (or "restored"—the "not My people" who were once again declared to be "My people" of Hosea).  The Greek word means, “son placing”.  Like the Prodigal, the adoption is the re-instatement of the formerly wayward, disgraced son back into good standing.  Man is not born into Satan’s family and adopted into God’s.  God’s people are born into God’s Family and by God’s Design (to show His Love and Mercy for His people and give the vessels of wrath and Satan opportunity to “fill up” the Measure of God’s Wrath) God's children are (as a result of the Fall) kidnapped into Satan’s family.  Upon conversion, those of His people whom God ordained unto life are regenerated and filled with faith whereby they believe unto salvation.  Faith does not originate in man.  Man does not choose to be saved.  “The wind bloweth where it listeth [determines], so is everyone that is born of the Spirit.”  “Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto you but My Father which is in Heaven.”  “Ye have not chosen Me but I have chosen you.”  “No man cometh unto Me except the Father draw him.”  “And if I be lifted up I will draw all men [that is, all of the elect of Israel to whom the Promise was given] unto Myself.”  “A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from Heaven.”  “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel.”  Christians would do well to study logic (of Dr. Gordon Clark) in order to dissipate their confusion from cognitive dissonance.  Sadly, most Christians are often at a theological crossroads, and invariably always pick the wrong direction to head in, end up getting hopelessly lost, but think that they are heading in the right direction.  God’s Word in many areas is as simple as reading any coherent novel.  The plot is easy to follow as long as you realize it is the same story and the characters do not change as if in some psychotic nightmare (where things “morph” from one thing into another); they ever remain the same and God is True and does not change His Declarations or Decrees.

40So when the Samaritans were come unto Him, they besought Him that He would tarry with them: and He abode there two days.

41And many more believed because of His own word;

Man does not choose to be saved.  God chooses.  Nothing happens by accident.  Christ said, “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel”.  Had these specific “Samaritans” been nonIsraelites, Christ would have been in violation of God’s very command to Him.  No one can seriously maintain the limp counter-claim that while Christ was not sent unto them, “they chose Christ” (for clearly Christ elicited the response that would cause them to seek Him) and we know that no man cometh unto Christ except the Father drawn him.  Those who come whom the Father does not draw, Christ declared to be thieves and robbers (John 10:1) and Christ is the Door (Gate) to the sheepfold and He admits only His sheep—Israel.  These specific “Samaritans” were Samaritans only in the geo-political sense (in that they were living in Samaria); even as the Greek woman of Canaan was a Suro-phenician [mis-spelled Syro-phenician in most translations] woman in a geo-political sense; even as the Edomites who infiltrated Israelite society were "Israelites" and "Judeans" only in a "geo-political" sense.  This can easily be understood now, better than at any other time in history, as we see all of Christendom being invaded by aliens who are then spuriously considered to be our people; when they are not.  And the result is always destruction of us, God’s people for the sin of embracing them.  Which is the more-likely interpretation of Scripture? —the consistent interpretation in accordance with what God prophecied and promised according to His Own Good Pleasure? or the inconsistent and contradictory interpretation that pleases sinful man?

42And [they] said unto the woman, “Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard Him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.

This certainly sounds like true faith and true conversion.  But later Christ specifically forbids His disciples to go to any town of the Samaritans.  This was one isolated example—and not an “exception” to the rule, for God’s Rules have no exceptions.  God clearly declared that Ammonites and Moabites and Edomites and Canaanites (all of whom constituted the melting pot of despised peoples known as Samaritans, which also included a dozen other corrupt peoples) and God clearly declared that bastards / mixed peoples were forever rejected by Him (Deuteronomy 23:2,3).  While that does not give me the warm fuzzies—God did not establish His Decrees to give me or any other human warm fuzzies!  God’s Decrees and His Calling are without repentance.  The hybridization / mongrelization / cross-breeding of what God created is an attempt to destroy God's Creation and supplant it with something else.  The mongrelization of God's children is the attempt to efface God's Image from them, the attempt to cause God's Inheritance to pass into the family of those who are not His people, and it is the attempt of Satan to cause God's Promise to fail that He would preserve an elect remnant of His people.  I don’t need to apologize for God for His not being "politically correct" in the eyes of the polluted, immoral, perverse world.  Why do other “Christians” feel the perverse need to be ashamed of and apologize to a wicked world for their God and what He decreed?  Those who apologize for what their Father decreed, those who reject what their Father decreed and preach "another gospel" and "another morality" are ashamed of and hate their Father.  Even as the word “all”, so also the word “world” is used.  It does not refer to "the entire planet earth" except when immediate context or other established Scripture indicates that is the meaning.  Rome did not rule the entire earth.  Neither did Cyrus.  The "whole earth" (or other similar phrase) in those passages refers to the entire “Roman World” or the entire “Persian World”: that is, all those nations over whom they did rule.  A simple word study of the word “world” in the New Testament will clearly reveal this.  God did not love every last individual on earth, for God is not double minded and He is True and He cannot love whom He hates and He clearly indicates that there are those whom He hates and upon whom His Eternal Wrath will abide.  His hatred (and Wrath and Vengeance and Judgment) is not due to their defection (God did not "grow new attributes" because of sinful man): for God shows us that He hated Esau and loved Jacob before either were born or had done good or bad.  Furthermore, God does not merely "passively know" as if He has a crystal ball, but no Will or Sovereignty.  God is not passive.  God is Immutable.  If He merely knew what some man would be and then changed His Plan because of that individual, God would not be Immutable and He would not be Omnipotent; but would be a cosmic janitor cleaning up man's messes and engaging in "damage control" rather than being Sovereign Master of His Universe.  God's Foreknowledge is determinative: "As I have thought it so shall it come to pass".  Nothing evolved, nothing came into existence on its own, nothing writes its own script: All was conceived in the Mind of God and all is perfectly governed by His Will to exactly fulfill what He determined.  Christ also said, “Love not the world and if any man love the world the Love of the Father is not in Him”.  Thus, the “world” to which Christ is referring in this verse is certainly not the same “world” that God so loved in John 3:16.  Thankfully, Christ is not confused as most Christians are.  Christ also said that He did not pray for the world, but those in the world whom the Father had given Him.


The Samaritan Leper

Someone emailed and asked:

In Luke 17 Jesus told ten lepers to go to the priest and on their way they were healed of their leprosy and only one came back to glorify Him and it was a Samaritan.  Jesus asked “How many lepers were there?” and only a foreigner came back to glorify God?

What I am puzzled about here is Why did Jesus call him a foreigner?  And if the Samaritan was not of Israelite blood then why did Jesus heal him? —for He told the the one Syro-Phenocian woman that He only came to the House of Israel.

Now I understand that it was his faith that made him well and the message to me is that anyone who has faith can be made well.  These lepers were not made well on the spot it was when they were going to the priest.  Was it the fact that he was doing what he was told that showed his faith?  And what about the others if they were going to the priest were they also not doing what they were told?


My reply:

Not all Samaritans were non-Israelites... however, they were “questionable” (like, for example, someone living today in Los Angeles, New York City, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Las Crusas, Albuquerque, Phoenix, Chicago, etc.).  Samaritans could be Israelites living in Samaria; or aliens living in Samaria; or they could have been part Israelite and part nonIsraelite of a pure kindred nation; or they could have been mixed-blooded peoples who may have been part Israelite, but part alien, and thus polluted and rejected by God.  God does not give His Laws just to hear Himself talk.  He commanded separation.  Furthermore, those Israelites living in the land of Samaria who had not corrupted themselves through intermarriage were most likely less concerned with closely obeying God’s Law.  Even the pure Israelites living in Samaria were considered strangers because they did not separate themselves from the aliens; and thus, how could they be distinguished? especially if most intermarried; though some kept pure, undoubtedly they were statistically far-fewer in number, and each generation less of them remained pure.  It is no different in the nations of Christendom today: the majority, the immoral masses, deluded “Christians” following a false christ, follow the broad way to destruction and follow the law of entropy (decay, degeneration) and “go with the flow” rather than “swim against the tide”.  The swirling drain only leads in one direction.  Sadly, as in all of our nations today, most mongrelized.  When this happens, the mass force of inertia is nearly unstoppable (that’s why Christ will stop it; see the other article posted here, “Gog and Magog...?”) and like a mudslide, everything is carried along by its moving mass; nothing can resist it unless safely on a rocky mount.

Even when the tiny remant was about to return to Jerusalem under Zerubbabel there were various Israelites who had intermarried with cursed peoples, and it was ordered that the Israelites men divorce these alien women and they and all children by them were to be sent away (even as God periodically commanded in the wilderness wanderings).  The same thing happened again within a few decades of having returned to Jerusalem, and Nehemiah and Ezra again had to command the Israelite men to “clean house”.  Of course, any Israelite man who refused to do so, could have snuck away with his corrupt pseudo-family and migrated to live elsewhere.  However, in doing so, he would have forever himself been an alien to God and the Covenants.  

[You cannot be a “Christian” and violate how God commanded us to live.  If you continue in such violations of God’s Law, you never truly repented; you merely thought that you were “making a good deal” (thinking that you could obtain Eternal salvation and just go on living however you pleased—but such a mind is not truly converted).  Christ is not your Lord if you don’t actually obey Him.  You cannot have Christ as your “Saviour”, but not your Lord.  Those whom He saves He owns (twice, firstly as Creator, secondly as Redeemer).  They are not their own; but are bought with a price.  What then is their “reasonable duty”...? —to glorify that in their body and spirit which are God’s.  How is that done?  God commanded, “be holy as I am Holy”, gave us His Law (which was not abolished; morality never changes) and commanded, “this is the way, walk ye in it”; which He commanded, “throughout all your generations forever”.  Obedience is what a father expects of his children.  Obedience does not contribute to salvation, but is the true evidence of salvation.  If batteries are energized, they will do what they are expected to do.]  

The Israelites in Jerusalem had the priests in the Temple, right their in their neighborhood, to lead them in holiness and obedience (though even some of the priests were corrupt, and were thrust out of the priesthood and chased away).  However, those in Samaria were not only “on their own”, but surrounded by often-hostile aliens.  One good apple in a basket of bad apples never has any good influence on the bad ones.  That is why God commanded separation.

When the tiny remnant returned from captivity, the corrupt peoples of the land said that they wanted to help build the Temple to Yahweh.  These superstitious corrupt peoples who had been resettled in the land of Israel after the captivity had been attacked by lions, and they sent to the pagan king who had taken Israel captive and asked him to send some Israelite priests to teach them how to worship the God of the land so He would not be angry.  They were taught but followed a hybrid religion including their own paganism and their head-knowledge of God was merely one more figure to add to their totem pole of superstition.  

[However, even if one does not actually repent, God honors (on some level) any attempt to be less evil or baby steps in the right direction of at least recognizing God.  God rebuked wicked king Ahab and told him that he was going to die.  Ahab was shocked to the very core of his being.  Though he did not actually repent of his sins, though he was not “converted”, he did humble himself in fear before God... and God honored that.  That does not mean Ahab was converted from life unto death; it simply means that his judgment (at least in this life) was less than he deserved.  You reap what you sow.  Draw nigh unto God and He will draw nigh unto you.  While these pagan, corrupt peoples were not converted, were not welcomed into the family, were not given any place in the Covenant (things that God declared would never happen and which God forbade) their at least making some effort to recognize the true God and curtail some of their wickedness, God honored, and no longer sent lions to devour them.]

Thus, when the remant returned, these corrupt peoples claimed that they wanted to help serve Yahweh, but they were lying.  The fact that the were lying is easily proved.  The Israelite leaders, to their honor, replied, “You have NOTHING to do with us or our God”.  These peoples who had claimed that they wanted to “help” God’s people and “worship” God then became terrorists, assassins, and troubled the Israelites in court lying against them, claiming that they were engaging in conspiracy against Persia.  That showed their true heart.  If one truly has honorable intentions in any endeavor, he will not change in his demeanor and actions and demonstrate the very opposite of what he had first professed, if he does not get his way.  His feelings may rightfully be hurt, but he will not change to the very opposite way of thinking and behaviour that he had professed.

Thus there were some lingering true Israelites, living in Samaria, who were known as Samaritans.  Had they been godly, they would have moved out of Samaria into areas populated by kinsmen who obeyed God.  However, like our neighborhoods today that have been destroyed by conspiratorial Third World Immigration and tax-payer funded breeding programs planned and carried out by treasonous politicians, many times if someone waits too long once the neighborhood goes bad, property values plummet, and his house and property would sell for but a fraction of what it was once worth, and then if the house did sell and the person moved out, he would not have enough money to buy a house in a better area (and he would have to find a new job, in addition to finding a way to pay for and transport all of his movable wealth—or simply abandon it).  Thus, many such people are stuck where they are, anciently and modernly.  However, it all depends on what a person values.  If he values life and godliness, he will abandon all and trust God.  If he values his possessions and being able to afford servants by hiring the alien subculture underclass in his neighborhood (which will probably eventually rob and murder him), then that is his god.

[It is sort of like being in a hot air balloon that has caught on fire.  If all do not jump out at the same time when the balloon is at a survivable altitude*, those who don't jump out have no chance, since the balloon will shoot upward like a rocket once it is several hundred pounds lighter after a few brave souls jumped out immediately.  Of course, in a burning balloon, no one should jump out immediately without consulting the others, or it is similar to manslaughter or depraved indifference.  However, there is no time for argument, only quick action.

* Even over water, the impact of a human body from over 150 feet (unless having a failed parachute that causes significant drag) is fatal nearly 100% of the time, even if the person is a world class diver.  Though from that height the human body does not reach terminal velocity before impact (that requires about 12 second and about 1,500 feet), the results are usually the same.]

Thus, there could be many reasons why pure Israelites may still have lived in Samaria, even as there are a tiny handful of true Americans living in our major cities, the rest having evacuated or been absorbed by the alien population.

[This is an abomination and a tragedy.  What price tag can you put on a city like Philadelphia...? which our ancestors built and in which they invested their lives and fortunes? —and all our major cities (trillions of dollars worth of real estate, infrastructure, businesses, historic sites, natural resources, and other wealth) have all been outright stolen from us; our people have been being slowly murdered, several hundred per major city annually, year after year, and bled to death through taxation to support the criminal aliens both here and abroad (and to pay the unwarranted salaries of the criminal politicians who have destroyed our nation, so they can live like aristocracy, safe and secure in their ivory towers at taxpayer expense; while the taxpayers are robbed, assaulted, robbed, raped and murdered).]

Thus, those few remaining Israelites living in Samaria did not live in obedience and holiness unto God.  Modernly, some of God's people who think that they are living for Him, live in such evil places because of the selfish reasons why they like remaining there (the climate, the convenience of all the things that they like, etc.)—while deluding themselves into thinking that they are being so spiritual in being a “good witness” to those around them.  The problem with that self-delusion is that God commanded, “Come out from among them and touch not the unclean people and ye shall indeed be My sons and daughters” and Christ declared, “give not that which is holy to the dogs and cast not pearls before swine”.  Those who do not come out will eventually see their children or grandchildren marry aliens, and that branch of the family tree dies forever and they are no longer God’s people.  Furthermore, God did not tell us to witness to the aliens; in fact, as I have just shown, Christ forbade it!  The Great Commission when properly understood is solely to God’s people Israel whom God scattered throughout the world, but whom He promised to regather.  When you scatter wheat, when the harvest comes, you gather in the wheat, not the tares, weeds, insects, rodents, or debris.  The elders (Zerubbabel and the High Priest Joshua) told the corrupt peoples around them, “Ye have NOTHING to do with us or our God”.  Thus, those who delude themselves that they are “trusting God” living in an evil land, or being a “good witness” to the aliens around them (and really, how often do they go door to door handing out tracts...? really! does anyone believe such deluded lies?) such persons are friends of the world which makes them enemies of God.

Samaria was the middle third of the land of Israel after the return of the captives.

Galilee the northern third.

Judea the southern third.

Had the Samaritan leper whom Christ healed been a Canaanite, he would not have had faith (explained below) and Christ would not have told him to go show himself to the priest according to the Law of Moses.  The point of God orchestrating this one leper to show appreciation is similar to the incident of the Syro-phenician woman and with Paul’s evangelization of the so-called “Gentiles” (who were the Israelites of the dispersion), who by nature did many of those things contained in the Law (because of the Law being written on their hearts).  These three events serve the same purpose.  They weer to serve as illustrations to shame to repentance the sinful Israelites of the House of Judah of the tiny remnant that returned, who went through the pretense of following the Law and pleasing God (like the self-imagined “faithful son” in Christ’s Parable of the Prodigal, or the son in Christ’s other parable who said that he would obey his father and go work in the field, but did not).  However, the hearts of the majority of the remnant that returned, in reality, were far from God (they built their own houses, but in decades never built the temple, and they again began corrupting their seed marrying aliens, and began violating other laws of God).

The Divine lesson in the historical event of Christ’s healing of the lepers was that the Samaritan, though an Israelite living among aliens, not observing the Law of God—had more appreciation of Christ’s deliverance than did the 9 Israelite lepers (presumably of Judea or Galilee) who should have known better and who should also have had the desire to show their appreciation.  However, some Israelites are not wheat, but the mere chaff.  Their eyes are ever only on themselves, and even when some act of kindness (small or grandiose) is unexpectedly done for them, their eyes greedily focus on the blessing, not the giver, and swallowed up in greed and self-aggrandizement, they stumble off lusting after the blessing, and thinking only of themselves; like a stray dog who seizes upon a hunk of meat given to him.  Such are the chaff—(dead-hearted Israelites) the outer, dead, woody, useless part of the wheat kernel—that the wind (the Holy Spirit) driveth away, and which Christ Himself will fan in the flames of Judgment.  Such will have the greater condemnation, having known the way of truth, but having turned from it.  To whom much is given much shall be required, but also he who is forgiven much is able to love much.  The Israelite leper of Samaria was forgiven much more than the 9 other Israelite lepers who most probably were raised knowing and keeping God’ Law.  This does not mean that the one forgiven more will always be more grateful, for in another parable, a man forgiven a huge debt that he could never pay, went out and grabbed by the throat someone who owed him a few pennies, and had him cast into debtor’s prison.  Such a person is the chaff—one of the goats (lawless Israelites) and they shall share the same Judgment with the tares, briars, dogs, and swine (nonIsraelites).

I explain in many of my books that the Syrophenician woman was not an alien, not a Canaanite.  The parallel account in the book of Mark clearly says she was a Greek woman living in Syrophenicia.  The original, pure Greeks were descended from the Israelites.  This woman knew the Law of God, knew that aliens had no right to the Covenant.  But she was not asking for herself, but her child, of mixed blood (the Greek word used is “puppies”, not dogs); she was not asking for the salvation of the daughter’s soul or for any place in the Covenant for her mongrel child (which would have been an abomination), but merely the overflow of blessing, a little relief from the demon possession that not only was traumatic for the child, but also for the mother to have to deal with and helplessly and hopelessly watch and endure.

Of course we could raise dozens of questions.  However, that would all be speculation, because God did not deem it necessary to give us more information, because the point is not the example that is used, but the primary principle that is being taught (not secondary or tertiary principles that are not the thrust of the lesson).  When you are dying of thirst what matters is a drink of water, not the vessel (gold, silver, or porcelain) that is used to transport it to you.  Some people focus on the minors and miss the real lesson.  Regardless, maybe the Syrophenician woman had been raped? maybe she had been sold as a slave to an alien master who impregnated her?  We don’t know why she had a mixed-breed child, only that she sought temporal relief from a terrible affliction.

But we do know is that she was a Greek-Israelite and that she had faith (based upon the facts in the Holy Scriptures revealed by the Holy Spirit to her understanding).  Most importantly (even if Mark had not told us that she was a Greek woman living in Syrophenicia) faith does not originate in man, but is a gift of the Holy Spirit given only to the elect of Israel whereby they believe unto salvation.

The other lepers most certainly went to the priest, for had they not gone to the priest, they would never have been officially declared “clean”.  Those unfortunate individuals who were lepers were known to be lepers (it’s really a stigma that is hard to shake) and most probably written documents were made recording who had contracted leprosy, when it was discovered, and that person was officially declared to be “unclean” and barred not only from entering the sanctuary, but also barred from entering the community at large; being quarantined in their own leper communities outside civilization.  Society could never merely assume that such a person had miraculously “recovered” from the dreaded, contagious disease.  Such a person had to be officially inspected by the priests and pronounced “clean”.  Thus the lepers would never have been allowed back into society had they not gone to the priest, and had they not been examined, discovered to have been healed, paid the temple fee and had sacrifices offered for them.  If a leper was found in society having not been declared clean, he could be put to death—for it risked the spread of the disease and death to the whole community.

[Modernly, to destroy Christendom, polluted and diseased individuals in many cases have more rights than the entire community.  Minority rights is only a ploy to weaken Christendom, until the minority becomes the majority (which it actually now is) and then the laws will be changed back to majority rule.]

The issue is not whether or not the other 9 lepers were being obedient and going to the priest.  Not all that seems to be obedience is actually obedience.  Those who go through the motions of obedience may not being obeying with the right attitude or for the right reason.  It was the lepers alone who stood to benefit from the “obedience”.  Was it then truly obedience to those whose hearts were not right?  Remember Naaman, the Syrian general with leprosy was told by Elijah to bathe in the muddy Jordan 7 times (presumably once a day for 7 days).  This proud, wealthy, powerful man was insulted, knowing there were far-cleaner waters back in his own country, proceeding from the mountains where the rivers originated.  He was about to leave, when his faithful servant smoothed his feathers and suggested he humble himself and do it.  They had travelled so far.  He was desperate.  No one else had offered any hope.  It was free.  They were already there.  What was there to lose?  Naaman reconsidered and was healed.  The true test of obedience is not doing something that you are told when it is something that you want to do (like telling your child, “I order you to eat that hot fudge banana split Sundae right now!”).  The true test of obedience is doing what you are told to do, even when it is something that you don’t want to do, but doing it with the right heart attitude as if it is something that you want to do (that is, scrubbing out the garbage cans as joyfully as if you were eating that ice-cream Sundae).

So the lepers merely going to the priest was not the actual act of obedience.  The true demonstration of obedience was determined by their heart’s response to the love and mercy and grace that was shown to them—which was demonstrated by what they did after they were healed.  Those who did not return to give thanks, went to the priest for themselves and thus it was not obedience.  The one who returned to thank Christ had gone to the priest in obedience to Christ, which was demonstrated by his return.  My dad raised me to realize that once given a command and you complete the task, you are to report back for inspection and possible further orders.  Such is unheard of today, therefore, most people are in ignorance concerning what obedience is.  Servants are not “free agents”; they are to ever be waiting on their master.  This one leper realized, on some level, this basic truth.  His life was not his own.

The same logic can be applied to Christ’s Parable (and remember, it was a parable, thus, the main thrust was the primary lesson, not auxillary issues) of the “Good Samaritan”.  The point was to shame God’s people in Judea and Galilee to repentance, by hearing that someone whom they despised was more godly than they were.  

However, note clearly: This example of the Good Samaritan cannot be blanketly applied in real life to any situation without weighing other factors.  God commanded us to “come out” and “be separate” and “join not” the unclean peoples.*  God warned, "shouldest thou help the ungodly and do good unto them that hate the Lord—therefore there is Wrath upon you from before the Lord".  God also commanded us concerning those who are truly not our people, and especially cursed peoples (and savages), "thou shalt not seek their peace or prosperity forever".   John tell us in one of his epistles, the last books of the Bible to be written, that if we even bid "God speed" (any verbal well wish / casual blessing) to those of our own people who reject Christ, that we become partakers in their sins!

[* In Peter’s vision (which had nothing to do with abolishing God’s dietary laws; see my, So, You Call Yourself A Christian...) God declared, “Call not thou unclean that which I have cleansed”.  This was in reference to the Israelites of the dispersion (the so-called “Gentiles” in such passages); not alien peoples (because that would violate what God commanded and that would contradict prophecy).  Similarly, we ought not to call “clean” that which God has not cleansed and which He has no intention of cleansing.  God said that He put a difference between clean and unclean peoples, even as He did clean and unclean animals.  These identities never change.  God is Sovereign.  God is True.  God is Immutable.  God is Holy.  God demands Justice according to His Decrees; not sinful man’s emotional notions of how God should have differently ordered His universe.]

It is always important—essential—to focus on ALL of the elements in a given passage (not just one word or a select few words), and understand the whole in harmony with all of established Scripture, combined with historical data that might help fill in the gaps.  Furthermore, the person reading the Bible who actually wants to understand it and obey God, shoud not get hung up on one word (like “Gentile”, “Samaritan”, etc.—especially if he doesn’t truly know the meaning* of such words) which is what leads to bad theology due to confused misinterpretation.  The reader of Scripture should focus on what he does know and focus on the never-changing Truth that God cannot change and will not violate His own Law.  Then, even if he can’t figure out the puzzle, what he will know is that God did not change or “make an exception”—but that there is information missing to correctly understand the true meaning, which will never contradict established Scripture.

[* The word “Gentile” is a second-hand miscarriage of translation from the Hebrew (or Greek) to Latin to English.  Actually, Gentile is not actually a translation, but a transliteration / Anglicization (putting of the word into English form).  Gentile is the English rendering of the the Latin gentilis, which was the Latinization for the Hebrew words goy / goyim or the Greek words ethnos / ethney.  The Hebrew and Greek words have no racial connotation whatsoever.  They are generic collective nouns that mean “nation” or “people”.  Context alone determines the identity of the nation or people or people being discussed.  The same applies to the various Hebrew and Greek words for “stranger”.  See my, Apologetic Expositions on Isaiah 56 for evidence of this concerning the words Gentile  and stranger.  See it and others in the series (Acts 13, 15, II Corinthians 3, Galatians 3) for evidence that the so-called “Gentiles” to whom the Gospel was taken were the Israelites of the dispersion.  The true and legitimate descendents of the Biblical Israelites are today the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic-Baltic-Slavic-Scandinavian peoples of Christendom.  That is the why the world wants to destroy us.  The Jews and Israelis are the Edomite-Canaanites (intermixed with all other peoples) who are not the ones who are persecuted (that has ever been a deceitful “act” they use to garner sympathy and then power)—they are actually the ones attempting the destruction of Christendom, by destroying us from within.  That alone should demonstrate that they are not God’s people, but stole the name of Israel when they took over the land, after the true Israelites realized, “there goes the neighborhood” and abandoned the former-Holy Land (now inhabited by dragons) and migrated to meet up with their Israelite and Judean brethren who had migrated into Europe and founded Christendom.  The word “Jew” itself is a miscarriage of translation; and it is an invented word.  In the Bible, most any time that the word Jew is used, it should be Judah-ite, meaning a member of the tribe or the House of Judah.  God commanded complete separation from aliens, and before that time, except those Canaanite hold-outs that the Israelites were never able to expel, the only people in the land of Judah were Israelites; likewise for the Israelites of the northern confederation of the House of Israel.  So it once was in our nations of Christendom.  A “German” or a “Swede” meant only one thing.  Now, with the corruption of our nations, an African or Arab or Hindu Indian or Jew or Turk or Chinese can be called a “Swede” or “German” (or “American”, “Brit”, “Canadian”, “Dane”, etc.)—but that is a corruption of the truth and it is only geo-political in meaning; not racial.  However, after the captivity and the return of the remnant, the word mistranslated “Jew” in the Old Testament should still be rendered Judah-ite, and in the New Testament it should be Judean.  However, the words themselves took on corrupt meaning as the land itself was polluted.  Now the word mistranslated Jew can refer to someone who is racially a Judean, or anyone regardless of race living within the geo-political territory of the Roman province of Judea (all of the land of Israel).  Thus, when the word mistranslated “Jew” appears, context must be discerned and the word must be considered in harmony with the entire Scriptures.  Christ came only for the lost sheep of the House of Israel.  When Scripture refers to those “Jews” who believed on Christ, it is talking about the actual Israelites; not aliens in the land, not Canaanites masquerading as Israelites, pretending to be God’s people (as did the Herods and various member of the priesthood or ruling council).  When Christ denounces the “Jews” and says, “ye cannot receive My words because ye are not of My sheep” nd “ye are not of Abraham, though you claim to be, and you are not of God, but you are of your father the Devil” and “the Jews took up stones to stone Him”, it does not take a rocket scientist to know that these are the imposter Judeans claiming to be God’s people, when in fact they are the eternal enemies of God’s people (so declared by God).  See Revelation 2:9 and 3:9.  See my, Uncovering the Mysteries of Your Hidden Inheritance and God’s Chosen People—Who Is and Who Isn’t and Why for more information firmly showing that the Anglo-Saxon and related peoples are the actual Israelites of the Bible, and that the Jews and Israelis, claiming to be God’s people, are not.  Even as we see before our very eyes the total racial composition of the nations of Christedom changing within a few years (though we lost our major cities half a century ago, now the entire nation is being polluted in every single community—by calculated planning), the very same thing took place in the land of Israel over the period of 2,500 years, to the point that the few remaining true Israelites left; and those who did not were absorbed by the alien Canaanite population which then claimed to be Israel (even as Africans and Arabs and Chinese now claim to be Americans or Germans; and once they completely take over, history will be re-written, again).  See also my What Was the Mark that God Placed on Cain? and Who Was the Serpent in the Garden? for more information on the “tares sown in among the wheat”.]