[–] SerialLarper ago
It has meaning within its context. Failure to distinguish between the two houses can lead to the idea that today, the Israelites are Jews, or that the the land of Israel should be Jewish.
[–] AngelofDeath [S] ago
Can you point out a location where the two house split is in reference where I fail to keep the distinction?
But, again, Yahudites are Israylites ... and many of the House of Judah were also taken in the Assyrian captivity, with the bulk of House of Israyl.
AND, I might point out, there are those that teach Yahshua did come from the tribe of Joseph and not Judah, as is commonly declared. Regardless to that, either way Yahshua, being of any tribe of Jacob makes him an Israylite.
[–] SerialLarper ago
It's not about location, it's about time. The distinction wasn't important before the separation of the northern and southern kingdoms, but it becomes more significant in the context of the lost tribes of Israel and the breaking of the brotherhood between Israel and Judah. The mission of the Messiah relates to the lost sheep of Israel, so there's some context for the rejection of Christian religion by the Yehudim.
[–] AngelofDeath [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
And, most of those that claim to be 'jews' are simply not. Adopting Talmudic Judaism does not make one an Israylite. And certainly neither does becoming a 'christain' magically make one a 'spiritual Israylite'.