Welcome to the Official Redemption® Message Board!
Acts 18:24 - A Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria...
To Redoubter's point, we know nothing about Apollos heritage except that he was born in Alexandria, unlike the heritage of Moses and his siblings. For all we know, he could have been a Jewish convert with Egyptian heritage.
I guess what it really comes down to is a need to better define what it means to be of a certain civilization. I can certainly see the opposing viewpoint, and if it seems cleaner to define the terms in a way that excludes him from being an Egyptian, so be it. But I think it's worth consideration.
Let us not forget that after Alexander swept through a territory, Alexandria as a city name was suddenly popular and that there was at least 18 variations of Alexandria with 1 in Egypt and 4 in Turkey, the same Turkey that was/is home to Ephesus.
Quote from: Praeceps on June 10, 2015, 08:07:01 PMLet us not forget that after Alexander swept through a territory, Alexandria as a city name was suddenly popular and that there was at least 18 variations of Alexandria with 1 in Egypt and 4 in Turkey, the same Turkey that was/is home to Ephesus.I'm with Praeceps that there is no way of knowing whether this is a reference to "Alexandria" in Egypt, or one of the many other "Alexandrias."
While I don't agree that he is Egyptian, I am not finding any references to him that are not pointing to Alexandria in the Egyptian province. I believe we are fairly certain on which Alexandria it is.
Right, Jew is not a race it represents religious belief.
No not really. Paul didn't write a letter to the Jews. Hebrew is ethnicity, Jew is race.
It seems the majority opinion is to go against the idea, which is ok, but I think what we really need is a more comprehensive way to determine what does and does not make a person of a particular civilization.
"Going to church no more makes you a Christian than standing in a garage makes you a Chevy."
Quote from: Professoralstad on June 10, 2015, 10:57:43 PMIt seems the majority opinion is to go against the idea, which is ok, but I think what we really need is a more comprehensive way to determine what does and does not make a person of a particular civilization. My input for this eventual definition is what I am sure has already been discussed... the classification for those that live in a country but are not considered an ethnic native of that country. As modern examples:1.) If my wife and I were in the military and lived on an Army base in Egypt, then had a child there, should my child be classified as "Egyptian?"2.) If my wife and I worked for Nintendo and lived in Japan, and had a child there, should my child be classified as "Japanese?"I personally feel that the answer to both of these is "no," but whatever definition we create needs to consider these possibilities.