₦airaland Forum

MaxInDHouse:
He wasn't referring to you but gentiles who adopted Judaism and they were so pleased that the promised Messiah recognized them as pets in the house of their masters. Matthew 15:27
So you don't have to worry it's none of your business if you aren't part of those who chose Judaism.

This is a weird excuse. And the fact that you say domestic pet leads me to believe you either used a concordance or AI in researching your approach. Fair enough but still, whether puppy or domestic pet it is still derogatory in the way used.

Jesus is the word of our God {John 1:1} so whatever protrudes out of his mouth is exactly what our God would have said if He is here in person! Matthew 17:5; John 5:30; 8:28

This just amounts to calling him God.

Dtruthspeaker:
Ask him oo.

It is you I am asking oh.

DeepSight:
This is a weird excuse. And the fact that you say domestic pet leads me to believe you either used a concordance or AI in researching your approach. Fair enough but still, whether puppy or domestic pet it is still derogatory in the way used.

You think it's derogatory but the woman felt so honored that the Christ quantified her as pet worthy of living in the house of it's master.
When it comes to scriptural discussions it's God's holy spirit we rely on to help not AI.

DeepSight:
This just amounts to calling him God.

He came as a representative of our God so we honor him just as we must honor the person who sent him! John 5:23
These are the things you missed when you were with the JWs so this is the time to understand!🙂

DeepSight:
It is you I am asking oh.

It came from the other guy na so it's him who should tell us

DeepSight:
➜All this grammar does not excuse such a profane racist analogy by JC, if truly he was referring to Gentiles as dogs.

Hold up! He referred to the Israelites as sheep, lost ones at that, in the same context. Sheep are animals that are largely considered stewpid and in need of a master. But somehow that is not profane? Dogs, on the other hand, are capable of surviving on their own, to the point of even having the ability to lead sheep, yet somehow you think the term is profane and racist when used for non-Israelites(not gentiles)? It seems to me that you have an agenda, and this is not about what Jesus Christ of Israel, in fact, said. 🤔

Kobojunkie:
Hold up! He referred to the Israelites as sheep, lost ones at that, in the same context. Sheep are animals that are largely considered stewpid and in need of a master. But somehow that is not profane? Dogs, on the other hand, are capable of surviving on their own, to the point of even having the ability to lead sheep, yet somehow you think the term is profane and racist when used for non-Israelites(not gentiles)? It seems to me that you have an agenda, and this is not about what Jesus Christ of Israel, in fact, said. 🤔

This is dishonest. In the particular sentence quoted, he referred to the Jews as children of the house, not as sheep. That's the context, while comparing them to gentiles who he called dogs. He also said that the children should eat their fill rather than have their food thrown to dogs. That is what was said.

Wherever else they may be referred to as sheep, you know very well that it has it's own context which simply renders the reference as one of the relationship between a shepherd and his herd, namely, a group he guides.

DeepSight:
✓ This is dishonest. In the particular sentiment quoted, he referred to the Jews as children of the house, not as sheep. That's the context.
✓ Wherever else they may be referred to as sheep, you know very well that it has it's own context which simply renders the reference as one of the relationship between a shepherd and his herd, namely, a group he guides.

1. Are you joking? 🥱

The context here is the Gospel where over and over the children of the house/Master are referred to as sheep that He, the good shepherd, was sent to gather back. 🥱

2. The context of the Gospel message of Jesus Christ of Israel is the Gospel. And that extends to the Laws and the Prophets as He never removes anything He says from all of that. 🥱

Kobojunkie:
1. Are you joking? 🥱

The context here is the Gospel where over and over the children of the house/Master are referred to as sheep that He, the good shepherd, was sent to gather back. 🥱

2. The context of the Gospel message of Jesus Christ of Israel is the Gospel. And that extends to the Laws and the Prophets as He never removes anything He says from all of that. 🥱

I have no time for this kind of dishonesty.
A specific statement was made where one group were called children of the house and another the dogs. He also said that the children should eat their fill rather than have their food thrown to dogs. That is what was said.

If you want to spin this, please just go and play with your toys somewhere else.

DeepSight:
➜I have no time for this kind of dishonesty. A specific statement was made where one group were called children of the house and another the dogs.
➜ He also said that the children should eat their fill rather than have their food thrown to dogs. That is what was said. If you want to spin this, please just go and play with your toys somewhere else.

Again, the context is the Gospel, not some private delusion one chooses in the name of religion.

24 Jesus went from there to the area around Tyre. He did not want the people in that area to know he was there, so he went into a house. But he could not stay hidden.
25 A woman heard that he was there. Her little daughter had an evil spirit inside her. So the woman came to Jesus and bowed down near his feet.
26 She was not a Jew. She was born in Phoenicia, an area in Syria. She begged Jesus to force the demon out of her daughter.
27 Jesus told the woman, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and give it to the dogs. First let the children eat all they want.”
28 She answered, “That is true, Lord. But the dogs under the table can eat the pieces of food that the children don’t eat.”
29 Then he told her, “That is a very good answer. You may go. The demon has left your daughter.”
30 The woman went home and found her daughter lying on the bed. The demon was gone. - Mark 7 vs 24 - 30

...

21 Jesus went from there to the area of Tyre and Sidon.
22 A Canaanite woman from that area came out and began shouting, “Lord, Son of David, please help me! My daughter has a demon inside her, and she is suffering very much.”
23 But Jesus did not answer her. So the followers came to him and said, “Tell her to go away. She keeps crying out and will not leave us alone.”
24 Jesus answered, “God sent me only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
25 Then the woman came over to Jesus and bowed before him. She said, “Lord, help me!”
26 He answered her with this saying: “It is not right to take the children’s bread and give it to the dogs.”
27 The woman said, “Yes, Lord, but even the dogs eat the pieces of food that fall from their master’s table.”
28 Then Jesus answered, “Woman, you have great faith! You will get what you asked for.” And right then the woman’s daughter was healed. - Matthew 15 vs 21 - 28

2. That isn't what Jesus Christ of Israel said. Rather, what He said, as detailed below, is that the children first have their fill before the rest is given to the dogs, i.e., it is not right to take the children's bread and give it to the dogs before the children are even done eating.

Again, religion does something ....

Kobojunkie:
Again, the context is the Gospel, not some private delusion one chooses in the name of religion.
...


2. That isn't what Jesus Christ of Israel said. Rather, what He said, as detailed below, is that the children first have their fill before the rest is given to the dogs, i.e., it is not right to take the children's bread and give it to the dogs before they are even done eating.

Again, religion does something ....

Have a good day.

OK. So you actually blocked me so you won't see my comment again shey?

Well it's better like that at least you won't have any reason quoting me again!

Bye!🙂

Was DeepSight racist yesterday.

Yes he was, he expressed some dark thoughts yesterday

DeepSight:
You know your hands are full of b l o o d

When someone sees blood, that means that hee needs a lot of help.

Can someone tell me, how can we help this guy...

DeepSight:
You know your hands are full of b l o o d

DeepSight:
What does this scripture disclose?

Mark 7.

24 Jesus left that place and went to the vicinity of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know it; yet he could not keep his presence secret. 25 In fact, as soon as she heard about him, a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an impure spirit came and fell at his feet. 26 The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter.

27 “First let the children eat all they want,” he told her, “for it is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”

28 “Lord,” she replied, “even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.”

29 Then he told her, “For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter.”

30 She went home and found her child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.......

Perhaps some leading Christians can help out here.

Kukutente23/ TV01/ Jesusjnr2020

Fourth time of posting what I believe is an excellent piece. NL' loss !


TV

TV01:
Fourth time of posting what I believe is an excellent piece. NL' loss !


TV

Remove the insults, it should sail through.

TV01: Have you ever considered what ails you? If you did, you wouldn’t dream of raising that poser.

You hail from desolate nation, do you not? Would you gainsay that? I’ll grant you, there are some who could live comfortably – without major adaptations to their characters – in more civilised climes, or even climes that we would consider more civilised than any currently extant. But, in your country, and amongst your people, lawlessness prevails.

How? you might ask. Let’s take the Christian student murdered in broad daylight. Not just in cold blood, but in a blood-letting frenzy. Recorded in all its grainy horror on video. A bare-faced confession – whole-chested boast?? – captured live.

Yet, nothing happened, justice was not only not served, it was utterly traduced, disdained, not even allowed to take a seat.
And, not only that, but members of the NBA offered to represent the perpetrators – who were not actually charges, let alone arraigned before a court of law - pro bono.

The NBA of which you, deepsight,are a member. Yet you kept mute, mum, nary a word. The NBA did not break, or split. Nothing, nada, zilch.

And the above is just one of literally innumerable instances of primitive behaviour in your environs. Yet you dared ask that question.
deepsight, you boasted of having a CEO sacked for racism. But you are the product of backwardness, possibly a coward, from a regressiveic nation, where did you learn, how do you understand the notion of racism?

You clothe yourself with the term “learned friend”, but that garb is borrowed. Purloined from a nation that is civilised. You hail from a nation where discrimination and bigotry are not only rife, they are celebrated, genetically codified almost, spiritually embedded. Environs where sectarianism and tribalism, caste-systems and personal self-aggrandisement unrelentingly underpin your social charter Yet you dare deploy the word racist, accuse anyone of racism. Have you no sense of irony?? no ability to self reflect??

Let me ask you a question, “what is the unique trait or behaviour that makes one a racist? deepsight, notions of inclusion, equity, diversity, equal opoortunity and the like did not emanate from the milieu of which you are a part. They arose from communities that accepted Jesus as Lord. From countries that embeddied the teachings of the Christian scriptures into their laws and constitutions. That live and embed Christs teaching, such as the sermon on the mount” into their day-to-ay interactions and national characters.

deepsight, deepsight, Deepight, you, from a primordial nation, are asking if the person responsible for bringing light to a darkened world freeing the enslaved and benighted, responsible for incepting notions of enlightened human rights, civil liberties and personal freedoms as they exist in civilised countries is a racisthuh Next you’ll be alleging that He endorses slavery grin.

Oga, come to Christ and now the love of God – join us who are way beyond civilised, we are godly.

Did you miss me you wet lettuce cool. Oya, answer the question in bold, let me add more stripes kiss


TV

Bless my nimble fingers, I snapped this up before the bot could act.

TV01: Have you ever considered what ails you? If you did, you wouldn’t dream of raising that poser.

You hail from desolate nation, do you not? Would you gainsay that? I’ll grant you, there are some who could live comfortably – without major adaptations to their characters – in more civilised climes, or even climes that we would consider more civilised than any currently extant. But, in your country, and amongst your people, lawlessness prevails.

How? you might ask. Let’s take the Christian student murdered in broad daylight. Not just in cold blood, but in a blood-letting frenzy. Recorded in all its grainy horror on video. A bare-faced confession – whole-chested boast?? – captured live.

Yet, nothing happened, justice was not only not served, it was utterly traduced, disdained, not even allowed to take a seat.
And, not only that, but members of the NBA offered to represent the perpetrators – who were not actually charges, let alone arraigned before a court of law - pro bono.

The NBA of which you, deepsight,are a member. Yet you kept mute, mum, nary a word. The NBA did not break, or split. Nothing, nada, zilch.

And the above is just one of literally innumerable instances of primitive behaviour in your environs. Yet you dared ask that question.
deepsight, you boasted of having a CEO sacked for racism. But you are the product of backwardness, possibly a coward, from a regressiveic nation, where did you learn, how do you understand the notion of racism?

You clothe yourself with the term “learned friend”, but that garb is borrowed. Purloined from a nation that is civilised. You hail from a nation where discrimination and bigotry are not only rife, they are celebrated, genetically codified almost, spiritually embedded. Environs where sectarianism and tribalism, caste-systems and personal self-aggrandisement unrelentingly underpin your social charter Yet you dare deploy the word racist, accuse anyone of racism. Have you no sense of irony?? no ability to self reflect??

Let me ask you a question, “what is the unique trait or behaviour that makes one a racist? deepsight, notions of inclusion, equity, diversity, equal opoortunity and the like did not emanate from the milieu of which you are a part. They arose from communities that accepted Jesus as Lord. From countries that embeddied the teachings of the Christian scriptures into their laws and constitutions. That live and embed Christs teaching, such as the sermon on the mount” into their day-to-ay interactions and national characters.

deepsight, deepsight, Deepight, you, from a primordial nation, are asking if the person responsible for bringing light to a darkened world freeing the enslaved and benighted, responsible for incepting notions of enlightened human rights, civil liberties and personal freedoms as they exist in civilised countries is a racisthuh Next you’ll be alleging that He endorses slavery grin.

Oga, come to Christ and now the love of God – join us who are way beyond civilised, we are godly.

Did you miss me you wet lettuce cool. Oya, answer the question in bold, let me add more stripes kiss


TV

All this is puerile self-hating ad hominem without addressing an inch of the issue raised.
Self hating because you spend your time insulting Nigeria as though I, singularly am Nigeria alone, and you are not Nigerian.
At all events, it does nothing to address the issue.

DeepSight:
All this is puerile self-hating ad hominem without addressing an inch of the issue raised.
Self hating because you spend your time insulting Nigeria as though I, singularly am Nigeria alone, and you are not Nigerian.
At all events, it does nothing to address the issue.

You would say that wouldn't you?
But at once fail to respond to any of the points or answer the question.

The milieu you hail from does not natally have any notion of rights, freedoms or liberties. Not the sort that would conceptualise racism as commonly used. It's borrowed language. And, borrowed from nations that developed those very notions on the basis of the teaching and work of Jesus Christ - the very person you ironically have the nads to allege racism against! You can't make this up. Take off the race-tinted lens and cape of victimhood.

What is the unique trait or behaviour that defines a racist?


TV

TV01:
You would say that wouldn't you?
But at once fail to respond to any of the points or answer the question.

The milieu you hail from does not natally have any notion of rights, freedoms or liberties. Not the sort that would conceptualise racism as commonly used. It's borrowed language. And, borrowed from nations that developed those very notions on the basis of the teaching and work of Jesus Christ - the very person you ironically have the nads to allege racism against! You can't make this up. Take off the race-tinted lens and cape of victimhood.

What is the unique trait or behaviour that defines a racist?


TV

You are all over the place. You are saying something like human rights are a borrowed concept so we in Africa must never complain of breach of human rights. If you have anything to say, address what Jesus said and thats all.

DeepSight:
You are all over the place. You are saying something like human rights are a borrowed concept so we in Africa must never complain of breach of human rights. If you have anything to say, address what Jesus said and thats all.

Complain away. How about you start with decapitations in Oyo, or public lynchings in Sokoto? Instead you raise a contrived allegation against the One from whom the very notion of human rights emanated.

You can question Christ, trash the West, smear white people, hate the juice - all to avoid taking a good hard look at your own culture and people. Bobo reflect small na. Truly what ails you?


TV

DeepSight:
What does this scripture disclose?

Mark 7.

24 Jesus left that place and went to the vicinity of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know it; yet he could not keep his presence secret. 25 In fact, as soon as she heard about him, a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an impure spirit came and fell at his feet. 26 The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter.

27 “First let the children eat all they want,” he told her, “for it is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”

28 “Lord,” she replied, “even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.”

29 Then he told her, “For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter.”

30 She went home and found her child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.......

Perhaps some leading Christians can help out here.

Kukutente23/ TV01/ Jesusjnr2020

You have asked a very good question. Jesus was not a racist here.
I want you to read carefully and do a little research more.
The story of salvation is very deep that Bible calls it a mystery.

After the Fall of man, God tried to reach out to man. Later God made a small way out by the reason of COVENANT. The covenant is a memorandum of ownership and commitment just like husband and wife. The Covenant with Abraham is the major one we are discussing here among others. So God made covenant with Abraham. The covenant was to be a generational one. The main agreement there was, ' to be a God to you and your generation.

Genesis 17:75
And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.

You know that if you are dating a girl, you cannot claim she is cheating on you until there is a proposal and acceptance. Better still if the girl eventually becomes your wife, there is this sense of belonging. So the covenant flows down to David to Jesus.
That is the Old Covenant which later became Old Testament.( find out the difference between covenant and testament).
You will have noticed that God called Himself or compared Himself a husband of Israel.

The covenant is what Jesus came to defend and abolish to make a new one. I want you to understand that Jesus operated purely under the Old Covenant. That was why he was called the Messenger of the Covenant.

Malachi 3:1
Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.

So, when Jesus came, the Bible says, He came to His own..... John 1:11

He came unto his own, and his own received him not and in another place,' I am sent to the lost house of Israel

One of the characteristics of a covenant is preferential treatment. It is normal. That was the reason for the wars also in the Old Covenant. That was why children of Esau was destroyed. Only because God chose Jacob and Esau was fighting him. (Read Obadiah).

So, when the woman came asking for help, she was not a covenant partner and the Messenger of the Covenant did not have any message for her but only Israelites. You would remember how Jesus healed a woman bent double and said ought not this daughter of Abraham be loosed from her infirmity.
The old Covenant was a family covenant. Things are different now. The new Covenant is a universal one established by Jesus for all.
Now in Jesus there is no Jews or gentiles. We are all one in Him and are equally entitled to the benefits of the salvation.

Hebrews 2:3
]How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;

Now if you accept the salvation by accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord ( the One that purchased you by His blood), you are in..

Acts.20.28 - Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Then you become a member in particular, known by God, and right to ask anything in Jesus Name, and you will get it.

1 Corinthians 12:27
Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

Remain blessed.

DeepSight:
What does this scripture disclose?

Mark 7.

24 Jesus left that place and went to the vicinity of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know it; yet he could not keep his presence secret. 25 In fact, as soon as she heard about him, a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an impure spirit came and fell at his feet. 26 The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter.

27 “First let the children eat all they want,” he told her, “for it is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”

28 “Lord,” she replied, “even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.”

29 Then he told her, “For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter.”

30 She went home and found her child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.......

Perhaps some leading Christians can help out here.

/ TV01/ Jesusjnr2020

I believe you've asked this question before and you were appropriately enlightened so I wonder why the repetition. Amnesia or just pure petulance?
Jesus called the children of Israel "sheep"
He called the Pharisees brood of "vipers"
He likened his disciples to "serpents and doves"
He himself is referred to at the "Lion of the tribe of Judah"
He called Peter "stone" etc
How come you don't seem to have a problem with any of these metaphorical usage but you have a problem with him calling the Gentile woman a dog?
Be guided Mister!!

DeepSight:
What does this scripture disclose?

Mark 7.

24 Jesus left that place and went to the vicinity of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know it; yet he could not keep his presence secret. 25 In fact, as soon as she heard about him, a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an impure spirit came and fell at his feet. 26 The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter.

27 “First let the children eat all they want,” he told her, “for it is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”

28 “Lord,” she replied, “even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.”

29 Then he told her, “For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter.”

30 She went home and found her child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.......

Perhaps some leading Christians can help out here.

Kukutente23/ TV01/ Jesusjnr2020

animal imagery is deeply rooted in Ancient jewish tradition language. They called God The Lion of Judah, Jesus called Israelites sheep in the same passage she referred to the gentile woman as dog.

Dog is a term is used for gentiles by ancient Israelites, it's not derogatory in anyway rather it stems from gentiles close relationship and fondness with dogs. for example dogs are allowed inside homes of gentiles while such practice is prohibited in jewish homes.

most gentiles in Jesus' era would not even care if u call them dogs, they will just look at u and shrug. It's like mocking an hausa by calling him aboki or mocking a south african by calling him bantu.
aboki means friend in hausa and bantu means people in zulu. they are in no way derogatory in their proper usage.
Just like benue people mock Yoruba people by calling them ajegbin- snail eaters. I'm sure a Yoruba man would care less so long as he has a steady plate filled with garnished snail meat to consume.

anyone seeing racism in that passage is just extrapolating today's understanding of the word 'dog' into ancient language. and that's simply ignorance.

SIRTee15:
animal imagery is deeply rooted in Ancient jewish tradition language. They called God The Lion of Judah, Jesus called Israelites sheep in the same passage she referred to the gentile woman as dog.

Dog is a term is used for gentiles by ancient Israelites, it's not derogatory in anyway rather it stems from gentiles close relationship and fondness with dogs. for example dogs are allowed inside homes of gentiles while such practice is prohibited in jewish homes.

most gentiles in Jesus' era would not even care if u call them dogs, they will just look at u and shrug. It's like mocking an hausa by calling him aboki or mocking a south african by calling him bantu.
aboki means friend in hausa and bantu means people in zulu. they are in no way derogatory in their proper usage.
Just like benue people mock Yoruba people by calling them ajegbin- snail eaters. I'm sure a Yoruba man would care less so long as he has a steady plate filled with garnished snail meat to consume.

anyone seeing racism in that passage is just extrapolating today's understanding of the word 'dog' into ancient language. and that's simply ignorance.

Cheap and desperate excuses. The word dog is telling enough on its own but we can ignore it. What is important is that he says the children of the house should be attended to first.

TV01:
Complain away. How about you start with decapitations in Oyo, or public lynchings in Sokoto? Instead you raise a contrived allegation against the One from whom the very notion of human rights emanated.

You can question Christ, trash the West, smear white people, hate the juice - all to avoid taking a good hard look at your own culture and people. Bobo reflect small na. Truly what ails you?


TV

Good grief. Can you not even just address the question of what Jesus said. And for heavens sake the notion of human rights did not originate with him.

DeepSight:
Cheap and desperate excuses. The word dog is telling enough on its own but we can ignore it. What is important is that he says the children of the house should be attended to first.

So let me ask u a question?

Jesus called Israelites sheep in that passage. Why don't u have a problem with it?
In some culture today, calling someone a sheep means naive and dumb. Will those cultures take offense in Jesus calling Israelites sheep.

In the book of Revelation, Jesus called some people dogs; and Paul also said beware of dogs, what does he mean?
What is the theological meaning of dog in the scripture.

I repeat, u have no clue what u talking about. U are simply extrapolating today's understanding of the word into ancient language.

DeepSight:
Good grief. Can you not even just address the question of what Jesus said. And for heavens sake the notion of human rights did not originate with him.

It wasn't really much of a question was it? It was an attempt to smear!

And, in as much as it was, I answered. I showed you a broad-lens view of the work and ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ. His ministry, what his acolytes taught & preached, and, most pertinently, the generational and national outworking in peoples and amongst nations that follow His teaching.

I even showed you that the progressive human rights which you predicate your poser on originated from the peoples and nations followed Him. No other peoples or nations gave rise to them or at best copied them.

I also pointed out that the cultural and civil milieu you hail from, does not have these kind of progressive human rights natively - if\where they exist, they are borrowed. And you can see they are, as they haven't really embedded, have they? Oyo, Sokoto, Alu and so on and so forth.

Now, answer the question - What is the unique trait or behaviour that defines a racist?. Waiting patiently to blow some wind .



TV

Kobojunkie:
I accept that the books of Israelite Scripture are meant only for Israelites, as continuously highlighted in the message of every one of the Laws and the prophets detailed in the Books.

Then why are you, a non Israelite, a follower of Jesus? Why do you hold this Israelite scripture in any esteem since it isn't meant for you?

DeepSight:
What does this scripture disclose?

Mark 7.

24 Jesus left that place and went to the vicinity of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know it; yet he could not keep his presence secret. 25 In fact, as soon as she heard about him, a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an impure spirit came and fell at his feet. 26 The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter.

27 “First let the children eat all they want,” he told her, “for it is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”

28 “Lord,” she replied, “even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.”

29 Then he told her, “For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter.”

30 She went home and found her child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.......

Perhaps some leading Christians can help out here.

Kukutente23/ TV01/ Jesusjnr2020

I think I read an interpretation (probably in Dake's Annotated Refernce Bible) that he wasn't saying it like he was calling the woman a dog but rather in a parable format to illustrate that she was not supposed to receive the kind of gift she was seeking from him as a way to test her earnestness. And her response showed she didn't take offense and instead passed the test by recognising the lesson he was passing across.

But whatever men, the book is open to interpretation of all sorts so I won't be surprised to learn that some people would use it to buttress their own racist ideas.