What meaneth these things?

[JohnD]

 

Doubling that, Paul himself said that a REAL JEW is one who is such INWARDLY, not of bloodright.

 

That is not what Paul said, exactly.  Paul was using an imaginary Jewish interlociter (a common rhetorical device) to make his point about what it means for Jews to live as true Jews.   Paul is not saying that all those who believe in Jesus are the real Jews.   Paul is explaining that a Jewish person should not put faith in their physical identity and that being Jewish really comes from living one's life as a praise to God.  He was not changing the defintion of "Jew" to include Gentile believers.

 

 

 

So, yes, of course all of Israel will be saved ... once you know who ISRAEL actually is.

 

Israel are those who are of the physical descendents of Jacob who put their faith in Jesus. They are the "Israel" within the physical nation of Israel.

 

 

Once again, in point #2 you douse the flame out of Galatians 3:28 etc.

 

Point #1 {would be} true if that was all the Bible said about the subject. It is far from all there is.

[JohnD]

If klal yisro'el is only believing yehudiym (in Yeshua) then there most certainly is a distinction between yehudiym (am yisro'el) and ha goyum that believe in Yeshua.

 

Get out your scissors and pen knives... it's time to extract texts from the Bible again (like the sephardics did with Isaiah 53 in the Haftorah) an the Sanhedrin did with Daniel demoting the book from the prophets to the writings... 'cause we don't want to believe what it  says.

[JohnD]

The origin of the name Israel (Yisra'el) comes from the original Hebrew:

 

Yish (he)

Sarar (prince)*

elohiym (God)

 

*8323 sarar { saw-rar’}

 

a primitive root; TWOT - 2295; v

 

AV - rule 3, make prince 1, altogether 1; 5

 

GK - 8606 { שָׂרַר }

 

1)     to be or act as prince, rule, contend, have power, prevail over, reign, govern

1a)     (Qal) to rule over, govern

1b)     (Hithpael) to lord it over

 

The ultimate Prince of God is Yeshua (Jesus). And if we realized who we are in the Spirit... we would be called by his name Israel.

[Guest shiloh357]

 

You are really good stringing verses and passages together from different contexts and forcing them to address an issue they were never meant to address.  When Paul refers to the "Israel of God."  He is talking about Jewish believers, the remnant in Israel that put faith in Jesus. 

 

The Bible doesn't spiritualize the terms "Jew" or "Israel."   Everytime those words are used they are ONLY ever referring to physical Jews, not Gentile beleivers.

 

Romans 2:28 is not talking about Gentile believers.  It is talking about Jews being circumcized in their heart.  Romans 2:28-29 is telling Jews what it means to be a real Jew. 

 

Romans 9:6 is talking about the remnant.   That true Israel is comprised of the Jews who accepted Jesus as the Messiah.  In God's eyes, from a theological standpoint, it is not enough to simply be a member of the physical nation of Israel.  The true Israel were Jewish believers.

 

 

Then Galatians 3:28 is nonsense.

 

 

Galatians 3:28 (KJV)

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

 

Right?

 

Galatians 3:28 is simply saying that in Christ being  Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female offers no one an advantage or sets one at a disadvantage where access to God's grace is concerned.

 

It is rather irrational to use Gal. 3:28 which says that one is neither Gentile or Jew in Christ to argue that in Christ one is, in fact, a Jew.   The Bible never spritualizes Jews to refer to Gentile believers.  To say otherwise is sloppy theology and sloppy hermeneutics.

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

Doubling that, Paul himself said that a REAL JEW is one who is such INWARDLY, not of bloodright.

 

That is not what Paul said, exactly.  Paul was using an imaginary Jewish interlociter (a common rhetorical device) to make his point about what it means for Jews to live as true Jews.   Paul is not saying that all those who believe in Jesus are the real Jews.   Paul is explaining that a Jewish person should not put faith in their physical identity and that being Jewish really comes from living one's life as a praise to God.  He was not changing the defintion of "Jew" to include Gentile believers.

 

 

 

So, yes, of course all of Israel will be saved ... once you know who ISRAEL actually is.

 

Israel are those who are of the physical descendents of Jacob who put their faith in Jesus. They are the "Israel" within the physical nation of Israel.

 

 

Once again, in point #2 you douse the flame out of Galatians 3:28 etc.

 

Point #1 {would be} true if that was all the Bible said about the subject. It is far from all there is.

 

No, you are simply not competent to correclty exegete Galations 3:28.  You don't know what you are talking about.

[nebula]

You are really good stringing verses and passages together from different contexts and forcing them to address an issue they were never meant to address.  When Paul refers to the "Israel of God."  He is talking about Jewish believers, the remnant in Israel that put faith in Jesus. 

 

The Bible doesn't spiritualize the terms "Jew" or "Israel."   Everytime those words are used they are ONLY ever referring to physical Jews, not Gentile beleivers.

 

Romans 2:28 is not talking about Gentile believers.  It is talking about Jews being circumcized in their heart.  Romans 2:28-29 is telling Jews what it means to be a real Jew. 

 

Romans 9:6 is talking about the remnant.   That true Israel is comprised of the Jews who accepted Jesus as the Messiah.  In God's eyes, from a theological standpoint, it is not enough to simply be a member of the physical nation of Israel.  The true Israel were Jewish believers.

Then Galatians 3:28 is nonsense.

 

 

Galatians 3:28 (KJV)

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

 

Right?

 

What do you do with the "there is neither male nor female" part of this sentence?

 

Do you treat it the same as you are treating "there is neither Jew nor Greek"?

[nebula]

John - Do you believe Gentile Christians have inherited the birthright to the land of Israel?

[EnochBethany]

 

Romans 9-11 is a key passage on Dispensations, Israel vs the Church.

 

Note that the passage states that true Israel is a smaller part of physical Israel. The meaning of Israel is not expanded to include non-descendants of Jacob, but restricted to a subset of them.

 

Not so.

 

You (again) throw out Galatians 3:28, Galatians 6:13-18, Romans 11:16-26, Romans 2:28-29, and Philippians 3:1-3.

 

You must consider what you read in all these texts together.

 

The foregone conclusion is:

 

John 4:

23 ... true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

24 God is Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

 

Philippians 3:3 (KJV)

3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

 

Romans 2:28-29 (KJV)

28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

 

Fact of the matter is, God has been doing this all along. It is what distinguished Jacob from Esau, Noah from the rest of his generation, Abel from Cain for pity sake.

 

Even in the law of Moses...

 

Deuteronomy 10:16 (KJV)

16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.

 

...where there is no distinction between male and female free or slave Jew or Greek.

 

Well, John of the dB's,

I hear you loud & clear.

 

No, I don't de-consider the rest of the Bible.  I have read it from cover to cover, times beyond counting. 

 

Yes, in the Church there is neither Jew nor Gentile, this dispensation.

 

Now back up a minute, por favor, senor, and look at your proof texts.  It is easy to show that not all Israel is Israel.  Scripture clearly teaches that true Israel is a smaller set of physical Israel.  The concept of Jew or Israelite is narrowed.  But,

 

it is not expanded to include more than the physical nation of Israel.  So to quote passages where Israel is less than Israel, is no proof that Israel is more than Israel.

 

As to Dispensationalism, I recommend to the one who wishes to know the concept or to argue against the real POV, instead of a straw man, study Ryrie's Dispensationalism Today.

 

Now if you are a covenant theologian & reject D, I can still regard you as a brother in the Lord.

[Willa]

The Holy Spirit in me cries out Abba, Daddy to Father God. Jesus has become my eldest Big Brother Who cares for me like my Daddy does. But I do not feel the connection to the LAND of Israel that Jews by blood feel--that it is my rightful inheritance. In Christ the land also belongs to me to eventually rule and reign over, but only by nature of my remaining in Him. So I bless Israel and pray for the peace of Jeruselem, because I know that she is dear to my Savior's heart. He wept over her.

Enoch, I have not read the linc, but all born again people are my brother and sisters in Christ, no matter what strange ideas they may have, including you. It is best to let God be the judge of who is our brother or sister, lest one seems to be contentious as in Gal. 5:20, or even worse, devisive.. I do not consider myself a dispensationalist other than where the Bible mentions such as in Epesians 1and 3:2 & 6. And I will not add to Scripture or go beyond what it plainly states as many theologians do. But I don't understand your statement concerning covenant theology. We are in the covenant of grace by His blood, which is the Gospel.

Please, tread softly and in His love, offering others grace as He has given you grace. The Holy Spirit is our Teacher Who will lead us into all truth.

Blessings,

Willa

PS, I, too have been reading and studying the Bible for a long time--since 1958 when I first repented and bought my first New Testament. But without love I am nothing.

[JohnD]

 

 

You are really good stringing verses and passages together from different contexts and forcing them to address an issue they were never meant to address.  When Paul refers to the "Israel of God."  He is talking about Jewish believers, the remnant in Israel that put faith in Jesus. 

 

The Bible doesn't spiritualize the terms "Jew" or "Israel."   Everytime those words are used they are ONLY ever referring to physical Jews, not Gentile beleivers.

 

Romans 2:28 is not talking about Gentile believers.  It is talking about Jews being circumcized in their heart.  Romans 2:28-29 is telling Jews what it means to be a real Jew. 

 

Romans 9:6 is talking about the remnant.   That true Israel is comprised of the Jews who accepted Jesus as the Messiah.  In God's eyes, from a theological standpoint, it is not enough to simply be a member of the physical nation of Israel.  The true Israel were Jewish believers.

 

 

Then Galatians 3:28 is nonsense.

 

 

Galatians 3:28 (KJV)

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

 

Right?

 

Galatians 3:28 is simply saying that in Christ being  Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female offers no one an advantage or sets one at a disadvantage where access to God's grace is concerned.

 

It is rather irrational to use Gal. 3:28 which says that one is neither Gentile or Jew in Christ to argue that in Christ one is, in fact, a Jew.   The Bible never spritualizes Jews to refer to Gentile believers.  To say otherwise is sloppy theology and sloppy hermeneutics.

 

 

 

Oh, so in Romans 11 God grafts non-olive branches into the olive tree and cuts off the natural olive branches and the non-olive branches are just non-olive branches?

 

No!

 

Sorry for your belief system, but the Bible does call Gentile born believers wild OLIVE branches.

 

And you isolated Galatians 3:28 leaving off Romans 2:28-29 / Philippians 3:3 / Romans 9:6 / Galatians 6:16 (same book as Galatians 3:28)...

 

So who is using bad hermeneutics? Hmm?