Israel (Jews) and Our Views

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

All I am saying is that "Israel" never includes Gentiles.   He doesn't include Gentile believers as spiritual Israelites.  

 

 

But that's where you fail miserably too.

 

Rom.9

³ For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:

⁴ Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;

⁵ Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

⁶ Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

⁷ Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

⁸ That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

That isn't talking about Gentile believers Paul is making a distinction between ethnic Israel and the believing remnant of Israel.  Paul is not saying that believing Gentiles are now part of Israel. Instead, his point is that believing Jews are the true Israel.

 

Paul is not distinguishing  a spiritual Israel (which some call "the church')  from ethnic Israel, but to state that the promises made to Israel might be fulfilled even if some of his descendants were shut out from them. What he states is that not all the physical descendants of Jacob are necessarily inheritors of the Divine promises implied in the name, "Israel."

 

Gal.3

⁶ Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.

⁷ Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.

⁸ And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

⁹ So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

 

¹⁸ For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

 

 

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.

²⁹ And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

 

This passage isn't about who is or isn't Israel.  This is an entirely different discussion Paul is having with Gentile belivers who were victims of a heresy that said they had to convert to the Jewish religion (i.e. get circumcised) into addition to faith in Christ in order to enter the Kingdom of God.   Paul was addressing a false gospel perpetrated by a Judaizing cult.   Israel isn't even on the radar in this passage.   Paul is drawing on the Abrahamic Covenant to show that Gentiles are part of the Kingdom by faith in Jesus alone apart from anything contained in the law, particularly circumcision.  

 

So you have ignored the context of that passage are attempting to get it address an issue it isn't meant to address.

 

The name Israel is about God's Promise by Faith first given through Abraham, because that early Promise included God's Birthright promises that descended down to Ephraim and Manasseh. All those of Faith inherit with Abraham, and that has always included God's Promises to Abraham of the land, of many seed, ruling the gates of his enemies, plenty of corn and wine, etc.

 

No, the land promises were given only to the ethnic, natural descendents of Abraham and the Scriptures make that clear.   Israel doesn't include any Gentiles.   Are you part of the Ephraimite "two-stick"  doctrinal position that sees the Gentile nations as "Ephraimites?"

[OakWood]

 

 

All I am saying is that "Israel" never includes Gentiles.   He doesn't include Gentile believers as spiritual Israelites.  

 

 

But that's where you fail miserably too.

 

Rom.9

³ For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:

⁴ Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;

⁵ Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

⁶ Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

⁷ Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

⁸ That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

 

 

Gal.3

⁶ Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.

⁷ Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.

⁸ And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

⁹ So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

 

¹⁸ For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

 

 

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.

²⁹ And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

 

 

The name Israel is about God's Promise by Faith first given through Abraham, because that early Promise included God's Birthright promises that descended down to Ephraim and Manasseh. All those of Faith inherit with Abraham, and that has always included God's Promises to Abraham of the land, of many seed, ruling the gates of his enemies, plenty of corn and wine, etc.

 

But I will tell you who tries to make that name 'Israel' into something it is not. The crept in unawares that took over the seat of Moses long ago, foreigners of the Canaanites which the children of Israel were not able to completely destroy per God's commandment, those seek to claim God's Israel and the promises for their selves, to set up their own kingdom denying the only One True God and to instead place their 'rock' in power over it in place of Jesus Christ. It's going to be fun to watch, because just when they think... they have succeeded in doing that, Christ Jesus is going to come to destroy their fake kingdom they have spent centuries to build off this earth, forever.

 

 

I agree with you, that is why you should never make the word 'Israel' into something that it is not, and Israel is not the gentiles, nor does it include the gentiles.

It includes only the seed of Jacob those that are bloodline descendants of him.

It is the reason that Jews have been persecuted for centuries because they carry the bloodline that God made his promise to. If the Jews are exterminated then Satan wins because God cannot fulfill his promises and prophecy will fail.

That is why the Jews have been slandered, libelled and lied about for the best part of two thousand years because Satan the father of lies, has used evil men to turn other men against them.

They've been accused of drinking the blood of new-born babies, accused of plotting to overthrow the World,, accused of secretly ruling the World, of causing World War one, accused of control the World's finances and even been accused of causing their own Holocaust in the 1940s.

Now that they have their own homeland again, Satan concentrates on trying to destroy Israel. The lies told about Israel are preposterous. Israel is falsely accused of being a terrorist state or an apartheid state, but anybody with any knowledge of the facts knows that these claims are ludicrous.

If the definition of Israel now includes gentiles as well, then none of this persecution makes any sense as the Jewish bloodline would be unimportant and God's promises to Israel would be nonsense.

Anybody who claims that Israel has been redefined to include non-Jews is twisting scripture, insulting God and making a mockery of his word.

[Salty]

 

This passage isn't about who is or isn't Israel.  This is an entirely different discussion Paul is having with Gentile belivers who were victims of a heresy that said they had to convert to the Jewish religion (i.e. get circumcised) into addition to faith in Christ in order to enter the Kingdom of God.   Paul was addressing a false gospel perpetrated by a Judaizing cult.   Israel isn't even on the radar in this passage.   Paul is drawing on the Abrahamic Covenant to show that Gentiles are part of the Kingdom by faith in Jesus alone apart from anything contained in the law, particularly circumcision.  

 

So you have ignored the context of that passage are attempting to get it address an issue it isn't meant to address.

 

 

I know it hurts you inside, but NO ONE will be saved just because of their flesh birth. ALL must... come to the Faith on The Father through His Son Jesus Christ, including those born of Israel. And that is what God's first Promise to Abraham is about, which was before the law, and before the existence of the Levites and the children of Israel.

 

⁸ That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

This passage isn't about who is or isn't Israel.  This is an entirely different discussion Paul is having with Gentile belivers who were victims of a heresy that said they had to convert to the Jewish religion (i.e. get circumcised) into addition to faith in Christ in order to enter the Kingdom of God.   Paul was addressing a false gospel perpetrated by a Judaizing cult.   Israel isn't even on the radar in this passage.   Paul is drawing on the Abrahamic Covenant to show that Gentiles are part of the Kingdom by faith in Jesus alone apart from anything contained in the law, particularly circumcision.  

 

So you have ignored the context of that passage are attempting to get it address an issue it isn't meant to address.

 

 

I know it hurts you inside, but NO ONE will be saved just because of their flesh birth.

I never said would be saved because of their ethnicity.  Where in my comments did you take the notion that I would say such a thing?  I never even implied it.  Here's a novel idea:   Try reading what I said and responding to what I actually posted instead of assigning false values to me.

 

A

[Salty]

I never said would be saved because of their ethnicity.  Where in my comments did you take the notion that I would say such a thing?  I never even implied it.  Here's a novel idea:   Try reading what I said and responding to what I actually posted instead of assigning false values to me.

 

 

 

I haven't ignored your posts. You keep trying to bring up ideas of seccessionism when that hasn't even been the subject between you and I, and that means you have tried to input falseness into my words when I never spoke of such things. So before you accuse me you might learn to check your own words.

[Guest shiloh357]

 

I never said would be saved because of their ethnicity.  Where in my comments did you take the notion that I would say such a thing?  I never even implied it.  Here's a novel idea:   Try reading what I said and responding to what I actually posted instead of assigning false values to me.

 

 

 

I haven't ignored your posts. You keep trying to bring up ideas of seccessionism when that hasn't even been the subject between you and I, and that means you have tried to input falseness into my words when I never spoke of such things. So before you accuse me you might learn to check your own words.

 

I didn't accuse you ignoring my posts.  I accused you assigning false values to my words.  .   The view that the Church is Israel is the heart of Supercessionism, whether you are willing to make room for that or not.   It is a false teaching.  

[Macs Son]

Hi Shiloh - hope you don't mind my enumerating your arguments for clarity

1. "The Church" is not an OT concept.   The Church was a mystery hidden in God and not revealed until God revealed to His apostles.   There is no mention of the Church or Church age in the OT.  There are no prophecies of the Church in the OT. 

 

2. The term ekklessia may have already been in use prior to the New Covenant, but the doctrine of the Church is not an OT doctrine.  And there is no use of it in the NT that includes OT saints.  Acts. 7:38 is not teaching the doctrine of the Church.  You are really stretching on that one.

 

3. I would point out that Jesus in Matt. 16 speaking to His disciples says, "upon this rock, I will build my church (ekklessia).   He spoke of it in the future tense. He did not speak of it as a spiritual entity that already existed.  He didn't say, "upon this rock I am building my Church.

 

4. Furthermore, Paul, Romans 9:3b-4 in referring to ethnic Israelites still considers the covenants, the promises and even the Temple services as still belonging to Israel, even during the church age and even during a time when Israel is in a state of disobedience.   He still speaks of Israel as a separate entity from the Church.

 

5. There is not ONE reference to Israel in the NT that speaks of it as continuance of biblical Israel.  It never equates Israel with the Church.   Israel Is Israel and the Church is the Church.  Israel and the Church are radically separate.

1. By Church you mean ekklessia correct?

"And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. "

κἀγὼ δέ σοι λέγω ὅτι σὺ εἶ Πέτρος καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν καὶ πύλαι ᾅδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς

so ekkllessia is the word is it not?

2. Yes, the term was definitely in use as the Septuagint clearly shows. In fact the word occurs about 80 times in the LXX in the books we consider to be canonical.

3. It's a feminine noun. But realize the Church was already established.

“And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven."

Are not Abraham and Jacob part of the Church then?

And are not we of the seed of Abraham's promise since we are now in Christ?

Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as of many, but as of one, “And to your Seed,” who is Christ.

4. Yes, but Peter, James, John, and Paul all continued o go up to temple and of the Jews Paul says in Romans 11:11-1

I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles. Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness! .....

For if their being cast away is the reconciling of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?

[Guest shiloh357]

Hi Shiloh - hope you don't mind my enumerating your arguments for clarity

1. By Church you mean ekklessia correct?

"And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. "

κἀγὼ δέ σοι λέγω ὅτι σὺ εἶ Πέτρος καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν καὶ πύλαι ᾅδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς

so ekkllessia is the word is it not?

2. Yes, the term was definitely in use as the Septuagint clearly shows. In fact the word occurs about 80 times in the LXX in the books we consider to be canonical.

3. It's a feminine noun. But realize the Church was already established.

 

The issue is not whether or not the word ekklessia is used in the OT  But it is not used in the sense that it is used in the NT.     The Church according to Paul was a mystery hidden in God.  There are no prophecies of the church or church age.  The OT prophets knew nothing of a "Church" in the sense that we understand the doctrine of the Church.    The OT prophets speak of Jesus' birth, ministry, death, burial and even his ascension and second coming.  But they never prophesy of the Church or Church age.

 

So it isn't enough that the word ekklessia appears in the LXX.   It is how it is used and applied.   Biblical israel was a worshipping congregation or ekklessia but that does NOT mean that we can call them "The Church."   That intellectual leap isn't warranted in Scripture.

[MorningGlory]

 

Zechariah 8:23

 

As yet unfulfilled. Those who think that God has finished with the Jews are calling God a liar. God loves the Jews.

Does he really love the Jews, or is he really just following up on a promise to Abraham?  

 

God always keeps His promises.  He loves all of His creations so how could He not love the Jews?

[Guest shiloh357]

If the Church is Israel and  if the promises of blessing that God made to biblical Israel are transferred to the Church as some erroneously claim, then God is not faithful.  If the Church is now the new Israel, then God is a liar.   It means that God has not kept His promises to biblical Israel and thus He cannot be trusted to keep His promises.