Israel, the Church, an the Parable of the Olive Tree

[Diaste]

17 hours ago, not an echo said:

Hello Diaste,

Maybe it is like you say.

But I don't want to confuse this withered fig with the parable of the fig tree in the Olivet Discourse. They are unrelated and teach about two very different concepts.

[not an echo]

14 hours ago, Diaste said:

On 8/28/2021 at 12:27 PM, not an echo said:

Hello Diaste,

Maybe it is like you say.

But I don't want to confuse this withered fig with the parable of the fig tree in the Olivet Discourse. They are unrelated and teach about two very different concepts.

Hello Diaste,

I do agree.  But, as you may have seen in my reply to Leonardo Von on page one, I don't want this thread to get sidetracked into a discussion about the fig tree.  I probably should not have even said what I did, but I thought that I might be able to be considerate of his question and still keep things on track.  The fig tree deserves a thread all its own, and I would think that there probably is one.  Of course, a new one may need to be started, but I don't have time to work the threads that I presently have.  Annnyway, in this thread, I would like to keep the focus on Paul's parable of the Olive Tree.

You may not have really realized this Diaste, but it was chiefly in response to some things that you have said that I felt led to start this thread in the first place.  I remain curious concerning your thoughts on my opening post.

[Diaste]

8 hours ago, not an echo said:

Hello Diaste,

I do agree.  But, as you may have seen in my reply to Leonardo Von on page one, I don't want this thread to get sidetracked into a discussion about the fig tree.  I probably should not have even said what I did, but I thought that I might be able to be considerate of his question and still keep things on track.  The fig tree deserves a thread all its own, and I would think that there probably is one.  Of course, a new one may need to be started, but I don't have time to work the threads that I presently have.  Annnyway, in this thread, I would like to keep the focus on Paul's parable of the Olive Tree.

You may not have really realized this Diaste, but it was chiefly in response to some things that you have said that I felt led to start this thread in the first place.  I remain curious concerning your thoughts on my opening post.

I don't want to assume the point you are trying to make.

Is it promise keeping?

The identity of Israel?

The identity of the church?

A plug for the dispensationalist view?

A pretrib rapture proof?

I think I saw all the above and more touched on.

And all that talk of food made me hungry so maybe it was all just about pie and ice cream!

 

[abcdef]

On 8/10/2021 at 7:57 PM, not an echo said:

Concerning the thread title, I want to put forth for everyone's consideration some thoughts I have concerning distinctions I see between the Nation of Israel and the Christian Church, especially as these distinctions are clarified by Paul's Parable of the Olive Tree (Rom. 11:16-24)

To begin, in the Bible, there is seen a sense in which a nation can be thought of as a church, and a church can be thought of as a nation.  On the one hand, Stephen referred to those of the Nation of Israel as "the Church in the wilderness" (Acts 7:38).  On the other hand, Peter referred to those of the Christian Church as "an Holy Nation" (I Pet. 2:9).

I would just like to comment,

I find that the word "church" is confusing because of the varied definitions in the minds of people. Some think of a building, a denomination, a congregation, or most commonly the RCC. I have tried to avoid using the word "church". 

The "kingdom of Israel" is more specific in its meaning.

When the kingdom came on Pentecost, 1000's of the natural branches accepted the gospel kingdom of Israel. For years the kingdom of Israel was exclusively made up of the children of Israel.

Then after years, the gentiles were allowed into the kingdom of Israel by faith.

So there were many children of Israel in the kingdom and many gentiles.

There are many children of Israel who rejected the gospel Pentecost kingdom, they are the broken off branches.

There are many children of Israel who accepted the kingdom of Israel, they are the natural branches who were not cut off and were included the new covenant. 

Then the gentile branches were grafted into the kingdom by faith.

------

As an example, try calling the RCC, the kingdom of Israel.

It changes the concept of what the RCC, "church", is.

To say that the children of Israel are permanently "cut off" and that they are replaced by the RCC as the kingdom of Israel exclusively, is shown in a different understanding when you call the "church" the "kingdom of Israel".

-----

When you say "church", I believe that most people think of the gentile side of the kingdom and exclude the children of Israel, distorting the identity of the kingdom.

-----

[not an echo]

On 8/30/2021 at 4:51 AM, Diaste said:

On 8/29/2021 at 8:22 PM, not an echo said:

Hello Diaste,

I do agree.  But, as you may have seen in my reply to Leonardo Von on page one, I don't want this thread to get sidetracked into a discussion about the fig tree.  I probably should not have even said what I did, but I thought that I might be able to be considerate of his question and still keep things on track.  The fig tree deserves a thread all its own, and I would think that there probably is one.  Of course, a new one may need to be started, but I don't have time to work the threads that I presently have.  Annnyway, in this thread, I would like to keep the focus on Paul's parable of the Olive Tree.

You may not have really realized this Diaste, but it was chiefly in response to some things that you have said that I felt led to start this thread in the first place.  I remain curious concerning your thoughts on my opening post.

I don't want to assume the point you are trying to make.

Is it promise keeping?

The identity of Israel?

The identity of the church?

A plug for the dispensationalist view?

A pretrib rapture proof?

I think I saw all the above and more touched on.

And all that talk of food made me hungry so maybe it was all just about pie and ice cream!

 

Hello Diaste,

Connected with some of the discussions we have had and things you have said, it is about distinctions that can be made between the Nation of Israel and the Christian Church.  Hey, if you like talk about apple pie and ice cream, I would like to encourage you to go back to my opening post and try another helping.  Don't miss this part...

"I've said much of the foregoing to say this:  There are distinctions to be made between the Nation of Israel and the Christian Church.  Moreover, in God's eyes, spiritually speaking, all that say they are of Israel are not (e.g., Rom. 2:28-29;  9:6-8), and all that say they are of the Church are not (e.g., II Cor. 11:13-15;  II Pet. 2:1-3).  Succinctly, some out there are bad apples.  But the good apples?  It don't matter a bit if they are Honey Crisps, Galas, Granny Smiths, or whatever---THEY ARE ALL APPLES!"

Edited February 3, 2023 by not an echo

[not an echo]

On 8/30/2021 at 10:46 AM, abcdef said:

On 8/10/2021 at 7:57 PM, not an echo said:

Concerning the thread title, I want to put forth for everyone's consideration some thoughts I have concerning distinctions I see between the Nation of Israel and the Christian Church, especially as these distinctions are clarified by Paul's Parable of the Olive Tree (Rom. 11:16-24)

To begin, in the Bible, there is seen a sense in which a nation can be thought of as a church, and a church can be thought of as a nation.  On the one hand, Stephen referred to those of the Nation of Israel as "the Church in the wilderness" (Acts 7:38).  On the other hand, Peter referred to those of the Christian Church as "an Holy Nation" (I Pet. 2:9).

I would just like to comment,

I find that the word "church" is confusing because of the varied definitions in the minds of people. Some think of a building, a denomination, a congregation, or most commonly the RCC. I have tried to avoid using the word "church". 

The "kingdom of Israel" is more specific in its meaning.

When the kingdom came on Pentecost, 1000's of the natural branches accepted the gospel kingdom of Israel. For years the kingdom of Israel was exclusively made up of the children of Israel.

Then after years, the gentiles were allowed into the kingdom of Israel by faith.

So there were many children of Israel in the kingdom and many gentiles.

There are many children of Israel who rejected the gospel Pentecost kingdom, they are the broken off branches.

There are many children of Israel who accepted the kingdom of Israel, they are the natural branches who were not cut off and were included the new covenant. 

Then the gentile branches were grafted into the kingdom by faith.

------

As an example, try calling the RCC, the kingdom of Israel.

It changes the concept of what the RCC, "church", is.

To say that the children of Israel are permanently "cut off" and that they are replaced by the RCC as the kingdom of Israel exclusively, is shown in a different understanding when you call the "church" the "kingdom of Israel".

-----

When you say "church", I believe that most people think of the gentile side of the kingdom and exclude the children of Israel, distorting the identity of the kingdom.

-----

Hello abcdef,

I can see some of what you are saying, but personally, I would be very disinclined to avoid using the word "church" for such reasons and much more inclined to just keep putting forth a proper understanding of it.  I think of the word "home".  If the wife and I have been out of town for the weekend, it would be a common thing for me to ask her if she is ready to go home.  Yet, we have long understood that she and I constitute the home.  If we were to get back to the house and find that it had burned down, our home would remain.  Now, my dad, because he was a stickler to such details, was always careful to say, "Are you ready to go to the house."  So, while we understand these things, the subject might still come up at times, especially if we are wanting to teach the concept to children, or those young in the Lord.

Of course, it is a good thing to reinforce what the Church actually is, for we do not come out of our mother's womb understanding these things.  It's like our ABC's and 123's.  While the "brick and mortar" edifice is not the church (similar as with the home), the steepled buildings that dot the earth do represent something, and we often talk about "going to church."  But, if we arrive to find that the church building has burned down, the church would remain, as the people (the saved) constitute the church.  Something that is common with me is to reinforce that our local church is a little "c" church and that we are a part of something much, much bigger---the capital "C" Church.  It is the capital "C" Church that Jesus was speaking of when He said that the "gates of hell would not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18).  I would be reluctant to avoid using the word "church" just because of aggravating elements related to the RCC.  I could see Satan delighting over such a thing.  Interestingly, the Church is spoken of as "the body" of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23;  4:12), over which Christ is the Head (Eph. 5:23).  Moreover, and in accord with your concern, the Church is certainly made up of Jew and Gentile alike (Gal. 3:26-29;  I Cor. 12:12-13).

[Anne2]

1 hour ago, not an echo said:

Hello abcdef,

I can see some of what you are saying, but personally, I would be very disinclined to avoid using the word "church" for such reasons and much more inclined to just keep putting forth a proper understanding of it.  I think of the word "home".  If the wife and I have been out of town for the weekend, it would be a common thing for me to ask her if she is ready to go home.  Yet, we have long understood that she and I constitute the home.  If we were to get back to the house and find that it had burned down, our home would remain.  Now, my dad, because he was a stickler to such details, was always careful to say, "Are you ready to go to the house."  So, while we understand these things, the subject might still come up at times, especially if we are wanting to teach the concept to children, or those young in the Lord.

Of course, it is a good thing to reinforce what the Church actually is, for we do not come out of our mother's womb understanding these things.  It's like our ABC's and 123's.  While the "brick and mortar" edifice is not the church (similar as with the home), the steepled buildings that dot the earth do represent something, and we often talk about "going to church."  But, if we arrive to find that the church building has burned down, the church would remain, as the people (the saved) constitute the church.  Something that is common with me is to reinforce that our local church is a little "c" church and that we are a part of something much, much bigger---the capital "C" Church.  It is the capital "C" Church that Jesus was speaking of when He said that the "gates of hell would not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18).  I would be reluctant to avoid using the word "church" just because of aggravating elements related to the RCC.  I could see Satan delighting over such a thing.  Interestingly, the Church is spoken of as "the body" of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23;  4:12), over which Christ is the Head (Eph. 5:23).  Moreover, and in accord with your concern, the Church is certainly made up of Jew and Gentile alike (Gal. 3:26-29;  I Cor. 12:12-13).

Church is a translation of the Greek ekklesia. This word is found in the old testament Greek. I don't know why the translators chose to translate this word as Congregation in the old, and then as Church in the new. But we do see it here in acts as the congregation or assembly with Moses.

Ac 7:38  This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

In Hebrew ekklesia (church) equals the Hebrew qahal 06951

Assembly, congregation, etc. Maybe the translators did it to distinguish between the assembly of the apostles and others?

Edited September 22, 2021 by Anne2

[Marilyn C]

On 8/11/2021 at 10:27 AM, not an echo said:

Hello all,

 

on can be thought of as a church, and a church can be thought of as a nation.  On the one hand, Stephen referred to those of the Nation of Israel as "the Church in the wilderness" (Acts 7:38).  On the other hand, Peter referred to those of the Christian Church as "an Holy Nation" (I Pet. 2:9).

 

Finally, God has not forgot those old natural branches of His Olive Tree.  He certainly hasn't forgot the trunk and root (His promise to Abraham). 

Hi not an echo,

Some more detail - Church (assembly) are called the out ones, Ekklesia

- for Israel - called out of the nations, (Gentiles) 

- for the Body of Christ - called out of Israel & the nations.(Gentiles)

Big difference there.

Then as to  `holy nation` that is actually referring to `ethnic` (nation) group, the `new man.`

 

Next the `root` of the Olive tree in Rom. 11: 17 refers to the Lord for only He is -

- holy,

- gives nourishment -fatness of the olive tree.

 

Israel or Abraham could never be that.

[Keras]

The future for the Lords faithful Christian peoples:

Zechariah 9:14-15 The Lord will appear over His people and His weapon of judgement will flash like lightning.  His war shofar will make a great sound, accompanied by a terrible whirlwind. The Lord will protect His people and they will exult in His deliverance. Paralleled by Isaiah 30:26

Zechariah 10:1-12 For now, your false gods and idols give empty promises, dreams and delusions. So My people are left to wander about, like sheep and distressed for the lack of a proper shepherd.

The Lord’s anger burns against the leaders of His people, they will fall on the Day of His wrath.

For the Lord will care for His flock, He will strengthen the House of Judah and save the House of Joseph. From Judah will come the leaders that will be My battleaxe and they will rout the enemy, because I am with them. The warriors of Ephraim will exult and rejoice in the Lord’s victory and in their deliverance. The families of the Lord’s people will see and be glad with what the Lord has done.

 The pride of the nations will be brought low, but Israel’s strength will be in the Lord, they will march proudly in His Name.

He will whistle and call them in. His redeemed people, though now in far off lands, they will answer the call.  They will return to their heritage, bringing their children with them. The Lord will bring them home from every nation around the world and He will lead them into Gilead and Lebanon until there is no more room for them all.  They will pass through rivers that will dry up for them to cross.

The Lord will give rain in due season, grass in the fields and fruit abundantly. On the Day the Lord takes action, He will save His flock. For they are like precious gems in His crown, they will sparkle all over His Land. What wealth is theirs! What beauty! Good food and drink will give health and strength to the young men and women.                                 Ref: REB, CJB.

 

This prophecy reiterates the great promise of God to His righteous people, whether they are true descendants of Jacob or grafted in Christians. The Lord will protect them on His great Day of judgement and punishment of the nations, as He brings down the pride of His enemies, but the strength of all true believers is in the Lord. He will be revealed to them; 2 Thess. 1:10, and will direct them into the Holy Land as He did with ancient Israel. 1 Corinthians 10:4  This is not the Return in glory, to come later.

All of that area given so long ago to Abraham, will be burnt, devastated and depopulated by the Lord’s Day of wrath – lightning flashes, great noise, earthquakes  and powerful storms - as described here and in other prophesies as a coronal mass ejection, explosion of the sun, that will affect all of the world, but primarily the Middle East region. Zephaniah 2:4, Ezekiel 30:1-5, Amos 1, 2 Peter 3:7

 

Ezekiel 36:8 But you mountains of Israel, put forth your branches and bear fruit, for the homecoming of My people is near.

This and many other prophesies say how the Lord will send rain and the holy Land will quickly regenerate into a Land of plenty and prosperity, ready for the great emigration of all the Lord’s Christian peoples. Psalms 107

They will live there as the rest of the end time prophesies unfold and it is them who say to Jesus: Blessed is He who comes in the Name of the Lord!   

   Be ready for the whistle!                 

[not an echo]

On 9/22/2021 at 4:58 PM, Anne2 said:

On 9/22/2021 at 3:17 PM, not an echo said:

Hello abcdef,

I can see some of what you are saying, but personally, I would be very disinclined to avoid using the word "church" for such reasons and much more inclined to just keep putting forth a proper understanding of it.  I think of the word "home".  If the wife and I have been out of town for the weekend, it would be a common thing for me to ask her if she is ready to go home.  Yet, we have long understood that she and I constitute the home.  If we were to get back to the house and find that it had burned down, our home would remain.  Now, my dad, because he was a stickler to such details, was always careful to say, "Are you ready to go to the house."  So, while we understand these things, the subject might still come up at times, especially if we are wanting to teach the concept to children, or those young in the Lord.

Of course, it is a good thing to reinforce what the Church actually is, for we do not come out of our mother's womb understanding these things.  It's like our ABC's and 123's.  While the "brick and mortar" edifice is not the church (similar as with the home), the steepled buildings that dot the earth do represent something, and we often talk about "going to church."  But, if we arrive to find that the church building has burned down, the church would remain, as the people (the saved) constitute the church.  Something that is common with me is to reinforce that our local church is a little "c" church and that we are a part of something much, much bigger---the capital "C" Church.  It is the capital "C" Church that Jesus was speaking of when He said that the "gates of hell would not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18).  I would be reluctant to avoid using the word "church" just because of aggravating elements related to the RCC.  I could see Satan delighting over such a thing.  Interestingly, the Church is spoken of as "the body" of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23;  4:12), over which Christ is the Head (Eph. 5:23).  Moreover, and in accord with your concern, the Church is certainly made up of Jew and Gentile alike (Gal. 3:26-29;  I Cor. 12:12-13).

Church is a translation of the Greek ekklesia. This word is found in the old testament Greek. I don't know why the translators chose to translate this word as Congregation in the old, and then as Church in the new. But we do see it here in acts as the congregation or assembly with Moses.

Ac 7:38  This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

In Hebrew ekklesia (church) equals the Hebrew qahal 06951

Assembly, congregation, etc. Maybe the translators did it to distinguish between the assembly of the apostles and others?

Hello Anne,

Kind of akin to what I spoke about in my opening post, it may have to do with distinctions.  Also, sometimes when I'm at church (there I go, using the word like we are used to using it in my neck of the woods ), I'll even speak of us as the congregation.  For example, if there is something we are planning, I might say, "Whatever the congregation would like to do."