Who is Israel?

[firehill]

Thus far I understand from Galatians that jew and gentile, slave and free, male and female inherit all that God has as sons of God.

I can agree with that statement on every level.

But you and I inherit it as "the nations joined to the Commonwealth of Israel" as Paul puts it in Ephesians 2 & 3 or as Isaiah says in chapter 55 "many sons of a stranger who have joined unto the land"

Can you post the verse/passage you are refering to?

Eph

2:14-19

For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death the enmity. And he came and preached peace to you who were far away, and peace to those who were near; for through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father. So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God

[Guest shiloh357]

Am trying to see all that you are saying. Does not the new man inherit all? So then jew and gentile inhert all things of God including the physical land of Isreal?

No, that is not how it works. The Land of Israel belongs to the Jewish people by virtue of the Abrahamic Covenant, not the New Covenant. The Abrahamic Covenant is an eternal covenant, still in force today.

Gentiles were never given sonship before the new covenant. But now as one new man, gentiles, slaves or free, and male or female, are joint heirs with the Jews.

No, the New Testament teaches that all believers are joint heirs with Messiah.

Jews and gentiles are now the one new man in Christ.

Yes, but you have to apply that within the context in which it is presented and in the manner in which Paul intends that concept to be understood. He is not erasing the distinctions between Jews and Gentiles.

[firehill]

What did Paul mean by there is no Jew or Gentile in galatians 3? Paul explains what he meant in Galatians 4:1-7

When Paul says in Galatians 3:28 that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile, he is talking about access to grace. Paul actually says there is nither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, slave nor free.

Can you show that from the context of 4:1-7? You've totaly lost me.

What Paul is saying is that pedigree, gender and social status offer no advantage or disadvantage where access to grace is concerned.

Paul is talking about sonship and thereby one is an heir which is far more than 'access to grace'.

1What I am saying is that as long as the heir is a child, he is no different from a slave, although he owns the whole estate. 2He is subject to guardians and trustees until the time set by his father. 3So also, when we were children, we were in slavery under the basic principles of the world. 4But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, 5to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons. 6Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, "Abba, Father." 7So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, God has made you also an heir.

Paul is not saying that the distinctions between Jew and Gentile are erased any more than he would argue that the distinctions between male and female are erased.

The distinction though that no longer exists is the jew only being an heir. That was the distinction that put a huge wall between jew and gentile.

Ephesians 3:5-6

which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit; to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel

No one would make the argument that they ceased to be a man or woman the moment they got saved.

No ofcourse not but the differences of sexuality has nothing to do with that which divided the groups which was being heir to all that God has.

Many people misapply what Paul is saying because they only apply the rules to Jews and Gentiles and not to males and females.

What's been misapplied?

It is not so much that Jews have a different inheritance. That is not really the issue.

Oh but it is an issue if all are one new man, and sons and therefore as sons all are heirs. This is the dividing wall that came down.

The issue is that many want to claim that the Jewish people are no longer imporant in the prophetic plan of God, and that God is done with biblical Israel.

I can see that which makes no sense to me.

Again, the nonsense that Israel is a type of the Church is part and parcel of the false teaching of Replacement Theology which is a harmful contagion that infecting Christian theology.

I think I'd have to agree with that since in the church, there is neither jew nor gentile, slave nor free nor male or female for all are the one new man whereas in Isreal the jewish male had all the privlidges of inheritence as 'the sons of God'.

[firehill]

Am trying to see all that you are saying. Does not the new man inherit all? So then jew and gentile inhert all things of God including the physical land of Isreal?

No, that is not how it works. The Land of Israel belongs to the Jewish people by virtue of the Abrahamic Covenant, not the New Covenant. The Abrahamic Covenant is an eternal covenant, still in force today.

Before switching over to a new context being that Abrahamic Covenant verses the New can you respond according to the context that we are discussing presently? All are sons now through Christ, all are heirs then of all that God has. Did not sonship divide the groups and that only the 'sons of Isreal' (jewish males) were heirs? We can get to the two covenants in time...

firehill:

Gentiles were never given sonship before the new covenant. But now as one new man, gentiles, slaves or free, and male or female, are joint heirs with the Jews.

Shilo357:

No, the New Testament teaches that all believers are joint heirs with Messiah.

Eph 3:4-6

By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit; to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel

[Guest shiloh357]

QUOTE(shiloh357 @ Jul 30 2007, 03:09 AM)

QUOTE

What did Paul mean by there is no Jew or Gentile in galatians 3? Paul explains what he meant in Galatians 4:1-7

When Paul says in Galatians 3:28 that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile, he is talking about access to grace. Paul actually says there is nither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, slave nor free.

Can you show that from the context of 4:1-7? You've totaly lost me.

QUOTE

What Paul is saying is that pedigree, gender and social status offer no advantage or disadvantage where access to grace is concerned.

Paul is talking about sonship and thereby one is an heir which is far more than 'access to grace'.

Galatian 4:1-7 is continuance of the line of thought of Galatians 3. What you need to understand is that vv 28-29 tell us what Gentiles are heir of. They are heirs according to the Promise. What "promise" is Paul talking about?

That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

(Galatians 3:14)

The blessing of Abraham which Paul is speaking refers to Abraham's justification which Paul exponds in Romans 4. The context of Galatians 3 is purely spiritual and does not apply to the Land. Paul has in view, entrance into the Kingdom, and that is also how the issue of sonship needs to be understood. He is only dealing with sonship as it pertains to access into God's grace.

Galatians is dealing with a particular heresy namely that one had to become a physical Jew to gain entrance into the Kingdom, and Paul is saying that this is not so, and that entrance into the Kingdom, and "sonship" is accomplished by faith, not by any other means. To expand this passage to apply to every promise that was ever made to the Jews is to misapply the passage.

QUOTE

Paul is not saying that the distinctions between Jew and Gentile are erased any more than he would argue that the distinctions between male and female are erased.

The distinction though that no longer exists is the jew only being an heir. That was the distinction that put a huge wall between jew and gentile.

No, it was not the distinction that put up the wall. It was God who made the distinction and sanctified biblical Israel to himself. It was human pride and arrogance with respect to that distinction that put up the wall. The wall was a product of Jewish pride not the fact that Jews are distinctively different and have been set apart by God for a particular purpose. That does not mean that God favors them more; rather, it simply means that they are in a different category of observance due to the purposes that God has for that nation.

QUOTE

No one would make the argument that they ceased to be a man or woman the moment they got saved.

No ofcourse not but the differences of sexuality has nothing to do with that which divided the groups which was being heir to all that God has.

Paul was making a cultural argument at that point. In that society, women and slaves were considered nothing but property. Yes, it made a very big difference to the people living in that time period, and so Paul had a need to address it.

QUOTE

Many people misapply what Paul is saying because they only apply the rules to Jews and Gentiles and not to males and females.

What's been misapplied?

Galatians 3:28 is misapplied to mean that when a Jew becomes a Christian, he ceases to be a Jew and is generally expected to live after Gentile patterns. Gentile Christians generally become quite offended if a Jews gets saved but remains kosher, keeps the Sabbath and simply lives as a Jew. The underlying consensus is that one cannot be both a Jew and a believer in Jesus (Jesus the Jew and the King of the Jews). This is because for centuries Christians have been conditioned to see the Jews as the "villains" of the New Testament.

QUOTE

It is not so much that Jews have a different inheritance. That is not really the issue.

Oh but it is an issue if all are one new man, and sons and therefore as sons all are heirs. This is the dividing wall that came down.

The New Testament does not say that Gentile beleivers receive every blessing pronounced upon Israel/the Jewish people. You are not a joint heir with the Jews. You are a joint heir with Christ.

[Guest shiloh357]

QUOTE(shiloh357 @ Jul 30 2007, 03:15 AM)

QUOTE

Am trying to see all that you are saying. Does not the new man inherit all? So then jew and gentile inhert all things of God including the physical land of Isreal?

No, that is not how it works. The Land of Israel belongs to the Jewish people by virtue of the Abrahamic Covenant, not the New Covenant. The Abrahamic Covenant is an eternal covenant, still in force today.

Before switching over to a new context being that Abrahamic Covenant verses the New can you respond according to the context that we are discussing presently? All are sons now through Christ, all are heirs then of all that God has. Did not sonship divide the groups and that only the 'sons of Isreal' (jewish males) were heirs? We can get to the two covenants in time...

You are the one who questioned whether or not Gentile Christians are also heirs to the Land of Israel, and I simply stated that Christians are not under the Abrahamic Covenant. The Abrahamic Covenant has nothing to do with Gentiles and is the covenant through which the Land was guaranteed to Israel eternally. You made the Abrahamic covenant an issue. I was explaining why Gentile Christians do inherit the Land. It is not an inheritance that belongs to them. Paul is very specific as to which promises he is referring to that apply to Gentile believers and the Land is not one of them.

QUOTE

firehill:

Gentiles were never given sonship before the new covenant. But now as one new man, gentiles, slaves or free, and male or female, are joint heirs with the Jews.

Shilo357:

No, the New Testament teaches that all believers are joint heirs with Messiah.

Eph 3:4-6

By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit; to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel

[firehill]

I'll just have to respond tomorrow. Nighty night!

[Fraught]

OT Israel is gone, - and their descendants whom are living in the very same land which God promised to bring them back to is all a strange coincedence?

Suppose all those other things the Prophets said which literally came true were coincedences also?

a type and shadow of the New Testament church. - a theological opinion which, strangely for you, NO ONE in the bible ever said

The temple is gone. - He is building it one stone at a time....and yet there is another literal one coming also.

The sacrifices are gone, completed and fulfilled at the cross. - the need to receive that sacrifice is central to the christian faith so the sacrifice isn't really "gone" is it? No, it is a good example of how the Law, while still in place, is interpreted through the Spirit.

The judicial OT law is gone. - answered that one already. It is not "gone". That opinion is another theological device which is not actually stated by Paul or any of the other Apostles. Again...EVERY Word of God is true, it is a shield to those who put their trust in Him.

What you fail to recognize is that the Torah was the Constitution of nation called Israel. It was their civil code just as we have the Bill of Rights in America. But you can't enfore the speed limits of the USA on a person living in Germany driving the Autoban. In like manner, the judicial laws you mention NEVER applied to anyone outside of Israel.

They didn't become "untrue" as though they were void, however. Many of the underlying principles are in our own Constitution. That is why America was once called a Judeo-Christian nation.

Therefore, the Spirit of the Law is intact even now.

The ceremonial law is gone. - if you are talking about the laws which only applied to levites working in the Temple anyway then, yea, they are gone for now; at least in the flesh. If you are speaking about the Mo'edim and Sabbath then we'd have to disagree.

The day is coming when the nations will be punished if they don't keep the Feast of Tabernacles. (That isn't talked about much in European theological writings, but it IS in Zechariah 14)

The Prophets are gone. - just because you can't hear them doesn't mean they aren't speaking

The baptism into Moses is gone and replaced by baptism into Jesus. - Ah..good example!

The "mikveh" (a hebrew word and concept translated as "baptism" in english) of repentance is what you were given by Yochanan ("John" in english) and the mikveh of new life in Yeshua ("Jesus" in english) is accomplished through immersion into the triune Father, Son, and Holy Spirit consumed just as a burnt offering.

But a "ritual" (aka baptism ceremony) done apart from being immersed into Him will only get you wet.

Jesus has come and now there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile. - I believe that is mistaken again.

There is no difference in position, preference, or person but that does not mean that there is no distinction

Just as there is a distinction between men and women in the Body without regard to position, preference, or person, so it is between jew and gentiles.

Consider this:

Yeshua went only to the lost sheep of the House of Israel. He recognized a distinction.

Paul spoke of "those of the circumcision" within the Body. He recognized a distinction.

Peter was the Apostle to the circumcision within the Body. He recognized a distinction.

The Europeans who came a couple of centuries later also recognized a distinction....and harrassed/persecuted jews out of "their" church through theological devices and even persecution.

Distinction doesn't have to mean that one is better than the other. It isn't "either/or" in the original hebraic understanding of what Shaul is saying. It's a multiplicity of depth of understanding. The jews already had a purpose before the gentiles came along. The nations (gentiles) who came in were taking a different role; one of provoking the jews to jealousy through faithfulness, kindness, mercy, love (romans 11:31)

Paul spoke of them here:

19You will say then, "Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in." 20Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. 21For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.

22Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. 23And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.

Unbelieving Jews now take their place with unbelieving Gentiles. - that is the only thing you've said that I can agree with so far. Yet you got it exactly backwards. The gentiles will be joining the jews there also.

Romans 2:8-10

But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.

God promises many wonderful things to an end-times nation called Israel. It will shake the surrounding nations into faith and it will be the most glorious day in history!

And those of the nations who love His appearing will be as blessed as His people. He will remove the veil over the eyes of the gentiles. And at the Great Feast, He will remove the reproach of His people. (That isn't in any European writings either but can be found in Isaiah 25)

He will judge the Nations according to Matthew 25. They will account for how they treated "the least of these, my brethren"

God has made his final move against sin. - there is a lake fire yet to come

It is finished. - the price is paid for those past and future who put their trust in HIM...but not through theology....through the Spirit.

He promises to show mercy to those who love Him and keep His commandments. Why would we need mercy if we keep those commandments?

Just because He shows mercy does not mean we aren't breaking the Law. But He owes no man mercy who constantly breaks His commandments whether that man has been sprinkled or not.

The gospel is here in its fullness. Amen, amen and amen. Praise God.-

And yet time goes on and we have the descendants of Jacob back in the land as the Prophets said they would be.

Acts 1:6 "Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?"

7 He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.

We don't know the times but according to Yeshua a time has been set.

This was said AFTER the Resurrection just before His feet left the Earth for heaven.

Thank you thank you thank you! I began this thread looking for some light and you have shown me some.

[nebula]

Why is it that we seem to always go around in this same circle?

The distinction though that no longer exists is the jew only being an heir. That was the distinction that put a huge wall between jew and gentile.

I hope you understand that none of us are disagreeing with this.

What we disagree with is the argument that Jews who come to faith in their Messiah are no longer Jews and should throw away their physical heritage.

What we disagree with is the argument that the call of the Lord on the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob has been made null and void.

As far as grace and selection, yes we are all the same. As for our inheritance in Heaven, yes we are all the same. But we have roles to play out here on Earth, and these are not the same. This does not make one better than the other any more than the skilled laborer is of greater of lesser value than the university educator. We all have different gifts and callings. In fact, I would venture to say that the Jewish believer in Messiah Yeshua has the toughest role to face of us all. They are double-branded, you might say: branded for their physical heritage and branded for their spiritual heritage.

The Jews (then called Israelites) suffered racism from their beginnings in Egypt, they suffered racism throughout their dwelling in the land of Israel from the surrounding nations, they suffered racism during captivity, they suffered racism under Roman oppression, they suffered racism throughout the past 2000 years of "Church history," they suffered racism under Nazi Germany, and they still suffer racism from the world this very day. Yes, the Lord uses the fires for refining. But as a people, they have undergone the most intense of fires. The Lord is not finished with physical Israel. If He were done with them, they would have ceased to be a people a long time ago.

[Vickilynn]

What did Paul mean by there is no Jew or Gentile in galatians 3? Paul explains what he meant in Galatians 4:1-7

When Paul says in Galatians 3:28 that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile, he is talking about access to grace. Paul actually says there is nither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, slave nor free.

What Paul is saying is that pedigree, gender and social status offer no advantage or disadvantage where access to grace is concerned.

Paul is not saying that the distinctions between Jew and Gentile are erased any more than he would argue that the distinctions between male and female are erased. No one would make the argument that they ceased to be a man or woman the moment they got saved.

Many people misapply what Paul is saying because they only apply the rules to Jews and Gentiles and not to males and females.

It is not so much that Jews have a different inheritance. That is not really the issue. The issue is that many want to claim that the Jewish people are no longer imporant in the prophetic plan of God, and that God is done with biblical Israel. Again, the nonsense that Israel is a type of the Church is part and parcel of the false teaching of Replacement Theology which is a harmful contagion that infecting Christian theology.

Shalom Shiloh,

Amen! I believe you already answered these questions, since they come up so often, but it is important to teach them every time. People use that verse to mistakenly assert there is no more Jew or Gentile. Well, how can that be when there is still male and female? We are not all one gender, neither are we one physical lineage.

Amen Shiloh!