There is neither Jew nor Greek...

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 10:42 PM
link   
In my time on ATS's Religion forum, I always find those who like to claim that Israel has no future in prophecy...that some how, their time is up. It seems that this ideology entirely hinges on one biblical verse:

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek...

Now, I hold a mostly Dispensational view of biblical history and prophecy. By that, I mean that the Church Age is a unique covenant and time period designed to bridge the gap of time between Daniel's 69th and 70th Week. This view states that Israel's covenant was never cancelled, but simply put on pause until the Church has reached full maturity. During the Age of the Church, there is no distinction in race or social status, but during the 70th Week, the focus will once again shift to Israel.

While I do not believe this view lends creedence to Zionism, there are those who label me as a Zionist for simply suggesting that the 12 tribes of Israel have a future in prophecy.

My question is: Aside from Galatians 3:28, how can one possibly support the notion that God has disposed of Israel once and for all?

It seems that Romans 11:11-24 directly contradicts Replacement Theology.


Romans 11:11-24

11 I say then, they did not stumble so as to fall, did they? May it never be! But by their transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles, to make them jealous. 12 Now if their transgression is riches for the world and their failure is riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their fulfillment be! 13 But I am speaking to you who are Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 14 if somehow I might move to jealousy my fellow countrymen and save some of them. 15 For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? 16 If the first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and if the root is holy, the branches are too.

17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 18 do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21 for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22 Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. 23 And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree?




posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 11:06 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

It seems that Romans 11:11-24 directly contradicts Replacement Theology.
"It seems"?
Could you explain how it contradicts the basic premise of Christianity that they are now God's chosen people?
Or is it just a fuzzy feeling that it might contradict it?



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 11:27 PM
link   
a reply to: jmdewey60


22 Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. 23 And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree?


It seems here that Paul has not dismissed the possibility of Israel's repentance. If Israel's covenant had truely been cancelled, then Paul would not raise the issue of Israel being "regrafted" into the tree. He wouldnt have refered to them being regrafted as a separate group if Israel were to be 'homogenized' into the Church. Paul is recognizing the distinction in covenants.



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 11:54 PM
link   
I find that fulfillment theology, replacement theology and Supersessionism all sorta focus on Moving away from the Jewish faith.

AS if those books in the OT only matter as much as they get you to the NT.

That would be very wrong, there is a much deeper reason for the Inclusion of the OT, it goes to the very nature of GOD.

The same, yesterday, today, and forever.

Means something, it means, the promises made last.

The Jewish people have a clear place in Biblical prophesy, most of the theology that seeks to remove that, stem from a fundamental misunderstanding.

Yes the Church is important, but so too are the Jewish people.

Even the term "spiritual Israel" stems from a time when Israel didn't exist, it was Christians, seeking to fill gaps in THEIR knowledge and faith, by coming up with something to intellectually satisfy the gap they saw with the existence or lack there of, OF Israel.

So for the Faithful, You can take whats presented, and like it says, see it as if through a cloudy glass, and have faith.

OR

You make up some convoluted theology to cover a gap in doctrine, in this case, NO Israel, which really is the basis for all of these Theologies.

Just never got corrected and people kept running with that thought that the CHURCH MUST be Israel, while never addressing that original error.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 12:22 AM
link   
a reply to: benrl

It seems that this theological error drives a wedge in the Church. How can we recognize what time it is on the prophetic clock if we continue in identity confusion?



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 12:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: benrl

It seems that this theological error drives a wedge in the Church. How can we recognize what time it is on the prophetic clock if we continue in identity confusion?


You don't need to.

Just like these errors, Prophecy, is not there to warn, people try to mistakenly use them as such.

It is Hubris, to try and guess the time, and lack the proper humility a Christian is called to.

We are told signs to be aware of, not dates for a reason. Its there to show from the beginning, what God plans, comes through.

Ours is to shine our light while we can, working as if the moment could come today.

Not to occupy ourselves about that day, when it comes, our job is to simply look up, for redemption draws near.

Hold our heads high, be an example to a lost world, and stop schisming over every single little doctrinal basis.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 01:22 AM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

It seems that this theological error drives a wedge in the Church.
You have yet to point out this supposed error.
What you presented was a Dispensationalist opinion, which I would think, if anything, would "drive a wedge" as you put it.

You quoted a bit of rhetoric used by Paul to persuade Christian converts from the gentiles to not get an attitude towards the Jews, as if they (the gentiles as now Christians) were somehow in the clear.
I think that the current animosity towards Christians by Dispensationalists is because of their faulty conception of what "saved" means in the New Testament.
1 Corinthians 10
For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea.
They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.
They all ate the same spiritual food and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.
Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered in the wilderness.

These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the culmination of the ages has come.
So, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall!

(2011 NIV)
These were saved, having crossed the Red Sea, the congregation at Mount Sinai.
We as the congregation of Jesus are saved by baptism, yet we too can fall if we give in to temptation.

Paul was saying the same basic thing in Romans 11:11-24, but in a more specific way for the people in Rome, where the mention of the "Olive Tree" would have significance to them in the metaphor because one of the synagogues in Rome at that time had that name, the Olive.
It could well have been that a lot of the Jew Converts involved in this situation Paul was discussing had come from that synagogue.
edit on 18-4-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 01:40 AM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

It seems here that Paul has not dismissed the possibility of Israel's repentance.
It's just a hypothetical, to make a point, he isn't suggesting that such a thing will happen.
Paul is talking about branches and a tree and roots.
None of those things are real, it's just a mental picture to use as an analogy.

If Israel's covenant had truely been cancelled, then Paul would not raise the issue of Israel being "regrafted" into the tree. He wouldnt have refered to them being regrafted as a separate group if Israel were to be 'homogenized' into the Church. Paul is recognizing the distinction in covenants.
He wasn't saying anything about covenants.
In the analogy, the root and tree are the source of good things.
There were branches that were on the tree first, then there were branches on there later.
Paul was talking about people, and it is to the hearer of this letter to figure out that he probably meant the people who had the Prophets and should have been ready to believe based on their readings.
The later people had to sort of figure it out in other ways, to believe in Jesus when they found out about him.

edit on 18-4-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 01:41 AM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Israel has it by right of a promise. But Christians are spiritual brothers of Christ which makes us sons of God, not the firstborn (who has the rights) but sons none the less. Israel will be judged differently than the rest and their future does not affect our salvation. But Israel is worth keeping an eye on.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 03:02 AM
link   
Op asks....''how can one support the notion that God disposed off Israel once and for all'' _________________________________________ The bible says Israel, as a people, will be made a ''third'' with Egypt and Assyria. Even if its not a disposal, it still sounds like Israel is being cutting down to size. The modern state of Israel and the powers ruling it, however will be disposed off completely, God willing. Christians are bedazzled by Israels 1948 formation ..yet turn a blind eye to its atheism, open homosexuality, prostitution and the insulting of Jesus and its overall cruelty. If you think these sins are not to be taken lightly, then yes, Israel the state will be disposed off. _________________________________________________Amazingly, I've heard some Christians find excuses for Israels abhorrent behavior, saying ''Israel is only in a temporary state of sin and will be redeemed once they see Jesus''. The same people who believe Jesus will spare and save the anti-christian state of Israel also believe Jesus would swoop down and kill the hindus, the buddhists, the muslims and everybody else, people who revere Jesus...as saint, teacher and prophet/messiah. respectively.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 03:31 AM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest
I really appreciate what you have had to say in this thread. It's pretty excellent



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 03:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Maximus2014

. . . Christians are spiritual brothers of Christ which makes us sons of God, not the firstborn (who has the rights) but sons none the less.
Paul discusses this in Galatians 4 with the analogy of the two sons of Abraham.
The fist born was a slave, and the second was free.

edit on 18-4-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 03:44 AM
link   
a reply to: benrl

The Jewish people have a clear place in Biblical prophesy, most of the theology that seeks to remove that, stem from a fundamental misunderstanding.
OK, then what is that misunderstanding?
What it sounds like you are saying is that Christianity itself is a misunderstanding.
There is no provision in the New Testament for a role for the Jews other than to accept Jesus, something that did happen to the most part.
Subsequently, though, a lot of them became Muslims.
About 90% of the people today going under the name Jew are not descended from the original tribe of Judah but are later converts from central Asia.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 03:57 AM
link   
a reply to: benrl

Not to occupy ourselves about that day, when it comes, our job is to simply look up, for redemption draws near.
That already happened.
Jesus has gathered his elect.
It's called the church.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 06:53 AM
link   
a reply to: jmdewey60

You have yet to show scriptural support for the claims against the Children of Israel.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

You have yet to show scriptural support for the claims against the Children of Israel.
I refuted the only scriptural support presented for your claim, which was quoting Romans 11:1-24, then saying that you thought it seemed like Paul must have implied by his wording that the two people had two covenants.

Hebrews 9:15 . . . Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance . . .

There isn't any implying here that the Faith of Jesus is something temporary.
"Those who are called" is not restricted to the exclusivity of particular tribal memberships.
That promise that has been there concerning an eternal inheritance is available to whoever is called, including those who were previously excluded, because of Jesus.

I think it is your divergent theory that needs some biblical support, all this counting up of prophetic days and turning them into years for no better reason than that it could then be construed to terminate in the same general time period that we live in today.

edit on 18-4-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: jmdewey60

All believers are bound by the messianic covenant, but there aslo exist sub-covenants. The Church is the body of Chist. Israel, on the other hand, belongs to the Abrahamic Covenant. God promised Abraham that his genetic seed would inheret the land eternally. God will not go back on His promise.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

All believers are bound by the messianic covenant, . . . .
There isn't any such thing, and that is just a made up term.
There isn't a literal covenant.
That is a sort of analogy drawing on the understanding people already had of the basic concept.
There was no official confirmation ceremony of a binding agreement.
What we do have is a promise from Jesus that his upcoming death was going to be beneficial to mankind, and was a symbol of God's love for us.

but there also exists sub-covenants.
There is really just one covenant.

The Church is the body of Christ.
That was Paul speaking metaphorically. Jesus actually used the word church, which is the congregation.

Israel, on the other hand, belongs to the Abrahamic Covenant.
Israel came later, and became a national designation under Moses and what the covenant was there was an agreement to keep the Law.
Most of the mentions of the word covenant in the Bible is a reference to that, and becomes a sort of synonym for the Law.

God promised Abraham that his genetic seed would inherit the land eternally.
This was a promise of eternal life before there was really that concept to support it, so it reverts to a concrete description to put the point across.
Saying your seed will not die out on the land conveys that thought.
This was before the concept of a universal god, so there were regional gods, and the god that Abraham was on good terms with happened to be the supreme sovereign of that particular piece of real estate.
Once ideas developed to where you can have a single god over the entire world, and that a single person could live forever, then the terms are redefined for what the promise was really about.
That is spelled out in the New Testament which is just a re-visioning of the old.

God will not go back on His promise.
We understand who God is now through Jesus.
edit on 18-4-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 02:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: jmdewey60

All believers are bound by the messianic covenant, but there aslo exist sub-covenants. The Church is the body of Chist. Israel, on the other hand, belongs to the Abrahamic Covenant. God promised Abraham that his genetic seed would inheret the land eternally. God will not go back on His promise.


That is correct. God does not break covenants, people might but God does not.

Who is married to the backslider?

The Book of Hosea is exactly the comparison that people forget. So show me jmDewey, where God divorced Israel.


Isaiah 50:1 Thus saith the Lord, Where is the bill of your mother's divorcement, whom I have put away? or which of my creditors is it to whom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves, and for your transgressions is your mother put away.



Jeremiah 3:8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

9 And it came to pass through the lightness of her whoredom, that she defiled the land, and committed adultery with stones and with stocks.

10 And yet for all this her treacherous sister Judah hath not turned unto me with her whole heart, but feignedly, saith the Lord.

11 And the Lord said unto me, The backsliding Israel hath justified herself more than treacherous Judah.

12 Go and proclaim these words toward the north, and say, Return, thou backsliding Israel, saith the Lord; and I willbnot cause mine anger to fall upon you: for I am merciful, saith the Lord, and I will not keep anger for ever

13 Only acknowledge thine iniquity, that thou hast transgressed against the Lord thy God, and hast scattered thy ways to the strangers under every green tree, and ye have not obeyed my voice, saith the Lord.

14 Turn, O backsliding children, saith the Lord; for I am married unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion:


It doesn't matter how people want to think of Israel and Judah, God HIMSELF is still married to her.


Hosea 1:10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

11 Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel.


Even though adultery was committed, God is still married to Israel and Judah. And this is promise is for a future time when Israel and Judah are what??? REUNITED.

jmDewey, unless the church is Israel or Judah, then who is God married to? And where is Israel and Judah to be reunited? Zion.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: WarminIndy

jmDewey, unless the church is Israel or Judah, then who is God married to? And where is Israel and Judah to be reunited? Zion.
That's a metaphor.
It's comparing a relationship to marriage.
It isn't a literal marriage.

And where is Israel and Judah to be reunited? Zion.
There were things written in the Prophets about a united kingdom, but it is more like just a note of encouragement, oracles of things that might be, rather than an actual announcement of things that must happen.






top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join