Are the Jews still God's people?

That's because Jesus has not come back yet.


Why do you assume you are a gentile?


Do you agree that O.T. saints are made apart of the church?

 

And according to Revelation, you are made a pillar in the temple of that new Israel. You will, as part of the church, rule and reign with Christ. You get every blessing that is given to saved Israelites. The heritage of Israel and the church are one in the same, they both rule and reign with Christ from Israel.

 

"The Word of God is not bound" --- least of all by the Jew's nationality. Christians worry more about the Jews than they worry about themselves!

"Therefore I endure all things for the sakes of the Elect --- that they, may indeed obtain the salvation that is IN Christ Jesus with eternal glory ----It is a faithful saying:- If we be dead with Him; we shall also live with Him."

This is the Church; the whole Church; nothing but the Church. It is one Salvation and one Saved People.

Martin Luther and Jim1999, how good to hear you speak the Gospel in this matter!

 

GE:
Israel was a branch just like the Gentiles were branches 'grafted in' - the Trunk is Christ, as is the root. I don't know where the idea comes from Israel to the flesh is the trunk, or that that they were a branch not grafted in as well.

Salvation works like a grafted in vine; it bears only branches that were grafted in originally; but it doesn't gaurantee some branches may be cut off so that the others may better bear fruit. It does gaurantee wild branches - branches that claim for themselves the right they may just grow from the vine of their own will - shall be cut off!

 

Lady Eagle:
"Please explain how you derived that conclusion from Eph.1:19. Thanks."

GE:
Thanks for being so observant. the text actually is 23.

 

Which text?
1Thess2:16

 

I said that everyone is saved the same way, by grace through salvation! Why do you keep telling us this? No one has said differently.

These are my words from post #90:

I also made this point in another thread in response to something similar that you said. With all due respect, I can only think that you must not read what anyone answers to you.

 

And Romans 11:1-2
"I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. "

Paul is saying what? He is using the STRONGEST word when he says "God Forbid!"

Romans 11:

[1] I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
[2] God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,
[3] Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.
[4] But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.
[5] Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
[6] And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
[7] What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
[8] (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear unto this day.
[9] And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling block, and a recompence unto them:
[10] Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
[11] I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.


There is no way this passage can be explained away to mean that the Church replaced Israel - not if interpreted correctly without going on a tangent chasing a rabbit which has been done on this thread so far....

:type:

 

No, I haven't, and I would not approve of anyone badmouthing dispensationalists, either.

I have read about the various eschatological viewpoints and even tried to go along with varoius ones but I always end up coming back to amillennialism as it seems to be the view most faithful to the Biblical text taken as a whole.

 

There is no way this passage can be explained to mean that Israel after the flesh is the Church.

Israel after the flesh rejected God's salvation through Jesus Christ; so God rejected Israel after the flesh; and established eternal Covenant of Grace with True Israel --- the spiritual Israel of God who alone and exclusively was the Israel of God even while Israel after the flesh was favoured among them.
"There no more is Jew or Gentile" deny it first then claim what you are claiming.

 

And Romans 11:1-2
"I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. "

Paul is saying what? He is using the STRONGEST word when he says "God Forbid!"

GE:
Paul is saying what? This: "I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew."

GE:
Paul includes himself under these, the true People of God: "His people whom He foreknew."
Paul excludes himself from these, those no longer - in fact, never - the true People of God: "Israelite(s) of the seed of Abraham".
For the People of God are of The Seed - which is One, even Christ. (In Galatians declared: "Not of many seeds".)

 

The short answer to this question is,

Only believing Jews are God's people.

Only believing Gentiles are God's people.

The two have become one and their lives are sustained by the Vine, Jesus Christ.


Anyone not fitting either of these catagories, is not one of God's people.

 

The two have become one...in Christ, yet they are still distinctly different. That is like saying my wife and I are interchangeable, since we are one flesh...or my son and daughter are the same because they have the same set of parents.
Israel is God's firstborn son...we are waiting for adoption as sons. God's promises are eternal in the same way our life is eternal.

 

1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:

Paul delineates three distinct groups of people under the direction of the Holy Spirit. I don't believe we should argue with him.

 

HP: Are you absolutely certain of these being “three distinct groups?” Could the possibility exist that there are ‘two groups’ of people in ‘one’ church of God? Could he have been saying in essence not to give offense to either to the Jews or the Gentiles, nor the Church as a whole, this speaking of two groups, not three, and the Church as a whole comprising those two groups together?

 

Study the Book of Ephesians. The purpose of the Book of Ephesians is to show that we (the saved), both Jews and Gentiles, are one in Christ. We all make up the Church of God. In Christ there in neither Jew nor Gentile. Thus we have the Church of God. There is no differentiation between Jew and Gentile among believers. In the world there are three groups as Paul states: Jew, Gentile, and the Church of God. There is no sense in arguing with God.

 

HP: May I apply the same logic you used on another thread? Is it possible for a Gentile to be saved? Are they still a Gentile in a sense after they are saved, now referred to as a believing Gentile, or would it be your position that a Gentile could not be saved, salvation being only possible subsequent to ceasing being a Gentile?

 

Up till about 450'ish bc. Christianity was Pre-mil. It wasn't until about 300'ish bc. a 'few' began to adopt a different view (in favor of spiritualizing scriptures) and then not till Augustine did that view become popular and subsequently an established teaching by the Catholic Church. It was the Amil view that came into being later and it was not a view shared by early NT Church

And since dispensationalism is based or better founded upon the Pre-mill view and the Amil (not specifically the postmil kind) is it's polar opposite we must conclude that if anyone is closer to the Early NT teachings it would and must be the Dispy's.

 

HP: Now you have made quite a claim. Now all you need to do is to show us the evidence to support such a remark. :wavey:

 

HP: Somewhere in the past I recall reading somewhere in the Scriptures of God making an everlasting covenant with Abraham and his children concerning a specific parcel of land. I have not read anywhere else such a covenant involving land granted to them by God as an everalsting possession and any other group of peoples, can you?

That leads me to believe there is a vast distinction between the nation of Israel and their connection to their land and the United States and the land it now possesses.