There are two Israels...

Please, get over it.

Re-read ALL that I wrote and it might help you understand alittle more than you got from the first line.

In the second line I show that if you can use/quote Gill as though he is authoritive then I (or anyone else for that matter) can pull anyone else out and quote them and declare them just as authoritive and then all you will have is a quoting contest of different authors.

 

I'm not sure if your posts are do more to arrogance or ignorance but in either case it might do some good to go back and re-read all that I wrote. Try to actaully engage rather than condesend James.

As I stated to JD>
In the second line I show that if you can use/quote Gill as though he is authoritive then I (or anyone else for that matter) can pull anyone else out and quote them and declare them just as authoritive and then all you will have is a quoting contest of different authors.

 

You just proved my point. Everyone becomes the authority so you get no where.

 

Wrong. The early church was "not" in the OT. Jesus stated "I WILL BUILD my church.." Not I will ADD to my Church..

Second it would help you alot to understand that "ekklēsia" does not have one singular meaning but refers simply to 'an assembly'. At times it is used in a general sense of people gathering, others it used to refer to a specific gathering for a specific purpose (ie. religious) in fact the word "ekklēsia" even refers to a pagan assembly at least once but maybe twice in the NT.

2 Peter 2:9 does not deal at all with a 'spiritual nation' as though it means Israel. That is A LOT of presupposition to be added in order to come to such a conclusion.

 

Climb down from your exhalted throne for a minute.

You, not I, said anything about 'personal' opinions. Mine was about citing commentators as though they were an authoritive sourse to which if I cited some to, then what.. where will that get us besides the whole mine is better than yours cycle.

I used your post to RevM to show this exact point because you made it into 'personal' opinions (or at the very least took what James said and ran with it).


However it is apparent that you didn't read all of my posts because you missed my very first one:

To which I could add Luk 1:32-33

When did Jesus recieve the throne of His father (linage wise) David, whereby He actaully reigned?
Over what Kingdom was David's throne?

I will add this little peice for vs 33.
Who does scripture bear out that the "house of Jacob" is?
Answer: Ethnic, National Israel.

And there are 17 more which say the same thing.

 

Well, if there was a previous Kingdom and it is to be restored was this kingdom physical or was it not?

Ah, but the text states that the Lord will give to Him "the throne of His father David". Deal with the text my brother. The reference here deals with "David's Throne" thus Davids literal and therefore earthly Kingdom.

That is what I am asking you concerning the just those verses I have given.. for now. If God is to 'give to Him' the throne of His father David to reign over the house of Jacob (which is a constant reference to Ethnic National Israel), what other conclusion contextually, exegetically, or hermeneutically can one come to? Answer: None. Any other answer must be obtain allegorically.

Who ever stated that Christ's Kingdom will end. Do presume that the 1000 years is the extent of His Kingdom reign. It is only a marker regarding His reign.

Well my brother, I "challenge you" to prove my accertion that the phrase "house of Jacob" is consistantly and contextually always a reference to National Ethnic Israel. I am apparently no better than pagan in understand so it should be pretty easy to do for you :thumbs:

To help you out a little - God does not give a meaning to some thing the OT and then change it to something else in the NT. What it means in the OT it will continue to mean in the NT, period.

 

Great point and great chance to illustrate the major problem: You talk about "israel not according to the flesh" as being genetic Israel, but then cite a verse that deals with the church, not Israel.

God is now working through his church, made up of Jews and Gentiles in one body. But he made promises to national Israel that he intends to keep. That is the point.

 

Yes, and that remnant is always in eschatological terms, in terms of the restoration of the nation and the fulfillment of God's promises. If you actually go and read those passages, you will find that the church does not, in any way, meet the descriptions.

Again, OR, you are simply wrong, and you and others here are in the place of unintentionally making God out to be a liar. God made promises to national Israel, and he will fulfill them whether you believe it or not.

 

Allan,

Actual, in the New Testament, of 'Israel' in sense it meaning spiritual nation since after Calvary.

And the Church was already right there in the Old Testment. In Acts 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 receivedd the lively oracles to give unto us:"

This verse tells us clear that Christ was with people in the wilderness. Church have few meanings: assembly together, called out,congregation, and people.

Also, in 1 Cor. 10:1-4 telling us that people in the wilderness with Moses, they were drink the same spiritual drink; and eat the same spiritual meat, which is CHRIST.

Notice 1 Cor. 10:4 says: "And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual ROCK that followed themL and that ROCK was Christ."

In Matthew 16:18, Jesus said: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this ROCK I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus is the rock.

In Ephesians 2:20 says; "And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and PROPHETS,(clearly included Old Testament saints) Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone."

Christ already reconciled both Jews and Gentiles became one as He builts both all together, not just for New Testament saints only, also include all Old Testament saints are already reconciled join with N.T. saints, as all of us are the members of the body of Christ is the 'Church'.

Many argued on Matt. 16:18 - "I WILL build my church", that they saying the 'Church' was not yet exist during Old Testament period, prove that, verse 18 tells us, the Church will be birth on Pentacost Day of Acts 2.

I want to tell you of Matthew 16:18-19, this is important passage or emphasis about the Church.

I found there is a refer verse in the Old Testament which tells the same with Matt. 16:18-19.

In Genesis 32:28- "And he said, 'Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast power with God and with men, and hast prevailed."

There are three important keys in Gen. 32:28:

1. Power
2. Men
3. Prevailed

In Matthew 16:18-19 do have three important keys:

1. Church
2. Prevail
3. Keys



Both 'men' of Gen. 32:28 & 'church' of Matt. 16:18 mean people.

Both 'prevailed' of Gen. 32:28 & 'prevail' of Matt. 16:18 mean overcome or success.

Both 'power' of Gen. 32:28 & 'keys' of Matt. 16:19 mean to bind, to carry out. Actual, 'keys' is a picture as have power or authority.

Keep in remind. My question is, did the disciples of Christ hear the word, "church" first time as when Christ told them of Matthew 16:18?

No. they understood 'church' in their language Hebrew, they understood it means congregation.

Interesting, I own 1611 A.V. Bible with me. I did read in introduction -'The Translators' about how 1611 A.V. were written. In the last page says that King James told the translators that he wanted 'church' removed from the Old Testament books, changed to 'congregation'.

That's why today, dispensationalists would easily saying: "See, there is no "church" find anywhere in the Old Testament books. Prove that church was not yet exist till Pentacost Day of Acts 2."

Later this week, I will show you verses "ekksia" in O.T. it find about 70 times which speaks of Church.

I understand of Matt. 16:18-19, Christ told disciples, that he promises to built his people over the world when he will give his power to disciples to spread the gospel over the world.

During Old Testament period, church was small and was limited power. Till when Christ came to earth, he brought the keys that He defeated Satan at Calvary, and Satan is bound in the bottomless pit, so, Christ already given the keys(power) to the Church to spread the gospel over the world. That is how Christ continues built his people over the world since Christ given power to disciples of Acts 2.

Same with Israel was small and limited power. Then, when after Christ made reconcile both Jews and Gentiles became one, now, Israel is expanding and have power to spread gospel over the world.

Israel means God's people
Church means God's people. Both Israel and Church same. In sense of them which speaking of spiritual nation - 1 Peter 2:9.

Understand clear?

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

Actually, Satan is a roaring lion walking about, and someone who disguises himself as an angel of light. He is not bound yet. He will be, but the Bible is clear that he is not currently.

Let's take an example:

"Jill is my wife."
"Jean is my wife."

Are Jill and Jean the same person? Of course not. It is easy to see that two people can have the same position with respect to someone without being the same identity.

 

Larry,

Later I will show prove verses in Bible that Israel is God's wife well as Church is God's wife. But are no difference.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

Israel's is God's wife. The Church is the bride of Christ. Those are pictures God uses to describe his relationship with his people. But they do not help here. The fact is that the same picture can be used to describe two different things.

 

Larry,

By the way, all amills include me, agree that Satan is a roaring lion walking seek to destroy our testimony. Amills know Satan is a real person. Understand, Satan is an angel, we cannot see his body, because he is spirit.

What thing Satan cannot stop Church from: - to stop Church from spreading the GOSPEL over the world for 2,000 years, because Christ already given the keys(power) to Church since Pentacost Day as He sent the Holy Spirit descend upon disciples to spread the gospel to the world. That why Satan have been not able to stop Church from spread the gospel over the world for 2000 years.

Satan have limited power, because he is restraining by God -2 Thess. 2:5-7. But, Satan can do with Christians is, to use lost people as his agents try to persecute Christians, or use agents, to use them for to running media, movies, stores, worldly things, etc. to cause Christians' minds being tempt fall into sins.

When the time comes, Satan will be loose out of the way, that means Satan will have much more power to make war against Christians as phyiscally for a little season which is called, "Great Tribulation". Satan will use soldiers, Police, SWAT to persecute against Christians.

Right now, Christians in America having freedom and still spreading the gospel, because the real 'Persecution' not hit America yet. But, when once the world dicator(Satan) is reaveled, persecutions will HIT against Christians in America and over the world so HARD.

Understand clear?

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

Larry,

Correct.

But, you say,

Oh really? Why?

How about Revelation chapter 19?

Please look in Rev. 19:7 says: "Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to himL for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his WIFE hath made herself ready."

Whilst, either word - 'Church' or 'Israel' is not find in Revelation chapter 19. Yet, both 'Church' and 'Israel' is very, very clear right there in the picture of Revelation chapter 19, it is all about God's PEOPLE.

What about Revelation 21:2 - "And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a BRIDE adorned for her husband." ?

While in Rev. 21:2 does not say either word - 'Church' or 'Israel' there. Yet, surely very clear enough that it is talk about God's PEOPLE of all ages from Old Testament period to New Testament period. From Adam to present day saints, who have faith IN Jesus Christ only are on the same boat. No difference.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

J.D., the following is something I put together that, "I think", is the answer to your question.

The small text is necessary to post all of it.

What happen to the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel who became the "Northern Kingdom" and where do they fit into the overall plans of God?


For that answer, we have to go back to Genesis.

Ge 48:17 And when Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, it displeased him: and he held up his father's hand, to remove it from Ephraim's head unto Manasseh's head.


18 And Joseph said unto his father, Not so, my father: for this is the firstborn; put thy right hand upon his head.


19 And his father refused, and said, I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations.

20 And he blessed them that day, saying, In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh: and he set Ephraim before Manasseh.

Ephraim, the second born of Joseph, who was a "prefigure" of Jesus, was prophesied by Jacob to be the "Father of a mulitude of nations", this of course is the "Gentile race".

The house of Joseph was a member of the Northern tribes and was given the land we know as "Samaria", residents of this land was later known as "Samaritans".

Ephriam made a pact with Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, to attack Jerusalem, the "Southern Tribes" of Benjamin/Judah.

Isa 7:1 And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it.

2 And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim.

However God said this:
Isa 7:7 Thus saith the Lord GOD, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass.


8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people.


9 And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliah's son. If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.

"that it be not a people" is found in other prophecies of scripture, which we'll get to later.

The "Assyria King" conquered the Northern Tribes about 135 years before Nebuchadnezzar conquered the "Southern Tribes", which he kept in captivity 70 years,

By this time the Northern Tribes had been in captivity 135+70=205 years, and had married into the "Gentiles Race".

However, when the Southern tribes returned to Jerusalem, a remnant of the Northern tribes returned as well, and settled back in the land of Samaria,

These were coming to be know as "Israelites" while the Southern Tribes were coming to be known as "Jews" (Judah)

This marriage of the Northern tribes into the Gentile race caused another disagreement between the Northern/Southern Tribes.

Ezr 9:1 Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites.


2 For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass.

Judah, decided they would divorce all non Jews, however the "Israelites" of Samaritan remained married.

Ezr 10:10 And Ezra the priest stood up, and said unto them, Ye have transgressed, and have taken strange wives, to increase the trespass of Israel.


11 Now therefore make confession unto the LORD God of your fathers, and do his pleasure: and separate yourselves from the people of the land, and from the strange wives.


12 Then all the congregation answered and said with a loud voice, As thou hast said, so must we do.

This had the effect of continuing the "riff" between the Jews and Samaritans.

Joh 4:9 Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.

When the "Jew" reject Jesus, he turned to the "Israelite/Samaritans", which accepted him as "Messiah".

Joh 4:39 And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him


Joh 4:40 So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them:

Remember what Jacob said about Ephriam becoming the Father of a mulitude of nations, and then God saying he make Ephraim a people that are not a people and then use those people who are not a people to "Provoke them to angry"??

De 32:21 They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.


Isa 7:8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people.


1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

10 Which in time past "were not a people", but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.


Ro 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they (Jews) should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

It's quite easy to see how the "Ten Lost Tribes" merged into and became the "Samaritan/Gentile"..... "Bride of Christ", ...... through Jacob's prophecy about "Ephraim", and became the people God used to make "JEWS" jealous.

Joseph, being a "prefigure of Jesus" and "Ephraim" being the prefigure of the "Samaritan/Multitude of Nations/Gentile Church".

These two sticks, House of Joseph/Ephraim, House of Judah will become one stick during the MK.

Eze 37:16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:

Eze 37:19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.

The "TEN LOST TRIBES" are not as "lost" as many believe, and it give new meaning to:


Ro 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved:

 

Something weird going on with board

 

Your convoluting everything into one big mish-mash mess.

The word 'church' used in Acts 7:38 was not/is not a good rendering by the KJV translators but should have been 'assembly' or 'congregation' and is attested as such by many of the newer trnaslations.* Though the truth still remains that this 'assembly' as is the church in the NT, Christ is still the focus in both places.* The passage is not trying to establish that the church existed back then but the same Christ and faith was just as important and central as it is in the New.

Secondly, I have not denied that Christ is the Rock and that both groups whom God has dealt with (though differently in means) comes to God by grace through faith. And though we are all reconciled we are not all the Church. and Jesus Himself distinquished between the two by stating He will build His church and not that He will continue to add to His church.

Thirdly, your 'link' you found to the OT regarding the Matthew passage is no link at all. They aren't even speaking about the same things!

Fourly, the isn't found in the OT NOT because the 'word' isn't there but because what constitutes the church is not found there.* It is not about a 'word' missing from the texts but because it can not be there due to what makes a church a church.