Are the Jews still God's people?

Quote: Up till about 450'ish bc
-----------------------------------

I think you might want to correct this one. Christianity didn't exist before Christ.

If the NT people were anything, I suggest post-mil might be in the taking. Many of them were still looking for a political takeover by the returning Christ. The fall of the temple put the wash on that.

We feel that the Abrahamic covenant was fulfilled in Christ and the establishment of the church at Pentecost. That is when Christ assumed His role on the throne f David, as it were, at the right hand of God the Father.

The 1000 years in Revelation, the only mention of a so-called millennium is spurious at best as to duration given the nature of the writing of John in the whole book beyond the first few chapters about given local churches. It is all mystical language, and one must be careful with interpretive misreadings.

We don't have all the writings of the early churches so we cannot be dogmatic on what they were teaching.

We see major differences in theology within the NT churches let alone all the little factions in the 2nd and 3rd centuries.

Cheers,

Jim

 

HP: I would agree in some ways and senses, but did not God say that the covenant involving the land itself was granted to them as an everlasting covenant, not simply until Christ would come? How long is everlasting Jim? Where did God take back or change the covenant regarding the land? Where did Christ fulfill, set aside, or otherwise change what God had said was to be everlasting in nature?

Now here is a thought. IF Jim is right, and everlasting does not mean everlasting in that such a thing that one received at the beginning as everlasting could be revoked or set aside and changed, possibly other promises of eternal life etc. could be the same.

It would seem impossible to me that any even remotely accepting notions of OSAS etc. would stand for such setting aside of such clear meanings to terms of everlasting or eternal meaning. To do so would automatically gender the cry of making out God to be a liar or breaking a promise, would it not?

 

I do not believe that the "eternal" land that Israel was promised refers to the physical dirt on this planet we call earth. I know this because God says that He will destroy this earth and create a new one, which will be eternal. I don't think it refers to the MK, because if it is true, it will only last 1000 years, which is hardly eternal. The land that is eternal is the new earth, which will be inhabited by all those whose faith is in Christ, also known as the new Jerusalem which comes down from heaven. All it's inhabitants have been washed in the blood of Christ and wear clean, white robes. Or...all believers of all time, regardless of earthly nationality or blood line.

This is what the OT saints looked forward to.


Hbr 11:16 But now they desire a better [country], that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

 

I believe some may need to read this passage again.

Ge 17:1 ¶ And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.
2 And I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly.
3 And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him, saying,
4 ¶ As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations.
5 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.
6 And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.
7 ¶ And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.
8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.

 

I see this passage slightly different LE, there is no argument that God sent his Son to fulfill the Covenant He made to Abraham regarding his seed. So Paul here ask, "did God cast away His people" and the answer from him is certainly not, I am one from the tribe of Benjamin. Then he goes on to say, "God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew"....

So the question then becomes who did God foreknow? We can say he foreknew Paul, Paul believes in Christ and and has accepted his redeemer. How about the Jewish disciples, we can say Paul foreknew them since they believe in Christ and has accepted him as their redeemer. There are lot of Judeo Christians who have accepted Christ as their redeemer.

The question is what about the pharisees and high priest who rejected Christ then hung him on a cross? What about any seed of Abraham who failed to accept Christ as their redeemer? God made a promise and he fulfilled His promise be sending a redeemer. Anyone who fails to accept the redeemer has 1. broken fellowship with God and 2. has excluded themselves from the promise by failing to accept the fulfillment.

It is like this, you are drowning and I promise to save you. I send a raggedy boat and you reject it and won't get on board because you don't find it sea worthy. You drown. Now whose fault is it. I kept my end of the promise by sending the boat. It is not my fault you drowned if you reject my means of salvation. You drowned of your own free will.

 

I like this except to say God didn't reject Israel. Israel is rejecting God. If Israel will come to saving faith in Jesus Christ as their Lord and savior God is faithful to forgive them and they shall be saved. The invitation is there even to Israel. God has rejected no one excluding the blasphemer...

 

I like this and will add, anyone not on the vine is missing of their own free will. The offer to be on the vine is extended to all of mankind to include Israel.

 

I think you are reading Pauls statements backwards, it is Israel who is waiting for adoption isn't it?

Ro 9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

In this passage, the adopted are the ones who were under the law. That would not be the gentiles.

He goes on to say...

Gal 4:7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.

They are an heir of God THROUGH Christ. So the question them becomes, what happens to the ones who didn't accept Christ?

 

Not so fast DHK.... A believing Gentile IS part of the Church. A non-believing gentile is not under the direction of the Holy Spirit. I don't think this statement is factual, "Paul delineates three distinct groups of people".

Also note, a believing Jew IS part of the Church. A non-believing Jew is who we bring to question in this thread. By your theory, a non-believing Jew is the same as a non-believing gentile and the Church which I don't believe is right.

 

Let me try a bit of the so-called iron clad logic of Calvinism on the list, and see how some of you might respond.

Does God know all that are saved? Has he known from eternity past all that will be saved? Are there any that He knew to be saved that could in the end be lost? Are there any He did not know that in the end will be saved?

Who then, according to the logic herein presented (or the claim of logic that is) would act as if though anything that man can do, accept or reject, has anything to do with whether or not one will in the end be saved? What is this talk LeBuick, of a free will? :smilewinkgrin:

 

DHK absolutely hit the nail on the head - there are three distinct groups as Paul told us. What is so hard to understand about it?

And please leave the C/A argument for another thread, ya'll.

It seems the problem in this thread is that some people want to spiritualize everything or allegorize everything instead of reading the text in context and comparing Scripture with Scripture.

People would do well to familiarize themselves with the conditional and unconditional covenants God made:

Abrahamic Covenant - unconditional
http://www.gotquestions.org/Abrahamic-covenant.html

Mosaic Covenant (Old Covenant) - conditional (law)
http://www.gotquestions.org/Mosaic-covenant.html

Davidic Covenant - unconditional
http://www.gotquestions.org/Davidic-covenant.html

Palestinian Covenant - unconditional
http://www.gotquestions.org/Palestinian-covenant.html

NT Covenant - Grace
http://www.gotquestions.org/Davidic-covenant.html

There seems to be confusion about these convenants and how they relate to the discussion at hand. They are not interchangeable, but are separate and distinct and one would think a student of Scripture will take the time to look up the Scripture references provided in the links above. :thumbs:

 

He is speaking of 3 groups.

1. Jews (unsaved)

2. Gentiles (unsaved)

3. Church (saved of both Jews and Gentiles)


Any Jew or Gentile that is saved is moved to the 3rd group, the church.

 

8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.

Amy, do you honestly believe that there was no physical dirt in the land where they were strangers, i.e., “all the land of Canaan?” Could it all have been simply rocks or something?

 

Do you honestly believe that the dirt or land that you stand on is eternal? There is an eternal land, it's called the new earth. The present earth will one day be burned up, therefore it is not eternal.

 

HP: No. Why would I? Things that are seem are temporal according to Scripture.

HP: Indeed there is, but that was not all God was addressing in His covenant with Abraham. There was some physical dirt involved as well, as a possession for as long as this earth exists, i.e. everlasting in the sense of the time duration of this present world.

 

I think this is the basis for our disagreement. I have always believed eternal meant eternal, as in eternal salvation. Since you believe one can lose their eternal standing with God (salvation), it's no surprise that you would think the "eternal" land is only for a certain period of time and not really eternal.
And I do believe the eternal land in the new earth is physical and real, not just spiritual.

 

Webdog:
"Israel is God's firstborn son..."

GE:
Jesus Christ is God's Only Begotten Son.

 

Ah, now I see the problem. Amy, this earth is eternal, just like our bodies it will be resurrected. It will never be "burned up", but renewed.
Have you ever read Heaven by Randy Alcorn? It is an excellent read on New Earth / Heaven.

 

Then the Bible's not true?

Exodus 4:22 "Then you shall say to Pharaoh, 'Thus says the LORD, "Israel is My son, My firstborn.

 

Is this just figurative language?


2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.