| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Pastor Dave" |
| Date: |
01 Nov 2007 04:22:23 AM |
| Object: |
Who Are God's Chosen People? |
Who Are God's Chosen People?
As you study this subject in light of this essay, you
may find that it contradicts what you have been taught.
If this is so, it is because you have been taught a
"system," not the scripture. What does the term "chosen
people" mean? Many think immediately of Israel. Is this
correct? What does the Bible say?
Who was Deuteronomy 7:6 (speaking of 'chosen people')
spoken to? Deuteronomy 6:3-4 reveals it was spoken to
Israel. At that time, Israel consisted of all those that
came out of Egypt with Moses (see Deuteronomy 7:8).
A very similar verse is Deuteronomy 14:2. In 1 Chronicles
16:13, Israel is called "His chosen ones": David wrote
Psalm 33:12; 105:6, 43. And Isaiah records these words
from the Lord: Isaiah 41:8-9; 43:10,20; 44:1. In Isaiah
48:12, the Lord refers to them as "My called." And Daniel
calls them "His chosen people" (Daniel 11:15).
From the above, it can be seen that the phrase,
"chosen people" definitely applied to Israel. But, what was
the composition of Old Testament Israel? According to
the Bible, Israel was made up of:
1) The descendants of Jacob (Exodus 1:1; Joshua 13:6, etc.),
And...
2) Those who joined Israel through circumcision and keeping
the law (Exodus 12:48ff).
Keeping the covenant was a requirement for all those who
wished to remain a part of Israel (Genesis 17:14, Exodus
12:15,19; 30:32,38; 31:14; Leviticus 7:20-21, 25,27;
17:4,9-10, 14; 18:29; 19:8; and Numbers 15:30-31).
These Scriptures, and many others, show that membership
in the nation of Israel was dependent on obedience to God's
commandments. To disobey God was to lose one's citizenship.
When most people think of Old Testament Israel, they
think exclusively in terms of Israel as a nation. Yet, this
is not the true Biblical meaning of "Israel". The name
"Israel" has always had a twofold significance: one
national, and the other religious. For example Exodus 19:6
and Amos 9:11-12 proclaims that the remnant of Israel
would be largely an entity of religious instead of national
destination. Isaiah says much the same thing (Isaiah
56:7-8).
The primary meaning of "Israel" in the Old Testament
stands for the religious covenant community, the people who
worship God in truth and Spirit. Secondarily, it denotes a
distinct ethnic group or nation which is called to become
spiritual Israel. Decisive for the Old Testament prophets
and their prophecies is the theological quality of the
'people of God,' not their ethnic and political
characteristics.
Contrary to the claims of Hal Lindsey, and other
dispensational authors (Charles Ryrie, etc.), the blessing
of Israel's election was not unconditional. When the
election service is withheld, the election loses its
meaning, and therefore fails. .If Israel ceased to
acknowledge God to be her Lord, then she declared that she
no longer wished to be His people. Her high calling to be
the 'Chosen People' was not the mark of Divine indulgence or
favoritism, but a summons to a task exacting and unceasing,
and election and task were so closely bound together that
she could not have one without the other."
Did Old Testament Israel lose her election? As Paul
would say, "God forbid!" The Old Testament prophesied in
many places that a "remnant" would be saved. The question
is: Of whom was this remnant to consist? According to
Jeremiah 31:31-34, the remnant would be made up of those who
"know the Lord," and whose sins would be forgiven completely
(unlike under the Old Covenant - Hebrews 10:1-4). This was
to be made possible through the initiation of a "new
covenant." This New Covenant (or "Testament" -KJV) was
ratified by Jesus at His crucifixion, shown to His disciples
in symbolic form in the Last Supper (Matthew 26:28, Mark
14:24, Luke 22:20, 1 Corinthians 11:25).
Is New Testament Israel any different from Old Testament
Israel? The Israel of the New Covenant is made up of 1)
those descendants of Jacob who believed in the Messiah
(Matthew 10:6; 15:24; Acts 2:36-41; 21:20, etc.), and, 2)
those who joined Israel through spiritual circumcision and
the keeping of the new "law" (Romans 2:28-29; 13:10; 1
Timothy 1:5).
With the establishment of the New Covenant, physical
descent was no longer a determining factor for entrance into
Israel. Only those who believed in the Messiah could enter
or remain a part of Israel. Let us examine what the Bible
has to say on the subject in Jeremiah 11:16. Verse 17 says
this was directed to "the house of Israel, and the house of
Judah." Read what Hosea says of Israel in Hosea 14:6.
Paul picks up the olive tree motif in Romans 11:17-24.
He says those Jews who rejected the Messiah were themselves
rejected and "broken off" (or cut off, to use the Old
Testament term) from the "olive tree" of Israel (verse 20).
The apostle showed that the only possible way to remain a
citizen of Israel was to believe in Jesus as Messiah. This
citizenship was also offered to the Gentiles on the same
condition. If they would put their faith in the Messiah of
Israel, they would be made fellow citizens of Israel
(Ephesians 2:19). Christ created His church, not beside
Israel, but as the faithful remnant of Israel that inherits
the covenant promises and responsibilities. Christ's church
is not separated from the Israel of God, only from the
Christ-rejecting Jewish nation.
The identification of the church with Israel is explicit
in Peter's first epistle (1 Peter 2:9). Here, Peter
definitively states that those who "believe" in Christ Jesus
(1 Peter 2:7) were the "chosen race" and the "holy nation"
(1 Peter 2:9; compare Exodus 19:6; Deuteronomy 7:6; and
14:2). Only in Christ could Israel as a nation have remained
the true covenant people of God. God's covenant people are
no longer distinguished by racial or territorial
characteristics, but exclusively by their faith in Christ.
And the land we have inherited is a spiritual one. The
spiritual blessings of citizenship in the Israel of God are
ours as servants of Christ, but what of the "unconditional"
land promises of the so-called "Palestinian Covenant"?
Is present Israel a fulfillment of prophesy?
One of the most common assertions of the premillennial
dispensationalist today is that the formation of the State
of Israel in 1948 is proof that the Jews are still "God's
Chosen People," and that He still has prophetic plans for
them. (This has been asserted more vigorously than ever due
to the recent hostilities in the Middle East). It is claimed
that God was at work bringing the Jews back to their
"ancient homeland," and that they have a Biblical right to
claim Palestine as their own. Are these claims correct? Was
the formation of the State of Israel evidence of God's
blessing? Of God's election?
Just what Scriptures do dispensationalists use to
support these claims? How do they come to their conclusions?
As you may know already, the dispensationalist uses what he
calls a "literal hermeneutic." That is, he claims to
interpret the words of the Bible at face value,
understanding them in their "normal," everyday usage and
meaning. This extremely literal hermeneutic is then used to
"interpret" the prophecies of the Old Testament that speak
of the return of God's people to the Holy Land. However,
this literalism is also used as an excuse to ignore the
plain reinterpretation by the New Testament writers of these
very same prophecies. Even when the inspired writers of the
New Testament give a meaning to the Old Testament.
prophecies other than a "literal" one, the dispensationalist
will say that this is not the complete meaning, and that
these prophecies "remain to be realized for Israel."
One of the Scriptures the dispensationalist claims was
fulfilled by the 1948 formation of the State of Israel is
found in Ezekiel 36-37. This prophecy was given to Ezekiel
during the Babylonian captivity (Ezekiel 1:1-2), and
foretold the eventual return of Israel to their land. Tied
in with this prophecy was the prediction of the coming
Messiah (Ezekiel 38), and the inauguration of the New
Covenant. As we know from both secular history and the New
Testament, the people did return to the land and the Messiah
did come and establish the New Covenant (Matthew 26:28).
Despite this, dispensationalists deny fulfillment of either
of these prophecies, saying they found only a "partial
fulfillment" in Israel's return and Christ's first advent.
They further allege that the re-gathering of Jews to form
the current State of Israel is part of the final
fulfillment. They say the blessings of the "Palestinian
Covenant" are only now coming into existence. The promises
of such passages as Deuteronomy 30 are touted as "Scriptural
basis" for Israel's re-gathering. How should we answer such
claims?
According to Deuteronomy 30:1-8, a necessary condition
for the re-gathering of Israel to Palestine was returning to
the Lord (verses 2-3). Based on this clear passage of
Scripture, it can be definitely concluded that the State of
Israel, which now exists, was not formed as a result of the
blessings of this covenant (the "Palestinian Covenant" of
the Scofield Bible).
The Jews of 1948 (except for maybe a few isolated
individuals) did not turn to the Lord. And, to base the
formation of Israel upon their alleged "faithfulness" to
Judaism is to betray a fundamental misunderstanding of what
Judaism is. Some think the Jew of today has a special
advantage, perhaps even salvation without Christ, because
they believe in the God of the Old Testament, and follow the
Old Testament religion. This overlooks the fact that the
religion of the Old Testament was based on making sacrifices
for sins (Leviticus 17:11). It also ignores the statements
of the New Testament that there is absolutely NO salvation
outside Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:10-12), and that the Old
Testament religion was no longer efficacious (Hebrews 7-10).
The Lord of the New Testament is Jesus. This revelation
casts light on who the Lord of the Old Testament is. For
example, Peter quotes Joel 2:32 as being fulfilled in Jesus
(Acts 2:21).
What shall we answer when the dispensationalist claims
the existence of the State of Israel today is "proof" of
God's covenant blessing upon them? With the clear backing of
Scripture, we can say, "NO!" We can then point to
Deuteronomy 30:1-8 as proof that the Israel of today is
definitely not the Israel of the Bible! But, what about the
land promised to Abraham?
Paul, in citing the promise to Abraham, does not limit
the territory to Palestine: It was NOT through the law that
Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would
be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that
comes by faith (Romans 4:13). This is an extension of the
statement of Jesus in Matthew 5:5, in which the meek shall
inherit not merely Palestine, but the earth. As you can see,
the inheritance is for Abraham and his offspring. The
dispensationalist believes Jewish people are entitled to the
inheritance based on their racial extraction or ethnic
heritage. But, Paul counters this idea in Galatians 3:7,29.
In case he hasn't made it clear enough, Paul reiterates for
those who expect some special privilege for physical
descendants of Abraham: "Now to Abraham's and his seed the
promises were made. He does not say, And to seeds' as of
many, but as of one, And to your seed, who is Christ"
(Galatians 3:16). The only way to inherit anything is in
Christ! The Jewish leaders who came to John the Baptist
thought the Kingdom was theirs automatically by virtue of
their heritage. (Matthew 3:9). The Apostle Paul states the
nature of true Jewishness in Romans 2:28,29; 9:6-8; 11:5-7.
The full scope of Israel's prophets was not
nationalistic, but universal, with an increasing cosmic
dimension which took in heaven and earth (Isaiah 65:17;
24:21-23). The writer of Hebrews assures them Abraham was
not looking merely to Palestine for fulfillment of the
promises. He looked for "a better country," and a city
"whose builder and maker is God" (Hebrews 11:10,16). The
continuity of the Old Testament terms and Middle East images
in Hebrews assures the church that God's promise has neither
failed nor been postponed, but is experienced now in Christ
(Hebrews 6:5), And, the land promises made to Abraham are
fulfilled in the universal Kingdom of God.
In conclusion, we have studied the subject of who God's
Chosen People are, and have found that, according to the
Bible, Israel is now composed of all those who believe in
Jesus as Messiah. It is not correct, therefore, to state
that the church has REPLACED Israel. Rather, the church IS
the continuity of the Old Testament Israel of God; it has
only replaced the Jewish nation. There is no more "Jew" and
"Gentile" racial distinctions. All nations are now a part of
Spiritual Israel in Christ. Christ's kingdom is here now in
fullness. All (who were a part of the true spiritual) Israel
were saved and given the inheritance (Romans 11:26).
With the advent of the war in the Middle East, many
people are wondering what is taking place in a prophetic
sense. As preterists, we can say with assurance that the
events now taking place are NOT a fulfillment of prophecy.
We know that all prophecy was fulfilled in A.D. 70, at which
time the New Covenant was fully established, making the
Kingdom available to all who would believe in Jesus as
Savior (Messiah). Some emotionalism is understandable in
time of war. However, we need not fear the Great Tribulation
or being "left behind" in the Rapture. We know by the time
limitations recorded in the New Testament that these things
have already occurred, and we are living in the new
spiritual promised land.
Speaking of Jews, here is what the scripture says:
Isaiah 65:15, "And ye shall leave your name for a
curse unto my chosen: for the Lord GOD shall slay thee, and
call his servants by another name:"
Matthew 21:43, "Therefore say I unto you, The
kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a
nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."
The above two verses were fulfilled in 70 AD, when the
Jews were slayed, the temple burned down, and the Kingdom of
God was taken from the Jews and given to all who believe in
Christ.
Other Proof that there is no Jewish Race Today
After the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD, the nation
of Israel, after the flesh, was scattered throughout the
earth, and lost all tribal relations. This scattering was
made immutable due to the fact that all tribal genealogical
records were destroyed with the Temple in A.D. 70. The
simple fact is that there is no existing Jewish race. Not
only the Bible confirms this (as already revealed), but the
writings of worldly authorities, including Jewish resources
as well. Consider the following quotations:
The Encyclopedia Brittanica (1973): "The Jews As A Race:
The findings of physical anthropology show that, contrary to
the popular view, there is no Jewish race. Anthropocentric
measurements of Jewish groups in many parts of the world
indicate that they differ greatly from one another with
respect to all the important physical characteristics" (vol.
12, page 1054).
Encyclopedia Judaica Jerusalem (1971): "It is a common
assumption, and one that sometimes seems ineradicable even
in the face of evidence to the contrary, that the Jews of
today constitute a race, a homogeneous entity easily
recognizable. From the preceding discussion of the origin
and early history of the Jews, it should be clear that in
the course of their formation as a people and a nation they
had already assimilated a variety of racial strains from
people moving into the general area they occupied. This had
taken place by interbreeding and then by conversion to
Judaism of a considerable number of communities. . . .
"Thus, the diversity of the racial and genetic
attributes of various Jewish colonies of today renders any
unified racial classification of them a contradiction in
terms. Despite this, many people readily accept the notion
that they are a distinct race. This is probably reinforced
by the fact that some Jews are recognizably different in
appearance from the surrounding population. That many can't
be easily identified is overlooked and the stereotype for
some is extended to all - a not uncommon phenomenon"
(Encyclopedia Judaica Jerusalem, 1971, vol. 3, p. 50).
Encyclopedia Americana (1986): "Racial and Ethnic
Considerations. Some theorists have considered the Jews a
distinct race, although this has no factual basis. In every
country in which the Jews lived for a considerable time,
their physical traits came to approximate those of the
indigenous people. Hence the Jews belong to several distinct
racial types, ranging, for example, from fair to dark. Among
the reasons for this phenomenon are voluntary or involuntary
miscegenation and the conversion of Gentiles to Judaism"
(Encyclopedia Americana, 1986, vol. 16, p. 71).
Collier's Encyclopedia (1977): "A common error and
persistent modern myth is the designation of the Jews as a
'race! This is scientifically fallacious, from the
standpoint of both physical and historical tradition.
Investigations by anthropologists have shown that Jews are
by no means uniform in physical character and that they
nearly always reflect the physical and mental
characteristics of the people among whom they live"
(Collier's Encyclopedia, 1977, vol. 13, p. 573).
Funk and Wagnall's New Encyclopedia (1970): "In 1970 the
Israeli Knesset adopted legislation defining a Jew as one
born of a Jewish mother or a convert" (vol. 14, p. 214).
H.G. Wells: "There can be little doubt that the
scattered Phoenicians in Spain and Africa and throughout the
Mediterranean, speaking as they did a language closely akin
to Hebrew and being deprived of their authentic political
rights, became proselytes to Judaism. For phases of vigorous
proselytism alternated with phases of exclusive jealousy in
Jewish history. On one occasion the Idumeans, being
conquered, were all forcibly made Jews. There were Arab
tribes who were Jews in the time of Muhammad, and a Turkish
people who were mainly Jews in South Russia in the ninth
century. Judaism is indeed the reconstructed political ideal
of many shattered peoples - mainly Semitic.... The main part
of Jewry never was in Judea and had never come out of Judea"
(The Outline of History, p. 505).
John Bray: "Many Christians do not know that the vast
majority of so-called Jews in the world today are the
Ashkenazim Jews, while the remainder of them are the
Sephardim Jews. The Ashkenazim Jews have as their background
not the nation of Israel but a country called Khazaria,
which country at one time was the largest country in Europe.
The settlers of Khazaria were Turks and Huns. In A.D. 740
King Bulan of Khazaria decided to adopt the Judaistic
religion for his country. A number of Jews were already
living there. So he converted to Judaism, along with all his
officials, and whole nation ended up being known as a nation
of Jews. In 970, Russia came in and dominated the situation,
and the Khazars were scattered, many of them going down into
Poland and Lithuania. Where at the dawn of our modern
civilization the largest concentration of Jews were found.
Today, the largest percentage of so-called Jews in the world
have as their background this group of people" (This
information is fully documented in detail in John Bray's
book, Israel in Bible Prophecy).
Today, being a Jew simply means that one is of the
Judaistic religion or a convert to it, or else in a
"brotherhood" of those who are. Therefore, being a Jew has
nothing to do with race. We are familiar with a number of
notable figures, such as Sammy Davis, Jr., Elizabeth Taylor,
Madonna, and Tom Arnold, in fact, who became Jews by
conversion to the religion of Judaism.
Therefore, we can clearly and confidently assert that
there is no such thing as a Jewish race, nor ever can there
be. Since the fall of Jerusalem, and the scattering of the
nation of Israel in the first century, the nation calling
itself Israel has consisted of a collection of people from
nearly every nation in the world, with no relation to the
twelve tribes of the historical nation known as Israel. Any
attempts to state that there is, or will ever again be, a
race of Israelites are proven to be futile and of no force.
There is no Jewish race.
What should a follower of Christ think of Jews?
Romans 2:28-29, "For he is not a Jew, which is one
outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in
the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and
circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in
the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."
Followers of Christ ARE Jews! Followers of Christ have
not REPLACED Israel…the followers of Christ ARE Israel.
Spiritual Israel.
Final Thoughts
Jews do not practice "Old Testament religion;" they are
not almost Christians, lacking only acceptance of the
Messiah and the New Testament. They do not worship the true
God, not even the “God of the Old Testament” Jesus was quite
adamant: If they had believed Moses, they would believe Him.
(John 5:46-47) They don't believe the Old Testament either.
The religion of Judaism is a Talmudic faith, not Biblical.
Those who support, as the majority of premillenialists do,
the secular nation of Israel at this time, simply because
they are so-called Jews, and claim the premillenial system
relies on Israel as a pivotal aspect of itself, give succor
to apostates and enemies of Christ, and actually encourage
them in their unbelief.
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/chosen.html
--
For Futurists/Dispensationalists, when the headlines
change, the interpretation of the Bible changes.
The failed interpretive history of Ezekiel 38 & 39
is prime evidence that modern day prophecy writers
are not profiling the future through the lens of
Scripture, but through the ever changing headlines
of the daily news.
To email me, just remove the underscores.
.
|
|
| User: "Fred A Stover" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
01 Nov 2007 05:48:52 AM |
|
|
"Pastor Knave" < SATAN_@_gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8m6ji35epbka8aa5p3t7ub0svontvqnj63@4ax.com...
Who they aren't:
2 John 1:7 (ASV)
For many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even they that confess
not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the
antichrist.
His,
--
http://tinyurl.com/2hf6ak
ho echon ota akoueto Preparing the way of the Lord
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a
little child, he shall not enter therein. (Matt 10:15)
<)))))))><
This Generation
The Author uses three different words translated "generation," using the
primary sense of the word generation: "what is generated by a generator;"
for He is calling attention to the generator too. He uses "genea," a word
used for a natural son to designate the people of Israel generated by Jacob,
as in "This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled"
(Matt 24:34). The Author uses "genos," a word used for adopted son, to
designate the church, generated by adoption: "ye are a chosen generation, a
royal priesthood" (1 Pet 2:9), and He uses "genemma" to designate all
mankind generated by Adam: "Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye
escape the damnation of hell?" (Matt 23:33).
This is apparent when looking at scripture in which two different words for
generation are used together, as in Matt 23:33-36:
You serpents, you generation [gennema: generated by Adam] of vipers, how can
you escape the damnation of hell? Wherefore, behold, I send to you prophets,
and wise men, and scribes: and some of them you shall kill and crucify; and
some of them shall you scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from
city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the
earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zacharias son of
Barachias, whom you slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say to
you, All these things shall come upon this generation [genea: generated by
Jacob].
That's the atonement. How does mankind, generated by Adam, escape the
damnation of hell? Mankind escapes the damnation of hell by all the sins of
the world coming upon the one generated by Jacob, who bore those sins on the
cross.
Satan has been shown this many times, but his interest is in promoting his
own gospel, not the gospel of our Lord.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
01 Nov 2007 12:30:16 PM |
|
|
Ohj I KNOW! I KNOW, raising his hand and waiving it furiously.
WHITE MEN in the south, who hate black people, and those nonchristians
who.dont agree with the trinity doctrine.
and don't think they should be allowed to be Americans
You know the guys with the white sheets on and wear pillow cases
over their heads..
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
03 Nov 2007 07:41:31 AM |
|
|
On Nov 1, 4:22 am, Pastor Dave <ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote:
Who Are God's Chosen People?
As you study this subject in light of this essay, you
may find that it contradicts what you have been taught.
If this is so, it is because you have been taught a
"system," not the scripture. What does the term "chosen
people" mean? Many think immediately of Israel. Is this
correct? What does the Bible say?
Who was Deuteronomy 7:6 (speaking of 'chosen people')
spoken to? Deuteronomy 6:3-4 reveals it was spoken to
Israel. At that time, Israel consisted of all those that
came out of Egypt with Moses (see Deuteronomy 7:8).
A very similar verse is Deuteronomy 14:2. In 1 Chronicles
16:13, Israel is called "His chosen ones": David wrote
Psalm 33:12; 105:6, 43. And Isaiah records these words
from the Lord: Isaiah 41:8-9; 43:10,20; 44:1. In Isaiah
48:12, the Lord refers to them as "My called." And Daniel
calls them "His chosen people" (Daniel 11:15).
From the above, it can be seen that the phrase,
"chosen people" definitely applied to Israel. But, what was
the composition of Old Testament Israel? According to
the Bible, Israel was made up of:
1) The descendants of Jacob (Exodus 1:1; Joshua 13:6, etc.),
And...
2) Those who joined Israel through circumcision and keeping
the law (Exodus 12:48ff).
Keeping the covenant was a requirement for all those who
wished to remain a part of Israel (Genesis 17:14, Exodus
12:15,19; 30:32,38; 31:14; Leviticus 7:20-21, 25,27;
17:4,9-10, 14; 18:29; 19:8; and Numbers 15:30-31).
These Scriptures, and many others, show that membership
in the nation of Israel was dependent on obedience to God's
commandments. To disobey God was to lose one's citizenship.
When most people think of Old Testament Israel, they
think exclusively in terms of Israel as a nation. Yet, this
is not the true Biblical meaning of "Israel". The name
"Israel" has always had a twofold significance: one
national, and the other religious. For example Exodus 19:6
and Amos 9:11-12 proclaims that the remnant of Israel
would be largely an entity of religious instead of national
destination. Isaiah says much the same thing (Isaiah
56:7-8).
The primary meaning of "Israel" in the Old Testament
stands for the religious covenant community, the people who
worship God in truth and Spirit. Secondarily, it denotes a
distinct ethnic group or nation which is called to become
spiritual Israel. Decisive for the Old Testament prophets
and their prophecies is the theological quality of the
'people of God,' not their ethnic and political
characteristics.
Contrary to the claims of Hal Lindsey, and other
dispensational authors (Charles Ryrie, etc.), the blessing
of Israel's election was not unconditional. When the
election service is withheld, the election loses its
meaning, and therefore fails. .If Israel ceased to
acknowledge God to be her Lord, then she declared that she
no longer wished to be His people. Her high calling to be
the 'Chosen People' was not the mark of Divine indulgence or
favoritism, but a summons to a task exacting and unceasing,
and election and task were so closely bound together that
she could not have one without the other."
Did Old Testament Israel lose her election? As Paul
would say, "God forbid!" The Old Testament prophesied in
many places that a "remnant" would be saved. The question
is: Of whom was this remnant to consist? According to
Jeremiah 31:31-34, the remnant would be made up of those who
"know the Lord," and whose sins would be forgiven completely
(unlike under the Old Covenant - Hebrews 10:1-4). This was
to be made possible through the initiation of a "new
covenant." This New Covenant (or "Testament" -KJV) was
ratified by Jesus at His crucifixion, shown to His disciples
in symbolic form in the Last Supper (Matthew 26:28, Mark
14:24, Luke 22:20, 1 Corinthians 11:25).
Is New Testament Israel any different from Old Testament
Israel? The Israel of the New Covenant is made up of 1)
those descendants of Jacob who believed in the Messiah
(Matthew 10:6; 15:24; Acts 2:36-41; 21:20, etc.), and, 2)
those who joined Israel through spiritual circumcision and
the keeping of the new "law" (Romans 2:28-29; 13:10; 1
Timothy 1:5).
With the establishment of the New Covenant, physical
descent was no longer a determining factor for entrance into
Israel. Only those who believed in the Messiah could enter
or remain a part of Israel. Let us examine what the Bible
has to say on the subject in Jeremiah 11:16. Verse 17 says
this was directed to "the house of Israel, and the house of
Judah." Read what Hosea says of Israel in Hosea 14:6.
Paul picks up the olive tree motif in Romans 11:17-24.
He says those Jews who rejected the Messiah were themselves
rejected and "broken off" (or cut off, to use the Old
Testament term) from the "olive tree" of Israel (verse 20).
The apostle showed that the only possible way to remain a
citizen of Israel was to believe in Jesus as Messiah. This
citizenship was also offered to the Gentiles on the same
condition. If they would put their faith in the Messiah of
Israel, they would be made fellow citizens of Israel
(Ephesians 2:19). Christ created His church, not beside
Israel, but as the faithful remnant of Israel that inherits
the covenant promises and responsibilities. Christ's church
is not separated from the Israel of God, only from the
Christ-rejecting Jewish nation.
The identification of the church with Israel is explicit
in Peter's first epistle (1 Peter 2:9). Here, Peter
definitively states that those who "believe" in Christ Jesus
(1 Peter 2:7) were the "chosen race" and the "holy nation"
(1 Peter 2:9; compare Exodus 19:6; Deuteronomy 7:6; and
14:2). Only in Christ could Israel as a nation have remained
the true covenant people of God. God's covenant people are
no longer distinguished by racial or territorial
characteristics, but exclusively by their faith in Christ.
And the land we have inherited is a spiritual one. The
spiritual blessings of citizenship in the Israel of God are
ours as servants of Christ, but what of the "unconditional"
land promises of the so-called "Palestinian Covenant"?
Is present Israel a fulfillment of prophesy?
One of the most common assertions of the premillennial
dispensationalist today is that the formation of the State
of Israel in 1948 is proof that the Jews are still "God's
Chosen People," and that He still has prophetic plans for
them. (This has been asserted more vigorously than ever due
to the recent hostilities in the Middle East). It is claimed
that God was at work bringing the Jews back to their
"ancient homeland," and that they have a Biblical right to
claim Palestine as their own. Are these claims correct? Was
the formation of the State of Israel evidence of God's
blessing? Of God's election?
Just what Scriptures do dispensationalists use to
support these claims? How do they come to their conclusions?
As you may know already, the dispensationalist uses what he
calls a "literal hermeneutic." That is, he claims to
interpret the words of the Bible at face value,
understanding them in their "normal," everyday usage and
meaning. This extremely literal hermeneutic is then used to
"interpret" the prophecies of the Old Testament that speak
of the return of God's people to the Holy Land. However,
this literalism is also used as an excuse to ignore the
plain reinterpretation by the New Testament writers of these
very same prophecies. Even when the inspired writers of the
New Testament give a meaning to the Old Testament.
prophecies other than a "literal" one, the dispensationalist
will say that this is not the complete meaning, and that
these prophecies "remain to be realized for Israel."
One of the Scriptures the dispensationalist claims was
fulfilled by the 1948 formation of the State of Israel is
found in Ezekiel 36-37. This prophecy was given to Ezekiel
during the Babylonian captivity (Ezekiel 1:1-2), and
foretold the eventual return of Israel to their land. Tied
in with this prophecy was the prediction of the coming
Messiah (Ezekiel 38), and the inauguration of the New
Covenant. As we know from both secular history and the New
Testament, the people did return to the land and the Messiah
did come and establish the New Covenant (Matthew 26:28).
Despite this, dispensationalists deny fulfillment of either
of these prophecies, saying they found only a "partial
fulfillment" in Israel's return and Christ's first advent.
They further allege that the re-gathering of Jews to form
the current State of Israel is part of the final
fulfillment. They say the blessings of the "Palestinian
Covenant" are only now coming into existence. The promises
of such passages as Deuteronomy 30 are touted as "Scriptural
basis" for Israel's re-gathering. How should we answer such
claims?
According to Deuteronomy 30:1-8, a necessary condition
for the re-gathering of Israel to Palestine was returning to
the Lord (verses 2-3). Based on this clear passage of
Scripture, it can be definitely concluded that the State of
Israel, which now exists, was not formed as a result of the
blessings of this covenant (the "Palestinian Covenant" of
the Scofield Bible).
The Jews of 1948 (except for maybe a few isolated
individuals) did not turn to the Lord. And, to base the
formation of Israel upon their alleged "faithfulness" to
Judaism is to betray a fundamental misunderstanding of what
Judaism is. Some think the Jew of today has a special
advantage, perhaps even salvation without Christ, because
they believe in the God of the Old Testament, and follow the
Old Testament religion. This overlooks the fact that the
religion of the Old Testament was based on making sacrifices
for sins (Leviticus 17:11). It also ignores the statements
of the New Testament that there is absolutely NO salvation
outside Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:10-12), and that the Old
Testament religion was no longer efficacious (Hebrews 7-10).
The Lord of the New Testament is Jesus. This revelation
casts light on ...
read more =BB
Ge 12:3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that
curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
http://www.watchmenwatching.com/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
04 Nov 2007 02:34:40 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 05:41:31 -0700, wrote:
On Nov 1, 4:22 am, Pastor Dave
<ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote:
Who Are God's Chosen People?
The Jews of 1948 (except for maybe a few isolated
individuals) did not turn to the Lord. And, to base the
formation of Israel upon their alleged "faithfulness" to
Judaism is to betray a fundamental misunderstanding
of what Judaism is. Some think the Jew of today has
a special advantage, perhaps even salvation without Christ,
because they believe in the God of the Old Testament,
and follow the Old Testament religion. This overlooks
the fact that the religion of the Old Testament was based
on making sacrifices for sins (Leviticus 17:11). It also
ignores the statements of the New Testament that there
is absolutely NO salvation outside Christ (John 14:6;
Acts 4:10-12), and that the Old Testament religion was
no longer efficacious (Hebrews 7-10). The Lord of the
New Testament is Jesus. This revelation casts light on ...
First of all, read the above paragraph I left intact from
what I first posted again, carefully! :)
Ge 12:3 And I will bless them that bless thee,
and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee
shall all families of the earth be blessed.
Note that God said to Abraham, "in you, shall all
the nations of the earth be blessed". Not just the
Jews (Israel), but ALL NATIONS! That includes
Gentiles, which means that it wasn't about national
Jews, in the end!
Furthermore, you must understand that God divorced
national Israel and left only Judah and so, national
Israel was out of the picture, before the Old Testament
even closed!
But anyway...
Now go read Galatians 3-4, which clearly tells us that
those called in Isaac, are those in Christ. I assume
you know that Isaac was Abraham's son and received
the same blessing.
"And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a
son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac:
and I will establish my covenant with him for an
everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him."
- Genesis 17:19
Now please don't skim through this. Please take
your time and put down your doctrine for a moment,
instead of trying to manipulate the words to fit it as
you read the following and instead, just read what
IT actually says, NOT your doctrine, okay? :)
Galatians 3:28-29; 4:22-31
3:28) There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither
slave nor free, there is neither male nor female;
FOR YOU ARE ALL ONE IN CHRIST JESUS.
3:29) And if you are Christ's, then you are
Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the
promise.
4:22) For it is written that Abraham had two sons:
the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman.
4:23) But he who was of the bondwoman was born
according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman
through promise,
4:24) WHICH THINGS ARE SYMBOLIC. For these
are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai
which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar;
4:25) for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and
corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in
bondage with her children.
4:26) But the Jerusalem above is free, which is
the mother of US ALL.
4:27) For it is written: Rejoice, O barren, You who
do not bear! Break forth and shout, you who are
not in labor! For the desolate has many more children
than she who has a husband.
4:28) Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children
of promise.
4:29) But, as he who was born according to the flesh
then persecuted him who was born according to the
Spirit, even so it is now.
4:30) Nevertheless what does the Scripture say?
CAST OUT THE BONDWOMAN and her son,
for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir
with the son of the freewoman.
4:31) So then, brethren, we are not children of
the bondwoman but of the free.
And who is "we"? C-H-R-I-S-T-I-A-N-S!!!
And as Paul said up in 3:28-29, it is Christians
who are both:
1) Not Jews, nor Greeks in Christ, but all one.
2) Heirs to the promise made to Abraham.
And what was that promise? That in Abraham,
ALL NATIONS would be blessed.
Now think about it, please. How could it be that it is
about national Jews because of a promise made to
Abraham and yet, the promise made to Abraham
was that ALL NATIONS would be blessed?
Huh??? That's a contradiction! :) Therefore, the Futurist
view about it being about national Israel (national Jews),
is in error, since the Bible does not contradict itself!
Nor was Paul wrong, since the promise, again, was that
ALL NATIONS would be blessed by the covenant made
with Abraham, not just national Israel!
--
Hate is a prison. Anger is the warden and rage
is the guard who takes a piece of you every day.
To email me, just remove the underscores.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
05 Nov 2007 01:34:21 PM |
|
|
Note that God said to Abraham, "in you, shall all
the nations of the earth be blessed". Not just the
Jews (Israel), but ALL NATIONS! That includes
Gentiles, which means that it wasn't about national
Jews, in the end!
Abraham bore children by a 3rd Woman called Katuarah
who bore him MANY sons the youngest called Shah
or darkness.
as fruitfull as his 1st 2 Sons were, it is possable that abraham is
the father of all the surviving peoples of the earth.
when many other peoples did not
Ketura was a kottish woman or African and black by color.
just as the wives of Moses, and Boaz.
Boaz is in the linage of Jesus.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
06 Nov 2007 02:13:49 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 11:34:21 -0800, Sam Taylor
<cygnet@cncnet.com> wrote:
Note that God said to Abraham, "in you, shall all
the nations of the earth be blessed". Not just the
Jews (Israel), but ALL NATIONS! That includes
Gentiles, which means that it wasn't about national
Jews, in the end!
Abraham bore children by a 3rd Woman called Katuarah
who bore him MANY sons the youngest called Shah
or darkness.
Your additions to Scripture do not concern me.
The fact is, you have deleted everything I wrote,
because you could not dispute it.
Furthermore, to throw a real wrench in your works,
when God made that promise to Abraham, there
was no such thing as "a Jew", nor "a Jewish nation",
so it is impossible that it is about the Jews!
--
Hate is a prison. Anger is the warden and rage
is the guard who takes a piece of you every day.
To email me, just remove the underscores.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
07 Nov 2007 03:18:46 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:13:49 -0500, Pastor Dave
<ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 11:34:21 -0800, Sam Taylor
<cygnet@cncnet.com> wrote:
Note that God said to Abraham, "in you, shall all
the nations of the earth be blessed". Not just the
Jews (Israel), but ALL NATIONS! That includes
Gentiles, which means that it wasn't about national
Jews, in the end!
Abraham bore children by a 3rd Woman called Katuarah
who bore him MANY sons the youngest called Shah
or darkness.
Your additions to Scripture do not concern me.
The fact is, you have deleted everything I wrote,
because you could not dispute it.
Furthermore, to throw a real wrench in your works,
when God made that promise to Abraham, there
was no such thing as "a Jew", nor "a Jewish nation",
so it is impossible that it is about the Jews!
I never said the promises of Abram were limited to the jew's nor the
tribes of Israel, nor josephs seed
ALL his children were a blessing unto the nations.
but seeing that many peoples are no longer in existance i think it
could be possable, that ALL the remaing MIGHT and I use the Word MIGHT
just be the seed of Abraham
not that i would make this a doctrine, but just a possabilaty.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
07 Nov 2007 03:20:20 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:13:49 -0500, Pastor Dave
<ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 11:34:21 -0800, Sam Taylor
<cygnet@cncnet.com> wrote:
Note that God said to Abraham, "in you, shall all
the nations of the earth be blessed". Not just the
Jews (Israel), but ALL NATIONS! That includes
Gentiles, which means that it wasn't about national
Jews, in the end!
Abraham bore children by a 3rd Woman called Katuarah
who bore him MANY sons the youngest called Shah
or darkness.
Your additions to Scripture do not concern me.
keturah, and her sons are noted in scripture
The fact is, you have deleted everything I wrote,
because you could not dispute it.
Furthermore, to throw a real wrench in your works,
when God made that promise to Abraham, there
was no such thing as "a Jew", nor "a Jewish nation",
so it is impossible that it is about the Jews!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "guardian Snow" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
04 Nov 2007 06:15:27 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
The identification of the church with Israel is explicit
in Peter's first epistle (1 Peter 2:9). Here, Peter
definitively states that those who "believe" in Christ Jesus
(1 Peter 2:7) were the "chosen race" and the "holy nation"
(1 Peter 2:9; compare Exodus 19:6; Deuteronomy 7:6; and
14:2). Only in Christ could Israel as a nation have remained
the true covenant people of God. God's covenant people are
no longer distinguished by racial or territorial
characteristics, but exclusively by their faith in Christ.
And the land we have inherited is a spiritual one. The
spiritual blessings of citizenship in the Israel of God are
ours as servants of Christ, but what of the "unconditional"
land promises of the so-called "Palestinian Covenant"?
I am not clipping this because of any disagreement but only to focus
my issue of discussion. Your article speaks of Peter and says that he
identifies the "church" as Israel and I would like to point out to you
that you point is well taken except one minor thought to include.
1Pe 2:3 if indeed you have tasted that the Master is good.
It was a conditional giving over of authority based upon acceptances
of sound doctrine. To say the "church" is Israel without this
condition would also Identify heathen churches as being Israel. I'm
certain you wouldn't agree the synagogue of Satan in Revelations 2 is
Israel.
1Pe 2:5 you also, as living stones, are being built up, a spiritual
house, a set-apart priesthood, to offer up spiritual slaughter
offerings acceptable to Elohim through =D7=99=D7=94=D7=95=D7=A9=D7=A2 Yeshu=
a Messiah.
People of El are the church and not some denomination such as
Lutherans, Catholics or Mormons.
1Pe 2:7 This preciousness, then, is for you who believe; but to those
who are disobedient, =E2=80=9CThe stone which the builders rejected has bec=
ome
the chief corner-stone,=E2=80=9D1 Footnote: 1Ps. 118:22.
1Pe 2:8 and =E2=80=9CA stone of stumbling and a rock that makes for falling=
,=E2=80=9D1
who stumble because they are disobedient2 to the Word, to which they
also were appointed. Footnotes: 1Isa. 8:14. 2See John 3:36, Heb. 3:18.
1Pe 2:9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a set-apart
nation, a people for a possession, that you should proclaim the
praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvellous
light,
1Pe 2:10 who once were not a people, but now the people of Elohim; who
had not obtained compassion, but now obtained compassion.
I have no issue with this scripture because Peter was the Rock of our
church. I would only point out that he is speaking about individuals
who come to give praise El and not a building or particular group of
people. These people are identified
1Pe 2:21 For to this you were called, because Messiah also suffered
for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps,1
Footnote: 11 Cor. 11:1, 1 John 2:6.
1Pe 2:22 =E2=80=9Cwho committed no sin,1 nor was deceit found in His mouth,=
=E2=80=9D2
Footnotes: 1John 8:55, John 15:10, 2 Cor. 5:21, John 3:5. 2Isa.53:9.
I think thats important to point out. I don't think we disagree.
With respect,
Snow
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
05 Nov 2007 04:50:16 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 16:15:27 -0800, guardian Snow
<snowpheonix@eck.net.au> wrote:
First of all, GS, I wish to thank you very much for your
polite and reasoned tone in your response to my post
and for expressing your thoughts in such a respectful
way! It is much appreciated!
And for your information, I am quoting from the NKJV
and for definitions (a lexicon) I am using Strong's.
Not from a web site that uses Strong's numbers,
but inserts Thayer's definitions, which (Thayer's)
seems to have added definitions over time, with every
new wind of doctrine. Almost all lexicons use Strong's
numbering system, so that people can jump from one
lexicon to another and easily see what each has to say.
That doesn't mean that the web site is using Strong's
definitions though and so, be careful about this,
when using them!
Strong's has been the standard for over 100 years
and Koine Greek is a dead language and so, words
in that language cannot possibly have definitions
added to them. :) Furthermore, even if it weren't
a dead language, it would still only be the definitions
from _that_ time that would matter and should be
included in the lexicon, amen?
Hint: If the definitions themselves have numbers,
then it is _not_ Strong's, period.
People who think they know it all and get very large
egos when they are in usenet, love to argue this
with me and make a big fuss, as if they are in a
position to teach me, when they don't even understand
the structure of a lexicon and in many cases, didn't
even know what a lexicon actually was! In fact,
one guy was so stubborn, that I had to write to
the publishers and copy and paste their response
into a message for him!
Now of course, with these folks who are actually
ignorant of the Scriptures (especially of the Old
Testament, which is the cause of Futurism being
so wide spread) love to pretend to be experts
and when shown they don't know what they're
talking about, they still won't admit to the proof
and instead, either snip it and insult me and then
run away, or they simply just run away. (:
Now in case you're not aware (maybe you are),
I have been using Strong's for over 20 years
in (I believe) all of its formats and so, I can tell
you how it's laid out, for your edification and to
make your experience with it easier, should you
choose to use it. :) I am not bragging, GS.
I only mean that I am very well qualified
to explain how to use Strong's to you, which
you may already be aware of and I am only
trying to be helpful. :)
So please allow me to give you a quick example
and I will use 1 Peter 2:5, that you referenced
below, as the example:
"...you also, as living stones, are being built up
a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up
spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through
Jesus Christ." - 1 Peter 2:5
Sacrifices = G2378 = Thusia
Thusia (thoo-see'-ah) - sacrifice (the act or
the victim, literally or figuratively): - sacrifice.
Now to explain this Strong's entry to you:
The "G" number means that it is a Koine Greek word
and of course, would be found in the Koine Greek
lexicon in the "Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
with Hebrew and Greek lexicons".
The number is the number you use in the Koine Greek
lexicon to look it up.
"Thusia" is the actual Koine Greek word (transliterated
into English letters, of course).
Now on to the actual Strong's entry that I have directly
quoted for you, in the order in which the portions appear
and will quote once again here right above the list, so
that you don't have to scroll up and down to compare:
Thusia (thoo-see'-ah); sacrifice (the act or
the victim, literally or figuratively): - sacrifice.
1) The Koine Greek word.
2) How the Koine Greek word is pronounced.
3) The definition (up to the full colon).
4) Words after the dash are what words it was
translated into by the translators, throughout
the New Testament. In this case, it was only
translated into one English word in the NT.
But this/these word(s) after the dash are not
definitions and are not even necessarily correct
translation work. Only the definition portion
itself contains the definitions.
As a side note about the definitions, in almost
all cases, we should use the primary definition
of the word, especially when we know it's used
that way in Scripture in other places. In other
words, we don't get to pick and choose, to make
it work for our doctrine. We need to filter any
doctrine through the lens of Scripture and not
the other way around, no matter what it means
will happen to our doctrine! Unfortunately,
that's not what people usually do and they
have been so brainwashed, that they actually
think that to reject a doctrine, means to reject
Scripture. It doesn't! It only means that they
would be rejecting a doctrine.
Futurists have a very hard time with admitting
to what is proved about their doctrine (that it
is self-contradictory and pits the Bible against
itself), because they can't stand the idea that
it isn't all about them and their generation
and so, they reject anything that says it isn't,
no matter what Scriptural proof is offered!
This is nothing more than ego and vanity!
Don't think so? Futurists have said to me:
"If the Bible's not all about us, then what good is it?"
Pretty bad, huh? (:
Anyway, back to the point... :)
So we see that it means "sacrifice" and can be used
literally or figuratively. We also see that in the NKJV,
it was only translated into "sacrifice". This is true of
the KJV as well, in this instance.
Also, you can do a quick reference web site for Strong's,
at : http://www.eliyah.com/lexicon.html and make sure
to use the second box down, since that is the one for
the lexicon. Click on the "Greek" circle just above it
and then put the number in, which is "2378" and it
will display a page and it will be there, along with
whatever is just before and after it. Those have nothing
to do with the word you would be looking at. It's just
the web site keeps the words in a list format and so,
you will see a couple of words above and below it.
So in this case, you will see the following...
http://www.eliyah.com/cgi-bin/strongs.cgi?file=greeklexicon&isindex=2378
I will discuss the meaning of the verse down below,
where you mention this and I hope this information
was helpful. :)
So anyway, I am quoting from the NKJV and using
the actual Strong's lexicon (which is the part with
the Hebrew and Greek words and their definitions)
for reference material.
Pastor Dave wrote:
The identification of the church with Israel
is explicit in Peter's first epistle (1 Peter 2:9).
Here, Peter definitively states that those who
"believe" in Christ Jesus (1 Peter 2:7) were
the "chosen race" and the "holy nation"
(1 Peter 2:9; compare Exodus 19:6;
Deuteronomy 7:6; and 14:2). Only in Christ
could Israel as a nation have remained the
true covenant people of God. God's covenant
people are no longer distinguished by racial
or territorial characteristics, but exclusively
by their faith in Christ. And the land we have
inherited is a spiritual one. The spiritual blessings
of citizenship in the Israel of God are ours as
servants of Christ, but what of the "unconditional"
land promises of the so-called "Palestinian Covenant"?
I am not clipping this because of any disagreement
but only to focus my issue of discussion.
Okay, that's fair enough. :)
Your article speaks of Peter and says that
he identifies the "church" as Israel and
I would like to point out to you that your
point is well taken except one minor thought
to include.
Okay, shoot. :)
1Pe 2:3 if indeed you have tasted that
the Master is good.
It was a conditional giving over of authority
based upon acceptances of sound doctrine.
To say the "church" is Israel without this
condition would also Identify heathen churches
as being Israel. I'm certain you wouldn't agree
the synagogue of Satan in Revelations 2 is Israel.
Okay, I do see where you're going, but remember
that the church is the bride of Christ and that is
the true Israel and whether we agree or disagree
about what Revelation 2 says, you are speaking
of national Israel being mentioned and the point
of my post is that they are not the true Israel now.
Now as for Rev 2, it could also be that John meant
"spiritual Jews", given what Paul said in Romans...
"But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision
is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter;
whose praise is not from men but from God."
- Romans 2:29
But I'm not disagreeing with your assessment there.
I am only offering another possibility, since Revelation
is such a spiritual and symbolic book. But I lean toward
whom you believe it is about and that it was probably
a church (I use the term generically) that was made up
of those who were Jews by physical birth.
1Pe 2:5 you also, as living stones, are being
built up, a spiritual house, a set-apart priesthood,
to offer up spiritual slaughter offerings acceptable
to Elohim through ????? Yeshua Messiah.
"...you also, as living stones, are being built up
a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up
spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through
Jesus Christ." - 1 Peter 2:5
We must note here that it says, "spiritual" sacrifices
and so, I do not see the point of your quoting this.
People of El are the church and not some
denomination such as Lutherans, Catholics
or Mormons.
With all due respect, one of the problems you have,
is that you refuse to listen when people respond to
you. I am not talking about agreeing with them,
but just remembering what they said about themselves.
For example, one time you had slammed me about
being in some denomination. Yet this was after
I had already told you that I am against denominations
and am not a member of any denomination and then
you still tried to slam me for being "Protestant". I am
"Christian" and that's all. I'm not a member of any
denomination, nor "branch" of Christianity, such as
"Catholic", or "Protestant", or whatever. So what
you did at that time, was to try to be right at all costs,
even if you were wrong, since after I said this, you
left the scene quite quickly! :)
Now I'm not saying that is your intent in this message.
I am saying that this is an unnecessary statement on
your part (regarding denominations), when discussing
this issue with me. :)
In fact, I believe that we can see denominations forming
in the NT and Paul condemning them; even those who
were trying to make him head of "their church":
1 Corinthians 1:10-13
10) Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name
of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the
same thing, and that there be no divisions among
you, but that you be perfectly joined together in
the same mind and in the same judgment.
11) For it has been declared to me concerning you,
my brethren, by those of Chloe's household, that
there are contentions among you.
12) Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am
of Paul", or "I am of Apollos", or "I am of Cephas",
or "I am of Christ".
13) Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you?
Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
1Pe 2:7 This preciousness, then, is for you
who believe; but to those who are disobedient,
“The stone which the builders rejected has become
the chief corner-stone,”1 Footnote: 1Ps. 118:22.
1Pe 2:8 and “A stone of stumbling and a rock
that makes for falling,”1 who stumble because
they are disobedient2 to the Word, to which
they also were appointed. Footnotes: 1Isa. 8:14.
2See John 3:36, Heb. 3:18.
1Pe 2:9 But you are a chosen race, a royal
priesthood, a set-apart nation, a people for
a possession, that you should proclaim the
praises of Him who called you out of darkness
into His marvellous light,
1Pe 2:10 who once were not a people, but now
the people of Elohim; who had not obtained
compassion, but now obtained compassion.
I have no issue with this scripture because Peter
was the Rock of our church.
I disagree and find that to be an extremely false
interpretation! Peter was speaking of Christ,
not himself and he called the members of the body
(church) "stones" (part of that massive boulder).
You should have read just one verse back. And this
is the problem with grabbing a verse out and trying
to build a doctrine on it.
1 Peter 2:4-5
4) Coming TO HIM as to a living stone, rejected
indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious,
5) you also, as living stones, are being built up
a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up
spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through
Jesus Christ.
Further, you shouldn't bother with Jesus' words
to Peter about being a rock, since you haven't
gone back to the Greek and no English translation
trumps the original language anyway.
From the Greek, Jesus said that Peter was a small
stone and when Peter made his confession, Jesus
said that He would build His church upon "this rock"
and the Greek word for that word means a massive
boulder, like a mountain cliff or something and is
not the same word that Jesus used for Peter.
The word actually means "a piece of rock", as if
part of a another, massive rock and so therefore,
Peter cannot be "THE Rock" that the church is
built upon. And to be frank, that is to worship
a man and not the Lord! (:
Now many will try to claim that since Jesus spoke
Aramaic (so they say), that if we look at Peter in
Hebrew, "Kephas", instead of in the Greek, which
has "Cephas", that it would be a massive rock and
so, it is indeed Peter that was the Rock that Jesus
built His church on.
However, the problem with that is, that it makes
Scripture untrustworthy! God inspired the Bible
and God doesn't make mistakes! Therefore,
God inspired the writer to use "Cephas". The
writer could have used the same word twice,
but didn't and that says it all!
Besides this, they don't seem to grasp how foolish
it would be, to even begin to think that the Lord
Jesus Christ would build His church on a man,
instead of Himself! Hello??? McFly??? <lol> :)
So basically Jesus said that Peter was a small stone,
part of the larger, massive rock (boulder) which was
the confession that Peter made about Him (Christ)
and is "the Rock" that He (Christ) was building his
church upon and so basically, He was building it
upon Himself. The confession of Him as Lord!
All through the Old Testament, we see that the Lord
is the Rock, not any man and we see what Peter said
about Christ being what the church is built on.
And let us look again at 1 Peter 2:4...
"Coming *_TO HIM_* as to a living stone, rejected
indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious"
Now note here that we come to Him as a stone.
Now if Peter were "the Rock" that the church were
built upon, then he would have told them to come
to him (Peter), amen?
Therefore, I'm sorry, but your interpretation is wrong.
I would only point out that he is speaking about
individuals who come to give praise El and not
a building or particular group of people. These
people are identified
1Pe 2:21 For to this you were called, because
Messiah also suffered for us, leaving us an
example, that you should follow His steps,
1 Footnote: 11 Cor. 11:1, 1 John 2:6.
1Pe 2:22 “who committed no sin,1 nor was
deceit found in His mouth,”2 Footnotes:
1John 8:55, John 15:10, 2 Cor. 5:21,
John 3:5. 2Isa.53:9.
I think thats important to point out.
I don't think we disagree.
Well, we don't seem to about who the true Israel is.
But we do on the side issues that you brought into it.
We can discuss those further if you wish and thank you
for your comments. :)
--
Hate is a prison. Anger is the warden and rage
is the guard who takes a piece of you every day.
To email me, just remove the underscores.
.
|
|
|
| User: "guardian Snow" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
05 Nov 2007 05:43:54 AM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
Actually Pastor Dave, It was one of the things that I came to
understand when I saw what I believe to be the truth about Saul. I
read your article and don't hold your breath but I didn't find
anything to pick on. I agreed on your point about Peter but I thought
you missed why I illustrated those verses and the problem was I was
trying not to limit it to one verse. First allow me to point out a
teaching of Yeshua.
Mar 9:38 And Yoh=CC=A3anan said to Him, =E2=80=9CTeacher, we saw someone, w=
ho does
not follow us, casting out demons in Your Name, and we forbade him
because he does not follow us.=E2=80=9D
Mar 9:39 And =D7=99=D7=94=D7=95=D7=A9=D7=A2 said, =E2=80=9CDo not forbid hi=
m, for no one who works a
miracle in My Name is able to readily speak evil of Me.
Mar 9:40 =E2=80=9CFor he who is not against us is for us.
Now let me point to why I was speaking about Peter.
1Pe 2:8 and =E2=80=9CA stone of stumbling and a rock that makes for falling=
,=E2=80=9D
who stumble because they are disobedient to the Word, to which they
also were appointed.
Now watch this....
Rev 2:14 =E2=80=9CBut I hold a few matters against you, because you have th=
ere
those who adhere to the teaching of Bil=CA=BDam, who taught Balaq to put a
stumbling-block before the children of Yisra=E2=80=99=C4=95l, to eat food o=
ffered
to idols, and to commit whoring.
I know you see where I'm going with this. It was the very reason I
bugged you till you unkill filed me. I wanted to discuss this with
you and I knew you would have insight on the stumbling block.
It fits in pretty damn good with your first century understanding of
Revelations. Let me show you a few other interesting connections.
Act 16:14 And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the
city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord
opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.
Lydia of Thyatira is the only mention of this church outside of
Revelation.
Rev 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because
thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess,
to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat
things sacrificed unto idols.
1Pe 5:12 By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I
have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true
grace of God wherein ye stand.
1Pe 5:13 The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you,
saluteth you; and so doth Mark my son.
Silvanus was Paul's "brother"... He was elected to Babylon. I found
a dozen other connections but I'll leave you with those and see what
your think.
2Th 1:1 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timothy,
I think that the Messiah understood that Paul must do his gospel of
the uncircumcised in order to lead those who were unfaithful to the
truth, even if it meant by means of a "stumbling block".
With respect,
Snow
"Liberty is the child of intelligence." -- Denis Waitley
He who sows brambles must not go barefoot.
~Proverb, (Spanish)~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
05 Nov 2007 11:01:07 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 03:43:54 -0800, guardian Snow
<snowpheonix@eck.net.au> wrote:
I read your article and don't hold your breath
but I didn't find anything to pick on. I agreed
on your point about Peter but I thought you
missed why I illustrated those verses and the
problem was I was trying not to limit it to
one verse. First allow me to point out a teaching
of Yeshua.
Mar 9:38 And Yoh?anan said to Him, “Teacher, we saw someone, who does
not follow us, casting out demons in Your Name, and we forbade him
because he does not follow us.”
Mar 9:39 And ????? said, “Do not forbid him, for no one who works a
miracle in My Name is able to readily speak evil of Me.
Mar 9:40 “For he who is not against us is for us.
Now let me point to why I was speaking about Peter.
1Pe 2:8 and “A stone of stumbling and a rock that makes for falling,”
who stumble because they are disobedient to the Word, to which they
also were appointed.
Now watch this....
Rev 2:14 “But I hold a few matters against you, because you have there
those who adhere to the teaching of Bil?am, who taught Balaq to put a
stumbling-block before the children of Yisra’?l, to eat food offered
to idols, and to commit whoring.
I know you see where I'm going with this. It was the very reason I
bugged you till you unkill filed me. I wanted to discuss this with
you and I knew you would have insight on the stumbling block.
It fits in pretty damn good with your first century understanding of
Revelations. Let me show you a few other interesting connections.
Actually, forgive my ignorance, but no, I'm not sure
where you're going, as far as exactly and I like to be
specific.
Act 16:14 And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the
city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord
opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.
Lydia of Thyatira is the only mention of this church outside of
Revelation.
Rev 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because
thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess,
to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat
things sacrificed unto idols.
1Pe 5:12 By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I
have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true
grace of God wherein ye stand.
1Pe 5:13 The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you,
saluteth you; and so doth Mark my son.
Silvanus was Paul's "brother"... He was elected to Babylon. I found
a dozen other connections but I'll leave you with those and see what
your think.
2Th 1:1 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timothy,
I think that the Messiah understood that Paul must do his gospel of
the uncircumcised in order to lead those who were unfaithful to the
truth, even if it meant by means of a "stumbling block".
Why don't you try something.
Try quoting the verses and then, explaining, straight out,
what it is you are saying, leaving nothing to mystery.
Have you ever seen me leave you wondering about what
it is I'm saying???
You see, the problem is, you are so steeped in your doctrine
which you believe is correct, that you now assume that even
though the words aren't actually there, that no other
conclusion can be drawn from the text. That is a bit of ego
don't you think? :)
--
Hate is a prison. Anger is the warden and rage
is the guard who takes a piece of you every day.
To email me, just remove the underscores.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Delancy" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
01 Nov 2007 08:11:52 AM |
|
|
The very notion of a "chosen people" is, in and of itself,
ethnocentristic and possibly even racist. It is incompatible with a
rational and compassionate mind. In the Old Testament it is used as an
excuse for genocide against the people "God" is allegedly angry with.
(What an incredibly stupid idea.)
In fact, the Old Testament records the first historical incidents of
ethnic cleansing.
Tom
.
|
|
|
| User: "L.T. David" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
01 Nov 2007 11:45:44 AM |
|
|
"Tom Delancy" <tomdelancy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1193922712.760117.60190@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
The very notion of a "chosen people" is, in and of itself,
ethnocentristic and possibly even racist. It is incompatible with a
rational and compassionate mind. In the Old Testament it is used as an
excuse for genocide against the people "God" is allegedly angry with.
(What an incredibly stupid idea.)
In fact, the Old Testament records the first historical incidents of
ethnic cleansing.
Tom
Agree. It's a political disguise for genocide, killings, abuse.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
01 Nov 2007 12:35:05 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 06:11:52 -0700, Tom Delancy
<tomdelancy@yahoo.com> wrote:
The very notion of a "chosen people" is, in and of itself,
ethnocentristic and possibly even racist.
Goodbye.
--
For Futurists/Dispensationalists, when the headlines
change, the interpretation of the Bible changes.
The failed interpretive history of Ezekiel 38 & 39
is prime evidence that modern day prophecy writers
are not profiling the future through the lens of
Scripture, but through the ever changing headlines
of the daily news.
To email me, just remove the underscores.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Delancy" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
01 Nov 2007 07:23:42 PM |
|
|
On Nov 1, 10:35 am, Pastor Dave <ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 06:11:52 -0700, Tom Delancy
<tomdela...@yahoo.com> wrote:
The very notion of a "chosen people" is, in and of itself,
ethnocentristic and possibly even racist.
Goodbye.
Do a real "goodbye" and leave this country altogether. If this ain't
you're "Holy Land", get the ***** out.
Tom
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
02 Nov 2007 11:17:32 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 06:11:52 -0700, Tom Delancy <tomdelancy@yahoo.com> wrote:
The very notion of a "chosen people" is, in and of itself,
ethnocentristic and possibly even racist.
Oh, brother. Now the weak of mind show up.
The Hebrews were the chosen people until God became man and brought
Christianity. Anybody is free to join.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Delancy" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
04 Nov 2007 07:17:50 AM |
|
|
On Nov 2, 8:17 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 06:11:52 -0700, Tom Delancy <tomdela...@yahoo.com> wrote:
The very notion of a "chosen people" is, in and of itself,
ethnocentristic and possibly even racist.
Oh, brother. Now the weak of mind show up.
Talk about weak of mind. All you're doing is repeating dogma that is
no more than gibberish.
The Hebrews were the chosen people
So they say in THEIR book. But who were the "chosen people" to the
people the Hebrews murdered? Murdered to every man, woman, and child -
no less! They committed genocide against other tribes and they admit
as much IN THEIR BOOK!
And that makes their "god" a homicidal maniac.
until God became man and brought
Christianity. Anybody is free to join.
duke, American-American
That's preposterous nonsense! "God became man..." what drivel!
Believing as you do not only requires a suspension of common-sense
disbelief, it requires the total death of reason.
Tom: American, veteran, descendant of Revolutionary Patriots.
Hang all priests and kings!
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Who Are God's Chosen People? |
04 Nov 2007 11:40:13 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 05:17:50 -0800, Tom Delancy <tomdelancy@yahoo.com> wrote:
The very notion of a "chosen people" is, in and of itself,
ethnocentristic and possibly even racist.
Oh, brother. Now the weak of mind show up.
Talk about weak of mind. All you're doing is repeating dogma that is
no more than gibberish.
But why would anyone believe you?
The Hebrews were the chosen people
So they say in THEIR book. But who were the "chosen people" to the
people the Hebrews murdered? Murdered to every man, woman, and child -
no less! They committed genocide against other tribes and they admit
as much IN THEIR BOOK!
And that makes their "god" a homicidal maniac.
Nope, he never told them to do that.
until God became man and brought
Christianity. Anybody is free to join.
That's preposterous nonsense! "God became man..." what drivel!
Believing as you do not only requires a suspension of common-sense
disbelief, it requires the total death of reason.
But why is it drivel? Just because YOU don't believe?
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
