Tags
called, chosen, Church, holy, Israel, Life, nation, natural, Politics, pristhood, race, Religion & Spirituality, royal
Jesus Christ is the only Israel the news should be reporting, because He is Israel, and those in Him!
Related Post:
I am often asked why I do not “stand with Israel”, meaning, why do I not support that people across the waters which we refer to as “natural” Israel. It is very simple actually. I will not pretend that unbelievers possess the favor of God. We should take the Gospel to them however….
And what is your question…?
It’s declarative my brother, declarative, not a question in my mind, lol.
Gosh – you mean John Haggee (sic?) is wrong about the geopolitical nation of Israel? You mean sovereign God has chosen His people from every tribe and nation, and that Christ is the true Israel – and in Him we have relationship and adoption with God? Is that what you’re saying? ‘Cause if it is, I’m right with ya!
Press on!
You saw right thru that, didn’t ya?
Just trying to understand. Are you suggesting that Jesus is Israel? Do you mean to say that when Peter speaks of ‘a chosen race’ he means Jesus and His Bride?
Thanks,
Yvonne
Yes, Yvonne – you understand me correctly.
Peace to you and yours, in Christ!
Manfred,
Would you be willing to provide any other Scripture to support your position? Peter was speaking to the Jewish Christians of the Dispersion; the Jews were ‘the chosen race’.
Thank you,
Yvonne
Yvonne, yes, Peter was speaking to Christians, and that my dear sister, is the whole point. He was not speaking to unbelievers. Jews who reject the Messiah, Jesus Christ, are enemies of God. His eternal love is upon the elect unto salvation alone, which includes those believing Jews, but not those who do not believe.
2 Corinthians 1:20 tells us that all the promises made to Israel are fulfilled in Christ Jesus. He is the One who fulfilled the law. In Him are no Jew, gentile, slave, free, male or female – He is the Rock and refuge of those called by God, the promised seed and Messiah that stiff-necked and unchosen Jews did not recognize.
The Jews were a chosen race in a temporal sense – much of the OT is shapes and shadows. The OT nation of Israel foreshadows the full body of redeemed chosen ones in Christ. Not every OT Jew was elect – as today, the path to righteousness is narrow and few are on it.
Would you then disagree with John MacArthur who notes that Israel because of its apostasy ‘temporarily’ forfeited their privilege of being the unique people of God until Israel’s future acceptance of Christ. Citing Romans 11 among others.
Thank you, judy
Yes, I would very much disagree with John MacArthur on this point. Where did God use the term ‘temporary’ in calling a people who was not His people, His people?
With all due respect, admin, where did God replace Israel with Jesus? T
The entire book of Zechariah speaks of the redemption of Israel. Romans 11:26-36 quotes Isaiah where he says Jesus will ‘take away their (Israel’s) sins.’ And in Rev. 12:13-17 where God protects Israel for a time.
Can you offer other Scriptural support please?
Thanks,
Yvonne
Yvonne. God did not replace anyone. I do not adhere to the so called ‘replacement theory’. There has always been one people of God in regard to salvation, from genesis to Revelation, and they are those of the faith of Abraham. It is all of grace. If you believe anyone who rejects Jesus Christ are ‘chosen’, that is, salvifically special unto God, then you have some unlearning to do. I appreciate your comments. God bless.
Yvonne, Go back a couple of chapters to get the context of Romans 11. In the 9th chapter, the Lord reveals through the Apostle Paul that “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
Rom 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.”
Manfred and admin,
I truly appreciate your willingness to engage in this discussion. You both have presented your perspectives with kindness and grace. Please know that I LOVE God’s Word and desire to stand for His truth.
Here on the East Coast it’s bedtime, so is it ok if we resume ‘on the morrow’?
Grace and peace!
~Yvonne
Grace and peace to you as well Yvonne. I may post on this. It is a profitable discussion. btw, I’m on your time, and your right. God bless.
Yvonne, I am with you on this. Nowhere in Scripture does it say that Jesus is Israel. God promised a remnant of natural Israel that they would be restored at the Second Coming. It is everywhere in the O.T. It says it in Ezekiel, Deut.,Zechariah, the minor prophets ect. You would have to spirtiualize half of the Scriptures to say that now that Israel has failed God is finished with them. If God is finished with Israel and all His promises to them are null and void, what hope do we have that God won’t decide to renig on His promises to us.
Peace to all here!!
Pam
Pam,
No sensible reformed person would claim that “God is finished with them” – the Jews. But sensible reformed folk will declare, with the historical church and a Christ-centered hermeneutic, that geopolitical Israel is not His chosen people. A remnant of that bunch will be saved – and added to the church. Interpret the OT through a proper understanding of the new.
Good evening, Gentlemen,
First of all I would like to clarify that I understand and believe that both Jew and Gentile are saved by way of God’s Grace through faith in Jesus Christ. By repenting of sin and placing their faith and trust in the completed work of Messiah Jesus is a requirement for salvation. It is a supernatural gift of God not of works (Eph 2). I would suggest that we are all in agreement concerning this.
Yes?
Manfred—you mentioned 2Cor1:20 as a proof text to support your idea that Jesus=Israel. You correctly state that Jesus fulfilled the Law of Moses; however, not all the Jews rejected the Messiah. God has always kept a believing Jewish remnant. From the time of Elijah to Paul, the Apostles and the many Jews that formed the early churches are all part of that remnant.
I took your advice and went back to study Roman’s 9-11. Starting in chapter 9 it is clear that Paul has a problem to clear up with unbelieving Israel. We find that there is a physical descendant of Abraham—the Jews, as well as spiritual children of Abraham—the believing Jews who had faith in Messiah. Clearly, there are Jews who were selected by God for salvation and they are the true Israel. Just because many Jews reject Messiah does not negate the promises God made to Israel.
admin—I do not believe that because the Jews are God’s chosen people that they all will necessarily be saved. (If my comments implied that then I was mistaken.) Romans chapter 11 makes it obvious that repentant Israel will be saved when the Deliverer (Jesus) comes out of Zion and takes away their sin (v. 26-32). “For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (v. 29) God gave Israel special privileges and because of God’s unchanging character (Mal 3:6) He declares, “nevertheless My lovingkindness I will not utterly take from him, nor allow my faithfulness to fail. My covenant I will not break, nor alter the word that has gone out of My lips.” Ps. 89:33-34
I am studying Zechariah in my personal Bible study. In this book, Zechariah received 8 visions of Israel’s future restoration. Especially interesting is chapter 13 where the Lord speaks of Israel being refined as silver and redeemed. What a glorious hope for God’s chosen people!
Hi Yvonne,
I have only recently come across from the dispensational viewpoint to that of amillennialist, but have honestly come to a belief that to attempt to separate believers under the old covenant from believers under the new covenant, is an impossible task, and I also believe offensive to God.
Quite honestly I do not see how Old Testament prophecies can be understood correctly, unless first acknowledging the way in which Christ Himself is the fulfillment of it all, and the central figure of the Bible, to Whom the Old Testament narratives point towards.
I don’t believe for a second that the church has replaced Israel, as is often claimed, but that the true Israel of God has been opened up widely in order to graft in believers from all nations according to the promise of God made to Abraham.
If you are serious in your quest for the truth in this matter, I strongly suggest reading through the book of Galatians, especially chapter 3. This is a letter Paul wrote to the churches in Galatia, who were predominantly Gentiles, and being deceived by Judaizers (those promoting Law above Grace).
This chapter makes it clear that the promises of God were to Abraham and His Seed (Offspring), not multiple but singular, and that Seed/Offspring being Christ [Gal 3:16]. It also makes it clear that the Law was given in order to guard the promises of God until the Christ be revealed in due course, and the promises of God inherited by Him and those in Him by faith.
This chapter is concluded with the following:
Galatians 3:27-29 ESV
[27] “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
[28] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
[29] And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.”
Bearing this in mind, along with the original promise made to Abraham, and also the fact that God allowed the utter destruction of the Old Testament sacrificial system from A.D.70 until now. Then in my mind this offers immense weight to the argument being made by this site.
One final thing, and although not proof, it is something that should cause concern, is the fact that dispensationalism as a theology is less than 200 years old. If you look into the claims that are made for unity of this system with those of a premillennial view from the early church, you will find virtually no unity whatsoever.
Maranatha,
John
John,
Going back to study Gal.3, I find that the promise spoken of here is the promise of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. Just as Abraham had faith and it was counted to him for righteousness, Jew and Gentile, slave and free, man or woman can receive salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
The context of this passage is salvation and does not negate the covenant that God made with Abraham and his believing descendants. When Paul makes the statement that there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male or female, he is speaking with regard to salvation. When one is saved, however, they do not stop being Jewish or a slave or a woman. Paul’s point is that salvation is for all peoples. The promise of salvation is fulfilled in Christ.
As I study through Zechariah, it is clear that God will redeem a remnant of Jews who will come to faith in Christ. When I read and study other books, Daniel, Ezekiel, Romans and Revelation it is clear that God is not finished with the Jews as a nation; His plan is to redeem a believing remnant for His glory.
Going back to the original post with that in mind, when Peter speaks to the believing Jews of the Dispersion and calls them ‘a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people’ he is speaking of the true Israel, the believing Jews—not Jesus.
Grace and peace, Friend.
~Yvonne
Yvonne,
My intention is to NEVER offer a proof text as there is no such thing. The passage is an example that supports my perspective.
The Israel of Zechariah’s prophecy is, as Paul reveals, not ethnic Israel – but all the redeemed of the Lord.
Manfred, you said that “a remnant of that bunch will be added to the Church”. That is happening now, but in the future, there is a promise by God that cannot be spiritualized in Ezk.37:21-22. God says Israel. He does not say the Church.
The only reason that Gentiles are saved is to make the Jews jealous, Ro.11:11. And of course, because of His grace and mercy in election and predestination.
Jer.31:31-40 tells the story of Israel’s future. Also, Ezk.37:23-28 is still future.
Heb.8:7-13 is also still future.
In these passages, as well as the passage in Zechariah, God says Israel. If He wanted to say the Church, I think He would have written it that way. Heb.8:11 says they(the Jews) will all know the Lord. Just hasn’t happened yet. All of the Jews do not know the Lord.
We have been grafted in to the New Covenant and Ro.11:25-36 tells of Israel’s future.
Paul goes into the Old Testament to make his points here in Ro.9-11.
The Body of Christ is being formed since Jesus returned to heaven, and it consists of Jew and Gentile. But a time of Jacob’s trouble is coming and after that, at the Second Coming, when the Deliverer comes out of Zion, those who were elected from the Jews for salvation, will be saved, Ro.11:26-27.
By the way, taken in context that Scripture in 1Cor. does not prove anything that has to do with this discussion.
I will be very interested to see what you have to say about the above mentioned Scriptures. Will you please explain according to what they say?
Thanks for letting me comment.
Grace and peace to you.
Pam
Pam,
It appears you hold to the “Bible code of the 19th century”, known as dispensationalism. I do not. THE main reason God saves anyone is to bring glory to His name – that all creation sees Him more clearly. That salvation of the Gentiles is a tool He uses regards His chosen Jews is not the same as that tool being His only purpose.
This blog is not the place for an in-depth theological review. If you wish to examine the historical reformed perspective, email me via my web site and I will be glad to help out.
Hi Pam,
You mention that in Ezekiel 37:21-22 that God says Israel, and doesn’t mention the church. I understand that the claim for pure literal interpretation that dispensationalism makes, actually leads to the conclusion you’ve made. However in the same passage of Scripture, using the same rule of interpretation, could you please tell me how you would deal with the following?
Ezekiel 37:24-25 ESV
[24] “My servant David shall be king over them, and they shall all have one shepherd. They shall walk in my rules and be careful to obey my statutes.
[25] They shall dwell in the land that I gave to my servant Jacob, where your fathers lived. They and their children and their children’s children shall dwell there forever, and David my servant shall be their prince forever.
Do you actually believe that David is to be resurrected again to rule as king, or do you actually concede that it is actually Christ who fulfills this prophecy?
Bless you,
John
Manfred,
I apologize to you if I offended with term ‘proof text’. It was not my intention.
Would you be willing to explain further on your perspective? I do not understand how the Israel of Zechariah becomes all believers.
Kindly,
Yvonne
Yvonne – No offense taken. My reply was intended to point out the fallacy of proof texting. To gain a relatively complete explanation of “how Israel of Zechariah becomes all all believers” is best handled by reading a book or two. Much of the OT prophecy is directed at the national Israel/Judah – but the major theme of the OT is the growing revelation of the coming Messiah, gathering the elect of God for the glory of His name.
This book does an excellent job explaining the reformed covenant view from the Baptist perspective:
http://reformedbaptist.blogspot.com/2010/05/fatal-flaw-of-theology-behind-infant.html
“My intention is to NEVER offer a proof text as there is no such thing. The passage is an example that supports my perspective”
Manfred, with all due respect, as someone who is eagerly following this discussion to refine my own understanding of Scripture — in regards to your recent comment — what is the purpose of the 5pt blog? From the “About Us” section I take away that your purpose is to “proclaim the doctrine of grace and to contend for the faith.” Gently I ask you, would you not rely soley on Scripture to support your “perspective”? Thank you, judy
Hey, wait a minute…this is my blog, Manfred just has a condo here, Ha!
and I think he did use Scripture. See earlier comments.
admin — Please accept my sincere apologies!!! I had a “midlife moment”. He did use Scripture earlier which is why I was so surprised by his latter statement of “NEVER” using proof text. In the spirit of iron sharpening iron I expected (and hoped) for a Biblical response to Yvonne as refinement continues.
Judy,
I do appreciate your contribution to the discussion, for the record. Now then, I am of the deep conviction that in dealing with any promise of God, Old or New Testament, the moment we separate the promise from Christ, we have made a hermeneutical error. 2Co 1:20 For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. That is why it is through him that we utter our Amen to God for his glory.
Judy,
DO NOT USE BLOGs (this one or any other) to ‘refine your understanding of scripture’. Blogs are not all that reliable. This blog is pretty good, except that with Reformed perspective, you must view certain things as they view them or you will not understand what they see the Bible communicating (Israel & eschatology).
I suggest you consult the teachings of Lewis Sperry Chafer, Norman Geisler, and John MacArthur to see their systematic approach. There are many more but you should get my drift. They do not require you to use a transmogrifier in order to ‘understand’. The Bible should be read literally with a historical perspective.
In the Bible, be careful of who is speaking to whom. Also, watch for tense and context. Never pull verses out and make them stand independently. Read the Bible as a whole and carefully watch what God has and is doing.
I just lost my condo but so be it…
Truthy
Truthy, nah, you still have a condo, but I just finished short-sheeting your bed, just for using the word ‘transmogrifier’ in a sentence.
Truthy – do you actually agree with Chafer and Geisler? God forbid!
Using Scripture to support an argument is not the same thing as “proof texting” a position. I do the former, avoid the latter.
admin, “Ouch” – please know I do not use bloggers as primary sources of theology or exposition of sound doctrine and please do trust that I am an energetic Berean. I spent a lovely chunk of time yesterday with my NASB and John MacArthur delving deeper into Scripture and commentaries on the discussion presented here. I am sure you know that MacArthur does not agree with the premise of the original post. Therefore, I welcome the teachings of other trusted believers – weighing everything against Scripture and depending solely on the Holy Spirit for guidance and illumination of Scripture and perhaps my error.
I look forward to future comments that maintain focus on the content and direction of your original post and I apologize for derailing edifying discussion. judy
No apology necessary, you derailed nada. (that’s Spanish).
Correction — this comment is meant for Truthy and not admin
Hey Truthy, you are absolutely right!! Except for one thing: Norm Geisler.
And Manfred, would you mind exegeting the Scriptures that I mentioned in my response? If you can show me where God has annulled His promises to Israel that state they will be a land, a people and a nation forever, then….. But there aren’t any annullments of the Abrahamic Covenant which was confirmed to Isaac and Jacob as well.
No one refutes that salvation is thru the Lord Jesus Christ and his finished work on the cross. It is by grace we are saved.
I know that the difference here is that you are a covenantalist and I do not ascribe to any hermeneutic system to make Scripture make sense. I just read what it says without presuppostion or spiritualizing everything that has to do with Israel.
Oh, well, never mind.
Peace.
Pam
Pam,
The promise was fulfilled so that, just before Joshua died, he could say, “And the Lord gave unto Israel all the land which He swear to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein.., there failed not ought of any good thing which the Lord had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass” (Joshua 21:43-45).
The fulfillment of the promise was confirmed by Nehemiah, who said, “So the children went in and possessed the land” (Neh. 9:7-24). Jeremiah also said that Israel “came in and possessed the land” (Jer. 32:21 ).
Before Stephen was killed by the Jews, he reminded them that God had fulfilled His promise regarding the land, saying, “They entered on the possession of the nations” (Acts 7:45).
Clearly the promise to give this land to Israel was totally fulfilled.
Read the article from which these statements came, here: http://www.theexaminer.org/volume6/number2/promises.htm
Your view IS affected by the theology you have sat under and it is obvious by your statements that you are a dispensationalist. This is what most churches teach, without declaring such. It is also wrong theology and came into being around the same time as Mormonism and the Watch Tower Society.
I believe it came into being in the first century church. Yes, the Scriptures you quoted say what they say as a matter of fact but they do not annull what God said about Israel and their future. He has “forever” promises to them specifically and they are still incomplete.
And you are affected by the theology that you have sat under. And yours, in my opinion is wrong. Can you explain the Scriptures that I quoted before? Moving on to something else does not prove your point.
I guess we will know when the Lord returns. I’m on the side of those who see Israel as the apple of His eye. Or is that over, as well. They are being chastized and will return to the Lord because He says so. And so it will be.
Peace.
No one who rejects Jesus the Messiah is under the favor of God, including unbelieving so-called ‘natural’ Israel (which is silly). As long as your idol continues to reject Christ, they shall continue under the disfavor of God.
“I just read what it says without presuppostion…”
Now Pam, in all reality, that cannot be true. A person who makes such claims is ‘always right’ and cannot be reasoned or taught, and dare never back down. God bless.
I’m sorry, I thought I said that in relation to a hermeneutic system.
I think that your statement could also refer right back at you.
God bless you too.
Peace.
No, not really. My statement cannot refer ‘right back to me’ and for this reason. I dare not say I have no presuppositions when I read, lol. Grace.
Pam,
There have long been premillennial views within the church, called Chiliasm in earlier days, and was declared a heresy at the Council of Ephesus (431).
Dispensational premillennialism came into being in 1830, with some help from Roman monks of the 16th century.
Some history about that view here: http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2010/06/11/where-dispensationalism-really-came-from/
and here: http://www.dispensationalism.org.uk/
As one who sat under dispensational pastors for years, the reformed teaching I’ve learned these past 8 has been an unveiling of the majesty of God and clarity and consistency of His Word.
Here’s a good one as well Manfred (throw a dog a bone will ya?) http://5ptsalt.com/2011/02/11/why-the-early-church-finally-rejected-premillennialism/
Forgot about that one, chief. Good dog.
Thanks so much for all of your recommendations.
Grace and peace to you all.
Pam, Thank you for your witness. Proverbs 31:25 & 26. I join you in leaving this discussion. Thank you, admin and others for the recommendations. Peace.
Pingback: Thoughts on Theology–Eschatology, Prophecy and Israel « Fragrance of Truth