Hebrews 3 & 4 - Future Promises For Israel

[_postpre]

Christopher,

My time is short tonight too. But I'd be curious how you would respond to Tim Warner's analysis of the verses you quoted from Galatians, and from which forms a foundation for your argument.

"Gal 3:27-28
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
(KJV)

Paul mentioned three classes of distinctions here. The first is regarding ethnicity. The second concerns gender, and the third regarding slavery. You can discern what Paul meant about there being neither "Jew nor Greek" by his treatment of the other two. Do gender distinctions dissapear when one is converted? Does the new convert become some kind of androgenous creature, losing his or her identity of gender? If so, then why does Paul indicate that women are to be silent in the Church. Why must an elder be the husband of one wife? Does a slave who is converted suddenly become free from his master? If so, why did Paul send the run away slave Philemon back to his master after he was converted?

It is obvious that when Paul uses such language he means ONLY to indicate a kind of equality IN CHRIST, and not a loss of identity. Israel is NOT the Church, and the Church is NOT Israel. Israel is a NATION. The Church is a body of saved remnants from all nations, including Israel. Nowhere in Scripture are saved Gentiles referred to as a part of Israel. All passages used to prove this use faulty exegesis. The remnant of Israel, or the "commonwealth of Israel," is the part of the Church that is Jewish. We Gentiles have been "made near" to Israel, and share in the blessings God promised Israel. But that does not make us "Israel."

Even in Revelation, in the eternal state, ethnic distinctions remain throught eternity.

Rev 21:24-26
24 And the nations (Gr. ethnos - ethnicity) of those who are saved shall walk in its light, and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it.
25 Its gates shall not be shut at all by day (there shall be no night there).
26 And they shall bring the glory and the honor of the nations (Gr. ethnos) into it.
(NKJ)

That means there will be Jews, French, Spanish, German, Arab, Russian, et. al, as distinct peoples in the eternal state. If ethnic distinctions remain even in the eternal state, they remain today as well."

(Again from an old archive, which I am too lazy to look up, but a general link for his work on progressive dispensationalism below)

http://www.pfrs.org/pd/index.html

Brian

[Guest]

I would have to say that the response is missing the whole point. Nobody said there were not ethnic distinctions. But Israel is no longer defined ethnically, but spiritually (Gal 6:16).

In response to his reference in Revelation.....

1 Peter 2:9-10
9 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation (Gr. ethnos - ethnicity), His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy.
NKJV

Try applying that one ethnically. Who is Peter addressing here? The church.

Blessings.

[_postpre]

Christopher,

Hold on. You have yet to prove your case from Galatians 6:16.

And as many as walk according to this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.

Notice it's not "who are the Israel of God." Rather, the Israel of God is a subset within this group. It is the true Israel from God's perspective, the Jewish remnant who believed in the first century. In a later post, I will further explain why Romans 9, Ephesians 2, and Galatians does not mesh Gentile believers into the concept of Israel. (such few texts you must rely on, yet IMO a solid exegetical explantion concerning the texts I submitted from Romans and Hebrews has yet to be offered)

I think, also, you are misapplying the text from 1 Peter. The {race are a chosen}- link below- are the Jews.
http://septuagint-interlinear-greek-bib ... 1peter.pdf

And why not? "This epistle is addressed to "the strangers scattered abroad", i.e., to the Jews of the Dispersion (the Diaspora)"

http://mb-soft.com/believe/txs/peter.htm

Take Care,

Brian

[Guest]

Nowhere in Scripture are saved Gentiles referred to as a part of Israel. All passages used to prove this use faulty exegesis. The remnant of Israel, or the "commonwealth of Israel," is the part of the Church that is Jewish. We Gentiles have been "made near" to Israel, and share in the blessings God promised Israel. But that does not make us "Israel."

Eph 2:14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.

I don't see how this passage can be read to mean that we (Gentiles) are seperate from Israel. It says one of the accomplishments of Christ was to make the two into one. Not to ensure the two would remian seperate.

Even in Revelation, in the eternal state, ethnic distinctions remain throught eternity.

Rev 21:24-26
24 And the nations (Gr. ethnos - ethnicity) of those who are saved shall walk in its light, and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it.
25 Its gates shall not be shut at all by day (there shall be no night there).
26 And they shall bring the glory and the honor of the nations (Gr. ethnos) into it.
(NKJ)

That means there will be Jews, French, Spanish, German, Arab, Russian, et. al, as distinct peoples in the eternal state. If ethnic distinctions remain even in the eternal state, they remain today as well."

(Again from an old archive, which I am too lazy to look up, but a general link for his work on progressive dispensationalism below)

http://www.pfrs.org/pd/index.html

Brian

I thought looking at personal distinctions was racism?

Anyway, I see this a bit different:

Revelation 21:9 Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls filled with the seven last plagues came to me and talked with me, saying, “Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb’s wife.” 10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God, 11 having the glory of God. Her light was like a most precious stone, like a jasper stone, clear as crystal. 12 Also she had a great and high wall with twelve gates, and twelve angels at the gates, and names written on them, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel: 13 three gates on the east, three gates on the north, three gates on the south, and three gates on the west.
14 Now the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

So when John was shown the Bride of the Lamb (the church) what he saw was Jerusalem which had the names of the 12 tribes and the names of the apostles of the church on it.

2 Corinthians 11:2
For I am jealous for you with godly jealousy. For I have betrothed you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

Paul is not talking to Jewish believers here. The Bride includes Gentiles. This applies to the Revelation imagery as well. The Bride is the Church, consisting of Jews and Gentiles.

[Guest]

Since I double posted again, I'll add this to a previous comment I made:

Seems to be something new that was not revealed until now. The mystery says that the Gentiles are fellow heirs of the same body. The same body as what? True Israel.

What is the one body both Jew and Gentile believers belong to? Christ.

What does Matthew say about Jesus:

Matthew 2:14 So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, 15 where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: "Out of Egypt I called my son."

Hosea 11:1 “When Israel was a child, I loved him,
And out of Egypt I called My son.

In Hosea it says Israel was loved and called God's son. Matthew says that Jesus coming out of Egypt fulfilled this. Jesus is that Son Israel. Jesus is the head of the body the Church (Eph 1:22-23) which is what the Jew and Gentile have become (Eph 2:16).

I think, also, you are misapplying the text from 1 Peter. The {race are a chosen}- link below- are the Jews.
http://septuagint-interlinear-greek-bib ... 1peter.pdf

And why not? "This epistle is addressed to "the strangers scattered abroad", i.e., to the Jews of the Dispersion (the Diaspora)"

http://mb-soft.com/believe/txs/peter.htm

Take Care,

Brian

I think the point was that Peter calls them a holy nation.

You said Peter was writing to Jews only? Then why does Peter say:

1 Peter 2:10 Once you were not a people,

How could Peter say that if the Jews have always been God's chosen people? Unless he was writing to Gentiles.

Peter's second letter says:

2 Peter 3:1 Dear friends, this is now my second letter to you. I have written both of them as reminders to stimulate you to wholesome thinking.

Peter then ends the letter like this:

15 Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

How can this be? I thought Peter only was writing to the dispersion? Yet here he states that not only is this letter going to the same people the first letter was written to, but he says Paul also writes letters that are considered scripture. If it is true that Peter was only writing to Jews, why is he recommending Paul's letters?

I don't think it can be shown that Peter only wrote to Jews and Paul wrote to Gentiles. It seems to be otherwise. Not only that, when there was a concern as to if Gentiles whould be circumcised, James made the final decision. If Paul was sent to the Gentiles, and James was to the Jews, why would James make a decision about Gentile policy and Paul sit back and take it?

I hope what I said makes sense. I don't have a lot of time either.

As far as your original posted question. I think Christopher brough up some great points. I would again assert that Just as he quoted, God said He fulfilled all the promises. The fact that God threw them out of the land itself proves there were conditions placed on the covenant. As Paul also said, the law which came later does not annul the covenant with Abraham. Meaning, if the Abrahamic covenant was unconditional, the law could not place conditions on it. So the only other conclusion was that it was conditional. We know of at least one condition:

Hebrews 11:8
By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went

Faith and obedience. He met that condition. Later, Jesus called other Jews sons of their father the devil because they did not do what Abraham did, that is they don't believe God or obey by faith.

Just some thoughts.

God Bless,
Sean

[Guest]

Hi Brian,

Christopher,

Hold on. You have yet to prove your case from Galatians 6:16.

And as many as walk according to this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.

Well, I can’t prove that Galatians 6:16 doesn’t mean what you think it means, but it would seem to me quite an odd statement for Paul to make after he just got through blasting Judaizers and rebuking the Galatians for trying to become as Jews, saying that it gains them absolutely nothing.

Also, the word “and” that you underlined can also be translated “even”.

NT:2532
kai (kahee); apparently, a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force; and, also, even, so then, too, etc.; often used in connection (or composition) with other particles or small words:

KJV - and, also, both, but, even, for, if, or, so, that, then, therefore, when, yet.

I find it interesting that Paul, a Jew, counted all his Jewishness and “dung”. (Phil 3)

(such few texts you must rely on, yet IMO a solid exegetical explantion concerning the texts I submitted from Romans and Hebrews has yet to be offered)

Well, if I’ve failed to present a convincing case, I’ll have to just leave it at that. Somebody else may be able to do better. I have thoroughly enjoyed the debate though.

As for the 1 Peter objection, I think Sean gave a very good answer to that so I won’t address it any further.

Just one more interesting thing to consider in this discussion. I’ve never noticed this before, but in normal bible reading through Kings yesterday, I just “coincidentally” happened upon this verse which may or may not be applicable to your original post.

1 Kings 8:56-57
56 "Blessed be the LORD, who has given rest to His people Israel, according to all that He promised. There has not failed one word of all His good promise, which He promised through His servant Moses.
NKJV

The word “rest” in this passage is the same Hebrew word used in the phrase “shall not enter My rest” you quoted earlier.

Now, remember Solomon came after David which you quoted to prove that the promises of God’s rest in their land had not been fulfilled to the Jews. Also, this statement came as Solomon was dedicating the temple which was a type and shadow of God’s true temple, the hearts of people (aka the church.).

Something about the completion of this temple was in Solomon’s mind equated with God giving the people “rest”. This ties in nicely IMO to what I was saying earlier about God’s “rest” being closely associated with His resting place and abode, His temple, His building not made with hands, His church. As Jesus (of whom Solomon was a type) has sat on His throne and dedicated His temple (the church), those who enter into can be said to be entering into the “rest” that God has given His people.

I'll have to consult some commentaries to make sure I haven't stuck my neck out too far here.

Just something to think about.

Lord bless.

[Guest]

Here is an April posting of mine found at http://www.wvss.com/forumc/viewtopic.ph ... c&start=60
It may or may not be helpful.

In the Book of Hebrews we have important information relative to this Sabbath rest in the dispensation of the New Covenant.

Heb. 3:7-15 -- So, as the Holy Spirit says: "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion, during the time of testing in the desert, where your fathers tested and tried me and for 40 years saw what I did.
This is why I was angry with that generation, and I said, "their hearts are always gone astray, and they have not known my ways." So I declared on oath in my anger, "They shall never enter my rest."
See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sins deceitfulness.



According to the words here by the Holy Spirit these unbelieving Israelites, during their wandering in the wilderness, would never enter God's rest because of their rebellion and unbelief. This can't be speaking of the weekly Sabbath rest as demanded of the shadow as they entered into that faithfully every Sabbath day. This is the Holy Spirit speaking to us who are living in the dispensation of the New Covenant. This couldn't be speaking to those of previous ages because only at the cross of Christ did the law with all its regulations including the Sabbath reach its fulfillment.

Here we are encouraged into God's rest, which is as was the rest that Adam and Eve entered following creation; a spiritual rest every day. It is "that rest" which gives us peace with God in the knowledge that our redemption through Christ was completed at the cross. We are to encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sins deceitfulness.

Heb. 4:1-11 -- Therefore, since the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us be careful that none of you be found to have fallen short of it.
For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did [speaking of the Jews hearing the gospel from Jesus]; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because those who heard did not combine it with faith. [They refused to accept Christ as the Messiah.]
Now we who have believed enter into that rest, just as God has said, "So I declared in my anger 'They shall never enter my rest.' "

Just as the Israelites who had been redeemed from slavery in Egypt, and their descendants, were entitled to the physical rest of the weekly Sabbath, so that spiritual rest (God's rest) is limited to all who believe on Christ and have had their sins cleansed by the blood of Christ on the cross. They have been redeemed from the world and set apart and enter into God's rest. This rest is peace with God in the assurance of eternal life through Christ.

Heb. 4 (Cont'd) -- And yet his work has been finished since the creation of the world.
For somewhere he has spoken about the seventh-day in these words: "And on the seventh-day God rested from all his work." And again in the passage above he says, "They shall never enter my rest."
It still remains that some will enter that rest, and those who formerly had the gospel preached to them did not go in, because of unbelief.



This has to be those unbelieving Jews at the time of Christ because the gospel was first presented by Jesus at that time. They were keeping "the rest" of the Shadow on every Sabbath day, but they did not enter into God's rest as presented in the new covenant due to their unbelief. He is just as surely speaking of those at the present time who, blending good works, obedience to the law, Sabbath keeping, etc. to assist in assuring their salvation, fall into this same classification and cannot enter into this rest.

Heb. 4 (Cont'd) -- Therefore God again set a certain day, calling it Today, when a long time later he spoke through David, as was said before: "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts."

Therefore God again set a certain day. What day had he previously set? It could only be the Sabbath. Which day was the day referred to as "God again set a certain day"? This according to the text above, can only be Today. This was the perfect opportunity for God to specify if another day had been solemnized to become a different Sabbath day. This He didn't do because the original Sabbath was a shadow of Christ and when He replaced the Sabbath at the cross, that day had served its purpose and now all our attention is to be returned to Christ instead of to any particular day.

The day we choose to come together to worship Him on a regular basis is left to the church to decide, but their decision, even though agreeable to the Lord, does not make it into a holy day. All the holiness of that day was transferred to Christ and none of it to be shared by another day. The day He chose was Today and everyday as long as it is called today.

[_postpre]

On Ephesians 2:

11. Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh--who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands--
12. That at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
13. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
14. For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation,
15. Having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace,
16. And that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.
17. And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near.
18. For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.

Even within the Body of Christ, Paul notes a distinction between Jew and Gentile. Because of Christ, Gentiles are "brought near" to the "covenants of promise." But, notice there still exists a distinction WITHIN the Church between Jew and Gentile. Verse 18 says "we both" have access to the Father. Is that not still implying a distinction between the two? That He "has made both one" only implies that both the Messianic believer and the Gentile believer are now in Christ, and make up His Church.

Chris,

If compelled, please continue with your posts. I should have qualified my last statement. Mainly, Hebrews 11, as I layed it out, has not been dealt with. But you are providing some challenging rebuttals, and for that I am thankful.

You apparentlly think that if "kai" is translated as "even" in Galatians 6:16 then my interpretation would fail. I don't think it does. If the "new creation" is the only thing that avails (6:15), Paul could be saying that this is "even so" for the Israel of God (true Jews from God's perspective- those Messianic Jews that believed) without implying that those that "walk according to this rule" consists ENTIRELY of the "Israel of God."

Before I post more I need to examine very closely the various arguments, and then make sure to give a thorough reply.

Brian

[_postpre]

Check out the following argument by Tim Warner that pertains to Peter's audience for his two epistles.

"I have become convinced that 1st & 2nd Peter were written quite close together, shortly before Peter's execution. Peter wrote the first Epistle to his Jewish brethren. He then wrote the second Epistle to the Gentile believers, perhaps right after the first.

1 Peter is parallel to Eph. 1:3-12, and 2 Peter is parallel to Eph. 1:13-23.

Here is my translation of the opening verses of both Epistles.

1 Peter -- To the Jews
1 Peter, Apostle of Jesus Christ, to the elect of the diaspora, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
2 [elect] according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace to you, and peace be multiplied.
3 Blessed [be] God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to His abundant mercy has Fathered us again, to a living hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.

2 Peter -- To the Gentiles
1. Simon Peter, servant and Apostle of Jesus Christ, to the ones who have come to obtain a faith equally as precious as ours, in the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ.
2. Grace to you, and peace be multiplied in the knowledge of God - Jesus our Lord.

The clause, "the elect of the diaspora" is clearly a referrence to the Jews living amongst the Gentiles. This understanding is also confirmed by 2:12, where he commands them to keep their "conduct honorable among the Gentiles." Also, the "sprinkling of the blood of Christ" (1:2) is a uniquely Jewish concept (cf. Heb. 12:24). Finally, that He has "Fathered us again" refers to the second birth, ie, the first being how God fathered the nation of Israel (cf. Jer. 31:9). Also, in the 2nd chapter, Peter leaves no doubt, by quoting extensively passages from the OT that apply to Israel, specifically the division of Israel.

1 Pet 2:4-10
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.
6 Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture, "Behold, I lay in Zion a chief cornerstone, elect, precious, and he who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame."
7 Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient, "The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone,"
8 and "A stone of stumbling and a rock of offense." They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they also were appointed.
9 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;
10 who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy.
(NKJ)

Peter was NOT allegorizing these passages and applying them to "the Church." He was not saying that the "Church" is "Israel." Rather, he viewed the recipients of these promises and titles as the believing remnant of that nation, to whom his Epistle was addressed. He considered the believing part of Israel (Messianic Christians) as the extension of OT Israel to whom God said these things, the unbelieving part of Israel having been cut off. So, he cites passages that refer to the part of Israel that stumbled, and cites other passages that refer to the part of Israel that continued in the blessings of the Lord -- the "election" (cf. Rom. 11:7). The rest of the epistle is encouragement toward endurance in persecution, the same theme as Hebrews, also written to the Jewish branch of the Church.

In the second Epistle, the recipents are identified as "the ones who have come to obtain a faith equally as precious as ours." Clearly, these are Gentiles. "Ours" refers to Peter and the Jewish brethren addressed in the first Epistle. Peter also reminds them of all Paul's letters written to them (3:15-16). All of Paul's letters were addressed to Gentile churches or individuals, except Hebrews. And he puts his stamp of approval on Paul's Gentile ministry, calling him, "our beloved brother, Paul." Just like Paul in Eph. 1:15-23, Peter's hope was that the Gentile believers would come to fully appreciate the blessings of this calling, and encouraged his Gentile readers to a deeper walk with the Lord (2 Pet. 1:3-11). He spent the entire 2nd chapter warning them against the various Gnostic cults that were springing up at that time. This was something that was a danger only to the Gentiles.

Consequently, Peter's two Epistles should bear the names, "The Epistle of Peter to the Hebrews" and "The Epistle of Peter to the Gentiles." It seems very appropriate the just prior to his death Peter would do this, his final words to the Church."

http://p214.ezboard.com/fthechristianca ... ID=7.topic

Brian

[Guest]

Check out the following argument by Tim Warner that pertains to Peter's audience for his two epistles.

"I have become convinced that 1st & 2nd Peter were written quite close together, shortly before Peter's execution. Peter wrote the first Epistle to his Jewish brethren. He then wrote the second Epistle to the Gentile believers, perhaps right after the first.

Could you explain why 2 Peter 3:1 says: "This is my second letter to you" if he was writing to different people?

And why in 1 Peter 2 it says they were once not a people but are now the people of God if he was speaking to Jews? Paul seems to say (in Eph 2) that Israel was the one with God's promises and were God's people but the Gentiles were not, at least until they were brought together into one body and could share in those promises.

On Ephesians 2:

Even within the Body of Christ, Paul notes a distinction between Jew and Gentile. Because of Christ, Gentiles are "brought near" to the "covenants of promise." But, notice there still exists a distinction WITHIN the Church between Jew and Gentile. Verse 18 says "we both" have access to the Father. Is that not still implying a distinction between the two? That He "has made both one" only implies that both the Messianic believer and the Gentile believer are now in Christ, and make up His Church.

Maybe I'm not understanding your point. No one is disputing that the church of Christ is made of people who are distincly Jewish and Gentile. The point is that this passage in Ephesians specifically says the two are made one. Why would Paul say they are now one if they are to remain seperate or distinct from one another. If they share in the promises, then why would I think that some promises still are for the Jews only?

19 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God

If I'm no longer a stanger or foreigner but a fellow citizen, what am I now a fellow citizen of? It seems to be: "being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world."

I was a stranger and a foreigner of Israel and God's promises but now I'm no longer, but rather I'm a fellow citizen. That seems really close, as in, a citizen of the Israel of God.

You mentioned that there is still a distinction WITHIN the Church between Jew and Gentile. I disagree, not only from Paul's comment that the two are now one and form on new man, but also from Galations 3 that says:

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. 29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

I many be wrong, but it seems that you are saying they are different even after they come into the body of Christ, where Paul says they (distinctly Jew and Gentile) are now one in Christ (once they become members of Christ body, the Church). It seems like they loose their old identity and find a new one in Christ. As Christopher said, Paul lists all his accomplishements and his Jewish heritage and says they are all "dung" compared to being found "in Christ". It seems like while Paul is still physically a Jew (obviously) that even better than that is to be part of the body of Christ.

I'm actually eager to hear how dispensationalists interpret these passages. I enjoy trying to understand others viewpoints. But sometimes it's hard not to talk past one another. Both sides here start from very different presuppositions, so it's hard to make headway without looking at the foundation of our presuppositions first.

Sean