A Remnant of Christians in Bethlehem

[Guest]

Bob,

Did you ever finishing listening to Steve's lectures on things-related?

They're good ones, Bro!

[Guest]

Rick,

No, unfortunately I haven't resumed listening to Steve's complete perspective on Israel yet. Too many distractions going on at the moment. But, as I've said, Steve primarily addresses the issue of Israel's future by presenting the common pre-trib-pre-millenial view and gives argument from his preterist amil opinions as to why he feels this view is not the best one. One of the things I am trying to do with my own understanding
on the matter is to understand the "literal" from the "spiritual" aspects when dealing with the issue of Israel. One of the thoughts I hold now is that I see no good reason to abrogate all of the promisses made to Abraham with regard to the Land. God made certain promises to a real person in a real time in a real place. Nothing here in my mind to indicate the need to "spiritualize" them into an empty metaphor with no real "fulfillment" except through the Church. We have to remember that we Gentiles have been "grafted into" Israel's True Vine, which of course is Jesus. I tend to view the promises through the various covenants God made with His key people through the ages. Some of their features overlap into the others. I believe there are 8 covenants of which the New
Covenant is the last. I am sure by saying this, I've opened a new "can of worms". Not every detail with regard to Israel is "fulfilled" imo. Oh well!!!

Stay tuned,
Blessings in Him,
Bob

[Guest]

Keep listening, Bob
(Steve covers it all)

[Guest]

Brothers,
Here is an interesting article for your consideration with regard to Israel:

http://www.therefinersfire.org/replacement_theology.htm

Peace in Him
Bob

While at least they try to tackle some of the better scriptures, their answers are a bit lacking.

Brody

Forgive me for being a "little slow at the switch". But was does Paul's letter to the Galatians have to do with what I posted about Israel's national future conversion to Jesus? Galatians is about Jewish-christians
imposing Mosaic law upon Gentile believers in order to be saved.
Care to elaborate? BTW, I am not defending dispensationalism, amil, postmil or any other "il" or "ism". I could care less about all the dogmatic
divisions.

Peace in Him,
Bob

Hello Bob,
Just some thoughts.

Gal 4:21 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not listen to the law?
Gal 4:22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and one by a free woman.
Gal 4:23 But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, while the son of the free woman was born through promise.
Gal 4:24 Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar.
Gal 4:25 Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.
Gal 4:26 But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother.
Gal 4:27 For it is written, "Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear; break forth and cry aloud, you who are not in labor! For the children of the desolate one will be more than those of the one who has a husband."
Gal 4:28 Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise.
Gal 4:29 But just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now.
Gal 4:30 But what does the Scripture say? "Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman."
Gal 4:31 So, brothers, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman.

To be brief, in the OT, the first born didn't receive the promises. Isaac was not the first born but the second, but he was born by a miracle and not "in the ordinary way" like Ishmael. Jacob & Esau as well as with Perez & Zerah had their birthright "switched" as a shadow of what was to come in Christ. What Paul is saying is that Israel is the first born son (Hos 11:1), natural Israel according to the flesh. Jesus is the second born literally, but first born spiritually. Since God has set a precident in scripture for giving the "birthright" to the one born of promise, it should not be surprising that Jesus is found to be the true heir of Abraham, the true "firstborn Son". All along it seemed like it would be Ishmael, but lo and behold God says that's not the one! It's Jesus! (Gal 3:16) This is what happened with Israel. Without being born again, Israel "according to the flesh" are like Ishmael, they appear to the natural heir but need to be born of the Spirit to be "true Israel".

The Church is Israel. The Church is nothing more than Jesus (as the head) and Jews with Gentiles making up the body. This body of Christ is what the NT calls the Church. So to say that non-regenerate Jews are owed something from God because they are born of the flesh of Abraham contradicts what Paul says in Gal 4:30 "But what does the Scripture say? "Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman."

God has never given up on the Jews. His call is to them as well as the Gentiles. However, if a Jew rejects Jesus, Peter says they are cut off from the people of God (Acts 3:22-23).

So what about the promises God made to Abraham and his "seed".

Does a natural Jew of the flesh count as a Jew? What is a Jew?

And are the land promises unconditional? I say no, otherwise God would be breaking His word the very first time He cast the Jews out of the land.

What happened to Israel when Jesus came? True (believing) Jews came under the Lordship of Christ and Gentiles were added to Israel. Both Jew and Gentile became one (true Israel).

Eph 2:14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility
Eph 2:15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,
Eph 2:16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.


This passage makes it clear. Israel and Gentile believer are now one new man (Christ). The body of Christ is called the Church (Eph 1:22-23)

The Church is Israel, consisting of Jew and Gentile believer.

Eph 2:19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,

Just before this Paul said:

Eph 2:12 remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.


So Gentiles were alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, but not anymore, now we are no longer strangers, but fellow citizens. Fellow citizens of what? Of Israel!

There are 77 references to Israel in the NT and none of them refer to the Church.

This comment is just plain silly. The website you linked to failed to quote Ephesians 2:14-16. Ephesians 2-3 answers this issue pretty directly.

1Pe 2:6 For it stands in Scripture: "Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame."

So is Zion Israel or the Church? What is Jesus the cornerstone of? It says Zion. Peter just spiritualized Zion and used it for the name of the foundation of the Church.

Ok, I'm tired.

[Guest]

Sean,

The link I posted doesn't mean I hold to every detail they espouse. I should have said so in the first place. It would have saved you a lot of time from posting your long response. I agree for the most part with your conclusions. However where we differ is that I do not believe the church replaces Israel but rather is the continuation of Israel under the New Covenant and constitutes the "new man" in Christ, whether Jew or Gentile.
By saying this however, I still hold that there will be a future National repentance and conversion of unbelieving Israel unprecedented in history. They will be grafted back into Vine which is Christ. This has nothing to do with the believing remnant that is already in Christ. It has nothing to do with what they believe about their inherent right to the Land either. I have drawn my conclusions from Paul in Romans and also the prophecies. The fact that "Israel" is back in the Land as I've said before is very significant, thouigh largely in unbelief. There is however a believing Remnant in the Land as well. All of the Land promises made to Abraham was in my mind never abrogated. And if you study closely the New Covenant prophecies, their being placed into the Land is always involved as part of their blessing, security and acceptance. Here is only one example; Ezek 36:30-37. I do not think the prophecy is speaking to "the believing remnant" who is already in Christ. God is not concerned about the faithful few here. He is speaking to the majority with-in unfaithful Israel. They will be brought to repentance in the future. I think the story of Joseph in Genesis serves as a good typology of future things to come for Israel.

Peace in Him,
Bob

[Guest]

Hello again Bob,

Sean,
The link I posted doesn't mean I hold to every detail they espouse. I should have said so in the first place. It would have saved you a lot of time from posting your long response.

Oh, now you tell me.

By saying this however, I still hold that there will be a future National repentance and conversion of unbelieving Israel unprecedented in history. They will be grafted back into Vine which is Christ.

I certainly hope so! It would be a glorious thing indeed!

I have drawn my conclusions from Paul in Romans and also the prophecies. The fact that "Israel" is back in the Land as I've said before is very significant, thouigh largely in unbelief.

I certainly understand where you are coming from. Ultimately I've come to the conclusion that the new testament confirms that "Israel" is under a new covenant, one that does not have land promises for the 12 tribes of Jacob (Israel), but rather it has land promises that extend beyond Canaan to include the whole world, to be fulfilled in the new creation, a true rest.

"The land" as it were seems to be something God can give to whomever He wills, including present day Jews. I don't, however, see this as a fulfillment of prophecy. Or an event of "biblical" significance, so to speak. To me that would actually contradict passages I've already cited. And some I have not. Like:

Deu 1:8 See, I have set the land before you. Go in and take possession of the land that the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give to them and to their offspring after them.'


Then, once the spies return and show their lack of faith in the Lord God says:

Deu 1:34 "And the LORD heard your words and was angered, and he swore,
Deu 1:35 'Not one of these men of this evil generation shall see the good land that I swore to give to your fathers,
Deu 1:36 except Caleb the son of Jephunneh. He shall see it, and to him and to his children I will give the land on which he has trodden, because he has wholly followed the LORD!'


It seems as if "true Israel" has always been those who were "of the faith of Abraham". I have a hard time seeing God changing His own stated principles about the land, especially after reading Romans 9 and the like.

All of the Land promises made to Abraham was in my mind never abrogated.

I don't believe so either. They apply to Abraham and to the only other truly faithful man, Jesus. As Deuteronomy states, God gives the land to whom He wills. This is the main thrust of Romans 9. God can do as He wills. Wouldn't saying God still owes Abraham or his "seed" something very anti-Reformed? Aren't Jacob and Esau children of Abraham? Yet God chose Jacob, if the "family tree" Paul has given only applies to the elect, and this means the non-elect Jews never have peace in the land (as promised) would this make God unrighteous?

And if you study closely the New Covenant prophecies, their being placed into the Land is always involved as part of their blessing, security and acceptance. Here is only one example; Ezek 36:30-37. I do not think the prophecy is speaking to "the believing remnant" who is already in Christ. God is not concerned about the faithful few here. He is speaking to the majority with-in unfaithful Israel. They will be brought to repentance in the future. I think the story of Joseph in Genesis serves as a good typology of future things to come for Israel.

I'm not sure I understand. Ezek 36:30-37 is speaking specifically of the faithful. The ones who have had a new Spirit placed in them, the ones who have a new heart. This covenant has already been established and preached first to the Jew and then the Gentile. However interpreted, this passage is speaking about Spirit filled people, we know that in the new testament, this occurs by becoming a Christian. It's not something you have to wait for.

God can do whatever He wants. But that not really the issue here. The question is, to whom do the promises apply? Are they conditional? Can the land be a shadow of a greater fulfillment?

Mat 5:5 "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the gē [can mean land or earth].

Did I ramble on again?

[Guest]

Sean,

The promises of God made to Abraham we agree were never abrogated.
But, by my saying this, I do not believe that the children of Abraham which eventualy became the nation of Israel, ever lost its distinctives we read about in the NT. I think Paul upholds this view in many places and ways. How we "unpack" and understand these distinctives of course, is where our differences become apparent.

Quote: "The land" as it were seems to be something God can give to whomever He wills, including present day Jews. I don't, however, see this as a fulfillment of prophecy".

God may indeed give the Land to whom He wills. He reminded Israel that they were the tenants of the Land and not the owners; Num. 25:23
The "key" however to understanding the Land promises as always, was tied directly to their obedience. But that does not necessarily demand or should we presume, the promises of God
"changed" or were abrogated under the terms of New Covenant. There is no plausible reason to even think so in light of what the Word teaches on the subject.

As for the prophecies relating to Israel's "return" to the Land, God always
set the condition of obedience as paramount. So what can we make of the present situation? Simple really. There is a believing Remnant present in the Land right now! We know sometimes God blesses the Nation because of the obedient few. There never was at any time in Israel's history the lack of a faithful Remnant to carry out God's purpose and pleasure. The question remains, Is it not of God's good pleasure and love to add to the "Remnant" of Israel those who have repented and believed upon Yeshua? Of course it is. so what is the significance of Israel being back in the Land? Much. For one, as God has dealt with Israel over the ages, He has clearly stated in numerous places that when He either blesses or curses them, His purpose(s) are revealed and that "You may know, and the Nations may know that YAHWEH is the LORD".. Israel is a living testimony of God's faithfulness even to a people who has largely rejected Him. It is also a warning that Judgement is coming.

Peace to You,
Bob

[Guest]

I came across this topic as I was looking for ways of dealing with the "you believe in the antisemitic heresy of replacement theology" accusations that seem to be attracted to me. It may be a little off the train of thought but I just wanted to post some Scripture that is often ignored.

The idea that Israel has never had all of the land promised by the Lord to Abraham is often brought up as a reason for the existence of the modern nation called Israel and its establishing settlements and not giving up the occupied territories. As I understand it, this is a land promise:

Genesis 15:18. In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:

Now, what does Scripture say?

Joshua 21:43-45 (NASB)
Jos 21:43 So the LORD gave Israel all the land which He had sworn to give to their fathers, and they possessed it and lived in it.
Jos 21:44 And the LORD gave them rest on every side, according to all that He had sworn to their fathers, and no one of all their enemies stood before them; the LORD gave all their enemies into their hand.
Jos 21:45 Not one of the good promises which the LORD had made to the house of Israel failed; all came to pass.

Also:

1Kings 8:65 (KJV) And at that time Solomon held a feast, and all Israel with him, a great congregation, from the entering in of Hamath unto the river of Egypt, before the LORD our God, seven days and seven days, [even] fourteen days.

And:

2Samuel 8:1-6 (KJV)
2Sa 8:1 ¶ And after this it came to pass, that David smote the Philistines, and subdued them: and David took Methegammah out of the hand of the Philistines.
2Sa 8:2 And he smote Moab, and measured them with a line, casting them down to the ground; even with two lines measured he to put to death, and with one full line to keep alive. And [so] the Moabites became David's servants, [and] brought gifts.
2Sa 8:3 ¶ David smote also Hadadezer, the son of Rehob, king of Zobah, as he went to recover his border at the river Euphrates.
2Sa 8:4 And David took from him a thousand [chariots], and seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen: and David houghed all the chariot [horses], but reserved of them [for] an hundred chariots.
2Sa 8:5 And when the Syrians of Damascus came to succour Hadadezer king of Zobah, David slew of the Syrians two and twenty thousand men.
2Sa 8:6 Then David put garrisons in Syria of Damascus: and the Syrians became servants to David, [and] brought gifts. And the LORD preserved David whithersoever he went.

According to Scripture, the land promises were all fulfilled.

I just had to tell someone.

Blessings,
Lazarus43

[Guest]

Lazarus,

Steve Gregg covers the texts you posted in his "What are we to make of Israel?" lectures. I think Traveler (Bob) had said he was going to listen to them.

Anyway, I became an ex-dispensationalist a long time ago, mostly from just reading the NT. I had seen these texts before but hadn't really considered their significance till Steve pointed it out.

I was like, Wow. Who knew?
Thanks,
Rick

[Guest]

I believe the physical land has nothing to do with anything nowadays, after all, who is God going to give it to, Madonna? As far as I know she converted to a form of Judaism so that make her children Jews as well. My point is that there really are no true blooded Jews today. Most all have descended from converts to the religion and we already know what God thinks of religious people. Steve, in one of his lectures rightly asked, "How much of Abraham's blood does it require of a person to be a Jew?", after all didn't Abraham have 8 sons in all and therefore aren't all who come from them then be descendants of Abraham? If it is by promise then we have the New Testament to tell us that the promise was only to Abraham's Seed Who is Christ Jesus the Messiah.

So who is a Jew today and why would it count for anything? As I said, Madonna is now a converted Jew. That means her children are now considered Jewish but yet not one drop of Abraham's blood flows through their veins as far as we know. Sammy Davis Jr. also converted to Judiasm so did that make him one of the choosen people of God? Did he suddenly have some of the blood of Abraham in his veins as well? These are important questions when we truly want to consider what it means and why we should or not support Israel. If much of prophecy is yet to be fulfilled concerning Israel, then we need to know who is a Jew today. Do you know? You may say, "God knows" and of course He does, but does it matter? What does the NT tell us about the true descendants of Abraham?

So if you are one who supports the current nation of Israel and claim that they are the blood descendants of Abraham then you need to look again. You will find a far different people genetically then the ones of the OT up to the 1st century.