ECT Jews know scripture better than the deceitful Supersessionalists

[andyc]

:chuckle:

:chuckle: at SaulToPaul:

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

:chuckle: at SaulToPaul:

:chuckle:

 

[andyc]

:chuckle:

Yup

Lots of :chuckle:

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

If Israel is the church, and is a kingdom of priests, who are they priests for?

 

[andyc]

If Israel is the church, and is a kingdom of priests, who are they priests for?

Not "for". To.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Not "for". To.

Priests make intercession for the people of God, do they not?

 

[andyc]

Priests make intercession for the people of God, do they not?

That's what Levites did for Israel. That ministry is over.
Christ is the only intercessor today. It is the ministry of worship that makes all saints priests today.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

That's what Levites did for Israel. That ministry is over.
Christ is the only intercessor today. It is the ministry of worship that makes all saints priests today.

Was it not a pattern?

 

[andyc]

Was it not a pattern?

Sure.

Christ is the fulfilment of everything.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

The problem I see is that the wrong thing is made a moving target. The term "Israel" has a national, racial and religious connotation in the nation that God established through His covenant with Abraham. Naturally speaking, the national tribes are broken down into the children of Isaac. So in a sense, the national component traces to him (even though it ultimately goes back to Abraham). But even then, what is treated (typically) as a single national entity ("Israel") is actually not - strictly speaking - correct either. God told Rebekah that she had "two nations" in her womb (Gen 25:23). The two nations are prophesied to be united (Ezekiel 37:15-28) - but if one reads that as a final days (i.e. current day) prophecy about the restoration of the Jews to the land of Israel in the Middle East, one also has to recognize that the prophecy has David ruling over the reunited kingdom. So while there is a sense in which there is a national fulfillment (it would seem), the promise is ultimately spiritual. David ruling Israel as a shepherd (Ezekiel 37:24) seems to point to Christ. So I see the natural and the spiritual in view here (both possibly referenced by sand of the sea and the stars of the sky in God's promise to Abraham). And the spiritual component - which is the eternal and more critical of the two - does not find the distinction that dispensationalism wants to make between Israel and the church. This is where I think the goalposts are moved - in conflating what may be (some of the promises and prophecies I think are more spiritual than natural) termed the natural and the spiritual Israel. The spiritual Israel has always been the true Israel in the sense God has used it. He has made promises to natural Israel that are fulfilled accordingly, but ultimately His view is to what endures forever. And in that sense, Israel and the church are no different. True Israel has always been true Israel and the church is the expression of that in a people not in national Israel.

Spoiler

Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
That at that time ye 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:
But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.
Ephesians 2:11-22

In one passage, Paul makes the entire focus spiritual - even to the extent of confirming his claim that the people of God ARE the temple of God. He makes no spiritual distinction between believers but has them all part of the same body (remember, there is no Jew or Gentile in Christ). So while there are undoubtedly promises of God for those "of (natural) Israel", they are only fulfilled in Christ the same way they are fulfilled for those who are not of national Israel. In other words, (spiritual) Israel has always been (spiritual) Israel and there has never been a different Israel in view. They are both the "Israel of God" - a spiritual body comprised of individuals of independent national/ethnic entities. I don't dispute that there may be physical/temporal promises that are due Israel (though I would probably disagree as to which ones and how many) but on identification of Israel in God's eyes, I see only one that encompasses both Jew and Gentile.

That's a summary, at least, of my take on it.

Nikolai_42,

You communicate calmly and from your heart, as always. Could you please fine tune your stance in speech for me? You note some core verbiage that is at the heart of the confusion, but I'm not certain I fully understand your perspective.

I'll try to ask a few questions for clearification.

Do you believe that Issac is Israel because he fathered Jacob?

Are you reaching to place the body of Christ within the "election" of Israel?

Do you believe that God has a plan for Israel, in the biblical sense (the Israel that scripture defines and never redefines), that will be part of Christ's second coming?

Are you a preterist, and if so, to what degree? As in Full or partial.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Sure.

Christ is the fulfilment of everything.

I'm so glad we agree on this. Now about that fulfillment, did Israel, via the national, Sanhedrin representatives of Israel agree that Jesus was the fulfillment of everything?

Are you a preterist?

Do you understand the difference between biblical Israel and self professed Christians that attempt to bypass Israel's suffering and usurp her "election" through complete falsification of scriptural revelation?

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

This is all a bit of overblown with emotionalism. Did you cry watching ET?
Israel is the church. Only those who of faith are Abraham's seed, and are spiritually blessed with Abraham.
Those who who are trusting in their snipped foreskins are as lost as ISIS terrorists.

AndyC Is re tarded.

Could you please quote one chapter that contextually renames Jacobs descendants anything other than Israel, and could you please quote full chapter and contextual verse that redesignates the Body of Christ, Israel?

Spoiler alert...

Jacob and Isaac are not the same person. Being children of faith in Abraham like Isaac is totally different than being Jacob who wrestled with God and got Named Israel, by God, for it. God named Israel, Israel. Are you wiser than God now?

Do you even own a bible "And He C's dimly?"

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

This is all a bit of overblown with emotionalism. Did you cry watching ET?
Israel is the church. Only those who of faith are Abraham's seed, and are spiritually blessed with Abraham.
Those who who are trusting in their snipped foreskins are as lost as ISIS terrorists.

Did you even watch the video? Have you noticed that no one, who is opposing the OP, has addressed the actual video content or Zechariah 12 as Jews are historically cited as rabinically interpreting scripture as pointing to a suffering messiah that would return for the Israel that was prophesied to reject Him when He would be pierced for them?

Did you research what the Messianic Jews said?

My guess, it wasn't in a Commentary or labeled "reformed", so you just assumed and shot your mouth off.

I cried during ET, Rob Zombies, Halloween... when Michael Myers died, Saving Private Ryan and a bunch of other movies too. But I think your writing is moving me to tears of a different kind. Tears... of... loss... of... hope... in... the... intellect... of... the reformed.

# Don't miss the Tard Cart that's outside your front door.

# The Tard cart called and reminded andyc to remember his helmet.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Yup

Lots of :chuckle:

Your ability to laugh at yourself is refreshing.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

There is no Jesus to be found unless he and his resurrection are the fulfillment of everything promised to the fathers, Acts 13:32, a sermon to synagogue Jews, mostly.

He's not doing anything other than what is in Christ with the race of Israel.

Ironically, I could Dispensationally interpret this, but, I'm certain that your south Eyes wouldn't understand.

Were you fed with a sling shot as a baby? Have you ever been dropped on your head at any age? Is there an excuse for your gross misinterpretation of scripture? Are you "special"?

 

[andyc]

Did you even watch the video? Have you noticed that no one, who is opposing the OP, has addressed the actual video content or Zechariah 12 as Jews are historically cited as rabinically interpreting scripture as pointing to a suffering messiah that would return for the Israel that was prophesied to reject Him when He would be pierced for them?

Zechariah's prophecy is extremely moving I agree, but I do not see your interpreting of it to assume that it's saying a spiritual Israel replaces the physical Israel. Maybe you can expand on that?

Did you research what the Messianic Jews said?

I have been reading the bible since 1991.

My guess, it wasn't in a Commentary or labeled "reformed", so you just assumed and shot your mouth off.

I cried during ET, Rob Zombies, Halloween... when Michael Myers died, Saving Private Ryan and a bunch of other movies too. But I think your writing is moving me to tears of a different kind. Tears... of... loss... of... hope... in... the... intellect... of... the reformed.

Oh really.

# Don't miss the Tard Cart that's outside your front door.

# The Tard cart called and reminded andyc to remember his helmet.

Does this require a visit to urban dictionary or something?

 

[nikolai_42]

Nikolai_42,

You communicate calmly and from your heart, as always. Could you please fine rune your stance in speech for me? You note some core verbiage that is at the heart of the confusion, but I'm not certain I fully understand your perspective.

In this case, as I review my post, I find that I have probably been too terse (compact) where I should have expanded. This is not a simple topic nor one that can be done justice briefly. So I welcome your questions. I hope it helps some...

I'll try to ask a few questions for clearification.

Do you believe that Issac is Israel because he fathered Jacob?

I believe Isaac is (if not natural) certainly that spiritual Israel I was trying to convey. When I hear the term "the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob", I hear a reference to spiritual Israel (primarily, but not exclusively). Isaac, however, has the unique position of being the father of natural Israel. One could make the case that even Abraham's father is of natural Israel because of his progeny. That, I think, only serves to underscore the nonsense that can be gotten into when one gets into wrangling about genealogies. It does no good - and partly (again, my reading of it) because it misses the point. God's men are God's men because of God - not because of who they are (or were). Israel or not.

To return to the question, though, Abraham was the one who was told that HE would be made the father of many nations (including Israel). Abraham is the father of the 1st century Jews by their own account. Jesus doesn't argue that other than to make the point that their spiritual lineage is what matters.

Bottom line, I do believe that Isaac is of Israel as Abraham's son.

Are you reaching to place the body of Christ within the "election" of Israel?

I am seeking to place all elections within the same context. Israel has a certain history that the Gentiles do not - so their path to Christ (and the way God may deal with each individual Israelite) will likely differ. Jesus said He had sheep of different folds - but they were all His sheep and He never distinguished between them (that I read) in terms of election. Israel after the flesh was unique because to them was entrusted the oracles of God. But being the trustees, they got so close that they (most of them) couldn't see the forest for the trees. It became about them instead about God so they rejected Him (over and over and over and....). Their election will be election in the same sense Gentiles are elected.

Do you believe that God has a plan for Israel, in the biblical sense (the Israel that scripture defines and never redefines), that will be part of Christ's second coming?

Short answer, yes. Where I have problems is where certain kinds of respect is given them because they are Israel. Thinking of examples like John Hagee's declaration that it is sinful to evangelize a Jew. Or those that hold that the Law will be the salvation of the Jews. I believe God will bring all - Israelite and non-Israelite alike - that are His to Himself. Here is where we probably differ most sharply. I don't necessarily see as sharp an eschatological distinction made over Israel as you do. I am not a dispensationalist and the kingdom having been taken from at least some of the tribes per Jesus' words, I don't see as much of a national import even if many who are Israelites will turn to Jesus Christ in the last days. If we are to be strict, how many who are really descended from Israel don't even realize it? How many generations have passed and how many scatterings have occurred in the past 2500 to 3000 years such that there is some notable degree of Israelite blood in those throughout the world? Is God going to do a test to determine how much Israelite blood is in someone to determine if they are in natural Israel or not? I don't believe He does things along those lines.

Are you a preterist, and if so, to what degree? As in Full or partial.

I figure this is an important question. I am neither full nor partial preterist. I hold to much of the Reformation eschatological school of prophecy called (at some time) historicism. More precisely, I see historical fulfillment of Revelation over time - but there is a dose of idealism/symbolism mixed into the interpretation (which I think most people have anyway since you can't read Revelation in a physically literal way and have it make sense).

I will also add that I still have more questions than answers about even my own understanding of eschatology.

Hope that helps...at least some.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Zechariah's prophecy is extremely moving I agree, but I do not see your interpreting of it to assume that it's to say that as spiritual Israel replaces the physical Israel. Maybe you can expand on that?




I have been reading the bible since 1991.



Oh really.



Does this require a visit to urban dictionary or something?

Israel wrote the Bible, starting with Moses, by God's inspiration, but 1991, oh yes... I am now stumped by your self professed credentials. I'm going to take an intermission at your reply...

Wait... for... it...

 

[andyc]

I'm so glad we agree on this.

You don't look it.

Now about that fulfillment, did Israel, via the national, Sanhedrin representatives of Israel agree that Jesus was the fulfillment of everything?

No.

Are you a preterist?

No.

Do you understand the difference between biblical Israel and self professed Christians that attempt to bypass Israel's suffering and usurp her "election" through complete falsification of scriptural revelation?

Well that's a mouthful right there.
Why don't you expand your view of what it means for 'Christians that attempt to bypass Israel's suffering and usurp her "election" through complete falsification of scriptural revelation?'

 

[andyc]

Israel wrote the Bible, starting with Moses, by God's inspiration, but 1991, oh yes... I am now stumped by your self professed credentials. I'm going to take an intermission at your reply...

All I meant by that is, I've read Zechariah a few times.

Wait... for... it...

Uh, I see. We got a another new member to TOL who's here to tell everyone where they're wrong.
We've seen these come and go over the years.