ECT The "Nation" of Mt 22

Interplanner

Well-known member
My literalist friends here have insisted that 'ethnei' in Mt 22:43 is to be a nation, and then they have missed the point even if that were true.

They think that the parable is saying that God makes his vineyard (the state of Israel) run by "regenerated" Jews in the future; that's why it is a 'nation.' They got to keep programs distinct!

But 'ethnei' is never used that way. As it's similarity to the English suggests, it is a people-group, usually defined by race. But that is the play here: it's not going to be. It's not going to be just Jewish Christians in a mix overshadowed by other ethnic types. It's going to be a people in which ethnicity does not matter.

The nation that Israel became through the law was never meant to void or displace the world-wide evangelical promise of the Gospel. That's why Paul had to declare war on that wrongheaded replacement theology in Gal 3:17.
 

Danoh

New member
My literalist friends here have insisted that 'ethnei' in Mt 22:43 is to be a nation, and then they have missed the point even if that were true.

They think that the parable is saying that God makes his vineyard (the state of Israel) run by "regenerated" Jews in the future; that's why it is a 'nation.' They got to keep programs distinct!

But 'ethnei' is never used that way. As it's similarity to the English suggests, it is a people-group, usually defined by race. But that is the play here: it's not going to be. It's not going to be just Jewish Christians in a mix overshadowed by other ethnic types. It's going to be a people in which ethnicity does not matter.

The nation that Israel became through the law was never meant to void or displace the world-wide evangelical promise of the Gospel. That's why Paul had to declare war on that wrongheaded replacement theology in Gal 3:17.

That's what all these different understandings ever boil down to - different study approaches.

Yours being - way off.

Acts 17: 11, 12.
 

Danoh

New member
Matthew 21:43 (KJV)

I see 144,000 Jews inheriting the New Jerusalem, and they are called a new nation, and a kingdom of priests.

So you say.

Problem is, that neither Moses, nor Isaiah, nor Malachi, nor Peter mention that group.

Instead, they each describe Israel's common man as that Priesthood.

And what did the Lord say?

That none of them would be given in marriage, rather; they would all be as those Lord's servants in Heaven: the Angels.

What's that now, some 35 or forty errors within your view, thus far?

The Romans were not saved; the establishing in chapter 1 is not about rooting and grounding them in the finer details of their faith; the Jew in chapter 2 is actually a prosylite; the salvation in Romans 3 was hidden in the OT; the this; the that; the other - all because "so you say."

Yo Barn, lock this fella up, a spell. :chuckle:

Rom. 5: 6-8.
 

genuineoriginal

New member
Which word do you believe would have been better to use than nation?

g1484 ἔθνος ethnos (Gentiles, nation, heathen, people)

Matthew 21:43
43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to [Gentiles, nation, heathen, people] bringing forth the fruits thereof.​


h1471 גּוֹי gowy (Gentiles, nation, heathen, people)

Deuteronomy 32:21
21 They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish [Gentiles, nation, heathen, people].​

 

Danoh

New member
Which word do you believe would have been better to use than nation?

g1484 ἔθνος ethnos (Gentiles, nation, heathen, people)

Matthew 21:43
43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to [Gentiles, nation, heathen, people] bringing forth the fruits thereof.​


h1471 גּוֹי gowy (Gentiles, nation, heathen, people)

Deuteronomy 32:21
21 They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish [Gentiles, nation, heathen, people].​


That proves nothing. Israel is just as often referrred to as "goy."

Just as a word like "car" can be either generic or specific - depending on context.
 

genuineoriginal

New member
That proves nothing. Israel is just as often referrred to as "goy."

Just as a word like "car" can be either generic or specific - depending on context.
I didn't try to prove anything.
I asked a question.
Which word do you believe would have been better to use than nation?

I think "people" is the more accurate one.
 

DAN P

Well-known member
Which word do you believe would have been better to use than nation?

g1484 ἔθνος ethnos (Gentiles, nation, heathen, people)

Matthew 21:43
43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to [Gentiles, nation, heathen, people] bringing forth the fruits thereof.​


h1471 גּוֹי gowy (Gentiles, nation, heathen, people)

Deuteronomy 32:21
21 They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish [Gentiles, nation, heathen, people].​



Hi and I was reading Matt 21:43 before you posted your reply and gives a good translation on what ETHNOS means and the other , is in John 11:48 , 50 and 51 !!

Context is very important as many Greek words have many meaning !!

dan p
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Hi and I was reading Matt 21:43 before you posted your reply and gives a good translation on what ETHNOS means and the other , is in John 11:48 , 50 and 51 !!

Context is very important as many Greek words have many meaning !!

dan p





People, because you can't put one nation there in place of the nation Israel, because it (the Christian following) was going to be from many nations.

I know of no place where 'ethnos' is tied to geography (in Jn 11 Caiaphas is concerned that the Jewish people would be destroyed. Notice how the TEV adds Jewish (that's fine) but does not say place/country/land. A people may be scattered widely and still be a people; we as Christians are. The death of Christ mentioned in v53 there does not put every one in the same location when it says it makes them one ('hen') but that they are unified.
 

Danoh

New member
People, because you can't put one nation there in place of the nation Israel, because it (the Christian following) was going to be from many nations.

I know of no place where 'ethnos' is tied to geography (in Jn 11 Caiaphas is concerned that the Jewish people would be destroyed. Notice how the TEV adds Jewish (that's fine) but does not say place/country/land. A people may be scattered widely and still be a people; we as Christians are. The death of Christ mentioned in v53 there does not put every one in the same location when it says it makes them one ('hen') but that they are unified.

Odd, the difference between actual Bible students and book readers.

And this is a practice I have often observed over the years.

Those who actually invest a heavy amount of time in Scripture, behave much like the Bereans of Acts 17: 11, 12 when going back and forth with one another about "the things of God."

"Comparing spiritual things with spiritual" to one another.

In other words, speaking forth "the things of God...not in words which man's wisdom teacheth, but that the Holy Ghost teacheth" to one another, due to their heavy amount of time in His Word Itself.

They tend to be that way and to expect that of any one professing to be "of the Book."

For that is how "the things of God...are spiritually discerned" - through - HIS - words - in HIS - WORD - "as - IT - is WRITTEN."

Why?

Is it that such are rabid or something?

Not necessarily. Theirs is just as likely to be the joy of...

1 Thessalonians 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

In stark contrast to that, heavy book readers tend to speak to one another and others in the word imagery or "writer-eez" of their favorite writers; a part of one passage of Scripture or another (if that much) often misquoted, and or proven having been understood from a context other than its own.

And such take great offense the obvious their study approach so clearly points to but to for them; given their having come to so enjoy the long robes their books based words so adorn them in before the less informed.

Took some getting used to, back when I first began dealing with other Believers and or was visiting various assemblies.

And rattling off a few passages verbatim due to time actually heavily invested in Scripture, and as the basis of what one holds to, throughout a conversation with such, is often a good way to find that conversation abruptly ended with one excuse or another, just before that odd look the book reader gives such, after which the thing often ends with the empty platitude "God bless..."

Acts 7:1 Then said the high priest, Are these things so? 7:2 And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran, 7:3 And said unto him, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew thee...

Acts 7:59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.

Now there is a way to go out - OVER relyers on their endless books "about" and their "traditions of men" be damned.

2 Timothy 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

4:7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:

4:8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

Amen, brothers Stephen and Paul!

Rom. 5: 6-8.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Problem is, that neither Moses, nor Isaiah, nor Malachi, nor Peter mention that group.

Instead, they each describe Israel's common man as that Priesthood.

And what did the Lord say?

That none of them would be given in marriage, rather; they would all be as those Lord's servants in Heaven: the Angels.

What's that now, some 35 or forty errors within your view, thus far?

The Romans were not saved; the establishing in chapter 1 is not about rooting and grounding them in the finer details of their faith; the Jew in chapter 2 is actually a prosylite; the salvation in Romans 3 was hidden in the OT; the this; the that; the other - all because "so you say."

Yo Barn, lock this fella up, a spell. :chuckle:

Rom. 5: 6-8.

I don't understand your point, here.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Odd, the difference between actual Bible students and book readers.

And this is a practice I have often observed over the years.

Those who actually invest a heavy amount of time in Scripture, behave much like the Bereans of Acts 17: 11, 12 when going back and forth with one another about "the things of God."

"Comparing spiritual things with spiritual" to one another.

In other words, speaking forth "the things of God...not in words which man's wisdom teacheth, but that the Holy Ghost teacheth" to one another, due to their heavy amount of time in His Word Itself.

They tend to be that way and to expect that of any one professing to be "of the Book."

For that is how "the things of God...are spiritually discerned" - through - HIS - words - in HIS - WORD - "as - IT - is WRITTEN."

Why?

Is it that such are rabid or something?

Not necessarily. Theirs is just as likely to be the joy of...

1 Thessalonians 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

In stark contrast to that, heavy book readers tend to speak to one another and others in the word imagery or "writer-eez" of their favorite writers; a part of one passage of Scripture or another (if that much) often misquoted, and or proven having been understood from a context other than its own.

And such take great offense the obvious their study approach so clearly points to but to for them; given their having come to so enjoy the long robes their books based words so adorn them in before the less informed.

Took some getting used to, back when I first began dealing with other Believers and or was visiting various assemblies.

And rattling off a few passages verbatim due to time actually heavily invested in Scripture, and as the basis of what one holds to, throughout a conversation with such, is often a good way to find that conversation abruptly ended with one excuse or another, just before that odd look the book reader gives such, after which the thing often ends with the empty platitude "God bless..."

Acts 7:1 Then said the high priest, Are these things so? 7:2 And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran, 7:3 And said unto him, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew thee...

Acts 7:59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.

Now there is a way to go out - OVER relyers on their endless books "about" and their "traditions of men" be damned.

2 Timothy 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

4:7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:

4:8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

Amen, brothers Stephen and Paul!

Rom. 5: 6-8.






Do you have anything to say about examples of 'ethnos' or did you forget that was the topic?
 

Danoh

New member
Thanks, STP, I agree.

STP is erroneously asserting that only the 144, 000 male virgin Jews will be Priests in a Kingdom of Priests.

In contrast...

Matthew 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

I suppose Peter was addressing said 144,000?

1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

Acts 17: 11, 12.

And then there is what you make of said 144, 000, within your approach, IP.

So, no surprise you also failed to understand my point.

Rom. 5: 6-8.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
STP is erroneously asserting that only the 144, 000 male virgin Jews will be Priests in a Kingdom of Priests.

In contrast...

Matthew 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

I suppose Peter was addressing said 144,000?

1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

Acts 17: 11, 12.

And then there is what you make of said 144, 000, within your approach, IP.

So, no surprise you also failed to understand my point.

Rom. 5: 6-8.

The 144,000 are caught up at the midpoint of the tribulation. Study and see.
 
Top