Why Jews And Gentiles Are Kept Separate ??

Martin W. · Jan 23, 2011

tomwebster said:
That foolishness tells me you have no idea who the ten tribes are today. But you are not alone; the majority of those that are of the tribes of Israel do not know their identity.

But you do Tom ?

And How Please ? Thank you.

To me there are only a couple of ways to determine (if you) are Israel. I cannot prove you are not Israel , and you cannot prove you are Israel. We are on a level playing field as far as evidence goes.

unless :

1. Possibly future DNA evidence can reveal tribal identity . We are right on the cusp of having that available for everybody (to be tested). That would be proper evidence with merit. As of this moment it has not been done (thus nobody can make the claim to be tribal Israel)

2. Exhaustive genealogy tracing the descendants of the tribes . At this moment mankind does not posses such records. Mormonism has put a lot of effort into it (geneology) but huge gaps remain. By the way Mormonism also makes the claim to be "Israel" . So does Armstrongism. So do hundreds of other groups. We come late to the table.

3. Or God himself supernaturally , or miraculously identifies the remnant of the 12 tribes. He certainly indicates he will in Revelation , but the number is limited to 144,000 . But This number is too small to include the millions of so called "British-American-Israel-Christians"

4. Or Something completely different that we are unaware of. And if so , it would be convincing and worldwide. Five people on this forum is not convincing evidence to me.

Tom , I have no problem if you are part of tribal Israel. My problem is the lack of evidence.

Thanks
Arnie Martin W.
<a gentile hanging on the branch grafted to Israel>

veteran · Jan 23, 2011

Walking in Grace said:
How, then, do we understand:

Walking in Grace said:
Romans 11:26 “And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:”

It is understandable but it is for many going to take patience. For many, and they do not know who they are, before it is possible for them to understand we first have a host of complex preconceived ideas that must be untangled and corrected.

While it may seem now that I am beating around the bush, it will not seem so once we have arrived there.

Sorry brother, but it very much seems you not only beat around the bush, but actually beat the bush to try to drum up Scripture proofs for your theory. Or should I say theories from men's traditions?

I left off last by saying that I have met some that even think that Old Law killed Jesus. I said that I tire of explaining to them that men's perversion of that Law killed Jesus, that, therefore it was the sin in men that killed Jesus, and not the Law.

If "sin in men", are you saying we all now killed our Lord Jesus? I've heard that garbage lie before too. The devil and his servants murdered our Lord Jesus. That's how Christ defeated death and the devil, like Paul said in Hebrews 2:14. The blood guilt of Christ's crucifixion is upon a specific group of the Jews that caused Him to be delivered up, and that's exactly who He pointed to (Matt.23:29-39, the hypcrites of scribes and Pharisees).

This point ought to not be diminished. It is important for us to realize that it was the sin in men that killed Jesus. It is important for us to realize that this was necessary for Jesus to take victory over both sin and death. Elsewise there is much of what Paul explains that will go over our heads.

The only thing gone over anyone's head here is how by that reasoning you are indirectly asking for that guilt of Christ's Blood be placed upon yourself because your own sins. Go ahead, God will let you feel it if that's what you want. Christ died on the cross to bring The New Covenant remission of sins for those who believe, NOT to place the blood guilt of His death upon a believer!! We are baptized into Christ's death like Paul said in Romans 6:3, not as partakers of those who did it! Oh how the devil's servants have tricked your ignorant deceived mind!

We have all sinned, and fall short of God's Glory. But that doesn't mean all men are guilty of Christ's Blood shed on the cross for us. Wake up!!

We cannot reasonably blame that handful of Jews alone who called for Jesus death. It is humility that we realize that the sin which is in all men called out for Jesus to die. As Paul tells us at Romans 3:19 “Now we know that whatsoever things the law says, it says to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and the entire world may become guilty before God.”

You're all mixed up. In Romans 3:19 Paul was talking about how WE ALL are guilty of sin in breaking God's law, for that IS the NT definition of sin. But that does NOT mean we are all convicted in the sin of Christ's crucifixion!!

But if you want to wear that shoe of blood guilt that belongs to the scribes and Pharisees that had our Lord Jesus crucified, God will let you wear it. Reminds me of how Peter thought himself not worthy to be crucified in the same manner as our Lord Jesus. So our Lord Jesus foretold how Peter would be crucified upside down instead. Be careful what you wish for. The LORD will deliver.

Because the sin in man twisted God’s perfect law to call out for Jesus’ death, when in fact Jesus had committed no sin in the flesh to be justly condemned under God’s Law, the effect was that it condemned sin in the flesh for all men. Think carefully about Paul’s following statement:

Romans 8:3 “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

If asked to explain what it is that the Law could not do, how would you answer?

Truly, you paint yourself as one of those deceived scribes and Pharisees that called for our Lord Jesus to be crucified. They were His enemies, servants of the devil, which is exactly what Jesus called them (John 8). And they were the ones who deceived other Jews in condemning our Lord Jesus. Did they claim God's law in that? Yes, but of course their condemnation of Jesus had nothing to do with God's real law.

God's law was given in order to point to Christ Jesus, to prepare a people in The New Covenant (Galatians). God's law was never intended to save anyone, but only to be a schoolmaster in bringing us to Christ Jesus. And by walking by our flesh we place ourselves back under God's law, showing it is not so done away with like many dream.

The Law could not condemn sin in the flesh without also killing the person. Why? This is because the Law calls for the penalty on the sinner to be death. The Law of God would have condemned us to die even without God’s having sent his Son into this world. Then our death would be everlasting. Sin and its hideous partner Death would have had the victory over us

Oh, you've made a gross error about the law per NT doctrine. You wrongly place God's law as the cause for death, when it's not the law itself that is the cause, but our BREAKING of the law that condemns us. Like Paul said in 1 Timothy1 that "the law is good, if a man use it lawfully". Even in Romans 7 Paul said "the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good." It is OUR disobedience that causes death, not the law itself. That's why the law can't save us, BECAUSE WE CANNOT BE WITHOUT SIN. It's so God's Salvation could ONLY come by Faith on The Saviour Jesus Christ (like Paul said in Gal.3:22).

I've seen that false tactic from men's traditions used before about the law. Purpose of that tactic from the devil is to make Christ's Body abhor God's laws and put His law in an evil light! It's so Christ's Body will want to throw God's laws out the window like a baby with the bathwater!

What did Paul tell Timothy who the law was made for?...

1 Tim 1:9-11
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
(KJV)

If you throw God's laws away, then it means Christ's Body has no means of protecting itself from those unholy, profane, murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, manslayers, whoremongers, them that defile themselves with mankind (homosexuality), menstealers, liars, perjurors, etc.

Now just who would want Christ's Body to throw all that away today, not having laws to convict those unrighteous among God's people? Christ's enemies, the servants of the devil, that's who. That was part of the problem with the false traditions of the scribes and Pharisees at Christ's first coming. They had made God's Word of none effect because of their own tradition!

Careful you don't condemn God's law like the devil himself desires its condemnation, so his evil servants may run free.

So in a nutshell, what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, is condemn our defect while at the same time rescuing us from it. Romans 7:24-25 “O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind, I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh, the law of sin.”

Once again you twist what Paul was teaching. Paul recognized that by sin he could never be perfect in following the law, because of sin in his members. His spirit desired to follow God's law, but sin in his flesh prevented it. The law itself did not prevent that, but his flesh (which you got that part right, though you twisted that around somewhat too).

Some day, our spirit is going to be released from this body (flesh) of sin, and we will then be able to follow God's law without sin. The law will not rescue us, only The Saviour can. And it will be so we are able to follow the law of God after the inward man. It is not the law that is bad and weak, but our flesh nature as sin that is weak.

Rom 7:9-25
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

How can the law itself represent sin? That's not what Paul showed at all. Instead, he showed how sin in his flesh is what condemned him, which is transgression of the law.

12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

If the law is good like Paul said, was that which is good (law) made death? No, Paul says. It was sin working death being judged by what is good (the law). The law was to reveal sin, not be the creator or cause of sin!

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

There it is. God's law is spiritual, meaning above the ways of sin and above our flesh.

15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.

By sin that happens our spirit does not intend, by that we show the law is good, but that something in our fleshy members is the real problem.

17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
(KJV)

Our Lord Jesus came not to destroy the law and the prophets, but to fulfill it (Matt.5;19).

Because once we understand this we see that God never really made any promises or deals with the fleshly blood lines of men. We understand that God knew men’s flesh was condemned with Adam to die and that God has not repented Adam’s punishment. Our flesh is the flesh of Adam’s loins and it actually died with Adam. Only God’s mercy permitted Adam to live long enough for him to have offspring. God’s grace reaches clear back to the beginning on our behalf.

Now you've really... gotten away from God's Truth and the subject of this thread. The nation of Israel is still very important to our Heavenly Father and His Son Jesus Christ, as written in many both OT and NT Scriptures. God's Promises to the seed of Israel, first given through Abraham, IS The Salvation Promise through Christ Jesus The Saviour. His promises about the seed of Israel of all 12 tribes being gathered from the north, the west, the east, and the south, back to the lands He promised their fathers, is all about Christ's future Salvation on this earth.

But you apparently are still trapped on the spiritual Israel concept of Romans 9, like a broken record, never finishing what Paul taught about the seed of Israel that will be saved according to the latter Romans chapters.

Hebrews 9:27 “… it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:”

1 Corinthians 15:19-22 “If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. But now Christ has risen from the dead, and become the first fruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.”

It is a complicated task for anyone to try to compose a writing that fits everyone’s needs, due to the tremendous variations of Biblical interpretations among men. Some persons would argue with me that even Adam will be saved. Yes, I have had also to wrestle with that idea. It is easily seen that it is not true IF it were not for the fact that those who believe it is true also have their web of confused ideas to support to their minds that it is true. And, those ideas must also be shot down for the falsehoods they are before these ones are able to see how actually simple is the real truth. That is why it sometimes gets tiring. Even before I could see, first I had to struggle to free myself of my own flawed reasoning. Then, to communicate to someone else I must sort through and figure out where the flaws in their reasoning are, so that we might deal with correcting them. Until that is done, they cannot see. They may get weak momentary glimpses of it if they are really trying to understand, but to really see it, they must be helped past their flawed ideas or those ideas will crop back up to keep them doubtful and confused.

The worst thing that ever happened in this world was for too many persons to think they knew so that they could teach others. The vast majority of those who undertake teaching God’s word do not realize that they did so more out of pride than by God’s calling.

James 3:1 “Be not many of you teachers, my brethren, knowing that we shall receive heavier judgment.” (ASV)

Well heck, why don't you just shoot to all the rest of God's Word EXCEPT the relavent Scriptures about God's chosen of the seed of Israel in final when Christ returns? What about Jeremiah 31 & 33? What about Ezekiel 37 and the two sticks of Israel? What about Ezekiel 48 with all 12 tribes reestablished back in the Holy Land in final? Nothing you can quote from our Lord Jesus or His Apostles will change what God promised to His Israel in final.

"There's more things in heaven and earth than in your philosophy Yago" - Shakespeare.

tomwebster · Jan 23, 2011

Martin W. said:
But you do Tom ?

And How Please ? Thank you.

Yes! I know because I have traced my ancestry. I also know the migrations of the Tribes of Israel. I have studied it.

Martin W. said:
…
2. Exhaustive genealogy tracing the descendants of the tribes . At this moment mankind does not posses such records. Mormonism has put a lot of effort into it (geneology) but huge gaps remain. By the way Mormonism also makes the claim to be "Israel" . So does Armstrongism. So do hundreds of other groups. We come late to the table.

This is where you are wrong; we do have historic records and the Mormans or Armstrong have NOTHING to do with it. You might be late to the table if you make the table.

Martin W. said:
3. Or God himself supernaturally , or miraculously identifies the remnant of the 12 tribes. He certainly indicates he will in Revelation , but the number is limited to 144,000 . But This number is too small to include the millions of so called "British-American-Israel-Christians"

Who are the dry bones Ezekiel prophecies too? Any idea???

Martin W. said:
… Five people on this forum is not convincing evidence to me.
…

You might regret that statement, marty, maybe two will not even convince you!

Vengle53 · Jan 23, 2011

I will respond more to the things you have said but do not have much time at the moment.

So I will just say this:
The reason Revelation 13:8 calls Jesus "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" is that we all slay him right there while we were yet in Adams loins. God's merciful grace allowed us to.

Even those who perverted the Law to call for Jesus to be slayed could, and some did repent.

Saul of Tarsus was one who zealously supported Jesus' slaying and participated in killing many Christians.

Neither of us are better than Paul.

Take to heart what Paul tells us Romans chapter 7 and you will understand that the sin in all of us slayed Jesus.

veteran · Jan 23, 2011

Walking in Grace said:
What are we really told at Ephesians 1: 4-5?

The idea of individual predestination finds its support in some very weak and wild interpretations of scripture. These interpretations are very convincing to those that are seduced by them. They truly have a drug like power upon those who, due to lack of knowledge, are ill equipped to see through them. And once they take hold upon a person’s mind and heart it is difficult to help such ones begin to see through those ideas. Such teachings truly do represent what Peter meant when he said that Paul often spoke words difficult to understand that the untaught and the unsteady twist to their destruction.

Why do you keep skipping around the Romans 11:1-5 Scripture, and the Jeremiah 31 Scripture, and the Ezekiel 37 Scripture, etc.?

Peter was covering a very specific subject in 2 Peter 3 when he said that of how some wrest with Paul's Epistles to their own destruction. But nowhere have you shown you know what that subject is that Peter covered there. So you've already started off on a false premise misapplying what Peter was talking about in Paul's Epistles. I'm not going to cover here either, since you're not staying in relevant Scripture to the thread subject, showing your lack of sincereness in God's Word. Predestination is a whole other subject.

One such example is the way people twist Paul’s words at Galatians 1:15. It seems correct that Paul is there speaking about his natural flesh and blood birth mother. And it seems all so innocent a belief which only makes that idea more appealing.

I've already shown quite a bit of how you've done just that, twist Paul's words. Will we ever find out about your twist of Romans 11:1-5 though?

We want to do two things here: (1) we want to glean all we can from the local context of Paul’s letter to the Galatians concerning the timing of the event in verse 15, while also noting any other comments he makes concerning mothers in that letter, and (2) we want look for information in Paul’s letters to other congregations that may contain similar or related information.

I thought Romans 11 was the topic of discussion? But OK, Galatians and Romans cover many of the same doctrine.

Galatians 1:15 says, “But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,”

But we need now to note that Paul continues on to reveal to us the purpose this, Galatians 1:16 “To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:”

Notice how Paul says that at the time of this event, “immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood”.

Then Paul says, Galatians 1:17 “Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.”

From this already we get a sense that he is talking about his conversion while on the road to Damascus. But how can we confirm that? We can go to his First letter to the Corinthians and find that he there also speaks about his conversion, comparing it to childbirth:

1 Corinthians 15:4-8 “And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:

6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.”

Note that in verse eight, after Cephas and the twelve saw Christ, after some above five hundred brethren at once, after James and the all of the Apostles, “last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.”

And then because he had been persecuting Christians at that time, Paul concludes this point, saying, 1 Corinthians 15:9 “For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.”

Nothing new so far. But how is it you skipped relevant Scripture like Galatians 3 already?

Looking back at Galatians we see in chapter 4 that Paul speaks concerning a mother that he was separated from saying that all his Christian brethren have been separated away from this same mother and now have a new mother:

Galatians 4:19 “My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,”

Galatians 4:22 “For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.”

Galatians 4:23 “But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.”

Galatians 4:24 “Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.”

àGalatians 4:25 “For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.”ß (“answereth to” = ,G4960> sustoicheo -- to file together (as soldiers in ranks), i.e. (figuratively) to correspond to: KJV -- answer to.)

àGalatians 4:26 “But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.”

The Jews regarded Jerusalem as the purest of mothers and they were taught to see themselves as being nurtured in the care of her womb to God. That is seeable also in the Psalms. But Paul had learned that Hagar actually was a prophetic picture of the earthly fleshly Jerusalem, wherein they were held in a yoke and bond of slavery by the Law.

Maybe you need a Bible lesson of who Hagar was? She was the maidservant of Abraham's wife Sarah. Sarah being old, got Abraham to go into her maid Hagar, and Hagar born the first son to Abraham, Ishmael (Arabia). But God said that in Isaac would be counted for the seed of Promise (Romans 9, remember?).

So who did Paul mean with, "but he of the freewoman was by promise"? It was Isaac. And that Promise was about God's Promise first given through Abraham. It continued through his son Isaac (of the freewoman), and then to Jacob (Israel), and then to Joseph and then Joseph's two sons Ephraim and Manasseh, where the Promise now rests.

So will you declare none the seed of Israel were in that promise of the freewoman? Paul doesn't say that there, but just the opposite, pointing to Abraham's son Ishmael under the covenant of Sinai, while pointing to Isaac born under covenant of the freewoman, pointing the Jerusalem above. Paul teaches this same idea about the OT saints in Hebrews 11, how God had promised them a Heavenly City...

Heb 11:8-10
8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.
9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:
10 For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.
(KJV)

Heb 11:16
16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for He hath prepared for them a city.
(KJV)

How could Paul say that in Hebrews 11 about the OT faithful, if it was only about Gentiles Paul preached to? Why would Paul point to Isaac in Gal.4 about the freewoman by promise?

The further you try to disprove what I've been saying about the saved seed of Israel in God's Plan of Salvation through Christ, the more you actually wind up proving it.

Galatians 5:1 “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.

6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.”

Galatians 4:30 “Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.”

That free woman corresponding to Sarah is the Jerusalem above, in heaven with Christ. By what you just learned above from Paul, the Jerusalem you are seeing here below is Hagar’s children whether they are Jews or Muslims. God has tried to tell you that by allowing the Muslim Mosque to dominate the Temple site in Jerusalem. The Muslims claim to be Hagar’s descendants. When will you see?

How quick you are to forget that Paul pointing to the seed of Isaac with the freewoman and Jerusalem above that is free...

Gal 4:28-30
28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
(KJV)

Ouch! That's gotta' hurt. Paul is talking about the Seed of the Woman, starting with God's Promise to Abraham, and then about his son of Sarah (the freewoman), Isaac. Paul even showed how God's test upon Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac was a figure for Christ. It's been those nations of Hagar's son Ishmael (Arabs) that have persecuted God's seed of Israel throughout Bible history, and in wanting Jerusalem, as it still is today with the nations of Islam, Edom, and the Canaanites (some of those are hidden as Jews). Or did you not know that NONE of the real seed of Israel came through Hagar the bondservant?

Nice try though, in trying to re-assign the seed of Israel to Hagar's children as bondservants. I knew you would try to twist Paul's Message for your own aims. Paul actually showed Christ's Salvation purposed through Isaac, and how only a portion of Israel refused. Paul was a chosen vessel by Christ to preach The Gospel to Gentiles, to king, AND TO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL (Acts 9). It's ludicrous to think the seed of Israel meant only the unbelieving Jews that refused Christ Jesus.

If you go back to Galatians chapter one you can see in the verses prior to what Paul said in verse 15, Paul is talking about how zealously he allowed himself to be nurtured in that womb of Hagar.

So now you deny what Paul said about Isaac in the Promise of the freewoman, the Jerusalem above that is free? What of those OT saints Paul taught of in Hebrews 11 that also believed the Promise? Have you tried to cut them out of God's Plan of Salvation through Christ also?

Think people, think. We are getting close.

Click to expand...

What are we really told at Ephesians 1: 4-5?

Even from Paul’s words in Romans 11: 14 and 23 we can see that he evidently did not believe these individuals would automatically be saved as if having been elected from the beginning of the world.

The hints lay all around you. Will you keep ignoring them?

It was obviously predestined from the beginning of the world that God would save as many as possible (a remnant) out of all nations, so especially out of the nation he most worked with along the way to achieving his purpose.

The individuals who were chosen to be saved from the beginning of the world are a group called “meek ones”.
Psalms 149:4 “For the LORD taketh pleasure in his people: he will beautify the meek with salvation.”

What about Romans 11:1-5? I see you just skip around again, like the one-verse charlies do, never coming to an understanding in God's Word. Good thing you don't have authority to say who all is not saved. I'm glad our Lord Jesus only has that Authority and can be Just.

veteran · Jan 23, 2011

Walking in Grace said:
Excellent point.

These simple to see evidences go unseen because we tend to allow our flesh to wrap us up into a more complicated frame of thinking than it really is. And that we do without realizing that we are actually rejoice over our own intelligence, not seeing that it is deceiving ourselves.

Walking in Grace said:
I am so glad to find a humble thinker here!

Thank you for responding.

So a "humble thinker" is someone who goes along with the doctrines of men you've preached here against God's Word?

More like a 'deceived thinker' puffed up against God's Salvation through His chosen remnant of Israel the way I see it. That was of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob by the way.

Matt 22:31-32
31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
(KJV)

Is He The God of the believing Gentiles too? Yes, of course. But don't be so ready cut off His chosen of Israel, lest you also be cut off, like Paul warns in Romans 11.

bud02 · Jan 23, 2011

veteran said:
So a "humble thinker" is someone who goes along with the doctrines of men you've preached here against God's Word?

More like a 'deceived thinker' puffed up against God's Salvation through His chosen remnant of Israel the way I see it. That was of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob by the way.

Matt 22:31-32
31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
(KJV)

Is He The God of the believing Gentiles too? Yes, of course. But don't be so ready cut off His chosen of Israel, lest you also be cut off, like Paul warns in Romans 11.

Do you ever tire of exalting yourself, " praise comes from another mans mouth and not your own ". Look the verse up sometime.

veteran · Jan 23, 2011

Walking in Grace said:
I

Walking in Grace said:
will respond more to the things you have said but do not have much time at the moment.

So I will just say this:
The reason Revelation 13:8 calls Jesus "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" is that we all slay him right there while we were yet in Adams loins. God's merciful grace allowed us to.

Even those who perverted the Law to call for Jesus to be slayed could, and some did repent.

Saul of Tarsus was one who zealously supported Jesus' slaying and participated in killing many Christians.

Neither of us are better than Paul.

Take to heart what Paul tells us Romans chapter 7 and you will understand that the sin in all of us slayed Jesus.

The devil has surely tricked you with such ideas, and you should feel ashamed for it.

There's only a couple Scriptures which are metaphorical of how a Christian believer can be guilty of Christ's crucifixion...

Heb 6:4-6
4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame.
(KJV)

After receiving of The Holy Spirit by Faith on Christ Jesus, then turning away from His Salvation to the devil, and seeking to be saved again. It's about full accountability to Christ. So it would have to mean one having been shown His Truth and Power in full proof, with NO doubts, and then willing deny His Salvation to instead follow the devil, KNOWINGLY. It's the unpardonable sin, the only sin that will not be forgiven. It would be like Christ Who appeared personally to convert Apostle Paul with doing Christ's Work by The Spirit, and then Paul turning to the devil later, knowingly. To try and come to Christ again after that level of proof and accountability would be like crucifying Christ all over again.

Heb 10:28-29
28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
(KJV)

Despite means insult per the Greek. That's the same kind of idea as the Heb.6 example. Once again, it shows only someone who once believed on Christ, and was sanctified by The Holy Spirit, can commit it.

Heb 10:38-39
38 Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.
39 But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.
(KJV)

There's that same idea, calling drawing back from Christ, which means... to follow the default. And who is the default? The devil. That's why the word "perdition" there.

I don't want to scare any of my Christian brethren about this, because it is a very, very specific sin involving full accountability, like one of Christ's elect, someone in full knowledge of Christ, with no room for ignorance or excuses. I don't think there are that many believers that are truly guilty of this specific sin, because it's pointing to a believer having full knowledge, but still turning away to the devil.

Vengle53 · Jan 23, 2011

veteran said:
So a "humble thinker" is someone who goes along with the doctrines of men you've preached here against God's Word?

More like a 'deceived thinker' puffed up against God's Salvation through His chosen remnant of Israel the way I see it. That was of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob by the way.

Matt 22:31-32
31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
(KJV)

Is He The God of the believing Gentiles too? Yes, of course. But don't be so ready cut off His chosen of Israel, lest you also be cut off, like Paul warns in Romans 11.

Are you imagining that because I say that the Jews have the exact same hope that I do I am somehow cutting them off?

Does it bother you that bad that you have to be saved just like everybody else?

Are you insisting on having the front seat in the synogogue?

Yes, He is the God of the living and the meek ones of this earth are gauranteed life because of it.

The short twinkle of time will not be noticed by them if one of them should momentarily sleep. For them it will be as though they closed their eyes and immediately opened them back up. But that will not be so for the prideful and the wicked.

Zephaniah 2:3 "Seek ye the LORD, all ye meek of the earth, which have wrought his judgment; seek righteousness, seek meekness: it may be ye shall be hid in the day of the LORD'S anger."

Why does Zephaniah say, "it may be ye shall be hid in the day of the LORD'S anger"?

Because it is not you nor I that judges ourself or others meek. He has purposed a time to judge the entire inhabited earth. If we think that we have that meekness in us we had better be about making sure of it by seeking the Lord and seeking righteousness and seeking meekness just as Zephaniah said.

1 Corinthians 13:1 "If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am become sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal.
2 And if I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.
3 And if I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and if I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profiteth me nothing."

bud02 · Jan 23, 2011

Walking in Grace said:
Zephaniah 2:3 "Seek ye the LORD, all ye meek of the earth, which have wrought his judgment; seek righteousness, seek meekness: it may be ye shall be hid in the day of the LORD'S anger."

Why does Zephaniah say, "it may be ye shall be hid in the day of the LORD'S anger"?

Powerful prophesy's Zephaniah, I think I'll read it over again

Vengle53 · Jan 23, 2011

This is the pivotal verse you fail to understand, veteran:

Galatians 4:23 "But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise."

The bond woman Hagar being born after the flesh was an allegory for the fleshly Jerusalem in bondage to the Law which was written to the flesh. The Law was given as Paul said in Romans 7:13 the latter part of the verse, "that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful." It therefore only produced slavery and brought about death. As Hagar was bound as a slave to Abraham's household, Jerusalem of the flesh was bound as a slave of the Greater Abraham's household due to the Law and sin. That is why the gospel books speak so much about the unfaithful servant. Jerusalem of the flesh proved unfaithful as a servant appointed over God's houshold.

Also, Ishmael was born of Abraham's and Sarah's trying to handle Abraham's childlessness through their own human effort. Therefore she and her child was an allegory for fleshly effort to please the Greater Abraham by Law.

But Sarah's child came by blessing from God. Sarah was therefore an allegory for those who enter into God's grace by means of and in Christ Jesus. And the Israel that is free is now above rather than below.

Can you grasp what I here said? if not, just ask and I will try to explain it another way.

Vengle53 · Jan 24, 2011

veteran said:
That's all well and good that you discovered there's a difference between God's Word and the religious traditions of men. The Protestant Church I was raised in didn't teach unfulfilled Bible prophecy, but only what was fulfilled by Christ's first coming. They applied most of our Lord's Book of Revelation to past history. Yet I did not understand that about them until God gave me the urge to study His Word line upon line in my 40's.

Thus we should stick to God's Word especially, and let the chips fall where they may. The love of the Truth means taking the good with the bad, regardless of what we 'want' to believe.

That is a truly beautiful comment.

And from what you say I take you are well along in the season. I am 58 and have had a love for God ever since I can remember. Did not know much as a child but I talked to him in the night skies. As a twelve year old I began a habit of sneaking out of the house late at night and walking the railroad tracks for miles, just so I could enjoy the stars and talk to God. That habit has proven to give me strength to survive some things in life that I know would have otherwise killed me. And I owe that to my mother. She was the one that imparted faith to me.

That is also why I know faith is not in head knowledge. Faith is only a beginning. Faith must grow to produce fruits. However, without it is impossible to even begin.

Along the way we all struggle. Along the way we all cross fine lines. That only proves that God did not lie. We are sinners just as he told us.

There have been points in my life when I have become exasperated and quit. I would be a liar if I said i don't ever have those moments yet today. But at least today it is myself that I get exasperated with instead of blaming others. And that is OK. I know me. I don't entertain any illusions as if I am anything special. That would be a kid thing. And I am long tired of kidden my self.

Vengle53 · Jan 24, 2011

PS/ there veteran:

I want you to learn to laugh at yourself.

In one of your posts here you were arguing that I am wrong that we are all responsible for crucifying Christ.

After all of your resistance to my saying that we all crucified Christ you quoted a scripture that says we did but you overlooked that part.

Here is the scripture you quoted: Hebrews 6:6 "If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame."

That shows that we do not have to be one of the ones that were there literally crying out for his death. That shows that there are other ways we can cry out for his death and yet we are just as guilty as those who literally cried out for him to die. That shows that when we were living our life independent of God we were calling out for the Son to be crucified even without fully realizing it.

We can crucify him "afresh" because we are all guilty of his being crucified the first time.

veteran · Jan 24, 2011

Walking in Grace said:
Are you imagining that because I say that the Jews have the exact same hope that I do I am somehow cutting them off?

Does it bother you that bad that you have to be saved just like everybody else?

Are you insisting on having the front seat in the synogogue?

Yes, He is the God of the living and the meek ones of this earth are gauranteed life because of it.

The short twinkle of time will not be noticed by them if one of them should momentarily sleep. For them it will be as though they closed their eyes and immediately opened them back up. But that will not be so for the prideful and the wicked.

Zephaniah 2:3 "Seek ye the LORD, all ye meek of the earth, which have wrought his judgment; seek righteousness, seek meekness: it may be ye shall be hid in the day of the LORD'S anger."

Why does Zephaniah say, "it may be ye shall be hid in the day of the LORD'S anger"?

Because it is not you nor I that judges ourself or others meek. He has purposed a time to judge the entire inhabited earth. If we think that we have that meekness in us we had better be about making sure of it by seeking the Lord and seeking righteousness and seeking meekness just as Zephaniah said.

1 Corinthians 13:1 "If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am become sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal.
2 And if I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.
3 And if I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and if I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profiteth me nothing."

Romans 11 is still the subject too. And you're still beating around it.

I'm not Jewish by the way. I'm a Protestant Christian, not a JW, not SDA, etc. So why do you think I so strongly support the idea that God's Salvation through His Son Jesus Christ continued through the seed of Israel, even to today? It's because it's God's Word per His Promise as written, and not of the traditions of men that want to keep pointing to unbelieving Jews as if they only are the seed of Israel, while totally dissing the believers of the seed of Israel, which according to Paul are the remnant according to the election of grace (Rom.11:5). Christ's Church is God's Israel today, and that's why Apostle Paul declared believing Gentiles are made nigh to the "commonwealth of Israel" and "covenants of promise" by believing on Christ Jesus.

veteran · Jan 24, 2011

Walking in Grace said:
This is the pivotal verse you fail to understand, veteran:

Galatians 4:23 "But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise."

The bond woman Hagar being born after the flesh was an allegory for the fleshly Jerusalem in bondage to the Law which was written to the flesh. The Law was given as Paul said in Romans 7:13 the latter part of the verse, "that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful." It therefore only produced slavery and brought about death. As Hagar was bound as a slave to Abraham's household, Jerusalem of the flesh was bound as a slave of the Greater Abraham's household due to the Law and sin. That is why the gospel books speak so much about the unfaithful servant. Jerusalem of the flesh proved unfaithful as a servant appointed over God's houshold.

I'm not the one failing to understand that Galatians verse and subject brother. Paul said in that very same Galatians 4 chapter, "Now we brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise."(Gal.4:28). Why would Paul link Isaac with us as the children of promise, and of the freewoman?

It's simple. It's because God first gave His Salvation Promise through Abraham, and it was by Faith, and Abraham believed, and that Promise is about The Saviour and The New Covenant, even BEFORE the law was given 430 years later, like Paul said back in Galatians 3. The inheritance to Abraham was NEVER about the law, period. It was always involving Faith on The Saviour, even back to Abraham's day. And how did that Promise of The Saviour become known to the world? Through a believing remnant of the seed of Israel by Faith, which is Paul's subject of Hebrews 11 and Galatians 3 and Romans 9-11 even.

Gal 3:14-18
14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
(KJV)

Oh, but you just skipped Galatians 3 about that Promise though, didn't you? Without understanding Galatians 3 first, understanding why Paul said Gal.4:28 about Isaac and us will be left hanging, which is exactly what you'v done in favor of your own tradition.

And you just don't get it about Abraham's household either. Hagar and Ishmael were cast out... of Abraham's household, which as an allegory is the opposite of your idea. The unbelieving scribes and Pharisee Jews were always trying to prove to Christ they were of Abraham's seed, when a lot of them were not (like the foreigner Kenite scribes). Why would they claim Abraham as their father? It's because of the Promise, not because of the law. Don't you see they were trying to supplant the Promise by Faith with the law instead, which is why they claimed Abraham?
Even John the Baptist knew that point about them...

Matt 3:7-9
7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
(KJV)

The law was not given through Abraham, The Promise by Faith was, so you cannot just try to change that and infer Abraham is about inheritance through the law.

Nor by that can you try to change Abraham's inheritance in The Promise by Faith continuing through his son Isaac, then to Jacob (Israel), then to Joseph and his two sons. God's Promised Salvation by Faith is what God's birthright to Israel is about. It began with Abraham. That has nothing to do with bondage to the law. It's THAT part of the seed of Israel which continued in that Promise which YOU are missing in your theology, and it's no doubt because of men's traditions you've been taught, or picked up from who knows where.

veteran · Jan 24, 2011

Walking in Grace said:
That is a truly beautiful comment.

And from what you say I take you are well along in the season. I am 58 and have had a love for God ever since I can remember. Did not know much as a child but I talked to him in the night skies. As a twelve year old I began a habit of sneaking out of the house late at night and walking the railroad tracks for miles, just so I could enjoy the stars and talk to God. That habit has proven to give me strength to survive some things in life that I know would have otherwise killed me. And I owe that to my mother. She was the one that imparted faith to me.

That is also why I know faith is not in head knowledge. Faith is only a beginning. Faith must grow to produce fruits. However, without it is impossible to even begin.

Along the way we all struggle. Along the way we all cross fine lines. That only proves that God did not lie. We are sinners just as he told us.

There have been points in my life when I have become exasperated and quit. I would be a liar if I said i don't ever have those moments yet today. But at least today it is myself that I get exasperated with instead of blaming others. And that is OK. I know me. I don't entertain any illusions as if I am anything special. That would be a kid thing. And I am long tired of kidden my self.

That's all well and good, and I'm glad for you. But let's not go assigning understanding in God's Word by The Spirit as merely an academic study, because if God gives one the urge by The Holy Spirit in His Word, it's not an academic or intellectual thing at all. A sign of The Holy Spirit in that working is the ability to make things simple from His Word.

That imitation of Christ thing you have is not to your advantage either. You may not be aware where those ideas of feeling the blood guilt of Christ's crucifixion originates. It comes from those who have added Mysticism into Christianity. It's ultimate purpose is to to create feelings of grandeur to make one think to become their 'own' Christ. When our Lord Jesus told us to follow Him and take up our cross, it was about following His commandments and obeying Him, not trying to actually imitate Him into becoming our own Christ, for that will never happen. Peter was prepared to suffer for Christ, but declared how he was not worthy to suffer the same way Christ Jesus did.

Vengle53 · Jan 24, 2011

veteran said:
Romans 11 is still the subject too. And you're still beating around it.

I'm not Jewish by the way. I'm a Protestant Christian, not a JW, not SDA, etc. So why do you think I so strongly support the idea that God's Salvation through His Son Jesus Christ continued through the seed of Israel, even to today? It's because it's God's Word per His Promise as written, and not of the traditions of men that want to keep pointing to unbelieving Jews as if they only are the seed of Israel, while totally dissing the believers of the seed of Israel, which according to Paul are the remnant according to the election of grace (Rom.11:5). Christ's Church is God's Israel today, and that's why Apostle Paul declared believing Gentiles are made nigh to the "commonwealth of Israel" and "covenants of promise" by believing on Christ Jesus.

Then it seems that we do not think as much differently about the subject as I have at times here thought.

Per my post (#51) I explained how Paul uses the allagory of Hagar to show that the promises were never made to the flesh. And if not made to the flesh then neither are they passed along by the lineage of the flesh.

It is really not hard to understand. Our flesh is riddled with sin. Our flesh is like the parable Jesus gave of the old garment and the old wineskins. And all of the systems that men have tried to perfect of the flesh, including the one God made demonstration of by giving it his perfect Law in a manner written to (or, for) the flesh, are as that old garment and old wine skins. They are fit for nothing but to be disposed of. (Matthew 9:16,17)

The Law of God is not abolished. It is just no longer kept in the manner written to the flesh. Romans 8:4 "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

Fleshly Israel is precious to God only in the sense that there are yet meek among it that MAY yet be saved, just as all nations have meek ones in them that May yet be saved. That is why we are wrong if we say they are cast off. God has not cast off any of the earth's nations but seeks to save as many within them as MIGHT be saved.

The MAYs and the MIGHTs be saved that I use here, Paul also uses in Romans chapter 11.

bud02 · Jan 24, 2011

veteran said:
I'm not the one failing to understand that Galatians verse and subject brother. Paul said in that very same Galatians 4 chapter, "Now we brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise."(Gal.4:28). Why would Paul link Isaac with us as the children of promise, and of the freewoman?

It's simple. It's because God first gave His Salvation Promise through Abraham, and it was by Faith, and Abraham believed, and that Promise is about The Saviour and The New Covenant, even BEFORE the law was given 430 years later, like Paul said back in Galatians 3. The inheritance to Abraham was NEVER about the law, period. It was always involving Faith on The Saviour, even back to Abraham's day. And how did that Promise of The Saviour become known to the world? Through a believing remnant of the seed of Israel by Faith, which is Paul's subject of Hebrews 11 and Galatians 3 and Romans 9-11 even.

Gal 3:14-18
14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
(KJV)

Oh, but you just skipped Galatians 3 about that Promise though, didn't you? Without understanding Galatians 3 first, understanding why Paul said Gal.4:28 about Isaac and us will be left hanging, which is exactly what you'v done in favor of your own tradition.

And you just don't get it about Abraham's household either. Hagar and Ishmael were cast out... of Abraham's household, which as an allegory is the opposite of your idea. The unbelieving scribes and Pharisee Jews were always trying to prove to Christ they were of Abraham's seed, when a lot of them were not (like the foreigner Kenite scribes). Why would they claim Abraham as their father? It's because of the Promise, not because of the law. Don't you see they were trying to supplant the Promise by Faith with the law instead, which is why they claimed Abraham?
Even John the Baptist knew that point about them...

Matt 3:7-9
7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
(KJV)

The law was not given through Abraham, The Promise by Faith was, so you cannot just try to change that and infer Abraham is about inheritance through the law.

Nor by that can you try to change Abraham's inheritance in The Promise by Faith continuing through his son Isaac, then to Jacob (Israel), then to Joseph and his two sons. God's Promised Salvation by Faith is what God's birthright to Israel is about. It began with Abraham. That has nothing to do with bondage to the law. It's THAT part of the seed of Israel which continued in that Promise which YOU are missing in your theology, and it's no doubt because of men's traditions you've been taught, or picked up from who knows where.

I don't exactly know what point you are attempting to make but I have no problem with your presentation yet. But the promise made to Abraham did not just speak to the physical seed of Abraham but to all the nations of the earth. The point that is so often missed is the two seeds "metaphorically" the physical seed of Abraham and the Spiritual seed "promise" Romans 9:6 Matthew 3:9 If you keep this in mind while reading the OT it is clear that it speaks of two Israels one of the "promise / Spirit, and one of the flesh / physical. Thus Paul says all Israel is not Israel.
And as I pointed out the promise was not just to the descendants of Abraham but to all men. Gen 12:3 ....... Gen 22:18

Now this promise is fulfilled and spoken of in Danial. As you know veteran I believe Dan 9:27 to be fulfilled "the 70th week" at the calling of Paul. Salvation was presented "complete" at the death and resurrection of Christ. And for the several years after words it was preached to Israel alone, until Paul received his charge to go to the Gentiles.

So the scriptures are true Gen 12:3 Gen 22:18 Dan 9:24 Dan 9:27 .....the covenant made by Jesus, not some future AC. The 70th week has been fulfilled. Just as the scriptures and promise to Abraham say.

Acts 9:15
[sup]15[/sup] But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. [sup]16[/sup] For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.”

And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.
In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.

Acts 10:44-45

veteran · Jan 24, 2011

Walking in Grace said:
PS/ there veteran:

I want you to learn to laugh at yourself.

I do laugh at myself at times. But for this time, we're talking about a serious matter. I'm not laughing.

In one of your posts here you were arguing that I am wrong that we are all responsible for crucifying Christ.

After all of your resistance to my saying that we all crucified Christ you quoted a scripture that says we did but you overlooked that part.

Here is the scripture you quoted: Hebrews 6:6 "If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame."

That shows that we do not have to be one of the ones that were there literally crying out for his death. That shows that there are other ways we can cry out for his death and yet we are just as guilty as those who literally cried out for him to die. That shows that when we were living our life independent of God we were calling out for the Son to be crucified even without fully realizing it.

We can crucify him "afresh" because we are all guilty of his being crucified the first time.

You obviously don't understand what Paul was saying there in Hebrews 6.

How is it you skipped the 2 previous verses that go with that one Hebrews 6:6 verse? Who am I to show you 'how' to study God's Word at your ripe age? You should well know how by now.

Heb 6:4-9
4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

Those 2 verses reveal this is about a believer with a definite chosen calling by God, one of His chosen elect servants, not a new babe in Christ, nor just a believer that has a hard time with sin yet still believes on Christ. This appies to someone which God has worked miracles through even, and that person knows it, with no doubts. That's the condition for understanding the next verse...

6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame.

This is not about little slip ups in small sins all believers may commit after having coming to Christ, and need to repent for. This is about one of His chosen elect turning completely away from Him to follow the world instead. And this world today belongs to the devil (Luke 4). Paul is going to stress that point in the next verses too...

7 For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:
8 But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned.
9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.
(KJV)

If you feel this Heb.6 matter applies to yourself (I already know it doesn't), then it would mean you should as a result expect the penalty for falling away under that condition, as given in Heb.6:8, "But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned."

So don't be silly in thinking that applies to the Body of Christ as anything other than a strong warning to stay in Christ Jesus; it's especially for those who have a calling from God as a chosen one, and have evidence of God's works to prove it.

bud02 · Jan 24, 2011

I'm reposting this so you don't miss it veteran

veteran said:
I'm not the one failing to understand that Galatians verse and subject brother. Paul said in that very same Galatians 4 chapter, "Now we brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise."(Gal.4:28). Why would Paul link Isaac with us as the children of promise, and of the freewoman?

It's simple. It's because God first gave His Salvation Promise through Abraham, and it was by Faith, and Abraham believed, and that Promise is about The Saviour and The New Covenant, even BEFORE the law was given 430 years later, like Paul said back in Galatians 3. The inheritance to Abraham was NEVER about the law, period. It was always involving Faith on The Saviour, even back to Abraham's day. And how did that Promise of The Saviour become known to the world? Through a believing remnant of the seed of Israel by Faith, which is Paul's subject of Hebrews 11 and Galatians 3 and Romans 9-11 even.

Gal 3:14-18
14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
(KJV)

Oh, but you just skipped Galatians 3 about that Promise though, didn't you? Without understanding Galatians 3 first, understanding why Paul said Gal.4:28 about Isaac and us will be left hanging, which is exactly what you'v done in favor of your own tradition.

And you just don't get it about Abraham's household either. Hagar and Ishmael were cast out... of Abraham's household, which as an allegory is the opposite of your idea. The unbelieving scribes and Pharisee Jews were always trying to prove to Christ they were of Abraham's seed, when a lot of them were not (like the foreigner Kenite scribes). Why would they claim Abraham as their father? It's because of the Promise, not because of the law. Don't you see they were trying to supplant the Promise by Faith with the law instead, which is why they claimed Abraham?
Even John the Baptist knew that point about them...

Matt 3:7-9
7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
(KJV)

The law was not given through Abraham, The Promise by Faith was, so you cannot just try to change that and infer Abraham is about inheritance through the law.

Nor by that can you try to change Abraham's inheritance in The Promise by Faith continuing through his son Isaac, then to Jacob (Israel), then to Joseph and his two sons. God's Promised Salvation by Faith is what God's birthright to Israel is about. It began with Abraham. That has nothing to do with bondage to the law. It's THAT part of the seed of Israel which continued in that Promise which YOU are missing in your theology, and it's no doubt because of men's traditions you've been taught, or picked up from who knows where.

I don't exactly know what point you are attempting to make but I have no problem with your presentation yet. But the promise made to Abraham did not just speak to the physical seed of Abraham but to all the nations of the earth. The point that is so often missed is the two seeds "metaphorically" the physical seed of Abraham and the Spiritual seed "promise" Romans 9:6 Matthew 3:9 If you keep this in mind while reading the OT it is clear that it speaks of two Israels one of the "promise / Spirit, and one of the flesh / physical. Thus Paul says all Israel is not Israel.
And as I pointed out the promise was not just to the descendants of Abraham but to all men. Gen 12:3 ....... Gen 22:18

Now this promise is fulfilled and spoken of in Danial. As you know veteran I believe Dan 9:27 to be fulfilled "the 70th week" at the calling of Paul. Salvation was presented "complete" at the death and resurrection of Christ. And for the several years after words it was preached to Israel alone, until Paul received his charge to go to the Gentiles.

So the scriptures are true Gen 12:3 Gen 22:18 Dan 9:24 Dan 9:27 .....the covenant made by Jesus, not some future AC. The 70th week has been fulfilled. Just as the scriptures and promise to Abraham say.

Acts 9:15
[sup]15[/sup] But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. [sup]16[/sup] For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.”

And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.
In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.

Acts 10:44-45

Why Jews And Gentiles Are Kept Separate ??

Active Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Similar threads