God's Chosen People, The Jews

***BillSPrestonEsq*** · 05-09-2003, 06:14 PM

Posted by Must be nothing

"in 70 AD, Jerusalem was destroyed. He divorced Israel."

If this is so, then

1) God is a liar as the Abrahamic Covenant was unconditional and everlasting
2) God's seeking back of the harlot Israel is pointless as he was just going to ditch her later
3) disagrees with romans 9-11

In short this is false and it really ticks me off when people try to take God's promises to a specific group and twist them away.

Travis · 05-09-2003, 06:24 PM

I'm not sure exactly what John means (although we probably agree since we are both CT), but my understanding is that God is still married to Israel. He divorced the Jews. Israel once consisted of almost all Jews, but no longer. Romans 9.

rredboy · 05-09-2003, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BillSPrestonEsq

In short this is false and it really ticks me off when people try to take God's promises to a specific group and twist them away.

amen to that the bibles promises are for everyone not just chosen groups of people.

How can the bible be true for some and not true for others??

***BillSPrestonEsq*** · 05-09-2003, 08:22 PM

rredboy, that made no sense. God has some promises just to the Jews.

God never dicvorced Israel Travis, support this claim and rectify it with the unconditional nature of the Abrahimc covenant as God cannot lie.

psalm63adam · 05-09-2003, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BillSPrestonEsq
1) God is a liar as the Abrahamic Covenant was unconditional and everlasting

Just curious - in one of my theology classes, my professor stated that all of the covenants made in the OT and NT were conditional. Just wondering where you would find verses that would state that the Abrahamic Covenant was unconditional.

***BillSPrestonEsq*** · 05-09-2003, 08:31 PM

it is unique

when it is confirmed look at it carefully, God forced Abraham to sleep, God passed through the halves of the animals alone, God made all the promises. Unlike any other covenant, no conditions are given and no participation of Abraham is required.

psalm63adam · 05-09-2003, 08:33 PM

Ah, I see. That is interesting.

Benny Hicks · 05-09-2003, 09:13 PM

[Bill] when it is confirmed look at it carefully, God forced Abraham to sleep, God passed through the halves of the animals alone, God made all the promises.
[Me] True, but who was the promise to? You obviously would say it was to the nation of Israel. Who is the nation of Israel? Paul clearly says that not all that are descendents of Abraham are Israel, but that the elect compose the kingdom of God.

[Bill] Unlike any other covenant, no conditions are given and no participation of Abraham is required.
[Me] Surely you jest...look at the OT law and requirements for being included in the nation of Israel and tell me that no conditions are given and no participation of the Israelites under the Old Covenant is required. God demanded much of the corporate nation of Israel, His covenant demanded their complete devotion and adherence to His law.

[Bill] God never dicvorced Israel Travis, support this claim and rectify it with the unconditional nature of the Abrahimc covenant as God cannot lie
[Me] You have not proved that God's covenant with Israel was unconditional. If it was, then what was the point of God giving Israel the law and providing atonement through animal sacrifices?

Ben

***BillSPrestonEsq*** · 05-09-2003, 09:19 PM

gruveguy tactical errors hav you hmmm<

1) this was before Israel, made to Abraham's physical descendants the jews.. Israel was born by the name Jacob 2 generations later.
2) made before the law and seperate from the law which was over 400 years from being given.
3) Your logic looks like swiss cheese as it is a false equivocation of the mosaic law and abrahamic covenant. The Abrahamic covenant had nothing to do with Moses. He was born under it, but the law had blessings and curses of its own. That is a strawman who needs to go off to see the wizard, the wonderful wizard of oz, because, because,because....

Bryan · 05-09-2003, 10:46 PM

(BillSPrestonEsq)
this was before Israel, made to Abraham's physical descendants the jews.. Israel was born by the name Jacob 2 generations later.
(Bryan)
the promise was made to Abraham and his descendant (no plural), his seed, namely Christ, even though people have shown you the verse in Galations that proves this is true, you still contradict Paul

Nevermind the fact that 2 Corinthians 1:20 says that all of the promises of God are YES in Christ Jesus. That means that if you are in Christ, a Christian, then every promise God has made is a promise to you. The corollary of this is also true, if you are NOT in Christ then every promise He has made is not to you.

Travis · 05-09-2003, 11:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BillSPrestonEsq
God never dicvorced Israel Travis, support this claim and rectify it with the unconditional nature of the Abrahimc covenant as God cannot lie.

I don't appreciate being called on to substantiate a claim I never made.

brown07 · 05-10-2003, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bryan
the promise was made to Abraham and his descendant (no plural), his seed, namely Christ, even though people have shown you the verse in Galations that proves this is true, you still contradict Paul

Nevermind the fact that 2 Corinthians 1:20 says that all of the promises of God are YES in Christ Jesus. That means that if you are in Christ, a Christian, then every promise God has made is a promise to you. The corollary of this is also true, if you are NOT in Christ then every promise He has made is not to you.

That is exactly correct. The question that must be answered is this: who was the promise to? Was the promise to national Israel, the physical descendants of Abraham? or was the promise to ELECT Israel, those who are in Christ. Paul makes it clear that the promise was to Abraham and to his seed (Christ) - not plural - therefore anyone who is in Christ is a part of Elect Israel and inherits the promise as a co-heir with Christ. This is precisely the kind of error Paul was arguing against - the error that says that the promises of God are for those who are not in Christ. Paul makes a specific point to say that the promises are to Christ and are to be received by faith in Christ - not by physical descent.

The promises are made to Christ and Elect Israel are co-heirs. Physical Israel was always just a physical manifestation of the elect body of God, as the visible church is today.

ThePlaidRanger · 05-10-2003, 10:21 AM

For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. For if it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void. - Romans 4:13-14, ESV

Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "In you shall all the nations be blessed." - Galatians 3:7-8, ESV

To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified. Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, "And to offsprings," referring to many, but referring to one, "And to your offspring," who is Christ. - Galatians 3:15-16, ESV

**Chrysostom** · 05-10-2003, 10:22 AM

(BillSPrestonEsq) Posted by Must be nothing

"in 70 AD, Jerusalem was destroyed. He divorced Israel."

If this is so, then

1) God is a liar as the Abrahamic Covenant was unconditional and everlasting
2) God's seeking back of the harlot Israel is pointless as he was just going to ditch her later
3) disagrees with romans 9-11

In short this is false and it really ticks me off when people try to take God's promises to a specific group and twist them away.

(Me) I don't see how you can honestly read the book of Revelation without coming away with this kind of an interpretation. In the end, He judges the harlot and marries the Church. In Matthew 24 (which discusses the Tribulation), Jesus explains the judgment that will come upon the Jews. All throughout Romans 9-11, we see that the Jews' rejection of Christ would be judged -- indeed, it says that this is why the Gospel came to the Gentiles.

In Romans 11, Paul explains that the nation of Israel (not the spiritual Israel) would be ultimately saved. I don't see how this contradicts what John and Jesus say, though. Though divorced, they may still be "beloved for the sake of their forefathers" (Romans 11:28).

Benny Hicks · 05-10-2003, 10:30 AM

[Bill] 3) Your logic looks like swiss cheese as it is a false equivocation of the mosaic law and abrahamic covenant.
[Me] You stated that there were no conditions placed on Abraham in order for the covenant to remain, and you implied that was also true of the physical nation of Israel. I was stating that since God demanded the nation of Israel to keep His law in order to stay in His covenantal relationship, His covenant with the nation of Israel was conditional.

Ben