Tentmaker Forum

So many people don't know that only Israel's Line of birth had a covenant relationship with Jehovah "their God", Theirs was the sonship (Ex.4:22; Hosea 11:1-4; Rom. 9:4, Greek) from which "they" strayed and became Prodigals and " lost sheep of the house of Israel" Lk. 15:11-24, 15:24, Mat. 10:5-6,  They are the only ones that can be born again, We Gentile cant be born again in a "Covenant Relationship" that we never had or became prodigals-strays- or never been a lost sheep.

Our Sonship is only by Adoption, Eph.1:5; 2: 11:19; Rom. 8:15,23

"They are the only ones that can be born again."

See, I don't get that.  How do you get that John 3:3 only applies to Israelites?  Jesus says "a man must be born again", not a Jew or Israelite.

The interesting thing about your post is it leads to a question I was going to post today, which is regarding the two gospels argument (I assume you subscribe to this by your "lost sheep of Israel" comment, but forgive if I am incorrect).  Has this topic been discussed before?  I have read both sides of the debate on a number of websites, but never from a UR perspective.  Internally, the two gospels (one Peter, one Paul) makes absolutely no sense to me--it always seems like the picking and choosing of literal versus to spiritual application of the the Word, but I am open to listen to both sides of the discussion.

Does anyone else have any feedback on this?

If you really want a real eye opener, order the booklet I quoted, How to Scripturally Study the Scriptures, at
www.concordant.org  for about 8 dollars
Hartley

 !!!   $8   !!!

Quote from: bmeansdfw

Internally, the two gospels (one Peter, one Paul) makes absolutely no sense to me--it always seems like the picking and choosing of literal versus to spiritual application of the the Word, but I am open to listen to both sides of the discussion.

Does anyone else have any feedback on this?

Paul, in Gal. 1:8-9, declared there is a curse on any person who preaches any other gospel, than the one he taught.

So if any other apostle or any person taught a different gospel, he would be under that curse. Thus there can't be another gospel; it is a flawed theory proposed by some critical scholars in Germany in the nineteenth century, who were unbelievers.

Jesus said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." [Matt. 5:17]

James said, "So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty."

Peter said, "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed."

Paul said, "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

David said, "Give me understanding, and I shall keep thy law; yea, I shall observe it with my whole heart." [Psa. 119:34]

Doug

http://vinyl2.sentex.ca/~tcc/OP/JJPP.html (http://vinyl2.sentex.ca/~tcc/OP/JJPP.html)

Hi Lee.  Many will disagree with you.  I don't know exactly to what extent, how far I am currently able to go into 110% seeing this/agreeing with this right now.  HOWEVER, I think you are onto something important.  If folks will be open, careful, honest, deal with this with brotherly love, there are surely some things to be learned here.

I am sometimes "against the stream" with some of my (DEVELOPING) POVs in these areas.  But I also believe there were different issues with Israel and now us the nations, including that we were never given the Law.  We are "those without the Law" as Paul described.  I also believe we were grafted in by adoption, and that God is not through with the literal House of Israel.  Some people read the CLT, which translates "dispensation", yet they will go into spasms if that word is used.  I AM NOT A 'DISPENSATIONALIST'.  I believe that label, in its strictest sense, carries SOME beliefs and connotations with which I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE OR BELIEVE - and using it as a label can be an easy attempt to marginalize others' beliefs by broad-brush/generalization.  However, rather than totally thowing out the baby with the bathwater, I believe there are some important issues to look at here...again, if we will do so with an open prayerful mind, heart, and realize that OUR WALK AND GOD'S REVELATIONS TO US ARE PROGRESSIVE.   IMO, sometimes we need to fight Him a little less and cling a little less to our already-established beliefs and doctrinal paradigms.  GOD JUST MIGHT BE ABLE TO SHOW US A LITTLE MORE YET.

So how much of this?  I don't know, but I think you're hitting on something here that there is more to see than many of us have to this point.  I keep thinking about Paul saying "it is no longer I that do it [sin] but the sin that dwells in me".  Some have explanations to that, that IMO, exist within their established belief structure - that haven't altogether satisfied my wonderment into this topic as of yet.

So thanks for bringing this up, expect to have hit some hot buttons and/or raw spots with some.  But if we can discuss this and not just argue or debate, there may some good word to be gleaned here  :thumbsup:.

Paul preached Jesus.  There is no other name (or gospel) under heaven, by which we can be saved.

But there may be other issues.  Not "gospels", but "issues, nuances.."  things to understand as the Word is rightly divided.  I can't necessarily always correctly do it, I'm just sayin'   :laughing7:     :thumbsup:

David was given the Law.  Paul, as a Jew, was given the Law.  But as he preached to the gentiles, he taught that the Law profits us nothing, the circumcision profits us nothing.  It was a shadow of a better thing to come.  The better thing to come was/is Christ in us, the hope of glory.  His fulfillment of the Law within us.  Grace.  For by grace are we saved, and that not of ourselves...we can't boast.  I can't cling to and obey a law and be made righteous by it.  It's Jesus' gift of grace and salvation within me, the "Law of Liberty" that can only justify and make me righteous before God.  I BELIEVE IN OBEDIENCE TO JESUS, WALKING HUMBLY BEFORE HIM.  He brings us daily into a personal crucifixion of self before His cross...killing our old man, raising Himself up within us.  BUT IT'S STILL NOT MY WORKS THAT SAVE ME.  ONLY HIS BLOOD AND GIFT OF GRACE CAN SAVE ME.  And His Spirit works within us to bring us more into His likeness.  So I'm not talking about a sloppy, "do whatever you want/I'm OK/you're OK" deal.  His Life and death was/is a serious matter, and our walk with Him as well.  But it's ultimately all HIM...in Him we live, breathe, have our being.  My  :2c:.

Right now, I'm maybe at 60% of complete agreement with the OP.  That doesn't necessarily mean it's wrong...it's that I think there are some legitimate (scripturally accurate) points there, but I'm just not sure how much of which ones yet...I've personally been working on this/(God working on me) for awhile...still searching and learning.  Don't want to shut my mind to it and say I've got it all figured out, and "no, it's this other way!"  Maybe I'm not seeing something here yet.  Want to be open, yet not so open-minded my brains fall out  :laughing7:.

Thanks, I am just starting to learn the sites navigation. Your words mean the world to me.
Hartley

Indeed!  In the first 33 years of teaching the Gospel of Christ Jesus about His death and resurrection now being able to bring people to salvation, that salvation in Christ was ONLY given to people who were of the House of Israel.

Jews within the Roman and Parthian Empires who lived at the time were certainly of the tribe of Judah who were a part of the House of Israel. It meant that salvation could be given to them, but it could not be given to Gentiles IF THEY REMAINED GENTILES! In the 33 years of time that elapsed from Christ's crucifixion in 30 to 63 C.E., it was necessary for all Gentiles who were saved in Christ to become spiritual Israelites. The New Covenant relationship with God was given only to those who were members of the House of Israel and the House of Judah (Jeremiah 31:31–34). Note what the clear word of God states:

"Behold, the days come, says the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they broke, although I was an husband unto them, says the Lord: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, says the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord': for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, says the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more." Jeremiah 31:31–34

As clear as God could make it, the New Covenant was to be made only with the House of Israel and the House of Judah. There is not one mention in this New Covenant relationship about participation of Gentiles who were not Israelites. And what did this lack of mention concerning Gentiles mean to the apostle Paul? He made it clear that salvation in Christ could only be given to the children of Israel and no other nation. Note what Paul said in Ephesians chapter 2:
"Wherefore remember [you Gentiles], that you, being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise [both Old and New Covenants], having no hope, and without God in the world." Ephesians 2:11–12

Paul made it clear in the above statement, which was absolutely true and accurate, that as long as Gentiles remained Gentiles, there was not a hope in the world for them to gain a salvation in Christ. They were those "having no hope." Remember, the Old and New Covenants were made only with the House of Israel and if one was not an Israelite then such persons were "strangers from the covenants of promise. ... and without God in the world." This was a terrible plight for Gentiles to be in, but this was their fate. Simply put, Gentiles could not be saved.

However, there came to be hope, and indeed, even a victory for the Gentiles. A legal was was found that could get Gentiles saved along with the Israelites. This was by grafting Gentiles into the stock of Israel so that they no longer would be reckoned as Gentiles. This was the manner in which Gentiles could be called the children of Abraham and the Israel of God, and be accepted for salvation like the other Israelites. And Paul, in the four epistles to the first three ekklesias (the congregations in Romans, Corinthians and Galatians) taught that all Gentiles who accepted Christ as their personal Savior were now reckoned to be "in Christ" (Romans 12:5, 16:7, 9–10; 1 Corinthians 3:1, 15:22; 2 Corinthians 1:21, 3:14, 5:17; Galatians 3:27). Putting Gentiles "in Christ" gave them an advantage they had not realized before. Since Christ was clearly reckoned in a legal sense to be from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Jacob's name was changed to Israel), then Gentiles now attached to Christ were no longer acknowledged as "Gentiles" in a spiritual sense. They had now become "the Israel of God" (Galatians 6:16).
"For you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you be Christ's, then are you Abraham's seed, and heirs [along with Israelites] according to the promise." Galatians 3:26–29

Similarly, Paul said in Romans 11:13–36 that the Gentiles being "in Christ" (and Christ was an Israelite in whom there was no guile and a legitimate son of Abraham) made them also to be children of Abraham and Israel as was Christ or any natural born Israelite. And since it was clearly understood by Paul that "all Israel shall be saved" (Romans 11:26), this of necessity included the Gentiles who accepted Christ and were grafted into Israel. Thus, these Gentile converts were no longer reckoned as Gentiles. They were now "the Israel of God"  (Galatians 6:16).

This was how the Gentiles could become partakers of all promises and covenants that pertained to the Israelites. This grafting into the stock of Israel made them able to be heirs of the New Covenant relationship that God was making only with Israel.

Rom 11:17  But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 18  do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you.

Paul

Quote from: Pierac

In the 33 years of time that elapsed from Christ's crucifixion in 30 to 63 C.E., it was necessary for all Gentiles who were saved in Christ to become spiritual Israelites.

I agree with what you said in your your post, except I think there may be a problem with the above mentioned dates. Agrippa I is thought to have died in 44 AD, and the story of his death is related in Acts 12.

[See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrippa_I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrippa_I)]

How do the above dates fit the record in Galatians 1:15-2:14?

Doug

Quote from: Lee Damboise on August 04, 2009, 09:15:08 PM
If you really want a real eye opener, order the booklet I quoted, How to Scripturally Study the Scriptures, at
www.concordant.org  for about 8 dollars
Hartley

Hmmm... the "Gospel" for sale - eh?  At the "bargain basement price" of only $8?  :omg:     

How to "Scripturally"  study the Scriptures?  According to WHOM?  The writer of this booklet? (and likely the beneficiary of the $8?)  :sigh:

Does this mean that if I do not have $8, that I am left to "study the Scriptures, Un-SCRIPTURALLY"?   :wacko2:

One reply for WillieH, It saddens me that you feel that way, because I have 1000's of books and half of them I paid for and it didn't hurt my spirit to pay the price to seek God. But if you are so hurt because of the 8 dollar price tag, just ask then to give it to you and they will.

Now to Pierac: I agree to almost every word you said except in every place I read "that you quoted the bible" the word if you except was no where to be found. salvation is only if i except him as savior? I have much more than excepted him, I was born after his blood shield covered all mankind. Lee

Quote from: willieH on August 04, 2009, 11:25:47 PM

Quote from: Lee Damboise on August 04, 2009, 09:15:08 PM
If you really want a real eye opener, order the booklet I quoted, How to Scripturally Study the Scriptures, at
www.concordant.org  for about 8 dollars
Hartley

Hmmm... the "Gospel" for sale - eh?  At the "bargain basement price" of only $8?  :omg:     

How to "Scripturally"  study the Scriptures?  According to WHOM?  The writer of this booklet? (and likely the beneficiary of the $8?)  :sigh:

Does this mean that if I do not have $8, that I am left to "study the Scriptures, Un-SCRIPTURALLY"?   :wacko2:

...willieH  :HeartThrob:

Lol... :thumbsup:

With it being the Concordant Publishing Concern, I would imagine the cost covers printing and expenses.  I also think they utilize a lot of volunteers.  Tony N that posts here is real involved.  I imagine most paid some coin for their hard copy of scripture.   :sigh:

"Freely you have received. Freely give."

not...

"Freely you have received. Cover your costs."

IMHO :HeartThrob:

Context, please.  Are you putting out copies of scripture on a large scale, Seth?  If people are peddling things to get rich and take advantage, IMO, that's one thing and a problem.  Otherwise, not so much.  The workman is worthy of his hire.

***NEW TOPIC SPLIT FROM HERE, MONEY AND THE GOSPEL***