Follow the law.

[Tom]

Like I said, sis, I understand what you're saying, and I know it is popular on this site. I'm not trying to offend you. You're my sister in Christ. I realize we are one with the Jews in spirit through Christ, but I think they still have an earthly mission to perform during the eons while we have been chosen to minister in the celestial realm. I'm aware of the scripture about there being no difference in Christ, and that all believers are one with Christ and the Father. But I also believe God chooses different folks for different tasks and operates differently at different times. That's why I don't think we're subject to the law and traditions of the Jews.

[Seth]

Like I said, sis, I understand what you're saying, and I know it is popular on this site. I'm not trying to offend you. You're my sister in Christ. I realize we are one with the Jews in spirit through Christ, but I think they still have an earthly mission to perform during the eons while we have been chosen to minister in the celestial realm. I'm aware of the scripture about there being no difference in Christ, and that all believers are one with Christ and the Father. But I also believe God chooses different folks for different tasks and operates differently at different times. That's why I don't think we're subject to the law and traditions of the Jews.

I agree that different people in the Body have different tasks, but I don't think that's based on the differences of the flesh. I think the scripture is pretty clear that all believers are Jews.

[Seth]

Paul seems to think there's a difference between the Jews and those of us of the nations.

Not within the household of the faith though. He was actually pretty clear that once we enter the household of the faith, the flesh creates no such difference, that all are the same man. A single man is not both Jew and Gentile. That's impossible. If all are one man, then all are one, and no differentiations remain according to the flesh.

It was Paul who said, we no longer know man after the flesh. Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

Why would God create us as a new creature both Jew and Gentile, tell us not to know each other after the flesh, only to tell us that there indeed are differences according to our flesh that place us in different administrations. I don't think that was part of Paul's ministry at all. Just my opinion.

[ed]

Not within the household of the faith though. He was actually pretty clear that once we enter the household of the faith, the flesh creates no such difference, that all are the same man. A single man is not both Jew and Gentile. That's impossible. If all are one man, then all are one, and no differentiations remain according to the flesh.

It was Paul who said, we no longer know man after the flesh. Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

Why would God create us as a new creature both Jew and Gentile, tell us not to know each other after the flesh, only to tell us that there indeed are differences according to our flesh that place us in different administrations. I don't think that was part of Paul's ministry at all. Just my opinion.

Great point.

It almost seems to read that they will be grafted back in as a nation if they remain not in unbelief?  I think that confuses me a bit.

It is ether all the way no more nationality, or there is some reason to know nationality?

:dontknow:

I know what I prefer, but whether I am thinking in the spirit or carnally, I don't know.

.

[Tom]

I believe Christ will be ruling the kingdom of the heavens for the eons of the eons on earth in Jerusalem. I don't believe we who have been chosen and called out of the nations to be the body of Christ are Jews.

[dajomaco]

"For the entire law is fulfilled in one word, in this: "You shall love your associate as yourself."" (Galatians 5:14)

Thanks Tom,

My friend would say,

Shall we break the law because we love?

To know the one true God.
To know the one true God through the Law.

That kind of knowledge will rip apart your mind leaving you insane then DEAD.

Anyone who says they know the Law is blind.
They cannot see God .

[Seth]

Not within the household of the faith though. He was actually pretty clear that once we enter the household of the faith, the flesh creates no such difference, that all are the same man. A single man is not both Jew and Gentile. That's impossible. If all are one man, then all are one, and no differentiations remain according to the flesh.

It was Paul who said, we no longer know man after the flesh. Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

Why would God create us as a new creature both Jew and Gentile, tell us not to know each other after the flesh, only to tell us that there indeed are differences according to our flesh that place us in different administrations. I don't think that was part of Paul's ministry at all. Just my opinion.

Great point.

It almost seems to read that they will be grafted back in as a nation if they remain not in unbelief?  I think that confuses me a bit.

It is ether all the way no more nationality, or there is some reason to know nationality?

:dontknow:

I know what I prefer, but whether I am thinking in the spirit or carnally, I don't know.

.

Yes, they will be grafted in when they say "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord." When that happens, and regardless whenever anyone believes it will happen, they will join us as one people, one new man. We will not know eachother after the flesh.

As far as being as chosen nation, that identity was always conditioned on obedience. It was never an unconditional identity. It was also based on God's prerogative to define the the lineage through a single chosen son regardless of genetic heritage. It happened with Isaac, Jacob, and now Christ.

[Seth]

I'd also want to clarify about the term "replacement theology." I actually think that is a misnomer, the idea that the church replaces Israel.

Israel has always been the tree. God describes Israel as his firstborn son in the Old Testament (Hosea) which Matthew attributes directly to Christ. Israel is not replaceable. But his branches are. If it's a question of Israel being replaced, not possible. But if it's a question of the wild branches replacing the natural ones for a time, I don't see how that could possibly be refuted since it is a clear teaching of the Bible.

[Tom]

I think it is God who has temporarily blinded the Jews until all those who have been chosen of the nations will be called out to be the body of Christ, and then the Jews will get their promised earthly kingdom of the heavens which will subject the nations.

[Seth]

I agree, although I go by the Romans 2 definition of what it is to be a Jew, not outward according to the flesh, but inward according to the circumcision of the heart by the Spirit.

[Tom]

I understand the "circumcision of the heart, in spirit."   

[Seth]

I understand the "circumcision of the heart, in spirit."   

Whenever Paul refers to Israel "according to the flesh" is to teach that such a thing (the flesh) does not define a Jew.

[rosered]

Like I said, sis, I understand what you're saying, and I know it is popular on this site. I'm not trying to offend you. You're my sister in Christ. I realize we are one with the Jews in spirit through Christ, but I think they still have an earthly mission to perform during the eons while we have been chosen to minister in the celestial realm. I'm aware of the scripture about there being no difference in Christ, and that all believers are one with Christ and the Father. But I also believe God chooses different folks for different tasks and operates differently at different times. That's why I don't think we're subject to the law and traditions of the Jews.

  Hi Tom . I am not offended   at all , just really trying to understand your point of view  , that is all

you said

But I also believe God chooses different folks for different tasks and operates differently at different times.

  I do not  see this  in the scriptures    , It clearly states that Jesus Christ come to finish the work   
                And to finish  means   have an end  , not  others  or other times , just me though

He come in the fullness of times [time in the full complete  ]"But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law" (Galatians 4:4)
    this to me is the  completing and finishing the law   age eon ,,,,   and the new age eon begins       The sign  and significance of the cross completeness or fullness of time   

John 4:34 Jesus said unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.

preparing for the Cross

Jesus answered them, saying, The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abides alone: but if it die, it brings forth much fruit... Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour. (John 12:24-27)
   
Now this work that Jesus had to complete was the FULL work of redemption.



Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation;

that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
(2Co 5:17-21 ESV)

It is interesting in this regard that the single word that Jesus spoke (which we translate as 'It is finished') was 'tetelestai'. This certainly has the meaning of completion (which is what it primarily means in the context of John 19:30) but it can also mean 'discharge a debt' or 'paid in full'. It was common to the Jews and Romans of that time because it was the word they wrote on a debt that someone had, once it was paid. So this victory cry of Jesus would have also meant to His hearers "Paid in full!

Now, this work of redemption involved the completion or end of many other things. So as a secondary application you could say that 'It is finished' applied to the following as well (remember, this is not the primary meaning of those words in context but is a part of Jesus' work in dying for our sins...)

'It is finished' applies to:

·         The work of redemption

·         The Mosaic covenant with it's priesthood, temple and sacrifices

·         The curse of the law

·         Sin (in the sense that it was all placed upon Christ - past, present and future)

·         The prophecies and types concerning the Messiah's death

·         The old fallen creation (which was placed 'in Christ'). God's purposes are now centered on a 'new creation' in Christ.

·         Satan's dominion and hold over man

·         The separation of Jew and Gentile

and death reigning   
I do and will always believe Jesus Christ is reigning now    and al those gathered into Christ   , they have passed from death to life
literally in the sense of this       death   has  no power over those in Christ ever again

not in this life   on  , they   shuck the mortal coil   /husk   and    the new creature in Christ   was there all along but Hidden in the mortal body /husk, Just as Jesus Christ was     in the WORD ALL    ALONG     but hidden till   the fullness of time had come     

[Tom]

I think Jews, proud of their fleshly circumcision, but not having a "circumcision of the heart, in spirit, not in letter," are not living truly as Jews.

[Tom]

There was a time I thought I should try to be Jewish and almost joined a Messianic congregation until I found out they were just Jews who followed church doctrine.

[Seth]

I think Jews, proud of their fleshly circumcision, but not having a "circumcision of the heart, in spirit, not in letter," are not living truly as Jews.

I don't believe they are Jews at all. I believe they are living as Gentiles. To be a Jew, you must have received the promise of Abraham: the Spirit. If Jesus Christ is one man, and he is a Jew, all those outside him are not. That's why I believe that revelation says that our Lord was crucified in Sodom and Egypt, and why Paul says, in Galatians that the present city of Jerusalem corresponds to Egypt and they are the children of Hagar, Gentiles.

[Seth]

this is why the Gospel was so controversial. They were being asked to give up everything they took pride in in order to win Christ.

[Tom]

That's where we disagree, bro. I think they're Jews who have not yet received their Messiah.

[Tom]

As I said before, I think it is God who has caused them not to see the light yet, but he has not un-Jewed them.

[Tom]

I think Paul was simply saying they were Jews only in appearance just as there are many church folks today who seem to be Christians only in appearance, but that didn't cancel them being Jews and the promise given to them of their future kingdom.

[Tom]

That's why I don't think we need to think we need to be Jews to be in the body of Christ because we came to Christ in grace through faith not being Jews but of the nations.

[dajomaco]

But God made a promise to us, and we are waiting for a new heaven and a new earth where goodness lives.
14 Dear friends, since you are waiting for this to happen, do your best to be without sin and without fault. Try to be at peace with God. 15 Remember that we are saved because our Lord is patient.

Peter

[Tom]

But I don't think we need to let this difference of opinion divide us. Just as I tend to interpret things a little more literally while others seem to interpret things a little more figuratively, I don't think that really affects our being one in spirit with each other, Christ, and the Father. We just have different perspectives which is to be expected considering we all have different past experiences that have brought us here. I think we can quibble and squabble or we can enjoy the diversity. I tend to enjoy the diversity just as I do in life in general while some other folks get tense about it. I think we are a family tapestry not a single color. I try to keep a sense of humor about differences because it keeps me happier about life.

[Seth]

I think Paul was simply saying they were Jews only in appearance just as there are many church folks today who seem to be Christians only in appearance, but that didn't cancel them being Jews and the promise given to them of their future kingdom.

Paul was much more specific than that. He said that being a Jew was not according to the flesh but according to circumcision of the heart by the Spirit. In order to have the spirit you must believe. And for those who do not believe they have no inheritance and are therefore not sons of Abraham. Only sons have an inheritance. Those who are not sons of Abraham by definition are not Jews. This follows along with how God said that isaac was Abraham's only son even though Ishmael was a living literal person. This shows that it is not about literal vs not literal. It's about how God defines the seed from the very beginning which is for a chosen son not according to genetics. He has chosen to define a Jew through Christ by the Spirit and a Gentile as those who are not of the Spirit. And this is a very consistent thing all throughout the Bible, God choosing a son through which the inheritance passes. Not having anything to do with the flesh or genetics but according to God's chosen son.

the fact that paul calls them children of Hagar is proof of itself that God does not consider anyone who is outside of Christ to be a Jew but actually consider them to be a Gentile.this is what made the gospel so difficult for them to accept. Because they had pride in the flesh and they were being told that the flesh doesn't count for anything and does not seal them children of Abraham or Jews.

[Tom]

As I said, I understand your perspective, but I disagree.