Dispensationalism Refuted

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jerryhuerta

Historicist
Supporter
Jul 21, 2018
1,012
130
Tucson
Visit site
✟217,485.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
quoted from your post in "Replacement Theology Refuted"

I stopped reading when I came to that false statement.
Isaiah 8:20
To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

The law was with the first family

Disobientance occurred in the Garden with Eve and Adam, ie sin, they were removed and did not have access to the tree of life, therefor they died.

Cain offered a sacrifice that the Lord would not accept.

Cain Killed Able

1 John 3:4 [Full Chapter]
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

so you see the law was always present with the human race and will be the instrument that we are judged by

John 14:15
If ye love me, keep my commandments.

I’m wondering if you would be the right person to count on in vindicating the “little horn” in Daniel 8 is not Antiochus Epiphanies. Is there some oversensitivity concerning Galatians 3:17? I assure you I have firmly established in my mind Paul is speaking idiomatically about the codification of the law by the Mosaic covenant. Transgressions preceded the Mosaic covenant, verse 19, which means that God’s law predated Sinai. Joseph knew adultery was a sin in support, as well as many other texts.

You obviously did read the issue of compatibilism, which is observed in the book of Jonah. This in itself opposes any use of Jonah in support of conditional prophecy. Replacement theology cannot really be upheld in scripture, as the promises to Israel were based on the Abrahamic covenant, which was unconditional. The Mosaic covenant was merely the schoolmaster to teach them the need of Christ and cannot support that the prophecies and promises to Israel were conditional.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

claninja

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2017
5,647
2,189
indiana
✟298,136.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
First, you state that you agree that Acts 13:47 affirms that the “biological descendants” of Israel (Paul and Barnabas) are prophesied in Isaiah 49:6 to bring the light to the gentiles.

For the 2nd or 3rd time now, correct, I did agree that Paul quotes Isaiah 49:6 as fulfilled with himself and Barnabas bringing the gospel to the gentiles.

I used the KJV so there is no mistake; the Servant, Christ, is given as a light to the gentiles

For the 2nd or 3rd time now, Correct, Christ is the servant as a light to the gentiles referred to in Isaiah 49:6.

So how do we reconcile that Christ is the light to the nations fulfilling Isaiah 49:6 AND the body of Christ is light to the nations as stated by Paul in acts 13, thus fulfilling Isaiah 49:6?

The offspring is singular (Christ the head) and yet Plural (the body of Christ); they are spiritually one flesh

he is not given as a light to the descendants of Israel in Isaiah 49:6.

Maybe you can clarify as I don't want to make assumptions about your beliefs based on a possible misunderstanding: do you believe Jesus is not a light to the descendants of Israel at all or just in the in the context of Isaiah 49:6?

Acts 26:23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.



You agreed that Paul’s revelation made the elect descendants of Israel synonymous with the Servant/Christ, not the gentiles.

Partially correct, but also incorrect on "not the gentiles" as I do not agree with that. I believe Christ is synonymous with Israel. I believe his body (Jew, Ephraim, Gentile) are one with Christ, thus also being synonymous with Israel, Abraham's offspring.

galatians 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.


Initially the body of Christ was Jewish (from the time of Christ's ministry, death, resurrection and ascension until the first major persecution of the church in Jerusalem). Then as the Jews brought the gospel/light to the gentiles, believing gentiles were grafted into the body of Christ and received the spirit. This one new man, of Jew and gentile, a new creation under Christ, continued to be the light to the nations.

Now you're recanting.

Incorrect, I have not changed my belief. Confusion on your part does not amount to "recanting" on mine.

The light in Isaiah 49:6 is the revelation of God through Christ and Paul’s rendering reveals that God used Christ and the descendants of Israel to give the revelation of God through Christ to the gentiles

I have never not agreed with this. The Gospel was clearly brought to the gentiles by the Jews.

The Jews began to bring the gospel outside of Jerusalem when the Church in Jerusalem was persecuted.

Acts 8:1 And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.

Acts 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost

Additionally, the gentiles that were grafted in to Israel became FELLOW workers with Paul, a Jew, in bringing the light to the nations, thus substantiating my argument.

2 Corinthians 8:23 As for Titus, he is my partner and fellow worker for your benefit. And as for our brothers, they are messengers of the churches, the glory of Christ

Philemon 1:24 and so do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, my fellow workers.

God chose the descendants of Israel to minister the revelation of God through Christ to the gentiles, which is also affirmed in Zechariah 10:7-12, Isaiah 54:3 and Amos 9:11-12 and Jeremiah 31 to name a few.

I have never not agreed with this, we can affirm this by Acts 8-10. The Jews brought the gospel to the gentiles.

which is what your backpedaling attempts.

Confusion on your part does not amount to backpedaling on mine.

 
  • Like
Reactions: parousia70
Upvote 0

keras

Writer of studies on Bible prophecy
Feb 7, 2013
13,558
2,480
82
Thames, New Zealand
Visit site
✟290,689.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
I have never not agreed with this. The Gospel was clearly brought to the gentiles by the Jews.
Correct. Although Luke was not and the Apostles did achieve the task that Jesus came for; to save the lost House of Israel.
To deny that there is such a thing as the Lost Tribes, means you must ignore much scripture.
God does know who and where they are, Amos 9:8-9, and it is a simple matter to be able to identify the majority of them today: they are the Christians!
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Jerryhuerta
Upvote 0

Jerryhuerta

Historicist
Supporter
Jul 21, 2018
1,012
130
Tucson
Visit site
✟217,485.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
For the 2nd or 3rd time now, Correct, Christ is the servant as a light to the gentiles referred to in Isaiah 49:6.
So how do we reconcile that Christ is the light to the nations fulfilling Isaiah 49:6 AND the body of Christ is light to the nations as stated by Paul in acts 13, thus fulfilling Isaiah 49:6?.... Maybe you can clarify as I don't want to make assumptions about your beliefs based on a possible misunderstanding: do you believe Jesus is not a light to the descendants of Israel at all or just in the in the context of Isaiah 49:6?

You're continuing to backpedal, above, by altering Isaiah 49:6. The gentiles were not the body of Christ until the true Israel of God gave the revelation of God through Christ to them. The Jews were already the keepers of the service and covenants and promises of God and that is why Christ was sent to them, that through them the gentiles would also become fellow heirs of the promises. Isaiah 49:6 and Paul’s revelation in Acts 13:47 relate this specific order of the phenomenon of how the gentiles are brought into the body of Christ, and your warping that order in order to further your supersessionists presuppositions.

As I stated above, you did admit that Paul’s revelation made the elect descendants of Israel synonymous and with the Servant/Christ, but, again, you try and warp the specific order of the phenomenon of how the gentiles are brought into the body of Christ in Isaiah 49:6 by the exploitation of NT passages.

Partially correct, but also incorrect on "not the gentiles" as I do not agree with that. I believe Christ is synonymous with Israel. I believe his body (Jew, Ephraim, Gentile) are one with Christ, thus also being synonymous with Israel, Abraham's offspring.

galatians 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Initially the body of Christ was Jewish (from the time of Christ's ministry, death, resurrection and ascension until the first major persecution of the church in Jerusalem). Then as the Jews brought the gospel/light to the gentiles, believing gentiles were grafted into the body of Christ and received the spirit. This one new man, of Jew and gentile, a new creation under Christ, continued to be the light to the nations.

Galatians 3:29 does not surmount the “order” of how the gentiles were brought into the body of Christ. Your assertions are merely an attempt to confuse that order. The biological descendants of Jacob brought the light to the gentiles and that is what Isaiah 49:6 and Paul’s revelation in Acts 13:47 affirms. And as I stated in my prior post, this phenomenon was of a greater extent than supersessionism is willing to grasp or comprehend.

Zechariah 10:7-12, Isaiah 54:3 and Amos 9:11-12, Jeremiah 31:1-10, and Hosea 2:23, to name a few, substantiate that Ephraim/Israel faithfully took the revelation of God through Christ to the gentiles, while Judah fulfills the “nation” that abhors the Servant in Isaiah 49:7. This was actually supported by your testimony concerning Zechariah 10:8-9 when you admitted that Ephraim was gathered in Christ to proclaim the great commission, which set them at enmity with the Jews. Texts such as Isaiah 49 and Zechariah 10, Hosea 2, Jeremiah 31 and Amos 9 affirm two houses of Israel and without this proper comprehension there can be no proper rendering of NT texts such as 1 Peter 2:9-10, Romans 9:25-26 or Matthew 21:43.

The phenomenon of Isaiah 49:6 is multigenerational through Ephraim/Israel. It is Ephraim/Israel that becomes a company of nations through Christendom in this age (Genesis 49:1, 22-24). Your admission that Zechariah 10:8-9 refers to the other house of Ephraim, as opposed to Judah, and your initial admission concerning Acts 13:14 are actually an acknowledgment of THT, but your supersessionist presuppositions keep you backpedaling.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: keras
Upvote 0

claninja

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2017
5,647
2,189
indiana
✟298,136.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You're continuing to backpedal, above, by altering Isaiah 49:6. The gentiles were not the body of Christ until the true Israel of God gave the revelation of God through Christ to them. The Jews were already the keepers of the service and covenants and promises of God and that is why Christ was sent to them, that through them the gentiles would also become fellow heirs of the promises. Isaiah 49:6 and Paul’s revelation in Acts 13:47 relate this specific order of the phenomenon of how the gentiles are brought into the body of Christ, and your warping that order in order to further your supersessionists presuppositions.

As I stated above, you did admit that Paul’s revelation made the elect descendants of Israel synonymous and with the Servant/Christ, but, again, you try and warp the specific order of the phenomenon of how the gentiles are brought into the body of Christ in Isaiah 49:6 by the exploitation of NT passages.

Another strawman. I believe the gospel is to the Jew first, then gentile. I believe the body of Christ consisted of Jews until the gospel went to the gentiles, then the believing gentiles were grafted in.

Then the gentiles and jews, body of christ, began to bring the light to nations.

Galatians 3:29 does not surmount the “order” of how the gentiles were brought into the body of Christ. Your assertions are merely an attempt to confuse that order. The biological descendants of Jacob brought the light to the gentiles and that is what Isaiah 49:6 and Paul’s revelation in Acts 13:47 affirms. And as I stated in my prior post, this phenomenon was of a greater extent than supersessionism is willing to grasp or comprehend.

Never argued with the "order". As I have stated multiple times now, I believe the gospel went to the Jew first, then to the gentile. We can clearly see this in the book of acts, especially chapters 1-10.

This doesn't surmount that when the gentiles were grafted in they were also a light to the nations. Luke and Titus were gentiles who fellow workers with Paul in bringing the light to the nations.

Zechariah 10:7-12, Isaiah 54:3 and Amos 9:11-12, Jeremiah 31:1-10, and Hosea 2:23, to name a few, substantiate that Ephraim/Israel faithfully took the revelation of God through Christ to the gentiles,

I have no arguments with this, as I believe the Israel of God consists of Jew and Gentile bringing the light to the nations.

while Judah fulfills the “nation” that abhors the Servant in Isaiah 49:7.

I agree, with exception of the remnant of Judah who remained grafted onto the root.

This was actually supported by your testimony concerning Zechariah 10:8-9 when you admitted that Ephraim was gathered in Christ to proclaim the great commission, which set them at enmity with the Jews.

Correct. But I believe Ephraim is gathered when the gentiles are gathered. Thus when the gentiles and Jews were made into one new man under Christ, they brought the light to the nations.

Texts such as Isaiah 49 and Zechariah 10, Hosea 2, Jeremiah 31 and Amos 9 affirm two houses of Israel

Who said there weren't 2 houses?
 
Upvote 0

Jerryhuerta

Historicist
Supporter
Jul 21, 2018
1,012
130
Tucson
Visit site
✟217,485.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Another strawman. I believe the gospel is to the Jew first, then gentile. I believe the body of Christ consisted of Jews until the gospel went to the gentiles, then the believing gentiles were grafted in.

Then the gentiles and jews, body of christ, began to bring the light to nations.



Never argued with the "order". As I have stated multiple times now, I believe the gospel went to the Jew first, then to the gentile. We can clearly see this in the book of acts, especially chapters 1-10.

This doesn't surmount that when the gentiles were grafted in they were also a light to the nations. Luke and Titus were gentiles who fellow workers with Paul in bringing the light to the nations.



I have no arguments with this, as I believe the Israel of God consists of Jew and Gentile bringing the light to the nations.



I agree, with exception of the remnant of Judah who remained grafted onto the root.



Correct. But I believe Ephraim is gathered when the gentiles are gathered. Thus when the gentiles and Jews were made into one new man under Christ, they brought the light to the nations.



Who said there weren't 2 houses?

But the gentiles do not get sown in the world as Ephraim; as you admitted, they were redeemed to take up the great commission and then sown throughout the nations. This is conveyed in Isaiah 49 and, of course, the parable of the wheat and tares.

The children of your bereavement will yet say in your ears: 'The place is too narrow for me; make room for me to dwell in.' Then you will say in your heart: 'Who has borne me these? I was bereaved and barren, exiled and put away, but who has brought up these? Behold, I was left alone; from where have these come?'" Isaiah 49”20-21 ESV​

This is how they are used by God to be the light to the gentiles, which is what Isaiah 49:6, Hosea 2:23, Acts 13:47 and Jeremiah confirm about Ephraim and a remnant of Judah.

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast. And it shall come to pass, that like as I have watched over them, to pluck up, and to break down, and to throw down, and to destroy, and to afflict; so will I watch over them, to build, and to plant, saith the LORD… "Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah… Jeremiah 31:27-28, 31​

Nothing is said about God’s intervention with the gentiles to sow them as lights to the world as Ephraim and a remnant of Judah. They were already scattered when the tower of Babel was destroyed and ignorant of God. And this is the specific order that is maintained in Isaiah 49:6, which supersessionism continually suppresses by the misapplication of texts such as Galatian 3:29. Galatian 3:29 does not support that the gentiles were to be used by God as a light to the four corners of the world as the biological descendants of Abraham were.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: keras
Upvote 0

claninja

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2017
5,647
2,189
indiana
✟298,136.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
But the gentiles do not get sown in the world as Ephraim; as you admitted, they were redeemed to take up the great commission and then sown throughout the nations.

Ephraim was divorced by God and became "not my people". Ephraim became as gentiles. Thus by God redeeming the gentiles, he redeems Ephraim. So my belief is that by God gathering the gentiles, which most likely included descendants from Ephraim, into the body of Christ along with the remnant of Judah, and then sowing them into the world to bring the light to nations, he fulfills his promise to Ephraim.

This belief is substantiated by Paul who has Hosea fulfilled with the inclusion of the gentiles

Romans 9:24-25 including us, whom He has called not only from the Jews, but also from the Gentiles? As He says in Hosea: “I will call them ‘My People’ who are not My people, and I will call her ‘My Beloved’ who is not My beloved,”

This is how they are used by God to be the light to the gentiles, which is what Isaiah 49:6, Hosea 2:23, Acts 13:47 and Jeremiah confirm about Ephraim and a remnant of Judah.

And yet Paul doesn't differentiate between Ephraim and Gentile, like you do. He does however, differentiate between Jew and Gentile.

Nothing is said about God’s intervention with the gentiles to sow them as lights to the world as Ephraim and a remnant of Judah.

From a superficial reading of the OT, it would not be known that gentiles would become one with Christ and be fellow members of the Body

Ephesians 3:4-6 In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God’s holy apostles and prophets. This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are fellow heirs, fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus.

The NT substantiates that gentiles, who had been grafted in, were fellow workers in the body of Christ bringing the light to the nations.

2 Corinthians 8:23 As for Titus, he is my partner and fellow worker for your benefit. And as for our brothers, they are messengers of the churches, the glory of Christ

Philemon 1:24 and so do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, my fellow workers.

They were already scattered when the tower of Babel was destroyed and ignorant of God.

these gentiles were not a part of the body of Christ.

And this is the specific order that is maintained in Isaiah 49:6,

Isaiah 49:6 he says:“It is too light a thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to bring back the preserved of Israel; I will make you as a light for the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth.”

The order is to the Jew first and then the gentile. Which group does Ephraim belong to, Jew or Gentile?

Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek

3:29 does not support that the gentiles were to be used by God as a light to the four corners of the world as the biological descendants of Abraham were.

Galatians 3 supports that anyone in Christ, regardless of race, tribe, or nationality, is a light to the nations
 
Upvote 0

claninja

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2017
5,647
2,189
indiana
✟298,136.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

jgr

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟783,467.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The biological descendants of Jacob brought the light to the gentiles

These biological descendants?

John 8
39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.
 
Upvote 0

Jerryhuerta

Historicist
Supporter
Jul 21, 2018
1,012
130
Tucson
Visit site
✟217,485.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Ephraim was divorced by God and became "not my people". Ephraim became as gentiles. Thus by God redeeming the gentiles, he redeems Ephraim. So my belief is that by God gathering the gentiles, which most likely included descendants from Ephraim, into the body of Christ, and then sowing them into the world to bring the light to nations, he fulfills his promise to Ephraim.

This belief is substantiated by Paul who has Hosea fulfilled with the inclusion of the gentiles

But your belief must suppress, disregard or bury the evidence in the NT and historical accounts that affirms the Jew knew where the descendants of the northern tribes were dwelling for the most part in the first century (John 7:35, 11:52 and Flavius Josephus), which substantiates the exiled tribes still maintained their identity to a great degree. The greatest evidence is 1 Peter 1:1-2 that is addressed to the elect exiles of the dispersion.

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect exiles of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood: May grace and peace be multiplied to you. 1 Peter 1:1-2 ESV​

No amount of suppression, disregard or secreting can surmount that Peter is addressing the very people the Jews were speaking about in John 7:35 and 11:15 and that the Jewish historian Josephus wrote about: Ephraim. The evidence maintains that Ephraim engaged in some intermarriage with gentiles but had still remained clannish or tribal, as characteristic of ancient times. Your perception is an anachronism; you are thinking in modern terms when people think little of tribal or clannish ties, but in ancient times these boundaries were rigidly held. Case in point, the ancient tribal Visigoths migrated for almost 200 years from the Steeps of Russia through the Italian boot and ended up in ancient Spain, maintaining their tribal identity throughout. Again, your perception of Ephraim is an anachronism, anthropologically as well as scripturally.

Furthermore, we have the element of the foreknowledge of God as to their sanctification that diminishes your beliefs, which is further substantiated in verses 10-12

Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look. 1 Peter 1:10-12​

There is no historical or grammatical support that the prophets would be inquiring about the future time of the salvation of the gentiles, when their principal concern was the salvation of the descendants of Jacob, the elect exiles of the dispersion, promised before they were born in Deuteronomy 30:1-10. As you commented, Ephesians 3:4-6 maintains the prophets knew nothing about the gentiles becoming fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in their Messiah, so why would they be inquiring about their salvation above the salvation of their own people except in the anachronistic and anthropologically bereft perception of supersessionism, in which you falter.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: keras
Upvote 0

Jerryhuerta

Historicist
Supporter
Jul 21, 2018
1,012
130
Tucson
Visit site
✟217,485.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
These biological descendants?

John 8
39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.

No these.

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect exiles of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood: May grace and peace be multiplied to you. 1 Peter 1:1-2 ESV​
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,587
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,240.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Now all you need to do is to find that straw man a dispy who believes that there are more than one way of salvation..
That will be fun too.. :)
:)

Dispensationalism

"Replacement Theology" is a Strawman Argument

GratiaCorpusChristi said:
I often hear the term "replacement theology" thrown about whenever dispensationalists (and dispensational messianics) want to demonize covenant theology.

But the term simply doesn't make sense.

"Replacement theology" assumes, it is said, that the church replaced Israel. Show me anyone who actually believes this. Covenant theologians don't because covenant theologians see continuity between the people of God.
To assume that covenant theologians think that the church placed Israel, you have to assume a radical discontinuity between Israel and the church- that is, you assign dispensationalist assumptions upon a group of Christians who make no assumptions.

But covenant theologians don't make that assumption.

Covenant theologians see one people of God throughout all of human history. The church, in covenant theology, cannot replace Israel because there is no difference between believers in ethnic Israel and believers in the church.
===========================
strawman scarecrow.jpg
 
  • Winner
Reactions: jgr
Upvote 0

jgr

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟783,467.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
No these.

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect exiles of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood: May grace and peace be multiplied to you. 1 Peter 1:1-2 ESV​

Yes; elect, faithful, obedient Jew and Gentile saints in Christ, of the specified churches in Asia Minor experiencing persecution.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

claninja

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2017
5,647
2,189
indiana
✟298,136.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
But your belief must suppress, disregard or bury the evidence in the NT and historical accounts that affirms the Jew knew where the descendants of the northern tribes were dwelling for the most part in the first century (John 7:35, 11:52 and Flavius Josephus), which substantiates the exiled tribes still maintained their identity to a great degree.

You are missing the entire point.

Their "tribal identity" was useless if God divorced them. Many of the northern tribes became as gentiles. They were divorced by God and became "not my people".

Hosea 1:6 Gomer again conceived and gave birth to a daughter, and the LORD said to Hosea, “Name her Lo-ruhamah, for I will no longer have compassion on the house of Israel, that I should ever forgive them

Hosea 1:8 After she had weaned Lo-ruhamah, Gomer conceived and gave birth to a son. 9And the LORD said, “Name him Lo-ammi, for you are not My people, and I am not your God

Jeremiah 3:8 Because faithless Israel had committed adultery, I gave her a certificate of divorce and sent her away.

The greatest evidence is 1 Peter 1:1-2 that is addressed to the elect exiles of the dispersion.

I would say James is greater evidence, as Peter doesn't specifically mention the northern tribes but simply the "elect exiles of the dispersion".

James 1:1 James, a servanta of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes in the Dispersion:

No amount of suppression, disregard or secreting can surmount that Peter is addressing the very people the Jews were speaking about in John 7:35

John 7:35 doesn't specifically mention the 10 northern tribes. It only mentions "those in the dispersion". Were the Pharisees referring to Jews in the dispersion or "not my people" in the dispersion? I would argue the Jews in the dispersion.

and 11:15

I think you meant John 11:51-52.

But in regards to that, the words come from the inspired John. As no specific tribes are mentioned, but only the "scattered children of God", this is not objective evidence to support your opinion. From the NT we know the "children of God" are anyone regardless of race, tribe, or nationality who are in Christ

Romans 8:16-17 The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children. And if we are children, then we are heirs: heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ—if indeed we suffer with Him, so that we may also be glorified with Him.

Jewish historian Josephus wrote about: Ephraim.

Can Josephus' work be backed up by other historians during that time. Do any other historians mention Ephraim on the other side of the Euphrates?

The evidence maintains that Ephraim engaged in some intermarriage with gentiles but had still remained clannish or tribal, as characteristic of ancient times. Your perception is an anachronism; you are thinking in modern terms when people think little of tribal or clannish ties, but in ancient times these boundaries were rigidly held. Case in point, the ancient tribal Visigoths migrated for almost 200 years from the Steeps of Russia through the Italian boot and ended up in ancient Spain, maintaining their tribal identity throughout. Again, your perception of Ephraim is an anachronism, anthropologically as well as scripturally.

You still appear to have some confusion in regards to my argument. Whether the tribes existed over a period of 700 years or intermingled with other nations for 700 years, from the (Assyrian exile to Christ's 1st advent) makes no difference. The 10 northern tribes were divorced by God and became "not my people", thus they became as gentiles.

Hosea 1:8 After she had weaned Lo-ruhamah, Gomer conceived and gave birth to a son. 9And the LORD said, “Name him Lo-ammi, for you are not My people, and I am not your God

Jeremiah 3:8 Because faithless Israel had committed adultery, I gave her a certificate of divorce and sent her away.

Furthermore, we have the element of the foreknowledge of God as to their sanctification that diminishes your beliefs, which is further substantiated in verses 10-12

Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look. 1 Peter 1:10-12

This actually supports my belief. Through Christ, under the new covenant, the 12 tribes would be united. This is confirmed by James calling the 12 tribes in the dispersion "brothers".

James 1:1-2 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes in the Dispersion: Greetings. Consider it pure joy, my brothers, when you encounter trials of many kinds

Additionally, Paul quotes Hosea (Israel joining Judah to be a people again) as fulfilled with the inclusion of the gentiles, thus substantiating my belief.

Romans 9:24-25 including us, whom He has called not only from the Jews, but also from the Gentiles? As He says in Hosea: “I will call them ‘My People’ who are not My people, and I will call her ‘My Beloved’ who is not My beloved,”

Remember, Ephraim became "not my people" thus they were as gentiles. by God including the faithful and obedient gentiles in the body of Christ, of whom some were most likely descendants from Ephraim, He fulfills his promise to Ephraim.

There is no historical or grammatical support that the prophets would be inquiring about the future time of the salvation of the gentiles, when their principal concern was the salvation of the descendants of Jacob, the elect exiles of the dispersion, promised before they were born in Deuteronomy 30:1-10. As you commented, Ephesians 3:4-6 maintains the prophets knew nothing about the gentiles becoming fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in their Messiah, so why would they be inquiring about their salvation above the salvation of their own people except in the anachronistic and anthropologically bereft perception of supersessionism, in which you falter.

This argument makes it appear as if you believe the salvation of the gentiles is not mentioned in the OT prophets, but was added later by the NT apostles and prophets.

My belief is that the gentiles being fellow heirs was always in the OT scripture, but it just wasn't seen or understood properly until the Spirit gave understanding.
 
Upvote 0

keras

Writer of studies on Bible prophecy
Feb 7, 2013
13,558
2,480
82
Thames, New Zealand
Visit site
✟290,689.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Their "tribal identity" was useless if God divorced them. Many of the northern tribes became as gentiles. They were divorced by God and became "not my people".
All the ten Northern tribes became as gentiles and were not My people. But Ezekiel 4:4-5 is crystal clear; their exile was to be for a decreed time. Then as Romans 9:24-26 states they will become again; My people.
John 7:35 doesn't specifically mention the 10 northern tribes. It only mentions "those in the dispersion". Were the Pharisees referring to Jews in the dispersion or "not my people" in the dispersion? I would argue the Jews in the dispersion.
There were and still are, those of Judah and Benjamin still in dispersion as well as the other 10 tribes. John, Peter and James, all referred to the entire twelve.
Can Josephus' work be backed up by other historians during that time. Do any other historians mention Ephraim on the other side of the Euphrates?
There is ample historical evidence of the founding tribes of several nations. The records of the English royal line goes back to Brutus, an Ephraimite. Also the Declaration of Arbroath, confirms the Scottish Israelite ancestry. Most is in a verbally kept form, now referred to as myths and legends. This in no way means they have no basis in fact.
There is also the archaeological evidence of the hundreds of dolmens, [waymarks, Jeremiah 31:21] and grave markers scattered across Europe.
Plus the heraldic symbols pertaining to each country, all have their origin in a Israelite tribe.
Remember, Ephraim became "not my people" thus they were as gentiles. by God including the faithful and obedient gentiles in the body of Christ, of whom some were most likely descendants from Ephraim, He fulfills his promise to Ephraim.
Right, but it was the Western nations who originally embraced Christianity and who remain the majority of the obedient Gentiles. God's amazing Plan worked; no surprise there, and the ten tribes are the Christian peoples, while the Jews remain in apostasy.
My belief is that the gentiles being fellow heirs was always in the OT scripture, but it just wasn't seen or understood properly until the Spirit gave understanding.
It was always possible for aliens to join with Israel. Many faithful people will accept the Gospel of Christ and become God's true Israelites; the Overcomers for Him. But the majority will be actual descendants of the 2 tribes, in order for God to fulfil His promises to the Patriarchs.
You are missing the entire point.
Your opposition of the Bible truths, like Amos 9:8-9, about God's Plan for His people, is the point: God does not want His Plan generally known. He wants His people as a seed in the world, bearing the proper fruit of the Spirit' just as we Christians do. The Jewish people, or better identified as; Those who call themselves Jews, are the visible entity of Israel, but they face virtual annihilation for their sins at the forthcoming Day of the Lord's fiery wrath. Ezekiel 20:45-48 & 21:1-7, Isaiah 22:14
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Jerryhuerta
Upvote 0

Jerryhuerta

Historicist
Supporter
Jul 21, 2018
1,012
130
Tucson
Visit site
✟217,485.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You are missing the entire point.

Their "tribal identity" was useless if God divorced them. Many of the northern tribes became as gentiles. They were divorced by God and became "not my people".

Hosea 1:6 Gomer again conceived and gave birth to a daughter, and the LORD said to Hosea, “Name her Lo-ruhamah, for I will no longer have compassion on the house of Israel, that I should ever forgive them

Hosea 1:8 After she had weaned Lo-ruhamah, Gomer conceived and gave birth to a son. 9And the LORD said, “Name him Lo-ammi, for you are not My people, and I am not your God

Jeremiah 3:8 Because faithless Israel had committed adultery, I gave her a certificate of divorce and sent her away.

In all cases, God forgives Ephraim. You need to read the texts further. And you’re sidestepping what Isaiah 11:13 states. When Christ strikes the earth with the rod of his mouth to kill the wicked (Isaiah 11:4), which is the second advent, the enmity between Ephraim and Judah will cease. This is also affirmed in Ezekiel 37:19 and Hosea 1:10. Out of the mouth of two or three witnesses! God declares the 10 northern tribes as a nation and people at the second advent! This and other evidence expose supersessionism as fallacious.

I would say James is greater evidence, as Peter doesn't specifically mention the northern tribes but simply the "elect exiles of the dispersion".

James 1:1 James, a servanta of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes in the Dispersion:

Already answered. Isaiah 36:1 reveals that Sennacherib took cities from Judah captive. There were refugees from Judah that went with the 10 tribes into captivity. Besides, you already conceded that Ephraim was redeemed and gathered in Christ to proclaimed the great commission (Zechariah 10:8-9), which is an acknowledgment 1 Peter 1:1 and 2:9-10 pertains to Ephraim.

John 7:35 doesn't specifically mention the 10 northern tribes. It only mentions "those in the dispersion". Were the Pharisees referring to Jews in the dispersion or "not my people" in the dispersion? I would argue the Jews in the dispersion.

You already conceded that Ephraim was redeemed and gathered in Christ to proclaim the great commission (Zechariah 10:8-9), which is a concession that 1 Peter 1:1 and 2:9-10 pertain to Ephraim.

I think you meant John 11:51-52.

But in regards to that, the words come from the inspired John. As no specific tribes are mentioned, but only the "scattered children of God", this is not objective evidence to support your opinion. From the NT we know the "children of God" are anyone regardless of race, tribe, or nationality who are in Christ

Romans 8:16-17 The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children. And if we are children, then we are heirs: heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ—if indeed we suffer with Him, so that we may also be glorified with Him.

Really, are you going so far as to state Caiaphas held that the “scattered children of God” represented anyone, regardless of race, tribe, or nationality? Are you trying to be humorous? Here’s a clue, the Jews came back from the Babylonian captivity to their own country, the 10 tribes never came back to Samaria, which was their country. The southern kingdom was restored, the northern one was not. The latter truth means the people of the northern nation are the exiles of the dispersion the NT is speaking about. That is why they are called the lost tribes, even though Isaiah 11:13, Ezekiel 37:19 and Hosea 1:10 substantiate God knows where they are! Besides, you already conceded that Ephraim was redeemed and gathered in Christ to proclaimed the great commission (Zechariah 10:8-9), and you also acknowledged the married woman in Isaiah 54:1 represents Judah, that was the Jerusalem that was in bondage in Galatian 4. Your concessions actually back THT, your backpedal notwithstanding.


Can Josephus' work be backed up by other historians during that time. Do any other historians mention Ephraim on the other side of the Euphrates?

Josephus was there; you were not. Your beliefs are an anachronism, anthropologically as well as scripturally.

This actually supports my belief. Through Christ, under the new covenant, the 12 tribes would be united. This is confirmed by James calling the 12 tribes in the dispersion "brothers".

James 1:1-2 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes in the Dispersion: Greetings. Consider it pure joy, my brothers, when you encounter trials of many kinds

Additionally, Paul quotes Hosea (Israel joining Judah to be a people again) as fulfilled with the inclusion of the gentiles, thus substantiating my belief.

Romans 9:24-25 including us, whom He has called not only from the Jews, but also from the Gentiles? As He says in Hosea: “I will call them ‘My People’ who are not My people, and I will call her ‘My Beloved’ who is not My beloved,”

Remember, Ephraim became "not my people" thus they were as gentiles. by God including the faithful and obedient gentiles in the body of Christ, of whom some were most likely descendants from Ephraim, He fulfills his promise to Ephraim.

What confusion and failure in light of my conclusion that followed.

This argument makes it appear as if you believe the salvation of the gentiles is not mentioned in the OT prophets, but was added later by the NT apostles and prophets.

My belief is that the gentiles being fellow heirs was always in the OT scripture, but it just wasn't seen or understood properly until the Spirit gave understanding.

In 1 Peter 1:10-12, Peter relates the prophets were inquiring about the salvation of the elect exiles of the dispersion. The gentiles were not dispersed or exiled, while Ephraim and Judah were. Language is not plastic, as you like to assert. Judah’s land was restored and they returned; Ephraim’s land was never restored and they never returned, which is why they are the exiles of the dispersion and Peter is addressing the elect of that body and stating the prophets were inquiring of their salvation. You avoided the part that Ephesians 3:4-6 affirms the prophets knew nothing about the gentiles becoming fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in their Messiah, so they couldn’t have been inquiring about their salvation, period. Your interpretations are anachronistic, both anthropologically and scripturally.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Jerryhuerta

Historicist
Supporter
Jul 21, 2018
1,012
130
Tucson
Visit site
✟217,485.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes; elect, faithful, obedient Jew and Gentile saints in Christ, of the specified churches in Asia Minor experiencing persecution.
In 1 Peter 1:10-12, Peter relates the prophets were inquiring about the salvation of the elect exiles of the dispersion. The gentiles were not dispersed or exiled, while Ephraim and Judah were. Language is not plastic, as you like to assert. Judah’s land was restored and they returned; Ephraim’s land was never restored and they never returned, which is why they are the exiles of the dispersion and Peter is addressing the elect of that body and stating the prophets were inquiring of their salvation. You avoided the part that Ephesians 3:4-6 affirms the prophets knew nothing about the gentiles becoming fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in their Messiah, so they couldn’t have been inquiring about their salvation, period. Your interpretations are anachronistic, both anthropologically and scripturally.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

jgr

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟783,467.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The gentiles were not dispersed or exiled

Demonstrably false.

1 Peter
1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

Paul wrote Galatians before Peter wrote his epistles.

Galatians 3
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.

There were certainly Gentiles in the Galatian Church when Paul wrote to it.

That church was the lair of the notorious judaizers. Whom do you think that the judaizers were judaizing?

Hint: It wasn't Jews.

The churches in Asia included Ephesus.

Ephesians 3
1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,

Furthermore, Paul declared in two of his epistles, which were written before those of Peter, that the gospel had already reached the known world of that day (Romans 1:8; Romans 16:25,26; Colossians 1:5,6,23). That world included the dispersion, which included Gentiles.

Your interpretations are anachronistic, both anthropologically and scripturally.

Your interpretations are racialized cultic modernism's apostasy from the faith of which Jude spoke:

Jude 3 (NASB)
Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.