Is God out to get us?

[Guojing]

Wouldn't Jesus be grieved over anyone who hasn't yet accepted his salvation, whether Jew or Gentile?

Well, in the sheep and goat judgement (Matthew 25:31-46), he is going to tell many gentiles to go to the lake of fire.

Do you think he would be grieved when he does that?

 

[Andrewn]

Ok here is your post and my comments....(my understanding)

Thank you for taking the time to explain.

Any and all Jews who are faithful from the very beginning to the time Jesus Christ of Nazareth proclaimed " it is finished" are considered the remnant. The remnant carried the seed of the Messiah among them. They were the faithful. The rest were branches broken off making room for the faithful Gentile. This is the " mystery" spoken of by Paul that Jew and Gentile become one Body.

I see it slightly differently but I don't have a major problem with this picture.

Blindness was given to the unbelieving Jew so that the fullness of the Gentiles can be grafted into the Olive Tree. This takes place up until the Temple is destroyed in 70AD.

Was the "fullness" of the Gentiles grafted into the Olive Tree before 70 AD? There are a lot of Gentiles who do not believe.

This takes place up until the Temple is destroyed in 70AD. After that, the blindness is lifted. This was a temporary measure in order to release the Gospel. In other words, keeping Temple Judaism seperate from the Gospel was necessary in order for the Gentiles to come into the fold known as The Body of Christ. This is the " mystery".

Was the "blindness" lifted from the Jews after 70 AD? There are a lot of Jews who do not believe.

This is Dispensational theology with an emphasis in Zionism.

Neither you nor I believe in Dispensationalism. This is good.

Paul often speaks hyperbolic especially in this case, . . . Paul again is being hyperbolic.

I guess this is the only logical way to interpret the verses if one rejects UR. There is no doubt that they are difficult verses and I heard debates between scholars who are experts on Romans and they confess that Rom 11 is difficult to take literally.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

I suppose many would say, "Yes, God is out to get us."
But what do they mean by "get us"?

Do they mean that God is watching for any slip up, so that he might punish us?
Or is God looking out for our best interest, that he might have us as his own?
Thus pursuing a positive relationship with his creation.

Many would combine these two aspects and claim a balanced view of "God's love and justice". The idea that he wants to have a positive relationship with us, but since we are "completely unworthy", he has no choice but to punish us. Thus blaming the victim for divine alienation and punishment. As if we should be accountable for the way in which he created us. Plan B treatment, since we messed up his plan A. Didn't see that one coming. Now what?

No, I don't believe God's original plan has been derailed by humankind, which he created in his own image. On the contrary. The intent is that all things will be restored. This story ends well.

Romans 8:20-21
For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.

Only on Mondays

 

[Ceallaigh]

Well, in the sheep and goat judgement (Matthew 25:31-46), he is going to tell many gentiles to go to the lake of fire.

Do you think he would be grieved when he does that?

Obviously yes. Are you trying make a point?

 

[Andrewn]

And a lot of these same words are also translated simply as "the grave," adding to the confusion in English.

Yes, I neglected to mention this. I also neglected to mention the expression "spirit prison" in 1Pe 3:19 and "the abyss" in Rev 9:11 and "apoleia" in Rev 17:8. Should I go back and edit my post .

hades and sheol are the Greek/Hebrew terms for something akin to a temporary abode of the dead before judgment.

Yes, this is what I used to think, also. I know that Sheol is translated into Hades in the LXX. But Hades, in Greek and later Jewish mythology (e.g. Book of Enoch) has 3 sections. This is also expressed in the NT (broadly speaking, with modifications). Was Sheol believed to have 3 sections? Probably not, and this is why it is frequently translated "the grave."

conceptually Gehenna, Tartarus, LOF, outer darkness, and Abaddon are joined as metaphors for a single concept which is where the wicked go after judgment

I think it is more complicated than that.

Tartarus is one section of Hades and is described in Jud and 2Pe as darkness and gloom. So, it could be the same as the Outer Darkness. Being a part of Hades, it is to be thrown into the LOF after the resurrection.

OTOH, the LOF is mentioned only in Revelation as a state after the resurrection.

St Thomas Aquinas identified Tartarus with Gehenna and was followed by almost all of Western Christianity.

In Eastern Christianity Gehenna is believed to be a state after the resurrection and is identified with the LOF based on:

Mat 10:28 Do not fear those who kill the body but are not able to kill the soul; rather, fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.

Abaddon, in the OT, seems to be parallel to Sheol. But, in later use of the word, it could be more akin to the Outer Darkness.

The issue is even further complicated with the concept of a purgatory for believers in Catholicism.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Thank you for taking the time to explain.


I see it slightly differently but I don't have a major problem with this picture.


Was the "fullness" of the Gentiles grafted into the Olive Tree before 70 AD? There are a lot of Gentiles who do not believe.


Was the "blindness" lifted from the Jews after 70 AD? There are a lot of Jews who do not believe.


Neither you nor I believe in Dispensationalism. This is good.


I guess this is the only logical way to interpret the verses if one rejects UR. There is no doubt that they are difficult verses and I heard debates between scholars who are experts on Romans and they confess that Rom 11 is difficult to take literally.

I belive the blindness, also stated in scripture, was a short period of time so that the Gospel could be "rooted" . It was nearly 40 years. Also, it was "partial" blindness (not to be confused with the fullness of the Gentiles). The Gospel was open to all in the first century as it is open to all today. Everyone has a choice to believe or not.
It is important to note that Paul is most likely using hyperbolic language or descriptors to get his point across. Paul is often misunderstood or taken literally leading us sometimes thinking something is prescriptive when in fact it is descriptive.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Thank you for taking the time to explain.


I see it slightly differently but I don't have a major problem with this picture.


Was the "fullness" of the Gentiles grafted into the Olive Tree before 70 AD? There are a lot of Gentiles who do not believe.


Was the "blindness" lifted from the Jews after 70 AD? There are a lot of Jews who do not believe.


Neither you nor I believe in Dispensationalism. This is good.


I guess this is the only logical way to interpret the verses if one rejects UR. There is no doubt that they are difficult verses and I heard debates between scholars who are experts on Romans and they confess that Rom 11 is difficult to take literally.

Cont.one more thing..
I put myself in Paul's shoes for a moment to try and understand his type of teaching. Afterall Peter did say Paul was sometimes difficult to understand.
As the Apostle appointed to the Gentiles, I am very sure he had to maneuver many concerns by Gentiles who questioned why most Jews rejected their Messiah, Jesus Christ of Nazareth. The "partial blindness" answer is a great way to make them understand even if ultimately their stubbornness was really the reason.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Eventual complete reconciliation.

Thank you for clarifying. Since I am not a proponent of UR I can not give a comment to your question of "complete reconciliation " as it appears no where in scripture. What I can quote is what it does say:
Daniel 12
1“At that time Michael shall stand up,
The great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people;
And there shall be a time of trouble,
Such as never was since there was a nation,
Even to that time.
And at that time your people shall be delivered,
Every one who is found written in the book.
2And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake,
Some to everlasting life,
Some to shame and everlasting [a]contempt.
3Those who are wise shall shine
Like the brightness of the firmament,
And those who turn many to righteousness
Like the stars forever and ever.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Thank you for clarifying. Since I am not a proponent of UR I can not give a comment to your question of "complete reconciliation " as it appears no where in scripture. What I can quote is what it does say:
Daniel 12
1“At that time Michael shall stand up,
The great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people;
And there shall be a time of trouble,
Such as never was since there was a nation,
Even to that time.
And at that time your people shall be delivered,
Every one who is found written in the book.
2And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake,
Some to everlasting life,
Some to shame and everlasting [a]contempt.
3Those who are wise shall shine
Like the brightness of the firmament,
And those who turn many to righteousness
Like the stars forever and ever.

I was responding to your reply to Steve based on the UR perspective. As to Daniel 12, the keyword is "everlasting" in verse 2, which is a translation of "olam" which means long duration, antiquity, futurity according to Strong's. It gets pointed out a lot that olam is also used in Jonah 2:6; To the roots of the mountains I sank down; the earth beneath barred me in forever [olam]. But you, LORD my God, brought my life up from the pit. We know of course that Jonah was in the whale for 3 days, rather than forever.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

I was responding to your reply to Steve based on the UR perspective. As to Daniel 12, the keyword is "everlasting" in verse 2, which is a translation of "olam" which means long duration, antiquity, futurity according to Strong's. It gets pointed out a lot that olam is also used in Jonah 2:6; To the roots of the mountains I sank down; the earth beneath barred me in forever [olam]. But you, LORD my God, brought my life up from the pit. We know of course that Jonah was in the whale for 3 days, rather than forever.

Well since the word "everlasting " is used for both life and contempt , I'll take it as forever.
And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, Some to everlasting life, Some to shame and everlasting contempt.

 

[Clare73]

Ok here is your post and my comments....(my understanding)
Re Rom 11:
The remnant that believed in Christ in the 1st century or the remnant that believed throughout the ages?

Any and all Jews who are faithful from the very beginning to the time Jesus Christ of Nazareth proclaimed " it is finished" are considered the remnant. The remnant carried the seed of the Messiah among them. They were the faithful. The rest were branches broken off making room for the faithful Gentile. This is the " mystery" spoken of by Paul that Jew and Gentile become one Body.

It looks like the Apostle Paul is talking about their fullness / totality / pleroma. Is this the fulness of their remnant

Blindness was given to the unbelieving Jew so that the fullness of the Gentiles can be grafted into the Olive Tree.

But do not only a remnant believe to this day?
How can the remnant have ended at the cross?
The Jews still persist in unbelief, do they not?

Paul's presentation of the rejection of the Jews is a justification of God's doing so, not a statement of its temporariness.
First of all, they were blinded because they shut their eyes and would not see, so in just judgment God blinded them so they could not see (11:7), a judgment that remains with them to this day.
Secondly, their rejection made it possible for the Gentiles to come in, because had the Jews received the gospel it would not have been taken to the Gentiles. The Jews refused the offer so the offer was made to the Gentiles (Luke 14:20-24).
Their rejection of the gospel hastened the gospel to the Gentile world (11:12) and the reconciliation of the world to himself (11:15).
Thirdly, their rejection is not final at this time, if they do not persist in unbelief (11:23) which to this day they do, right?

Yes, only a remnant of Jews believed in Israel. . .which is the pattern of all mankind.
For since the cross, when Jew and Gentile are without difference in Christ, still only a remnant of both Jews and Gentiles believe.
It seems that only a remnant of all mankind will be saved, of which the Jewish remnant was a pattern.

This takes place up until the Temple is destroyed in 70AD. After that, the blindness is lifted. This was a temporary measure in order to release the Gospel. In other words, keeping Temple Judaism seperate from the Gospel was necessary in order for the Gentiles to come into the fold known as The Body of Christ. This is the " mystery".
What does their acceptance mean? Acceptance of the remnant?
They will also receive mercy? Who are "they" the remnant?
The remnant are the " first fruits" into the "Body of Christ". The Apostles are first fruits and the foundation .
It looks like he is talking about a future hope, no? If this hope is about a future generation, why would it be relevant to talk about to Jewish believers living in 1st century Rome?
This is Dispensational theology with an emphasis in Zionism. The blindness ended with the destruction of the temple. Now all have the opportunity to know Jesus Christ of Nazareth the Messiah.
12 If their trespass means riches for the world, and their impoverishment means riches for the nations, how much more will their fullness mean!
Paul often speaks hyperbolic especially in this case, to Gentiles, who may have had an attitude about the unbelieving Jew. He is simply stating that the Gospel came to the Jew first making them the first fruits. Additionally, it would have been very difficult for some to accept the "mystery" of the Gentile fold so the blindness was necessary.
15 If their casting away, you see, means reconciliation for the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead?
Paul again is being hyperbolic. God never cast away His chosen people, they always cast Him away. If they choose to believe then they will be reinserted into the Olive Tree.
30 For just as you were once disobedient to God, but now have received mercy through their disobedience, 31 so they have now disbelieved as well, in order that, through the mercy which has come your way, they too may now receive mercy. 32 For God has shut up all people in disobedience, so that he may have mercy upon all.
This confirms the temporary blindness.

 

[Fervent]

Yes, this is what I used to think, also. I know that Sheol is translated into Hades in the LXX. But Hades, in Greek and later Jewish mythology (e.g. Book of Enoch) has 3 sections. This is also expressed in the NT (broadly speaking, with modifications). Was Sheol believed to have 3 sections? Probably not, and this is why it is frequently translated "the grave."

I'm not sure the Greek mythology is all that applicable to the term, as it was likely a case of a well understood term being convenient to express a concept that was similar enough to be understood in context. As far as I am aware there wasn't a whole lot of attention paid to Sheol in Jewish view as most of their theology was centered around this life rather than focusing on what is to come after, and where what is to come was focused on it was eschatology rather than intermediates that got the attention.

The issue is even further complicated with the concept of a purgatory for believers in Catholicism.

Yes, though that's the case with a lot of scholastic theology.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

good night

 

[Ceallaigh]

Well since the word "everlasting " is used for both life and contempt , I'll take it as forever.
And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, Some to everlasting life, Some to shame and everlasting contempt.

I wonder though how contempt is the opposite of life?

 

[Saint Steven]

The Gospel was open to all in the first century as it is open to all today. Everyone has a choice to believe or not.

That's not possible. Billions have never heard.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I wonder though how contempt is the opposite of life?

Aw, c'mon... lol

 

[Ceallaigh]

Aw, c'mon... lol

Is that the best explanation you can come up with?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Is that the best explanation you can come up with?

What? You were serious?? I was guessing she had spell-correct kick in and didn't notice.

That's not possible. Billions have never heard.

Romans 1, no?

 

[Ceallaigh]

What? You were serious?? I was guessing she had spell-correct kick in and didn't notice.

Yes, I'm serious. How is "contempt" an antonym of "life"? At face value it doesn't seem to make much sense.

 

[Saint Steven]

Romans 1, no?

That's the standard answer which doesn't hold water. IMHO
Where is the gospel message in creation?
Since when does acknowledgement of a creator equal salvation?

Saint Steven said: ↑
That's not possible. Billions have never heard.