God makes no distinction between Jew and greek, why do so many scholars like to ?

[ralliann]

Which did not exist During Moses time

Right, neither did Moses covenant exist prior to his time either.
De 5:2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.
De 5:3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

 

[Guojing]

Right, neither did Moses covenant exist prior to his time either.
De 5:2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.
De 5:3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

So the question was whether God made a distinction between Jews and gentiles at the time of Moses.

If you don't want to answer, I am fine. Just don't change the question.

 

[ralliann]

So the question was whether God made a distinction between Jews and gentiles at the time of Moses.

If you don't want to answer, I am fine. Just don't change the question.

It does not matter concerning the Christian faith. the carnal (fleshly) commands are disanulled.

 

[Guojing]

It does not matter concerning the Christian faith. the carnal (fleshly) commands are disanulled.

Many things we discussed in this forum don't matter to the Christian faith, you don't have to participate.

 

[DaveM]

So the question was whether God made a distinction between Jews and gentiles at the time of Moses.

If you don't want to answer, I am fine. Just don't change the question.

in what way would he make a distinction, I am of curse assuming you think he did

. Did he not punish them for sin, as he does with all people? the only distinction we should focus on, the only two people groups in the bible are sinners who do not repent or seek God, sinners that repent and seek God,,,,,, those are the only two people groups and the only thing that has mattered since the beginning of time.


He has used many different ethnic groups for many different tasks but it all boils down to sin and how we handle it

 

[Guojing]

in what way would he make a distinction, I am of curse assuming you think he did

. Did he not punish them for sin, as he does with all people? the only distinction we should focus on, the only two people groups in the bible are sinners who do not repent or seek God, sinners that repent and seek God,,,,,, those are the only two people groups and the only thing that has mattered since the beginning of time.


He has used many different ethnic groups for many different tasks but it all boils down to sin and how we handle it

Ephesians 2:11-12 have the distinction that will answer your question.

 

[ralliann]

Ephesians 2:11-12 have the distinction that will answer your question.

Ephesians is about the priesthood.
Both.....
14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: {thereby: or, in himself }
17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.

Fellows with the priests. The holy (anointed) of Gods house. Lev. 25:23, 1 Chr. 29:15
19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

 

[Guojing]

Ephesians is about the priesthood.
Both.....
14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: {thereby: or, in himself }
17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.

Fellows with the priests. The holy (anointed) of Gods house. Lev. 25:23, 1 Chr. 29:15
19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

I notice your consistent inability to consider different time periods when you read scripture, is it on purpose?

At least address what those 2 verses are saying, in time past, first, before you go on to vs 13 onwards, but now

I hope you know which time period, time past, is referring to.

 

[ralliann]

I notice your consistent inability to consider different time periods when you read scripture, is it on purpose?

II just gave you scripture concerning times past, in a manner that Ephesians speaks. It is not just speaking of the uncircumcision in Ephesians. The difference here seems to be, the consistent dismissal of the priesthood and their lawful role under the mosaic covenant.

At least address what those 2 verses are saying, in time past, first, before you go on to vs 13 onwards, but now

I did, perhaps you did not understand it. The high priest is the holy one of Israel, anointed one (christ). Circumcision is how citizenship was attained. Upon circumcision was given tribal identity. All twelve tribes were written and represented on both the shoulders and the breastplate of the high priest. No uncircumcision were named there.

I hope you know which time period, time past, is referring to.

It is speaking of the time period of the Levitical priesthood as representative agents in Gods household, which only the son's of Aaron were allowed. Even (though nearer) Jew's were strangers there. It is not just speaking about Gentiles (far off). Ephesians speaks in similar fashion as does Hebrews.
Not even Jesus Christ himself could be a priest in times past.
Heb 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

 

[Guojing]

I did, perhaps you did not understand it. The high priest is the holy one of Israel, anointed one (christ). Circumcision is how citizenship was attained. Upon circumcision was given tribal identity. All twelve tribes were written and represented on both the shoulders and the breastplate of the high priest. No uncircumcision were named there.

So you agree there was a distinction made in the past, but there is no longer a distinction now?

That was all you needed to say.

 

[ralliann]

So you agree there was a distinction made in the past, but there is no longer a distinction now?

That was all you needed to say.

Well, actually it was a distinction in priesthood in the past.

 

[Guojing]

Well, actually it was a distinction in priesthood in the past.

So you still want to hold the view that gentiles could be saved as gentiles, without joining the nation of Israel, during the time of Moses.

Alright then, let's just move on from this.

 

[ralliann]

So you still want to hold the view that gentiles could be saved as gentiles, without joining the nation of Israel, during the time of Moses.

Alright then, let's just move on from this.

Your question shows your lack of understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Especially, concerning Ephesians. Jew's had no more "SALVATION" given by Jesus than Gentiles, in times past.

Both need reconciliation.......
Eph 2:16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: {thereby: or, in himself }

Both have access unto the father........
Eph 2:18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.

The representative agency of PRIESTHOOD is inclusive to Ephesisns here. Salvation in Jesus Christ Was not by Levitical law.

 

[Doug Brents]

So you still want to hold the view that gentiles could be saved as gentiles, without joining the nation of Israel, during the time of Moses.

Alright then, let's just move on from this.

I think it is clear that God continued to speak to the heads of some families of Gentiles (as in the Patriarchal Dispensation) even after the Abraham was called out to be the head of God’s special people. Moses’ father in law was a priest of the Most High God. Melchizedek was both king and High Priest of the Most High God. And I think there were others that I cannot think of right off.

I do not know if the Patriarchal Dispensation continued (outside of Israel) after Moses, but I believe it may have; up until Christ that is. At Christ, all the world moved from whatever dispensation they had been under to the current, single, worldwide dispensation of Christ.

Not sure if that helped, but I hope so.

 

[Guojing]

I think it is clear that God continued to speak to the heads of some families of Gentiles (as in the Patriarchal Dispensation) even after the Abraham was called out to be the head of God’s special people. Moses’ father in law was a priest of the Most High God. Melchizedek was both king and High Priest of the Most High God. And I think there were others that I cannot think of right off.

I do not know if the Patriarchal Dispensation continued (outside of Israel) after Moses, but I believe it may have; up until Christ that is. At Christ, all the world moved from whatever dispensation they had been under to the current, single, worldwide dispensation of Christ.

Not sure if that helped, but I hope so.

Gentiles could always convert to become Jews throughout the OT (Esther 8:17) so I am not sure why you immediately concluded that Jethro, Moses's father in Law, must be a gentile.

Do you have any scripture saying that Jethro was a gentile?

As for Melchizedek, people have linked this mythical person to many different people, the most popular I have seen is that he was the pre-incarnate Christ.

Anyway, he was before Abraham so would clearly not fall under my category of "at the time of Moses"

 

[Doug Brents]

Gentiles could always convert to become Jews throughout the OT (Esther 8:17) so I am not sure why you immediately concluded that Jethro, Moses's father in Law, must be a gentile.

All of the Israelites were in bondage in Egypt. Exo 2:16 says that Jethro was the priest of Midian. He was not one of the Israelites.

As for Melchizedek, people have linked this mythical person to many different people, the most popular I have seen is that he was the pre-incarnate Christ.

Anyway, he was before Abraham so would clearly not fall under my category of "at the time of Moses"

Not sure why you would call him mythical. He, to whom the tithe was due, paid a tithe to Abraham (he was a real person who lived), but you are right, he lived during Abraham’s time, not Moses’.

But I addressed that fact in the rest of my comment.

 

[Guojing]

All of the Israelites were in bondage in Egypt. Exo 2:16 says that Jethro was the priest of Midian. He was not one of the Israelites.

So what I am asking you is, being the priest of Midian immediately means he cannot have descended from Abraham?

Are these 2 terms incompatible?

 

[Doug Brents]

So what I am asking you is, being the priest of Midian immediately means he cannot have descended from Abraham?

Are these 2 terms incompatible?

Yes, I believe they are, because all of the Israelites were slaves in Egypt, and Jethro lived in Midian, and had for presumably his whole life.
One other piece of reasoning comes from Exo 18:27. Jethro, after meeting Moses at Sinai gave some advice, and then he went back to his own country. He did not join Israel, and was never part of the nation.
That is all the evidence we have one way or the other, but I believe from what we do know that Jethro was a Gentile.

 

[Guojing]

Yes, I believe they are, because all of the Israelites were slaves in Egypt, and Jethro lived in Midian, and had for presumably his whole life.
One other piece of reasoning comes from Exo 18:27. Jethro, after meeting Moses at Sinai gave some advice, and then he went back to his own country. He did not join Israel, and was never part of the nation.
That is all the evidence we have one way or the other, but I believe from what we do know that Jethro was a Gentile.

But do you accept that Jethro could have been a physical descendant of Abraham?

In fact, he was, since Abraham married again and have other children after Sarah passing Genesis 25:1–6

You don't need to belong to the nation of Israel to have descended from Abraham.

That was my point.

 

[Doug Brents]

But do you accept that Jethro could have been a physical descendant of Abraham?

In fact, he was, since Abraham married again and have other children after Sarah passing Genesis 25:1–6

You don't need to belong to the nation of Israel to have descended from Abraham.

That was my point.

You are correct, Midian was one of Abraham’s children. But, Midian was not one of Jacob’s children, and it was Jacob who was renamed Israel. So no, it is not possible for Jethro to be one of the nation of Israel. And just being a descendant of Abraham doesn’t make you one of the children of the Promise. Esau was a descendant of Abraham, and he was not a child of the Promise. Ishmael was a descendant of Abraham, and he was not a child of the Promise. Only the children of Abraham through Issac through Jacob (Israel) were the children of the Promise.