The Israel of God in Gal.6:16

Quasar92 said:

The Church is dealt with differently than the nation of Israel, God has a differnt plan for both.

Click to expand...

Who is considered to be part of the “nation of Israel”? What are the identifying characteristics that qualify them for inclusion therein, and enable us to know who they are?

Hi in respect to Romans 4 and 9 there is a logical fallacy in claiming that they obliterate dispensational prophecy. My observations that the new covenant was promised to replace the covenant made with Moses specifically and did not replace the covenant made with Abraham regarding the land. This covenant was reaffirmed in psalm 105 which I quoted as God declaring the land of Canaan as an everlasting possession. Now to sort out some ground I agree with you all on. There is only one covenant for the forgiveness of sins. The promised of in Abraham's seed all the world will be blessed is talking about those saved by faith in Jesus and yes I agree that those under the promise of the seed are Israel in that they are governed by God. The focus is on the seed not Abraham. The promise of the seed goes back to the garden and the seed of the woman would crush the head of the serpent. The lineage is followed to Noah then down to Abraham where two distinct covenants made here. One is in Abraham' seed all the nations of the world would be blessed. The other to Abraham and his descendants god gave the land of Canaan as an everlasting possession. The onset of Jesus lifting the cup and declaring Jer 31 is now in place when he said this is the blood of the new covenant made in my blood. When Jesus said it is finished and the veil of the temple was torn in two the new covenant was in full effect.
What I am going to try to establish is that I agree we have one name under which we must be saved and the Jewish man is only saved by faith in Christ; also that the prophecies regarding the nation of Israel are not fulfilled and still to be accomplished through the 7 year tribulation and 2nd coming. In following the promise of the seed of the woman through Abraham we get to Judah and down to David where more specifics of this seed promise are given. In Chronicles 17
And it shall be, when your days are fulfilled, when you must go to be with your fathers, that I will set up your seed after you, who will be of your sons; and I will establish his kingdom. 12 He shall build Me a house, and I will establish his throne forever. 13 I will be his Father, and he shall be My son; and I will not take My mercy away from him, as I took it from him who was before you. 14 And I will establish him in My house and in My kingdom forever; and his throne shall be established forever.”  The line of David is followed to Jesus in the gospels. He is the one who reigns forever and in acts 1 they ask Jesus a very specific question,
4 And being assembled together with them, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the Promise of the Father, “which,” He said, “you have heard from Me; 5 for John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” 6 Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority.
They certainly expected the kingdom to be established on earth and Jesus did not spiritualie His answer but told them that the Father had put this information under his own authority.
The debate switches to is Jesus really going to reign on earth as king from the throne of David? Daniel 2 depicts the kingdom that covers the earth descending as a stone cut with out hands crushing the image of mans kingdoms and this stone becomes a mountain that covers the earth. Jesus was offered all the kingdoms of the world at a time by Satan and indeed Satan must have that authority for a time. Jesus said he came in His own name and was rejected and warned that if another comes in his own name Israel would accept. In Rev we see the beast is given the authority of the dragon (Satan) and at the mid point of the 7 years commits the abomination of desolation. A countdown from that act of 42 months or a times, times and half a time is given on both Daniel and Revelation until the LORD comes. It is specific in Revelation that those who were beheaded will live and reign with Jesus and that Satan is bound for 1000 years and them released. I believe this as written and dare not ad or subtract from the literal interpretation. Jude quotes Enoch saying I saw the LORD come with 10'000's of his saints. Zech 14 shows the 2nd coming of Jesus and the equality of Jesus with the Father as Israel is being overrun and it says the LORD comes with His saints, The LORD shall stand on the Mt of Olives and it will split in two forming a new valley and a river that flows year round. It is a day when it in light out at night and Gods enemies have been melted. In that day it says they will say God is one. This is key as this is the day that they look upon Him whom they pierced and it is Jesus having come and they says the LORD is one which is a confession that Jesus is LORD. Paul said partial blindness has come to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. This is the moment that that blindness is lifted. In REv 12
Rev 11:2

“But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months. You see in 70 AD nothing happened after 42 months. The abomination of desolation leaves 42 months until the 2nd coming also you see here in Zechariah after the 42 months the Gentiles are wiped out at the 2nd coming. On this day in Zech it says that the LORD shall be king over all the earth. This is why they asked in Acts if at this time He would restore the kingdom. The promised seed of David and the throne of David are many. But lets look at Luke 2 real quick. Here Zacharias speaks of Jesus being a horn of salvation for Israel and promises a day of being delivered from their enemies and from that point on being able to worship and sever the LORD with out fear all the days of their lives. See if the delverance in Zech 14 matches this promised deliverance and Dan 2 the stone descending and destroying the kingdoms of man and the stone becoming a mountain that is a kingdom that covers the earth and will have no end.

67 Now his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Spirit, and prophesied, saying:
68 “Blessed is the Lord God of Israel,
For He has visited and redeemed His people,
69 And has raised up a horn of salvation for us
In the house of His servant David,
70 As He spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets,
Who have been since the world began,
71 That we should be saved from our enemies
And from the hand of all who hate us,
72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers
And to remember His holy covenant,
73 The oath which He swore to our father Abraham:
74 To grant us that we,
Being delivered from the hand of our enemies,
Might serve Him without fear,
75 In holiness and righteousness before Him all the days of our life.

Here will be a random set of a few more prophecies that support a future kingdom on earth with Jesus as king for the 1000 years promised in Rev.

Hosea 1
“Call his name Lo-Ammi,[fn]
For you are not My people,
And I will not be your God.
“Yet the number of the children of Israel
Shall be as the sand of the sea,
Which cannot be measured or numbered.
And it shall come to pass
In the place where it was said to them,
‘You are not My people,’[fn]
There it shall be said to them,
‘You are sons of the living God.’
11 Then the children of Judah and the children of Israel
Shall be gathered together,
And appoint for themselves one head;
And they shall come up out of the land,
For great will be the day of Jezreel!
Note: Jezreel is on the opposite end of the valley of Meggid or where Armageddon is.

Hosea 3 4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred pillar, without ephod or teraphim. 5 Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the LORD their God and David their king. They shall fear the LORD and His goodness in the latter days.

The return of the sacrifice in not an acceptable offering for sin but pointing to the time of the abomination of desolation. This prophecy links the return of the king and the sacrifice to a time when David is raised up in the latter days. This promise of David returning is confirmed out the mouth of two witnesses.

Ezekiel 34
20 ‘Therefore thus says the Lord GOD to them: “Behold, I Myself will judge between the fat and the lean sheep. 21 Because you have pushed with side and shoulder, butted all the weak ones with your horns, and scattered them abroad, 22 therefore I will save My flock, and they shall no longer be a prey; and I will judge between sheep and sheep. 23 I will establish one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them—My servant David. He shall feed them and be their shepherd. 24 And I, the LORD, will be their God, and My servant David a prince among them; I, the LORD, have spoken.
25 “I will make a covenant of peace with them, and cause wild beasts to cease from the land; and they will dwell safely in the wilderness and sleep in the woods. 26 I will make them and the places all around My hill a blessing; and I will cause showers to come down in their season; there shall be showers of blessing. 27 Then the trees of the field shall yield their fruit, and the earth shall yield her increase. They shall be safe in their land; and they shall know that I am the LORD, when I have broken the bands of their yoke and delivered them from the hand of those who enslaved them. 28 And they shall no longer be a prey for the nations, nor shall beasts of the land devour them; but they shall dwell safely, and no one shall make them afraid. 29 I will raise up for them a garden of renown, and they shall no longer be consumed with hunger in the land, nor bear the shame of the Gentiles anymore. 30 Thus they shall know that I, the LORD their God, am with them, and they, the house of Israel, are My people,” says the Lord GOD.’ ”
31 “You are My flock, the flock of My pasture; you are men, and I am your God,” says the Lord GOD.

You see the deliverance again promised by Zacharias in Luke being accomplished and this is future.

I can put at least another 100 prophecies together that all work like a swiss watch where the literal interpretation works with a future scenario that by the way is lined up exactly according to what is detailed to happen in chronological order. So I rejoice that the LORD has brought so many into the blessing of the seed of Abraham that being by faith all the nations are blessed with the hope of Jesus and I acknowledge that God is going to keep his covenant also with the land and perform a transformation thorough the fire of the tribulation to finally make that stiff necked and rebellious people the work of His hands into a crown jewel of salvation and redemption. Imagine the glory of unrighteous Israel not getting it for almost all of their history being a fully born again people. It is the prophetic destiny and the tribulation is setting up right now; the return of the sacrifice is prepared at the same time world government approaches near.

Quasar92 said:

Show me anywhere in Paul's epistles where he ever made a claim that the Church was any part of Israel!

Click to expand...

Again???

Gal 6:15 Certainly, it doesn't matter whether a person is circumcised or not. Rather, what matters is being a new creation.
Gal 6:16 Peace and mercy will come to rest on all those who conform to this principle. They are the Israel of God.
(GW)


And James...

Jas 1:1　 James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad: Greetings.
Jas 1:2　 My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials,　
Jas 1:3　 knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience.

.　

Quasar92 said:

FYI, the Church consists of all those who have believed/received Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior. Consisting of Jew and Gentiles alike, each of which having been baptized by the Holy Spirit, as recorded in 1 Cor.12:12-13. It has nothing whatever to do with Israel! Period, end of report!


Quasar92

Click to expand...

Now that's a very interesting misconstrual. My request is for the definition of the "nation of Israel", and your response is a definition of "the Church". Could it be that you really do see no difference?

Likely, nah. So here's the question for you again:
Who is considered to be part of the “nation of Israel”? What are the identifying characteristics that qualify them for inclusion therein, and enable us to know who they are?

The Israel of God in the New Testament:
God’s work with and the development of His people, Israel in the Old Testament is continued in the New Testament. Those who presumed that ancestry gave them privileges were chastened. John the Baptist’s strong language indicates how seriously God viewed their pride and arrogance.
John said to the crowds coming out to be baptized by him, "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce fruit in keeping with repentance. And do not begin to say to yourselves, `We have Abraham as our father.' For I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham. The axe is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. Luke 3:7-9

Jesus gives a similar warning to those who were trying to trap him: Abraham is our father, they answered. “If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would do the things Abraham did”. John 8:39 Jesus goes even further in Matthew 8 when he praises the faith of a Gentile Roman Centurion: I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. Matthew 8:10

Jesus then goes on to make a prediction: I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But those who were born to the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Matthew 8:11-12
Here Jesus is warning his Jewish hearers that unless they recognize him as their Messiah they will be excluded from the Kingdom.

This is how we are to understand Paul when he specifically uses the expression: Israel of God in Galatians 6:16. Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule, even to the Israel of God. Galatians 6:16 For those who hold to a rapture, Paul is referring to Jews, or at least Christian Jews, but this flies in the face of everything he has said in the first five chapters of this letter.

In Galatians 3:23-29, Paul says we are saved by God’s grace and justified by faith alone in Jesus Christ. Paul is emphatic - people are not saved by ethnicity , by circumcision, by offering animal sacrifices or by keeping the Law of Moses.
In Galatians 4:21-31, those who follow Jesus, are likened to the free children of Sarah. Those seeking to be justified by the Law have been alienated from Jesus and are likened to the children of Hagar. Quoting Genesis 21, they will, he warns: never share in the inheritance…. Paul speaks of our freedom in Christ and our new life in the Holy Spirit. He contrasts living by the Spirit with living by our sinful nature.

Do you see what Paul is saying? We have a choice – grace or law, faith or works? When Paul writes: Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule, [and or even] to the Israel of God, he is obviously referring to all the followers of Jesus who have repudiated the legalists who wanted to impose circumcision and keeping the Law.

John Stott provides on of the best explanations of this verse: ‘All who walk by this rule’ and ‘the Israel of God’ are not two groups, but one. The connecting particle: ‘kai’ should be translated ‘even’, not ‘and’, or be omitted, as in the RSV. The Christian church has a direct continuity with God’s people in the Old Testament. Those who are Christians today are the true circumcision - Phil. 3:3, ‘Abraham’s offspring’ Galatians 3:29 and ‘the Israel of God’.

And don’t worry about the phrase ‘walk by this rule’ either. The Greek word ‘rule’ is kanon and simply describes a carpenter’s or surveyor’s plumb line. John Stott says, This is the ‘canon’ of Scripture, the doctrine of the apostles, and especially in the context of Galatians 6 the cross of Christ and the new creation. Such is the rule by which the church must walk and continuously judge and reform itself.

In the closing sentences of this letter, Paul is drawing on an ancient prayer he would have prayed all his life on the Sabbath. Known as the additional 19th benediction to the 18 benedictions, and based on the Aaronic blessing of Numbers 6:24-26, God is asked in the final prayer for ‘Peace… and mercy on us and all Israel: your people.’ Now Paul prays this blessing on the Jewish and Gentile Christian believers in Jesus for they are the ‘Israelites of God’.

Quasar92 said:

If you had read my post #65, you would not be making the false claims in the above.


Quasar92

Click to expand...

In post #65 I read:
"Only Israel is descended from the physical posterity of Jacob."

You are therefore defining Israel in terms of ethnicity. Is that correct?

If so, how much ethnicity does it take to qualify? Given that after some 100 biblical generations since Jacob, via the mechanics of genetic diffusion and dispersion, untold millions (and possibly up to the whole planet) possess at least one molecule of Jacobic DNA; might we not potentially all qualify as Israel?

Quasar92 said:

You are not going to find a single passage of Scripture that places the Church of Jesus nChrist under any lable you make out of Israel! That is the bottom line!


Quasar92

Click to expand...

Since you have cut Acts 2:36 and Hebrews 8:6-13 and James 1:1-2, out of your Bible, that would be correct for you.

Others here are able to see what type of intellectual integrity is required to make modern Dispensational Theology work.

.

Quasar92 said:

The Israel of today is the same Israel as the Israel during Jesus first advent.

Click to expand...

If ethnicity is the criterion, then there must be objective means of determining it. What are those means? I could say I'm an Israelite. How would that be proven or disproven?

Quasar92 said:

The above Scriptures you alluded to in the above: Acts 2:38; Heb;8:6-13 and James 1:1-2 DO NOT IN ANY WAY make the Church of Jesus Christ any part of Israel. Your attempt to prove it is a failure.

Click to expand...

On the Day of Pentecost, when Peter used the phrase "all the house of Israel" in Acts 2:36, what do you think he was talking about?

When the author of Hebrews quoted the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, word-for-word in Hebrews 8:6-13 and used the word "Israel", what do you think he was talking about?

When James referred to "the twelve tribes" in James 1:1-2, what do you think he was talking about?

.

Quasar92 said:

Why is this issue such a problem for you? Israel are non-believers in Jesus as their Messiah. On the other hand, all believers in Jesus Christ make up His Church. The latter has no part of/in Israel.


Quasar92

Click to expand...

But according to your definition, in which ethnicity is a criterion, they must also be ethnic non-believers. So if I want to befriend Israel, I want to ensure that I'm befriending those who qualify ethnically. How can I be sure?

jgr said:

If ethnicity is the criterion, then there must be objective means of determining it. What are those means? I could say I'm an Israelite. How would that be proven or disproven?

Click to expand...

Israelis: The current inhabitants of the State of Israel.
Israelites: True descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, or those people grafted in by reason of righteousness. Every born again Christian, from every tribe, race, nation and language. Revelation 5:9-10 Only God knows who they all are. Amos 9:9, Romans 9:6

Most Western Christians view modern Israelis as a continuation of the ancient Biblical drama of Israel and as the inheritors of the traditional role that the Jews have played through the ages. Through them, we have a universal moral code of justice: the Ten Commandments. These Divinely inspired Laws form the basis of our Judeo/Christian morality and ethics.
But Jesus says who they are today: They are of the synagogue of Satan. Revelation 2:9b

Quasar92 said:

The purpose of this section is to present a dispensational view of Galatians 6:16, the only passage produced by all Covenant Theologians as evidence that the Church is the spiritual Israel, or that Gentile believers become spiritual Jews. The verse does not prove their case. The passage reads:

"And as many as shall walk by this rule, peace be upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God."

The Book of Galatians is concerned with Gentiles who were attempting to attain salvation through the law. The ones deceiving them were Judaizers, who were Jews demanding adherence to the Law of Moses. To them, a Gentile had to convert to Judaism before he qualified for salvation through Christ. In verse 15 Paul states that the important thing for salvation is faith, resulting in the new man. He then pronounces a blessing on two groups who would follow this rule of salvation through faith alone. The first group is the “them,” the Gentile Christians to and of whom he had devoted most of the epistle. The second group is the “Israel of God.” These are Jewish believers who, in contrast with the Judaizers, followed the rule of salvation by faith alone. Covenant Theologians must ignore the primary meaning of kai [the conjunction which is usually translated “and”] which separates the two groups in the verse in order to make them both the same group.

In a recent work, Dr. S. Lewis Johnson, former professor of Greek and New Testament Exegesis at Dallas Theological Seminary, has done a detailed study of Galatians 6:16. In his introduction, Johnson makes the following observation:

In spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, there remains persistent support for the contention that the term Israel may refer properly to Gentile believers in the present age . . . .the primary support is found in Galatians 6:16 . . .

I cannot help but think that dogmatic considerations loom large in the interpretation of Galatians 6:16. The tenacity with which this application of “the Israel of God” to the church is held in spite of a mass of evidence to the contrary leads one to think that the supporters of the view believe their eschatological system, usually an amillennial scheme, hangs on the reference of the term to the people of God, composed of both believing Jews and Gentiles. Amillennialism does not hang on this interpretation, but the view does appear to have a treasured place in amillennial exegesis.

In speaking of the view that the term refers to ethnic Israel, a sense that the term Israel has in every other of its more than sixty-five uses in the New Testament and in its fifteen uses in Paul, in tones almost emotional William Hendriksen, the respected Reformed commentator, writes, “I refuse to accept that explanation.” . . .

What I am leading up to is expressed neatly by D. W. B. Robinson in an article written about twenty years ago: “The glib citing of Galatains 6:16 to support the view that ‘the church is the new Israel’ should be vigorously challenged. There is weighty support for a limited interpretation.” We can say more than this, in my opinion. There is more than weighty support for a more limited interpretation. There is overwhelming support for such. In fact, the least likely view among several alternatives is the view that “the Israel of God” is the church. [Toussaint and Dyer, Pentecost Essays, “Paul and ‘The Israel of God’: An Exegetical and Eschatological Case-Study” by S.Lewis Johnson, pp. 181-182. Quoted in William Hendriksen, Exposition of Galatians, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1868), p. 247, and D. W. B. Robinson, “The Distinction Between Jewish and Gentile Believers in Galatians,” Australian Biblical Review 13 (1965): 29-48.]

Johnson presents three views concerning this verse. Only the first insists that “the Israel of God” is the Church as a whole while the other two limit it to Jewish believers. The first view is described as follows:

This first is the claim that “the Israel of God” is simply a term descriptive of the believing church of the present age . . . . The Israel of God is the body who shall walk by the rule of the new creation, and they include believing people from the two ethnic bodies of Jews and Gentiles [Ibid., p. 183].

The basis for the first view is:

The list of names supporting this view is impressive, although the bases of the interpretation are few and feeble, namely, the claim that the kai . . . before the term “the Israel of God” is an explicative or appositional kai; . . .and the claim that if one sees the term “the Israel of God” a believing ethnic Israel, they would be included in the preceding clause, “And those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them” [Ibid., p. 184].

Johnson rejects this view on three grounds. The first is for grammatical and syntactical reasons for which there are two [Ibid., pp. 187-188]. The first is that this view must resort to a secondary or lesser meaning of kai:

It is necessary to begin this part of the discussion with a reminder of a basic, but often neglected, hermeneutical principle. It is this: in the absence of compelling exegetical and theological considerations, we should avoid the rarer grammatical usages when the common ones make good sense [Ibid., p. 187].

Because the latter usage serves well the view that the term “the Israel of God” is the church, the dogmatic concern overcame grammatical usage. An extremely rare usage has been made to replace the common usage, even in spite of the fact that the common and frequent usage of and (kai) makes perfectly good sense in Galatians 6:16 [Ibid., p. 188].

Second, Johnson points out that if Paul’s intention was to identify the “them” as being the “Israel of God,” then the best way of showing this was to eliminate the kai altogether. As shown earlier, this was exactly what Hendriksen wanted to do by leaving kai untranslated. The very presence of the kai argues against the “them” being “the Israel of God.” As Johnson notes, “Paul, however, did not eliminate the kai” [Ibid., p. 188].

The second ground for rejecting this view is for exegetical considerations, which deals with context and usage. Concerning usage, Johnson states:

From the standpoint of biblical usage this view stands condemned. There is no instance in biblical literature of the term Israel being used in the sense of the church, or the people of God as composed of both believing ethnic Jews and Gentiles. Nor, on the other hand, as one might expect if there were such usage, does the phrase to ethne (KJV, “the Gentiles”) ever mean the non-Christian world specifically, but only the non-Jewish peoples, although such are generally non-Christians. Thus, the usage of the term Israel stands overwhelmingly opposed to the first view.

The usage of the terms Israel and the church in the early chapters of the book of Acts is in complete harmony, for Israel exists there alongside the newly formed church, and the two entities are kept separate in terminology [Ibid., p. 189].

For those who would cite Romans 9:6 as evidence, Johnson shows that this verse is no support for such a view for the distinction is between Jews who believe and Jews who do not:

Paul is here speaking only of a division within ethnic Israel. Some of them are believers and thus truly Israel, whereas others, though ethnically Israelites, are not truly Israel, since they are not elect and believing . . . No Gentiles are found in the statement at all [Ibid., p. 189].

Even many Covenant Theologians have agreed with this view of Romans 9:6 and do not use it to support their view of Galatians 6:16. As for context, Johnson observes:

On the contrary, the apostle is concerned with correcting the gospel preached to the Galatians by the Judaizers, particularly their false contention that it was necessary to be circumcised to be saved and to observe as Christians certain requirements of the law of Moses in order to remain in divine favor . . . The apostle makes no attempt whatsoever to deny that there is a legitimate distinction of race between Gentile and Jewish believers in the church . . . . There is a remnant of Jewish believers in the church according to the election of grace . . . . This approach fails to see that Paul does not say there is neither Jew nor Greek within the church. He speaks of those who are “in Christ.” . . . But Paul also says there is neither male nor female, nor slave nor free man in Christ. Would he then deny sexual differences within the church? Or the social differences in Paul’s day? Is it not plain that Paul is not speaking of national or ethnic differences in Christ, but of spiritual status? In that sense there is no difference in Christ [Ibid., p. 190].

The third ground for rejecting this view is theological:

. . . there is no historical evidence that the term Israel was identified with the church before A.D. 160. Further, at that date there was no characterization of the church as “the Israel of God.” In other words, for more than a century after Paul there was no evidence of the identification [Ibid., p. 191].


Johnson’s summary concerning the rejection of the first view is:

To conclude the discussion of the first interpretation, it seems clear that there is little evidence—grammatical, exegetical, or theological—that supports it. On the other hand, there is sound historical evidence against the identification of Israel with believing or unbelieving Gentiles. The grammatical usage of kai is not favorable to the view, nor is the Pauline or New Testament usage of Israel. Finally, . . .the Pauline teaching in Galatians contains a recognition of national distinctions in the one people of God [Ibid., p. 191].

“the Israel of God” is the believing Jewish remnant within the Church. This is Johnson’s own view and is the common dispensational view. Johnson describes this view as follows:

The second of the important interpretations of Galatians 6:16 and “the Israel of God” is the view that the words refer simply to believing ethnic Israelites in the Christian church. Does not Paul speak of himself as an Israelite (cf. Rom. 11:1)? And does not the apostle also speak of “a remnant according to God’s gracious choice” (cf. Rom. 11:5), words that plainly in the context refer to believing Israelites? What more fitting thing could Paul write, it is said, in a work so strongly attacking Jewish professing believers, the Judaizers, than to make it most plain that he was not attacking the true believing Jews? Judaizers are anathematized, but the remnant according to the election of grace are “the Israel of God.” . . .

Perhaps this expression, “the Israel of God,” is to be contrasted with his expression in 1 Corinthians 10:18, “Israel after the flesh” (KJV), as the true, believing Israel versus the unbelieving element, just as in Romans 9:6 the apostle distinguishes two Israels, one elect and believing, the other unbelieving, but both ethnic Israelites (cf. vv. 7-13) [Ibid., p. 185].

By: Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum

Source: http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org...d/israelaf.htm


Quasar92

Click to expand...

"Israel" appears to be a national term, e.g. "not so much faith in all of Israel" (Matt 8) and "lost sheep of the house of Israel" & "cities of Israel" (Matt 10,15); as well as "many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord" (Luke 1:16).

Prima facie, the opposite of "Israel of God" (Gal 6:16) would be Rev 2:9, 3:9. The terms "Israel" & "Jew" refer to human ethnicity, whereas the terms "God" and oppositely refer to those humans' (current) Spiritual state.

Hence, the use of two words, one referring to a terrestrial human element, the other to a Heavenly Divine status. Cp. "two standing, one taken the other left" (Matt 24:40). The division depends on Faith in Jesus as the Prophesied Messiah.

The Roman Stoic philosopher Seneca, supposedly a pen pal of the Apostle Paul, stated "I shall never fail to quote a bad author, if the line is good". Everything requires filtering, especially in this day & age:

Paul: Jewish Law and Early Christianity: A Free BAS eBook - Biblical Archaeology Society

Never-the-less, I think it is the case, that St. Paul was preaching a sort of "bi-cameral Church". Jesus, the Living Torah, not the written Torah, was the only "way truth life" (John 14:6). But different people start from different conditions. Jews of Faith should remain Jews and keep following the Law (and Christ), as did St. Paul (Acts 21). Gentiles of Faith need not follow the Law, only Christ -- although they had to become "Righteous Gentiles" per decree of the first Jerusalem Council of ~50 AD (Acts 15), and keep the basic Noachide Commandments (lest they not even qualify for Salvation from the first global judgement by water).

Kinda sorta "everybody keep doing what you were doing, just believe in Jesus as Messiah". Jews stay Jews, gentiles (Righteous) gentiles. In some sense, gentiles had it worse, because they actually had to admit to previous un-Righteous behavior, and actually change their tune, adopting (the Church's take on) the Noachide Commandments.

St. Paul preached a "bi-cameral Church" composed of a "Senate & House":


It was not a "one size fits all" doctrine. The Judaizers in Galatia were trying to impose a "one size fits all" doctrine of their own, requiring gentiles to become Jews. Meanwhile, on the opposite hand, St. Paul faced other accusations from Jews who calumnied him, that he himself was imposing a "one size fits all" doctrine abrogating the Law for everyone.

There is still much confusion. But St. Paul taught neither that Jews should apostasize from the Law, nor that gentiles should observe the whole of it. Rather, "one Legislative Branch with two houses", Jews remain Jews, gentiles join up righteously, and all are saved by Faith in Jesus as Messiah.

Also, Jesus and the Apostles themselves kept the Law their entire lives (non-factual calumnies notwithstanding).

Gospel of Matthew - Wikipedia


"Israel" and "Jew" apply to national ethnic Israelite Jews, reflecting their Spiritual status. Meanwhile, for gentiles, one usually uses the terms "Christian" vs. "pagan" or some such.

Erik Nelson said:

Israel" and "Jew" apply to national ethnic Israelite Jews, reflecting their Spiritual status. Meanwhile, for gentiles, one usually uses the terms "Christian" vs. "pagan" or some such.

Click to expand...

I think we should stop using Israel and Israelites, as those terms are so laden with connotations, good and bad. The current citizens of the State of Israel are Israelis.

In God's sight, there are just two types of human; those who love Him and keep His Commandments; the Overcomers and those who don't, the godless; doomed for destruction. Romans 9:22
So in discussion about the times in which we live, any further divisions, such as a group of ethnic people who may or may not be actual descendants of the original people that God chose, is irrelevant.

The reason for the idea of a special redemption for the group of people who claim descent, but who fail to live up to the tenets of their own religion, let alone that of what Jesus taught, is plain: there has to be that group on earth, while the Church flies off to heaven. This is not what scripture teaches: Of Israel only a remnant will survive. Romans 9:27 But God's holy people, from every race, nation and language, chosen by the Lord, will be as many as the sands of the sea and they will reign on earth. 1 Peter 2:9-10, Revelation 5:9-10, Revelation 7:9