claninja
Well-Known Member
How can Jews be descended from the 10 tribes?
I don't know, how?
You acknowledged the desolate woman represents Ephraim when Isaiah wrote and at the same time try to make me believe that Jews are included as the descendants of the 10 northern tribes.
This statement clarifies the disconnect. I have never stated that Jews are included as the descendants of the 10 northern tribes.
My argument the entire time as been those in Christ are the children of the new covenant, whether they are from the kingdom of Judah, the kingdom of Israel, or from the gentile nations.
My argument the entire time is that the progressive revelation given by the Spirit reveals that the children of the desolate woman are found in the body of Christ under the new covenant.
Again, you protest that Paul cites Hosea in reference to Israelites.
In Romans 9, Paul gives 2 categories of genetic people in regards to the vessels of mercy: Jew and Gentile.
Romans 9:23-25 What if He did this to make the riches of His glory known to the vessels of His mercy, whom He prepared in advance for glory—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,”
In this context is it the Jew or the gentile who God now calls my people who were not my people?
Paul never destroys the original intent of any ciliation from the Old Testament.
I agree that he doesn't.
how does including Ephraim into body of Christ destroy the original intent? I am arguing that is how it is fulfilled, by including Ephraim in the body of Christ.
The original intent is that the descendants of the northern kingdom would be more than that of the southern kingdom in Isaiah 54:1.
How does finding the fulfillment of this through including those from the 10 northern tribes into the body of Christ under the new covenant, with those from Judah and the gentiles, destroy the original intent?
Paul never destroys the original intent of any ciliation from the Old Testament. The revelation/mystery is that the gentiles are fellow heirs in Christ through the assistance of the biological descendants of Abraham, the latter being the original intent of Genesis 22:18. The offspring or seed in the “collective” sense, was affirmed by Paul in Galatians 3:29. .
Are the gentiles included in the collective seed (body of Christ) one with those from Ephraim and Judah under the new covenant?
Again, you protest against the grammatical-historical hermeneutic.
This only appears to be so to you because you seem to misunderstand my argument.
Those from every nation, meaning the gentiles, are included by using the grammatical-historical hermeneutic. The revelation/mystery is that the gentiles are fellow heirs in Christ through the assistance of the biological descendants of Abraham, the latter being the original intent of Genesis 22:18.
Through a superficial reading of the OT, it is not clear that the gentiles are fellow heirs to the promises in Jesus.
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.
Concerning my exegesis that Genesis 3:18 affirms the gentiles are saved by the descendants of Abraham in the “collective” sense, you stated.
Genesis 3:18?
No one here is denying the gentiles are made one with Israel in Christ, what we are contending is what the scriptures or prophecies state about HOW they are made one. They are save by the promise to Abraham, cited in Galatians 3:14, 16. Of course, the context maintains the promises and prophesies concerning Israel are affirmed in verse 17. The evidence substantiates that they are saved by Christ and through the assistance of the biological descendants of Abraham according to Genesis 22:18.
Are saying the biological Israel in its collective sense saves the gentiles or Jesus saves the gentiles? or are you saying both Jesus and the collective biological Israel save the gentiles?
In Genesis 22:18 the collective sense of the word “seed” cannot be the gentiles; the gentiles are not blessed through the gentiles, they are blessed by the seed, and in the collective sense, in Genesis 22:18, the seed represents the biological descendants of Abraham.
So the gentiles are not a part of Abraham's seed? Paul literally states that if the Greeks are in Christ they are Abraham's seed.
Galatians 3:28-29 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.
You seem to grasp progressive revelation.
Good, we agree.
nation in Matthew 21:43 can be none other than Ephraim,
Does this mean that you believe the gentiles and those from Judah who are in Christ are not included in this nation that the kingdom is transferred to when Jerusalem was destroyed?
. Judah is punished, they are blinded (Romans 11), while he saves Ephraim in Hosea 2:23,
And while He saves the gentiles. Israel was blinded so that the gospel would go to the gentiles, in order to make Israel jealous.
Romans 11:11 I ask then, did they stumble so as to lose their share? Certainly not! However, because of their trespass, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel jealous.
Zechariah 11 prophecies Christ breaks the covenant with Judah by his death in Romans 7:1-4, and severs the brotherhood with Ephraim. Judah is punishment, they are blinded (Romans 11), while he saves Ephraim in Hosea 2:23, who also affirms they are scattered. Ephraim is not being punished; it’s just not the appointed time for them to return. Through them, the gentiles are blessed, fulfilling Genesis 22:18. There is a lot more scripture that substantiates this, but unless one comprehends why I used the term “assistance” it would be pointless to present it.
how does this relate to the scattering done by the romans in 70ad? Are you saying that the son of man didn't sow the good seed until after Jerusalem was destroyed?
Rachel is the mother of Joseph, and of Ephraim and Manasseh, by lineage.
18 I have surely heard Ephraim bemoaning himself thus; Thou hast chastised me, and I was chastised, as a bullock unaccustomed to the yoke: turn thou me, and I shall be turned; for thou art the LORD my God.
19 Surely after that I was turned, I repented; and after that I was instructed, I smote upon my thigh: I was ashamed, yea, even confounded, because I did bear the reproach of my youth.
20 Is Ephraim my dear son? is he a pleasant child? for since I spake against him, I do earnestly remember him still: therefore my bowels are troubled for him; I will surely have mercy upon him, saith the LORD. Jeremiah 31:
Remember, the shepherd and stone, Christ, stem from Joseph, Genesis 49:24, making the fulfillment literal in the sense it was time for mercy to be restored to Ephraim and that he becomes the people of God again through the body of Christ.
Herod was killing babies in Bethlehem and the surrounding areas. Bethlehem was in Judah, not Benjamin. Judah was not one of the sons of Rachel. This response does not address the point I brought up.
You are telling me, that if Matthew had not quoted Jeremiah 31:15, you would know that it was about Herod killing babies in Bethlehem by the grammatical historical context of Jeremiah 31:15 alone?
Upvote
0