I augment or support my comments on the basis of scripture, just as you do Jerry. The point comes down to which argument does scripture support?
You read my comment and incorrectly stated I said that only Christ is “the Israel of God”. What I actually said is that “Christ is Israel from His birth”, which is a big difference, and exactly what Isaiah 49 is saying at vss 1-6. It declares Christ TO BE Israel...NOT the Israel of God. The "Israel of God" is every believer in Christ! Perhaps you should read it again. You probably do even recognize how that is true.
Did you or did you not declare:
“I'm not...nor would I ever assert that God is done with Israel according to the flesh. That is clear throughout scripture…. A remnant of Israel has been being saved since Christ ascended, and that will continue until the last day, as they of Israel who become saved, are elect as every believer is Jerry.”
You unequivocally substantiated through your own declaration there is a remnant of biological descendants that are just as much “the Israel of God” as Christ: Many are called but few are chosen. Furthermore, before they were born, this Israel was known by God from the foundations of the world (Ephesians 1:4; 1 Peter 1:10-12). Acts 13:47 also substantiates my perception.
For so the Lord has commanded us, saying, "'I have made you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.'" Acts 13:47
The pronouns
us refers to Israel/Ephraim (Romans 11:1) but in the original quote from Isaiah 49:6 the pronoun
you, singular, refers to Christ, the Servant. Paul, through progressive revelation, supplanted a plural where a singular was expressed, which substantiates both are appropriate from a theological interpretation. Christ is synonymous with
the nation Israel (Isaiah 49:3). Certainly, the pronoun
us in Acts 13:47 cannot represent the gentiles, as the event is when the apostles/Israel turn to the gentiles, and we cannot have the gentiles turning to the gentiles.
Try and reconcile this with what Paul stated in Romans 4, where his ENTIRE argument is that “ALL who have the faith of Abraham are true descendants”, and this is because God’s promise to Abraham was BEFORE he was circumcised.
What you don’t get in this, is that as the promise was before Abraham was circumcised. Therefore that promise does not distinguish based on ethnicity…BUT strictly on the basis of individual faith, which is and always has been the gift of God to ALL who believe!
True, it is by faith that the children of the promise are counted, but that does not preclude differing callings for individuals or peoples. What supersessionism is blind to is Israel’s missionary calling to gather the gentiles in the fulfillment that through Abraham the families of the earth shall be blessed (Genesis 12:3).
After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead of him, two by two, into every town and place where he himself was about to go. And he said to them, "The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few. Therefore pray earnestly to the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest. Luke 10:1-2
While the salivation went to the Gentiles because of Christ, Christ used Israel as the labors to this end according to scripture, like Acts 13:47 and the book of Isaiah.
But now thus says the LORD, he who created you, O Jacob, he who formed you, O Israel: "Fear not, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by name, you are mine…. All the nations gather together, and the peoples assemble. Who among them can declare this, and show us the former things? Let them bring their witnesses to prove them right, and let them hear and say, It is true. "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me. Isaiah 43:1, 9-10
Awake, awake, put on your strength, O Zion; put on your beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city; for there shall no more come into you the uncircumcised and the unclean…. How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news, who publishes peace, who brings good news of happiness, who publishes salvation, who says to Zion, "Your God reigns." Isaiah 52:1, 7
Romans 4 does not preclude the remnant of Israel’s mission to the gentiles, as specifically Ephraim as the nation that bears the fruit in Matthew 21:43.
I’m not sure how you get to your point here if you follow scripture. The first problem is not reconciling scripture with scripture…for if one takes your view, they must discard John’s introduction of Jesus at John 1:9:13, which clearly states Jesus came to “His own” ("His own" were Israel according to the Old Covenant).
Obviously, you maintain that Christ is the Servant given the title Israel in Isaiah 49:3, but fail to dig deeper that he is abhorred by a nation in verse 8, which can only be Judah, which was Christ’s people and fulfills John 1:11. But you refuse to note that “raising the tribes of Jacob” as too easy a task for Christ the Servant and tasks him further to save the elect gentiles, which substantiates, one, these tasks are conflated and, two, they commenced with the first advent just as you conceded and, three, the tribes of Jacob are the literal descendants of the patriarch Jacob, as they are discerned from the nations/gentiles. The only reconciliation for John 1:11 is THT’s exegesis of Matthew 21:43 that the management of the kingdom of God was taken from Judah and given to Ephraim/Israel. I’m not going to let you side-step your concession or the implications of “all” of Isaiah 49.
And this goes to the heart of your misconception of Peter’s epistles. The gentiles were not exiles or were they dispersed as Ephraim in the first century. This is supported by the first-century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who observed that the ten tribes were “beyond Euphrates till now”and were as “an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers.” (Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 11.133)
