Who is "National Israel"?

Zao is life · Dec 12, 2020

grafted branch said:
Ok, let me ask one final question here, do you think the ordinances of the sun, moon, and stars are recorded in Genesis 1:14-18?

Yes.

Zao is life · Dec 12, 2020

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
Yes.

OK I don't understand why you would even ask that question and I don't understand why you respond with "informative" because you still haven't helped me to understand why you believe that the similitude God uses in Jeremiah 31 in the context of speaking about His New Covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, between the ordinances of sun, moon and stars and His faithfulness to His promise to the seed of Abraham/Israel, has anything to do with one day being as a thousand years to the LORD and a thousand years as one day, or for that matter has anything to do with what the identity of "National Israel" is.

grafted branch · Dec 12, 2020

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
OK I don't understand why you would even ask that question and I don't understand why you respond with "informative" because you still haven't helped me to understand why you believe that the similitude God uses in Jeremiah 31 in the context of speaking about His New Covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, between the ordinances of sun, moon and stars and His faithfulness to His promise to the seed of Abraham/Israel, has anything to do with one day being as a thousand years to the LORD and a thousand years as one day, or for that matter has anything to do with what the identity of "National Israel" is.

I rated it informative because I honestly wasn’t sure if you agreed that Genesis 1:14-18 was speaking of the ordinances.

My view on Jeremiah 31:35-36 is that it’s not talking about the physical sun, moon, and stars departing from God but it is referring to the ordinances of the sun, moon, and stars departing from God (not departing from mankind). Therefore I think the seed of Israel, as a nation, has to be referring to some group of people that are not to be considered a nation any longer once the ordinances are not used by God.

Since these ordinances involve the definition of what a day and year are, and 2 Peter 3:8 is describing something that is different than the definition given in Genesis, I think that the seed of Israel (whoever they are) are no longer considered a nation before God.

If you have God still using the ordinances in your theology then I think the seed of Israel could still be considered a nation before God.

jgr · Dec 12, 2020

Guojing said:
The key to understanding that difference is that during the millennial reign, National Israel will dwell on the Earth, in the land promised to them in Jerusalem, as promised to Abraham in Genesis 15:18–21.

Note: "Millennial reign" is conspicuously absent from the following:

Genesis 15
18 In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:

Fulfilled literally to Israel in Joshua's day:

Joshua 21
43 And the Lord gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein.
45 There failed not ought of any good thing which the Lord had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass.

Fulfilled spiritually in Christ at His first coming:

Galatians 3
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

Guojing · Dec 12, 2020

Spiritual Jew said:
I recognize that all Christians are in the body of Christ. That's why we are called CHRISTians. You have no discernment.

That is certainly true, but why do you insist that the 12 apostles are also called "Christians"?

Did the 12 apostles ever call themselves "Christians", or that they are in the "Body of Christ" in the scriptures?

Guojing · Dec 12, 2020

jgr said:
Note: "Millennial reign" is conspicuously absent from the following:

Genesis 15
18 In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:

Fulfilled literally to Israel in Joshua's day:

Joshua 21
43 And the Lord gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein.
45 There failed not ought of any good thing which the Lord had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass.

Fulfilled spiritually in Christ at His first coming:

Galatians 3
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

The millennial reign is found clearest in Revelation 20, but its also mentioned in other places, like Zechariah 8.

Spiritual Jew · Dec 12, 2020

Fullness of the Gentiles said:
OK if you can answer these 5 questions for me then I will be satisfied that you are correct:

1. In Luke 1:17, was Zechariah told that his son was Elijah who was to come?

And he shall go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

Yes. The angel was quoting Malachi 4:5-6 there.

Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: 6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

2. In John 1:21, when John the Baptist was asked by the Priests and Levites if he was Elijah, what did he say?

And they asked him, What then? Are you Elijah? And he says, I am not. Are you that prophet? And he answered, No.

The passage is quoted below the final three questions:

You answered your own question here, so what are you asking me? I already told you that all he was doing there was indicating that he wasn't literally Elijah. He was John the Baptist. So what? He wasn't saying that he wasn't the Elijah to come. Jesus said that later. Isn't that enough for you?

3. In Matthew 17:1-8, did the disciples see John the Baptist with Jesus and with Moses on the mountain when Jesus was transfigured?

No. What is the point of this question?

4. In Matthew 17:9-11, did Jesus say John the Baptist "truly shall come first and shall restore all things", or did He say Elijah shall come first and shall restore all things?

He said "Elijah", but that doesn't matter because it says in verse 13 that the disciples understood that He was talking about John the Baptist.

5. In Matthew 17:12-13, was Jesus referring to John the Baptist, or was He referring to Elijah?

Obviously, John the Baptist because Jesus said that they were going to kill Him just like they did the Elijah who had already come. That wouldn't make sense if He was talking about Elijah. And, of course, verse 13 removes all doubt because it says the disciples understood that He was talking about John the Baptist.

Matthew 17:12 But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have done to him everything they wished. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.” 13 Then the disciples understood that he was talking to them about John the Baptist.

Okay, I answered your 5 questions, so now you should be satisfied that I am correct (this is a joke in case you can't tell).

Spiritual Jew · Dec 12, 2020

Guojing said:
That is certainly true, but why do you insist that the 12 apostles are also called "Christians"?

Because they were followers of Christ and all followers of Christ are Christians. My goodness. This is Christianity 101 and you're in danger of failing the class.

Did the 12 apostles ever call themselves "Christians", or that they are in the "Body of Christ" in the scriptures?

Why did they need to in order for that to be the case? Do you need everything spelled out to you in minute detail in order to accept it?

Do you not believe that Ephesians 2:11-22 describes the body of Christ, which is the church (Eph 5:23, Col 1:18,24), which was founded on the apostles and prophets with Jesus Christ as the chief cornerstone?

Guojing · Dec 12, 2020

Spiritual Jew said:
Because they were followers of Christ and all followers of Christ are Christians. My goodness. This is Christianity 101 and you're in danger of failing the class.

Why did they need to in order for that to be the case? Do you need everything spelled out to you in minute detail in order to accept it?

Do you not believe that Ephesians 2:11-22 describes the body of Christ, which is the church (Eph 5:23, Col 1:18,24), which was founded on the apostles and prophets with Jesus Christ as the chief cornerstone?

Nothing in those passages say the 12 apostles are part of the Body of Christ.

They were promised 12 thrones and that they will judge the 12 tribes. The 12 tribes are national Israel, not the Body of Christ.

Because you don't accept the 1000 year millennial reign of Christ on Earth, you will naturally have difficulty accepting the role of National Israel on Earth.

Spiritual Jew · Dec 12, 2020

Guojing said:
Nothing in those passages say the 12 apostles are part of the Body of Christ.

Why do you not answer my questions? Are they too difficult for you? Please answer this question. Do you believe that Ephesians 2:11-22 is a description of the body of Christ or not? If not, please explain to me the difference between the body of Christ and what Paul describes in Ephesians 2:11-22.

Guojing · Dec 12, 2020

Spiritual Jew said:
Why do you not answer my questions? Are they too difficult for you? Please answer this question. Do you believe that Ephesians 2:11-22 is a description of the body of Christ or not? If not, please explain to me the difference between the body of Christ and what Paul describes in Ephesians 2:11-22.

I already said that passage is not saying the 12 belong to the body of Christ.

You are trying to read that into it. Are you trying to form a doctrine out of a single vague passage?

Spiritual Jew · Dec 12, 2020

Guojing said:
I already said that passage is not saying the 12 belong to the body of Christ.

Are you incapable of giving a straightforward answer? Do you believe that Ephesians 2:11-22 is a description of the body of Christ? Yes or no, please.

If not, then please explain the difference between the body of Christ and what Paul described in Ephesians 2:11-22. If you knew what you were talking about, you wouldn't have difficulty answering these questions.

Guojing · Dec 12, 2020

Spiritual Jew said:
Are you incapable of giving a straightforward answer? Do you believe that Ephesians 2:11-22 is a description of the body of Christ? Yes or no, please.

If not, then please explain the difference between the body of Christ and what Paul described in Ephesians 2:11-22. If you knew what you were talking about, you wouldn't have difficulty answering these questions.

Yes.

Now, for my question to you, do you believe in a future millennial reign of Christ with national Israel, on the earth?

Spiritual Jew · Dec 12, 2020

Guojing said:
Yes.

So, you are saying that Ephesians 2:11-22 is a description of the body of Christ and I agree. That passage says that the body of Christ is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Jesus Christ as the chief cornerstone. How can the apostles be part of the foundation of the body of Christ without being part of the body of Christ? That does not make any sense whatsoever.

Now, for my question to you, do you believe in a future millennial reign of Christ with national Israel, on the earth?

No, I do not. I am an amillennialist.

Guojing · Dec 12, 2020

Spiritual Jew said:
So, you are saying that Ephesians 2:11-22 is a description of the body of Christ and I agree. That passage says that the body of Christ is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Jesus Christ as the chief cornerstone. How can the apostles be part of the foundation of the body of Christ without being part of the body of Christ? That does not make any sense whatsoever.

No, I do not. I am an amillennialist.

As I already stated to you, it won't make sense to you because of your amillennialist doctrine. That doctrine governs the way you interpret the rest of the scripture that you read.

Can you now understand why you would naturally not accept that the Body of Christ and national Israel are separate entities?

Spiritual Jew · Dec 12, 2020

Guojing said:
As I already stated to you, it won't make sense to you because of your amillennialist doctrine. That doctrine governs the way you interpret the rest of the scripture that you read.

Can you now understand why you would naturally not accept that the Body of Christ and national Israel are separate entities?

I don't accept your doctrine as it doesn't make even a tiny bit of sense to me. It's like saying part of the foundation of a house isn't part of the house.

So, we can agree to disagree as there's nothing more to add regarding this particular topic. We will likely never agree on it.

Guojing · Dec 12, 2020

Spiritual Jew said:
I don't accept your doctrine as it doesn't make even a tiny bit of sense to me. It's like saying part of the foundation of a house isn't part of the house.

So, we can agree to disagree as there's nothing more to add regarding this particular topic. We will likely never agree on it.

Yes, that is fine.

That is why we have discussion forums. All of us are just sharing our different interpretation of scriptures.

Timtofly · Dec 12, 2020

Spiritual Jew said:
Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: 6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

When was the great and dreadful day of the Lord? That last Day God planned for this earth? The one you want to be 24 hours instead of 1000 years.

Spiritual Jew · Dec 13, 2020

Timtofly said:
When was the great and dreadful day of the Lord? That last Day God planned for this earth? The one you want to be 24 hours instead of 1000 years.

Do you deny that scripture teaches that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come (Luke 1:13-17, Matthew 11:7-15, Matthew 17:9-13)? That is the question you need to answer first before answering these other questions yourself.

I don't want the day of the Lord to be anything except what scripture teaches about it, but you're thinking of the wrong day of the Lord. There isn't just one day of the Lord in scripture. That is what many people, like yourself, miss. If you read Acts 2:16-21 you should see that it quotes Joel 2:28-32, which is also about the same day of the Lord as Malachi 4:5-6. And, yet, in Acts 2:16-21, Peter relates what happened on the day of Pentecost long ago to the great and dreadful day of the Lord.

What you don't understand is that the first coming of Christ and related events to that was the day of the Lord that Malachi 4:5-6 and Joel 2:28-32 prophesied about while the future day of the Lord is about His second coming as Paul prophesied about in 1 Thess 4:13-5:6 and Peter prophesied about in 2 Peter 3:3-13.

The reason Christ's first coming was considered "great and dreadful" is because there were both great and dreadful things that occurred around that time. One dreadful thing is that He was rejected and crucified, but the great thing is that He rose again from the dead and conquered death which brought the hope of eternal life to the world. But, it also brought condemnation to those who rejected Him so it was dreadful in that sense as well.

What happened on the day of Pentecost after His ascension was also great because that is when the Holy Spirit began to dwell in the hearts of Christians and when the gospel began to be shared through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Timtofly · Dec 13, 2020

Spiritual Jew said:
Do you deny that scripture teaches that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come (Luke 1:13-17, Matthew 11:7-15, Matthew 17:9-13)? That is the question you need to answer first before answering these other questions yourself.

I don't want the day of the Lord to be anything except what scripture teaches about it, but you're thinking of the wrong day of the Lord. There isn't just one day of the Lord in scripture. That is what many people, like yourself, miss. If you read Acts 2:16-21 you should see that it quotes Joel 2:28-32, which is also about the same day of the Lord as Malachi 4:5-6. And, yet, in Acts 2:16-21, Peter relates what happened on the day of Pentecost long ago to the great and dreadful day of the Lord.

What you don't understand is that the first coming of Christ and related events to that was the day of the Lord that Malachi 4:5-6 and Joel 2:28-32 prophesied about while the future day of the Lord is about His second coming as Paul prophesied about in 1 Thess 4:13-5:6 and Peter prophesied about in 2 Peter 3:3-13.

The reason Christ's first coming was considered "great and dreadful" is because there were both great and dreadful things that occurred around that time. One dreadful thing is that He was rejected and crucified, but the great thing is that He rose again from the dead and conquered death which brought the hope of eternal life to the world. But, it also brought condemnation to those who rejected Him so it was dreadful in that sense as well.

What happened on the day of Pentecost after His ascension was also great because that is when the Holy Spirit began to dwell in the hearts of Christians and when the gospel began to be shared through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Peter was preaching God's Word. Peter claims it was fulfilled. I get that. But there is still coming a day of the same magnitude. That is my point.

Did Christ teach Elijah will not come again at the Second Coming?

Who is "National Israel"?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Well-Known Member

Amillennialist

Well-Known Member

Amillennialist

Well-Known Member

Amillennialist

Well-Known Member

Amillennialist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Amillennialist

Well-Known Member

Similar threads