Are the Jews Israel, or is the church Israel? Or does it depend on the context of the passage?

Fisherking · 2025-11-17T12:16:17-0600

Clare73 said:
Holy Toledo!

God's "bride" rejects God's own son? . . .and being God's bride that makes him her son also.

Pass the smelling salts. . .

I have been a preacher 40 plus years, I understand the bible. Can you not read? Because I explained why it is as it is in vivid detail. Yes, God's bride rejected Jesus as their Messiah, so God forsook them for nigh 2000 years but God had a plan. Question, do you really think if Jews had tried to take the Gospel unto the whole world the whole world would have accepted Jesus? God used Israel to birth the Messiah, the promise to Abraham, then God used 12 men and their underlings to teach the Gentiles how to Evangelize the whole world. If God had not allowed the Diaspora, the Gospel would have been perverted into some type of legalistic Judaism , so God knew exactly what needed to be done, Gid used His bride to birth the Messiah, then he used the Church or Jesus' future Bride to evangelize the whole world, then God will use His bride Israel to set up His sons 1000 year reign on earth.

The whole Bride thing is just to show us how our relationship with God is supposed to be pure like a relationship with ones spouse. Israel were put forth as an example. Have you ever seen Christian friend that FALL then get back right with God? So, Israel only rejected Jesus the Promise because they got sidelined with THE LAW, the never understood fully that it was The Promise which came over 400 years before the Law of Moses came. So, the fell because of Paul said.......LACK of FAITH....... and when that faith returns so will Israel unto God.

19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.

20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:

21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. 22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. 23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.

24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? 25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: 27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

Here we can clearly see Paul delineates between THE CHURCH...........&..........Israel.

You can understand it now, or after you get to heaven, but one day you will see it sister. Just like Satan blinded Israel unto THE PROMISE (Jesus) he still blinds us on may things today.

Fisherking · 2025-11-17T13:01:20-0600

sovereigngrace said:
Does it take 7 yrs for a Jewish Wedding to be consummated?

Yes, a day for a year in Prophesy is a well known prophetic understanding.

sovereigngrace said:
This is another Pretrib invention that has no connection to reality or God's infallible Word.

The only invention comes from you, you strain at a gnat when you pretend you have no clue about the 1 day for a year prophetic lingo in the bible, so WHY GO THAT ROUTE? You already knew it was a proper interpretation analogy.

sovereigngrace said:
When Christ is united with His bride; it will not be for a 7-day or 7-year consummation; it will be for eternity!

You are just wrong, on all accounts, God married Israel long ago, we will marry Jesus. Satan loves deceiving people. He has an easy job at times. Here you are trying to debate someone who can explain the whole book of Revelation in one post, about the simple Pre Trib. Rapture. Everything as per a timeline that you buy into has to be warped to not fit the pre trib. rapture timing.

sovereigngrace said:
If you want to know when the marriage occurs; you must go to the end of the Tribulation; in Revelation chapter 19; when Jesus returns to the earth as King of kings, and Lord of lords. That is when Scripture teaches the Marriage will occur.

Boom, you do not get that Rev. 19 is the start of the tribulation period, the book is NOT IN ORDER, just like Daniel is NOT in order. Rev. 1 is Jesus in all his Eternal Glory, Rev. 2 & 3 is the Church Age, the number 7 means Divine Completion. The THINGS WHICH ARE = the Church Age. Thus everything after that, starting in Rev. 4:1 is the HEREAFTER or 70th week, the Church is in Heaven now, the 24 Elders represent the 24 Orders of the Priesthood see 1 Chronicles 24, we the Church are called Kings and Priests in Rev. 1:6 and in Rev. 5:9-10. We have White Robes on and Gold Crowns in Rev. 4:4 and we also sit at God's THRONE, now go back to Rev. 2:10, Rev. 3:5 and 3:21 and look real close, those who die in Jesus are promised what? To sit at God's THRONE and to wear Crowns of Gold, and to have on White Robes !! Meaning this is THEV CHURCH in Heaven. We know this by reading Rev. 5:9-10 they say they have been REDEEMED by the blood of Jesus, they are in Heaven, Angels can not be redeemed !! This in Rev. 19 when we see the have not yet Married the Lamb that has to happen BEFORE Rev. 4:4 and Rev. 5:9-10. God jumbled it up on purpose, that is cool with me. I am the unscrambler of Revelation. Thus Rev. 19 covers the full 7 years as does Rev. 14 the Harvest Chapter, we see the 144,000 (5 Million Jews who repent as an ENCODED name tag) on the Mt. but they are really in the Petra/Bozrah region, Jesus only goes tom get them AFTER he defeats Satan, the AC and their minions because Isaiah says he comes in BLOOD STANED Garments. They are shown on the Mt. because that is where the Wheat (Israel) will rule from with Jesus. In Verses 17-20 we see the Wicked Grapes are harvested (the Tares) and we know they are only judged 1000 years later at the 2nd Resurrection when Jesus destroys this earth, and universe. So, in vs. 14 we see a Pre Trib. Cinematic FLASHBACK where Jesus Harvests the Church from where? UPON A CLOUD !! Why is this so hard to grasp?

The Book of Revelation is not in Chronological Order sir. Rev. 2 and 3 is the Church age, Rev. 4, 5 and 6 is after the Rapture but before the middle of the 70th week Wrath of God falls. Rev. 7 is Israel fleeing Juda, at least the 1/3 whom repented, the 2/3 will die. Rev. 8stsrts God's Wrath not Rev. 6, the Seals UNSEAL the Wrath to come, thus Seal #6 merely foretells Trump #4 and Seals 1-5 foretell the Anti Christs coming actions in each case. Rev. 9 is STILL IN ORDER, the first and 2nd Woe emit from the 5th and 6th Trump. Now we have to jump to Rev. 16 (15 & 16 really are one chapter) and that finishes off the 70th week.

Rev. 10, 11, 12, 13, 17 and 18 all cover the 42 months of God's Wrath, but are speaking about specific 1260 day r 42 month events that come to pass there in. We see the exact same even THREE TIMES as per Jesus destroying the AC and his minions, in Rev. 16:19, in Rev. 14:17-20 and in Rev. 19 at Armageddon, they are all three the SAME EVENT !!

sovereigngrace said:
Postribber Tony Warren argues in an article on this issue (Jewish Wedding Customs & the Rapture): “If pretribulationists are right, we would expect the wedding and the feast to commence at the beginning of the tribulation, not after the tribulation as Revelation 19 plainly indicates. If Jesus was referring to heaven as the seven years in the 'Chuppah' in John 14:1-3, the bride should have “made herself ready” before the pretribulation rapture (around Rev. 4). And the “marriage of the Lamb” should have occurred at the beginning of the tribulation, and not at its extreme end. The pretribulation scenario has Jesus being intimate with the Bride in the “Chuppah” for seven years before Revelation 19 indicates the wedding occurs!”

Seems he not hip to these facts either. You guys just can not grasp why God jumbles up the book of Revelation, even though you see the same thing with Daniel, come on now. GET WITH IT....

sovereigngrace said:
Dr. Robert Gundry contends. "If a purported pretrib coming to fetch the church to heaven is supposed to reflect the ancient Semitic custom of a groom's fetching the bride to his home, what is Jesus' taking the church with Him back to earth right after the marriage supper, and for a thousand years, supposed to reflect

Armageddon is the Marriage Feast. The Bride will not remain on earth read Rev. 20:4 it SPECIFICALLY SAYS, that only those whom were Martyred by the Beast (70th week Gentile Saints who repented during the 70th week) will reign and rule 1000 years with Jesus on earth. Now THINK LOGICALY, God hates idle time and ide people. Jesus being God will not need billions of people on earth to help hm rile. My hunch is, since the New Jerusalem is called the Bride of Christ as it descends, that we go back up into the heavens to build the New Jerusalem, or to complete it in full.

You can't start out for the wrong destination and get to where you are going.

Clare73 · 2025-11-17T13:45:13-0600

Fisherking said:
I have been a preacher 40 plus years, I understand the bible. Can you not read? Because I explained why it is as it is in vivid detail. Yes, God's bride rejected Jesus as their Messiah, so God forsook them for nigh 2000 years but God had a plan. Question, do you really think if Jews had tried to take the Gospel unto the whole world the whole world would have accepted Jesus? God used Israel to birth the Messiah, the promise to Abraham, then God used 12 men and their underlings to teach the Gentiles how to Evangelize the whole world. If God had not allowed the Diaspora, the Gospel would have been perverted into some type of legalistic Judaism , so God knew exactly what needed to be done, Gid used His bride to birth the Messiah, then he used the Church or Jesus' future Bride to evangelize the whole world, then God will use His bride Israel to set up His sons 1000 year reign on earth.

The whole Bride thing is just to show us how our relationship with God is supposed to be pure like a relationship with ones spouse. Israel were put forth as an example. Have you ever seen Christian friend that FALL then get back right with God? So, Israel only rejected Jesus the Promise because they got sidelined with THE LAW, the never understood fully that it was The Promise which came over 400 years before the Law of Moses came. So, the fell because of Paul said.......LACK of FAITH....... and when that faith returns so will Israel unto God.

19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. 22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. 23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.

Note the "IF", not "when."

Fisherking said:
24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? 25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: 27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
Here we can clearly see Paul delineates between THE CHURCH...........&..........Israel.

And the rest of the story. . .(Gal 3:29)

Guojing · 2025-11-17T16:26:07-0600

sovereigngrace said:
Where does it say that?

I cannot prove a negative.

Guojing · 2025-11-17T16:27:29-0600

sovereigngrace said:
Galatians 6:15-16: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.”

Q. 1 Who is Paul specifically speaking to?
Q. 2 What is he speaking of in this text?
Q. 3 Who is he speaking about?

A. 1 He is primarily speaking to Gentile believers in Galatia, although there would doubtless have been Jewish converts among that assembly of believers.
A. 2 The whole focus of this passage is the subject of circumcision, and how it has no bearing upon the issue of salvation.
A. 3. All those who are born again.

Whilst this epistle was inspired of the Holy Spirit for the edification and instruction of the Church of Jesus Christ generally, it was initially and principally written to the Galatian Gentile believers. The verses that actually precede Paul’s instruction on “the Israel of God” makes it clear that his counsel was primarily directed to those Galatian saints who were experiencing hostility from certain Jews for not being physically circumcised. Paul in turn was specifically addressing the issue of circumcision, warning the Galatian Gentile believers against the dangerous crusade of these misguided Judadizers who were attempting to put them under bondage by compelling them to be circumcised.

Paul says of such, in his introductory comments in Galatians 6:12-13, “As many as desire to make a fair shew in the flesh (speaking of the Jews), they constrain you (Galatian Gentile believers) to be circumcised; only lest they should suffer persecution for the cross of Christ. For neither they themselves who are circumcised (namely the Jews) keep the law; but desire to have you (Gentiles) circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh.”

Obviously, it would not make sense for the carnal Jews to pressure the saved Jews to get circumcised, as they had to be circumcised to be a Jew. It is therefore not hard to identify Paul’s audience here. His recipients are indeed uncircumcised Gentiles. Paul indeed declares, “they constrain you to be circumcised” (v12); and repeats, they “desire to have you circumcised” (v13).

These religious Jews were false teachers looking to bring Gentiles under bondage. Peter highlighted the error of these Jewish legalists in Acts 15:24, saying: “Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment.”

Paul is constantly telling us in his writings in lucid terms that there is no ‘them and us’ within the body of Christ. He emphasizes how one’s Jewishness or Gentileness means absolutely nothing today “in Christ Jesus.” He actually rebukes those that try to establish distinct groupings within the body of Christ (namely Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians). Paul repeatedly instructs the New Testament believer that there should be no racial, cultural or economic division within the body. 1 Corinthians 12:25 says: “That there should be no schism in the body.”

Those that would argue that a man’s natural race carries any merit or virtue before God when it comes to salvation or that it in any way adds anything to a man’s spiritual status are severely censured by passages like Galatians 6. The reading declares, “And as many as walk according to this rule” (what rule?) – the non-racial new birth experience, – then “peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.” Paul places a blessing upon all who “walk according to this rule” – all who are conformed to this standard. As Christopher W. Cowan puts: “All who have experienced the new creation in Christ will have lives that manifest conformity to it” (Context Is Everything: “The Israel of God” in Galatians 6:16). Manifestly, Paul only had one company in mind: the redeemed Church of Jesus Christ.

The verb interpreted “walk according to” here [Gr. stoicheō] means to keep in step with, to conform to or to follow. Paul uses the same word in Galatians 5:25: “If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk [Gr. stoicheō] in the Spirit.” Paul’s approval in Galatians 6:16 is placed upon all those who live their lives in strict conformity with the rule/standard he has just proclaimed.

James Burton Coffman remarks: “It is surprising that any could misunderstand this, as if Paul were, in any manner, invoking a blessing upon racial Jews. ‘Israel of God’, in the true sense, with Paul, was never racial Israel, but the spiritual Israel … This meaning of ‘spiritual Israel’, of course, included all of every race, including Jews, who accepted Christ.

John Wesley agrees: “‘Peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel, that is, the Church, of God. Which consists of all those, and those only, of every nation and kindred, who walk by this rule.” John Calvin writes: “I extend the word Israel to all the people of God, according to this meaning, - When the Gentiles shall come in, the Jews also shall return from their defection to the obedience of faith; and thus shall be completed the salvation of the whole Israel of God.”

The Bible makes clear, only the second birth can create “a new creature” – nothing else. That is why Paul commences by saying, in Galatians 6:16, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature” (Galatians 6:15). Those who subject themselves to this divine decree (namely, giving their life to Christ), will, irrespective of race, experience the peace of God and the mercy of heaven.

The New Testament is constantly reminding us that we are saved by grace and not by race; and that when we are saved we become one unique spiritual race. The Church in fact is a spiritual nation with it passport stamped in heaven.

Are you agreeing with me that the Israel of God must still undergo circumcision, as in Acts 21:18-25?

I know what Paul said in Galatians, no need for you to explain, focus on what James and the elders told Paul.

Fisherking · 2025-11-17T20:11:42-0600

Clare73 said:
Note the "IF", not "when."

No, we get too technical translating these words at times, and we also then fail to see why Paul's IF if it was not some other word that did not quite mean if, is then overridden by Pau in vs. 25 where he says emphatically that ALL Israel (he means all 12 tribes will be represented in this repentance not ever Jew, of course, Zech. 13:8-9 tells us that only 1/3 repent, but since there are 8 Billion Gentiles and only 1/8 of us make it to heaven, yest I know there are now 2 billion Christians, but 5 of the 10 virgin brides do not make the wedding call or rapture. So, 33% is a lot higher than 12-13%.

Clare73 said:
And the rest of the story. . .(Gal 3:29)

I have taught on Gal chapter 3 many times sister, its not what you think it is, as a matter of fact its just the opposite. I can go into detail, but I will just give a brief understanding for now.

During the whole chapter Paul is rebuking the Galatians for moving away from the faith, and unto the Law of Moses. So, some converted Jews no doubt came along and said BUT....you still have to keep Moses' Law. That is why Paul juxtaposed FAITH (Spirit) vs. FLESH (Law) over and over in Gal. 3. Then at the end to bring it home, he's saying STOP TRYING TO BE Jewish in order to make it to heaven, we all make it the same way, Jew, Greek, Male & Female BY FAITH ALONE. You and others wrongly surmise this means Paul is saying the Church are all one, if that is what he mean, that Jews and Males are now all ONE, why did he use Males and Females because we are not ALL ONE are we? Males are males and females still are the only gender that can have babies in this world. So, males and females are all one in what manner? How we come unto Christ Jesus by.....................FAITH ALONE....Not by keeping Moses' Law. Likewise, the same thing was meant about Jews and Greeks (Gentiles) all being ONE. Both Jew and Gentile must come unto God by FAITH ALONE. This is why Israel can not repent until after the Pre Trib. Rapture, because God has turned the mantle of taking the Gospel unto all the world over to the [mostly] Gentile Church(Time of the Gentiles [SERVICE unto God]. Only after we are Raptured will Gd call Israel, as a nation, unto repentance, as a matter of fact, its our Rapture (which is 1 Billion people dying at the same time) of our Spirit Man, which starts the ball rolling for a lot of the Jews, ALL THOSE WHO DIED were Christians. Then Elijah and Moses shows up to finish the job.

Never let one chapter or verse send you down a wrong path sister.

sovereigngrace · 2025-11-17T22:34:30-0600

Fisherking said:
Yes, a day for a year in Prophesy is a well known prophetic understanding.

The only invention comes from you, you strain at a gnat when you pretend you have no clue about the 1 day for a year prophetic lingo in the bible, so WHY GO THAT ROUTE? You already knew it was a proper interpretation analogy.

You are just wrong, on all accounts, God married Israel long ago, we will marry Jesus. Satan loves deceiving people. He has an easy job at times. Here you are trying to debate someone who can explain the whole book of Revelation in one post, about the simple Pre Trib. Rapture. Everything as per a timeline that you buy into has to be warped to not fit the pre trib. rapture timing.

Boom, you do not get that Rev. 19 is the start of the tribulation period, the book is NOT IN ORDER, just like Daniel is NOT in order. Rev. 1 is Jesus in all his Eternal Glory, Rev. 2 & 3 is the Church Age, the number 7 means Divine Completion. The THINGS WHICH ARE = the Church Age. Thus everything after that, starting in Rev. 4:1 is the HEREAFTER or 70th week, the Church is in Heaven now, the 24 Elders represent the 24 Orders of the Priesthood see 1 Chronicles 24, we the Church are called Kings and Priests in Rev. 1:6 and in Rev. 5:9-10. We have White Robes on and Gold Crowns in Rev. 4:4 and we also sit at God's THRONE, now go back to Rev. 2:10, Rev. 3:5 and 3:21 and look real close, those who die in Jesus are promised what? To sit at God's THRONE and to wear Crowns of Gold, and to have on White Robes !! Meaning this is THEV CHURCH in Heaven. We know this by reading Rev. 5:9-10 they say they have been REDEEMED by the blood of Jesus, they are in Heaven, Angels can not be redeemed !! This in Rev. 19 when we see the have not yet Married the Lamb that has to happen BEFORE Rev. 4:4 and Rev. 5:9-10. God jumbled it up on purpose, that is cool with me. I am the unscrambler of Revelation. Thus Rev. 19 covers the full 7 years as does Rev. 14 the Harvest Chapter, we see the 144,000 (5 Million Jews who repent as an ENCODED name tag) on the Mt. but they are really in the Petra/Bozrah region, Jesus only goes tom get them AFTER he defeats Satan, the AC and their minions because Isaiah says he comes in BLOOD STANED Garments. They are shown on the Mt. because that is where the Wheat (Israel) will rule from with Jesus. In Verses 17-20 we see the Wicked Grapes are harvested (the Tares) and we know they are only judged 1000 years later at the 2nd Resurrection when Jesus destroys this earth, and universe. So, in vs. 14 we see a Pre Trib. Cinematic FLASHBACK where Jesus Harvests the Church from where? UPON A CLOUD !! Why is this so hard to grasp?

The Book of Revelation is not in Chronological Order sir. Rev. 2 and 3 is the Church age, Rev. 4, 5 and 6 is after the Rapture but before the middle of the 70th week Wrath of God falls. Rev. 7 is Israel fleeing Juda, at least the 1/3 whom repented, the 2/3 will die. Rev. 8stsrts God's Wrath not Rev. 6, the Seals UNSEAL the Wrath to come, thus Seal #6 merely foretells Trump #4 and Seals 1-5 foretell the Anti Christs coming actions in each case. Rev. 9 is STILL IN ORDER, the first and 2nd Woe emit from the 5th and 6th Trump. Now we have to jump to Rev. 16 (15 & 16 really are one chapter) and that finishes off the 70th week.

Rev. 10, 11, 12, 13, 17 and 18 all cover the 42 months of God's Wrath, but are speaking about specific 1260 day r 42 month events that come to pass there in. We see the exact same even THREE TIMES as per Jesus destroying the AC and his minions, in Rev. 16:19, in Rev. 14:17-20 and in Rev. 19 at Armageddon, they are all three the SAME EVENT !!

Seems he not hip to these facts either. You guys just can not grasp why God jumbles up the book of Revelation, even though you see the same thing with Daniel, come on now. GET WITH IT....

Armageddon is the Marriage Feast. The Bride will not remain on earth read Rev. 20:4 it SPECIFICALLY SAYS, that only those whom were Martyred by the Beast (70th week Gentile Saints who repented during the 70th week) will reign and rule 1000 years with Jesus on earth. Now THINK LOGICALY, God hates idle time and ide people. Jesus being God will not need billions of people on earth to help hm rile. My hunch is, since the New Jerusalem is called the Bride of Christ as it descends, that we go back up into the heavens to build the New Jerusalem, or to complete it in full.

You can't start out for the wrong destination and get to where you are going.

This is all man-made extra-biblical theories. Zero substance. Like Van Imp you do not quote Scripture. You just reference it because the Book forbids your error.

Where is "the Church age" mentioned in Revelation 2 and 3?
Where is your "rapture" in Revelation 4?
Where is your 3rd coming in Revelation?

sovereigngrace · 2025-11-17T22:36:31-0600

Guojing said:
Are you agreeing with me that the Israel of God must still undergo circumcision, as in Acts 21:18-25?

I know what Paul said in Galatians, no need for you to explain, focus on what James and the elders told Paul.

Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
Rom 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

sovereigngrace · 2025-11-17T22:37:21-0600

Guojing said:
I cannot prove a negative.

Exactly. You cannot prove anything that you have taught. I knew that! The reader knows that.

sovereigngrace · 2025-11-17T22:39:44-0600

Fisherking said:
I have been a preacher 40 plus years,

And?

I understand the bible.

I beg to disagree. You are just teaching what you have been taught.

Show us any Scripture that teaches a rapture of the Church, followed by a tribulation period of any length, followed by a third coming of the Lord?

Guojing · 2025-11-17T22:45:21-0600

sovereigngrace said:
Exactly. You cannot prove anything that you have taught. I knew that! The reader knows that.

It merely shows you are asking a dumb question.

Guojing · 2025-11-17T22:45:51-0600

sovereigngrace said:
Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
Rom 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

So why didn't Paul tell James that at Acts 21:18-25?

sovereigngrace · 2025-11-17T23:18:46-0600

Guojing said:
So why didn't Paul tell James that at Acts 21:18-25?

Are you a proponent of apostate Judaism? The old covenant died with the death of Christ. It is finished!

To achieve this you have to ignore the repeated teaching of Christ, Paul and all the New Testament writers that show Christ as the fulfillment of the temple, the whole sacrifice system and the Old Testament priesthood.

Whilst the cross and the blood of Christ spelt the end of the old covenant, God allowed the Jews 40 years to repent and see the truth. It was only then that the temple was destroyed. It was not that the temple sacrifices continued to be legitimate or that the old covenant remained active. It didn't. Heb 8:13 tells us: "A new covenant, he hath made the first old (palaioō, worn out, decayed, declared obsolete). Now that which decayeth (palaioō, worn out, decayed, declared obsolete) and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”

The new covenant age did not begin in AD 70; it began at the cross. The removal of the last vestiges of the old covenant arrangement may have finally been removed in AD70, but that was just a sign of God's longsuffering with Israel. Notwithstanding, when Christ said "it is finished" that was the end of the old covenant arrangement. Once the curtain was cut in two that was it. It usefulness had found its termination point in God's economy. Christ was now the final sacrifice for sin. He had now introduced a new covenant to replace the old! It is already made at the cross! He has already removed our sin!

Hebrews 10:9-12 confirms: "Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away (present active indicative) the first, that he may establish (aorist, active subjunctive) the second. By the which will we are sanctified (present active indicative) through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God."

Where does it say that ‘He taketh away the second, that he may re-establish the first’? The thought is preposterous and erroneous to repeated New Testament Scripture. There is nowhere in the NT that it says Paul performed sin offerings. You impute a lot into one passage that most Premils wouldn't'. What is more throughout his teaching Paul renounced the efficacy and legitimacy of the old covenant arrangement today or in the future and repeatedly showed that Christ was the final sacrifice for sin. This is accepted by multiple Postmil, Premil and Amil commentators. You attribute a lot to Paul in order to defend the indefensible. Your passion to see the reintroduction of additional sin offerings in this age and on the new earth is misplaced, unscriptural and deeply disturbing. When did Christ, Paul or any NT writer promote such error? NEVER!

I do find it grievous that you try to claim Paul as a proponent of the old covenant sacrifices after the cross. Several times in the New Testament Paul yielded to Jewish customs in order to appease the Jews. However, his overriding desire was never to put his blessing upon a failed bankrupt religious system but to win his fellow countrymen to Christ. We see that in his vow in Acts 18:18, his attendance to the temple in Acts 21:25-27 while a festival was ongoing, and the circumcising of Titus the Gentile in Galatians 2:2-5. The thinking behind his actions is shown in 1 Corinthians 9:20-21 for all to see. None could doubt his overriding desire to see his fellow-religionists saved. He testified: “And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ) that I might gain them that are without law.”

I don’t see any deeper a meaning than this. Paul writings make it clear that the old covenant arrangement has been superseded by Christ and the new covenant. There was a religious / political aspect to the sacrifices that all Israelis were bound to as Jews in order to maintain their Jewish privileges. I believe Paul yielded to the political requirements - in honouring the God-ordained authorities - but he made no spiritual submission to these abolished rites. I don't believe he recognised the expiatory significance of the sacrifices, as he finally released himself from the religious Judaic baggage he was bound with. He would not have recognised the intercession of the high priest with God for the people because he had a real, perfect and eternal great High Priest (Hebrews 5:6, 9, Hebrews 4:14).

Jennings' Jewish Antiguities, p. 17 says of Acts 21:26: "there was a political as well as a typical use of sacrifices; and that, though the typical ceased upon the sacrifice of Christ, yet the political continued until God in his providence broke up the Jewish state and polity about forty years after our Savior's death. Till that time it was not merely lawful, but matter of duty, for good subjects to pay the dues which were appointed by law for the support of the government and magistracy. Now, of this kind was the sacrifice which Paul offered; and in this view they were paid by Christians dwelling in Judea, as well as by those who still adhered to the Jewish religion. So that, upon the whole, this action, for which Paul has been so much censured, probably amounts to nothing more than paying the tribute due to the magistrate by law, which the apostle enjoins upon all other Christians in all other nations, Romans 13:6."

We do not know the motive for Paul going into the temple at this time, or if he in fact actually made a blood offering. It could have been legally required to maintain his citizenship. It could thus have been a sop to the religious authorities, albeit not in any way he believed that there was any spiritual purpose or efficacy in the rite. Of course there is the possibility that it was an imprudent compromise on Paul’s part. He may have meant well, participating in this solely to get an opportunity to preach in the temple. We just don’t know. However, we definitely cannot build a doctrine upon silence, especially when the New Testament is very clear that Christ’s sacrifice was the final sacrifice for sin forever.

The one thing we do know that not long after this incident Christ eradicated the whole Judaic sacrifice system through the destruction of the temple, proving that this system was over forever. It was impossible for this system to survive the destruction of its ceremonial centre of operations. This reinforces the belief that this arrangement was now considered rebellious, pointless and redundant with the arrival of the new covenant and Christ’s final sacrifice for sin.

It doesn't even mention the feast that he attended in the chapter. Even if Paul attended a festival, it was for the sole purpose of preaching the cross. Every time they went to the temple it was to present Christ and expose the error of the then Christless Crossless Jewish religion.

sovereigngrace · 2025-11-17T23:19:46-0600

Guojing said:
It merely shows you are asking a dumb question.

That is nice.

Avoidance seems to be your only tactic.

Guojing · 2025-11-17T23:40:07-0600

sovereigngrace said:
Are you a proponent of apostate Judaism? The old covenant died with the death of Christ. It is finished!

To achieve this you have to ignore the repeated teaching of Christ, Paul and all the New Testament writers that show Christ as the fulfillment of the temple, the whole sacrifice system and the Old Testament priesthood.

I am asking you why Paul did not tell James everything you are saying here, during Acts 21:18-25.

It is fine to say you don't know why.

Clare73 · 2025-11-18T09:13:13-0600

Fisherking said:
No, we get too technical translating these words at times,

Oh, that's rich. . .

Are the Jews Israel, or is the church Israel? Or does it depend on the context of the passage?

Active Member

Active Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Similar threads