Continuity? Yes.

[Cajun Huguenot]

I have been thinking about several things these days and one of those things has to do with the relationship between the people of God in the Old Testament (OT) and the people of God in the New Testament (NT). I hope you will find what follows to be of interest. It is an attempt to look at the continuity between the church age and the ages that came before.

Question: Are Christians a totally separate people of God than those under the Old Covenant?
Answer: No. We are part of the one covenant people of God. There is only one people of God, from the time of Adam until the Second coming of Jesus Christ.

We know this because Paul tells us that we gentiles have been grafted into the one olive tree, which represents God's covenant people (i.e. Israel). We are not a new tree (a new people) we are but branches grafted in with those that were already there (the ethnically Jews Christians) and were not cut off for unbelief.

For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches. And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. (Romans 11:16-21)

This shows our continuity with the Old Covenant (OC) people of God. Notice that some of God's covenant people were broken off of the olive tree. These were the Jews who rejected Christ. They were in covenant and yet not saved. We non-Jews in the New Covenant, represented as wild branches, were grafted in to the very same olive tree. This means we have become part of God's one covenant people. Notice also that we too are threatened with the possibility of being cut off just as they were.

If those now in the New Covenant (NC) era can be cut off of the Olive tree in the same way those in the OC were cut off, then it follows that there are some of God's covenant people today who are not born again. They, like those in the OC, can be cut off.

The fact that we are "grafted into the olive tree" and are part of the one people of God is a strong point of continuity that exists under all the separate covenants, from the beginning of history to the end.

I would like you to notice something else from Romans 11. "And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee." (Romans 11:17)

Notice we partake of the root. We partake of the ancient covenants and promises. We are not something brand new. We Christians are united to the ancient root of God's covenant people. Not only that but "thou bearest not the root, but the root thee." It is the ancient root of the one people of God that supports us here in the NC.

We Christians are also (like believing ethnic Jews) "Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Gal, 3:29). We are fixed here directly to God's covenant with Abraham. We in the church are the heirs of God's promises to Abraham. This again connects us today with the ancient people of God. God's people both then and now, are one people not two or more. We are part of the Covenant people of God, and are therefore sons of the Abraham whom God gave His covenant sign.

Now let's go to Ephesians. Here we read "Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ." (Eph. 2:11-13)

Notice that we "being in time past Gentiles in the flesh" are no longer so. We are no longer Gentiles. Why? Because we are now part of the one covenant people of God. We who were "aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise" are no longer so. We are no longer aliens from the commonwealth of Israel.

Question: What is a commonwealth?
Answer: The Greek word translated commonwealth here is "politeia", and it can be defined as "a state or commonwealth" and as "citizenship."

So we are no longer aliens to the state, commonwealth, or citizenship" of Israel. We, who were once gentiles, are now citizens of God's covenant people Israel, and are part of the historic covenant people of God.

Notice that we, who were once gentiles, are no longer strangers from the "covenants" (plural) "of promise" (singular).

Question: Who were these "covenants" made with?
Answer: They begin at the beginning. In Genesis 3 is where we find the first of these covenants; next it is with Noah; then Abraham, Moses, David and then the New Covenant with the house of Israel and house of Judah.

We who were once gentiles are now no longer "strangers from the covenants of promise." Why is that? It is because we have been grafted into the one people of God. We have become citizens of the commonwealth of Israel. This is continuity with the old covenants that were all part of the one promise.

The radical discontinuity between OC and NC that some modern Christians perceive is (IMHO) a gross misreading of the Word of God.

We, in the church are today the Israel of God. This is why we in the church are a "holy nation" (1 Pet 2:9) just as our fellow citizens in ancient Israel were a "holy nation" (Ex. 19:6). Israel was the "peculiar people" of God (Deut 14:2; 26:18) and we in the church today are also the "peculiar people" of God (Titus 2:14; 1 Pet. 2:9).

These examples that are given above are just a few of the Scriptures that show continuity between the people of God in the OC and the People of God in the NC. They can be expanded many times over. We are one with the historic and ancient people of God.

Some Christians today will likely reply something like this "The people in the OC were not all saved, but now in the NC all God's covenant people are saved." They can say what they want to, but I believe the facts are otherwise. Folks have to ignore an awful lot of NT Scripture to make that claim or they must believe that salvation can be lost in the NC.

Question: Can branches grafted into the olive tree be cut off today?
Answer: Yes we see that in Romans 11. "Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee." If we in the NC can be cut off from the olive tree just as those in the OC were cut off, and none who have been born again can become unsaved, then there must be some now grafted into the olive tree who are not born again. This is as it was in the OC.

Now let’s look at another matter for just a moment. At the time which Paul and the other Apostles were preaching, there was only one set of Scriptures and those were the writings of what we today call the Old Testament. Some of my Christian brethren today make a gulf between the OT and NT and speak as though they are hermetically sealed from one another. However, that was not the view of the Apostles or the Church before the modern era. (Note: It was the view of a number of cults and heretical movements like Marcionism in the ancient world) That chasm that supposedly exists is not biblical and was never the position of anyone in the Church until recent history.

Let's see what we can learn from the ethnic Jews in Berea. We read:

And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. (Acts 17:10,11)

Paul and Silas came to the Synagogue at Berea and taught the Jews there about the NT Gospel.

Question: Where did these Jews go to see if what Paul was saying about Jesus and everything else was true?
Answer: They searched the Scriptures of the Old Testament because these were the ONLY Scriptures then in existence.

I think this alone shows there must be continuity, but there is no reason to let this stand-alone. Let see what Paul said to young Timothy. Paul wrote "And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus." (II Tim 3:16)

Question: What holy Scriptures had Timothy grown up with that were able to "make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus”?
Answer: They were the Scriptures of the Old Testament, because these were the only Scriptures that existed when Timothy was a child. Notice that the OT was able to make young Timothy "wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus."

Jesus Christ has always been the object of saving faith. There has never been any other object of saving faith since the beginning of the world, and this is the greatest and most important of all the continuities from OC to NC.

There is one people of God from beginning to end. We are part of that one people. There is one Scripture and it is made up of the Old and New Testaments, but these are one single Word of God. There are not two words of God for two peoples; there is but one Word for one people of God. This too is continuity.

There is a dramatic change between Old Testament and New Testament, the difference is the OT looked forward to, and anticipates, the coming Saviour, and the NT is better because we live in the fulfilment of the Saviours redemptive work and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. But even with this the Bible is one book and God’s people are all one people.

Coram Deo,
Kenith

 

[heymikey80]

I agree with you. There is some way in which God is treating everyone who is His as the same group of people, His people of God, with the same criteria, the same intentions, the same purposes in relating to us through the covenants of grace.

I think what most people have trouble with is the difference. It's making sense of the idea that there's continuity, yes, but there are also changes in different ... dispensations (as Westminster calls it) or administrations (as Westminster also calls it) of the covenant.

I think the more I read it, the biggest argument I see in favor of continuity is Romans 2. Romans 2 talks first about "you who judge [the unrighteous]" as also being unrighteous. As he addresses the Jewish people, the circumcision, Paul constantly refers back to Gentiles in a positive light. He states Gentiles who conscientiously perform the Law are a Law unto themselves; those who do the Law are righteous, not simply hearers of the Law; uncircumcision will be considered circumcision for those who do the Law; and inward circumcision is true circumcision, inward Judaism [ie, inward praise from God] is true Judaism.

There's some kind of distinction. It's simply buried when it comes to righteousness. Romans 3 starts out with the distinction, and yet points out it doesn't make a Jew superior in respect of righteousness (Rom 3:9). Everyone is unrighteous, everyone needs the righteousness of God (Rom 3:19-21).

In Romans 9 Paul also describes another distinction of Israel -- and buries it yet again. Israel is chosen (ie, elect), but not everyone called "Israel". Only some individuals are really chosen. And they're chosen by God. And Paul points out near the end of the chapter, God's under no compunction to choose individuals descended from Israel. He picks strangers. He picks those not striving for righteousness. He picks those He wants.

Paul does it again in Romans 11. Israel is hardened -- but not all Israel. And plenty of Gentiles are brought in due to this hardening -- but what'll happen when plenty of Israelites are also brought to Christ? Paul expects much more from that.

So it seems to me like a merger of sorts is underway. The existing people of God are being merged with new people God is redeeming. God is sending His Spirit into the Gentiles more and more, and the people of God must follow the Spirit's lead or they show they're not born of Him (John 3:3-8). There's definitely continuity. There's this huge expansion in God's actual ministry to the world, as God's people come to realize His true heart for all His people among the Gentiles. And it's been triggered by the increase in spiritual depth brought by the Spirit poured-out on His people, in response to the Crucifixion of Christ Jesus.

 

[pehkay]

If you interprete the olive tree as Christ (John 15) ... there is an organic union with Christ in life whether Jews or Gentiles.

Rom 11:11-22 speaks on the Gentiles being saved through Israal's stumbling ...

But verses 23-32, especially on v23 "And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again." are on Israel restored through the Gentiles' receiving mercy.

This will occur at the Lord's second coming, when all the remnant of the nation of Israel will repent and turn to believe in Him as their Messiah and be saved (Zech. 12:10; Rom. 11:26).

 

[ddub85]

@ Cajun Huguenot

Question: Are Christians a totally separate people of God than those under the Old Covenant?
Answer: No. We are part of the one covenant people of God. There is only one people of God, from the time of Adam until the Second coming of Jesus Christ.

The Bible declares that we Gentiles are a part of the Old Covenant (Gal 3:8). Yet, the Bible never includes us in the New Covenant. So yes, clearly we are all included in the Old Covenant.

The fact that we are "grafted into the olive tree"...

What were we grafted into? We would have to be grafted into something already in place, correct? So what was already in place? The Old Covenant. That's what we were grafted into, as foretold to Abraham by God (Gen 12:3).

Notice that we, who were once gentiles, are no longer strangers from the "covenants" (plural) "of promise" (singular).

So true. Except,... "once gentiles"? When did we become something other than Gentiles?

We who were once gentiles are now no longer "strangers from the covenants of promise."

Does that say strangers from the covenants of ONE promise, or strangers from the covenants of ALL promises? If it says one promise, then that would mean only one, and we would be excluded from the others. Paul tells us it's one, and tells us which one it is. That would mean exclusion from the others.

Why is that? It is because we have been grafted into the one people of God. We have become citizens of the commonwealth of Israel. This is continuity with the old covenants that were all part of the one promise.

First, we have become fellowcitizens, meaning we are to receive what we've been allotted/assigned, not all that is promised.

Second, there are many promises given to Abraham, but according to Paul we have been allotted the one promise pulled out of the many.

We, in the church are today the Israel of God.

Such a thing cannot be found ANYWHERE in scripture. Not one book, chapter, or verse. You've come to this conclusion based on your CALCULATIONS of what you think scripture is saying, NOT based upon what is actually said. There is a difference between these two things.

God Bless!

 

[heymikey80]

So true. Except,... "once gentiles"? When did we become something other than Gentiles?

Apparently "in Christ". You'll just have to ask Paul:

"Wherefore, remember that you, once the Gentiles ..." Ep 2:11
​

 

[ddub85]

Once Gentiles in the flesh, but now Gentiles in the Spirit. Do you see it any different than that? If so, where does scripture say such a thing? Surely not in Eph. 2.

Try again.

God Bless!

 

[Iosias]

Such a thing cannot be found ANYWHERE in scripture. Not one book, chapter, or verse.

Try Romans and Galatians and Philippians

E.g.

Phil 3:3 "For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh."

Gal 3:16, 29 "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. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise."

 

[heymikey80]

Apparently "in Christ". You'll just have to ask Paul:"Wherefore, remember that you, once the Gentiles ..." Ep 2:11

Once Gentiles in the flesh, but now Gentiles in the Spirit. Do you see it any different than that? If so, where does scripture say such a thing? Surely not in Eph. 2.

Try again.

God Bless!

It is in Ep 2. We're no longer separated Gentile from Jew in the Spirit:

For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. Ep 2:14-16
​

And it's taught in plenty of other places, to cite just a few:

For we are the real circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh Pp 3:3

Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all. Col 3:11

So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? Rom 2:26
​

 

[ddub85]

@ AV1611

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddub85
Such a thing cannot be found ANYWHERE in scripture. Not one book, chapter, or verse.

Try Romans and Galatians and Philippians
E.g.
Phil 3:3 "For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh."

Gentiles in the flesh, Gentiles in the Spirit. Do you see anything different here in this verse? Do you take this as stating Gentiles are Jews?

Gal 3:16, 29 "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. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise."

BOTH Jews and Gentiles are Abraham's seed. So the promises are to Abraham's seed. By "YE... are heirs according to the (SINGLE) promise." See that in the verses you quote? Not heirs to the plural promises, but heirs to the single promise.

God Bless!

 

[ddub85]

@ heymikey

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddub85
Quote:
Originally Posted by heymikey80
Apparently "in Christ". You'll just have to ask Paul:"Wherefore, remember that you, once the Gentiles ..." Ep 2:11
Once Gentiles in the flesh, but now Gentiles in the Spirit. Do you see it any different than that? If so, where does scripture say such a thing? Surely not in Eph. 2.
Try again.
God Bless!

It is in Ep 2. We're no longer separated Gentile from Jew in the Spirit:
For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. Ep 2:14-16
And it's taught in plenty of other places, to cite just a few:
For we are the real circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh Pp 3:3
Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all. Col 3:11
So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? Rom 2:26

"Once Gentiles in the flesh, now Gentiles in the Spirit." None of these verses says differently. If they do, be very specific as to how, and let's discuss it. If not, then let's stop crediting things to the Bible that it doesn't say. Your interpretation won't change fact.

God Bless!

 

[heymikey80]

"Once Gentiles in the flesh, now Gentiles in the Spirit." None of these verses says differently. If they do, be very specific as to how, and let's discuss it. If not, then let's stop crediting things to the Bible that it doesn't say. Your interpretation won't change fact.

None of these verses says "Gentiles in the Spirit".

Paul opposed ancient Judaizing the Church, there's no reason to suppose Paul wouldn't have opposed Gentilizing the Church, if anyone had tried such a radical thing in his day.

Paul's statements here hold none of the "Jew/Gentile" split you wish to maintain in the Spiritual realm:

For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God Ep 2:14-19
​

We have access in one Spirit to God. How can the Spirit of God distinguish spiritual Gentiles from spiritual Jews when we have the the same standing in the Spirit?

 

[ddub85]

@ heymikey

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddub85
"Once Gentiles in the flesh, now Gentiles in the Spirit." None of these verses says differently. If they do, be very specific as to how, and let's discuss it. If not, then let's stop crediting things to the Bible that it doesn't say. Your interpretation won't change fact.

None of these verses says "Gentiles in the Spirit".

Why is that a problem for you? No verses say Gentiles become Jews, yet you readily believe that.

Paul opposed ancient Judaizing the Church, there's no reason to suppose Paul wouldn't have opposed Gentilizing the Church, if anyone had tried such a radical thing in his day.

"Judaizing and Genilizing the church"? What is that? There are both Jews and Gentiles in the church. That promise was made long ago to Abraham that it would be this way. Paul makes it clear that this is the way it is. So what's the problem?

Paul's statements here hold none of the "Jew/Gentile" split you wish to maintain in the Spiritual realm:

What split? BOTH are in Christ. There is no split. But one IS NOT the other, as you maintain. You say one becomes the other at the elimination of one. The Bible doesn't maintain that genocidal split, eliminating Gentiles.

For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God Ep 2:14-19
We have access in one Spirit to God. How can the Spirit of God distinguish spiritual Gentiles from spiritual Jews when we have the the same standing in the Spirit?

If we are equal, then why would God eliminate one? Why would God commit genocide, eliminating Gentiles as you maintain, and make everyone Jews? There is one Spirit, and we Jews and Gentiles share it. BOTH are reconciled to God, BOTH have access to the Father, not one being swallowed up by the other. We Gentiles are fellow citizens, receiving what we've been assigned. That's what the Bible says.

You say Gentiles are eliminated, and become Jews. You assign superiority to Jews over Gentiles, even to the point of the elimination of Gentiles.

That's not the message from God. Not biblical. Not even close.

God Bless!

 

[heymikey80]

Why is that a problem for you? No verses say Gentiles become Jews, yet you readily believe that.

Actually, they do. "We are the true circumcision"; "So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?"; "an inward Jew is one".

They don't say it in your interpretation. Nevertheless they do say it.

"Judaizing and Genilizing the church"? What is that? There are both Jews and Gentiles in the church. That promise was made long ago to Abraham that it would be this way. Paul makes it clear that this is the way it is. So what's the problem?

So when Peter went up to Jerusalem, the circumcision party criticized him Ac 11:2

But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." Ac 15:1

For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. Gal 2:12
​

What split? BOTH are in Christ. There is no split. But one IS NOT the other, as you maintain. You say one becomes the other at the elimination of one. The Bible doesn't maintain that genocidal split, eliminating Gentiles.

Continuing in your lie I see. I've brought this to your attention before, your persistence indicates knowing denial of the truth -- a lie. I didn't say that, I said Gentiles who are inward Jews are thus (already) Jews by definition -- not that Gentiles should become outward Jews.

The definition of "Jew" is not what you say it is.

 

[ddub85]

@ heymikey

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddub85
Why is that a problem for you? No verses say Gentiles become Jews, yet you readily believe that.

Actually, they do.

Actually, that's not true.

"We are the true circumcision";

The true circumcision is the circumcision of the heart, which is from God. All who come to Christ are the true circumcision, but not the circumcision referred to as the Jews by the Bible. Gentiles and Jews are the true circumcision.

"So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?";

There is no such Gentile. Again, if there is, list him/her. If you can't, then obviously you agree.

"an inward Jew is one".

An inward "Jew", which says nothing of a Gentile. YOU, not the Bible, attempt to include Gentiles in this.

They don't say it in your interpretation. Nevertheless they do say it.

I have no interpretation, you do. What you say isn't said in the Bible. It's time to tell the truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddub85
"Judaizing and Genilizing the church"? What is that? There are both Jews and Gentiles in the church. That promise was made long ago to Abraham that it would be this way. Paul makes it clear that this is the way it is. So what's the problem?

So when Peter went up to Jerusalem, the circumcision party criticized him Ac 11:2
But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of
Moses, you cannot be saved." Ac 15:1
For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated
himself, fearing the circumcision party. Gal 2:12

You're not saying anything with these scriptures that would lead to Gentiles becoming Jews.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddub85
What split? BOTH are in Christ. There is no split. But one IS NOT the other, as you maintain. You say one becomes the other at the elimination of one. The Bible doesn't maintain that genocidal split, eliminating Gentiles.

Continuing in your lie I see.

Do you say Gentiles become Jews when saved? Would that then lead to the genocidal elimination of Gentiles? Then it is YOU who is the liar.

I've brought this to your attention before, your persistence indicates knowing denial of the
truth -- a lie. I didn't say that, I said Gentiles who are inward Jews are thus (already) Jews by definition -- not that Gentiles should become outward Jews.

Are you maintaining that Gentiles are Jews as well, or are really Jews? Be clear! Why all of the secrecy?

The definition of "Jew" is not what you say it is.

Oh, is the definition of a Jew really a Gentile? Be clear!

God Bless!

 

[heymikey80]

The posting's clear -- you're imposing an interpretation on Scripture -- I'm superimposing Scripture on an interpretation.

"We are the true circumcision";

The true circumcision is the circumcision of the heart, which is from God. All who come to Christ are the true circumcision, but not the circumcision referred to as the Jews by the Bible. Gentiles and Jews are the true circumcision.

"An inward Jew is one, and circumcision of the heart by the Spirit. This one's praise is from God." Rom 2:29

There's just no reason to go splitting verses the way you're splitting them. The circumcision of the heart is inward Jewishness.

"So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?"

There is no such Gentile. Again, if there is, list him/her. If you can't, then obviously you agree.

Rom 8:4 "in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit."

Us, ddub. Us.
They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. Rom 2:15-16

"an inward Jew is one".

An inward "Jew", which says nothing of a Gentile. YOU, not the Bible, attempt to include Gentiles in this.

The Bible, not I, includes Gentiles in this.

So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law. For an outward Jew isn't one, nor circumcision outward and physical. But an inward Jew is one, and circumcision a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God. Rom 2:26-29
​

Gentiles are non-Jews, and outward Jews aren't inward Jews. Some Gentiles will be inward Jews as surely as some outward Jews won't be inward Jews.

Why all the secrecy?

No secrecy.

Are you maintaining that Gentiles are Jews as well, or are really Jews?

You didn't know the answer to that question. You were lying by previously asserting I said something about it. "You say Gentiles are eliminated, and become Jews." It's called "bearing false witness."

When you lie about something, just bombing your assertion onto the conversation, don't expect me to respond before the fact. If you wanted to know the answer I would have expected you to ask the question, bereft of prejudice.

Clearly you don't want to know the answer, because you've prejudiced the answer by your false assertion.

 

[ddub85]

@ heymikey

The posting's clear -- you're imposing an interpretation on Scripture -- I'm superimposing Scripture on an interpretation.

You're adding to scripture by including Gentiles where the Bible doesn't. I'm pointing out that Gentiles aren't included, and you're arguing against that FACT.

The true circumcision is the circumcision of the heart, which is from God. All who come to Christ are the true
circumcision, but not the circumcision referred to as the Jews by the Bible. Gentiles and Jews are the true circumcision.
"An inward Jew is one, and circumcision of the heart by the Spirit. This one's praise is from God." Rom 2:29
There's just no reason to go splitting verses the way you're splitting them.

What split? I don't split the verse. I accept it just as it is. YOU, on the other hand have decided to include Gentiles in this statement, when the Bible does not. An "inward Jew" has nothing to do with a Gentile, but you're attempting to rewrite the Bible. I'll pass on your version.

The circumcision of the heart is inward Jewishness.

See what I mean? A deceptive change in what God says. The Bible DOES NOT say circumcision of the heart = inward Jewishness to all, because Paul isn't speaking to all. He's speaking to Gentiles, and for some reason you want to squeeze in there, and eliminate Gentiles from God. Not biblical.

There is no such Gentile. Again, if there is, list him/her. If you can't, then obviously you agree.

Rom 8:4 "in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit."
Us, ddub. Us.

No, "fulfilled in us". Who fulfilled it? A Gentile? NO! Fulfilled in us doesn't mean it was "US" who fulfilled it. The "US" is not the one who fulfilled. Try again.

An inward "Jew", which says nothing of a Gentile. YOU, not the Bible, attempt to include Gentiles in this.

The Bible, not I, includes Gentiles in this.

Nope, not true. The Bible uses Gentiles as a comparison ONLY, and Paul states clearly that he is speaking to Jews, not Gentiles (i.e. v.17).

Gentiles are non-Jews, and outward Jews aren't inward Jews.

True.

Some Gentiles will be inward Jews as surely as some outward Jews won't be inward Jews.

Now that's some other gospel that isn't Bible. If this were Bible, you'd simply list the scripture which says such a thing. But you can't because the statement doesn't exist in the Bible. No Gentile is ever a Jew in the Bible. A Gentile is a Gentile, and a Jew is s Jew. One doesn't become the other, and one isn't superior to the other as you're professing.

Originally Posted by ddub85
Why all the secrecy?

No secrecy.

Then why didn't you answer the question? "Are you maintaining that Gentiles are Jews as well, or are really Jews? Be clear! Why all of the secrecy?"
If there wasn't any secrecy, then you would've simply answer the question. But you didn't, thereby denoting secrecy.

Originally Posted by ddub85
Are you maintaining that Gentiles are Jews as well, or are really Jews?

You didn't know the answer to that question. You were lying by previously asserting I said something about it. "You say Gentiles are eliminated, and become Jews." It's called "bearing false witness."

In your view, do saved Gentiles become Jews? If Gentiles become Jews when saved, and you're attempting to save Gentiles, then you are attempting genocide upon Gentiles.
That's not false witness, that's the bearing of the truth.

When you lie about something, just bombing your assertion onto the conversation, don't expect me to respond before the fact. If you wanted to know the answer I would have expected you to ask the question, bereft of prejudice.
Clearly you don't want to know the answer, because you've prejudiced the answer by your false assertion.

If I didn't want an answer, I wouldn't have asked the question. But I'm pointing out to you how it is you're advocating the elimination of Gentiles. You haven't shown any of what I said to be incorrect in any manner, other than to posture against it with statements of it being a "false assertion". If it is indeed a false assertion, then tell us "HOW" it is false.

Otherwise, your assertions of "false assertion" is hollow.

God Bless!

 

[heymikey80]

But you didn't, thereby denoting secrecy.

No denotation of secrecy. The questions being asked pose a false dichotomy. I've no reason to answer a question directly when it's embedded in an assumption I consider to be false. In point of fact it's folly to ask me to "think like you" on such a count. You haven't made the case that there's something lacking without your assumption.

A Gentile can be considered circumcised in heart, and thus an inward Jew.

So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law. For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God. Rom 2:26-29
​

As Gentiles are those who are not nominal Jews, the definition of a Jew as an inward Jew, with heart-circumcision, includes Gentiles. These are the people whose praise is from God -- and so they have the name, "Judah" ("praise").

But I'm pointing out to you how it is you're advocating the elimination of Gentiles. You haven't shown any of what I said to be incorrect in any manner, other than to posture against it with statements of it being a "false assertion". If it is indeed a false assertion, then tell us "HOW" it is false.

Making false assertions about my position, that "It advocates the elimination of Gentiles" is lying, ddub85. Continuing in it is lying.

It's lying. Don't do it to me any more.

 

[ddub85]

@ heymikey

No denotation of secrecy. The questions being asked pose a false dichotomy.

Untrue. Your statements clearly say that Gentiles become Jews.

I've no reason to answer a question directly when it's embedded in an assumption I consider to be false. In point of fact it's folly to ask me to "think like you" on such a count. You haven't made the case that there's something lacking without your assumption.

I make no assumption. You say Gentiles become Jews, and the Bible does not. There is nothing to assume.

A Gentile can be considered circumcised in heart, and thus an inward Jew.

Untrue. Circumcised of the heart doesn't equate to Jew. That's what YOU say, and not what the Bible says. Don't attribute your personal beliefs to the Bible.

So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law. For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God. Rom 2:26-29

None of which says what you say.

As Gentiles are those who are not nominal Jews, the definition of a Jew as an inward Jew, with heart-circumcision, includes Gentiles. These are the people whose praise is from God -- and so they have the name, "Judah" ("praise").

Untrue. Nowhere in the Bible does it say being a Jew includes Gentiles. Furthermore, nowhere does it say that Gentiles are "Judah". Judah = Jewish, not Gentile. Stop attributing your beliefs to God and the Bible with your reckless assumptions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddub85
But I'm pointing out to you how it is you're advocating the elimination of Gentiles. You haven't shown any of what I said to be incorrect in any manner, other than to posture against it with statements of it being a "false assertion". If it is indeed a false assertion, then tell us "HOW" it is false.

Making false assertions about my position, that "It advocates the elimination of Gentiles" is lying, ddub85. Continuing in it is lying.
It's lying. Don't do it to me any more.

A lie would be saying that Gentiles become Jews. That's what YOU say. A lie would be to say that Judah = Gentiles. That's what YOU say. A lie would be advocating the elimination of Gentiles by saying they become Jews when saved. That's what YOU say.

I'm not lying. I can prove it by the fact what I'm saying (Gentiles not becoming Jews, Judah are Jews,...) is proven by scripture.

So YOU should not do it anymore.

God Bless!

 

[GLJCA]

The true circumcision is the circumcision of the heart, which is from God. All who come to Christ are the true
circumcision, but not the circumcision referred to as the Jews by the Bible. Gentiles and Jews are the true circumcision.
"An inward Jew is one, and circumcision of the heart by the Spirit. This one's praise is from God." Rom 2:29
There's just no reason to go splitting verses the way you're splitting them. What split? I don't split the verse. I accept it just as it is. YOU, on the other hand have decided to include Gentiles in this statement, when the Bible does not. An "inward Jew" has nothing to do with a Gentile, but you're attempting to rewrite the Bible. I'll pass on your version.

The Jews were known as the circumcision, but they who sought for righteousness through the law and not through faith(Rom 9:32) were the circumcision of the flesh not the spirit. Only the ones who sought after Christ's righteousness were considered by God as the true circumcision, whether they be Jew or Gentile.

The Gentile doesn't become a Jew nor does the Jew become a Gentile. Why do you have to make a division when the Bible doesn't make one? Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Jesus Christ is the vine and the root of the olive tree. All who are in Him are one, New Man. Christ brought both together and made one NEW MAN.
Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, [even] the law of commandments [contained] in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, [so] making peace;

We are all together in the olive tree which is the covenant people of God. God erradicated both Jew and Gentile in Christ, who is the root of the olive tree.

DDub, you are so embedded in MAD teaching that you can not see the forest for all the trees, my friend.

GLJCA

 

[ddub85]

@ GLJCA

Quote:
The true circumcision is the circumcision of the heart, which is from God. All who come to Christ are the true circumcision, but not the circumcision referred to as the Jews by the Bible. Gentiles and Jews are the true circumcision.
"An inward Jew is one, and circumcision of the heart by the Spirit. This one's praise is from God." Rom 2:29
There's just no reason to go splitting verses the way you're splitting them.

What split? I don't split the verse. I accept it just as it is. YOU, on the other hand have decided to include Gentiles in this statement, when the Bible does not. An "inward Jew" has nothing to do with a Gentile, but you're attempting to rewrite the Bible. I'll pass on your version.

The Jews were known as the circumcision, but they who sought for righteousness through the law and not through faith(Rom 9:32) were the circumcision of the flesh not the spirit. Only the ones who sought after Christ's righteousness were considered by God as the true circumcision, whether they be Jew or Gentile.
The Gentile doesn't become a Jew nor does the Jew become a Gentile.

Then why is heymikey telling me that Gentiles are Judah? Judah is a Jewish nation, not Gentile. Do you disagree with heymikey in that respect?

Why do you have to make a division when the Bible doesn't make one?

What division did I make? God says there are Jews, and there are Gentiles. God says according to the promise, there is no difference between the two. He doesn't say one group is eliminated, and all become the other. So what division are you referring to?

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

According to WHAT? (Gal 3:29). ACCORDING TO WHAT? You're conveniently leaving that little fact out. Why? I point it out to you, and you act as if it doesn't exist. You act as if it wasn't said. According to what? Until you begin to tell the whole truth, you're wasting time.

Jesus Christ is the vine and the root of the olive tree. All who are in Him are one, New Man. Christ brought both together and made one NEW MAN.
Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, [even] the law of commandments [contained] in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, [so] making peace;
We are all together in the olive tree which is the covenant people of God. God erradicated both Jew and Gentile in Christ, who is the root of the olive tree.

ACCORDING TO THE PROMISE! See that? You would have us believe it is according to all of the promises, and that's NOT what the Bible says. You are therefore misleading folks with something that isn't true.

DDub, you are so embedded in MAD teaching that you can not see the forest for all the trees, my friend.

GLJCA, I don't even know what MAD teaching is. I'm not familiar with it. But if they refute what you're saying with what I'm telling you, then I'm all for it.

God Bless!