Continuity? Yes.

[ddub85]

@ GLJCA

Quote:
Again you misspeak on behalf of Paul. What Paul says is bloodline alone doesn't make one the Covenant people of God. He NEVER says that bloodline has nothing to do with it. That's what YOU say in order to create the story you've created. But please don't attribute that to Paul when he doesn't say such a thing.

DDub you are reaching, my friend. God's promises have never in history come through the bloodline. I have already shown you that a stranger in Israel who received circumcision was as one born in the land. All of the mixed multitude that left out of Egypt, were circumcised and became Israel even though many of them were Egyptians.

"Became Israel"??? What scripture? Is that Bible, or are you just making it up? Show the scripture which says "became Israel" please.

Exo 12:38 And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, [even] very much cattle.
Exo 12:48 And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof.
Was bloodline the criteria? No!!! The criteria was circumcision. A stranger who was circumcised entered into covenant with God and was as one born in the land of Israel.

Circumcision OF THE HEART,done by God, has always been the criteria. Physical circumcision has always only been an outward sign.

Bloodline means nothing in the New Covenant because God has made all nations of one blood.
Acts 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

God has given Israel promises, and has allotted the promise to Gentiles. That biblical fact hasn't changed. The NC wasn't given to Gentiles. That fact hasn't changed.

The Word of God is plain, DDub. You can keep denying it but it is not doing you any good at all.

I haven't denied one word. I've denied what YOU say, not what the Bbile says. The Bible doesn't say Gentiles become Israel, YOU say that. The Bible doesn't say Gentiles receive all of the promises, YOU say that. The Bible doesn't say Gentiles are under the NC, YOU say that. The Bible doesn't say the NC is for Gentiles, YOU say that.

These are the non-biblical statements by YOU, not the Bible, that I categorically deny, and that you present NO SCRIPTURE to verify.

God Bless!

 

[ddub85]

@ GLJCA

Quote:
Rom 3:1-2 ¶ What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
... this scripture totally disagrees with what you just said.

No it does not disagree with me. Taken in context it totally agrees with me.
Why do you insist on taking verses out of the context of the book to prove your point? Read it in context my friend.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither [is that] circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: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.
Rom 3:1-3 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
Rom 3:9 What then? are we better [than they]? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
Paul's thoughts were carried over from the chapter before, which were not chapters when he wrote it. Once he established who a true Jew was in chapter two, he shows the advantage of being a true Jew in chapter three. To you and I, my friend, has been
given the oracles of God also.

Wait,... So Paul is speaking to YOU in Rom 3:1-2? And you actually believe that? In Rom 3:9, when Paul says "we", you're claiming that includes Gentiles? Is that it?

Hbr 5:12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which [be] the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

Amen! Concerning your argument, "where's the beef?"

God Bless!

 

[GLJCA]

Again you misspeak on behalf of Paul. What Paul says is bloodline alone doesn't make one the Covenant people of God. He NEVER says that bloodline has nothing to do with it. That's what YOU say in order to create the story you've created. But please don't attribute that to Paul when he doesn't say such a thing.

I beg to differ with you, my friend. Here Paul says it as plain as he can.
Gal 3:7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
If my faith makes me a child of Abraham then bloodline means nothing. Paul reiterates this over and over in the New Testament.
Col 3: 10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:
11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.
No one in the New Testament says it more than Paul. Bloodline means nothing.
Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 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.

"Became Israel"??? What scripture? Is that Bible, or are you just making it up? Show the scripture which says "became Israel" please.

Why do you keep asking me for proof that I have already given you?

DDub, I did show you the scripture. What does, "become as one born in the land" mean to you?
Ex 12:48 And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof.

If someone does all of the work to acquire citizenship in the United States they become as one born in the land. They become an American citizen. I don't have more rights or opportunities than they do just because I was born here.

In the same way, if a stranger in Israel does what God required (circumcision) they become a part of Israel, the people of God, with all of the privileges of the descendants. You have the mistaken belief that bloodline was the only way the promises passed on in Israel which is incorrect. Notice in this passage that the people were called the children of Israel even though they were the children of the mixed multitude that came out of Egypt.

Joshua 5:2 At that time the LORD said unto Joshua, Make thee sharp knives, and circumcise again the children of Israel the second time.
3 And Joshua made him sharp knives, and circumcised the children of Israel at the hill of the foreskins.
4 And this is the cause why Joshua did circumcise: All the people that came out of Egypt, that were males, even all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way, after they came out of Egypt.
5 Now all the people that came out were circumcised: but all the people that were born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, them they had not circumcised.
6 For the children of Israel walked forty years in the wilderness, till all the people that were men of war, which came out of Egypt, were consumed, because they obeyed not the voice of the LORD: unto whom the LORD sware that he would not shew them the land, which the LORD sware unto their fathers that he would give us, a land that floweth with milk and honey.
7 And their children, whom he raised up in their stead, them Joshua circumcised: for they were uncircumcised, because they had not circumcised them by the way.

Again these were people who were part of the mixed multitude that left Egypt but were not all of the bloodline of Abraham yet they are called the Children of Israel.

GEN 34:22 22 Only herein will the men consent unto us for to dwell with us, to be one people, if every male among us be circumcised, as they are circumcised.
The act that made someone, whether they be of the bloodline of Abraham or a stranger, one with the children of Israel or as one born in the land, was circumcision. An Egyptian or in the case in the scripture above, a Hivite, that was circumcised became one with the children of Israel.

The covenant was never exclusive to only those of the bloodline of Abraham.

GLJCA

 

[ddub85]

@ GLJCA

Quote:
Again you misspeak on behalf of Paul. What Paul says is bloodline alone doesn't make one the Covenant people of God. He NEVER says that bloodline has nothing to do with it. That's what YOU say in order to create the story you've created. But please don't attribute that to Paul when he doesn't say such a thing.

I beg to differ with you, my friend. Here Paul says it as plain as he can.
Gal 3:7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
If my faith makes me a child of Abraham then bloodline means nothing. Paul reiterates this over and over in the New Testament.

You are thoroughly confused, and ignore the truth. Being a child of Abraham DOES NOT, repeat: DOES NOT make you a Jew. A Jew, an Israelite, is one born of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Abraham is the father of many nations, both Jew and Gentile. The Jew, the Israelite, is from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The Bible declares a difference. You need to both recognize and
respect that difference.

Col 3: 10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:
11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

"ACCORDING TO THE PROMISE"!!! You have a tendency to leave that out. According to the single promise which includes both Jew and Gentile, there is no diffference. But pertaining to the PROMISES, there surely is a difference. Abraham asked God this very question, and pay attention to the answer;

Gen 15:3 And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir.
Gen 15:4 And, behold, the word of the LORD [came] unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.

"HE THAT SHALL COME FORTH OUT OF THINE OWN BOWELS SHALL BE THINE HEIR"- GOD.

That doesn't include Gentiles. Understand? That alone eliminates all Gentiles from what you attempt to include us in. You're contradicting the word of God.

No one in the New Testament says it more than Paul. Bloodline means nothing.
Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 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.

NOWHERE in this statement does Paul state that bloodline means nothing. YOU say that, not Paul. Over and over again I have PROVEN to you that Paul is speaking about Jews, not Gentiles. Gentiles aren't included in the statement, as Gentiles are only
examples, and vv. 17 & 24 make it clear who Paul is speaking about. Ignoring this fact doesn't make it go away.
Quote:
"Became Israel"??? What scripture? Is that Bible, or are you just making it up? Show the scripture which says "became Israel" please.

Why do you keep asking me for proof that I have already given you?
DDub, I did show you the scripture. What does, "become as one born in the land" mean to you?
Ex 12:48 And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof.
If someone does all of the work to acquire citizenship in the United States they become as one born in the land. They become an American citizen. I don't have more rights or opportunities than they do just because I was born here.
In the same way, if a stranger in Israel does what God required (circumcision) they become a part of Israel, the people of God, with all of the privileges of the descendants.

--Again, you are thoroughly confused. Having citizenship doesn't mean you "become Israel". These are two different things. God didn't call any Egyptians the children of Israel. God says,

"HE THAT SHALL COME FORTH OUT OF THINE OWN BOWELS SHALL BE THINE HEIR"- GOD, Gen. 15:4.

So... who out of the bowels is God referring to?
Gen 17:19 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, [and] with his seed after him.
Gen 17:21 But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year.

God said through Isaac. Paul reiterated that fact;

Rom 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, [are they] all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

You and I are the seed of Abraham, but we aren't Israel. Those "IN ISAAC" are Israel. Stephen makes that clear in Acts;

Act 7:8 And he gave him the covenant of circumcision: and so [Abraham] begat Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day; and Isaac [begat] Jacob; and Jacob [begat] the twelve patriarchs.

THESE twelve patriarchs and their descendants are Israel. See that? It doesn't include Gentiles. Paul continues to make it clear. He says that he is an Israelite as opposed to being a Gentile. He declares a DIFFERENCE between the two based upon
BLOODLINE;

Rom 11:1 ¶ I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, [of] the tribe of Benjamin.

BLOODLINE. See that? Israel is of Israel by bloodline. That separates Jews from Gentiles. However, being "of" Israel doesn't make one Israel. But you must first be "of" Israel in order to be Israel. Gentiles are not "of" Israel according to God, Paul, Stephen, and all other authors in the Bible.

You have the mistaken belief that bloodline was the only way the promises passed on in Israel which is incorrect.

You are in total contradiction to Paul and the Bible. The PROMISES, according to the Bible, are to Israel;

Rom 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom [pertaineth] the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service [of God], and the PROMISES;

The PROMISES (plural) given to the Israelites. Who are the Israelites? Paul is speaking of those of the BLOODLINE. He says the PROMISES (plural) are to them. YOU, on the other hand, are saying something different.

Notice in this passage that the people were called the children of Israel even though they were the children of the mixed multitude that came out of Egypt.
Joshua 5:2 At that time the LORD said unto Joshua, Make thee sharp knives, and circumcise again the children of Israel the second time.
3 And Joshua made him sharp knives, and circumcised the children of Israel at the hill of the foreskins.
4 And this is the cause why Joshua did circumcise: All the people that came out of Egypt, that were males, even all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way, after they came out of Egypt.
5 Now all the people that came out were circumcised: but all the people that were born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, them they had not circumcised.
6 For the children of Israel walked forty years in the wilderness, till all the people that were men of war, which came out of Egypt, were consumed, because they obeyed not the voice of the LORD: unto whom the LORD sware that he would not shew them the land, which the LORD sware unto their fathers that he would give us, a land that floweth with milk and honey.
7 And their children, whom he raised up in their stead, them Joshua circumcised: for they were uncircumcised, because they had not circumcised them by the way.
Again these were people who were part of the mixed multitude that left Egypt but were not all of the bloodline of Abraham yet they are called the Children of Israel.

Where? They are NOT called the children of Israel here. You'd better read it again more carefully.

GEN 34:22 22 Only herein will the men consent unto us for to dwell with us, to be one people, if every male among us be
circumcised, as they are circumcised.
The act that made someone, whether they be of the bloodline of Abraham or a stranger, one with the children of Israel or as one born in the land, was circumcision. An Egyptian or in the case in the scripture above, a Hivite, that was circumcised became one with the children of Israel.

A foreigner, a stranger, was privy to those things of the children of Israel. They were never called the children of Israel. They never became the children of Israel. That is a figment of your imagination. Scripture never says that.

The covenant was never exclusive to only those of the bloodline of Abraham.

Gen 15:4 And, behold, the word of the LORD [came] unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.

Rom 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom [pertaineth] the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service [of God], and the promises;

I'll allow you to explain away these scriptures. Please clarify, using these scriptures, what you're saying here.

God Bless!

 

[GLJCA]

Gen 15:4 And, behold, the word of the LORD [came] unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.

Rom 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom [pertaineth] the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service [of God], and the promises;

I'll allow you to explain away these scriptures. Please clarify, using these scriptures, what you're saying here.

Who is the heir that inherited the unconditional promises of God with Abraham? It was Jesus Christ not Isaac or his decendants.

Gal 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.
Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

The covenant promises to the decendants of Abraham were not unconditional, but they were conditional upon obedience.
Deut 28:1 And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe [and] to do all his commandments which I command thee this day, that the LORD thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth:
2. And all these blessings shall come on thee, and overtake thee, if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God.
If they were disobedient this would happen.
Deut 28:15 But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee:
Lev 26:18 And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins.
This is why there were seven plagues and seven vials of the wrath of God poured upon Israel in Revelation.

DDub the New Testament explains to us to whom the promises of God were made. You have to read it to find out who inherited those unconditional promises. Paul is explaining that in the next verse you presented.

Rom 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom [pertaineth] the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service [of God], and the promises;

Let's continue on in the context, DDub.
Romans 9:6-8 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they [are] not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, [are they] all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Paul is speaking of election here. Is all Israel elect, DDub? No! He is distinguishing between the children of the flesh and the children of faith, just like he did in Romans 2:28-29. He is defining a true Jew.

What he is not saying is that all Jews in Israel are children of promise, which again blows your theory that the promises were according to bloodline.

DDub you can't just take one scripture out of context to prove a point that will fall apart when viewed in the context. It looks bad.

It will change your belief if you start looking at the context, my friend.

GLJCA

 

[GLJCA]

Quote: I said,

No one in the New Testament says it more than Paul. Bloodline means nothing.
Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 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. ,

Your answer was:

NOWHERE in this statement does Paul state that bloodline means nothing. YOU say that, not Paul. Over and over again I have PROVEN to you that Paul is speaking about Jews, not Gentiles. Gentiles aren't included in the statement, as Gentiles are only
examples, and vv. 17 & 24 make it clear who Paul is speaking about. Ignoring this fact doesn't make it go away.

Please explain to me what Paul is saying in Romans 2:28-29? You keep disagreeing with our interpretation of it but you really don't give your interpretation. It is easy to just say, "no that is not what he was saying", but it is a different thing to tell us what you think he was talking about.

Let's say you are right that Paul is only speaking to Jews in Romans 2:28-29. What is he telling them? Is he telling them that bloodline means everything? If that is what you get out of that passage you are putting it in there because that is not what it says.

Who is the uncircumcision in verse 26? Aren't they Gentiles?
Rom 2:26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?
28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither [is that] circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
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.
If you want to say that Paul is only talking to the Jews here that is fine but he is also talking about the Gentiles saying that their uncircumcision was and he is telling all of them what a true Jew is. Remember Romans was written to a church which was comprised of Jews and Gentiles. Again context is important DDub.

He reiterates what he said in Romans 2:26 again in Romans 9.

Romans 9:30-32 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.Wherefore? Because [they sought it] not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

GLJCA

 

[Hismessenger]

Rom 4:9 [Cometh] this blessedness then upon the circumcision [only], or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. Rom 4:10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. Rom 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which [he had yet] being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: Rom 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which [he had] being [yet] uncircumcised.

Abraham was a gentile saved by grace. God choose him before he was circumcised and so it is with all gentiles. God choose them in eternity pass and now we who are called are circumcised of the heart. The true Israel. Not of flesh and blood but of the seed of righteousness imputed by Christ.

GLJCA has it right. anyone who's heart is for God can become the children of the promise, the seed of Abraham.

Hismessenger

 

[ddub85]

@ GLJCA

Quote:
Gen 15:4 And, behold, the word of the LORD [came] unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.
Quote:
Rom 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom [pertaineth] the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service [of God], and the promises;
I'll allow you to explain away these scriptures. Please clarify, using these scriptures, what you're saying here.

Who is the heir that inherited the unconditional promises of God with Abraham? It was Jesus Christ not Isaac or his decendants.

Jesus Christ came forth out of Abraham's bowels, through Isaac, as He was born a Jew. The ONLY way to be born a Jew is through Isaac. The seed, which is Christ, is through Isaac just as the Bible declares;

Rom 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, [are they] all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

Gal 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.

Christ, who came through Isaac, is that seed.

Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Now you're speaking about the PROMISE (singular), which applies to both Jew and Gentile.

The covenant promises to the decendants of Abraham were not unconditional, but they were conditional upon obedience.
Deut 28:1 And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe [and] to do all his commandments which I command thee this day, that the LORD thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth:
2. And all these blessings shall come on thee, and overtake thee, if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God.
If they were disobedient this would happen.
Deut 28:15 But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee:
Lev 26:18 And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins.

These are things that would happen to Israel, but NONE of these things were ever intended to end God's relationship with Israel, or nullify God's promises to Israel. These things were to happen, but the promises were still to be fulfilled through the Jewish remnant.

This is why there were seven plagues and seven vials of the wrath of God poured upon Israel in Revelation.

I disagree, but digress as it's a different subject.

DDub the New Testament explains to us to whom the promises of God were made. You have to read it to find out who inherited those unconditional promises. Paul is explaining that in the next verse you presented.
Quote:
Rom 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom [pertaineth] the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service [of God], and the promises;

Throughout the Bible the inheritors of the promises is given, and God does not change. It was the Jews in the OT, and it's the Jews in the NT. That fact hasn't changed. What you're missing is the fact that the promise included Gentiles in the OT, and Paul reiterates that fact in the NT. God doesn't change.
Concerning the above verse, who are the Israelites? Who is Paul speaking about?

Rom 9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:

He's speaking to the Jews, according to the flesh! He says so right there in the the preceding verse! That EXCLUDES ALL GENTILES. See that?

Let's continue on in the context, DDub.
Romans 9:6-8 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they [are] not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, [are they] all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Paul is speaking of election here. Is all Israel elect, DDub? No! He is distinguishing between the children of the flesh and the children of faith, just like he did in Romans 2:28-29. He is defining a true Jew.

You couldn't be any further from the truth. "Which are of Israel"... see that statement? That eliminates Gentiles from the group Paul is speaking of. Why? Because Gentiles are not "of Israel". You have to recognize that fact if you want to understand what Paul is saying.
"IN ISAAC"... see that? That excludes Gentiles. He's speaking about those JEWS, NOT GENTILES. You have just decided to include us Gentiles where we're not included.

What he is not saying is that all Jews in Israel are children of promise, which again blows your theory that the promises were according to bloodline.

That's not my theory. What I'm saying is those of the Jewish bloodline who accept Christ are the recipients of the promises. Those of Gentile bloodline who accept Christ are the recipients of the promise.

DDub you can't just take one scripture out of context to prove a point that will fall apart when viewed in the context. It looks bad.

I'm sure it does. That's why I'm criticizing for doing just that. But you haven't listed one scripture which I supposedly took out of context. Where's that out of context scripture? Here you have included yourself as an Israelite, against Paul's words that he's speaking about his "kinsmen according to the flesh." A clear example of you taking scripture out of context. Care to explain that? But you want to accuse me of taking scripture out of context. Wow.

It will change your belief if you start looking at the context, my friend.

Let's start with you considering yourself included in the Israelites of Rom 9:4, and Paul stating he's speaking of his "kinsmen according to the flesh". Let's start right there, and see what happens.

God Bless!

 

[ddub85]

@ GLJCA
Quote:
No one in the New Testament says it more than Paul. Bloodline means nothing.
Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 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. ,
Quote:
Your answer was:
Quote:
NOWHERE in this statement does Paul state that bloodline means nothing. YOU say that, not Paul. Over and over again I have PROVEN to you that Paul is speaking about Jews, not Gentiles. Gentiles aren't included in the statement, as Gentiles are only
examples, and vv. 17 & 24 make it clear who Paul is speaking about. Ignoring this fact doesn't make it go away.

Please explain to me what Paul is saying in Romans 2:28-29? You keep disagreeing with our interpretation of it but you really don't give your interpretation. It is easy to just say, "no that is not what he was saying", but it is a different thing to tell us what you think he was talking about.

Sure. Let's begin with Paul's subject matter here. What is he even talking about?

Rom 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law [are] just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

He's explaining that only those Jews who follow the law will be justified. We know he's not speaking about Gentiles, because Gentiles don't have the law. Gentiles are then used as an EXAMPLE of someone without the law.

Then in v. 17 Paul again makes it clear he's speaking to the Jews of the flesh, who rest in the law.

Then Paul explains to those with the law, the Jews, that they dishonor the law and disgrace God in the eyes of the Gentiles when they break it. This clearly shows he's speaking to the Jews of the flesh.

He then explains that physical circumcision is only beneficial if they keep the law, and uses Gentiles as an EXAMPLE of uncircumcision, and how it would be more beneficial than circumcision if they kept the law.

Then he explains to the Jews of the flesh that they're not really Jews without being Jews of the Spirit as well.

Let's say you are right that Paul is only speaking to Jews in Romans 2:28-29. What is he telling them? Is he telling them that bloodline means everything? If that is what you get out of that passage you are putting it in there because that is not what it says.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying he's telling them that bloodline alone isn't enough. They need the Spirit as well.

Who is the uncircumcision in verse 26? Aren't they Gentiles?

Yes.

If you want to say that Paul is only talking to the Jews here that is fine but he is also talking about the Gentiles saying that their uncircumcision was and he is telling all of them what a true Jew is. Remember Romans was written to a church which was comprised of Jews and Gentiles. Again context is important DDub.

Context, exactly. In what context is God speaking about Gentiles? As EXAMPLES, not as the subject. When you recognize that fact, you'll better understand the chapter.

He reiterates what he said in Romans 2:26 again in Romans 9.
Romans 9:30-32 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.Wherefore? Because [they sought it] not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

Correct. Israel stumbled because their faith was in the law, or rather in their ability to follow the law. The Gentiles don't have that problem because we weren't given the law. Paul is explaining to the Jews that their ability won't get them to God. Why would he need to explain that to Gentiles when we were never given the law???

God Bless!

 

[ddub85]

@ Hismessenger

Rom 4:9 [Cometh] this blessedness then upon the circumcision [only], or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. Rom 4:10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. Rom 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which [he had yet] being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: Rom 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which [he had] being [yet] uncircumcised.

Abraham was a gentile saved by grace. God choose him before he was circumcised and so it is with all gentiles. God choose them in eternity pass and now we who are called are circumcised of the heart...

No argument.

...The true Israel. Not of flesh and blood but of the seed of righteousness imputed by Christ.

Now we are in disagreement. There is NOTHING in the Bible that says Gentiles are the true Israel. There is plenty which says those of the bloodline of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (ALL 3!) are Israel. So how do you all of a sudden make yourself Israel? It just isn't biblical.
We have to come to an understanding of the Bible within the context of what is stated. When we begin to assume things, we come to wrong conclusions which lead to further wrong conclusions.

GLJCA has it right. anyone who's heart is for God can become the children of the promise, the seed of Abraham.

Again, if that's what GLJCA is saying, then I'm in full agreement. But when you, or GLJCA, or anyone else, says that Gentiles are Israel, then you have left the Bible and created your own gospel, because the Bible says no such thing.

God Bless!

 

[Hismessenger]

ddub85,

answer for yourself this question. What was Abraham before he became the Father of the nation Israel? A gentile saved by Grace. A gentile simply means one who is outside the will of God but God has granted them Grace to become one of His own.

Hismessenger

 

[Hismessenger]

When I say Israel, I mean the spiritual Israel of which there is no jew nor gentile, male or female. One body with Christ as the head.

 

[GLJCA]

Quote:
Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
Now you're speaking about the PROMISE (singular), which applies to both Jew and Gentile.

There must be several of "the promise" (singular) cause I thought you said that "the promise" (singular) was in Gal. 3. speaking of salvation by faith. Now the land promise in Rom 4:13 is "the promise" (singular)?

I thought that the land promise only applied to Jews not Gentiles. Since when does any Dispy say that the Gentiles inherit the land promise?


GLJCA

 

[GLJCA]

Quote:
The covenant promises to the decendants of Abraham were not unconditional, but they were conditional upon obedience.
Deut 28:1 And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe [and] to do all his commandments which I command thee this day, that the LORD thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth:
2. And all these blessings shall come on thee, and overtake thee, if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God.
If they were disobedient this would happen.
Deut 28:15 But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee:
Lev 26:18 And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins.
These are things that would happen to Israel, but NONE of these things were ever intended to end God's relationship with Israel, or nullify God's promises to Israel. These things were to happen, but the promises were still to be fulfilled through the Jewish remnant.

Ahh yes but my friend the scripture clearly shows that the covenant to the descendants of Abraham was not unconditional. It was based upon obedience.

It was only to Abraham and his seed, Christ that the covenant was unconditional. God could not have destroyed the Jews when they went whoring after other gods if the covenant was unconditional to them. I would have to say that His promises to those whom He destroyed were nullified. He said in Hebrews that He refused to allow them to enter into His rest. That is pretty conclusive, DDub.

GLJCA

 

[GLJCA]

Then he explains to the Jews of the flesh that they're not really Jews without being Jews of the Spirit as well.

Ok then that makes my point, my friend. Bloodline of a Jew who does not keep the law can not make him a true Jew, therefore bloodline is not what makes a true Jew but outward and inward circumcision made someone a true Jew. That is why Paul said in verse 26 that the uncircumcision of a Gentile(uncircumcised) that keeps the righteousness of the law would be counted for circumcision. It was outward and inward circumcision, not bloodline, that made someone a true Jew.

Oh, and Joshua 5 mentions "the children of Israel" several times. Look at it again.
Joshua 5:2 At that time the LORD said unto Joshua, Make thee sharp knives, and circumcise again the children of Israel the second time.
3 And Joshua made him sharp knives, and circumcised the children of Israel at the hill of the foreskins.
4 And this is the cause why Joshua did circumcise: All the people that came out of Egypt, that were males, even all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way, after they came out of Egypt.
5 Now all the people that came out were circumcised: but all the people that were born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, them they had not circumcised.
6 For the children of Israel walked forty years in the wilderness, till all the people that were men of war, which came out of Egypt, were consumed, because they obeyed not the voice of the LORD: unto whom the LORD sware that he would not shew them the land, which the LORD sware unto their fathers that he would give us, a land that floweth with milk and honey.
7 And their children, whom he raised up in their stead, them Joshua circumcised: for they were uncircumcised, because they had not circumcised them by the way.
The people who left Egypt were a mixed multitude including many Egyptians who had to be circumcised to be a part of the children of Israel. Your argument is weak on this point, my friend. Even though they were Egyptians they were still considered the Children of Israel after they were circumcised, even though they were not of the bloodline of Abraham.

GLJCA

 

[ddub85]

@ Hismessenger

answer for yourself this question. What was Abraham before he became the Father of the nation Israel? A gentile saved by
Grace. A gentile simply means one who is outside the will of God but God has granted them Grace to become one of His own.

Ok. And what would be your point?

God Bless!

 

[ddub85]

@ Hismessenger

When I say Israel, I mean the spiritual Israel of which there is no jew nor gentile, male or female. One body with Christ as the head.

The "spiritual Israel"? Any Israel of the Bible is comprised of the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. That excludes all Gentiles. Therefore, the spiritual Israel you speak of is non-existent.

God Bless!

 

[ddub85]

@ GLJCA

Quote:
Quote:
Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Now you're speaking about the PROMISE (singular), which applies to both Jew and Gentile.

There must be several of "the promise" (singular) cause I thought you said that "the promise" (singular) was in Gal. 3. speaking of salvation by faith. Now the land promise in Rom 4:13 is "the promise" (singular)?
I thought that the land promise only applied to Jews not Gentiles. Since when does any Dispy say that the Gentiles inherit the land promise?

This isn't speaking of land. It's speaking about people.

God Bless!

 

[ddub85]

@ GLJCA

These are things that would happen to Israel, but NONE of these things were ever intended to end God's relationship with Israel, or nullify God's promises to Israel. These things were to happen, but the promises were still to be fulfilled through
the Jewish remnant.

Ahh yes but my friend the scripture clearly shows that the covenant to the descendants of Abraham was not unconditional. It was based upon obedience.

The condition was NEVER that the promise would be annulled. You're attempting to annul the promise, and that isn't biblical. The promise was unconditional from the standpoint that God was going to do wht He said He would do, for whom He said He would do it.

It was only to Abraham and his seed, Christ that the covenant was unconditional.

Jer 33:14 ¶ Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto the house of Israel and to the house of Judah.

So... in your opinion, did God lie?

Jer 33:20 Thus saith the LORD; If ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night in their season;

So I guess there is no day or night, is that it? The promise is unconditional, make no mistake about it. The unconditional promise is to Israel, and God will fulfill His promise.

God could not have destroyed the Jews when they went whoring after other gods if the covenant was unconditional to them. I would have to say that His promises to those whom He destroyed were nullified.

Remnant sh@'eriyth {sheh-ay-reeth'} Strong's 07611

TWOT Reference Root Word
TWOT - 2307b from 07604
Part of Speech
n f
Outline of Biblical Usage
1) rest, residue, remainder, remnant
a) rest, what is left
b) remainder, descendants

Mic 2:12 ¶ I will surely assemble, O Jacob, all of thee; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel; I will put them together as the sheep of Bozrah, as the flock in the midst of their fold: they shall make great noise by reason of [the multitude of] men.

Gentiles aren't the remnant, the remainder of Israel. You know that, and I know that. God has made an unconditional promise to Israel, and He will fulfill it. If you disagree, you're disagreeing with the word of God.

He said in Hebrews that He refused to allow them to enter into His rest. That is pretty conclusive, DDub

Who will not be allowed to enter? Those Jews not in Christ. Those Jews in Christ will enter. You need to read the book more carefully.

God Bless!

 

[ddub85]

@ GLJCA

Quote:
Then he explains to the Jews of the flesh that they're not really Jews without being Jews of the Spirit as well.

Ok then that makes my point, my friend. Bloodline of a Jew who does not keep the law can not make him a true Jew, therefore bloodline is not what makes a true Jew but outward and inward circumcision made someone a true Jew. That is why Paul said in verse 26 that the uncircumcision of a Gentile(uncircumcised) that keeps the righteousness of the law would be counted for
circumcision. It was outward and inward circumcision, not bloodline, that made someone a true Jew.

You are taking what is said one step further. You are removing bloodline altogether, and including a group of people that aren't included in Israel by the Bible. The proof is that you have NO SCRIPTURE which says Gentiles are Israel. We Gentiles aren't the outward circumcision, we're the inward circumcision. That's all we need to be, as we have Christ with that.

Oh, and Joshua 5 mentions "the children of Israel" several times. Look at it again.
Joshua 5:2 At that time the LORD said unto Joshua, Make thee sharp knives, and circumcise again the children of Israel the second time.
3 And Joshua made him sharp knives, and circumcised the children of Israel at the hill of the foreskins.
4 And this is the cause why Joshua did circumcise: All the people that came out of Egypt, that were males, even all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way, after they came out of Egypt.
5 Now all the people that came out were circumcised: but all the people that were born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, them they had not circumcised.
6 For the children of Israel walked forty years in the wilderness, till all the people that were men of war, which came out of Egypt, were consumed, because they obeyed not the voice of the LORD: unto whom the LORD sware that he would not shew them the land, which the LORD sware unto their fathers that he would give us, a land that floweth with milk and honey.
7 And their children, whom he raised up in their stead, them Joshua circumcised: for they were uncircumcised, because they had not circumcised them by the way.
The people who left Egypt were a mixed multitude including many Egyptians who had to be circumcised to be a part of the children of Israel. Your argument is weak on this point, my friend. Even though they were Egyptians they were still considered the Children of Israel after they were circumcised, even though they were not of the bloodline of Abraham.

Fine. Then just list the scripture which says so, and expose my "weak" argument.

God Bless!