• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

Israel and the church: a distinction?

Discussion in 'Dispensationalism' started by Mayflower Pilgrim, Mar 5, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. In Romans and Galatians Paul is redefining the meaning of Israel. The matter seems to hinge upon Galatians 3:16 "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, 'And to seeds', as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ."

    This plainly teaches that the seed of Abraham is Jesus Christ and that there is only one seed, that is Jesus Christ. Therefore "if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." (Gal 3:29). Therefore I believe that the church is the 'true' Israel or the "Israel of God" (Gal 6:16) :)
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?

    KEPLER Crux sola est nostra theologia

    MP, you are absolutely correct!

    Indeed there is some point in Paul's epistles where he refers to the Jews wandering in the desert as the "church," but I can't find it now (It's different than the passage in 1Cor10.1-4). I hate it when I do this....
  3. Dave Taylor

    Dave Taylor Senior Member

    United States
    That view, unfortunately but true; conflicted with the endtime view of the Pharisees of Jesus day, who were looking for an ethnic, geo-political governmental kingdom established by the Messiah.

    Christ corrected them too; and they rejected His teachings on the kingdom He was offering.

    Sad that many today, as well; still prefer the endtime teachings and expectations that the Pharisees looked for; in opposition to the teachings that Jesus gave them to the contrary.

    Some just refuse to accept 'one body' as being just that; and the ethnic distinctions being desolved; as the NT teaches over and over again.
  4. Tractor1

    Tractor1 Liberalism has taken the place of Persecution.

    Your assertion that Paul is redefining the meaning of Israel is false. Paul is making clear the Abrahamic covenant can't be transfered to someone else for fulfillment. He points out that once a covenant has been ratified it can't be changed in any way. This includes provisions and the parties involved. The covenant was made with Abraham and his descendants, and it remains that way.

    In spite of your claim that the Church is the "true Israel" the facts of Scripture don't support you. The writers of the New Testament consistently make a distinction between the two. The term Israel is used over seventy times in the New Testament, and in each case referencing ethinic Israel.

    Let's look closer at the Scripture text you've quoted as proof of your assertion.

    "For neither is circumcsion anything, nor uncircumcsion, but a new creation. And those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God" (Gal. 6:15-16).

    Your conclusion couldn't be based on anything other than a mistranslation of the word "and" (the word that appears before the term "Israel of God"). In order for your theology to be Scriptural you have to set aside the primary meaning of "and" in favor of the secondary meaning of "even."

    Everyone is in agreement that "them" refers to believing Gentiles and using "even" makes the passage read, "mercy be upon them, even the Israel of God." This translation essentially equates believing Gentiles with the Israel of God, but the intepretation is grammatically weak and fails to take into consideration the other uses of Israel in the New Testament. Also, it doesn't deal with the entire context of Paul's discussion with the Galatians. (Verse 16) concludes a letter that warns against Judaizers. The Church was made up of both Jews and Gentiles, but Judaizers were attempting to persuade the Gentiles of the need for circumcsion in order to be saved. Needless to say Paul was in opposition to this teaching, pointing out that everyone was saved the same way, either Jew (the circumcsion) or Gentile (called the uncircumcsion). When he comes to the end of his letter he pronounces a blessing upon those same two groups. Therefore, the word "them" refers to believing Gentiles and the "Israel of God" refers to the believing Jews who were in the Galatian Church.

    Examination of (Gal. 6:16) and the rest of the New Testament shows there's no evidence that "Israel" is ever used for anything other than the entire nation or the believing Jews within the nation.

    In Christ,

  5. bainecaileag86

    bainecaileag86 Member

    I'm sorry, but isn't the belief that the church and Israel are the same group more synonymous with covenant theology? I thought dispensationalism was supposed to be made up of these important distinctions. I'm with Tracey on this one.
  6. Dave Taylor

    Dave Taylor Senior Member

    United States

    Why would you quote this statement:

    Galatians 3:16 "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, 'And to seeds', as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ."
    [​IMG] Then turn around and say this:
    "The covenant was made with Abraham and his descendants, and it remains that way."

    Can't you see that the comment you made, turned around and conflicted with the very scripture you quoted?

    Why do that?

    Paul makes it very clear in that verse, that it was 'one-seed(CHRIST)' that the promises were made; not to 'seeds as many' aka fleshly descendents.

    Abraham's promises were completely fulfilled in Christ and no-one else. They were intended for Christ in Genesis (but few understood then) and they were re-explained in Galatians, so that no doubt could be left.

    Do you think Christ has fallen short or is somewhat inadequate in fulfilling the promises made to Abraham? Surely Christ is very sufficient isn't He?

  7. Tractor1

    Tractor1 Liberalism has taken the place of Persecution.

    Due to the fact there are promises having to do with national Israel, and promises that go beyond Israel and include all the nations of the earth. The Church belonging to the latter.

    The assertion was made that the Church is the “Israel of God” and that brings with it the implication that God has abandoned Israel and has chosen to spiritually fulfill His promises with another party. I’m in disagreement with that position. National Israel will experience all that God has promised.

    The argument that the Church is a spiritual fulfillment isn’t necessary as Gentiles are blessed as a literal fulfillment of (Gen. 12:3). The verse promises that in Abraham “all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” Now that Abraham’s heir has appeared in the Person of Jesus Christ, they are, through Him (Gal. 3:26-29). Paul doesn’t argue that Gentiles are blessed because the promise in reference to seed has been spiritually fulfilled, he is arguing on the basis of identification with Christ through whom they are blessed. He identifies that particular blessing because they are now heirs of the promised given to Abraham in (Gen. 12:3). This is true because the promise to Abraham is now given to Christ (Gal. 3:16). The New Testament just specifies what was promised as blessing in the Old.

    There’s no question that portions of the covenant have been fulfilled. Personal promises to Abraham have literally been fulfilled, but key portion haven’t and due to their unconditional nature await later fulfillment through the Davidic, Palestinian, and new covenants.

    In Christ,
  8. A Brethren IN CHRIST

    A Brethren IN CHRIST Well-Known Member

    Gal 3:15b though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth or added there to 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 they seed which is Christ

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

    question is to what promise?

    Gen 22:17 is the only covenant that the seed is singular the other three covenants where plural....

    where is this a covenant luke 1:68-72
  9. Dave Taylor

    Dave Taylor Senior Member

    United States
    what promises do you believe are yet unfulfilled (except for His return, the resurrection, and the judgement?)
  10. Covenant Heart

    Covenant Heart Principled Iconoclast


    In Christ
  11. A Brethren IN CHRIST

    A Brethren IN CHRIST Well-Known Member

    there are four different covenant with abraham
  12. Tractor1

    Tractor1 Liberalism has taken the place of Persecution.

    There are numerous provisions of the Abrahamic covenant that have yet to be fulfilled.

    Scripture states: "And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee" (Gen. 17:7).

    Certain provisions of the covenant have been fulfilled literally throughout history. Promises of a great nation, a great name, personal blessings, God's claim that those who bless would be blessed and those that curse would be cursed, and finally, in him all the nations of the earth would be blessed. Therefore, provision that remain will see their ultimate fulfillment in a literal sense also. They can be found in three covenants which are unconditional in nature and are an enlargement of the Abrahamic. The Palestinian (Duet. 28-30) which relates to the land aspect, the Davidic (2 Sam. 7) which relates to the seed aspect, and the new (Jer. 31: 31-34; 32:40; Ezek. 16:60-62; 34:25-31; 37:26-28; Rom. 11:25-27; Heb. 8:6-13) which relates to the blessing aspect. All three await their ultimate fulfillment at the second advent.

    In Christ,
  13. Dave Taylor

    Dave Taylor Senior Member

    United States

    The New Testament doesn't relegate these fulfillments to the second Advent.

    The New Testament explains it very clearly that they were fulfilled in Christ; or were conditional; and will not be literally fulfilled. (The Deuteronomic).

    How much more blessed can the nations be than to have Christ's blood shed on Calvary for the complete remission of sins? Is there a greater sacrifice than Calvary that can bring a greater blessing?

    Likewise, in speaking of Land; Christ gives the whole of creation to those who faithfully follow Him....and that inheritance is the only thing that is 'everlasting'.

    In speaking of Davidic; Christ has ascending to the highest heavens; above all powers and principalities of creation; whether in Heaven, on Earth, or under the Earth....How much more fulfilling could His Throne and Rulership be?

  14. Dmckay

    Dmckay Guest

    Within the church there is no distinction made between Jew and Gentile. However, between the Nation of Israel as G-d's Covenant people and the Church there are clear distinctions made.

    I put the following together for a class I teach on eschatology.

    (for understanding studying prophecy)
    ISRAEL—The most commonly accepted definition is those persons descended from Abraham through the lineage of Isaac, Jacob, and the sons of Jacob. The definition of Israel is so closely related with the purpose for which God called & established Israel, that the two can’t properly be separated.
    “God chose Abraham to be the head of a special people (Gen. 12:1–3). He limited the line after Abraham to Isaac (Gen. 17:21), Jacob (Gen. 25:23; 27:27–29), and to the twelve sons of Jacob (Gen. 49). He chose Israel for Himself, to make them a nation of priests, and a holy nation (Ex. 19:4–6). It was not a decree to salvation in the first place, but to outward standing and privilege. This outward standing & privilege was, however, by means of His Holy law and divine institutions to lead them* to salvation and acceptable service. Included in the later was the solemn responsibility to be a spiritual blessing to the surrounding nations.”
    —H.C. Theissen
    Introductory Lecture in Systematic Theology
    THE CHURCH—If the term church (Ecclesia) were to mean all the saints of all ages, then it would be evident that the church must go through the tribulation, as we are told that there will be saints in the tribulation. So it becomes necessary to define just what is meant by this Greek word that literally means, “the called out ones.” The church consists of all those who, in this dispensation, have been born of the Spirit of God, and baptized into the Body of Christ.
    Paul, writing to the church at Corinth, said of the Church, “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we all were made to drink of one Spirit.” I Corinthians 12:13.
    The Church is composed only of those believers in Christ from the day of Pentecost until the Rapture of the Church. The purpose of the Church as stated by Scripture, is clearly different from that of any other group in Scripture. This purpose is seen as seven–fold:
    1. To glorify God.
    2. To edify itself.
    3. To purify itself.
    4. To educate it’s constituency.
    5. To evangelize the world.
    6. To act as a restraining and enlightening force in the world.
    7. To promote all good.

    Some distinctions between Israel & the Church

    I Corinthians 10:32 “Neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God,” shows that Paul made a distinction between the Jewish people, the Church, and gentiles. There are many definite contrasts between Israel and the Church here are but a few:


    Promise of a nation, a land, and a citizenship in Canaan, Gen. 12:1–3; 13:15.

    Promise of great blessing and satisfaction of physical needs as a reward for a Godly life, Deuteronomy 8:7–10.

    Life is a thing earned by a certain line of obedience, Leviticus 18:.

    Promise of the Restoration of Israel is an earthly blessing, Isaiah 11:11–12; 14:1; Jeremiah 23:5–6.

    Blessings were conditional, Deuteronomy 28–30.

    Chosen in Abram, Deuteronomy 7:6; Nehemiah 9:7.

    Purposed to be a great* nation, a great blessing, and to dwell alone, Genesis 12:2; Numbers 23:9.


    Promise of a citizenship in Heaven, Philippians 3:20.

    Promise of great physical need, as a reward for a Godly service–filled life, I Corinthians 4:11–12.

    Saved by faith, not through works, Ephesians 2:8–10.

    Future of the Church has to do with Heaven, and heavenly blessings, I Thessalonians 4:16–17.

    Blessings are unconditional.

    Chosen in Him (Christ), Ephesians 1:4.

    Purposed to build the Body of Christ—the Church, Ephesians 1:4, 22–23; Colossians 1:18.

    THE TRIBULATION—(Thlipsis) This Greek word translated tribulation appears some 54 times in the New Testament, with many varied uses. Clearly some 24 times it’s meaning is only that of any time of suffering or testing, such as the persecution believers endure for their faith (Matthew 13:21; Mark 4:17). The remaining 30 occurrences it is used in a eschatological sense with reference to either: 1) the entire seven-year period known as the both “70th week of Daniel” (Daniel 9:27), and the “time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jeremiah 30:7); or 2) in it’s narrower sense as the last 3 1/2 years of this seven-year period commonly referred to as the “Great Tribulation” (Matthew 24:21).
    The nature or character of this period can be discerned from several passages of Scripture as being: 1) of wrath (Zeph. 1:15, 18; I Thess 1: 10; 5:9; Rev. 6:16–17); 2) of judgment (Rev. 14:7; 15:4); 3) of trial (Rev. 3:10); 4) of destruction (Joel 1:15; I Thessalonians 5:3); 5) of darkness (Joel 2:2; Amos 5:18); and 6) of desolation (Daniel 9:27; Zeph. 1:14–15). It will be a time of such unsurpassed carnage and destruction that Jesus said, “…except those days should be shortened, there would no flesh be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened.” Matthew 24:22. The purpose of the Tribulation is stated in Daniel 9:24, “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people [the Jews] and upon thy holy city, to 1) finish the transgression, and 2) make an end of sins, and 3) to make reconciliation for iniquity, and 4) to bring in everlasting righteousness, and 5) to seal up the vision and prophecy, and 6) to anoint the Most Holy.” This prophecy was given to Daniel, a Jew, regarding the Jewish people, and the Jewish city of Jerusalem. In short, the primary purpose of the tribulation is to prepare, thru purging, the Jewish people for the Coming of their Messiah.
    A secondary purpose for the tribulation is as an outpouring of the Wrath of God upon the unbelieving men and nations as “the Times of the Gentiles” (Luke 21:24) comes to an end.

    “For, behold, the Lord cometh out of His place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity.” —Isaiah 26:21

    “and for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie; that they all might be damned who believe not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”
    —II Thessalonians 2:12
    Promises to The Church
    regarding The Rapture & Wrath
    1. I Thess. 5:9 For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.
    2. Rev. 6:17 For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?
    3. I Thess. 1:9 for they themselves report what kind of reception you gave us. They tell how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God,

    I Thess. 1:10 and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead—Jesus, who rescues us from the coming wrath.

    4. Rev. 3:10 Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth.

    5. II Pet. 2:6 if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly;
    II Pet. 2:7 and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the filthy lives of lawless men

    II Pet. 2:8 (for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)—

    II Pet. 2:9 if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.
  15. Dispy

    Dispy Veteran

    The "roots" of ALL believers go back to Abram/Abraham.Read Romans 4:12 right along with verse 13. "And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcsion only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, WHILE HE HAD BEING YET UNCIRCUMICSED. For the promise, that he should be heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or his seed, through the Law, but through the righteousness of FAITH.

    Those verses just tell us that justification/salvation is apart from the Law, even while Abram was still a Gentile and before his name was changed to Abraham and he became a Jew in the flesh.

    The covenant to Abram was when he was still a Gentile and was unconditional. After his name was changed to Abraham and required to become a "Jew in the flesh" by being circumcised, the unconditional promise to Abram wasn't changed, but new conditions were added to receive the promise. Any Jew that refused to be circumcised, was "cut off from his people; he hath broken the covenant" (Genesis 17:14).

    After Abram's name was changed to Abraham, he is no longer referred to as Abram, even when they are talking about the times in which he lived before his name was changed.

    Romans 4:1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh (when he was still called Abram and prior to his name change and his circumcision), hath found?
    2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
    3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

    Paul is speaking of the time in Genesis 15:5,6. Verse 2 identifies to who God is speaking is Abram. Abram was call a friend of the Lord and was declared righteous (justified/saved). Abram was justified/saved just as members of the Body of Christ are today. By FAITH ALONE and not by any deeds/works of the Law.

    In contrast to this, James tells us in his Letter 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
    22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
    23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God

    James is talking about the time in Genesis 22 when circumcised Abraham, a Jew in the flesh, was justified by doing a work to demonstrate his faith.

    So the roots of ALL BELIEVERS go back to Abram/Abraham and are called the children of God. Those that are the seed of Abram are saved by FAITH alone, just as members of the Body of Christ are today, and those that were required to perform deed/works of the Law were saved/justified by doing the deed/works of the law BY FAITH. Salvation/justification has always been on the basis of FAITH. Now read Galations in that light.

    As a Gentile, I am a child of God, saved by GRACE, THROUGH FAITH ALONE, and my roots go all the way back to Abram. All believers that were saved during the dispensation of the Law, are children of God, and saved by FAITH ALONE which was demonstrated by dong the deed/works of the Law by FAITH. Isn't Jesus the root in which the promise of salvation/justification is based for ALL mankind?

    I, as a member of "the Body of Chirst" am not a Jew or "spiritual" Jew. My salvation/justifiction comes from Chirst through my FAITH ALONE in His Cross work, Just like Abram was saved/justified by just believing God.

    All those that were saved/justified during the "dispensation of the Law" are saved by FAITH ALONE by demonstrating that faith by doing what the deed/works of the Law required.

    Prior to the setting aside of Israel, and the formation of "the Body of Christ", There were different instructions addressed to Israel then to the Gentiles. If a Gentile wanted to serve the God of Israel, then the Gentile had to become a Jew (proselyte) and place themselves under the Civil, Moral and Ceremonial Laws of Moses.

    Are the Instructions in righteousness to Israel, under the Laws of Moses, the same as the instructions of righteousness to the Body of Chirst? I don't think so.

    I will follow the instructions that God gave to Paul for members of the Body of Christ. I will not mix them with the instructions that God gave to Moses for the children of Israel. You may if you wish.

    When the gospel (good news) of the Law is mixed with the gospel (good news) of God's grace, you end up with confusion and denominations.

    God Bless.
    Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!
  16. KEPLER

    KEPLER Crux sola est nostra theologia

    Bainecaileag86, (what on earth does that mean?),

    You speak of "covenant theology" as if it's a bad word rolling out of your mouth...???

    While it's true that covenant theology makes no distinction between the Israel to whom promises were made in the OT and the Church in the NT, this belief is not peculiar to covenant theology: the vast majority of Christendom holds this view, only dispensationalism is out of step with orthodoxy on this point.


  17. Dispy

    Dispy Veteran

    Being I haven't read every post in this thread, I would like to respond to one of the first ones by R.J.S.

    There was a Church at Pentecost and it was the Jewish Church. Those that were "added" to the Church were added to the Jewish Church.

    It is my contention that the Church (the Body of Christ) was not formed until AFTER the stoning of Stephen, in Acts 7 and the raising up of Saul/Paul in Acts 9.

    The Body of Christ consists of believing "set aside" Jews and Gentiles. Also, they on equal footing and without distinction, and no longer under the Law. This condition never existed until revealed to the Apostle Paul. Therefore, the Church, the Body of Christ was not present at Pentecost; neither was it started at Pentecost.

    In his web-site on Acts 2 Problems, Robert C. Brock wrote the following article:


    This is the doctrine that gives Acts 2 brethren their name - Acts 2 Dispensationalists. This is the most popular form of Dispensationalism.

    Their main argument for starting the Church in Acts 2 is the baptism of the Holy Spirit mentioned in Acts 2:4 and in Acts 11:15-16. They say that this 'baptism' places believers into the Body of Christ, thereby equating this with the 'baptism' of 1 Cor. 12:13 (Dispensationalism Today by C.C. Ryrie, pages 136,137; Moody Press; 1965).

    They also point to the word 'church' in Acts 2:47 of the King James Bible. Of course, they believe that Peter preached Christianity on this day and that he presented the death, burial and resurrection of Christ for salvation; in other words, Peter preached the Gospel of the grace of God.


    The only way and the Scriptural way to solve the many problems that Acts 2 causes is to move over from Acts 2 to Acts 9 (just7 chapters), and begin the Church and this Dispensation of grace with the salvation of Saul/Paul. In making this simple little move, one's whole outlook and perspective changes in how to view and understand the Word of God, especially in the book of Acts. Instead of starting things on a very controversial Jewish festival day and dream up human interpretations to defend it, it is best to start things when God did something different. And certainly the salvation of Saul was different from anything that had happened before it or after it. It was unique (1 Tim. 1:15-16).

    In making this move, the doctrines of the Bible are enhanced rather than lost or given up. Truth about the Church becomes clearer. This move allows the Holy Spirit to work in us according to His teaching ministry to believers. And most of all, our RISEN Lord and Head, Christ Jesus, is honored and glorified when we preach Him according to His heavenly ministry for this Age of grace.

    Charles F. Baker, in his 'A Dispensational Theology,' pages 483-486, gives 12 Scriptural reasons why the Church, the Body of Christ, could not have begun on the Day of Pentecost. Instead of quoting from his theology, we will look at the more obvious reasons taken from Acts 2 and 3. The Day of Pentecost covers two whole chapters - Acts 2 and 3.

    1. The Day of Pentecost was one of the important feast days in Israel's calendar (Lev. 15:22). This religious feast day belonged to Israel alone. It was one of the three great annual festivals, the other two being the Passover and Tabernacles.

    Now I realize that believers today in this Age of grace can learn a lot from the Old Testament. This is one thing that the Apostle Paul wrote about to the assembly at Rome (Romans 15:4 - "For whatsoever things were written aforetime [before] were written for our learning ... " 'learning' refers to 'teaching,' indicating that the Old Testament is important for the Christian. But please notice that this verse DOES NOT SAY that the Old Testament Scriptures are for our obedience.. To 'obey' the Old Testament Scriptures is impossible in the light of the cross of Christ (Col. 2:14).

    Therefore, to bring this major Jewish festival of the Old Testament into Christianity and make it a major doctrine of Christianity, causes believers to become inconsistent in their doctrine and walk before the Lord. Bringing Pentecost into Christianity mixes Judaism with Christianity. It is-this part of the Word of God that causes all the problems that the Acts 2 position teaches. Acts 2 brethren NEED to remove the Church from Acts 2 and place it in Acts 9 where it belongs. Then they will be able to rightly divide the Word of truth consistently.

    2. The baptism of the Holy Spirit (Acts 11:16) was administered by the Lord Jesus Christ just as John the Baptist said He would do, as recorded in Matt. 3:11, "...He [Jesus] shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit..." This baptizing ministry of our Lord was done on the Day of Pentecost. This baptism was NOT performed by the Holy Spirit like we read about in 1 Cor. 12:13, "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one Body..." Acts 2 Dispensationalists cannot understand that the two baptisms mentioned here are DIFFERENT BAPTISMS performed by two different members of the Godhead. The verse in 1 Cor. 12:13 does not relate to the Day of Pentecost. They confuse the ministry of Christ with the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Their arguments for putting 1 Cor. 12:13 into Acts 2 are very weak.

    3. Peter's two messages in Acts 2 and 3 are related to the DAY OF THE LORD (Acts 2:17-21; 3:19-23). This particular period of time is part of the LAST DAYS of Israel rather than to the first days of the Church, the Body of Christ. The Day of the Lord covers the Tribulation Period and the Millennium, not this Dispensation of the grace of God.

    4. The gospel message that Peter used to close his two messages was the Gospel of the Kingdom, the only gospel Peter knew, as seen in Acts 2:38-39 especially (also Acts 3:19). They were to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins and then the Holy Spirit would be given to those who believed. Repentance was NATIONAL as well as INDIVIDUAL, and had to take place FIRST before any of God's blessings would come (Joel 2:12-17).

    How did Peter proclaim the death and resurrection of Christ?

    First of all, the Apostle Peter accused the Nation of murdering their Messiah. He told them twice that they killed Him (Acts 2:23), and they killed the Prince of life (Acts 3:15).

    Second, in relation to the resurrection, Peter said that God raised Him from the dead in order to sit on David's throne (Acts 2:30). This is one of the reasons for the resurrection of Christ.

    The Apostle Paul did not teach about the death and resurrection of Christ like Peter did.

    The Gospel of the Kingdom is NOT God's message for this Age of grace. Acts 2 brethren know this but do not know what to do with it. They do not like what Peter taught about being baptized in water MR the forgiveness of sins. They realize that this is not the same thing that Paul wrote in Eph. 1:7 and in Col. 1:14, that forgiveness of sins is NOW by the blood of Christ.

    One of America's greatest Greek scholars, A.T. Robertson, a very strong Baptist teacher, strongly disliked Acts 2:38. He taught that the 'for' in the phrase 'be baptized ... FOR the remission of sins' means 'because of.' The Greek preposition for 'for' is EIS. He used Matt. 12:41 as the proof, where it is stated 'they repented at [EIS] the preaching of Jonah.' He also said in his book 'A Grammar of the-Greek New Testament' on page 592 in relation to Acts 2:38, that the right translation of this verse depended on the interpreter instead of the grammarian (translator). In a list of meanings for EIS, he left out 'for,' a legitimate meaning that the Greek lexicons recognize. The meaning of 'because of' is not recognized by the lexicons for EIS.

    What can be said about this? The answer is that if the meaning of 'because of' was the intended meaning in Acts 2:38 and in Matt. 12:41, then the Holy Spirit would have guided Luke and Matthew to use the Greek preposition DIA in the accusative case, for DIA in the accusative case means 'because of.' But it is EIS that is used instead, and so we must accept the meaning of 'for' as making more sense than the other meanings of EIS. Besides, the meaning of 'for' is consistent with its use in describing the work of John the Baptist (Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3; Matt. 26:28) and our Lord's teaching.

    Another problem that Acts 2 brethren have is that they believe in only one gospel. Hence, they have to change the obvious meaning of Acts 2:38 so that it fits into the Gospel of the grace of God. And they do this by attacking the Greek preposition EIS.

    5. All the Jewish believers on the Day of Pentecost had everything in common (Acts 2:44-45). They shared everything they had with one another so that no one lacked anything.

    Had not the Lord told His disciples earlier to sell all that they had and to follow Him? (Luke 12:1,29-34). Matthew's record of this teaching is found in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 6:31-34). On another occasion the Lord had said the same thing to a rich young ruler (Mark 10:21). Could it have been possible that this rich young ruler was born again on the Day of Pentecost and shared all his possessions with the Jewish believers? The Lord had sown the seed in his heart, and after thinking about it for some time, he could have accepted Peter's invitation of Acts 2:38-39 and been saved. Many thousands were born again back then (at least 5,000 men - Acts 2:41; 4:4), and it would have taken a lot of earthly possessions in order to meet everyone's needs.

    Is this condition of 'sharing' going on now? Absolutely not! As a matter of fact, it didn't last too long in the book of Acts, just a few years, maybe 10-20 at the most. Paul wrote in Rom. 15:26 about the POOR SAINTS that were in Jerusalem. He and sanefrom the Gentile churches in Greece wanted to help them out, which they did. Something had happened in the book of Acts that led to their being poor - probably the unbelief of the Jewish Nation, and the beginning of God's heavenly purpose through the Apostle of the Gentiles, the Apostle Paul (Rom. 11:13).

    6. In Acts 3, the Apostle Peter said that their Messiah would come back if they would repent and be converted (Acts 3:19-21).Peter did not offer the earthly Kingdom of God to the Church. He offered it to the Nation of Israel! This was an honest, genuineoffer of the Kingdom to Israel. He went to Moses and to all the prophets from Samuel onwards, and even back to Abraham, showing them that this was God's plan for them IF they really believed it. But we know that they did not believe it.

    The Body of Christ is not a part of Old Testament prophecy or history. The Body of Christ was kept secret in God, hidden in Him until revealed to the Apostle Paul (Ran. 16:25; 1 Cor. 2:7; Eph. 3:9).

    So then, here are six very good reasons why the Body of Christ did not begin on the Day of Pentecost. There is just no reason to put it in Acts 2 under those circumstances. And believe me, it becomes a wonderful blessing when you do get it OUT of Acts2 and place it in Acts 9 where it belongs.

    This Dispensation of the grace of God was given to the Apostle Paul, as is so clearly stated in Eph. 3:2, "If [Seeing that] you have heard of the Dispensation of the grace of God which is given to me for you." Peter did not write this! John did not write this! Paul wrote it, but Christendom does not want to accept it. If Christendom would sincerely accept the truth of this verse, it would start a world-wide revival with millions of people saved. But until it does, confusion will abound among believers because of unbelief.

    God Bless.
    Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!
  18. St.Augustine

    St.Augustine Guest

    Israel is the type of the Church, the church is the antitype of Israel. :)
  19. A Brother In Christ

    A Brother In Christ Senior Veteran

    In context of Galation

    Gal 3:27b For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ 28 There is neither Jew or Geek, there is neither slave or free, there is neither male or female: for ye are all one in Christ

    states different
  20. St.Augustine

    St.Augustine Guest

    How does that undermine the claim that the church is the true Israel?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.