Preterists, how do you answer Israel Only?

[Residential Bob]

You may already know the I/O position, but I’ll summarize just in case.

Jesus came only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel, as he says to the Syrophoenician woman in Matthew 15:24. Paul iterates this sentiment to the Galatian churches, telling them that Jesus came to redeem those under the law (Gal 4:5). As the law condemned only Israelites (and Jews), then redemption did not extend to foreigners.

On top of that, both Jesus and St. Paul use epithets in referring to foreigners; Jesus calls this woman a dog (Mt 15:26) and to foreigners in general as pigs, as in the parable of the prodigal son, and St. Paul calls foreigners barbarians, as in Colossians 3:11.

Some Preterists have despaired of these passages and implications, even to the point of abandoning their faith. I/O advocates are atheists, ultimately. I myself have stood on the edge of the I/O cliff, but in view of historical and cultural context, stopped just short of jumping. And of course I cannot forget my own salvation experience.

Have you ever contemplated I/O? And if so, does it still haunt you in some measure? And how do you combat it?

 

[Lost4words]

On top of that, both Jesus and St. Paul use epithets in referring to foreigners; Jesus calls this woman a dog (Mt 15:26) and to foreigners in general as pigs, as in the parable of the prodigal son, and St. Paul calls foreigners barbarians, as in Colossians 3:11.

So very very wrong indeed!

 

[Residential Bob]

So very very wrong indeed!

Well, these are in fact the words of the Scriptures.

 

[HTacianas]

What does I/O mean?

 

[Residential Bob]

What does I/O mean?

Israel Only.

 

[Lost4words]

Well, these are in fact the words of the Scriptures.

No they are not. Its your interpretation of what those words actually mean which is very far from the truth.

 

[HTacianas]

Israel Only.

Ok. I see now. You've grossly misrepresented the teachings of Jesus and Paul regarding foreigners, and I don't see how any of that speaks to preterism.

 

[Residential Bob]

Ok. I see now. You've grossly misrepresented the teachings of Jesus and Paul regarding foreigners, and I don't see how any of that speaks to preterism.

What is the misrepresentation? Did Jesus not say that he came only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel? Did he not send his disciples to preach the kingdom only to Israelites? Did St. Paul not say that Christ came "to redeem those who were under the law"?

 

[HTacianas]

What is the misrepresentation? Did Jesus not say that he came only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel? Did he not send his disciples to preach the kingdom only to Israelites? Did St. Paul not say that Christ came "to redeem those who were under the law"?

And shortly after the resurrection he told his apostles "Go and make disciples of all nations", and Paul was appointed specifically to be the apostle to the gentiles.

 

[Righttruth]

You may already know the I/O position, but I’ll summarize just in case.

Jesus came only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel, as he says to the Syrophoenician woman in Matthew 15:24. Paul iterates this sentiment to the Galatian churches, telling them that Jesus came to redeem those under the law (Gal 4:5). As the law condemned only Israelites (and Jews), then redemption did not extend to foreigners.

On top of that, both Jesus and St. Paul use epithets in referring to foreigners; Jesus calls this woman a dog (Mt 15:26) and to foreigners in general as pigs, as in the parable of the prodigal son, and St. Paul calls foreigners barbarians, as in Colossians 3:11.

Some Preterists have despaired of these passages and implications, even to the point of abandoning their faith. I/O advocates are atheists, ultimately. I myself have stood on the edge of the I/O cliff, but in view of historical and cultural context, stopped just short of jumping. And of course I cannot forget my own salvation experience.

Have you ever contemplated I/O? And if so, does it still haunt you in some measure? And how do you combat it?

It is not I/O; it is Jesus only!

 

[Residential Bob]

And shortly after the resurrection he told his apostles "Go and make disciples of all nations", and Paul was appointed specifically to be the apostle to the gentiles.

First, may I ask if you're a Preterist. Preterists consider time statements and audience relevance when they read scripture, as you must know if you are one. They read the Scriptures for what they say sans any presuppositions or eschatological theory (as in futurism).

They start reconsidering what nations actually means, if the Gentiles were not the diaspora, and all the rest. It's an intellectual pursuit, really. Very liberating.

But also troubling because logically it can be taken to an extreme.

That's my concern. I'm a Christian. And I read passages in the Bible for what they say, even those that say that Israelites are no longer Abraham's progeny by blood but rather by faith and that their organs aren't circumcised but their hearts are. That's all well and good, and gives me comfort, but I encounter I/Oers on occasion who point to verse after verse written by, for, and about the Israelites who were physically descended from Abraham. Even Luke was no longer a foreigner when he wrote his gospel and the Acts.

I was just curious about how others might respond to this ideology.

 

[mkgal1]

As I understand, in order for Daniel's
prophecy to be fulfilled - there were 7 "weeks" (translated to years) to confirm His covenant with His people (those under the Mosaic covenant). That means that 3.5 of those years were covered by His ministry - and the remaining 3.5 years were when the gospel was shared in synagogues after His death and resurrection. It looks like this:

Claninja started a thread a while back regarding this, here: If there is a gap, Daniel 9:24 becomes a false statement

 

[Southernscotty]

Friend, Jesus spoke to the jews and Israel however He spoke to the apostle Paul on the Damascus road in a Spiritual state and gave him the gospel that we are saved by believing 1 Cor 15 1-4
Paul is the apostle to the gentiles
We are saved by grace through faith and this is God's gift.
Israel will be saved after the number of gentiles are completed

 

[Residential Bob]

Friend, Jesus spoke to the jews and Israel however He spoke to the apostle Paul on the Damascus road in a Spiritual state and gave him the gospel that we are saved by believing 1 Cor 15 1-4
Paul is the apostle to the gentiles
We are saved by grace through faith and this is God's gift.
Israel will be saved after the number of gentiles are completed

You don't appear to be a Preterist, either, my friend. I would love to dialogue with you some time, but honestly, Preterists are really about the only ones who might relate to the topic, which is why I addressed them.

 

[1stcenturylady]

You may already know the I/O position, but I’ll summarize just in case.

Jesus came only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel, as he says to the Syrophoenician woman in Matthew 15:24. Paul iterates this sentiment to the Galatian churches, telling them that Jesus came to redeem those under the law (Gal 4:5). As the law condemned only Israelites (and Jews), then redemption did not extend to foreigners.

On top of that, both Jesus and St. Paul use epithets in referring to foreigners; Jesus calls this woman a dog (Mt 15:26) and to foreigners in general as pigs, as in the parable of the prodigal son, and St. Paul calls foreigners barbarians, as in Colossians 3:11.

Some Preterists have despaired of these passages and implications, even to the point of abandoning their faith. I/O advocates are atheists, ultimately. I myself have stood on the edge of the I/O cliff, but in view of historical and cultural context, stopped just short of jumping. And of course I cannot forget my own salvation experience.

Have you ever contemplated I/O? And if so, does it still haunt you in some measure? And how do you combat it?

I'm so confused. Are you Preterist, or not. Is I/O Preterist or not?

I am not Preterist, so maybe you don't want me to post an opinion, but it is true that Jesus came (first) only to the House of Israel. But later, starting with Peter, gave him permission to start preaching to Gentiles in Acts 10, starting with Cornelius, when He showed Peter a vision of the unclean/common animals, and said “What God has cleansed you must not call common.” So there was a point when the edict changed to include Gentiles. Read Romans 11. It shows that Gentiles who accepted Christ were grafted into what we now call Spiritual Israel, consisting of Jews and Gentiles, still making I/O accurate, except what now consists of Spiritual Israel - a mixture of Jew and Gentile into "one new man."

Ephesians 2:
11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you 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. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. 17 And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near. 18 For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.

 

[Erik Nelson]

it is true that Jesus came (first) only to the House of Israel. But later, starting with Peter, gave him permission to start preaching to Gentiles in Acts 10, starting with Cornelius, when He showed Peter a vision of the unclean/common animals, and said “What God has cleansed you must not call common.” So there was a point when the edict changed to include Gentiles. Read Romans 11. It shows that Gentiles who accepted Christ were grafted into what we now call Spiritual Israel, consisting of Jews and Gentiles, still making I/O accurate, except what now consists of Spiritual Israel - a mixture of Jew and Gentile into "one new man."

Ephesians 2:
11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you 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. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. 17 And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near. 18 For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.

yes exactly

Acts 10 and the Gentile Mission began about 42 AD. When Saint Peter was forced to flee Jerusalem due to persecution.

That's about 12 years after the resurrection. And according to an early church tradition. Jesus ordered. The Apostles to give the Jews 12 years to repent. And become Christian. Evidently, one year for each of the tribes of Israel. It was only after they rejected Christ once. Crucifixion. And again. 12 years of further rejections, culminating in the persecutions of Saint Peter. Then the head of the church. That the gentile mission was authorized and began.

 

[mkgal1]

Is I/O Preterist or not?

I'm fairly new to understanding preterism - but I can't see how "Israel only" would fall into that framework. It's more in line with what dispensationalists believe (which is also a new term for me).

 

[1stcenturylady]

yes exactly

Acts 10 and the Gentile Mission began about 42 AD. When Saint Peter was forced to flee Jerusalem due to persecution.

That's about 12 years after the resurrection. And according to an early church tradition. Jesus ordered. The Apostles to give the Jews 12 years to repent. And become Christian. Evidently, one year for each of the tribes of Israel. It was only after they rejected Christ once. Crucifixion. And again. 12 years of further rejections, culminating in the persecutions of Saint Peter. Then the head of the church. That the gentile mission was authorized and began.

I've never heard of that church tradition.

 

[Erik Nelson]

I'm fairly new to understanding preterism - but I can't see how "Israel only" would fall into that framework. It's more in line with what dispensationalists believe (which is also a new term for me).

Yes, and please remember that context matters. Jesus came to the House of Israel only at first. But they collectively rejected him. Many times over. Eventually. The mission was granted to the Gentiles instead. As the parable of. The wedding feast explains.

 

[Erik Nelson]

I've never heard of that church tradition.

Will try to find it again