THE QUESTION IS HOW IS ISRAEL SAVED ??

[David Lamb]

If you are a believer during the early Acts 2 period, you are part of true Israel, the remnant Israel who believed, aka Romans 9:6-13.

You are under the gospel of the circumcision/kingdom, and under the stewardship of Peter James and John. You have to obey the Law of Moses, circumcise your kids etc (Acts 21:18-24).

So you are NOT an Israelite Christian. All Christians today and after the fall of Israel, belong to the Body of Christ, where there is neither Jew nor gentile (Galatians 3:28), and they are not to circumcise their kids (Galatians 5:2, Acts 21:25).

Sorry, but you are reading more into my words "Israelite Christian" than I intended. All I meant was a Christian whose nationality was Israelite. I certainly never said that I was an Israelite Christian.

 

[Tom8907]

It's a good thing the body of Christ is Israel and not the modern nation state.

 

[Guojing]

Sorry, but you are reading more into my words "Israelite Christian" than I intended. All I meant was a Christian whose nationality was Israelite. I certainly never said that I was an Israelite Christian.

There are no Israelite Christians today, you or otherwise, that was my point in that post,

My point is that when Peter, James and John wrote their epistles, they are not written to Israelite Christians.

They are written to the remnant of Israel, true Israel, which is NO ONE physically living today.

 

[Guojing]

It's a good thing the body of Christ is Israel and not the modern nation state.

That cannot be correct.

All Christians today and after the fall of Israel, belong to the Body of Christ, where there is neither Jew nor gentile (Galatians 3:28), and they are not to circumcise their kids (Galatians 5:2, Acts 21:25).

 

[David Lamb]

There are no Israelite Christians today, you or otherwise, that was my point in that post,

My point is that when Peter, James and John wrote their epistles, they are not written to Israelite Christians.

They are written to the remnant of Israel, true Israel, which is NO ONE physically living today.

So if I am talking about Christians who happen to be Chinese, I can call them Chinese Christians, but (according to you) it is for some reason wrong to refer to Christians who happen to be of Israelite descent as Israelite Christians? Why?

I have also just had an email notification of a post from you in reply to mine, where you said: "I never said you are one, there are no Israelite Christians today." (I couldn't find that post on the thread). No, you did not say that I am an Israelite Christian; you said: "So you are NOT an Israelite Christian." That is why I replied to you to say that I never said I was and Israelite Christian.

 

[Guojing]

So if I am talking about Christians who happen to be Chinese, I can call them Chinese Christians, but (according to you) it is for some reason wrong to refer to Christians who happen to be of Israelite descent as Israelite Christians? Why?

The problem is your claim here

Peter wasn't writing his first letter to the nation of Israel. He is writing to Christians who have been dispersed by persecution:

“Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To the pilgrims of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace be multiplied.” (1Pe 1:1-2 NKJV)

It is to Christians that he writes in vv 6-9:


“In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, that the genuineness of your faith, [being] much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ, whom having not seen you love. Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, receiving the end of your faith — the salvation of your souls.” (1Pe 1:6-9 NKJV)

By using the term "Christians" interchangeably with "Israelite Christians", there is a problem.

 

[David Lamb]

The problem is your claim here



By using the term "Christians" interchangeably with "Israelite Christians", there is a problem.

I didn't think I had ever used the two interchangeable. I apologise if I did. I thought I had only used "Israelite Christians" to mean Christians who by nationality are Israelites.

 

[Guojing]

I didn't think I had ever used the two interchangeable. I apologise if I did. I thought I had only used "Israelite Christians" to mean Christians who by nationality are Israelites.

Because when you use "Christians" in that quote, you are also implying we today are also the audience of his epistle.

That is the interchangeably part

 

[David Lamb]

Because when you use "Christians" in that quote, you are also implying we today are also the audience of his epistle.

That is the interchangeably part

Oh, I think I see. I hope you don't mean that because Peter was addressing "pilgrims of the dispersion", and we are not "pilgrims of the dispersion," his letter can be ignored by us. We would have very little of the New Testament left in that case. Luke wrote his gospel and Acts to Theophilus, and most of the epistles were addressed to individuals or churches.

 

[Guojing]

Oh, I think I see. I hope you don't mean that because Peter was addressing "pilgrims of the dispersion", and we are not "pilgrims of the dispersion," his letter can be ignored by us. We would have very little of the New Testament left in that case. Luke wrote his gospel and Acts to Theophilus, and most of the epistles were addressed to individuals or churches.

All scripture is to our benefit, but it does not follow that all scripture are instructions written to us.

Otherwise you will still be building an ark today because of Genesis 6:14.

 

[David Lamb]

All scripture is to our benefit, but it does not follow that all scripture are instructions written to us.

Otherwise you will still be building an ark today because of Genesis 6:14.

Yes, true about the ark of course. But there are important lessons for all Christians in (for example) the Epistle to the Ephesians. It was not only believers at Ephesus who needed the spiritual armour described in Chapter 6.

 

[Hawkins]

David was not offered salvation in the OT.

Like the rest of Israel under the Old Covenant, he has to make sure he remains part of the nation of Israel for his lifetime, and not get cut off.

He will then be in paradise after his death, and wait for the coming of the Messiah, (Daniel 12:1-2, Romans 11:25-27)

The point is, do you believe whether David is finally saved or condemned? Generally it's believe he's saved instead of being condemned to hell. Do you mean to say that David should stay in hell? If not that the discussion will be, how is he saved? Like I said, you may need to figure it out how David is possibly saved before you can reveal the truth about how Israel is saved at the end. That's my point!

To put it another way, if you failed to figure out how David is saved, I am not surprised that you are clueless about how Israel is finally saved.

 

[Tom8907]

That cannot be correct.

All Christians today and after the fall of Israel, belong to the Body of Christ, where there is neither Jew nor gentile (Galatians 3:28), and they are not to circumcise their kids (Galatians 5:2, Acts 21:25).

Yeah. Ofcourse we don't circumcise, this is the new covenant. "All Israel shall be saved" so just get Israeli citizenship for salvation then?

 

[Dan Perez]

Yeah. Ofcourse we don't circumcise, this is the new covenant. "All Israel shall be saved" so just get Israeli citizenship for salvation then?

Yeah. Ofcourse we don't circumcise, this is the new covenant. "All Israel shall be saved" so just get Israeli citizenship for salvation then?

And have yet had NO one explain how anyone is saved under the NEW COVENAMT and would like to hear

how that happens ?

dan p

 

[Guojing]

The point is, do you believe whether David is finally saved or condemned? Generally it's believe he's saved instead of being condemned to hell. Do you mean to say that David should stay in hell? If not that the discussion will be, how is he saved? Like I said, you may need to figure it out how David is possibly saved before you can reveal the truth about how Israel is saved at the end. That's my point!

To put it another way, if you failed to figure out how David is saved, I am not surprised that you are clueless about how Israel is finally saved.

He is now at Abraham's bosom, the heart of the Earth, to wait for the 2nd return of Christ.

Only then will he receive his salvation (Daniel 12:1-2, Romans 11:25-27).

The rest of True Israel (Romans 9:6-13) are likewise doing that.

Salvation is a future event for members of the nation of Israel (1 Peter 1:9, Daniel 12:1-2).

 

[Tom8907]

And have yet had NO one explain how anyone is saved under the NEW COVENAMT and would like to hear

how that happens ?

dan p

I don't understand what you're saying. We're obviously saved by Christ's shed blood on the cross.

 

[Guojing]

Yeah. Ofcourse we don't circumcise, this is the new covenant. "All Israel shall be saved" so just get Israeli citizenship for salvation then?

To be true Israel, Isaac and Jacob has to be your ancesters as well. (Romans 9:10-13)

Too bad you won't qualify.

 

[Tom8907]

To be true Israel, Isaac and Jacob has to be your ancesters as well. (Romans 9:10-13)

Too bad you won't qualify.

To get saved, you have to trust in Christ's shed blood- this is either the case or it isn't. What did John the Baptist say about Abraham as their father?

 

[Guojing]

To get saved, you have to trust in Christ's shed blood- this is either the case or it isn't.

That is true (1 Cor 15:1-4), but that has nothing to do with "being Israel".

 

[David Lamb]

To be true Israel, Isaac and Jacob has to be your ancesters as well. (Romans 9:10-13)

Too bad you won't qualify.

Not according to the New Testament:

“Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all” (Ro 4:16 NKJV)

Romans wasn't written to people who had Isaac and Jacob as their natural ancestors.