WHEN was Israel set aside ?

[Dan Perez]

Because "those who are called" (Hebrews 9:15) refers to the current born again (Romans 8:30), who are body of Christ.

You should know this.
Your understanding is a perversion of the NT.

And not understanding why you use Heb 9:15 just means that Jesus death paid for the sins committed under the first covenant is what is meant and do not see your understanding ??

dan p

 

[Clare73]

And not understanding why you use Heb 9:15 just means that Jesus death paid forn the sins committed under the first covenant is what is meant and do not see your understanding ??

dan p

"Those who are called" of Hebrews 9:15 are the "called" of Romans 8:30.

Who are the "called" of Romans 8:30?

It is "us" (Romans 8:31-35), NT Christians of the the first century and on to the end of time at the second coming.

 

[Clare73]

Israel was never set aside, because the Everlasting Covenant, in Genesis 17:13, is forever.

The "everlasting" (meaning duration of the Old Dispensation) covenant of Genesis 17 consisted of two parts:

1) conditional: to be their God (Genesis 17:7); i.e., his wisdom, power and goodness are to them-- ("As for me," v. 4; "As for you," v. 9; everlasting from God's standpoint, but it could be broken--v.14, and was);

2) unconditional: an everlasting possession (Genesis 17:8, Genesis 48:4), fulfilled to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the eternal city (New Jerusalem) of the heavenly land (Hebrews 11:16).

And Jesus taught Israel the laws of the Kingdom, under Peter's stewardship... and Peter is told to feed Jesus' sheep in John 21:15-19, and what to feed them, in Matthew 10:6-7 and Matthew 24:14 and Matthew 28:18-20: The good news of the Reign of the Heavens.

Not according to authoritative NT teaching, where Jesus taught the laws to Peter for those who would believe in Jesus; i.e., the church, the body of Christ, of both Jews and Gentiles, to which Gentiles the kingdom had been given in place of the Jews (Matthew 21:43).

 

[Clare73]

Look at how the Church was thinking. What was their frame of mind? "So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” Acts 1:6 ESV
They expected Jesus to sit as Israel's King in the land of Judea and rule over the Gentile nations as His kings and priests. Instead they as well as us are still waiting.
The Israel of God was never set aside,

Note: The "Israel of God" is spoken to believing Gentile Galatians (Galatians 3:16), not to Jews.
The church is the "Israel of God," the one olive tree of God's people (Romans 11:17), made up of both Jew and Gentile.

And yes, not all Israel was set aside, a remnant remains (Romans 11:5).

But Israel was cut off the one olive tree of God's people and the Gentiles were grafted in instead (Romans 11:16-17, Romans 11:23)

we get distracted about what being a Christian is all about. Law vs. Grace,

Which has no bearing on God setting Israel aside, except for a remnant (Romans 11:5).

 

[Clare73]

Yes, supersessionism.

The NT presents Fufillment Theology, not Replacement Theology.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

The NT presents Fufillment Theology, not Replacement Theology.

All of these terms are the same. Only replacement is a perjorative.
Israel and Fulfillment Theology – ICEJ USA Branch
Blessings.

 

[Norbert L]

Note: The "Israel of God" is spoken to believing Gentile Galatians (Galatians 3:16), not to Jews.

There are two contexts to be aware of when reading the Bible. The passage itself but the second one is the historical context.

Given the tensions between Judea and Rome, the gospel was a huge political threat when the general population was being told ".. They are all guilty of treason against Caesar, for they profess allegiance to another king, named Jesus.” ".. the King of the Jews". Acts 17:7 Matthew 27:37 NLT

I imagine in modern terms that would be far more of a threat than lets say, inviting Donald Trump over for dinner if a persons family and neighborhood was Democrat.

 

[Clare73]

There are two contexts to be aware of when reading the Bible. The passage itself but the second one is the historical context.

Given the tensions between Judea and Rome, the gospel was a huge political threat when the general population was being told ".. They are all guilty of treason against Caesar, for they profess allegiance to another king, named Jesus.” ".. the King of the Jews". Acts 17:7 Matthew 27:37 NLT

I imagine in modern terms that would be far more of a threat than lets say, inviting Donald Trump over for dinner if a persons family and neighborhood was Democrat.

Okay. . .and?

 

[Norbert L]

Okay. . .and?

And given the statement by the apostles when Jesus ascended, did they believe Israel was being set aside?

 

[Guojing]

All of these terms are the same. Only replacement is a perjorative.
Israel and Fulfillment Theology – ICEJ USA Branch
Blessings.

Yes, for this, I respect you for using the correct term, rather than following others to hide behind more "politically correct" sounding terms like fulfillment.

 

[Clare73]

And given the statement by the apostles when Jesus ascended, did they believe Israel was being set aside?

And when Jesus ascended:
Did they believe the church is the body of Christ?
Did they believe the church is the bride of Christ?
Did they believe in salvation by faith, not by works, and justification apart from works?

Was NT revelation complete when Jesus ascended?

Israel's rejection was revelation which Paul, who was taken up into the third heaven and personally taught by Jesus himself (2 Corinthians 12:1-8), was given over about eight years after Jesus ascended, and is found in Romans 11.

You should know that.

 

[Clare73]

Yes, for this, I respect you for using the correct term, rather than following others to hide behind more "politically correct" sounding terms like fulfillment.

Or what she described as prejorative in "replacement."

Biblically correct is now "politically correct"?

 

[timf]

The offer of the kingdom to the nation of Israel was a national offer so the nation had to respond.

The offer of salvation by grace was an individual offer such that those who were waiting for the nation to accept the kingdom would gain immediate salvation and not have to wait for the resurrection.

The offer of the kingdom to the nation of Israel was withdrawn at 70 AD. The offer will be made again when a nation will be born in a day.

It is not certain that the offer of salvation by grace to individuals will be withdrawn when Israel is restored and their kingdom received.

We can know that those believers that were waiting for and anticipated that Israel would accept the kingdom "tasted the powers of the age to come" (Heb 6:5)

We can also know that salvation by grace was something new (Heb 11:40)

 

[Norbert L]

And when Jesus ascended:
Did they believe the church is the body of Christ?
Did they believe the church is the bride of Christ?
Did they believe in salvation by faith, not by works, and justification apart from works?

Was NT revelation complete when Jesus ascended?

Israel's rejection was revelation which Paul, who was taken up into the third heaven and personally taught by Jesus himself (2 Corinthians 12:1-8), was given over five years after Jesus ascended, and is found in Romans 11.

You should know that.

Paul's adverse letters against certain of the Jews was directed with the language of Temple theology towards a number of its' hostile traditions and laws towards the gentiles. It's not about what kind of majority Gentile church or majority Jewish synagogue a Christian was attending.

Did they believe the church is the body of Christ?

Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in your midst? 1 Corinthians 3:16

Nowadays we still see the residual confrontations between Martin Luther and Pope Leo X, only expanded whereby some will happily hold hands together when it comes to distinguishing themselves from the Jews. Even though Paul was very clear and told gentiles we were grafted into Israel, not the other way around. The fulness of the gentiles goes into a Jewish Church whereby both Jew and Gentile have equal access to the LORD. There's no more elite Aaronic priesthood as a go between whereby gentiles are summarily executed if they go beyond a certain point of access. Similarly the women and the average Jew could only go so far too without consequences.

Did they believe the church is the bride of Christ?
Did they believe in salvation by faith, not by works, and justification apart from works?


The body and bride is also warned about having similar fates through the way of Cain, Korah's rebellion and rushed to the deceit of Balaam for reward when trying to rationalize their behavior and actions before God. All done while being in the presence of God in their midst.

 

[Clare73]

The offer of the kingdom to the nation of Israel was a national offer so
the nation had to respond.

Jesus preached to individuals.
Evidently he considered the "nation" to have responded since he said the kingdom would be taken from them and given to another people (Matthew 21:43).

The offer of salvation by grace was an individual offer such that
those who were waiting for the nation to accept the kingdom would gain immediate salvation and not have to wait for the resurrection.

Do you have any NT teaching to that effect?

"Individual" was the only offer Jesus ever made.

The offer of the kingdom to the nation of Israel was withdrawn at 70 AD.

Authoritative NT teaching (as distinct from personal interpretation of prophetic riddles--Numbers 12:8) is that unbelieving Israel was "cut off" the one olive tree of God's people (her unbelief being judged in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD) and believing Gentiles were grafted in. And Israel will remain cut off as God's people as long as she persists in unbelief (Romans 11:17, Romans 11:23), which has gone on for 2,000 years now.

The offer will be made again when a nation will be born in a day.

Unbelieving Israel is now on the same footing as all mankind--salvation is by faith in the person and atoning sacrifice (blood--Romans 3:25) of Jesus Christ for the remission of their sin and right standing with God; i.e., "not guilty." And as with the rest of mankind, only a remnant believe now.

It is not certain that the offer of salvation by grace to individuals will be withdrawn
when Israel is restored and their kingdom received.

That prohecy of restoration was fulfilled in a remnant--just as the promises of God to Israel are fulfilled in a remnant today (Romans 11:1-5, 23 )--when a remnant returned from exile, the Temple and the walls were rebuilt and the people rededicated themseles to God with great joy (Nehemiah 12:43).

Authoritative NT teaching allows for no temporal restoration of Israel in a kingdom, for it presents the second coming, resurrection, rapture, and final judgment in the last day, the end of time (John 6:39-40, 44, 54, 1 Corinthians 5:5, 1:8; Philippians 1:6, 10, 2:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:2-6), with only eternity following in the new heaven and new earth (2 Peter 3:10-13).

Authoritative NT teaching presents the everlasting and eternal Messianic kingdom as now (Matthew 12:28), as spiritual--invisible and within (Luke 17:20-21), in the hearts of those where Jesus reigns and rules. It is eternal and never ending (Luke 1:33).
A future temporal Messianic kingdom is in contradiction to authoritative NT teaching regarding the temporal and eternal Messianic kingdom now.

We can know that those believers that were waiting for and anticipated that Israel would accept the kingdom "tasted the powers of the age to come" (Heb 6:5)

We can know no such thing.
That is a complete misrepresentation of Hebrews 6, which was written to new Hebrew Christians who were considering a return to Judaism, maybe because of persecution (the Jews were seriuously persecuting Christians), or maybe to merge with a Jewish sect like the one at Qumran near the Dead Sea, or whatever, and were being warned in this letter that if, after having seen the gospel and its benefits, they decided to reject the sacrifrice of Jesus Christ for Judaism, there would be no sacrifice for their sin, and they would die in their sin, condemned.

We can also know that salvation by grace was something new (Heb 11:40)

Unless you did not understand Jesus when he said those who believe in the Son have eternal life (John 3:16).

 

[Clare73]

Paul's adverse letters against certain of the Jews was directed with the language of Temple theology towards a number of its' hostile traditions and laws towards the gentiles. It's not about what kind of majority Gentile church or majority Jewish synagogue a Christian was attending.

Did they believe the church is the body of Christ?

Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in your midst? 1 Corinthians 3:16

Nowadays we still see the residual confrontations between Martin Luther and Pope Leo X, only expanded whereby some will happily hold hands together when it comes to distinguishing themselves from the Jews. Even though Paul was very clear and told gentiles we were grafted into Israel, not the other way around. The fulness of the gentiles goes into a Jewish Church whereby both Jew and Gentile have equal access to the LORD. There's no more elite Aaronic priesthood as a go between whereby gentiles are summarily executed if they go beyond a certain point of access. Similarly the women and the average Jew could only go so far too without consequences.

Did they believe the church is the bride of Christ?
Did they believe in salvation by faith, not by works, and justification apart from works?


The body and bride is also warned about having similar fates through the way of Cain, Korah's rebellion and rushed to the deceit of Balaam for reward when trying to rationalize their behavior and actions before God. All done while beoing in the presence of God in their midst.

None of which addresses my point that the apostles did not have the full Christian revelation at the ascension of Jesus, which explains their questions which were not in agreement with NT teaching.

 

[Dan Perez]

Note: The "Israel of God" is spoken to believing Gentile Galatians (Galatians 3:16), not to Jews.
The church is the "Israel of God," the one olive tree of God's people (Romans 11:17), made up of both Jew and Gentile.

And just where is the church called the " Israel of God "

And Gal 3:28 says , There CANNOT BE , OV and that is called a DISJUNATIVE PARTICLE NEGATIVE which means there are not Jews or Greeks , bond or free and neither male or female IN the BODY OF CHRIST .

And Col 3;11 says the same thing , There CANNOT BE / OV is a DISJUCTIVE PARTICLE PRONOUN and so , Israel and the BODY of CHRIST are not the same and your above reply seems to be BLOVIATING .

dan p

 

[Clare73]

And just where is the church called the " Israel of God "

And Gal 3:28 says , There CANNOT BE , OV and that is called a DISJUNATIVE PARTICLE NEGATIVE which means there are not Jews or Greeks , bond or free and neither male or female IN the BODY OF CHRIST .

And Col 3;11 says the same thing , There CANNOT BE / OV is a DISJUCTIVE PARTICLE PRONOUN and so , Israel and the BODY of CHRIST are not the same and your above reply seems to be BLOVIATING .

Well, first, there was no Jewish "Israel of God" when Paul composed Galatians.
There was only unbelieving-cut-off-from-God's-people Israel (Romans 11:17, Romans 11: 19-20), and the remnant, the true Israel (Romans 9:6), who believed in Jesus Christ.
So Israel of God does not refer to Israel.

Then secondly, Galatians 6:12-13 refer to the Judaizers, Jewish professing Christians who were teaching that Gentiles had to be circumcised to be saved.

Galatians 6:14-15 - "But far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.
For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircuncision, but a new creation."

Galatians 6:16 - "And as many as by this rule will walk, peace on them and mercy, and on the Israel of God."

It is not only the circumcised and Mosaic law-keepers who receive peace and mercy (salvation) from God, as the judaizing teachers maintained, rather it is only as many as walk according to the rule of the new creature, or the gospel, who receive peace and mercy from God, for they are the true Israel of God, not those who walk according to the rule of circumcsion, which is a false gospel. . .and those who teach it are to be cursed (Galatians 1:6-9).

The "Israel of God" are those who walk according to the rule of the gospel; i.e., salvation is "not by works" (Ephesians 2:8-9); i.e., circumcision, but through faith apart from its works. It is the faith that saves, not its works that save.

Galatians 6:16:
Israel of God = those who walk according to the rule of the gospel = church.

Two things equal to the same thing are equal to each other. . .first axiom of algebra.

 

[Guojing]

Well, first, there was no Jewish "Israel of God" when Paul composed Galatians.
There was only unbelieving-cut-off-from-God's-people Israel (Romans 11:17, Romans 11: 19-20), and the remnant, the true Israel (Romans 9:6), who believed in Jesus Christ.
So Israel of God does not refer to Israel.

There was a little flock of Jewish believers pastored by James, the brother of Jesus, as described in Acts 21:18-25.

They had to follow the Law of Moses, including physical circumcising their children.

 

[Clare73]

There was a little flock of Jewish believers pastored by James, the brother of Jesus, as described in Acts 21:18-25.

They had to follow the Law of Moses, including physical circumcising their children.

They didn't have to, they wanted to, they didn't want to part with their customs, a spiritual weakness on their part, in preferring the shadow to the substance.
No problem. . .circumsion of the Jew according to the law did not prevent him from being saved, any more than horse and buggies keep the Amish from being saved.

The issue regarding circumcision was requiring the Gentiles to be circumcised to be saved.

Now if those Jewish Christians were the Israel of God, then all Christians are the Israel of God, for there is no Jew nor Gentile, slave nor free, male nor female, all are one in Christ, and are the Israel of God just as they are.