Why do people fight this verse?

[John S]

1. The Israelites didn't return to their homeland. That is HISTORICAL knowledge. That is why they were called "Lost". If you want to dispute history be my guest but you will be foolish trying to do that.
2. Have you ever heard of prophecies? It doesn't matter in the least when the prophecies of Jacob were made. PLEASE. You look less than intelligent trying to make this argument. The prophecies of Revelation were made almost 2000 years ago. By your less than intelligent argument, you are making the claim that they are irrelevant today.
3. I don't give a hoot what constitutes a Jew. What matters is what constitutes an Israelite - and that is the vast majority of the Christian world today, along with the Jews - and that is us.

 

[Interplanner]

John

is your #1 about 445 BC or 1948 AD?

You are right not to dwell on Jacobism.

The Rev says it is about things coming quickly, at hand, etc.

You should care about what constitues a Jew in light of Rom 2 and John 8 on true sons.

 

[Douggg]

John

is your #1 about 445 BC or 1948 AD?

You are right not to dwell on Jacobism.

The Rev says it is about things coming quickly, at hand, etc.

You should care about what constitues a Jew in light of Rom 2 and John 8 on true sons.

What is Jacobism?

 

[Douggg]

1. The Israelites didn't return to their homeland. That is HISTORICAL knowledge. That is why they were called "Lost". If you want to dispute history be my guest but you will be foolish trying to do that.
2. Have you ever heard of prophecies? It doesn't matter in the least when the prophecies of Jacob were made. PLEASE. You look less than intelligent trying to make this argument. The prophecies of Revelation were made almost 2000 years ago. By your less than intelligent argument, you are making the claim that they are irrelevant today.
3. I don't give a hoot what constitutes a Jew. What matters is what constitutes an Israelite - and that is the vast majority of the Christian world today, along with the Jews - and that is us.

John, you are just making statements without any bible passages to back them up. I presented the bible passages and quotes from the bible. You are not doing that.

 

[Interplanner]

Doug
I coined Jacobism to refer to what you are doing about the name Israel which worked perfectly fine for the theological purposes of Paul.

Like I said a couple days ago, if I'm reading Gal 3 and the point is more than clear, and there is good commentary about it, I'm not going to chase down a theory about Jacob, when that distinction is not even mentioned.

 

[Douggg]

Doug
I coined Jacobism to refer to what you are doing about the name Israel which worked perfectly fine for the theological purposes of Paul.

Like I said a couple days ago, if I'm reading Gal 3 and the point is more than clear, and there is good commentary about it, I'm not going to chase down a theory about Jacob, when that distinction is not even mentioned.

Jacob is not mentioned in Galatians 3 because Christians don't become Children of Israel, by faith. It is not a theory that Jacob's name was changed to Israel. That's right in the bible.

That a person becomes a descendant of Abraham, by faith in Christ, and thus one of the Children of Israel has no biblical support. You are not a spiritual Israelite.

There is no such thing as Jacobism by the way. Just as there is no such thing as Abrahamism.

 

[Interplanner]

Its Jacobism if you don't use Israel when Paul does for what he does.

He does say there is a group that is both Jew and Gentile and that has faith like Abraham and that recieve/inherit those promises by that faith in the Gospel. You can call the Red Party for all I care, but it has to have a name. They become sons, they inherit, the promises are recieved by them, they are citizens, and on and on. No believers are therefore in a 2nd class as Judaizers in Col and Gal would have them be.