Another Premillennial absurdity
- Thread starter WPM
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
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!
CadyandZoe
Well-Known Member
CadyandZoe
Well-Known Member
CadyandZoe
Well-Known Member
What are you talking about? I stated the following:
Romans 9:6-13: “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.”
What this is saying is, those who are not saved have no right to consider themselves as true Israel. The apostle here identifies two Israels; one elect and believing, the other lost and unbelieving. One is true spiritual Israel (“the children of God”/“the children of the promise”), the other is unbelieving and merely “children of the flesh.” Basically: national theocratic Israel was a political entity in which a believing spiritual remnant – true Israel – abode. It is only those Jews who belong to the remnant that are true Israelis in God’s eyes.
You replied:
You accused me of skipping over the question. What question did i skip over? There was no question in my post to skip over.
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
Paul is NOT asking a question! He makes a statement. Paul is not asking how God's Word has failed, just read the rest of the verse. Paul tells us they are not all Israel which are of Israel. Which according to Paul proves God's Word of promise to Israel has not failed, because His promise is only to the true SEED which is Christ.
Romans 9:6 (KJV) Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
Paul further enlightens the reader when he continues saying being the seed of Abraham does not mean all of Israel are children of Abraham, because the true seed of Abraham shall come through Isaac. That SEED once again is Christ.
Romans 9:7 (KJV) Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
I suppose you're unwilling or unable to answer the question? I told you the question was from Cady--not from Paul. Cady was asking you a question based on Paul's statement that the word of God had not failed. That word appears to be in the form of a previously-understood promise from God concerning Israel. But your position seems to prevent you from acknowledging that? You were given an opportunity, but I'm done.
I don't mean to be rude Randy, but frankly I'm glad you're done! Why are you speaking for Cady anyway? When I have a question, I would like to have answered, but the person I'm asking has no idea what the question is, I would try harder to clarify the question rather than simply repeating the same thing over and over. You do know the definition of insanity, right?
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
Yes, it's your failure over and over again to answer a simple question, and then follow-up by complaining about the process and who's asking?? ;)
Seriously, I just wanted you to answer the question too. What harm is there in that?
The reason I'm interested is because I've invested a significant amount of time among Amills explaining that God made promises to Abraham, guaranteeing Israel an *eternal inheritance.* That's why Paul said that God wasn't just going to save half a nation, but a whole nation.
For the present, He is only saving a Christian remnant among the Jewish People. But His plan, ultimately, is to save an entire nation from destruction, which is a political salvation, as opposed to evangelical salvation.
This does not of course mean that evangelical salvation has nothing to do with this. God wants to save nations and render them Christian precisely so that He can obtain a large number of evangelically-saved Christians. God promised both, the political salvation of nations who become Christian and the evangelical salvation of Christians in those nations across the earth and, in fact, in all nations.
Saving godly nations is integral because without them paganism ravages the world, making God's wish to evangelically-save people untenable or nearly impossible--at least the numbers of "saved" would be much lower.
Honestly if I knew what the question is, I would be delighted to try to answer it.
Here's the thing! The only eternal inheritance God gave to ethnic Israel was the promised land. That promise of eternal inheritance of the promised land was always dependent upon Israels faithfulness to God and His Covenant. God never promised the Old Covenant nation, ethnic Israel that the entire nation would be saved. If God had, then we would have to say His promises aren't worth much, because a vast multitude of ethnic Jews have already died in unbelief.
The only nation the Bible assures will be saved is a holy nation, not ethnic. This nation is chosen of God, and precious, built up a spiritual house an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. This holy nation consists of those who believe in Christ by grace through faith.
1 Peter 2:9-10 (KJV) But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.
I don't know where you get this "political salvation", because it is not found in the Bible. The Bible tells us God saves people from the nations, but it does not say He will save entire nations, not even Israel.
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
Yes, it's your failure over and over again to asnwer a simple question, and then follow-up by complaining about the process and who's asking?? ;)
Seriously, I just wanted you to answer the question too. What harm is there in that?
Yea, I don't really expect many to hear me out--at least you're doing that. I appreciate it very much. The question you were asked by Cady is, What was the promise that God wasn't failing?
So the question Cady was asking you was this: what was the "word of God" that Paul said had been effective? This was Cady's question--not Paul's question. And I was hoping you understood that the "word of God" here is representative of a promise God made to Abraham, to establish a nation in his name, of his posterity?
Paul said, "It is not as though God’s word had failed."
While it's true that the Law made Israel's inheritance dependent on their obedience, it is said that God had made these promises *eternal* nonetheless.
Gal 3.17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise.
So if God's promise to Abraham concerning the existence of Israel and their inheritance of Canaan was an *eternal promise,* then all the failure they committed under the Law, including failing the entire covenant of Law, could be forgiven, and they would still eventually come to inherit all that was promised to them.
Paul clearly said that this promise was not without effect, meaning that it was still in play. Even though Israel had failed under the Law, and they would be reduced severely as a nationality and as an ethnicity, God still promised that they would be regathered, just as they had been regathered nationally and ethnically after the Babylonian Captivity.
Even more so, they would be restored as a whole nation, better than when the ancient Persians supervised their restoration. And furthermore, they would ultimately be restored, never to be destroyed again. This is the "Jewish Hope," the Messianic Hope.
Being that it concerns a nation and an ethnicity does not mean God is prejudiced towards a particular nationality and ethnicity. Rather, it means he is concerned about the descendants of men like Abraham, who served Him. If you serve God faithfully, He will bless your children, along with you. This is not playing favorites, choosing you and discarding others. No, this is God using you to set an example as to what standards He requires of men and of their families in order to be blessed by Him.
God promised not just to save Israel, but He also promised Abraham He would do the same for many nations, which I believe are the Christian nations of the world. Like Israel, however, they are failing and will need the promise of grace and national restoration.
Political Salvation is evident as far back as Abraham, when he rescued Lot and his acquaintances from the kings who captured them. It took place under the Covenant of Law, which stipulated curses and blessings, based on disobedience or obedience. When Israel returned to obedience under the Law the nation was saved *politically* from their enemies. There is absolutely nothing new about this.
There is often confusion because Christians know that evangelical salvation is more important than political salvation. Individuals can be saved even in pagan nations.
But God showed His preference for Christian nations by setting forth Israel as an example of a proper theocracy that could be blessed. God wanted not just to bless nations, but He also knew that an ethical, spiritually-founded nation will produce a lot more evangelically-saved Christians than pagan nations, who persecute or abuse the righteous.
Thanks for listening....
Last edited:
Truth7t7
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2014
- 11,973
- 3,759
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Not only "National Salvation" for Israel But Your Going To Add "Political Salvation" Toooooo!
Real Big Smiles!
Last edited:
CadyandZoe
Well-Known Member
Sorry, somehow my words were misconstrued. In Romans 9:6, Paul implies that a Jewish unbeliever, living in Rome, might raise an objection to the gospel. It might go something like this, "Paul, your gospel can't be true because it leads to the logical conclusion that God's word to Israel has failed." Paul begins his answer in 9:6, "But it is not as though the word of God has failed."
What I am asking is this. What specific promise does Paul have in view?
What promise does the average Jew claim, that the Gospel of Christ seems to reject or at least, clarify?
In my opinion, Paul spends three entire chapters of Romans answering that question. Our understanding of the objection implied in 9:6 will inform our understanding of those three chapters.
Truth7t7
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2014
- 11,973
- 3,759
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
You mean "Your" understanding that's wrong!
Roman's 9:6-8 clearly identifies "Two" Israel's, one of the flesh "Ethnic Jews" and one of the promised seed "The Church" both Jew and Gentile
Your claims are from a poster in denial of the very deity of Jesus Christ being God manifest in the flesh as seen below, nobody would expect otherwise!
Jesus Is The Lord
Colossians 2:9-10KJV
9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
Last edited:
CadyandZoe
Well-Known Member
Your explication of the text is missing an answer to the implied objection raised in Romans chapter 9. Let me repeat my answer to rwb here.
In Romans 9:6, Paul implies that a Jewish unbeliever, living in Rome, might raise an objection to the gospel. It might go something like this, "Paul, your gospel can't be true because it leads to the logical conclusion that God's word to Israel has failed." Paul begins his answer in 9:6, "But it is not as though the word of God has failed."
What I am asking is this. What specific promise does Paul have in view?
What promise does the average Jew claim, that the Gospel of Christ seems to reject or at least, clarify?
In my opinion, Paul spends three entire chapters of Romans answering that question. Our understanding of the objection implied in 9:6 will inform our understanding of those three chapters.
If we have time, we might go to the Old Testament and find the specific passage that Paul has in mind?
CadyandZoe
Well-Known Member
Suppose a man is walking down the street and he notices a woman wearing a watch. He asks the woman, "what time is it?" She says, "it's about 3:30."
Similar threads
