I completely disagree. Have you never read the following passage where Paul explains who were once not a people and became "one body" together in a spiritual house of God with Jesus Christ as the cornerstone?
Ephesians 2:11 Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” by those who call themselves “the circumcision” (which is done in the body by human hands)— 12 remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, 16 and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17 He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit. 19 Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21 In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22 And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.
This describes the Gentile believers as formerly not being the people of God "but now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ". They are joined together with Israelite believers in one body "by the blood of Christ". The Gentile believers became "fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone". Does that not remind you of the text in 1 Peter 2:5-7? How can you act as if what Peter said there has nothing to do with the church as a whole and only relates to Israelite believers when Paul described Gentile believers in the same way that Peter described the people he was writing to?
I take note of the fact that Paul is using different terminology than Peter. Paul is talking about the unification of all believers, both those who are near and those that are afar, "reconciling both of them to God through the cross." Peter refers to the Hebrew diaspora as "not a people" consistent with Hosea's prophetic word.
Consider,
Hosea 1:10
Yet the number of the sons of Israel will be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered; And in the place where it is said to them, “You are not My people,” It will be said to them, “You are the sons of the living God.”
Take note of the transition here between "people" and "sons." In the place where it was said, "You are not my
people" It will be said, "You are the
sons of the living God." I pointed this out earlier in this thread. The New Testament favors this language, speaking about those "in Christ" as "sons", and "children."
At this point in Hebrew history, the Hebrews are divided up into two houses: The house of Israel and the House of Judah. The Lord God, through the prophet Hosea, declares that he will save the House of Judah, but he will destroy the house of Israel. (House = dynasty.) God isn't going to destroy the individuals who make up Israel. Rather, he disbanded the "house" of Israel, which was the presumed royal leadership. Her government was destroyed and her people were taken into exile.
Bear in mind, when a deity agrees to be a "god" for a particular people that deity agrees to protect the people from her enemies. In this case, whereas Yahweh formerly agreed to be "god" to the house of Israel, protecting them from enemies, he declared that he would no longer be "god" for them, and they would no longer be a "people" for him.
Paul is talking about individuals living abroad and in our idiom one might say, "These people living abroad were formerly not sons of God and for this reason, they were formerly 'not a people.'"
But this would be to misconstrue Hosea's prophetic word. The terms "people" and "not a people" are specific to a people descended from the patriarch Jacob, grandson of Abraham. After the Exodus, these people agreed to be "a people" for Yahweh. Later on, at the schism of Schechem, the people divided up into two houses: the House of Judah and the House of Israel. And the Lord is telling the house of Israel, "You are not my people."
In this context "people" does not refer to human beings in general. It refers to a particular ethnic group. The ethnic group assembled at Mt. Sinai agreed to be "a people" for God and he agreed. Later, as Hosea says, God declared that the northern ten tribes would no longer be "a people" for him. Peter addressed his letter to an ethnic group that was formerly once "a people" but subsequently became "not a people."
Paul is talking to Gentiles who came "near" by the blood of Christ, and Peter is talking about "Hebrews" who also came "near" by the blood of Christ.
I don't see you doing that.
I guess you missed it. Sorry about that. I thought sure I mentioned Peter's salutation where he specifically addresses the Diaspora.
It is, and I just showed that above. How could you not be familiar with Ephesians 2:11-22? It seems that you maybe have never read it. I don't know any other way you would say what you said here.
I claim that your argument fails because you assumed that one part of something has to be applied to all. While it is true that the body of Christ contains Hebrew believers, it is not true that all believers are Hebrews. Peter is speaking to a subset of believers, all Hebrews when he reminds them that they are a "chosen race", for instance. I think we can both agree that God does not save a person based on a person's ethnicity. What Peter says about the diaspora, as an ethnicity, he does not intend to say about the entire Body of Christ.
In terms of what Peter described in 1 Peter 2, everything he said applies to Gentile believers as well.
Agreed.
What is true about the ones Peter wrote to that is not true of Gentile Christians? That's what we're talking about.
Of course. The Hebrews are a chosen race. It doesn't follow, therefore, that the Body of Christ is limited to one race.
I'm not even saying that. I'm saying that everything Peter said in 1 Peter 2 can be applied to both Jew and Gentile believers.
Not everything. That's my point.
The entire house, which is the church, share Christian characteristics. That is what matters. There is neither Jew nor Gentile in the church which means that "Hebrew characteristics" and "Gentile characteristics" have nothing to do with being in the church.
Of course. But again, not everything Peter said about the Diaspora, applies to the church.
Your attempts at just dismissing what I was saying before make it difficult for me to believe you are being genuine here.
The way I see it, we are both presenting perspectives so that we can learn from each other. It is up to you whether the dialog is mutually beneficial.
