Another Premillennial absurdity

[CadyandZoe]

God's chosen people physically abide in a world that is hostile to its message.

So what. Peter isn't going to write something so trivial as "Christians abide in the world."

 

[CadyandZoe]

Verse 10 demonstrates the dominant people in view here are not Jews but Gentiles. These were a people who have previously “in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.”

This agrees with the constant message of the New Testament that all the people of God, whether Jew or Gentile, have taken a hold of Sion’s king and entered into a heavenly standing in Christ.

You are mistaken. That was never said of the Gentiles. That was said of the Jews.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Look, putting aside all the different meanings that Christians ascribe to the definition of "fulfilled" there are at least three, maybe four connotations of the term "fulfilled" in the New Testament.

A predicted event that came to pass
A promise that was delivered
A promise that was kept in a more complete fashion than originally promised.

Peter has none of these connotations in mind when he says mentions Joel. He literally says, "this is having been spoken by Joel". He doesn't say anything about fulfillment.

Stop the nonsense. When Peter said "this" in Acts 2:16, he was clearly talking about what was happening on the day of Pentecost. That is undeniable. And he said "this", which was what was happening on that day, was what Joel had prophesied about in Joel 2:28-32. That doesn't mean the prophecy was completely fulfilled that day, but it at least meant that the prophecy had begun to be fulfilled that day. You have to be utterly lacking in discernment to not recognize this.

 

[WPM]

Whether or not they are "of their father the devil" is beside the point. God called them out of Egypt and he took them as his people. These facts are indisputable and without controversy. And referring to Moses as nonsensical is both incendiary and not helpful. Paul tells you that while they are enemies of the Gospel, they are beloved for the sake of the fathers.

I didn't say they were "of God." Pay attention.

Premils fail to see that there are two Israels that Paul is speaking about between Romans 9-11 - "the blinded" and "the election" or "elect."

Romans 11:25 fits in with this thesis: “For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness [Gr. porosisor – hardening] in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.”

This passage continues the theme of what Paul has been presenting in regard to the mystery of the dichotomy between the chosen and the hardened of Israel. Paul is nowhere saying that salvation is by way of Israeli birth right; otherwise he would totally reverse everything he has hitherto taught in his epistles, and counter the consistent teaching of Scripture (Old and New Testament) that salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. No, Paul is simply expanding upon his preceding comments about an elect people within the physical nation – “a remnant according to the election of grace.” This is true Israel!

Blindness in part does not mean that a Jew is half enlightened and half blinded. The fact is, men are either saved or else they aren’t. We learn, not all Israelis are blinded, only part of Israel. Only they who have experienced eternal life through faith in Christ are saved. The remaining Israelis that depend upon their own works or innate goodness are deluded. Notwithstanding, they are not all deceived; a remnant will continue to believe (as they always have). The engrafting isn’t restricted to an end-time mass corporate repentance by the whole nation (prior to the Lord’s coming) as Dispensationalists seem to imagine (although a sizeable company of Jews may be saved at the end). This reading makes no such suggestion along that line. It is simply speaking of that portion or part of Israel that is not blinded but has been saved by the precious blood of Jesus. They will continue to come to Christ “while” the Gentiles also come through. Again, this grouping is called “a remnant according to the election of grace” (Romans 11:5).

Paul underlines in Romans 11:28: “As concerning the gospel, they (Christ-rejecting Jews) are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election (God’s people), they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.”

No one could argue that all natural Israelis are “enemies” as “concerning the gospel.” After all, many have gladly embraced Christ over this past 2,000 years, because of this they are intimately loved of the Father. They are not enemies of God, but rather friends. This fits Paul’s ongoing comparison between those who are loved by God amongst his kinsmen, and those who are enemies. These two distinct groups operate under two antithetical banners: “enemies” and “the election.” The enemies are the general Christ-rejecting populace of natural Israel. The election are the believers.

Scottish pastor Eric J Alexander very powerfully submits: “How can God reject the people whom He foreknew? You can no more imagine God saying those whom He foreknew He later rejected than you can imagine Him saying those whom He predestined He later rejected. These are unbreakable chains!” Basically, Paul is demonstrating that God doesn’t turn His back on His elect.

 

[covenantee]

So what. Peter wouldn't write a letter to "all the sojourners on earth." What a vacuous statement.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You are mistaken. That was never said of the Gentiles. That was said of the Jews.

The Jews were not previously a people before Christ came? That's nonsense. Peter could not possibly have been speaking of the Jews there. That statement could only apply to Gentiles. And it's likely he was including believing Jews as well because it had not previously been the case that Jew and Gentile believers were united as one body before Christ accomplished that. But, at the very least he had to be referring to Gentiles because they had not previously been the people of God, while Jews were.

 

[covenantee]

So what. Peter wouldn't write a letter to "all the sojourners on earth." What a vacuous statement.

Did Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia contain all of the sojourners on earth?

Thanks for the guffaw.

 

[WPM]

You are mistaken. That was never said of the Gentiles. That was said of the Jews.

Not true! Quite the opposite!

1 Peter 2:9-10, addressing the New Testament Church of Jesus Christ, declares, “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.”

Peter confirms the significant participation of Gentile believers in God’s elect covenant community. Where natural Israel failed in their vocation, true Israel accomplishes it as a multinational spiritual force. He takes promises, which were clearly addressed to Old Testament Israel (in Exodus 19:5-6 and Deuteronomy 14:2), and applies them directly and unambiguously to the Church of Jesus Christ in the New Testament. God’s people are shown to be a holy people, because God is holy. In presenting this, Peter ratifies the continuity between the people of God in the Old Testament and the people of God in the New Testament.

Let us remind ourselves of the Old Testament text in Exodus 19:5-6: “Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.” Deuteronomy 14:2 connects: “for thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth.”

Far from restricting the “chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people” description to the nation of Israel, Peter expands it out to embrace the many Gentile believers in this new covenant period. Not even the most blinkered Dispy could surely dispute this. The New Testament trans-national congregation today fulfils the priestly commission that Old Testament Israel failed to accomplish.

To support his reasoning, he also employs Hosea 1:10 which predicted that enlightening of the Gentiles, and their integration into the people of God. This is demonstrated in verse 10, where he testifies that the mainly Gentile Church who were once “not a people, but are now the people of God” had now been integrated into the Israel of God. He reinforces this point, telling us that they “which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.”

Adam Clarke say of this reading: “The titles formerly given to the whole Jewish church, i.e. to all the Israelites without exception, all who were in the covenant of God by circumcision, whether they were holy persons or not, are here given to Christians in general in the same way; i.e. to all who believed in Christ, whether Jews or Gentiles, and who received baptism in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”

Peter describes the Church as “a chosen generation” (or a chosen race), “a royal priesthood” and “an holy nation.” He related this to all believers, irrespective of natural race. This shows us the spiritual nature of the Israeli designation in the New Testament. We can find that holy nation predicted in Isaiah 55:5 says, “Behold, thou shalt call a nation that thou knowest not, and nations that knew not thee shall run unto thee because of the LORD thy God, and for the Holy One of Israel; for he hath glorified thee.”

Both Paul and Peter allude to the Old Testament prophecies in Hosea that predict a people that were separated from God (the Gentiles) would become the people of God. They demonstrate, with legal acumen, that many of the great promises that rested upon Old Testament Israel are now exclusively realized in the spiritual entity of the non-ethnic assembly of God.

This people that Paul is referring to here, who are divinely called, which God said, “were not my people” and which are now loved “which was not beloved” are the elect Gentiles. Paul, referring to Deuteronomy 32:21, in Romans 10:19-21, supports this gracious fulfilment, saying, “Moses saith, I will provoke you (natural Israel) to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation (the mainly Gentile New Testament Church) I will anger you.”

He continues, supporting his line of reasoning, this time referring to Isaiah 65, saying, “Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me (the Gentiles). But to [natural] Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.”

 

[WPM]

So, you think people like the Jewish Pharisees and scribes that Jesus called hypocrites and snakes are part of a holy nation? LOL. No, they were part of an unholy nation. You're not reading 1 Peter 2:9 in context.

Exactly bro! Very pungent point. He has people like that and Judas Iscariot in God's holy chosen nation but real genuine repentant redeemed godly Gentiles on the outside trying to get in. There is such a similarity between the theology of the Pharisees and Premil outlook. It is false teaching.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Premils fail to see that there are two Israels that Paul is speaking about between Romans 9-11 - "the blinded" and "the election" or "elect."

Romans 11:25 fits in with this thesis: “For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness [Gr. porosisor – hardening] in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.”

This passage continues the theme of what Paul has been presenting in regard to the mystery of the dichotomy between the chosen and the hardened of Israel. Paul is nowhere saying that salvation is by way of Israeli birth right; otherwise he would totally reverse everything he has hitherto taught in his epistles, and counter the consistent teaching of Scripture (Old and New Testament) that salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. No, Paul is simply expanding upon his preceding comments about an elect people within the physical nation – “a remnant according to the election of grace.” This is true Israel!

Blindness in part does not mean that a Jew is half enlightened and half blinded. The fact is, men are either saved or else they aren’t. We learn, not all Israelis are blinded, only part of Israel. Only they who have experienced eternal life through faith in Christ are saved. The remaining Israelis that depend upon their own works or innate goodness are deluded. Notwithstanding, they are not all deceived; a remnant will continue to believe (as they always have). The engrafting isn’t restricted to an end-time mass corporate repentance by the whole nation (prior to the Lord’s coming) as Dispensationalists seem to imagine (although a sizeable company of Jews may be saved at the end). This reading makes no such suggestion along that line. It is simply speaking of that portion or part of Israel that is not blinded but has been saved by the precious blood of Jesus. They will continue to come to Christ “while” the Gentiles also come through. Again, this grouping is called “a remnant according to the election of grace” (Romans 11:5).

Paul underlines in Romans 11:28: “As concerning the gospel, they (Christ-rejecting Jews) are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election (God’s people), they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.”

No one could argue that all natural Israelis are “enemies” as “concerning the gospel.” After all, many have gladly embraced Christ over this past 2,000 years, because of this they are intimately loved of the Father. They are not enemies of God, but rather friends. This fits Paul’s ongoing comparison between those who are loved by God amongst his kinsmen, and those who are enemies. These two distinct groups operate under two antithetical banners: “enemies” and “the election.” The enemies are the general Christ-rejecting populace of natural Israel. The election are the believers.

Scottish pastor Eric J Alexander very powerfully submits: “How can God reject the people whom He foreknew? You can no more imagine God saying those whom He foreknew He later rejected than you can imagine Him saying those whom He predestined He later rejected. These are unbreakable chains!” Basically, Paul is demonstrating that God doesn’t turn His back on His elect.

Exactly. Dispensationalists fail to recognize that Paul contrasted elect/saved Israelites from unsaved Israelites throughout Romans 11. They act as if all of them were cut off back then and one day all of them will be grafted in (saved). But, that isn't what Paul was saying at all. He contrasted the remnant of those who are saved with the rest who are unsaved throughout the chapter. It is only the unsaved who are enemies, not the saved. And it is only the saved who are beloved, not the unsaved. This is obvious, but dispensationalists still miss it.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Exactly bro! Very pungent point. He has people like that and Judas Iscariot in God's holy chosen nation but real genuine repentant redeemed godly Gentiles on the outside trying to get in.

Right. It's insane. It's a doctrine of devils (1 Timothy 4:1).

There is such a similarity between the theology of the Pharisees and Premil outlook. It is false teaching.

I couldn't agree more. They, of course, are blind to this. But, their expectations match up very closely to the expectations that the Pharisees had of the future.

 

[WPM]

Right. It's insane. It's a doctrine of devils (1 Timothy 4:1).


I couldn't agree more. They, of course, are blind to this. But, their expectations match up very closely to the expectations that the Pharisees had of the future.

The gulf between Amillennialism and Premillennialism is enormous. Amillennialism is based upon a spiritual heavenly eternal hope. Amillennialism is fixated with Christ. He is the fulfillment of every OT type and shadow. He fulfilled every heavenly demand. He abolished the old impotent ceremonial structure in full. He is the hope of Israel. He is the eternal hope for the believer. He is the only Promised Land that matters under the new covenant. The Premillennialists fixation is upon an earthly temporal carnal hope. It is obsessed with natural ethnic Israel. It is obsessed with natural soil in the Middle East.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Christians are God's chosen people!

Be careful here because you are generalizing where the Bible is being specific. When we speak about "people" we typically refer to humans considered as a group or in indefinite numbers. But when God talks about a "chosen people" he is using the term "people" as a synonym for "family" Christians are God's chosen people individually. But Israel is God's chosen family. As he says in Deuteronomy, God chose that family out of all the other families of the earth.

You referenced Romans 11:18. Do you have any understanding of Romans 11 at all? That talks about Gentile believers being grafted in with Israelite believers. That makes Gentile believers His chosen people as well. How can you not know this? Surely, it's not based on ethnicity or nationality or else even wicked people like the Pharisees and scribes would be considered among God's chosen people.

Again, we must be careful to be accurate here. Deuteronomy 7:6 speaks about a particular family line that came out of Egypt, which God declares to be his "chosen people", meaning "my chosen family line" or "my chosen nation."

Paul also speaks about individual followers of Christ as "the elect.", which is a different context. It all depends on the purpose for election. For instance, one person may be elected as governor and another person elected as president. They are both elect, but each person is serving a different role and a different purpose.

Obviously God didn't elect to save each and every descendant of Jacob. But he did choose his family line to be "his people." In that context, the promise to be "God" to them is the promise to bless them materially, and to keep them safe from their enemies. He never promised to do this for any other family line and not for Christians as individuals. God promises to grant eternal life to those whom he elected for THAT purpose.

We need to keep context and purpose in mind when we speak about God's elect.

So, to try and claim that the Jews alone are God's chosen people, as if ethnicity or nationality, has anything to do with being chosen, is proven false by scripture. You never have scripture on your side. You only have your imagination.

I'm not claiming that. You jump too easily to conclusions. I maintain that Peter is speaking to his own kinsmen when he writes "you are a holy nation." The family line that came from Jacob is God's holy nation, according to Moses.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Stop the nonsense. When Peter said "this" in Acts 2:16, he was clearly talking about what was happening on the day of Pentecost.

I agree. I never said otherwise.

That is undeniable. And he said "this", which was what was happening on that day, was what Joel had prophesied about in Joel 2:28-32. That doesn't mean the prophecy was completely fulfilled that day, but it at least meant that the prophecy had begun to be fulfilled that day. You have to be utterly lacking in discernment to not recognize this.

Where did Peter say it was partially fulfilled? You need to recognize when you are speculating about a reason, which seems to make sense, and when the Apostle actually gives you a reason.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Be careful here because you are generalizing where the Bible is being specific. When we speak about "people" we typically refer to humans considered as a group or in indefinite numbers. But when God talks about a "chosen people" he is using the term "people" as a synonym for "family" Christians are God's chosen people individually. But Israel is God's chosen family. As he says in Deuteronomy, God chose that family out of all the other families of the earth.

Again, we must be careful to be accurate here. Deuteronomy 7:6 speaks about a particular family line that came out of Egypt, which God declares to be his "chosen people", meaning "my chosen family line" or "my chosen nation."

Such nonsense. It never ends coming from you. I can't take you seriously and I can't imagine anyone else can, either. You twist things constantly to fit your view. It's pathetic.

Paul also speaks about individual followers of Christ as "the elect.", which is a different context. It all depends on the purpose for election. For instance, one person may be elected as governor and another person elected as president. They are both elect, but each person is serving a different role and a different purpose.

Obviously God didn't elect to save each and every descendant of Jacob. But he did choose his family line to be "his people." In that context, the promise to be "God" to them is the promise to bless them materially, and to keep them safe from their enemies. He never promised to do this for any other family line and not for Christians as individuals. God promises to grant eternal life to those whom he elected for THAT purpose.

We need to keep context and purpose in mind when we speak about God's elect.

Yes, we do, and maybe you will learn to do that some day. It's clear to me that no matter what I say to refute your false doctrine you will come up with a way to twist things in order to deny what I'm saying. It's just ridiculous.

I'm not claiming that. You jump too easily to conclusions. I maintain that Peter is speaking to his own kinsmen when he writes "you are a holy nation." The family line that came from Jacob is God's holy nation, according to Moses.

Again, you are ignoring the context! Peter indicated that the holy nation he referenced was formerly not the people of God. How can that be said about "the family line that came from Jacob"? It can't. You have chosen to completely disregard the context in favor of what you want it to say.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I agree. I never said otherwise.

LOL! Then you should also agree that "this" was "that" (the prophecy from Joel 2:28-32), but you don't believe "this" was "that" at all.

Where did Peter say it was partially fulfilled? You need to recognize when you are speculating about a reason, which seems to make sense, and when the Apostle actually gives you a reason.

He didn't need to. Part of what that prophecy entails is that all who call on the name of the Lord will be saved. Well, it wasn't just on the day of Pentecost that people have called on the name of the Lord and have been saved. That has been happening ever since then.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Premils fail to see that there are two Israels that Paul is speaking about between Romans 9-11

Do you think that speaking in the third person about someone with whom you are having a conversation is okay? You don't find it a bit rude?

- "the blinded" and "the election" or "elect."

Romans 11:25 fits in with this thesis: “For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness [Gr. porosisor – hardening] in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.”

This passage continues the theme of what Paul has been presenting in regard to the mystery of the dichotomy between the chosen and the hardened of Israel. Paul is nowhere saying that salvation is by way of Israeli birth right

Of course not, but I didn't say that did I? No, not really. You seem to be having a conversation with a fictional character called "Premils" who ever that is.

No one could argue that all natural Israelis are “enemies” as “concerning the gospel.”

Of course not, but what you fail to understand is that Paul is done talking about individual Jews by the time he gets to Romans 11:6 Beginning at Romans 11:7 he has changed the subject. He begins to speak about Israel the nation. You don't even agree that such a thing exists, so how can you know what Paul is talking about?

 

[covenantee]

I maintain that Peter is speaking to his own kinsmen when he writes "you are a holy nation."

You obviously don't read the posts which debunk your fallacies.

Scripture does not maintain what you maintain.

I Peter 2:5 describes the Church, the Holy Nation of 1 Peter 2:9, using construction metaphors which are applied exclusively to the Church.

They are affirmed in Matthew 16:18 and Ephesians 2:19-22.

 

[WPM]

Do you think that speaking in the third person about someone with whom you are having a conversation is okay? You don't find it a bit rude?

Of course not, but I didn't say that did I? No, not really. You seem to be having a conversation with a fictional character called "Premils" who ever that is.

Of course not, but what you fail to understand is that Paul is done talking about individual Jews by the time he gets to Romans 11:6 Beginning at Romans 11:7 he has changed the subject. He begins to speak about Israel the nation. You don't even agree that such a thing exists, so how can you know what Paul is talking about?

No. He is absolutely consistent throughout Romans 9 - 11 that there is one physical ethnic nation that possesses two type of Israeli - a true spiritual Israeli and the other a phony. One is the friend of God and the other an enemy of God. You don't see that because it exposes what you have been taught.

 

[CadyandZoe]

The Jews were not previously a people before Christ came? That's nonsense.

Stop with the "nonsense" nonsense. Just admit that you don't agree. You claim ignorance of the Old Testament so it's no wonder you have never heard this idea. Ever heard the name "Lo-Ammi"?