The Son of Man returns with and for his people

[marks]

That makes God out to be a respecter of persons even though scripture repeatedly says that He is not a respecter of persons.

God doesn't respect a person's wealth, or beauty, or position over others, or anything like that.

Just the same, God has mercy on whom He has mercy. He sets up one king and takes down another. And in many ways God demonstrates His sovereignty, without being a respecter of persons.

Just think of it! He selected one nation out from among all the others, and yet it remained true, even then, that God is not a respector of persons.

Here again, we need to interpret that expression in a Biblically harmonious way.

James 2:1-9 KJV
1) My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.
2) For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment;
3) And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool:
4) Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?
5) Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?
6) But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats?
7) Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?
8) If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:
9) But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.

Much love!

 

[marks]

and by receiving spiritual discernment from the Holy Spirit.

And will your discernment ever contradict the plain sayings, if not modified or qualified or interpretted some other way by other passages?

Much love!

 

[marks]

By you saying "My God keeps His promises" that implies that you think I have a different God and He doesn't keep His promises

I'm sorry if you think that's rude, but I stand strongly on that point. The key difference here is the matter of, Does the Bible actually say it.

I'm afraid that a certain portion of your Biblical interpretion is to look at a passage and say to yourself, "It simply must mean something different, because of how I understand these other passages." Not meaning to offend, only to describe what seems to me. So that Zechariah CANNOT absolutely cannot be propheseying a return to temple sacrifices, because Jesus is the end of sacrifice for sin. Like that.

And I've found prophecy in the Bible to be literally fulfilled, and I look for the rest to be literally fulfilled as well. I get it, and to his seed, that is, Christ, but keep that in context. It has a context, the prophets have their context, each is fully true in its own right.

Don't be divided, join me in declaring, Our God keeps His promises!!

Much love!

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

God doesn't respect a person's wealth, or beauty, or position over others, or anything like that.

It's more than just that. This shows that you don't have a full understanding of what it means for God not to be a respecter of persons. So, I will show you what it means.

Acts 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: 35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. 36 The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all ) 37 That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; 38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him. 39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree: 40 Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly; 41 Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead. 42 And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead. 43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. 44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. 45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

In this passage we can see that what God not being a respecter of persons means is that He does not favor the people of one nation over another as it relates to salvation. That was something the Jews did not understand which is why they "were astonished...because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.". They assumed His favor was on their nation, but He showed that one's nationality means nothing to Him when it comes to salvation. He has the same plan for Gentiles as He does for the Jews.

Just the same, God has mercy on whom He has mercy. He sets up one king and takes down another. And in many ways God demonstrates His sovereignty, without being a respecter of persons.

Just think of it! He selected one nation out from among all the others, and yet it remained true, even then, that God is not a respector of persons.

He did not choose them for salvation or else all of them would have been saved. I'm talking about God not being a respecter of persons as it relates to salvation. The nation Israel was not chosen to be saved, but rather was chosen to be the nation through which salvation would come. And, it did, because it came through Jesus and He was a Jew.

Here again, we need to interpret that expression in a Biblically harmonious way.

James 2:1-9 KJV
1) My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.
2) For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment;
3) And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool:
4) Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?
5) Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?
6) But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats?
7) Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?
8) If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:
9) But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.

I was talking about the sense in which GOD is not a respecter of persons, not people. Why would you not have thought of finding a passage that speaks about God not being a respecter of persons when determining what that means?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

And will your discernment ever contradict the plain sayings, if not modified or qualified or interpretted some other way by other passages?

Of course not. Any other questions you'd like to ask me that I would never give a "yes" answer to?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I'm sorry if you think that's rude, but I stand strongly on that point.

You stand strongly on the point that you think I believe God doesn't keep His promises? As in, you think I actually would make the statement "God does not keep His promises"? Yes or no?

I understand that you think my beliefs don't line up with His promises, but that's different than you declaring that I actually believe that He doesn't keep His promises. I certainly do believe He keeps all of His promises. But, my understanding of some of His promises differs from yours.

I'm afraid that a certain portion of your Biblical interpretion is to look at a passage and say to yourself, "It simply must mean something different, because of how I understand these other passages." Not meaning to offend, only to describe what seems to me.

You have a problem with someone not wanting to interpret a passage in such a way that doesn't contradict other passages? I ask that because that is the only reason why I would think that a passage "must mean something different". If I see 20 passages that say one thing about something and then I find a passage that, on the surface, seems to say something different about that thing, I should not question that and try to dig deeper into what that passage is saying?

So that Zechariah CANNOT absolutely cannot be propheseying a return to temple sacrifices, because Jesus is the end of sacrifice for sin. Like that.

What is wrong with coming to that conclusion? Why are you okay with interpreting Zechariah 14 in such a way that contradicts other scripture? You can try to say that it's not talking about animal sacrifices as sin offerings all you want, but that requires ignoring what is required in order to observe the feast of tabernacles. So, if you are interpreting that literally as something happening in the future then it contradicts NT scripture such as Hebrews 8-10.

And I've found prophecy in the Bible to be literally fulfilled, and I look for the rest to be literally fulfilled as well.

What does this even mean? Is all prophecy literally fulfilled? No. Some is and some isn't. But, what you're saying here comes across like you're saying all of it is literally fulfilled.

I get it, and to his seed, that is, Christ, but keep that in context. It has a context, the prophets have their context, each is fully true in its own right.

What does this mean? What context about promises made to Abraham and his seed is different than what Paul wrote about in Galatians 3:16-29 and what is your reason for thinking that? Do you know better than Paul how to interpret the fulfillment of those promises?

Don't be divided, join me in declaring, Our God keeps His promises!!

Goodness gracious. Have I ever said that He didn't? NO! Yes, our God keeps His promises and I never have said otherwise! The difference between us is not that you believe He keeps His promises and I believe He doesn't. Why can't you understand that? I bet everyone else here can understand that. The difference is that we interpret some of His promises differently. Paul understood the promises to Abraham and his seed differently than how people had understood them using a non-spiritual hermeneutic to interpret scripture. Did that make him wrong and did it mean He didn't believe that God kept His promises? No.

 

[amigo de christo]

I don't understand your question.

I was talking about God's promises to Israel made through His prophets, and God's covenant addressed directly to the people from Mt Horeb, and through Moses.

We can talk about God's promises to Abraham if you like. Did you have any other comment on these promises to which I've been referring? The regathering of Israel (the nation as understood in the prophet's day) to her Promised Land at the end of the age? When YHWH comes to earth? That God will always keep that particular nation before Him, that He will rescue them in the day of trouble?

I believe God keeps His promises, and will keep those also. But if you are done with those, we can speak of Abraham.

Much love!

The glorious LORD has put all things into His own determined time .
Will ye at this time restore the kingdom back to Israel .
Its not for you to know the time nor the seasons the Father has placed in His own hands .
But we sure can see THE GLORIOUS COMING OF THE KING draws ever nigh indeed .
Lift those hands and let the LORD be praised .
Unto abraham was the gospel preached and HE saith unto thy seed , not seeds .
That SEED was the GLORIOUS LORD JESUS . Now lift those hands mark , ITS LORD praising time
in the building and round the world .

 

[amigo de christo]

I asked you: Are there two spiritual houses of God that have Jesus Christ as the cornerstone? What is your answer to that question? I can't tell from what you said here.

We know that the church is a spiritual house of God that has Jesus Christ as the cornerstone (Eph 2:19-22), right? Is there any other? Yes or no? If yes, then please tell me what it is.

There is but one house . WHOSE HOUSE ye are . Its the believing jews and gentiles who believe in the glorious Christ JESUS .
There is heavenly jerusalem . Where the LORD GOD ALL MIGHTY and the LAMB are the temple .
LET the LORD be praised .
In AMOS it was written many moons ago , And HE WILL REBUILD the tabernacle of DAVID that is fallen ,
DO you realize PETER actually quoates that and the TABERNACLE HE IS SPEAKING OF IS SPIRITUAL .
YEP . its in acts . A lot of folks keep using that phrase in amos to support a natural temple to be built in JERUSALEM .
BUT IT WERENT talking of the natural kingdom . PETER USED IT to talk about THE GOSPEL . yep .
Now lift those hands and let the LORD be praised .
THERE IS BUT ONE TRUE CITY , ONE TRUE TEMPLE , ONE TRUE KINGDOM . ITS HEAVENLY JERUSALEM
and its home of the lambs who believe in CHRIST .

 

[Truth7t7]

Here's one of them, rather specific, I should say!

Jeremiah 31:31 KJV
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Here's another,

Jeremiah 31:34 KJV
34) And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

More of the same . . .

Jeremiah 31:35-37 KJV
35) Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts is his name:
36) If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.
37) Thus saith the LORD; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the LORD.

God is NOT done with the nation Israel. God keeps His promises.

He will do all for them that He has said will do.

Here's another,

Ezekiel 39:28-29 KJV
28) Then shall they know that I am the LORD their God, which caused them to be led into captivity among the heathen: but I have gathered them unto their own land, and have left none of them any more there.
29) Neither will I hide my face any more from them: for I have poured out my spirit upon the house of Israel, saith the Lord GOD.

God is not done with Israel, He will not forget His chosen nation.

Much love!

God clearly defines who his people are, "The Remnant Of Israel" you aren't going to change the scripture before your eyes, read it again and again

Save Thy People "The Remnant Of Israel"

Jeremiah 31:6-7KJV
6 For there shall be a day, that the watchmen upon the mount Ephraim shall cry, Arise ye, and let us go up to Zion unto the Lord our God.
7 For thus saith the Lord; Sing with gladness for Jacob, and shout among the chief of the nations: publish ye, praise ye, and say, O Lord, save thy people, the remnant of Israel.

 

[covenantee]

The diaspora is NOT a place or a location.

You mean that Peter was writing to people, not to places??

I never knew.

 

[CadyandZoe]

No, it is not. You are trying to get around the weakness in your view by dismissing my valid arguments.

Your argument contains a few critical errors that render it invalid. First, it ignores Peter's opening remarks. He is writing to the "diaspora", the Hebrew people who remained in exile. Second, the argument mistakenly assumes that the Gentiles were "not a people", when in fact, Hebrews in the diaspora were called "not my people."

I agree with your interpretation of 1 Peter 2:5-7, where Peter talks about being built into a spiritual house. This is true of all believers in Christ. Nonetheless, your argument fails because you incorrectly concluded that Peter's description of part of the church, which consists of Hebrew believers, must be true of the entire church.

Peter speaks about the diaspora as "not my people" because, in the Hebrew experience, God declared that the Ten Tribes were "not my people." And those among his kinsmen who accept that Jesus is the cornerstone, are as stones being added to the house that God is building.

But it does not follow that what is true of a part is also true of the whole. Part of the church, the believing Hebrews among the diaspora, were once "not a people" but it doesn't follow, therefore, the entire church was once "not a people." While it is true that the Hebrews of the diaspora were once members of a chosen race, it does not follow that the entire church is now a chosen race. Just because the Hebrews came to faith in Jesus Christ it doesn't follow that everything true of the Hebrews is also true of the church.

Like you, I am using other scripture to help understand the verse in question, which is 1 Peter 2:9. But, unlike you, I am using the surrounding verses to help establish the context of that verse.

We are both using the surrounding verses. However, you maintain that a description of the Hebrew exiles, who are but a fraction of the church at large, is also true of the entire church. I do not find strong evidence that Peter held this view. Evidence indicates the Apostle's familiarity with the Hebrew people, their history with God, and their commitment to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But evidence is lacking that he equated the two. Not all characteristics shared by the Hebrew people are shared by the church at large. The Hebrew people were coming to faith and as the apostle to the Hebrews (as Paul said) he employs vocabulary and concepts familiar to them as a people. Not everything true of the Hebrew converts is true of the entire church.

No, I have not! Looking at the verses preceding the verse we're talking about is going "so far off the track"? Are you kidding me?

No. That is not what I meant. I wasn't critical of your approach, an approach that I also employ and value. We agree about that. I very much appreciate the fact that you brought us to the text.

No, he is not and I have been showing why not.

As I said above, it is not valid to conclude that everything true of a subset of Christians is also true of the entire set.

And you are just trying to dismiss that. If you simply read the verses preceding that you can see he also called them a "spiritual house" that has Jesus Christ as its cornerstone. Do you deny that? If not, then why can't we use that information to determine what he is saying in 1 Peter 2:9?

Yes. of course. I agree that God is building a spiritual house containing all who believe. I do not agree, however, that everything true of the Hebrew exiles is also true of God's house.

The same ones he called a "spiritual house" with Jesus Christ as its cornerstone are the "royal priesthood". What other spiritual house with Jesus Christ as its cornerstone is there besides the church? You can't just dismiss what I'm saying. I'm making valid points and asking valid questions here.

Again, although God is erecting a spiritual house, which contains members from among the Hebrews, it does not follow that the entire house shares Hebrew characteristics.

Your attempt to dismiss that shows your unwillingness to honestly address challenges being made to your view. What other reason could there be for that than you wanting to just believe what you want to believe rather than accepting what Peter was saying in context?

I don't want to go there because I believe that you and I are having an honest and fair dialog. I don't want to say anything to disparage your capabilities or your motives. I might be mistaken in my views. I readily admit that. But rest assured that my strong push-back is not due to my simply "wanting to just believe what I want to believe."

I am genuinely interested in what you say and I am trying to understand it. I assume you are doing the same.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Every fraction was comprised of individuals.

Are you attempting to argue that nations don't exist? That's what it sounds like.

 

[CadyandZoe]

You mean that Peter was writing to people, not to places??

I never knew.

Paul referred to Peter as an apostle to the circumcised. Why did he make this distinction?

 

[marks]

It's more than just that. This shows that you don't have a full understanding of what it means for God not to be a respecter of persons. So, I will show you what it means.

And yet still more . . .

Matthew 10:5-6 KJV
5) These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6) But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Matthew 15:21-24 KJV
21) Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon.
22) And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.
23) But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
24) But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

And even so, God is not a respector of persons - In the way He means it. Which is to say, if God chooses one person over another, or one group of people over another, that doesn't mean He is unfairly biased.

Jesus was sent to Israel and not the other nations, which is plainly stated truth in Scripture.

Romans 9:10-14 KJV
10) And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;
11) (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth)
12) It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13) As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14) What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

I sometimes wonder that as a person may realize about themself that they hold predudices against others, and employ double standards, and give partiality based on their opinions of others, that they feel God must be like them, and therefore can't understand how God could actually choose one nation over another without unrighteousness.

Just the same, God did in fact choose one nation over the others, and separated that nation, and continues to separate that nation.

Romans 1:16 KJV
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Romans 2:6-11 KJV
6) Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
7) To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
8) But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
9) Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
10) But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
11) For there is no respect of persons with God.

You will notice here that this speaks of the Jew and the gentile receiving their reward, whether eternal life, or wrath. Tribulation and anguish, or glory, honor and peace - - - "to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile". Jews and Gentiles remain separated even in judgment.

For God to show a separation between Jews and Gentiles is not showing "respect of persons", and in fact, that God will address each in their own order is presented as evidence of this fact. This separation in no wise contradicts that, or harms the idea. And it endures just as God had said.

Jeremiah 31:35-37 KJV
35) Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts is his name:
36) If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.
37) Thus saith the LORD; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the LORD.

Much love!

 

[covenantee]

Paul referred to Peter as an apostle to the circumcised. Why did he make this distinction?

So that they wouldn't get left out.

 

[covenantee]

Are you attempting to argue that nations don't exist? That's what it sounds like.

Only to you does it sound like that.

 

[marks]

Only to you does it sound like that.

No, to me also. You seem to be sidestepping.

Much love!

 

[covenantee]

No, to me also. You seem to be sidestepping.

Much love!

Sorry I overlooked you. Describe "sidestepping".

 

[covenantee]

I agree with your interpretation of 1 Peter 2:5-7, where Peter talks about being built into a spiritual house. This is true of all believers in Christ. Nonetheless, your argument fails because you incorrectly concluded that Peter's description of part of the church, which consists of Hebrew believers, must be true of the entire church.

First you acknowledge that "this is true of all believers in Christ". Then you opine that Peter's description is "of part of the Church".

Which is it?

If the latter, cite the Scripture in which Peter is describing only "part of the Church".

God is not a racist.

 

[marks]

God is not a racist.

True, in the sense that humans can be racist. And neither is this an example of unrighteous racism:

Matthew 10:5-6 KJV
5) These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6) But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Matthew 15:21-24 KJV
21) Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon.
22) And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.
23) But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
24) But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Of course, not being racist, as people can be racist, doesn't mean that God neither knows nor uses distinctions between nations.

Much love!