Christian Zionism and Literal Restoration of Israel In Judism

[tulsa 2011]

Christian Zionism and the Literal Restoration of Israel In Talmudic Judaism

On http://www.realapologetics.<wbr>org/blog/2010/06/15/ci-<wbr>scofield-the-meaning-of-<wbr>literal-and-the-birth-of-<wbr>hyper-dispensationalism/

Jamin Hubner says about dispensationalism or Christian Zionism that: "It still made a sharp
distinction between Israel and the Church. And it still stressed a
literalist hermeneutic."

The foundational assumptions of dispensationalism, or Christian Zionism, are that scripture must be literally interpreted and that God now has two peoples, Israel - meaning physical, Old Covenant Israel - and the church.

In Scofield Bible Correspondence School (1907, 45-46), C. I. Scofield (1843 -1921) writes that "In prophetic Scriptures … we reach the ground of absolute literalness. Figures are often found in the prophecies, but the figure invariably has a literal fulfillment. Not one instance exists of a “spiritual” or figurative fulfillment of prophecy…Jerusalem is always Jerusalem, Israel always Israel, Zion always Zion….Prophecies may never be spiritualized, but are always literal."

In 1936, Lewis S. Chafer, a classical dispensationalist, defined Scofield's literalism as "The outstanding characteristic of the dispensationalist is ... that he believes every statement of the Bible and gives to it the plain, natural meaning its words imply." From: L. S. Chafer, ‘Dispensationalism,' Bibliotheca Sacra, 93, October (1936), pp410, 417.

Charles C. Ryrie (born 1925) says:
"basic promise of Dispensationalism is two purposes of God expressed
in the formation of two peoples who maintain their distinction
throughout eternity." Charles C. Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today,1966, pp.44-45.

In his book, Dispensationalism (1966), Charles Ryrie says "The
essence of Dispensationalism, then, is the distinction between Israel
and the church." (page 3, "Dispensationalism")

"The nature of the church is a crucial point of difference between
classic, or normative, dispensationalism and other doctrinal systems.
Indeed, ecclesiology, or the doctrine of the church, is the touchstone
of dispensationalism (and also of pretribulationalism)."
(page 123, Charles Ryrie Dispensationalism (Chicago: Moody Press,
[1966], 1995)

J. Dwight Pentecost is another dispensationalist theologian who in
his book Things To Come ( 1965) says "The church
and Israel are two distinct groups with whom God has a divine plan.
The church is a mystery, unrevealed in the Old Testament. This mystery
program must be completed before God can resume His program with
Israel and bring it to completion. These considerations all arise from
a literal method of interpretation."
(page 193, J. Dwight Pentecost, Things To Come, Zondervan, 1965).

"No part of historic Christian doctrine supports this radical distinction between church and kingdom. To be sure they are not identical; but dispensationalism has added the idea that the kingdom was to be a restoration of Israel, not a consummation of the church.In the light of this principle, it is legitimate to ask whether dispensationalism is not orientated more from the Abrahamic Covenant than from the Cross. Is not its focus centred more on the Jewish kingdom than on the Body of Christ? Does it not interpret the New Testament in the light of Old Testament prophecies, instead of interpreting those prophecies in the light of the more complete revelation of the New Testament?" Clarence B. Bass, .Backgrounds To Dispensationalism: Its Historical Genesis and Ecclesiastical Implications, 2005,, p. 31. P. 151.

In John 10: 16 Christ says "...and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd." Romans 12: 5 says "So we, being many.are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another."

The Rabbi leaders of Talmudic Judaism who after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. sought to preserve the religion of the Pharisees and to defend it from both Jewish and Gentile Christians continued in the literalism of those Pharisees of Christ's time. These leaders of Talmudic Judaism continued the literalistic and carnal mind set which had led the Pharisees to reject Jesus Christ and to be broken off Paul's tree in Romans 11: 17-20 for unbelief. That mind set is identified in the parable of the wicked husbandmen who killed the owner's son to take the vineyard over for themselves in Matthew 21: 33-41.

"The kingdom of God shall be taken from you and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof." Matthew. 21:43

One of the main reasons the natural minded Pharisees rejected the New Testament Kingdom of God and had Christ crucified was that their carnal mind, or natural mind (I Corinthians 2: 14) led them to insist on interpreting prophecies about the Messiah in a literalist way. This literalist view of the Pharisees was reflected even in the expectations
of some of Christ's disciples in Acts 1: 6, when they asked Christ, who was about to ascend into heaven, "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" The Pharisees were looking for the Messiah to create a literal, earthy kingdom on earth, and to overthrow the rule of the Romans. When they saw that Christ was talking about a spiritual kingdom within a person, they rejected that and Christ himself.

John Darby, is seen as the founder of dispensationalism, or Christian Zionism, though Edward Irving studied the futurist book of Manuel Lacunza, "The Coming of the Messiah In Glory and Majesty, and some of the doctrines that Darby took up were developed by Irving. See Dave MacPhearson at http://www.scionofzion.com/<wbr>edward_irving.htm

Darby stated the early Christian Zionist doctrine which supported the restoration of national Israel taught by Talmudic Judaism. In John Darby's original view, the Capital C Church, as the Gentile Body of Christ, in Christian Zionist theology, had the role of honoring and supporting the restoration of national and physical Israel.

John Darby said that the "Church has sought to settle itself here, but it has no place on the earth... [Though] making a most constructive parenthesis, it forms no part of the regular order of God's earthly plans, but is merely an interruption of them to give a fuller character and meaning to them..."


John. N. Darby, 'The Character of Office in The Present Dispensation'
Collected Writings., Eccl. I, Vol. I, p. 94.


"Them" are all physical Israel. The church, for Darby exists to "give
fuller character and meaning to all physical Israel." Darby thought that the purpose of the Christian church, based on the Catholic capital C Church, was to honor all physical Israel, and its restoring.


This teaching by Darby that the Church has no role in God's earthly plans, but is to "give a fuller character" to physical Israel has been moderated somewhat by later dispensationalists or Christian Zionists.


Yet the Christian Zionist teaching that the thousand year millennium, from Revelation 20: 6, is to be primarily an earthly Jewish kingdom where the Gentiles are allowed but are secondary citizens is consistent with Darby's statement above.

Darby and other dispensationalists had accepted the Talmudic Judaism doctrine that physical and national Israel was destined to be restored in the future when its Messiah would arrive and set up an earthy kingdom.


In the literalism of the Pharisees, which was taken up by the Christian Zionists, the Jewish Messiah was to create an earthly kingdom run by the Jews. In Talmudic Judaism and in Christian Zionism the Kingdom of Heaven was not just a spiritual kingdom in which Christ puts his mind in his followers, makes them alive spiritually in him, and their consciousness is raised to a spiritual or higher level in Christ Jesus. Their literalness made them unable to see that the Kingdom of Heaven was to be spiritual and not an earthly one on the lines of the kingdoms of man. The literal mind of the natural man cannot envision a change in his consciousness in Christ, but sees his salvation to be as a continuation of himself as a natural man, and Paul in I Corinthians 2: 14 says the natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit. Paul teaches in I Corinthians 15: 50 that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." John 3: 3

And - the natural man is the man who thinks in literal terms and has, in our time, a dialectic mind, which always wants to compromise that which is absolute, like the word of God.


Most Christian Zionists see the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 as evidence that the Jews remain God's chosen people.

On

http://servantsplace.org/wp-<wbr>content/uploads/2012/12/<wbr>Dispensationalism-by-L-S-<wbr>Chafer.pdf


Lewis S Chafer says "The Davidic Covenant. 2 Samuel 7:16 with its context records the covenant Jehovah made with David. David's own interpretation of it is written in 2 Samuel 7:18 - 2 9 and in Psalm 89:20 - 37. This covenant, without imposing the slightest obligation upon David, does bind Jehovah with an oath (Acts 2:30) to the perpetuity of the Davidic house, the Davidic throne, and the Davidic kingdom. Again, Jehovah reserves the right to chasten the sons of David, but with the express declaration that the covenant cannot be abrogated (2 Sam. 7:13 - 15; Ps. 89:30 - 37). This covenant is unconditional, even into eternity to come.........Nor is this kingdom and throne established in heaven. It is established on the earth when the Son of David returns to the earth (Matt. 25:31 - 32; cf. 19:28; Acts 15:16 - 17; Luke 1:31 - 33; Matt. 2:2)."


For Christian Zionism, the Davidic Covenant is unconditional, eternal and is a physical kingdom on earth, ruled by Christ.


Then, Chafer, the founder of Dallas Theological Seminary, says "The New Covenant for Israel. A new covenant for Israel is anticipated in Jeremiah 31:31 - 40; Hebrews 8:8 - 13; 1 0:16 - 17. This is not to supersede the Abrahamic and Davidic Covenants which continue forever."


But Hebrews 10: 9 says "He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second." .The first and second what? The first covenant is taken away in order to establish the second, better covenant. Hebrews 7: 22 says "By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament." Then Hebrews 8: 6 says "But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises." Remember that Christ says in John 10: 16 that there is one fold and Paul in Romans 12: 5 says there is one Body of Christ. Now we see that classical Christian Zionism says, contrary to Hebrews 10: 9, that the New Covenant did not supersede the Abrahamic and Davidic Covenants.


This disagreement with basic teachings of the Gospel of Christ tends to diminish belief that the word of God is absolute and cannot be compromised by the dialectic process.


Classical Christian Zionism teaches that the restoration of national Israel will be in the millennium reign on earth, interpreted from Revelation 20: 6, and made into a literal kingdom on earth, run by physical Israel.

On http://www.gospelway.com/man/<wbr>israel-future.php John F. Walvoord,
a classical dispensationalist, as saying:

"Passages of the Old Testament ... anticipating a future day of glory
for Israel find their fulfillment in the millennial reign of Christ.
The regathering of Israel, a prominent theme of most of the prophets,
has its purpose realized in the re-establishment of Israel in their
ancient land. Israel as a nation is delivered from her persecutors in
the time of tribulation and brought into the place of blessing and
restoration" -John F. Walvoord, The Millennial Kingdom, 1959,
Zondervan, p. 303 (, p. 207).

"The Gentiles will be Israel's servants during that age ..." - J
Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come, 1958, Zondervan, p. 508

http://www.geocities.com/<wbr>Heartland/9170/DEVENTER1.HTM

According to dispensationalism, the millennium is fundamentally Jewish
in nature such that the Jews will be "exalted above the Gentiles."
[6].

"The Gentiles will "be on the lowest level" in Christ's rule. [7]

In addition, despite Christ's ultimate sacrifice as "the lamb of God who
takes away the sin of the world," dispensationalism teaches that the
sacrificial system will be reinstituted! [8]"

6 John Walvoord, The Millennial Kingdom (Grand Rapids,MI: Zondervan,
1959), p. 136.

7 Herman Hoyt, "Dispensational Premillennialsim," in Robert G.
Clouse,The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views(Downer's Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 1977), p. 81.

8 J. Dwight Pentecost, Things To Come (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan
Publishing House, 1958), p. 525


The Zionist Kingdom To Come

The Messianic age of restoration and redemption (tikkun olam)in the prophecies of Talmudic Judaism describes a world restored to harmony and justice.


http://www.myjewishlearning.<wbr>com/beliefs/Theology/Kabbalah_<wbr>and_Mysticism/Kabbalah_and_<wbr>Hasidism/In_Safed.shtml?p=2


Isaac Luria wrote about the tikkun olam, repairing the world.

"For Luria and his followers, the commandment of tikkun olam (repairing the world) takes on a highly specific meaning in which it is through Jewish ritual life that we contribute to the reversal of the shattering of the ves*sels, ward off the powers of evil, and pave the way of Redemption."

In the theology of Isaac Luria, repairing the world is to be done by the Jewish people. Repairing the world is the establishment of the Zionist kingdom, and is the restoration of national and physical Israel.

Talmudic Judaism would point to these Bible texts as support for their teaching
that physical Israel willalways be the chosen people of God.

"Israel is saved in YHVH, an eternal salvation" (Isaiah 45:17).

"In YHVH all the seed of Israel will be righteous and praise" (Isaiah 45:25).


"I will give salvation to Israel, My glory" (Isaiah 46:13).


"Your people will all be righteous; will inherit the earth forever" (Isaiah 60:21).


This last verse became the basis for the rabbinic teaching that all religious Jews have eternal salvation.


But Old Testament prophecy shows that God was to transform physical Israel into a spiritual house (I Peter 2: 5-9).
In Isaiah 19: 25 God calls, though the prophet Isaiah, Israel his inheritance. "Whom the LORD of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel mine inheritance."

Here is what God in II Kings 21: 13 says he will do as a result of
Israel having done that which was evil in his sight: "And I will
stretch over Jerusalem the line of Samaria, and the plummet of the
house of Ahab: and I will wipe Jerusalem as a man wipeth a dish,
wiping it, and turning it upside down."

Isaiah 29: 16 comments on this promise to turn Israel upside down.
There Isaiah says "Surely your turning of things upside down shall be
esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made
it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed
it, He had no understanding?"

"God's turning of things upside down is to be esteemed as the potter's
clay. " This refers to Jeremiah 18:2-7. "Arise, and
go down to the potter's house, and there I will cause thee to hear my
words. Then I went down to the potter's house, and, behold, he wrought
a work on
the wheels. And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the
hand of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good
to the
potter to make it. Then the word of the LORD came to me, saying, O
house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD.
Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O
house of Israel. At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation,
and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to
destroy it;"

God first made a vessel on his potter's wheel which was marred.
This represents physical Israel in apostasy. Then the Lord made that
same lump of clay into a different vessel as seemed good to him to
make it. A potter who does not like the pot he has thrown on the wheel
can take it off, mix it with dry clay kneed it again, put it back on
the wheel and throw a different pot with that same lump of clay. In
the past I did this when I was a potter.

Ethnic Israel was translated or transformed into Israel born
again. Israel reborn in Christ became the spiritual house of I Peter
2: 5, "Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an
holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God
by Jesus Christ."

Christian Zionism does not accept the prophecies of II Kings 21: 13, Isaiah 29: 16 and Jeremiah 18: 1-7. Instead, Christian Zionism says Old Covenant Israel now remains a people of God alongside the Capital C Church.
Israel was changed into a spiritual house, and in order to stay in Israel to be saved, those in Old Covenant Israel had to be born again in Christ. But Israel is nowhere said to be replaced by the Church. In the eyes of God, Israel reborn in Christ is still his inheritance, which is Israel.


So, Isaiah 45: 17, "Israel shall be saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation" now applies to Israel reborn in Christ, the spiritual house of I Peter 2: 5-9. And In Isaiah 60:21, "Thy people also shall all be righteous: they shall inherit the land forever..." applies to Israel reborn in Christ.

 

[B-A-C]

In John 10: 16 Christ says "...and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd."

Actually this incorrect, it says...

John 10:16; "I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd.

They will eventually become one, but they aren't there yet.

Rom 11:25; For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery--so that you will not be wise in your own estimation--that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in;

 

[tulsa 2011]

Actually this incorrect, it says...

John 10:16; "I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd.

They will eventually become one, but they aren't there yet."

Since "they will become" indicates a version of John 10: 16 which I have not found yet, I wonder what translation it is from.

"They will become" one flock is a statement saying that becoming one fold or flock is to occur in the future. Is John 10: 16 a prophecy of the joining of the remnant of Old Covenant or physical Israel who accepted Christ to the Gentile Christians at some future time? If it is such a prophecy, it would have been fulfilled at the time the calling of the Gentiles began in Acts 10. In his work Paul never indicated that the Jews who accepted Christ and the Christian Gentiles or Greeks were two different groups in Christ. In fact he says just the opposite in Romans 3: 12, "For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek," in Galatians 3: 28, "There is neither Jew nor Greek...for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." And in Romans 12: 5 Paul says "So we, being many, are one body in Christ."


"I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd." NIV

"And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd." KJV

"I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd." New Revised Standard Version

Tyndale 1526 New Testrament: "and other sheep I have which are not of this fold. Them also must I bring that they may hear my voice and that there may be one flock and one shepherd"

"And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, one shepherd." Geneva Bible

The question is whether the Greek verb agagein is in the future tense, indicating that the joining of Christian Jews to Christian Gentiles is an event in the future.

agagein, to bring: See: The gospel of John 10:1-21

"agagein (agw) aor. inf. "I must bring" - [it is necessary me] to drive, lead, bring. The infinitive serves as the subject of dei, "is necessary". Expressing compulsion."

See: Learn Greek Online!: Infinitive aorist

"While the term "infinitive aorist" could be considered somewhat technically accurate in that an infinitive is "infinite" in tense, that is, it does not express any specific time of the action, the "infinitive aorist" in the Modern language actually expresses verbal aspect, that is, the distinction between instantaneous or one-time actions versus continuing or habitual actions. Perhaps a more descriptive term for the "infinitive aorist" is the "tenseless perfective", in that this form expresses perfective (or in LGO's terminology, "non-continuous") verbal aspect."

The aorist tense does not have a time indication. And the aorist tense is clearly not a future tense. And even if agagein were in the future tense, the joining of Christian Jews to Christian Gentiles was fulfilled in the First Century A.D. To say that the joining of Christian Jews to Christian Gentiles is a future event implies they are now two separate groups, contrary to a whole lot of New Testament scripture. And in fact, that Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles have been one body of Christ,since the calling of the Gentiles in Acts 10 is a part of the Gospel of Christ. To make this joining a future even is part of another Gospel.

To interpret Romans 11: 25-26 as also being a prophecy for the future, when "All Israel" will be saved, would contradict what Paul has already taught in Romans 2: 17-29, Romans 9: 6-9, Romans 12: 5, Romans 11: 17-20, and Galatians 3: 3-29, which show that the true Jew is not not one by genetics, by the flesh, but by being in Christ, that those of physical Israel who are only Israel of the flesh are not the Children of God, that there is now one body of Christ, not two, and that those of unbelieving physical Israel were broken off.

 

[james1523]

I disagree with this article. The scholars are right that prophecy must be fulfilled literally. There is no such thing as a non-literal fulfillment of prophecy. That is not real prophecy at all.

• The Bible clearly teaches the literal restoration of Israel. If this does not happen literally then the prophecies will not be fulfilled
• Isaiah 63:4—63:19
• Jeremiah 23:3-8; 33:1-26, 23:5-6
• Even though the 12 apostles were called out from Judaism into Christianity, the 12 apostles were Jews and will always be Jews and will rule Israel (Matt. 19:28)
• Jesus will receive the throne of David his father first (Luke 1:32) and from this position rule the nations (Rom. 15:12).
• Israel will repent and turn to Christ at His coming back (Zech. 12:10—13:1).

 

[tulsa 2011]

The Rabbi leaders of Talmudic Judaism who after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. sought to preserve the religion of the Pharisees and to defend it from both Jewish and Gentile Christians continued in the literalism of those Pharisees of Christ's time. These leaders of Talmudic Judaism continued the literalistic and carnal mind set which had led the Pharisees to reject Jesus Christ and to be broken off Paul's tree in Romans 11:17-20 for unbelief.

Darby stated the early Christian Zionist doctrine which supported the restoration of national Israel taught by Talmudic Judaism. In John Darby's original view, the Capital C Church, as the Gentile Body of Christ, in Christian Zionist theology, had the role of honoring and supporting the restoration of national and physical Israel.

John Darby said that the "Church has sought to settle itself here, but it has no place on the earth... [Though] making a most constructive parenthesis, it forms no part of the regular order of God's earthly plans, but is merely an interruption of them to give a fuller character and meaning to them..."

Darby's statement here has been toned down a little by later Christian Zionists. But this tradition of men still teaches that God now has two peoples, Israel, always meaning Old Covenant physical Israel to Christian Zionists, and the Capital C Church. The implication in teaching that Old Covenant Israel is still a people of God is that it has that status because of genetics, that is, that which is in the physical, the blood line from Abraham. And Christian Zionism teaches, in agreement with Darby, that this Israel they honor, which is not that remnant of Israel of Romans 11: 5, is the chosen people. The Church is to honor Old Covenant Israel.

But Old Covenant Israel does not exist now and has not existed for centuries. What has existed since the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. is Talmudic Judaism. It is Talmudic Judaism which Christian Zionism honors as being the chosen people. Talmudic Judaism continues in its rejection of Jesus Christ and is of the spirit of anti-Christ (I John 4: 3).

What evidence is there that Talmudic Judaism is the religion of the Pharisees? Since Christ taught against the Pharisees and warned against the leaven of the Pharisees (Matthew 16: 6, 11-12), those who want to have Christ's mind in them, would want .to understand what Talmudic Judaism is, and would want to avoid taking on any of the leaven of the Pharisees it possesses, so that they are not false prophets because they have that leaven in them.

This means that A Christian can present the true Gospel to Jews and hope they would accept it, and be changed by it. But what Christ said in Matthew 10: 14 applies to everyone who will not hear that Gospel and rejects it. "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet."

The remnant of Israel is not called to honor Talmudic Judaism, somehow thinking it is Old Covenant Israel, and in the process taking on some of the leaven of the Pharisees. Yet that leaven exists among the Christian Zionists and makes them unable to see the meanings of a number of New Testament scriptures, such as Galatians 3: 3-29. There it is explained that the seed of Abraham, which is the seed of God, comes to us not by that which is physical, because that was merely a shadow of better things to come, and Paul concludes in saying all those in Christ are Abraham's seed - his spiritual seed - which are the spiritual seed of God, and now there is no difference between Jews and Greeks, as far as being in Christ is concerned. But the dialectic mind set wants to compromise this teaching and go back to the promises in the Old testament to Israel, rejecting what God said in II Kings, 21: 13, Isaiah 29;16 and especially Jeremiah 18: 1-6, that he was going change Israel, turning Jerusalem upside down.

On http://www.come-and-hear.com/<wbr>dilling/chapt01.html

they say "the missing link in Christian understanding on the subject
of "Pharisees" is best supplied by the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia
(1943): The Jewish religion as it is today traces its descent,
without a break, through all the centuries, from the Pharisees. Their
leading ideas and methods found expression in a literature of enormous
extent, of which a very great deal is still in existence. The Talmud
is the largest and most important single piece of that literature …
and the study of it is essential for any real understanding of
Pharisaism.

Concerning the Pharisees, the 1905 Jewish Encyclopedia says: With
the destruction of the Temple (70 A.D.) the Sadducees disappeared
altogether, leaving the regulation of all Jewish affairs in the hands
of the Pharisees. Henceforth, Jewish life was regulated by the
Pharisees; the whole history of Judaism was reconstructed from the
Pharisaic point of view, and a new aspect was given to the Sanhedrin
of the past. A new chain of tradition supplanted the older priestly
tradition (Abot 1:1). Pharisaism shaped the character of Judaism and
the life and thought of the Jew for all the future."

"Rabbi Louis Finklestein was chosen in 1937 by the Kehillas (Jewish
communities) of the World as one of the top 120 Jews best representing
"a lamp of Judaism" to the World...In his two-volume work "The
Pharisees." Rabbi Finklestein writes: Pharasaism became Talmudism …
But the spirit of the ancient Pharisee survives unaltered. When the
Jew … studies the Talmud, he is actually repeating the arguments used
in the Palestinian academies. From Palestine to Babylonia; from
Babylonia to North Africa, Italy. Spain, France and Germany; from
these to Poland. Russia and Eastern Europe generally, ancient
Pharasaism has wandered."

"In Rabbi Finklestein's history of the Jews, he states: The Talmud
derives its authority from the position held by the ancient academies.
(i.e. Pharisee) The teachers of those academies, both of Babylonia and
of Palestine. were considered the rightful successors of the older
Sanhedrin . . . At the present time, the Jewish people have no living
central authority comparable in status to the ancient Sanhedrins or
the later academies. Therefore, any decision regarding the Jewish
religion must be based on the Talmud as the final resumé of the
teaching of those authorities when they existed. [page 2] (The Jews
— Their History, Culture, and Religion , Vol. 4, p. 1332, Jewish
Publication Society of America, 1949). "

"Note the Foreword to the first English translation of the Babylonian
Talmud by the late Chief Rabbi of Great Britain, J.H. Hertz, who, like
Rabbi Finklestein, was one of the 120 Jews chosen in 1937 by the
Kehillas of the World as best holding up the "lamp of Judaism:" The
beginnings of Talmudic literature date back to the time of the
Babylonian Exile in the Sixth pre-Christian Century … When a thousand
years later, the Babylonian Talmud assumed final codified form in the
year 500 after the Christian era, the Roman Western Empire had ceased
to be."

In Christ's time the Pharisees were the leaders of most of the Jews.
There were a small number
of Jews who were faithful to the Lord, such as the two mentioned in
Luke 2: 25 and 2: 36, Simeon and
Anna, and others. In modern times, as the sources quoted above say,
Talmudic Judaism is derived from
the religion of the Pharisees of the First Century.

The important question is which group of Jews are the
dispensationalists refering to as Israel and the Jews? Is
it the Talmudic Jews who follow the Pharisees, or is it that very
small Remnant of Jews who were faithful to God during the period
Christ was on earth?

The dispensationalists or Christian Zionists are referring to All Jews, not just the small
number who accepted Christ. They think "All Israel shall be saved" in
Romans 11: 26 is a prophecy for the future when, in effect, phsycial
Israel will be restored.

 

[DHC]

Hello Tulsa.

You seem confused with the distinct separation of the Old Covenant, which physical Israel as a nation
was under, and the New Covenant that Christ established with humanity as a whole.

Not separate dispensations (Darby) by God so much, as an all new and powerful Spiritual Covenant,
established by Christ.

2 Corinthians 3:6
who also made us adequate as servants of a New Covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit;
for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

In the Old Testament, the word 'covenant' is used nearly 300 times! Anyone trying to understand the
Old Testament needs to associate one self with the term 'covenant'. God enacts a number of 'covenants'
with certain distinct groups of people throughout the Bible. But for our purposes, God's older covenant
with Israel at Mt Sinai is foremost in the New Testament and is redundant in Christ.

Your language is difficult to read Tulsa, because you employ terminology, that is not the terminology
that the scripture uses.

For example, the phrase 'physical Israel' should be replaced with the phrase 'old covenant' Israel. As
the reference to old covenant Israel is much more precise. The term 'physical Israel' is not really
Biblical and far to vague to actually describe a specific entity.

When the term 'old covenant' is mentioned, the reader knows full well, that you are talking about,
the older covenant that God established with the refugees from Egypt. This specific older covenant
mentioned by the author of the letter to the Hebrews, as below.

Hebrews 8:13
When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete
and growing old is ready to disappear.

He made the first obsolete? He made the first covenant with Moses and the people, obsolete.
The temple, sacrifice, feasts, laws, priesthood, e.t.c, have become obsolete, replaced with the
supreme and Spiritual, New Covenant!

The older covenant included everything that Moses recorded in Exodus and Leviticus.
The older covenant was physical and not a spiritual covenant, the older covenant promised
not life, but in fact death, to it's adherents. The law made no one holy, more correctly, the law
convicted of sin and death.

Let Paul explain this important truth, if you understand the following verses then you are on top
of what Paul really taught.

Romans 4
9 Is this blessing then on the circumcised (Jews), or on the uncircumcised (Gentiles) also? For we
say, “Faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness.” 10 How then was it credited? While he
was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised; 11 and he
received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while
uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that
righteousness might be credited to them.

Abraham was credited with righteousness through Faith, and this was before He was circumcised!
Circumcision is irrelevant and so is the old covenant at Mt Sinai, the theocratic old covenant centered
on the law and the temple is obsolete. Abraham was the father of all who believe without being
circumcised! In other words, a Gentile does not become a Jew in Christ.

Paul is stating, that you adopt not one part of the old covenant, for to do so requires circumcision.
Paul is telling you, that you like Abraham, have been reckoned righteous because you believed in
God's promised messiah. Liberty and freedom is the cry of those in Christ.

 

[tulsa 2011]

Bible doctrines are taught in the churches in a compartmentalized way. For example, I have listed Romans 2: 28-29, Romans 9: 6-8 and also Galatians 4: 24-26 all together as being statements saying that there has been a change in Israel made by Jesus Christ. But a guy taught by the compartmentalized method in the churches said, no, Galatians 4: 24-26 is not about a change in Israel, so that, in a way, there were two Israels, as Paul says in Romans 9: 6-8, that "they are not all Israel, which are of Israel." The guy said Galatians 4: 24-26 is only about the two covenants. But it is also about the change in Israel, and a spiritual Israel in Christ is now the real Israel. Since the New Covenant does change old Israel, the text is also about the change in Israel.

Saying that there is no physical Israel in scripture is also part of the compartmentalized process of teaching scripture in the churches, Paul says in Romans 9: 8 "They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God." And in I Corinthians 10: 18 he says "Behold Israel after the flesh..." Israel after the flesh, and Israel as the children of the flesh have the same meaning as physical Israel. Part of the problem in this compartmentalized problem is the insistence on a literal view of scripture, when scripture often teaches the same meanings using different metaphors. What does the metaphor "Jerusalem" mean in II Kings 21: 13, "I will wipe Jerusalem as a man wipeth a dish, wiping it, and turning it upside down.?" Jerusalem has the same meaning as Israel, or sometimes Jacob, used in scripture. But with the compartmentalized and literal approach, if its followers were consistent, "Jerusalem" in II Kings 21: 13 would have to be literal Jerusalem, the city over in the Middle East, and turning it upside down would mean somehow taking that city up by its roots, out of the ground and placing it down on the ground with what was before its roots turned up toward the sky.

But - a system of false doctrines, a tradition of men, a theology, often gives words both in scripture and outside of scripture meanings which people outside this system do not understand or use in that way. So, communicating with those in false doctrines, like Christian Zionism, is tricky.

And again the dialectic is a kind of argument, or quarrel, against the absolute truth of scripture, in attempt to compromise it in some way. Defenders of Christian Zionism use the dialectic all the time, not knowing what it is they are doing.

 

[tulsa 2011]

A long thread on a site, which is not a Christian Internet forum is relevant to this thread on Talk Jesus.

Here is one of my comments on this thread: ""Romans 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes." Paul is not saying that "they," as "Israel," that is, Old Covenant physical Israel, who rejected Christ, are beloved for the father's sake. The key word here is "election." "They," as Old Covenant Israel who rejected Christ, are not part of the election. So Paul must be saying that the fathers, meaning Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and others, love, not old Covenant Israel who rejected Christ, who are the enemies of the Gospel, but the remnant (Romans 11: 5) who accepted Christ and became part of the elect. This is not an easy verse to follow. And those following a tradition of men that denies physical Israel was changed in Christ, often point to this verse and say All Israel, meaning Old Covenant Israel, are beloved by the fathers, or by the Father. But Paul said clearly in Romans 11: 15-20 that unbelieving Israel was cut off."

And this is a comment by another person, a woman, on this thread: "There are 2 dominant lines of false doctrine concerning Israel.

The first teaches that God has a second work planned for the people who identify themselves as Jewish after the flesh. This is known as dispensational theology. These false doctrines were made main stream by the Schofield Study Bible. The doctrine teaches that the Jewish people after the flesh are a stand alone identity separate from the identity know as Christian and that after the New Testament era when God redeems the Christians he will then return to finish the work he was unable to do at the cross and redeem the Jewish people.

Replacement Theology teaches that the Christian Church replaced Israel. This causes tremendous unrest in the corporate Christian body and is simply a means of division, Satans favorite tool. This is symbolized in Rev 13 where we see the 2nd beast, the false prophet with 2 horns. There is always 2 factions of evil, Satan must have disagreement. Dispensational Theology and Replacement Theology are the 2 poles of the dialectic. The synthesis is in the middle where the dragon acts as the facilitator.

The truth is Israel was, is, and always will be Gods chosen people, his covenant people. Few understand that Israel was simply translated to a spiritual identity after the cross. Jer 31:31 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:
To be outside of the commonwealth of Israel is to be without Christ, you have no hope. Eph 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
The Israel in the middle east is a man made counterfeit. It is the foundation of the strong delusion that God has sent to those who received not the love of the truth. 2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
While the strong delusion has many layers, at the foundation is the Body of Christ forfeiting their heritage as the Israel of God. This is the reason for the strong delusion. Man as always must have an earthly idol to put his trust in. Jesus said his kingdom is not of this world. Man can not accept that."

There are no defenders of Christian Zionism posting on this thread, but most likely it has been read by some followers of this theology.

 

[DHC]

Bible doctrines are taught in the churches in a compartmentalized way. For example, I have listed Romans 2: 28-29, Romans 9: 6-8

Hello Tulsa.

Your reply seemed to contain an inference, more to the point, an interpretation of the scripture
that perhaps is not really there.

You referred to the letter to the Romans twice, and with an inherent inference, that Gentile believers
become Jews? This inference is supposedly based on the scripture, and you have been taught to
accept that you are a Jew inwardly?

Let us together Tulsa, examine your first two quotations from your previous post #7. To see whether
Tulsa has become an inward Jew, a member of the nation of Israel?

Romans 2
28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh.
29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly...

On the surface Tulsa it does appear that you may be correct, for I read these two lines exactly the
same way as you do. But there is a catch, and the catch is that these two lines above, are within
the wider context of this chapter, that these two lines are occur in.

So without any hesitation, we will look at some earlier lines in this chapter two of Romans, and
search for the context.

Romans 2
10...to the Jew first and also to the Greek...

There seems to be two groups that Paul is talking about in this chapter, Jews and Gentiles.

More lines and more of the context now.

Romans 2
14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law...

Gentiles are non Jews and never received the law, Paul states this point Tulsa. This is not my
opinion or interpretation, this is Paul's teaching and the specific context.

Romans 2
17 But if you bear the name “Jew” and rely upon the Law and boast in God...

The specific context is clear now, your original quotation is contained in this context.
Paul is now isolating the Jews in the church at Rome. Paul is now addressing the Jews
directly, for they were the confident teachers of the law in the church at Rome. Which
Paul is know expanding on.

Now who carries the name 'Jew', and is under the 'Law', and this is even more important
Tulsa, who 'boasts in God'?

Romans 2
23 You who boast in the Law, through your breaking the Law, do you dishonor God?
24 For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,”

Well we found out just who boasts in God and they are none other than the Jews. For
it is impossible for a Gentile to boast and teach the law, because Gentiles are not the
old covenant people. Only a Jew can boast in and break the 613 laws of the old covenant.

The context of Romans chapter two does not allow just any interpretation, but only the
interpretation which the specific context dictates. Context determines the interpretation
in any chapter, of any letter, in the entire Bible.

Romans 2
25 For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law;

Gentiles are the uncircumcised and are always referred to as the 'uncircumcised'. Paul does
not allow Gentiles to be circumcised, nor does Paul allow Gentiles to be placed under the law.
Jews are the only people on earth that are raised under the law. Gentiles are ignorant not only
of the Jewish messiah to some extent but also are profoundly ignorant of the old covenant.

Paul is not correcting the Gentiles at Rome, because they don't know anything about the law.
Paul is taking aim at the Jews in the church at Rome, and these Jews at Rome will destroy
the church. That is why Paul spends the next nine chapters devoted to the subject of the Jew.
Paul is attempting to educate the Gentiles about the Jews and deal with the Jews at the same
time.

I have no choice in this matter Tulsa, I am subject to the reading of the context. And will reject
your claim, that Gentiles must become Jews inwardly. By the way Tulsa, just have a peek at the
next chapter and the first line.

3 Then what advantage has the Jew?

 

[DHC]

Bible doctrines are taught in the churches in a compartmentalized way. For example, I have listed Romans 2: 28-29, Romans 9: 6-8

Hello again Tulsa.

Your first two quotations from Romans, need to be read in the given context of the letter.

I have dealt with the first quotation and now for your second quotation. Your quotation from (Romans 9:6 -8)
will be placed back into the resident passages from the ninth chapter. This will provide the appropriate context
for your quotation.

Romans 9
1 I am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience testifies with me in the Holy Spirit,
2 that I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed,
separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, 4 who are Israelites,
to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and
the temple service and the promises, 5 whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the
flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen. 6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed.
For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; 7 nor are they all children because they are
Abraham’s descendants, but: “through Isaac your descendants will be named.” 8 That is, it is not the
children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.

Well there can be no hesitation in understanding that Paul is still discussing the Jews.

3...'for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh'...

Paul call them his 'kinsman', so why has Paul spent so many chapters discussing the Jews?

For it is not the descendants of Abraham that are the benefactors of the promise.
Contrary to what would be expected given that the Jews were the chosen nation, the
chosen people after all. Paul has received a direct revelation from the risen Christ regarding
the truth about who has actually been offered salvation.

God is entirely impartial and has offered salvation both to the Jew and to the Gentile.

The Jews even though they have formerly been in relationship with God, have no advantage
over the Gentiles. For salvation is granted to all and sundry, regardless of race, and is by faith
and by no other means.

Jews have encountered the Christ as a stumbling block, to offset their distinct advantage derived
from their previous covenant relationships. Whereas the Gentile does not see Christ as a stumbling
block at all, but alas, are very ignorant about who God really is, and even more ignorant regarding
His nature. Both groups have a distinct impediment to Christ and Paul must weave through this
seemingly, impossible mystery, and deliver the Gospel in tact.

6 'For it is not as though the word of God has failed'

No failure at all Paul declares, the Jews were a chosen people but not for salvation!

The Jews were not elect by birth right, the Jews would only ever be elect in Christ.

24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

Paul is doing nothing more in his letter to the Romans than fully explaining that the Jew
has no inherent advantage in Christ. Rather the Jew is at a distinct disadvantage, given that
the Jew will pursue righteousness by the law and not by faith.

Jews are saddled with unbelief through their misunderstanding of the purpose of God.
Obedience to the law and the temple obligations do not offer the devotee salvation.
In fact, a false sense of a legal based, self righteousness, will prevail over those who
were under the law.

Jews are inhibited by a preoccupation with legal works!

32 ...'Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works...

So in the context, (Romans 9:6-8) has nothing to do with Gentiles becoming Jews, or even
Gentiles in some way joining the nation of Israel. (Romans 9:6-8) has all to do with why
the Jew has stumbled over the Christ. The children of the promise are heirs, which even Abraham
was. Abraham was credited with righteousness through just believing God and this was before
anything regarding the Abraham covenant and circumcision!

 

[james1523]

Bible doctrines are taught in the churches in a compartmentalized way. For example, I have listed Romans 2: 28-29, Romans 9: 6-8 and also Galatians 4: 24-26 all together as being statements saying that there has been a change in Israel made by Jesus Christ.

Romans 2: 28-29 is speaking to Jews, to those who call themselves Jews outwardly - Romans 2:17. There i no sense of Gentiles becoming Jews in this verse.
Romans 9:6-8 - not all who are out of Israel, are Israel, means not all who are born in the nation of Israel , it is not referring to Gentiles at all.
Gal 4:24-26 also refers only to the Jews. The state of bondage or freedom, depends upon whether the Jews live under slavery to the Law, or find freedom in Christ.

 

[james1523]

In the literalism of the Pharisees, which was taken up by the Christian Zionists, the Jewish Messiah was to create an earthly kingdom run by the Jews. In Talmudic Judaism and in Christian Zionism the Kingdom of Heaven was not just a spiritual kingdom in which Christ puts his mind in his followers, makes them alive spiritually in him, and their consciousness is raised to a spiritual or higher level in Christ Jesus. Their literalness made them unable to see that the Kingdom of Heaven was to be spiritual and not an earthly one on the lines of the kingdoms of man. The literal mind of the natural man cannot envision a change in his consciousness in Christ, but sees his salvation to be as a continuation of himself as a natural man, and Paul in I Corinthians 2: 14 says the natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit. Paul teaches in I Corinthians 15: 50 that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." John 3: 3

And - the natural man is the man who thinks in literal terms and has, in our time, a dialectic mind, which always wants to compromise that which is absolute, like the word of God.

The Holy Spirit (who is Jewish, by the way ) does not teach this kind of replacement theology.
Let us re-establish what the Bible teaches:

• God's will for the Israelites is to make them a nation of priests to teach the nations (Exodus 19:6)
• The Bible teaches that Jesus will return as King to inherit the throne of David, and setup an earthly kingdom in Jerusalem Zech. 8:20-23; 14:16-17; Isa. 2:2-3; Jer. 3:17
• Gen. 49:10; 2 Sam. 7:13, 16; Psa. 2:8-9; 72:1-20; 89:4; 110:2-3; Isa. 9:6-7; 11:1-5, 10; Jer. 23:5-6; 30:9; 33:14-17; Ezek. 21:27; 34:23-24; 37:24, 28; Dan. 2:35; 7:14; Hosea 3:5; Amos 9:11-12; Zech. 3:8; 6:12-13; 9:9-10.
• The early Christians were seeking this earthly kingdom of Israelites (Acts 1:6), to which the Lord did not rebuke or deny their question. If the Kingdom was meant to only be spiritual, then Jesus would have taught this to his disciples already prior to Acts 1:6.

Like it or not, a literal earthly kingdom run by Jews is the teaching of the Bible. The Pharisees are correct that the Jewish Messiah is to create an earthly kingdom run by the Jews. This is clearly taught in scripture and the prophesy is still to be fulfilled. The Kingdom of God is not only a spiritual kingdom. Jesus has a ministry primarily to the Israelites, as well as a ministry to the Gentiles (rest of the world).
Jesus, at his return, is yet to fulfill the old testament prophecies concerning the earthly aspects of His kingdom and the nation of Israel.

 

[tulsa 2011]

"In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old: That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the LORD that doeth this.That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things." Amos 9: 11-12

The Septuagint for Amos 9: 11-12 says "In that day I will raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and will rebuild the ruins of it, and will set up the parts thereof that have been broken down, and will build it up as in the ancient days: 12 that the remnant of men, and all the Gentiles upon whom my name is called, may earnestly seek me, saith the Lord who does all these things."

Acts 15: 14-17 "Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: "

Amos 9: 11-12 is one of several Old Testament prophecies on the restoration of Old Covenant Israel. Note that James says "And to this agree the words of the prophets." It is not only Amos 9: 11-12 that James is saying agrees with what Peter had said (Acts 15: 7-14) about God visiting the Gentiles and taking a people out of them for himself. It is also several other Old Testament prophecies on a future restoration of Old Covenant Israel which are said in this New Testament text to agree with what Peter had stated in Acts 15: 7-14.

David's tabernacle was rebuilt by Jesus Christ and David's kingdom was restored by Christ. So, Amos 9: 11-12 and several other Old Testament prophecies on the restoration of Old Covenant Israel have already been fulfilled in Christ and in the kingdom of God he established. The literal Kingdom of David - the Tabernacle of David -is like the shadows talked about in Hebrews 10: 1 and in Colossians 2: 16-17. The physical shadows of the Old Covenant - having the physical DNA of Abraham, circumcision, animal sacrifice, and the temple building - were just things which pointed to Jesus Christ and what he called the kingdom of God, which is not different from the kingdom of heaven.

"And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:" Luke 17:20

"Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you." Luke 17: 21

"Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence." John 18: 36

To say that the kingdom of God - the kingdom of Heaven - is a literal earthly kingdom is a quarrel of the dialectic, against scripture and which tries to compromise the absolute truth of scripture.

The tabernacle of David was restored in a spiritual way.

If someone with a dialectic mind who is defending or promoting a false doctrine can keep a quarrel going it is possible that this kind of dialog can put the opponent of the false doctrine in the condition of the natural man and in that sense the dialecic mind can win the argument. For this reason, it is best not to get into a prolonged quarrel.

 

[james1523]

This idea of Davids tabernacle already being restored was foreign to the 12 apostles because they knew it would not happen until Christ came back. To rebuild the tabernacle of David means to restore the Kingdom of Israel (Acts 1:6). In the time of the early church the tabernacle of David has not yet been restored (Acts 15:16-18). Also see Isa. 9:7, 16:5, Jer 30:9, Ezek. 34:23-24; 37:24-25; Hosea 3:5

Revelation shows the Kingdom of Messiah as future, not past or present:

Rev 11:15 The seventh angel sounded his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, which said:“The kingdom of the world has become
the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah,
and he will reign for ever and ever.”

 

[tulsa 2011]

"In the time of the early church the tabernacle of David has not yet been restored (Acts 15:16-18)." You have here set up an issue with Acts 15: 14-18 because you left out verses 14 and 15. This is a good example of the dialectic process of argument, which is basically dishonest. And misrepresenting Acts 15: 14-18 would mean additional argumentation with those who are upholding scripture. The reason leaving verses 14 and 15 out of your quote is a misrepresentation is because these two verses are important in understanding what is said in Acts 15: 14-18, that Amos 9: 11-12, and several other Old Testament prophecies on the restoration of Old Covenant Israel were all fulfilled in the New Covenant. Peter only talks about God calling a people out of the Gentiles for himself which happens in Acts 10, and is predicted to happen in Hosea 2: 23, "And I will sow her unto me in the earth; and I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy; and I will say to them which were not my people, Thou art my people; and they shall say, Thou art my God."

A remnant of Old Covenant Israel were transformed by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost and that fulfilled II Kings 21: 13, Isaiah 29: 16 and Jeremiah 18: 1-6 on the turning of Jerusalem upside down, which is the restoration of Old Covenant Israel in Jesus Christ. These three prophecies do not mention bringing the Gentiles into an Israel reborn in Christ, but Hosea 2: 23 supplies that prophecy. In the transformation of Old Covenant Israel - called turning Jerusalem upside down - the Gentiles were to be brought into Israel as equals to those with the bloodline from Abraham, and after that change bloodlines were done away with because that is in the physical and to enter Israel born again in Christ you must be born again, meaning you are changed from the state of the natural man to having Christ formed in you by the Holy Spirit.

 

[james1523]

"In the time of the early church the tabernacle of David has not yet been restored (Acts 15:16-18)." You have here set up an issue with Acts 15: 14-18 because you left out verses 14 and 15. This is a good example of the dialectic process of argument, which is basically dishonest. And misrepresenting Acts 15: 14-18 would mean additional argumentation with those who are upholding scripture. The reason leaving verses 14 and 15 out of your quote is a misrepresentation is because these two verses are important in understanding what is said in Acts 15: 14-18, that Amos 9: 11-12, and several other Old Testament prophecies on the restoration of Old Covenant Israel were all fulfilled in the New Covenant. Peter only talks about God calling a people out of the Gentiles for himself which happens in Acts 10, and is predicted to happen in Hosea 2: 23, "And I will sow her unto me in the earth; and I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy; and I will say to them which were not my people, Thou art my people; and they shall say, Thou art my God."

A remnant of Old Covenant Israel were transformed by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost and that fulfilled II Kings 21: 13, Isaiah 29: 16 and Jeremiah 18: 1-6 on the turning of Jerusalem upside down, which is the restoration of Old Covenant Israel in Jesus Christ. These three prophecies do not mention bringing the Gentiles into an Israel reborn in Christ, but Hosea 2: 23 supplies that prophecy. In the transformation of Old Covenant Israel - called turning Jerusalem upside down - the Gentiles were to be brought into Israel as equals to those with the bloodline from Abraham, and after that change bloodlines were done away with because that is in the physical and to enter Israel born again in Christ you must be born again, meaning you are changed from the state of the natural man to having Christ formed in you by the Holy Spirit.

Acts 15 does not matter, I do not need it, I only need Acts 1:5-8 and Rev 11:15 for my proof. Please try to refute Acts 1:5-8 and Rev 11:15. The apostle's dialogue with Christ in Acts 1:5-8 outweighs any proof that can be offered by Acts 15. It was not fulfilled in the New Covenant because in Acts 1:5-8, the apostles asked Christ if He would restore Israel at Pentecost, and His reply was "it is not for you to know the time", which is basically a "no". Obviously then, Pentecost and the New Covenant had not fulfilled the prophecy concerning Israel.


Furthermore, as Revelation 11:15 shows, it is yet to be accomplished, and no one would say that Revelation 11:15 referred to pentecost or the start of the New Covenant, it is in the future.


It is not right to say that the Christian church is the complete replacement for Israel and that God is finished with Israel. The following verse proves that:
"For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery, lest you be wise in your own estimation, that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; 26 and thus all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, 'The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will remove ungodliness from Jacob.'” (Rom. 11:25-26).


Romans 11 is clear that Israel and the Church both co-exist together, which continues long after Pentecost and establishment of the New Covenant.


Based on Acts 1:6-7 and Rev 11:15, and Romans 11:25-26, any teaching that the Church has replaced Israel, or that the restoration of Israel has already happened, or already been fulfilled spiritually, is false doctrine.

The Bible teaches that Israel and the Church co-exist together, and then the Church is identified with Israel (all Israel is saved - Rom 11:26), and that Pentecost /New Covenant does not fulfill any of the prophetic types concerning the restoration of Israel, and that the restoration of Israel will be a physical and literal restoration, not a spiritual and symbolic one.

 

[tulsa 2011]

John Gill, the Baptist Calvinist who lived from 1697 to 1771, is useful on topics other than end time Bible prophecy. He tended to follow amillennialism on end time prophecy. But on the fundamentals of the Gospel, his commentaries show what mainstream Christians were taught and believed before the 19th century when dispensationalism began to take over so many denominations.


What Gill says about the meanings of Romans 2: 28-29 indicate that Paul is saying that an "outward Jew" is not now an inward "Jew" as a person who has the Spirit in him and not the letter.


John Gill on Romans 2: 28-29


For he is not a Jew which is one outwardly
"The apostle removes the plea in favour of the Jews, taken from their name and privilege, by distinguishing between a Jew and a Jew, and between circumcision and circumcision: "he is not a Jew which is one outwardly"; by mere name, nature, nation, religion, and profession:"
neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh;
"which takes away the flesh of the foreskin, but not the carnality of the heart; leaves a mark upon the flesh, but no impression on the mind. This is nothing, is not the true, solid, substantial, spiritual circumcision, which only avails in the sight of God."

But he is a Jew which is one inwardly
Who has an internal work of grace upon his soul: who has not only an outward name, but an inward nature; not the law of God in the hand, but in the heart; not an external righteousness only, but internal holiness; and who is not a mere outward court worshipper, but a worshipper of God in Spirit and in truth. The Jews have a F5 saying themselves,

``that whosoever denies idolatry, (ydwhy arqn) , "is called a Jew":''
​

so that, according to them, this is a name that is not confined to themselves, but belongs to all such who truly fear and worship God; and they say, in the same place, that Pharaoh's daughter was called (tydwhy) , "a Jewess", because she denied idolatry, and went down to wash herself from the idols of her father's house. And elsewhere F6,

``that faith does not depend upon circumcision, but upon the heart: he that believes not as he should, circumcision does not make him a Jew; and he that believes as he ought, he indeed is a Jew, though he is not circumcised.''
​

And circumcision is that of the heart;
which God requires, and he himself promises to give, ( Deuteronomy 10:16 ) ( 30:6 ) ( Jeremiah 4:4 ) , upon which last passage, a very noted Jew F7 has this observation, (blh tlm ayh taz) , "this is the circumcision of the heart"; the very phrase the apostle here uses: circumcision of the flesh was typical of this, which lies in a godly sorrow for sin, in a putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, and in renouncing a man's own righteousness in the business of justification. The ancient Jews had some notion of this typical use of circumcision. So Philo the Jew says F8, that circumcision taught (hdonwn kai paywn pantwn ektomhn) , "the cutting off of all pleasures and affections": and elsewhere he says F9: it is a symbol of two things particularly; the one is the cutting off of pleasures, as before; and the other is the removal of arrogancy, that grievous disease of the soul: and in another place F11 he calls purity, or chastity, (peritomhv peritomhn) , "the circumcision of circumcision". Now this our apostle says is in the spirit;
meaning either the spirit or soul of man, which is the seat and subject of it; or the Spirit of God, who is the author of it: the Ethiopic version reads it, "by the Holy Ghost":
and not in the letter;
or "by the letter" of the law; but the Holy Ghost produces this spiritual work instrumentally, by the preaching of the Gospel. To which the apostle adds,
whose praise is not of men, but of God;
referring not to circumcision immediately spoken of before, but to the Jew who is one inwardly: and alludes to the name Judah, from whence the Jews are called, which comes from the word (hdy) , which signifies to "praise"; and intimates here, that such persons must not expect praise from men, who are only taken, with outward things, but from God, who searches and knows the heart.

To understand more of what Gil thought see his comments on Revelation 2: 9.

And [I know] the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are
not;
who asserted themselves to be the true Israel of God, Jews that were so inwardly, regenerate persons, or truly Christians; for the Christians, baptized persons F13, were by the Heathens called Jews; but these were not, they professed Christianity in words, but in works denied it; they were men of bad principles and practices, and both blasphemed the ways and doctrines of Christ themselves, and caused them to be blasphemed by others also; they were false Christians, nominal professors, and shunned persecution for the Gospel; who were not what they would be thought to be: these were the broachers of heresies in this period of time, in which there was a multitude of them, and which chiefly respected the doctrine of the Trinity, and the person of Christ; and they were introducers of Pagan and Jewish rites into the church, and were men of flagitious lives and conversations, and paved the way for the man of sin:
but [are] the synagogue of Satan:
were the children of the devil, imitated him, and were influenced by him, and were the forerunners of antichrist, whose coming was after the working of Satan.
"Jews that were so inwardly, regenerate persons, or truly Christians; for the Christians, baptized persons F13, were by the Heathens called Jews; but these were not, they professed Christianity in words, but in works denied it;"

Gill is talking about Jews, like the Pharisees in Acts 15, who demanded that all Christians must be circumcised in order to be saved. who made Christ their Jewish Messiah, but they denied him and the Christian Gospel because they retained the Old Covenant. Dispensationalists, in more subtle ways, are doing a similar thing. Dispensationalists do not, as far as I know, say that Christians must be circumcised, must celebrate the feast days, etc, or go to Synagogues, as do some Messianic Judaism groups. But followers of John Darby, C.I., Scofield and Lewis S. Chafer honor Old Covenant Israel now as the chosen people - by virtue of their bloodline as the outward Jews in Romans 2: 28-29.

---

---