# God's Favoritism of Ethnic Israel



## ClayPot (Jun 10, 2012)

Is there any sense in which God still favors/blesses ethnic Israel over and above other people groups? Galatians 3:28, "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus", so it seems that there is no ethnic favoritism. On the other hand, we have seen the Jewish people preserved through the centuries, and reestablished as a nation (at least in some sense) after they had been destroyed. What are your thoughts?


----------



## AThornquist (Jun 10, 2012)

God favors _His people_, whether Jew or Gentile, over and above other people groups.


----------



## Pergamum (Jun 10, 2012)

You said "ethnic Israel" and not a political nation-state, right?

Your question was in the present tense and not referring to past favors? 

How about future favors per Romans 11?

How about being especially cursed if in unbelief? Will they be cursed above all others for unbelief despite past favors due to sinning against greater light?


----------



## AThornquist (Jun 10, 2012)

I do think that there will be a future revival among ethnic Israel as a remnant is called out, but I'm not sure if I'd called that favoritism.


----------



## reaganmarsh (Jun 11, 2012)

I agree with you, Andrew; a future revival/ingathering of the ethnic Jews is in view in Rom 9-11, but that's not a matter of favoritism. It's a matter of God's effectual calling.


----------



## Pergamum (Jun 11, 2012)

D'Oh....I answered YES to the poll because of my view of Romans 11. If this is NOT favoritism, then I need to retract my answer.


----------



## Loopie (Jun 11, 2012)

I think it is important to keep in mind though that first of all, most Jews in the world live OUTSIDE of the physical nation of Israel. Second of all, it would be very hard to trace the ethnic ancestry of all modern Jews back to the tribes of Israel. Keep in mind that in the middle-ages, the Khazars (who lived in modern-day Ukraine and Kazakhstan) adopted Judaism as their official religion. That is why many Jews (not all) trace their heritage back to Eastern Europe. It has nothing to do with them being the physical descendants of the tribes of Israel, but that their ancestors embraced Judaism as a people back in the 8th century AD. 

Anyways, to answer Pergamum's question it would seem to be true that those who have received greater light, and yet rejected the Son of God, would receive greater condemnation. I am still unsure whether to accept the belief that there will be a mass conversion of the physical nation of Israel, or whether this will refer to all the Jews around the world (or perhaps simply just a worldwide revival, not necessarily just a Jewish one). Romans 11 is difficult for me to fully wrap my mind around. In Romans 11:26 Paul says:

Romans 11:25-26 (NASB) 
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; 
26 and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, "THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION, HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB." 

Honestly it is difficult for me to be sure whether "all Israel will be saved" refers to the ethnic descendants of Abraham, or the spiritual children of Abraham (the Elect). I lean more towards this referring to Abraham's TRUE children, which are the Elect, the spiritual sons and daughters of Abraham. If anyone else has any thoughts or insights, please let me know, so that I do not misinterpret scripture. It just seems like it could not be referring to physical Israel, since there are many Jews who have lived and died between the time of Christ and today. For that reason alone it would be impossible for ALL of the physical descendants of Abraham to be saved. Also, if we view this verse as referring to the physical descendants of Abraham, does that mean that EVERY SINGLE Jew in the future will accept Christ? It seems like the verse only makes sense if 'all Israel' refers to spiritual Israel. Thoughts?


----------



## arapahoepark (Jun 11, 2012)

I said no, however, I felt like it was part yes. Jews will always be around particularly because of Romans 11. However, I don't think ALL will be saved in the Dispensational or postmill way.

So I believe he doesn't favor them because they are Jews and they are still His chosen people today, but at the same time, like many other people, He is preserving them, whether as a nation or ethnicity.


----------



## KMK (Jun 11, 2012)

Define 'ethnic' Israel.

Strimple made a good case that Rom 11 is not about the future, but the present. 

Doctrine of the Holy Spirit - Download free content from Westminster Theological Seminary on iTunes

Listen to 35 and 36


----------



## RyledPiper (Jun 11, 2012)

I can't look at Romans 9 and 11 any other way but see something at least a little bit distinct. Even if only a handful more than average were elect from ethnic Israel, wouldn't there have to be _something?_ I mean, why would Paul even bring it up? That's not to say that the current nation-state of Israel proper is included in that passage. They are very hostile to Christianity. I've seen people take the Israel-worship to a _way_ out-there extreme, including, "Christians" going over to Israel to work in vineyards for free to "fulfill" Isaiah 61:5...

My Postmil father would chastise me severely for voting "yes," but fortunately, he doesn't use the internet (despite being only 60).


----------



## Loopie (Jun 12, 2012)

It is important that we be careful with the phrase 'chosen people'. I mean, there are multiple ways that God has 'chosen' certain people or nations throughout history. Some, like the Amorites, were 'chosen' for destruction, as a demonstration of God's justice. I agree that the physical descendants of Abraham were 'chosen' to receive the inheritance of the land of Canaan. But the modern use of the term 'chosen people' needs to be clarified. Christ's sheep, the Elect, are indeed the 'chosen people' in the sense that God has chosen to bestow upon them saving grace as a demonstration of his love and mercy. 

So when someone refers to modern Jews as God's 'chosen people', I always ask for clarification as to what they mean by that. Certainly the Bible suggests that TRUE Israel does not refer to physical Israel:

Romans 9:6-8 (NASB) 
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.* 

Galatians 3:7 (NASB) 
7 Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham. 

Romans 2:28-29 (NASB) 
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; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God. 

Romans 10:12 (NASB) 
12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; 

Galatians 3:28-29 (NASB) 
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 
29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise. 

Colossians 3:11 (NASB) 
11 a renewal in which there is no distinction between Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and freeman, but Christ is all, and in all.


----------



## schwarzeneggerchia (Jun 29, 2012)

Ah! Im currently on a OT theology paper tracing Gentile election from the OT. 
The issue stems from Paul's use of Hosea's children, to typify Gentile inclusion. However in the context of Hosea, the message was to adulterous Israel. 
What are your views? was the Gentile inclusion contingency? if it is, does it not then give room for Open-Theism? 
If not, how to prove Gentile inclusion as elect in the OT?


----------



## earl40 (Jun 29, 2012)

Pergamum said:


> D'Oh....I answered YES to the poll because of my view of Romans 11. If this is NOT favoritism, then I need to retract my answer.



If God chooses to turn from one ethnic group to another it is (As Bobby Brown used to say) His prerogative. In other words, if God wants to change His intentions or favor twards or away from a group (As McCartny used to say) Let it Be. So I think your first answer of yes may be fine.


----------



## earl40 (Jun 29, 2012)

Loopie said:


> It is important that we be careful with the phrase 'chosen people'. I mean, there are multiple ways that God has 'chosen' certain people or nations throughout history. Some, like the Amorites, were 'chosen' for destruction, as a demonstration of God's justice. I agree that the physical descendants of Abraham were 'chosen' to receive the inheritance of the land of Canaan. But the modern use of the term 'chosen people' needs to be clarified. Christ's sheep, the Elect, are indeed the 'chosen people' in the sense that God has chosen to bestow upon them saving grace as a demonstration of his love and mercy.
> 
> So when someone refers to modern Jews as God's 'chosen people', I always ask for clarification as to what they mean by that. Certainly the Bible suggests that TRUE Israel does not refer to physical Israel:
> 
> ...



Of course history does show the God does indeed appear to show favor to certian ethnic groups such as physical Israel in the OT and Gentiles in the NT. Of course this bias or favor is of His choosing based on His pleasure.


----------



## Loopie (Jun 29, 2012)

Keep in mind Earl that Gentiles are not a specific ethnic group. The Israelites are an ethnic group, very distinct, and set apart from the nations around them. But the term 'Gentiles' refers to everyone else, everyone who is not an Israelite. So which ethnic group does God favor today? English? German? Japanese? The point I am trying to make is that spiritual Israel is God's Elect. It is very true that the physical nation of Israel was set aside as God's people in the Old Testament (and it would seem this was a typology of the church). But now, through the revelation of the New Testament, we can see that God's people (in a redeemed sense) are spiritual Israel, the spiritual children of Abraham. This includes both Jews and Gentiles, and so in this way there is no distinction anymore between Jew and Gentile. 

You are right though that it is always according to God's good pleasure whom he favors. I believe that there was a time when God 'favored' the United States in a sense that God blessed this nation greatly. It wasn't for ethnic reasons though. And that is why we must be careful when we say that today God favors a specific ethnic group, since this suggests that a person's ethnic background grants them special privileges and blessings.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jun 29, 2012)

schwarzeneggerchia said:


> was the Gentile inclusion contingency? if it is, does it not then give room for Open-Theism?
> If not, how to prove Gentile inclusion as elect in the OT?


1) With respect to "contingency," the Bible is full of examples of series of eventualities that are cause-and-effect; a series of which would have been different and have a different conclusion if other human decisions had been made along the way. The free decisions of men are part of the fixed and eternal predestinating decree of God, so that what is contingent in the earthly realm is not contingent from God's foreordination of all things.

2) Having said that, Gentile inclusion is by no means "contingency," in the sense that God first makes an attempt to get the physical seed of Abraham to accept his blessing; and because they refuse him he then retools his plans and pursues the "Gentile option." As Gal.3:8 plainly states, referencing Gen.12:3, so goes Paul's argument: that "Gentile inclusion" belongs to the first issuance of the Promise to Abraham, it isn't an afterthought, and it even stands as the ultimate goal of the Promise, as expressed. We might even say that from the first word God intends to bless the whole earth through the nation of Israel. The biggest apparent "contingency" is that he works around the chosen people's persistent refusal to obey him to that end, which goal he achieves while using their very refusal as the means to saving not only the Gentiles, but the Jews as well.

Further, if election is conceived _primarily_ in a corporate and indistinct way, and in such a way as God may select and then deselect the same entity, _contingent_ upon the presence or absence of faithfulness (even if he then later reselects the same, again with faithfulness as basis)--all this tends to undermine salvation (election) by grace alone, apart from works. Personal election is effectively removed from the discussion of individual salvation, other than once again having a vague, "backstory," _pro nobis_ (for us) feel to it. What's missing is the specific "for me!" aspect.

Corporate election, if it is to have any real analogy to personal salvation, must have constituent individual election. Think of a satellite image of earth. Corporate-electionists would have us conceive of election as a "clear" picture of earth from a million miles away, but the resolution is low; no increase in focus will render particulars with greater clarity, and in fact will distort the picture. To them, this is the design. Personal-election is a high-resolution picture; there's one view that takes in the big picture, and a zoom feature that takes one in close, so that individual features of the whole are themselves revealed as highly detailed microcosms within the big picture. God doesn't merely choose the big-picture, and leave the self-choosers to fill in the "minor collage elements" on his big canvas.

Corporate election is basically meaningless, without individual election. God chooses Abraham's seed, but that election ends up being an election of One Person. Paul points to individuals as being elect (or reprobate), as proof of his comfortable doctrine for believers (discomforting for the faithless). He writes that not all _individuals_ deserve the name "Israel" who have some claim to membership in _corporate_ Israel.

Finally, consider texts such as Ps.87:4-6 & Is.56:3, 6-8.


----------



## schwarzeneggerchia (Jun 29, 2012)

I certainly agree that God individually elects persons, in that He elects people out of every tribe and tongue, etc . . . as much as not all of (Abraham's seed) is Israel.


----------



## KMK (Jun 29, 2012)

schwarzeneggerchia said:


> I certainly agree that God individually elects persons, in that He elects people out of every tribe and tongue, etc . . . as much as not all of (Abraham's seed) is Israel.



Hello, and welcome to the board! Please fix your signature according to board rules.


----------



## schwarzeneggerchia (Jun 29, 2012)

I certainly agree that God individually elects persons, in that He elects people out of every tribe and tongue, etc . . . as much as not all of (Abraham's seed) is Israel.


----------

