# Who are the "Jews"?



## Tirian

This answer to this is one that refuses to coalesce in my mind. Here is where I am at:

The Jews in the OT were of Abrahamic descent. The Jews were followers of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob - this is what made them Jews.

In the NT era, the biblical concept of Jews is lost, particularly after AD70. Followers of the one true God are called *Christians*, or *true Israel* and include not only OT Jews but all who are grafted in.

There are now Israelites (as they have a recognised state) who are of mixed decent. Some people still claim to be Jews, claiming Abrahamic descent. These people are spread throughout the world and tend to recognise themselves primarily as Jews and secondarily by the nationality. e.g. a german Jew.

We must now make a distinction between biblical Jews and modern Jews??? Modern Jews want to claim the land promises of biblical Jews? 

Help!

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## Leslie

You are confusing spiritual and genetic/secular categories. God's chosen people currently are both genetic Jews and Gentiles who believe. God's land promises were made to the genetic Jews; many of them were not spiritual Jews at all.


----------



## Tirian

I would have thought that the land promise foreshadowed a heavenly land (Hebrews 11) and with Christ the earthly type finished. Or do you think that genetic Jews are supported by scripture in claiming modern day Israel?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Tirian

the thought behind that thought is that the land promise was originally to the covenant people called Israel, not genetic Jews at all

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## shoeless

the covenant people called Israel were genetic Jews. Many may have been spiritual as well, but OT Israel was comprised of a mixed community of both genetic Jews and those were both genetic Jews as well as Spiritual


----------



## Bill The Baptist

God promised the land of Canaan to Abraham and his descendants as an _*eternal*_ possession, so unless all that business about the Earth being destroyed by fire is not true, then we must take this as spiritual in nature.


----------



## Peairtach

The Jews are the nation of the Jews, called "Israel after the flesh" by the Apostle in I Corinthians 10. God is committed to always have a remnant of believers among them because of His covenant with Abraham ( Rom 9-11). Gentile believers are engrafted in among the believing Jews to form the Commonwealth of Israel (Eph 2) or Israel of God (Gal 6:16). The whole earth is promised to the Israel of God including the Land of Israel (e.g. Matt 5:5). If God wished to return the Jews to the Land in anticipation of their conversion, as part of His plan for the Israel of God to inherit the earth, that's His will. The realationship of the Jews to the Land has never been unconditional, and in the NT the Land's typological significance has ceased. The Jews are obliged to treat the Arabs in a Christian way according to Christian laws of war, and the Arabs likewise must do the same by the Jews.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Contra_Mundum

It is not insignificant--a roundabout way of saying it is quite relevant--to realize that 
_starting with the household of Abraham himself,_ 
and continuing through the days of the patriarchs going down to Egypt, 
importantly (!) at the occasion of the Exodus and the constitution of the nation Israel at Sinai, 
and then constantly through the subsequent centuries of OT covenant-life,​
the chosen-people were NEVER a "pure-bred" genetic stock. To begin with, Abraham's house was vastly "top-heavy" with covenant-members who were not his children, much of which was surely unrelated (consider Gen.14:14 as an indicator). This situation may have transformed by the time the patriarchs went down into Egypt, but it is by no means certain that the "seventy" souls (Gen.46:27) who constituted the family-core outnumbered servants.

By the time the people leave Egypt, the single family has become a tribal collection. It isn't vital to this observation to determine the precise ratio of genetic/blood relations to marriage relations, or servants, or any other connections; nor how far back any attached person had become connected. It is enough to observe that the divisions known by then as *tribes *perpetuated the family-core ideal, to which was added who-knows-how-many attached persons. What is absolutely critical to understand is that EVERYONE who comes out of Egypt *saved* by the mighty hand of God is constituted into the Twelve Tribes, all of whom swear to the covenant made at Sinai.

The OT people of God were certainly mixed--mixed both genetically and spiritually. Genetically there was a family-core, begun with Abraham then Isaac then Jacob, and then his twelve sons; and with them were extraneous household members. This pattern continued through the Exodus and the national constitution; and it continued throughout the life of the nation as aliens became children of Abraham by faith, and took their place among the ranks of the visible people of God. Given a free-flowing (within the nation) exchange of sons and daughters in marriage, it would be very likely that within two-to-four generations some "blood-link" could be made literally with Abraham and almost any convert, but this is a trivial detail. It is enough that the historic connection between this nation and Abraham was both real, and tied to the covenant-promises.

Spiritually the people were always mixed, since it was possible from the days of Abraham to be a visible member of the community (circumcised in flesh) without being an invisible member (circumcised in heart), ala Ishmael.

Most significant of all is the principle that Abraham really only has ONE SON of absolute importance. That Seed is Christ. The Lord Jesus Christ is the Jew-of-Jews, He is Israel. The NT church has not "replaced" Israel (a people); it is simply a name for the NT people of God, who are either in the Christ/Israel/Vine by an historic relation (to the OT people) or due to some fruitless branches of that stock having been broken off to make room, a wild shoot has been grafted onto the Vine.


Are there still people today who claim either a genetic or a religious (Pharisaic, Talmudic, non-Temple, non-Christian) tie to Abraham and Moses and Judah? Yes, that's just a fact. I don't think there's anything to gain by disputing those folks' desire to be called by the identification they choose. Before the NT is done being written, a distinction is being made between two sets of people who claim Abraham as their father. A difference is being made between those who cling to religious modes that do not recognize fulfillment in Jesus Christ of OT promises made, and those who do. The former cling to the name "Jew," the latter give it up, particularly as the ethnic component of the true faith slips into irrelevance, and national-Jews become a mere component of a trans-national religion.

Today, claiming or adopting Judaism continues to be a religious/cultural move, typically. Some may also use the name as a way of recognizing a portion (whether majority or minority) of their personal heritage.


For believers in Christ, quite apart from any prejudice (an ugly form of collectivism) "there is neither Jew nor Greek" anymore, "but all one in Christ Jesus," Gal.3:28.


----------



## Peairtach

Tirian said:


> Followers of the one true God are called *Christians*, or *true Israel*



The expression "true Israel" is never used by the Apostle. He uses the expression "Israel after the flesh" and the expression "the Israel of God" (i.e. the Israel that truly belongs to God in distinction from the Israel that doesn't't truly belong to God) and indicates that there will always be some of Israel after the flesh among the Israel of God, because of God's commitment to the Abrahamic Covenant.(Rom 9-11)

The expression " true Israel" for the regenerate, or more widely for the visible Church, could be used, as long as we recognise that God isn't "finished with the Jews", and as long as we don't boast against the natural branches that have been (temporarily) cut out i.e. against unconverted Jews (Rom 9-11).


Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Tirian

Peairtach said:


> as long as we recognise that God isn't "finished with the Jews"



but is he "not finished" with the Jews in any way different from being "not finished" with any elect of any nation He has not yet regenerated (eg not born yet)?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Tirian

Contra_Mundum said:


> For believers in Christ, quite apart from any prejudice (an ugly form of collectivism) "there is neither Jew nor Greek" anymore, "but all one in Christ Jesus," Gal.3:28.



Many thanks Rev Buchanan - I have been coming back to ponder your post several times a day as I try to get it to sink in and work through it


----------



## Peairtach

Tirian said:


> Peairtach said:
> 
> 
> 
> as long as we recognise that God isn't "finished with the Jews"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but is he "not finished" with the Jews in any way different from being "not finished" with any elect of any nation He has not yet regenerated (eg not born yet)?
Click to expand...


That's not what the Apostle says in Romans 9-11.

E.g. he calls the unsaved Jews "natural branches" that have been cut off, and says in Romans 11:28-29, "As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance."

We don't have a specific promise that God will always have a remnant among e.g. the Scottish people, although because of the fullsome general promises about the salvation of the nations, we might hope or conclude that; but we do have one respecting the Jews.

Within the church there is no spiritual hierarchy between converted Jews and converted Gentiles, as there was under the Old Testament, but people still retain national and ethnic distinctives. The wall between Gentile believers and Jewish believers that was symbolised by the wall of partition in the Temple, has been knocked down. There is also neither Scots nor American in Christ but that does not mean that these nationalities do not exist side by side in the Church, or lose their identity (Rev.7:9).

See John Murray's commentary on Romans 9-11.

There is a lot of (over) reaction to Dispensationalism in Reformed circles respecting the Jews, because Dispensationalists sometimes (often) go OTT about them; such that on this board, a number of years ago, someone was denying that the Jews even existed, which sounded like a variety of boasting against the natural branches if ever there was one, both those converted natural branches and those unconverted.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## jwithnell

I was thinking of John Murray's commentary on Romans 9-11 as well. For a long time, I had assumed there was no longer a distinction between the physical descendants of Abraham and all others who hear the gospel. Then I heard Romans 11 expounded, studied Mr. Murray's commentary and had to conclude that there will be a future return of some of the physical children of Abraham through the gospel found in Jesus.


----------



## Peairtach

jwithnell said:


> I was thinking of John Murray's commentary on Romans 9-11 as well. For a long time, I had assumed there was no longer a distinction between the physical descendants of Abraham and all others who hear the gospel. Then I heard Romans 11 expounded, studied Mr. Murray's commentary and had to conclude that there will be a future return of some of the physical children of Abraham through the gospel found in Jesus.



Yes.

The important point regarding distinctions is that when a Jew is converted there is spiritual equality between him and the Gentile Christian within the household of God, the Israel of God.

Under the Old Testament this was not the case. Gentile god-fearers were "second-class citizens" because they were uncircumcised, because of the food laws, and because they could not approach God so closely in the Temple, but had to remain in the Court of the Gentiles.

If you wished to enjoy the full spiritual benefits of the ceremonial law and of being a Jew, you had to become a Jew.

These things were done away in Christ (Eph.2)

As regards different people groups and nations, the Lord has different historical courses for them as had been shown by providence, so why should He not reveal something about His plans re the Jews and Gentiles in NT refemptive history in the Book of Romans.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Tirian

Peairtach said:


> We don't have a specific promise that God will always have a remnant among e.g. the Scottish people, although because of the fullsome general promises about the salvation of the nations, we might hope or conclude that; but we do have one respecting the Jews.



As you go on to refer to Rev 7:9 we do have some kind of similar promise to all nations - Paul here is dealing with specific transitional issues entering the Apostolic era. I'm still not convinced this indicates a "special" future blessing for Jews apart from any other nation mentioned in Rev 7:9. It only says that the way is never barred to the elect, even if they belong to a nation once greatly blessed by God who have rejected Him corporately and individually.




Peairtach said:


> There is a lot of (over) reaction to Dispensationalism in Reformed circles respecting the Jews, because Dispensationalists sometimes (often) go OTT about them; such that on this board, a number of years ago, someone was denying that the Jews even existed, which sounded like a variety of boasting against the natural branches if ever there was one, both those converted natural branches and those unconverted.



I agree this kind of thinking does not sit well with scripture - if God saves a miserable man like me He can surely save the elect from any nation, including one which has rejected His Messiah.

Having said that - I'm still not seeing (even having read Murray as you suggested) that the ability to graft in any branch, whether they were originally part of the root or whether they are foreign, is different for one type over another.

When all Israel is saved - we are not suggesting there will be a time when everyone standing on a piece of land in the middle east will simultaneously turn to Christ, quite apart from any other nation?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Tirian

jwithnell said:


> I was thinking of John Murray's commentary on Romans 9-11 as well. For a long time, I had assumed there was no longer a distinction between the physical descendants of Abraham and all others who hear the gospel. Then I heard Romans 11 expounded, studied Mr. Murray's commentary and had to conclude that there will be a future return of some of the physical children of Abraham through the gospel found in Jesus.



I get that - but that is true of every nation in which, by God's gracious covenant, He draws out an saves His elect. Rev 7:9 tells us that - so there is nothing "special" per se about the physical children of Abraham other than Paul is making it clear that we shouldn't write them off...... But then again, we shouldn't do a "Jonah" and write ANY nation off.....


----------



## Tirian

Peairtach said:


> As regards different people groups and nations, the Lord has different historical courses for them as had been shown by providence, so why should He not reveal something about His plans re the Jews and Gentiles in NT refemptive history in the Book of Romans.



That makes sense. No nation is written off in God's economy - even one which trampled on the OT era revelation they had been given. Such is the depth of the grace of our God.


----------



## Peairtach

Tirian said:


> Peairtach said:
> 
> 
> 
> As regards different people groups and nations, the Lord has different historical courses for them as had been shown by providence, so why should He not reveal something about His plans re the Jews and Gentiles in NT refemptive history in the Book of Romans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That makes sense. No nation is written off in God's economy - even one which trampled on the OT era revelation they had been given. Such is the depth of the grace of our God.
Click to expand...


It is wonderful grace and maybe one of the ways our Lord's prayer,"Father forgive them..." was answered. I suppose we might have expected that all the Jews would have been destroyed in AD70, but instead the people were spared and, beyond that, there has always been a believing remnant among them. I also believe that it is promised that as whole they will become a Christian nation in the future, but I know many do not subscribe to that eschatalogical point. It would certainly appear to be a great miracle.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Stephen L Smith

Tirian said:


> and write ANY nation off.....



Except Australia - a convict nation


----------



## Tirian

Stephen L Smith said:


> Originally Posted by Tirian
> and write ANY nation off.....
> Except Australia - a convict nation



haha! Well, somebody will have to do the dishes in heaven..


----------



## Stephen L Smith

Dr Lloyd Jones did a sermon on this. One of his classic Great Doctrines of the Bible series. http://www.mljtrust.org/sermons/gods-plan-for-the-jews/


----------



## Stephen L Smith

Tirian said:


> haha! Well, somebody will have to do the dishes in heaven..


----------



## Andrew P.C.

The only catch to most of what Richard is saying is that you have to have some sort of "Golden Age" view in order to believe that the "physical" Jews will come back to God. Even though most of them, throughout OT history, repeatedly became idolaters. I'm not excluding ALL "physical" Jews, but it's important to keep in mind what Paul wrote 7 chapters previous to Romans 9: "28 For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. 29 But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God." This is why I DO make a distinction between physical and spiritual. There is such thing as a "true Jew" even though scripture doesn't specifically say "true Jew".


----------



## Tirian

Andrew P.C. said:


> for no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. 29 But a Jew is one inwardly



Good observation! This kind of brings me back to my opening post. So throughout all history, true Jews (including now) = "elect of God"


----------



## Peairtach

Remember that Paul himself called the Jews Israel after the flesh; so he's not saying they are not Israel in any sense. There is duality in covenant administrations so that e.g. you can be a Christian by virtue of profession or birth, and yet not have the inward reality. Baptists and others tend to collapse the whole meaning of the covenant into the inward reality, so that if someone isn't a Christian inwardly, he's not a Christian in any sense, or if someone's not a Jew inwardly he's not a Jew in any sense. The New Testament doesn't do this. See e.g. Louis Berkhof's "Systematic Theology" on the "Duality of the Covenant".

I have no problem with a Silver Age; the Golden Age is eternity.The conversion of the Jews doesn't entail logically a Silver Age, although biblically speaking the Apostle indicates that the conversion of the Jews will be associated with great general Gospel blessing.

I don't see how it makes sense to restrict what Paul is saying in Romans 9-11 as applying to a transitional period between when he wrote it and the fall of Jerusalem. How would that work out?


Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## MW

Reflecting on Gal. 3:28, it is observable that there is neither male nor female, yet we still recognise distinct functions for male and female. There is no reason why the statement that there is neither Jew nor Greek should be understood to mean there is no distinct function so far as God's purpose is concerned. Romans 9-11 reveals a different function, and it seems to me that the apostle's language would make no sense if "Israel" were to be interpreted to mean elect Jews and Gentiles. He could have simply said so.


----------



## py3ak

According to WLC 191, in the second petition of the Lord's prayer, one of the things we request is the calling of the Jews. Comparing with 178 and 180 and 184, it would seem that the Larger Catechism would teach us to _desire_ that the Jews to be called, to confidently trust that it will be so, and that it will tend to the glory of God.


----------



## Andrew P.C.

So, this is a bit long, but I think it's an important part of this discussion. I would like to bring Calvin's Commentary on Romans 11 into the equation. Here is what he writes, particularly focusing on verses 25-27.



> 25. I would not, etc. Here he rouses his hearers to a greater attention, while he avows that he is going to declare something that was secret. Nor did he do this without reason; for he wished to conclude, by a brief or plain sentence, a very perplexed question; and yet he declares what no one could have expected. But the words, Lest ye should be proud in yourselves, 361 show what was his designed object; and that was, to check the arrogance of the Gentiles, lest they should exult over the Jews. This admonition was also necessary, lest the defection of that people should immoderately disturb the minds of the weak, as though the salvation of them all was to be forever despaired of. The same is still not less useful to us at this day, so that we may know, that the salvation of the remnant, whom the Lord will at length gather to himself, is hid, sealed as it were by his signet. And whenever a long delay tempts us to despair, let us remember this word mystery; by which Paul clearly reminds us, that the mode of their conversion will neither be common nor usual; and hence they act absurdly who attempt to measure it by their own judgment; for what can be more unreasonable than to regard that as incredible which is far removed from our view? It is called a mystery, because it will be incomprehensible until the time of its revelation. 362 It is, however, made known to us, as it was to the Romans, that our faith may be content with the word, and support us with hope, until the event itself come to light.
> 
> That blindness in part, etc. “In part,” I think, refers not simply to time, nor to the number, but means, in a manner, or in a measure; by which expression he intended, as it seems to me, only to qualify a declaration which in itself was severe. Until does not specify the progress or order of time, but signifies the same thing, as though he had said, “That the fullness of the Gentiles,” etc. The meaning then is, — That God had in a manner so blinded Israel, that while they refused the light of the gospel, it might be transferred to the Gentiles, and that these might occupy, as it were, the vacated possession. And so this blindness served the providence of God in furthering the salvation of the Gentiles, which he had designed. And the fullness of the Gentiles is to be taken for a great number: for it was not to be, as before, when a few proselytes connected themselves with the Jews; but such was to be the change, that the Gentiles would form almost the entire body of the Church. 363
> 
> 26. And so all Israel, etc. Many understand this of the Jewish people, as though Paul had said, that religion would again be restored among them as before: but I extend the word Israel to all the people of God, according to this meaning, — “When the Gentiles shall come in, the Jews also shall return from their defection to the obedience of faith; and thus shall be completed the salvation of the whole Israel of God, which must be gathered from both; and yet in such a way that the Jews shall obtain the first place, being as it were the first-born in God’s family.” This interpretation seems to me the most suitable, because Paul intended here to set forth the completion of the kingdom of Christ, which is by no means to be confined to the Jews, but is to include the whole world. The same manner of speaking we find in Galatians 6:16. The Israel of God is what he calls the Church, gathered alike from Jews and Gentiles; and he sets the people, thus collected from their dispersion, in opposition to the carnal children of Abraham, who had departed from his faith.
> 
> As it is written, etc. He does not confirm the whole passage by this testimony of Isaiah, (Isaiah 59:20,) but only one clause, — that the children of Abraham shall be partakers of redemption. But if one takes this view, — that Christ had been promised and offered to them, but that as they rejected him, they were deprived of his grace; yet the Prophet’s words express more, even this, — that there will be some remnant, who, having repented, shall enjoy the favor of deliverance.
> 
> Paul, however, does not quote what we read in Isaiah, word for word;
> 
> “come,” he says, “shall a Redeemer to Sion, and to those who shall repent of iniquity in Jacob, saith the Lord.” (Isaiah 59:20.)
> 
> But on this point we need not be very curious; only this is to be regarded, that the Apostles suitably apply to their purpose whatever proofs they adduce from the Old Testament; for their object was to point but passages, as it were by the finger, that readers might be directed to the fountain itself.
> 
> But though in this prophecy deliverance to the spiritual people of God is promised, among whom even Gentiles are included; yet as the Jews are the first-born, what the Prophet declares must be fulfilled, especially in them: for that Scripture calls all the people of God Israelites, is to be ascribed to the pre-eminence of that nation, whom God had preferred to all other nations. And then, from a regard to the ancient covenant, he says expressly, that a Redeemer shall come to Sion; and he adds, that he will redeem those in Jacob who shall return from their transgression. 364 By these words God distinctly claims for himself a certain seed, so that his redemption may be effectual in his elect and peculiar nation. And though fitter for his purpose would have been the expression used by the Prophet, “shall come to Sion;” yet Paul made no scruple to follow the commonly received translation, which reads, “The Redeemer shall come forth from Mount Sion.” And similar is the case as to the second part, “He shall turn away iniquities from Jacob:” for Paul thought it enough to regard this point only, — that as it is Christ’s peculiar office to reconcile to God an apostate and faithless people, some change was surely to be looked for, lest they should all perish together.
> 
> 27. And, this is my covenant with them, etc. Though Paul, by the last prophecy of Isaiah, briefly touched on the office of the Messiah, in order to remind the Jews what was to be expected especially from him, he further adds these few words from Jeremiah, expressly for the same purpose; for what is added is not found in the former passage. 365 This also tends to confirm the subject in hand; for what he said of the conversion of a people who were so stubborn and obstinate, might have appeared incredible: he therefore removes this stumblingblock, by declaring that the covenant included a gratuitous remission of sins. For we may gather from the words of the Prophet, — that God would have no more to do with his apostate people, until he should remit the crime of perfidy, as well as their other sins.



I hope this helps.


----------



## MW

Note the way "Israel" is used in Romans 9-11.

9:6, "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:"

9:27, "Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:"

9:31, "But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness."

10:1, "Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved."

10:19, "But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you."

10:21, "But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people."

11:2, "God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,"

11:7, "What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded"

11:25, "For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
11:26, "And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:"

The name is uniformly used of the covenanted nation of Israel in contrast to the Gentiles throughout the passage. It would be very odd if it changed its meaning to include the Gentiles in the resolution of v. 26, especially given the fact that v. 25 continues to distinguish Israel and the Gentiles and v. 26 quotes an Old Testament text which is immediately connected with the covenanted nation.


----------



## One Little Nail

Stephen L Smith said:


> Tirian said:
> 
> 
> 
> and write ANY nation off.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except Australia - a convict nation
Click to expand...


but were The Great Southland of The Holy Spirit, its all written down there in The Book,right , isn't it?


----------



## Andrew P.C.

armourbearer said:


> Note the way "Israel" is used in Romans 9-11.
> 
> 9:6, "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:"
> 
> 9:27, "Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:"
> 
> 
> The name is uniformly used of the covenanted nation of Israel in contrast to the Gentiles throughout the passage. It would be very odd if it changed its meaning to include the Gentiles in the resolution of v. 26, especially given the fact that v. 25 continues to distinguish Israel and the Gentiles and v. 26 quotes an Old Testament text which is immediately connected with the covenanted nation.



I am curious as of how this can be so, given that it would be contradictory of Paul to say, "They are not all physical Jews which are of Physical Jews". This wouldn't make sense. There is a contrast in that passage. The first Israel is not the second. So when you say "uniformly", I would have to disagree and so would Calvin. John Calvin writes this regarding the use of Israel in verse 6 of Chapter 9:


> But when he says, that all who are of Israel are not Israelites, and that all who are of the seed of Abraham are not children, it is a kind of change in the meaning of words, (παρονομασία); for in the first clause he includes the whole race, in the second he refers only to true sons, who were not become degenerated.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade

A few thoughts here . . . to take exception to a small portion of Pastor Bruce’s excellent post (#8), some folks do falsely claim title to the name Israel (such as the state with that name) without warrant, for as Paul said, “they are not all Israel, which are of Israel... but the children of the promise are counted for the seed” (Rom 9:6, 8).

I see no promise in Scripture that a massive return of ethnic Jews to Messiah will occur at the age’s end, though there has indeed been a massive (could one but see) return throughout the NT church age, myself being one.

Richard, remember, when Paul used the term “Israel after the flesh” the temple was still standing, so there was such a nation albeit renegade against the Giver of that name to Jacob; nay, not only renegade but traitor complicit with the arch-demon to murder the Giver. No longer was it true of the apostate nation regarding the name given, “Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men” (Gen 32:28), rather Ichabod. Then the temple was destroyed and the nation disbanded and scattered. An imposter resides in the land of Palestine. Why is it there? It may be a threshing floor unto judgment, or blessing, or both – I do not know.

It has been said of this nation, “the State of Israel”, that it is “a one-bomb nation”, meaning only one nuclear detonation would be sufficient to utterly eradicate it from the face of the earth, unlike the United States, which would need many hundreds – or even a couple of thousands – of megatons to so eradicate it. In the days to come nothing is so “sacred” as to be untouchable, not even God’s elect nation, of which it is written we shall be “hated of all men” (Matt 10:22; 24:9), and “For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter” (Rom 8:36) – so there is no guarantee whatsoever as to the continuance of the apostate nation.

As for the genuine Israel – who only is Christ Jesus, and all those who are in Him – even today they are slaughtered, women (grandmas and little girls included), children, old men and boys, pastors and elders, in many countries around the world; there the “problem of Christians” (the Israel of God) is being “solved” by the arch-fiend, and it is coming to the West quickly. Our women have cause to be afraid of the teaching and preaching of Revelation – we have become so soft and complacent a church – but it is the cost we must daily count in Muslim, Hindu, Communist, &etc countries; they know that to name Christ may be to seal a death warrant.

Remember what Paul said, “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh” (Rom 1:28; cf Jer 9:25-26). We do better hearkening to God’s naming than man’s.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## Stephen L Smith

One Little Nail said:


> but were The Great Southland of The Holy Spirit, its all written down there in The Book,right , isn't it?



I think I have outwitted you my Aussie friend. Southland is a province of New Zealand. No State of Australia is called Southland. Correct?


----------



## Scott1

This is a somewhat perplexing question and I too am reading these posts thinking this through, particularly post#8.

It is striking that at the time of our Lord, the northern Kingdom of Israel had long ago split off and been absorbed into the Assyrian empire and was so intermixed with gentiles, the Assyrians, that the Samaritans were already not considered Jewish by the Israelites of our Lord's Day. Yet, they were perhaps 50/50 Jew and Gentile, with many variations. And their religion was a mixture of Judaism and paganism of the Gentiles. And the Jews had no dealings with them. (John 4:9).

Yet, in our time, people who ostensibly have less than 50% Jewish blood sometimes consider themselves Jewish. One famous American politician had one cousin who if purely Jewish would have made them about 1/7 Jewish proclaimed themselves Jewish at an opportune time in their political career.

I think that while the Jewish people have always been greatly mixed, and are very much so today, there still is enough of an ethnic and cultural identity to be called a separate people, one who God is dealing with. Not the only one, certainly not the center of His attention now that Christ has gone to the nations in accordance with the plan from the beginning, yet one people nonetheless.

In this lies the grain of truth in dispensationalism but also its giant structural error. It's why dispensationalism is off base.

When the New Testament refers to Israel it is referring to spiritual Israel, Jews and Gentiles sometimes, and in other places, it refers to a people who still retain an ethnic and cultural identity.

It also strikes me that that the animosity toward them today, even through their pride, hypocrisy, etc. is really a strike at God because of the legacy of His dealing with them as a nation in the past. That's why we must somehow, be supportive of them as a people, imperfect even as that description may be.

And be grateful for what God did among them.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade

I think what you say is true, Scott. We must be supportive of ethnic Jewry, and of the Jewish state, while, on the one hand decrying its injustices, and on the other reminding it of its illustrious past and forsaken heritage, which may indeed be regained.

We should recall what Paul also said, "salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them [the Jews] to jealousy" (Rom 11:11), and how is that? To talk of the new temple of living stones, the High Priest who cleanses with His own shed blood (the true Passover Lamb), the last and true exodus from slavery (to sin and guilt, eternal misery, the oppression of men, the fear of pain and death, of needless suffering), and the approaching – yet commencing and present even today! – celebration in the temple at the Glory, the Shekinah, returned upon the people of God by the presence of the King, mighty Messiah Yeshua who shall tread down the nations of the wicked who love not God and despoil His earth and children.

There are likely many among ethnic Jewry with ears to hear and hearts to understand that the old Law and temple service were typical of a genuine and pure spiritual worship to be revealed by Messiah in His prophesied New Covenant in the latter days. That the foretold glory of Israel has been bestowed upon even Gentiles who bow the knee to the greater Son of King David, and that this King is preparing New Jerusalem upon New Earth so that we may have fellowship not only with the OT saints, but with God Himself through Messiah – such a report may well make many a Jew take thought, and for a godly jealousy to obtain the glory lost in an ancient betrayal, to return in repentance with joy, as it is written,
*Zechariah 12:10; 13:1* And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn. . .

In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.​ 
This may well have happened already in Acts 2:36-37 upon Peter’s preaching to the great crowd in Jerusalem, but I do not see it impossible the LORD will again pour forth the spirit of grace and supplications, and give to see Him whom they pierced, that they may have faith and repentance unto eternal life.

They _are_ my people after the flesh, and I desire this for them, whosoever will.


----------



## MW

Andrew P.C. said:


> I am curious as of how this can be so, given that it would be contradictory of Paul to say, "They are not all physical Jews which are of Physical Jews". This wouldn't make sense. There is a contrast in that passage. The first Israel is not the second. So when you say "uniformly", I would have to disagree and so would Calvin. John Calvin writes this regarding the use of Israel in verse 6 of Chapter 9:
> 
> 
> 
> But when he says, that all who are of Israel are not Israelites, and that all who are of the seed of Abraham are not children, it is a kind of change in the meaning of words, (παρονομασία); for in the first clause he includes the whole race, in the second he refers only to true sons, who were not become degenerated.
Click to expand...


Granted 9:6 is referring to an election within Israel and 9:27 to remnant Israel, it still requires a limitation to the covenanted nation and cannot in any sense be extended to include Gentiles. The point remains valid that to make "all Israel" include Gentiles in the last reference requires a sense which is at variance with the use of the name throughout chapters 9-11.


----------



## NB3K

Wouldn't the old testament Jews simply be the shadow of the Church. With the Church in it. But as a nation according to the flesh God has given her a decree of divorce because she has not held her part of the covenant at Mt. Sinai.


----------



## Peairtach

> Wouldn't the old testament Jews simply be the shadow of the Church. With the Church in it. But as a nation according to the flesh God has given her a decree of divorce because she has not held her part of the covenant at Mt. Sinai.



The midwall of partition between believing Jews and Gentiles is broken down, and Gentile believers are no longer second class citizens in God's Kingdom and Church. The ceremonial system and Temple are at an end, along with the theocracy.

But the New Testament Jews who believe are the believing remnant of the Old Testament Jews, and they are joined by believing Gentiles to form the Church (the Israel of God).

Part of the message of Romans 9-11 is that God in His great mercy has not utterly forsaken the Jews otherwise (a) Why do they still exist? (b) Why is there a believing remnant among them and promised to be among them?

Some people here have said the Jews are difficult to identify, but is that not also the case for the Scots, Americans or Australians?

They are not the special nation in the same way that they they were, but they have that historical and covenantal link to the Patriarchs and to Christ.

God has also promised to have a remnant of true Israel among them. 

The Gentiles in Christ are engrafted in among the believing remnant of Israel, to form the Church, the Israel of God.

Dispensationalism on the other hand teaches that the Jews and the Church are separate and distinct with different divine plans for both.


----------



## Tirian

Peairtach said:


> They are not the special nation in the same way that they they were, but they have that historical and covenantal link to the Patriarchs and to Christ.



Those covenantal promises are true only in Christ though, so nationally this is no longer relevant. The covenant promises were always with the church, as represented by one nation in the previous dispensation, and no longer limited to any one nation in the current. That God has or will save a remnant from the previous should come as no surprise but should not direct us in any particular way now in terms of revere, preferential pastoral/financial care or evangelism.


----------



## Peairtach

> That God has or will save a remnant from the previous should come as no surprise but should not direct us in any particular way now in terms of revere, preferential pastoral/financial care or evangelism.



I would have to disagree. Although it's clear from the Apostle Paul's teaching in Romans 9-11 that God will always have His believing people among the Jews as part of His covenantal commitment, it is in a sense surprising when we think of the events of the first century, and their rejection of Christ - as a whole - nationally.

The Apostle doesn't indicate that we should revere them, in the sense of thinking they're wonderful people merely because they're Jewish, in the same way that we think (or don't think) our brothers and sisters in Christ - Jewish or Gentile - are wonderful people. 

But the Apostle still says that they are beloved for the sake of the fathers, and devoted some space in the Book of Romans under the inspiration of God to lay out the Jews' place vis-a-vis the Gentiles in NT redemptive history.

Of course there has been a severe and maybe understandable reaction to Dispensationalism in some Reformed circles in America and elsewhere to the idea that God has any particular plans for the Jews via-a-vis the Gentiles. 

Clearly the Apostle was misinterpreted by many of the pre-Dispensationalist Reformers and Puritans. See e.g."The Puritan Hope" by Iain Murray



Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Scott1

Very helpful.

A few thoughts below.





Peairtach said:


> The midwall of partition between believing Jews and Gentiles is broken down, and Gentile believers are no longer second class citizens in God's Kingdom and Church. The ceremonial system and Temple are at an end, along with the theocracy.
> 
> But the New Testament Jews who believe are the believing remnant of the Old Testament Jews, and they are joined by believing Gentiles to form the Church (the Israel of God).
> 
> This makes sense, particularly in light of Galatians 6:16.
> 
> Part of the message of Romans 9-11 is that God in His great mercy has not utterly forsaken the Jews otherwise (a) Why do they still exist? (b) Why is there a believing remnant among them and promised to be among them?
> 
> That makes sense in light of a difficult to understand context here in Romans.
> 
> Some people here have said the Jews are difficult to identify, but is that not also the case for the Scots, Americans or Australians?
> 
> The identity of Jews is, I think, unique in world history in both quantity (length) and quality (identity, sometimes for persecution's sake). Small in number, like the Scots in that way, but with a recorded history and identity to the present unlike them. Certainly unlike the "Johnny come lately" Americans. (Of which I am proud to be one).
> 
> They are not the special nation in the same way that they they were, but they have that historical and covenantal link to the Patriarchs and to Christ.
> 
> Yes, and that what was I was thinking above. They do have an historical and covenantal link unlike any other.
> 
> And we know,
> God did it.
> 
> God has also promised to have a remnant of true Israel among them.
> 
> My understanding is Mr. Edwards thought it would be the nation broadly speaking, Mr. Calvin thought it would be a remnant, however large or small that might be.
> 
> The Gentiles in Christ are engrafted in among the believing remnant of Israel, to form the Church, the Israel of God.
> 
> Dispensationalism on the other hand teaches that the Jews and the Church are separate and distinct with different divine plans for both.
> 
> Yes, and this is huge error because it affects the way we view the whole of Scripture. Dispensationalism is an artificial system imposed, as it were, from the mind of the creature, upon God's overall plan to redeem a people from every tribe, nation, kindred and tongue which initially involved a covenant people, Israel, as a vehicle toward that glorious end.



Very insightful post, Richard.

Thank you.


----------



## Peairtach

*Scott*


> God has also promised to have a remnant of true Israel among them.
> 
> 
> 
> My understanding is Mr. Edwards thought it would be the nation broadly speaking, Mr. Calvin thought it would be a remnant, however large or small that might be.
Click to expand...


I myself relatively confidently believe that the passage teaches that at some point the Jewish nation as a whole will embrace Christ, but some don't see that there, so I was limiting myself to what could be more easily agreed among us i.e. that God has allowed the Jewish people to continue in existence, and that the Apostle here promises that there will always be at least a small part of them who are of the Israel of God, the Church.


----------



## One Little Nail

Peairtach said:


> *Scott*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> God has also promised to have a remnant of true Israel among them.
> 
> 
> 
> My understanding is Mr. Edwards thought it would be the nation broadly speaking, Mr. Calvin thought it would be a remnant, however large or small that might be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I myself relatively confidently believe that the passage teaches that at some point the Jewish nation as a whole will embrace Christ, but some don't see that there, so I was limiting myself to what could be more easily agreed among us i.e. that God has allowed the Jewish people to continue in existence, and that the Apostle here promises that there will always be at least a small part of them who are of the Israel of God, the Church.
Click to expand...


that seems to be be my understanding of it, that a large portion or even a national repentance which seems more likely will
occur, though the only problem seems to be a matter of timing,

can I suggest that it will occur at or immediately preceding The Second Coming of The Lord Jesus Christ,
if the coming of The Lord mentioned in 2 Thess 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, is the bona fide Second Coming & not just a general judgment coming like AD70 Jerusalem was (Matt 24) 

then it will mean a fulfilment of an Old Testament Prophecy Zechariah 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn,
which seems to be hinted at here in Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. if this be 
The Glorious Appearance of Our Great God,& Saviour then it will be at the 2nd Coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ that this
national repentance & awakening of the Jews will occur as the Text seems to suggest.


----------



## MW

I believe Romans 11 is providing a missionary vision rather than a programme of events. Difficulty in interpretation arises over our failure to perceive that the normal state of affairs for ourselves were still in process of development in the NT. The apostle's eschatology is often doing nothing more than explaining the process towards full Gentile inclusion which we now take for granted. In Romans 11 the movement in the unfolding purpose of God from Jew to Gentile is explained so as to ensure that the hardening of the Jews is not perceived by the Romans as if God had for ever cast them off or that there was no mercy for them in the Gospel.


----------



## KMK

armourbearer said:


> In Romans 11 the movement in the unfolding purpose of God from Jew to Gentile is explained so as to ensure that the hardening of the Jews is not perceived by the Romans as if God had for ever cast them off or that there was no mercy for them in the Gospel.



This would jibe well with the way Paul seems to weave back and forth between his Gentile and Jewish readers in Rome.


----------



## Peairtach

One Little Nail said:


> Peairtach said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Scott*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> God has also promised to have a remnant of true Israel among them.
> 
> 
> 
> My understanding is Mr. Edwards thought it would be the nation broadly speaking, Mr. Calvin thought it would be a remnant, however large or small that might be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I myself relatively confidently believe that the passage teaches that at some point the Jewish nation as a whole will embrace Christ, but some don't see that there, so I was limiting myself to what could be more easily agreed among us i.e. that God has allowed the Jewish people to continue in existence, and that the Apostle here promises that there will always be at least a small part of them who are of the Israel of God, the Church.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that seems to be be my understanding of it, that a large portion or even a national repentance which seems more likely will
> occur, though the only problem seems to be a matter of timing,
> 
> can I suggest that it will occur at or immediately preceding The Second Coming of The Lord Jesus Christ,
> if the coming of The Lord mentioned in 2 Thess 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, is the bona fide Second Coming & not just a general judgment coming like AD70 Jerusalem was (Matt 24)
> 
> then it will mean a fulfilment of an Old Testament Prophecy Zechariah 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn,
> which seems to be hinted at here in Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. if this be
> The Glorious Appearance of Our Great God,& Saviour then it will be at the 2nd Coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ that this
> national repentance & awakening of the Jews will occur as the Text seems to suggest.
Click to expand...


I tend to believe that there will be a Jewish national conversion long before the end of the age which will be associated with great Gospel blessing for the Gentiles, even greater blessing than has been experienced in the 2,000 years since their general apostasy. If the conversion of the Jews happened at the end there would be no time for this blessing to be outworked in history.

I don't really see how II Thessalonians 2:8 is relevant since that is talking about Antichrist. The two issues don't logically relate or impinge on one another.

Hypothetically speaking, the Papacy could fall before the conversion of the Jews, or long outlast the conversion of the Jews even to the end of the world.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## MW

Peairtach said:


> I don't really see how II Thessalonians 2:8 is relevant since that is talking about Antichrist. The two issues don't logically relate or impinge on one another.



I take it that the man of sin passage is dealing with essentially the same "mystery" of reconstitution, but looked at from the perspective of "iniquity" rather than "salvation."


----------



## Mushroom

> Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: (29) *But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly*; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.


Doesn't this mean that we are Jews, that are of the priesthood of believers?


----------



## One Little Nail

Peairtach said:


> One Little Nail said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peairtach said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Scott*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> God has also promised to have a remnant of true Israel among them.
> 
> 
> 
> My understanding is Mr. Edwards thought it would be the nation broadly speaking, Mr. Calvin thought it would be a remnant, however large or small that might be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I myself relatively confidently believe that the passage teaches that at some point the Jewish nation as a whole will embrace Christ, but some don't see that there, so I was limiting myself to what could be more easily agreed among us i.e. that God has allowed the Jewish people to continue in existence, and that the Apostle here promises that there will always be at least a small part of them who are of the Israel of God, the Church.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that seems to be be my understanding of it, that a large portion or even a national repentance which seems more likely will
> occur, though the only problem seems to be a matter of timing,
> 
> can I suggest that it will occur at or immediately preceding The Second Coming of The Lord Jesus Christ,
> if the coming of The Lord mentioned in 2 Thess 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, is the bona fide Second Coming & not just a general judgment coming like AD70 Jerusalem was (Matt 24)
> 
> then it will mean a fulfilment of an Old Testament Prophecy Zechariah 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn,
> which seems to be hinted at here in Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. if this be
> The Glorious Appearance of Our Great God,& Saviour then it will be at the 2nd Coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ that this
> national repentance & awakening of the Jews will occur as the Text seems to suggest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I tend to believe that there will be a Jewish national conversion long before the end of the age which will be associated with great Gospel blessing for the Gentiles, even greater blessing than has been experienced in the 2,000 years since their general apostasy. If the conversion of the Jews happened at the end there would be no time for this blessing to be outworked in history.
> 
> I don't really see how II Thessalonians 2:8 is relevant since that is talking about Antichrist. The two issues don't logically relate or impinge on one another.
> 
> Hypothetically speaking, the Papacy could fall before the conversion of the Jews, or long outlast the conversion of the Jews even to the end of the world.
Click to expand...


Old Testament Prophecies are taken by The New Testament writers and given their proper interpretation, what I was trying to say here was that I believe the Zechariah 12:10 was given its true interpretation by The Apostle John by his use of the term pierce,in Revelation 1:7.

what I was speculating was whether the, cometh with the clouds, Rev 1:7 & ,the brightness of his coming, II Thess 2:8 was the Second Coming of The Lord Jesus Christ or just a coming in judgment,believing as I do that these 2 comings were one & the same event,

when you mentioned that the conversion of the jews was to be be associated with great Gospel blessing for the Gentiles, 
you helped me remember that I was looking for that particular verse myself the other day & had forgotten,
as I believed that was its proper interpretation myself, this being its Post-Millennial interpretation! 
it is Romans 11:15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

this interpretation is a spiritualising of the text , for the statement "life from the dead?" can refer to none other than the Resurrection of the Dead, and also "what shall the receiving of them be" denotes the calling of the jews does it not?

so this national calling of the jews "what shall the receiving of them be" is concurrently connected with the " life from the dead" or
Resurrection of the Dead, as the text seems to suggest which meshes with the previous statement in Rev 1:7 they that pierced 
him shall see him or as Zechariah says they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, a seeing of & a looking upon denotes an evangelical faith response of the jews upon The Lord Jesus Christ the pierced one Psalm 22:16, while a mourning for him assumes an evangelical repentance unto life, does it not & Behold, he cometh with clouds; would speak 
of his Second Coming would it not?

so to sum up it,it is my belief that the previous Scriptures that have been quoted point to a national awakening of the jews 
at or immediately prior to The 2nd Coming of Our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ.


----------



## Tirian

One Little Nail said:


> so to sum up it,it is my belief that the previous Scriptures that have been quoted point to a national awakening of the jews
> at or immediately prior to The 2nd Coming of Our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ.



So these Jews are Jews because they can trace their genetics back to Abraham? If, God forbid, there was a Tsunami that wiped out all but 10 people that actually had that genetic descent saw Christ and mourned and converted when Christ returns - would that fulfil that scripture as you see it?


----------



## Tirian

Mushroom said:


> Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: (29) But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
> Doesn't this mean that we are Jews, that are of the priesthood of believers?



I think so. Does that mean we can start settling in Palestinian territory? (That is an obscure way of asking what to do with the land promises)


----------



## Peairtach

Mushroom said:


> Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: (29) *But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly*; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't this mean that we are Jews, that are of the priesthood of believers?
Click to expand...


Yes. Jews and Gentiles who believe in Christ are truly Jews, according to the Apostle speaking under inspiration. But that does not mean that for the Apostle, equally speaking under inspiration, the apostate natural branches, the part of the Jewish nation that doesn't believe, ceases to exist, otherwise he wouldn't distinguish them as natural branches against which Gentile believers should not boast.


----------



## MW

The phrase, "to the Jew first," literally means what it says. While it is possible to extend the meaning so as to make it applicable to the visible church now that the Jews are no longer regarded as a covenant nation, in its natural context it indicates that there was still a distinction so far as the purpose of God and the apostolic witness was concerned. This would also be the case in relation to the statement relative to the inward and outward Jew. The terms must be understood in their historic context. While they can be extended to the condition of the visible church now, they must be interpreted according to their original ethnic significance when seeking to understand the specific meaning of the Epistle.


----------



## One Little Nail

Tirian said:


> One Little Nail said:
> 
> 
> 
> so to sum up it,it is my belief that the previous Scriptures that have been quoted point to a national awakening of the jews
> at or immediately prior to The 2nd Coming of Our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So these Jews are Jews because they can trace their genetics back to Abraham? If, God forbid, there was a Tsunami that wiped out all but 10 people that actually had that genetic descent saw Christ and mourned and converted when Christ returns - would that fulfil that scripture as you see it?
Click to expand...


It seems difficult to determine who the real Jews after the flesh are, there definitely is that spiritual/ physical Jew distinction were true believers Jew or gentile are true spiritual Jews , I've had this discussion with bob Mendelssohn of Jews for Jesus fame & said to him basically because we are in NT times that Gentiles who become Jews now for instance or during this economy arent real jews, like the Ashkenazi Jews as there of pure gentile stock, though while the Older Testament was in operation a gentile could/would be ingrafted upon believing,
but now that we're in the Christian Testament & Dispensation I don't think this rings true,
Though this is not gospel on my part & I'm willing to change that view if I can be shown from the Scriptures.

Regardless amongst the physical Jews of today there does exist the Jew after the flesh, the true physical jew who has yet to inheret the promises of national conversion.

So if there were only ten Jews left after a tsunami,
well I knew this woman who had a husband then he died & she married another, he also died,she also had 5 other husbands who all likewise died before her so at The Resurrection who's wife shall she be? 
You question is abit like that, Matt, God is Sovereign & his Promises are yea & amen in Christ, His will cannot be thwarted
There are no hypotheticals with God He has ordained everything after the counsel of His will & it shall come to pass


----------



## One Little Nail

Tirian said:


> I think so. Does that mean we can start settling in Palestinian territory? (That is an obscure way of asking what to do with the land promises)



If you like anyplace has got to be better than Victoria haha


----------



## Peairtach

Tirian said:


> Mushroom said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: (29) But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
> Doesn't this mean that we are Jews, that are of the priesthood of believers?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think so. Does that mean we can start settling in Palestinian territory? (That is an obscure way of asking what to do with the land promises)
Click to expand...


Re the question of the Land, although that may merit a separate thread, it is clear from various New Testament Scriptures that Jews and Gentiles who believe in Christ are in the process of inheriting the whole Earth, including Israel and Palestine. This will not be fully and completely and truly realised until the Eschaton, but is partially realised now.

If God in His Providence wishes to have some believing Jews and Arabs in that part of the world, then that will be, and is, the case. 

Even under the typological Old Testament period, the Land promises to the Jews weren't unconditional. Even less so in the NT when the Land has lost its special typological staus, apart from the fact it is special as the historical homeland of the Jews, and where our Saviour lived.

The tensions between Jews and Arabs, and between believing Jews and Arabs, in that part of the world must be resolved ultimately politically, providing the needed peace and security for both sides.

Theology has precious little to do with it, and even if lots of Jews and Arabs were converted in that corner of the world, it might or might not move things on politically very much.


----------

