beloved57
Well-known member
Sure it does. Its all about Salvation, in fact the entire book of Romans is, particular chapters 1-11
ECT Does Romans 9 support Individual Election?
- Thread starter Potter's Clay
- Start date
Sure it does. Its all about Salvation, in fact the entire book of Romans is, particular chapters 1-11
Israel and the BOC are separate entities with separate promises.
THE BOC is never restored because the BOC was never split and cast aside, and therefore needed no promise of restoration.
Paul explains that while Israel has been cast away temporarily, it will be regathered and restored.
During that temporary casting away and being enemies of the gospel, Israel is still GOD's beloved and HIS promises to them remain intact.
If one cannot understand the clear election of national/corporate Israel and the promises made to THEM even when they are unworthy, then no one in the BOC can understand how they can be elected while being unworthy.
And if one cannot count on the sure oath of GOD to elected corporate Israel, then no one can count on the sure oath of GOD to the BOC.
The BOC should not, and CANNOT, boast against Israel.
One just cannot say that GOD's oath to the BOC is reliable if they cannot even trust that the oath to Israel is reliable.
GOD keeps HIS word, no matter what man does.
True and well said! :thumb:
Interplanner
Well-known member
The problem is that the new covenant was with Christ. This is the blindspot of Tam even after 2 years trying. It was between God and Christ, it is eternal (heb 13), it hinges on Christ's performance, and those who are in Christ share in what he accomplished and inherits; hence, co-inheritors. (This would be a different sense from the Jew-Gentile co-inheriting of passages like Eph 3).
It is absolutely clear that the NT is saying this in Gal 3, 4, Rom 4 etc. It never validates the nation of Israel or its DNA as such like this. Only Christ is the access of the new covenant and its benefits. The down payment of these benefits is the Spirit of God for the mission of God. So if you are not busy in those things, you are entirely on the wrong track.
The problem with D'ism ever since it began is that it is trying to resolve two GROUPS. There is no need. The only thing to relate/resolve is Christ and Israel. God is not doing things anymore with Israel, Dan 8-9. But anyone, Jew or Gentile, is involved with God if they are in Christ by faith in him, by reliance on him for justification from sins.
Thus the declarations of D'ism usually end as Tam just did with 'there are two programs' because of the misconception that two groups' roles need to be resolved. That is not the question at all.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Made up.
Both the OT and NT scriptures says the New Covenant was with the house of Israel and the house of Judah.
Jeremiah 31:31 KJV
(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:
Hebrews 8:8 KJV
(8) For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
That is your blind-spot.
Israel is not the BOC.
The BOC is not Israel.
That is your blindspot.
Jesus is the King of Israel.
LA
LA
Interplanner
Well-known member
The same Jeremiah passage announces the arrival of THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. Gee, I wonder why that is at the same time?
Isaiah: 'it is too small a thing for you (the Servant) to bring back the fortunes of Israel; I will make you a covenant for the nations.'
There is no ongoing activity with Israel as a race, a DNA, a nation. It sounds like it in your one fav Hebrews passage, but is obviously beyond it, and the prophets often had to phrase things in a way that THAT nation could use to see the coming worldwide community. You must interp that one fav passage with ALL of Heb 9 because everything about the covenant applies to all believers, and nothing about the LAND is found in ch 9. Those are your set of blind spots. When you are done with ch 9, you can clearly see that there is no ongoing activity just with that nation, and that it is all about the saving or justifying of all mankind through the preaching of the Gospel of Christ.
D'ism does not submit to the NT/apostles. It handles the OT on its own--like Judaism itself. It is closer to 1st century Judaism than it is to the apostles.
Scripture says there is.
The promises to them are all through the Bible.
It's not my favorite.
It is the one in Hebrews that clearly and point blank tells us the answer of whom the New Covenant was made with.
No guesswork or assumption or twisting or ambiguity ------- just point blank gives us the answer.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Translation: unbelief
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
You handle the word deceitfully. What it actually says:
Isaiah 42
6 I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;
1. A covenant of the people (Israel)
2. A light of the Gentiles
Read more,
Isaiah 60
Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee.
2 For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee.
3 And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising.
Thee (singular) is the people. And the Gentiles come to their Light.
All of this is so elementary, but it is no surprise that IP has gotten it convoluted after having consulted 25,519 different commentaries over the past 40 years of his "study".
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Interplanner
Well-known member
/sorry Tam, it's not in the NT and NT history tells you a lot about that. As for Heb 9 commenting on Heb 8, you will not find any interest in the land (that is prob due to what was said in 6). It is about explaining that what Messiah did was already mentioned there in that Jeremiah passage.
Furthermore, as you know hebrews is concerned with the city above and all that, not Judea.
As I have asked you before, you must see that you are rutted in how the thing looked in the OT not how it was meant once Christ came. You have no concept of this NT doctrine. You have the veil. you have no concept of shadow vs reality (which is in Hebrews as well as Paul in Colossians). But you won't admit this. You keep going back tone deaf to OT passages WITHOUT NT comment. You have the right to do that, of course, but you can't be clear or have understanding if you think these things are in the NT.
The reason I'm saying heb 8 is a fav is because it is a huge quote, as line-count goes. But therein lies the risk of going stray from what was important to the NT writer. It is not a new covenant as in 'let's give them another chance.' it is new because Christ is the other party and all things come about and through him and in him, which is the resounding chorus heard when reading Paul. Christ does for Israel and the nations what they cannot do as the other party.
You have to say that your view veers away from how the NT handled things. That's what this is all about. That's why D'ism is actually a neo-Judaism.
Interplanner
Well-known member
If you have Christ saying 'this is the new covenant in my blood for the forgiveness of many' you don't have a contract/pact with Israel, got it? It is that simple, unless you are stuck in the OT. He is offering that because he is accomplishing it. The other part, when Christ speaks, is the Father, not Israel.
Interplanner
Well-known member
I should be saying 9-10 on the interp of 8.
Where is the big plan for Israel in 9:26-28 which is about the END OF THE AGES? It is not even a consideration, yet it is what the new covenant was about.
V26 is about the sacrifice of himself. he does not set up a Judaistic worship system all over again. the passage of the new covenant is about the sacrifice of himself!
Where is the big plan for Israel in 9:26-28 which is about the END OF THE AGES? It is not even a consideration, yet it is what the new covenant was about.
V26 is about the sacrifice of himself. he does not set up a Judaistic worship system all over again. the passage of the new covenant is about the sacrifice of himself!
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:doh:
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
You have no concept of the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven spoken of by the LORD, and how they do not cancel out the promises made beforehand. Believe the prophets. Believe the LORD Jesus, too.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Jer 33 in no way implies that the New Covenant is not with Israel and Judah.
Where do you come up with these things? From which commentary did you glean this pearl?
Right Divider
Body part
He's not satisfied with being unbiblical, he has to proceed to being anti-biblical.