Spiritual Israel not "Real Israel" is a doctrine of Demons!

Epoisses

New member
Fact...

All second coming prophecies revolve around "Earthly" Israel and Middle Eastern Geography. If you haven't studied this... you become an easy dupe.

Fact...

There's a reason that many Jews rejected Christ! The Messianic prophecies were partially fulfilled.

They were expecting a liberating Messiah of Earthly Israel... Gee... I wonder why?

#Scripture

The book of Revelation was written to the church. All references to Israel have a spiritual application. There are many Jewish symbols applied to the seven churches from the golden candlesticks to the pillars in the temple to the golden manna and on and on. You're deceived worship the flesh of some people in the holy land.
 

Epoisses

New member
Replacement Theology) drones are spinning, "spiritual"izing of scripture has introduced the heresy of "Replacement" theology. That is why there is so much confusion in the body, when the clear and plain word must be spinned, with words such as "figurative," performing more contortions, back flips, than a woman's gym team, to make it fit. Right dividing the word of truth,is the answer, and is commanded, as well as recognizing the authority of Paul's message and ministry. REPYS make a mockery of the OT promises to the believing remnant of the nation Israel, God's chosen nation, "elect" for service. And there is NADA anyone can do about that-NADA, despite blusterings, objections, snorts, grunts, flipping the bird at God the Father, and His Christ, and being thiefs, robbers.



REPYS tear Romans through Philemon right out of the Holy Bible. At a minimum, they marginalize this section of scripture that applies to today, and would rather pretend they are somehow a warmed over Israel, including "dissing" the land promises. To them, Gen 1:1 KJV reads:

"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth, but the earth is just a bunch of dirt which 'the' Church now owns."

And thus, REPYS, most/many(?) members of the boc, alleged "Christian" denominations, are preaching the gospel of the kingdom, because, of course, according to them, EVERYTHING IS THE SAME,=one "the gospel", one "the Church", "the Church"="Israel", one baptism(I counted 12), land to Israel=their home...............

Tell us, please....How can someone be a co-heir with their King? Oh, "heirs with God", "co-heirs with Christ"=subjects of a king! Right. But then again, to REPYS, everything is the same. Right.

Thiefs, robbers....Every last one of them


For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 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. Rom. 2:28,29

Idiot!!
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
Lets break down what 'semitism' is, and what it is not.

It is not a race, it is a culture.

It is the culture of the Jews and Arabs.

It is a culture of Abrahamic origin, despite that

it is not a culture of Christianity

It is a culture against Christianity


'Anti-Semitism' is an outdated word. In fact, it was never really legitimate in the first place- it seemed to have been ushered in around the late 80's and into the 90's, and has since faded out the same way it came in.

People have began to rediscover the reality with 'semitism', with 9/11 and the liberal reaction thereafter revealing all. 'Anti-semitism' is simply being a conservative Christian, and lo and behold, the Left also calls conservative Christians racist, sexist, homophobic, and all matter of things which have lost their effect just the same :rolleyes:

And
It is called ̷R̷e̷p̷l̷a̷c̷e̷m̷e̷n̷t̷ Covenant Theology. MADists call it something different because they can't deal with the fact of what it actually is- it's hard to be seen as having a legitimate standing when opposing the concept of a universal covenant :wave2:


And before you cry foul and whine... what was this about? Did this not happen? Your lack of understanding of any history outside of the reformation astounds me.

#Another fail post.
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
The book of Revelation was written to the church. All references to Israel have a spiritual application. There are many Jewish symbols applied to the seven churches from the golden candlesticks to the pillars in the temple to the golden manna and on and on. You're deceived worship the flesh of some people in the holy land.

Fact... The book of revelation is a rehash of Old Testament prophecies.

Big example Zechariah and Joel

Fact... #You are a western Eschatology drone.
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
I can't see your Esau analogy. To Esau belonged the birthright. Esau sold the birthright. In what sense (in the dispensational framework) did the birthright EVER belong to the church?

Physical Israel IS Spiritual Israel? Is that what you are saying?

Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
*And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
*For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
*Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
*Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
*Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
*But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

Galatians 3:16-22
*


Literal Israel IS Spiritual Israel? Really?

*For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
*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.

Romans 2:28-29

So... I'm full scale laying into the Demon Doctrine many Love to learn and teach...

Leaning in and whispering... "you're welcome"

As the scripture above in Galatians says, God always has had one Israel in view. The natural Israel was to show His power and glorify Himself - they were, after all, the least of all peoples. But to them belonged the covenants and the giving of the scriptures. So they were honored IN SPITE of who they were. The church is no different. That's why Paul says the promise is (and always has been) to all those who come to Him in faith through Jesus Christ (whether Jew or Gentile).

Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
*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:
*But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
*For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
*Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
*And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:

Ephesians 2:11-16

Well played... you have me on multiple fronts...

I will respond within 2 days...

As the scripture above in Galatians says, God always has had one Israel in view. The natural Israel was to show His power and glorify Himself - they were, after all, the least of all peoples. But to them belonged the covenants and the giving of the scriptures. So they were honored IN SPITE of who they were. The church is no different. That's why Paul says the promise is (and always has been) to all those who come to Him in faith through Jesus Christ (whether Jew or Gentile).

Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
*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:
*But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
*For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
*Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
*And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:

Ephesians 2:11-16

Yup...is why it behooves us to be more like Him and live more like Him then less...staying true to what His will wants of us and not the traditions of man that did replace His...to be like His people as Stephen called them "the church in the wilderness"...

Heathen in a spiritual context would be all those with uncircumcised hearts.

For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 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. Rom. 2:28,29

The flesh profits nothing only the new birth. Jews and Gentiles can both be born again.

For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 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. Rom. 2:28,29

Idiot!!

Ok...

The Galatians verbiage has nothing to do with replacement of Earthly Israel. It is about Paul preventing the gospel from being mixed with the old covenant.

The utilization of circumcision and the Sarai and Hagar analogies are to assert that the Body of Christ must rely solely on Jesus and Not the 613 commandments.

The reasserted verbiage in Romans about the "inner" Jew relates to Christ indwelling us and again the importance of the new covenant in place of the Old for CHRISTIANS!

I will go further... but I'm short on time right now.

Romans 9-11... especially 11... and especially... look at my signature... Nails this down and gets to the Earthly implications.

Also... Who is the mother of the church that flees into the desert? I'm looking forward to your explainations...

#Will be back
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
BTW
[MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION]...

[MENTION=12870]steko[/MENTION] [MENTION=1851]john w[/MENTION]. [MENTION=10]Jerry Shugart[/MENTION]
and others here have bolstered the OP title assertion far beyond my initial writings...

If you are contending here... you have to gander at their writings as well and attempt to dismember what they have bolstered in tangent defense of the OP.

: )
 

jamie

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
You don't even see the contradiction in your question. If we have a tradition, how can it be that we have no connection to the generations before us that had the same tradition?

Buddhists also may go back many, many generations. They can make the same claim as you do.
 

nikolai_42

Well-known member
Ok...

The Galatians verbiage has nothing to do with replacement of Earthly Israel. It is about Paul preventing the gospel from being mixed with the old covenant.

The utilization of circumcision and the Sarai and Hagar analogies are to assert that the Body of Christ must rely solely on Jesus and Not the 613 commandments.

The reasserted verbiage in Romans about the "inner" Jew relates to Christ indwelling us and again the importance of the new covenant in place of the Old for CHRISTIANS!

I will go further... but I'm short on time right now.

Romans 9-11... especially 11... and especially... look at my signature... Nails this down and gets to the Earthly implications.

Also... Who is the mother of the church that flees into the desert? I'm looking forward to your explainations...

#Will be back

VERY quickly...

I don't agree with the term Replacement Theology because it implies something that I don't think the Reformed view (and certainly not mine) ever supports. Rather, it has always been that there are two classes of individuals - sheep and goats, believers and unbelievers, the false and the true - and God has revealed that in manifold ways. In the initial revelation of Himself and His Word, natural Israel is used. Not for anything He saw in them, but simply because they were chosen. And ONLY because of that does God maintain that Israel will be saved. That is, because of His name's sake, He will do what He has promised. But in terms of spiritual Israel, there is no difference between the Jew or the Gentile in Christ. There is one (and always has been one) spiritual Israel - those that believe and trust Him. To them are all the promises in Christ. So I disagree that you can split off what Paul said in Galatians 3 and isolate it from who Israel is (since natural Israel is wrapped up in the Law). The Law and observances (of themselves) he calls "weak and beggarly elements" in Galatians 4:9-10 and goes on to show the two types of Israel typified in Isaac and Ishmael, Sinai/earthly Jerusalem and Jerusalem above (which is free and the mother of us all). In the context of this, those who are of natural Israel (and cling to it) are typical of Israel of old and refuse to see the true end of God's promise to Abraham. There is that natural promise (I've heard it said that the sand of the sea and the stars of the sky represent the two realms - earthly and heavenly), but the real aim of God is the spiritual. And if I might point out, without the context of ALL men being sinners and condemned thereby - without us being chosen of God, there might be reason to boast ("I chose the better covenant"). Rather, there is an identification with Israel of old in that they were chosen for God's glory and in a sense because they were insignificant in the world's eyes. It was so that God's glory might shine the more.

Spoiler
John Newton's Letters

The doctrines of election and final perseverance

Dear Sir,
Your letter breathes the spirit of a Christian, though you say you are not a Calvinist. I would have still confined myself, in my letters, to the great truths in which we are agreed, if you had not invited me to touch upon the points wherein we differ. If you were insistent in your present sentiments, I would not think it my duty to debate with you: in that case, we might contend as much for victory as for truth. But as you profess yourself an inquirer, and are desirous of forming your judgment agreeably to the word of God, without being influenced by the authority of names and parties, I willingly embrace the occasion you offer me.

You say, that though you are not prejudiced against the doctrines of election and perseverance of the saints, they appear to you attended with such difficulties, that you cannot yet heartily and fully assent to them. May the Lord the Spirit, whose office it is to guide his people into all truth, dictate to my pen, and accompany what I shall write with his blessing. It is not my intention to prove and illustrate these doctrines at large, or to encounter the various objections that have been raised against them. So much has been done in this way already, that I could only repeat what has been said to greater advantage by others. Nor need I refer you to the books which have been professedly written upon this argument. In a letter to a friend, I shall not aim at the exactness of a disputant, but only offer a few unpremeditated hints, in the same manner as if I had the pleasure of personally conversing with you.

Permit me to remind you, in the first place, of that important aphorism, John 3:27, (which seems to speak strongly in favor, of the doctrines in question): "A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from Heaven." If you should accede to my opinions upon my persuasion only, you would be little benefited by the exchange. The Lord alone can give us the true, vital, comfortable, and useful knowledge of his own truths. We may become wise in notions, and so far masters of a system, or scheme of doctrine, as to be able to argue, object, and fight, in favor of our own hypothesis, by dint of application, and natural abilities; but we rightly understand what we say, and whereof we affirm, no farther than we have a spiritual perception of it wrought in our hearts by the power of the Holy Spirit. It is not, therefore, by noisy disputation, but by humble waiting upon God in prayer, and a careful perusal of his holy word, that we are to expect a satisfactory, experimental, and efficacious knowledge of the truth as it is in Jesus. I am persuaded that you are seeking in this way: if so, I am confident you shall not seek in vain. The Lord teaches effectually, though for the most part gradually. The path of the just is compared to the light, which is very faint at the early dawn, but shines more and more to the perfect day.

If you sincerely seek the Lord's direction by prayer, you will of course make use of his appointed means of information, and search the Scriptures. Give me leave to offer you the following advises, while you are reading and comparing spiritual things with spiritual. First, Not to lay too great stress upon a few detached texts, but seek for that sense which is most agreeable to the general strain of the Scripture. The infallible word of God must, doubtless, be consistent with itself: if it does not appear so to us, the obscurity and seeming inconsistency must be charged to the remaining darkness and ignorance of our minds. As many locks, whose wards differ, are opened with equal ease by one master-key; so there is a certain comprehensive view of scriptural truth, which opens hard places, solves objections, and happily reconciles, illustrates, and harmonizes many texts, which to those who have not this master-key, frequently styled the analogy of faith, appear little less than contradictory to each other. When you obtain this key, you will be sure that you have the right sense.

Again: You will do well to consult experience as you go along. For though this is not to be depended upon in the first instance, but must itself be subjected to the rule of the written word, yet it is a good subordinate help. Consider which sense is most agreeable to what passes within you and around you, and which best answers to the dealings of God with yourself, and to what you can observe of his dealings with others.

Farther: When you are led (as I think you will be, if you are not already) to view the Calvinist doctrines in a favorable light, be not afraid of embracing them, because there may be perhaps some objections which, for lack of a full possession of the key I mentioned, you are not able to clear up; but consider if there are not as strong or stronger objections against the other side. We are poor weak creatures; and the clearing up of every difficulty is not what we are immediately called to, but rather to seek that light which may strengthen and feed our souls.

Lastly: Compare the tendency of different opinions. This is an excellent rule, if we can fairly apply it. Whatever is from God, has a sure tendency to ascribe glory to him, to exclude boasting from the creature, to promote the love and practice of holiness, and increase our dependence upon his grace and faithfulness. The Calvinists have no reason to be afraid of resting the merits of their cause upon this issue; notwithstanding the unjust misrepresentations which have been often made of their principles, and the ungenerous treatment of those who would charge the miscarriages of a few individuals, as the necessary consequence of embracing those principles.

But I must check myself, or I shall finish my letter before I properly begin my subject. You have objections to the doctrine of election. You will however agree with me, that Scripture does speak of it, and that in very strong and express terms, particularly Paul. I have met with some sincere people, as I believe, who have told me, they could not bear to read his 9th chapter to the Romans, but always passed it over: so that their prejudices against election prejudiced them against a part of the Scripture likewise. But why so, unless because the dreaded doctrine is maintained too plainly to be evaded? But you will say, that some writers and preachers attempt to put an easier sense upon the Apostle's words. Let us judge then, as I lately proposed, from experience.

Admitting, what I am sure you will admit, the total depravity of human nature, how can we account for the conversion of a soul to God, unless we likewise admit an election of grace? The work must begin somewhere. Either the sinner first seeks the Lord, or the Lord first seeks the sinner. The former is impossible, if by nature we are dead in trespasses and sins; if the god of this world has blinded our eyes, and maintains the possession of our hearts; and if our carnal minds, so far from being disposed to seek God, are enmity against him.

Let me appeal to yourself. I think you know yourself too well to say, that you either sought or loved the Lord first: perhaps you are conscious, that for a season, and so far as in you lay, you even resisted his call; and must have perished, if he had not made you willing in the day of his power, and saved you in defiance of yourself. In your own case, you acknowledge that he began with you; and it must be the case universally with all who are called, if the whole race of mankind are by nature enemies to God. Then, farther, there must be an election, unless all are called. But we are assured that the broad road, which is thronged with the greatest multitudes, leads to destruction. Were not you and I in this road? Were we any better than those who continue in it still? What has made us differ from our former selves? Grace! What has made us differ from those who are now as we once were? Grace! Then this grace, by the very terms, must be differencing, or distinguishing grace; that is, in other words, electing grace.

And to suppose that God would make this election or choice only at the time of our calling, is not only unscriptural, but contrary to the dictates of reason, and the ideas we have of the Divine perfections, particularly those of omniscience and immutability. Those who believe there is any power in man by nature, whereby he can turn to God, may contend for a conditional election upon the foresight of faith and obedience: but while others dispute, let you and I admire, for we know that the Lord foresaw us (as we were) in a state utterly incapable either of believing or obeying, unless he was pleased to work in us to will and to do according to his own good pleasure.

As to final perseverance, whatever judgment we form of it in a doctrinal view, unless we ourselves do so persevere, our profession of religion will be utterly vain; for only "those who endure to the end shall be saved." It would seem that whoever believes this, and is duly apprised of his own weakness, the number and strength of his spiritual enemies, and the difficulties and dangers arising from his situation in this evil world, will at least be desirous to have (if possible) some security that his labor and expectation shall not be in vain. To be at an uncertainty in a point of so great importance; to have nothing to trust to for our continuance in well-doing, but our own feeble efforts, our partial diligence and shortsighted care; must surely be distressing, if we rightly consider how unable we are in ourselves to withstand the forces of the world, the flesh, and the devil, which are combined against our peace.

In this view I would expect, that the opposers of this doctrine, if thoroughly sensible of their state and situation, upon a supposition, that they should be able to prove it unscriptural and false, would weep over their victory, and be sorry that a sentiment, so apparently suited to encourage and animate our hope, should not be founded in truth. It is not to be wondered at, that this doctrine, which gives to the Lord the glory due to his name, and provides so effectually for the comfort of his people, should be opposed and traduced by men of corrupt hearts. But it may well seem strange, that those who feel their need of it, and cannot be comfortable without it, should be afraid or unwilling to receive it. Yet many a child of light is walking in darkness upon this account. Either they are staggered by the sentiments of those whom they think wiser than themselves, or stumbled by the falls of professors who were once advocates for this doctrine, or perplexed because they cannot rightly understand those passages of Scripture which seem to speak a different language. But, as light and knowledge increase, these difficulties are lessened. The Lord claims the honor; and he engages for the accomplishment of a complete salvation, that no power shall pluck his people out of his hand, or separate them from his love.

Their perseverance in grace, besides being asserted by many express promises, may be proved with the fullest evidence from the unchangeableness of God, the intercession of Christ, the union which exists between him and his people, and from the principle of spiritual life he has implanted in their hearts, which in its own nature is connected with everlasting life; for grace is the seed of glory. I have not room to enlarge on these particulars, but refer you to the following texts, from which various strong and invincible arguments might be drawn for their confirmation: Luke 14:28-30, compared with Phi. 1:6; Heb. 7:25, with Rom. 8:34-39; John 14:19, with John 15:1-2; John 4:14. Upon these grounds, my friend, why may not you, who have fled for refuge to the hope set before you, and committed your soul to Jesus, rejoice in his salvation; and say, "While Christ is the foundation, root, head, and husband of his people, while the word of God is Yes and Amen, while the counsels of God are unchangeable, while we have a Mediator and High Priest before the throne, while the Holy Spirit is willing and able to bear witness to the truths of the Gospel, while God is wiser than men, and stronger than Satan—so long the believer in Jesus is and shall be safe? Heaven and earth must pass away; but the promise, the oath, the blood, on which my soul relies, affords me a security which can never fail."

As the doctrines of election and perseverance are comfortable, so they cut off all pretense of boasting and self-dependence when they are truly received in the heart, and therefore tend to exalt the Savior. Of course they stain the pride of all human glory, and leave us nothing to glory in but the Lord. The more we are convinced of our utter depravity and inability from first to last, the more excellent will Jesus appear. The whole may give the physician a good word, but the sick alone know how to prize him. And here I cannot but remark a difference between those who have nothing to trust to but free grace, and those who ascribe a little at least to some good disposition and ability in man. We assent to whatever they enforce from the word of God on the subject of sanctification. We acknowledge its importance, its excellency, its beauty; but we could wish they would join more with us in exalting the Redeemer's name. Their experience seems to lead them to talk of themselves, of the change that is wrought in them, and the much that depends upon their own watchfulness and striving. We likewise would be thankful if we could perceive a change wrought in us by the power of grace; we desire to be found watching likewise. But when our hopes are most alive, it is less from a view of the imperfect beginnings of grace in our hearts, than from an apprehension of him who is our all in all. His person, his love, his sufferings, his intercession, his compassion, his fullness, and his faithfulness—these are our delightful themes, which leave us little leisure, when in our best frames, to speak of ourselves. How do our hearts soften, and our eyes melt, when we feel some liberty in thinking and speaking of him! For we had no help in time past, nor can have any in time to some, but from him alone.

If any people have contributed a mite to their own salvation, it was more than we could do. If any were obedient and faithful to the first calls and impressions of his Spirit, it was not our case. If any were prepared to receive him beforehand, we know that we were in a state of alienation from him. We needed sovereign, irresistible grace to save us, or we would be lost forever! If there are any who have a power of their own, we must confess ourselves poorer than they are. We cannot watch, unless he watches with us; we cannot strive, unless he strives with us; we cannot stand one moment, unless he holds us up; and we believe we must perish after all, unless his faithfulness is engaged to keep us. But this we trust he will do, not for our righteousness, but for his own name's sake, and because, having loved us with an everlasting love, he has been pleased in loving kindness to draw us to himself, and to be found by us when we sought him not.

Can you think, dear Sir, that a person who lives under the influence of these sentiments, will desire to continue in sin because grace abounds? No! you are too candid an observer of men and manners, to believe the calumnies which are propagated against us. It is true, there are too many false and empty professors among us; but are there none among those who hold the opposite sentiments? And I would observe, that the objection drawn from the miscarriages of reputed Calvinists is quite beside the purpose. We maintain, that no doctrines or means can change the heart, or produce a gracious conversation, without the efficacious power of Almighty grace: therefore, if it is found to be so in fact, it should not be charged against our doctrine, but rather admitted as a proof and confirmation of it. We confess, that we fall sadly short in everything, and have reason to be ashamed and amazed that we are so faintly influenced by such animating principles; yet, upon the whole, our consciences bear us witness, and we hope we may declare it both to the church and to the world without just fear of contradiction, that the doctrines of grace are doctrines according to godliness.

{From http://gracegems.org/Newton/09.htm}
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
VERY quickly...

I don't agree with the term Replacement Theology because it implies something that I don't think the Reformed view (and certainly not mine) ever supports. Rather, it has always been that there are two classes of individuals - sheep and goats, believers and unbelievers, the false and the true - and God has revealed that in manifold ways. In the initial revelation of Himself and His Word, natural Israel is used. Not for anything He saw in them, but simply because they were chosen. And ONLY because of that does God maintain that Israel will be saved. That is, because of His name's sake, He will do what He has promised. But in terms of spiritual Israel, there is no difference between the Jew or the Gentile in Christ. There is one (and always has been one) spiritual Israel - those that believe and trust Him. To them are all the promises in Christ. So I disagree that you can split off what Paul said in Galatians 3 and isolate it from who Israel is (since natural Israel is wrapped up in the Law). The Law and observances (of themselves) he calls "weak and beggarly elements" in Galatians 4:9-10 and goes on to show the two types of Israel typified in Isaac and Ishmael, Sinai/earthly Jerusalem and Jerusalem above (which is free and the mother of us all). In the context of this, those who are of natural Israel (and cling to it) are typical of Israel of old and refuse to see the true end of God's promise to Abraham. There is that natural promise (I've heard it said that the sand of the sea and the stars of the sky represent the two realms - earthly and heavenly), but the real aim of God is the spiritual. And if I might point out, without the context of ALL men being sinners and condemned thereby - without us being chosen of God, there might be reason to boast ("I chose the better covenant"). Rather, there is an identification with Israel of old in that they were chosen for God's glory and in a sense because they were insignificant in the world's eyes. It was so that God's glory might shine the more.

Spoiler
John Newton's Letters

The doctrines of election and final perseverance

Dear Sir,
Your letter breathes the spirit of a Christian, though you say you are not a Calvinist. I would have still confined myself, in my letters, to the great truths in which we are agreed, if you had not invited me to touch upon the points wherein we differ. If you were insistent in your present sentiments, I would not think it my duty to debate with you: in that case, we might contend as much for victory as for truth. But as you profess yourself an inquirer, and are desirous of forming your judgment agreeably to the word of God, without being influenced by the authority of names and parties, I willingly embrace the occasion you offer me.

You say, that though you are not prejudiced against the doctrines of election and perseverance of the saints, they appear to you attended with such difficulties, that you cannot yet heartily and fully assent to them. May the Lord the Spirit, whose office it is to guide his people into all truth, dictate to my pen, and accompany what I shall write with his blessing. It is not my intention to prove and illustrate these doctrines at large, or to encounter the various objections that have been raised against them. So much has been done in this way already, that I could only repeat what has been said to greater advantage by others. Nor need I refer you to the books which have been professedly written upon this argument. In a letter to a friend, I shall not aim at the exactness of a disputant, but only offer a few unpremeditated hints, in the same manner as if I had the pleasure of personally conversing with you.

Permit me to remind you, in the first place, of that important aphorism, John 3:27, (which seems to speak strongly in favor, of the doctrines in question): "A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from Heaven." If you should accede to my opinions upon my persuasion only, you would be little benefited by the exchange. The Lord alone can give us the true, vital, comfortable, and useful knowledge of his own truths. We may become wise in notions, and so far masters of a system, or scheme of doctrine, as to be able to argue, object, and fight, in favor of our own hypothesis, by dint of application, and natural abilities; but we rightly understand what we say, and whereof we affirm, no farther than we have a spiritual perception of it wrought in our hearts by the power of the Holy Spirit. It is not, therefore, by noisy disputation, but by humble waiting upon God in prayer, and a careful perusal of his holy word, that we are to expect a satisfactory, experimental, and efficacious knowledge of the truth as it is in Jesus. I am persuaded that you are seeking in this way: if so, I am confident you shall not seek in vain. The Lord teaches effectually, though for the most part gradually. The path of the just is compared to the light, which is very faint at the early dawn, but shines more and more to the perfect day.

If you sincerely seek the Lord's direction by prayer, you will of course make use of his appointed means of information, and search the Scriptures. Give me leave to offer you the following advises, while you are reading and comparing spiritual things with spiritual. First, Not to lay too great stress upon a few detached texts, but seek for that sense which is most agreeable to the general strain of the Scripture. The infallible word of God must, doubtless, be consistent with itself: if it does not appear so to us, the obscurity and seeming inconsistency must be charged to the remaining darkness and ignorance of our minds. As many locks, whose wards differ, are opened with equal ease by one master-key; so there is a certain comprehensive view of scriptural truth, which opens hard places, solves objections, and happily reconciles, illustrates, and harmonizes many texts, which to those who have not this master-key, frequently styled the analogy of faith, appear little less than contradictory to each other. When you obtain this key, you will be sure that you have the right sense.

Again: You will do well to consult experience as you go along. For though this is not to be depended upon in the first instance, but must itself be subjected to the rule of the written word, yet it is a good subordinate help. Consider which sense is most agreeable to what passes within you and around you, and which best answers to the dealings of God with yourself, and to what you can observe of his dealings with others.

Farther: When you are led (as I think you will be, if you are not already) to view the Calvinist doctrines in a favorable light, be not afraid of embracing them, because there may be perhaps some objections which, for lack of a full possession of the key I mentioned, you are not able to clear up; but consider if there are not as strong or stronger objections against the other side. We are poor weak creatures; and the clearing up of every difficulty is not what we are immediately called to, but rather to seek that light which may strengthen and feed our souls.

Lastly: Compare the tendency of different opinions. This is an excellent rule, if we can fairly apply it. Whatever is from God, has a sure tendency to ascribe glory to him, to exclude boasting from the creature, to promote the love and practice of holiness, and increase our dependence upon his grace and faithfulness. The Calvinists have no reason to be afraid of resting the merits of their cause upon this issue; notwithstanding the unjust misrepresentations which have been often made of their principles, and the ungenerous treatment of those who would charge the miscarriages of a few individuals, as the necessary consequence of embracing those principles.

But I must check myself, or I shall finish my letter before I properly begin my subject. You have objections to the doctrine of election. You will however agree with me, that Scripture does speak of it, and that in very strong and express terms, particularly Paul. I have met with some sincere people, as I believe, who have told me, they could not bear to read his 9th chapter to the Romans, but always passed it over: so that their prejudices against election prejudiced them against a part of the Scripture likewise. But why so, unless because the dreaded doctrine is maintained too plainly to be evaded? But you will say, that some writers and preachers attempt to put an easier sense upon the Apostle's words. Let us judge then, as I lately proposed, from experience.

Admitting, what I am sure you will admit, the total depravity of human nature, how can we account for the conversion of a soul to God, unless we likewise admit an election of grace? The work must begin somewhere. Either the sinner first seeks the Lord, or the Lord first seeks the sinner. The former is impossible, if by nature we are dead in trespasses and sins; if the god of this world has blinded our eyes, and maintains the possession of our hearts; and if our carnal minds, so far from being disposed to seek God, are enmity against him.

Let me appeal to yourself. I think you know yourself too well to say, that you either sought or loved the Lord first: perhaps you are conscious, that for a season, and so far as in you lay, you even resisted his call; and must have perished, if he had not made you willing in the day of his power, and saved you in defiance of yourself. In your own case, you acknowledge that he began with you; and it must be the case universally with all who are called, if the whole race of mankind are by nature enemies to God. Then, farther, there must be an election, unless all are called. But we are assured that the broad road, which is thronged with the greatest multitudes, leads to destruction. Were not you and I in this road? Were we any better than those who continue in it still? What has made us differ from our former selves? Grace! What has made us differ from those who are now as we once were? Grace! Then this grace, by the very terms, must be differencing, or distinguishing grace; that is, in other words, electing grace.

And to suppose that God would make this election or choice only at the time of our calling, is not only unscriptural, but contrary to the dictates of reason, and the ideas we have of the Divine perfections, particularly those of omniscience and immutability. Those who believe there is any power in man by nature, whereby he can turn to God, may contend for a conditional election upon the foresight of faith and obedience: but while others dispute, let you and I admire, for we know that the Lord foresaw us (as we were) in a state utterly incapable either of believing or obeying, unless he was pleased to work in us to will and to do according to his own good pleasure.

As to final perseverance, whatever judgment we form of it in a doctrinal view, unless we ourselves do so persevere, our profession of religion will be utterly vain; for only "those who endure to the end shall be saved." It would seem that whoever believes this, and is duly apprised of his own weakness, the number and strength of his spiritual enemies, and the difficulties and dangers arising from his situation in this evil world, will at least be desirous to have (if possible) some security that his labor and expectation shall not be in vain. To be at an uncertainty in a point of so great importance; to have nothing to trust to for our continuance in well-doing, but our own feeble efforts, our partial diligence and shortsighted care; must surely be distressing, if we rightly consider how unable we are in ourselves to withstand the forces of the world, the flesh, and the devil, which are combined against our peace.

In this view I would expect, that the opposers of this doctrine, if thoroughly sensible of their state and situation, upon a supposition, that they should be able to prove it unscriptural and false, would weep over their victory, and be sorry that a sentiment, so apparently suited to encourage and animate our hope, should not be founded in truth. It is not to be wondered at, that this doctrine, which gives to the Lord the glory due to his name, and provides so effectually for the comfort of his people, should be opposed and traduced by men of corrupt hearts. But it may well seem strange, that those who feel their need of it, and cannot be comfortable without it, should be afraid or unwilling to receive it. Yet many a child of light is walking in darkness upon this account. Either they are staggered by the sentiments of those whom they think wiser than themselves, or stumbled by the falls of professors who were once advocates for this doctrine, or perplexed because they cannot rightly understand those passages of Scripture which seem to speak a different language. But, as light and knowledge increase, these difficulties are lessened. The Lord claims the honor; and he engages for the accomplishment of a complete salvation, that no power shall pluck his people out of his hand, or separate them from his love.

Their perseverance in grace, besides being asserted by many express promises, may be proved with the fullest evidence from the unchangeableness of God, the intercession of Christ, the union which exists between him and his people, and from the principle of spiritual life he has implanted in their hearts, which in its own nature is connected with everlasting life; for grace is the seed of glory. I have not room to enlarge on these particulars, but refer you to the following texts, from which various strong and invincible arguments might be drawn for their confirmation: Luke 14:28-30, compared with Phi. 1:6; Heb. 7:25, with Rom. 8:34-39; John 14:19, with John 15:1-2; John 4:14. Upon these grounds, my friend, why may not you, who have fled for refuge to the hope set before you, and committed your soul to Jesus, rejoice in his salvation; and say, "While Christ is the foundation, root, head, and husband of his people, while the word of God is Yes and Amen, while the counsels of God are unchangeable, while we have a Mediator and High Priest before the throne, while the Holy Spirit is willing and able to bear witness to the truths of the Gospel, while God is wiser than men, and stronger than Satan—so long the believer in Jesus is and shall be safe? Heaven and earth must pass away; but the promise, the oath, the blood, on which my soul relies, affords me a security which can never fail."

As the doctrines of election and perseverance are comfortable, so they cut off all pretense of boasting and self-dependence when they are truly received in the heart, and therefore tend to exalt the Savior. Of course they stain the pride of all human glory, and leave us nothing to glory in but the Lord. The more we are convinced of our utter depravity and inability from first to last, the more excellent will Jesus appear. The whole may give the physician a good word, but the sick alone know how to prize him. And here I cannot but remark a difference between those who have nothing to trust to but free grace, and those who ascribe a little at least to some good disposition and ability in man. We assent to whatever they enforce from the word of God on the subject of sanctification. We acknowledge its importance, its excellency, its beauty; but we could wish they would join more with us in exalting the Redeemer's name. Their experience seems to lead them to talk of themselves, of the change that is wrought in them, and the much that depends upon their own watchfulness and striving. We likewise would be thankful if we could perceive a change wrought in us by the power of grace; we desire to be found watching likewise. But when our hopes are most alive, it is less from a view of the imperfect beginnings of grace in our hearts, than from an apprehension of him who is our all in all. His person, his love, his sufferings, his intercession, his compassion, his fullness, and his faithfulness—these are our delightful themes, which leave us little leisure, when in our best frames, to speak of ourselves. How do our hearts soften, and our eyes melt, when we feel some liberty in thinking and speaking of him! For we had no help in time past, nor can have any in time to some, but from him alone.

If any people have contributed a mite to their own salvation, it was more than we could do. If any were obedient and faithful to the first calls and impressions of his Spirit, it was not our case. If any were prepared to receive him beforehand, we know that we were in a state of alienation from him. We needed sovereign, irresistible grace to save us, or we would be lost forever! If there are any who have a power of their own, we must confess ourselves poorer than they are. We cannot watch, unless he watches with us; we cannot strive, unless he strives with us; we cannot stand one moment, unless he holds us up; and we believe we must perish after all, unless his faithfulness is engaged to keep us. But this we trust he will do, not for our righteousness, but for his own name's sake, and because, having loved us with an everlasting love, he has been pleased in loving kindness to draw us to himself, and to be found by us when we sought him not.

Can you think, dear Sir, that a person who lives under the influence of these sentiments, will desire to continue in sin because grace abounds? No! you are too candid an observer of men and manners, to believe the calumnies which are propagated against us. It is true, there are too many false and empty professors among us; but are there none among those who hold the opposite sentiments? And I would observe, that the objection drawn from the miscarriages of reputed Calvinists is quite beside the purpose. We maintain, that no doctrines or means can change the heart, or produce a gracious conversation, without the efficacious power of Almighty grace: therefore, if it is found to be so in fact, it should not be charged against our doctrine, but rather admitted as a proof and confirmation of it. We confess, that we fall sadly short in everything, and have reason to be ashamed and amazed that we are so faintly influenced by such animating principles; yet, upon the whole, our consciences bear us witness, and we hope we may declare it both to the church and to the world without just fear of contradiction, that the doctrines of grace are doctrines according to godliness.

{From http://gracegems.org/Newton/09.htm}

I am not impressed by John Newton. He is non canon. So discard that please. I am also baffled you are here on this thread denying that replacement theology isn't real.

You are claiming to be Israel and a Jew, while denying Jews and geographical Israel spiritual and ethnic validity.

You are claiming to replace the Jews!

Joel 3:2, Zechariah, Isaiah, Psalms, Jesus in Matthew, Luke, Revelation... all of these sources eschatologically acknowledge geographical Israel and (per romans 11) the election of "enemy of the gospel Jews".

Quote a TOL exegesis... but know that the other OP we are debating in addresses the use of many words to blur your point and intentions. If you can't say it succinctly, what are you doing?

I mean seriously! You start with "very quickly" and then write a book and follow it with 2 books of a 1700's author! This is a deceitful debate tactic and AMR knows I won't tolerate it. Why do you think he's not answering me?

He knows I'll point out his obfuscation. Please cease from using this tactic. It is not acceptable.
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
Buddhists also may go back many, many generations. They can make the same claim as you do.

Jamie,
[MENTION=5868]chair[/MENTION] is a Jew by blood. Give it a rest! You are literally denying him his blood heritage with your assertions! This is so beyond rediculous that I am holding my tongue.

#Jamie isn't a human being... they can't ethnically prove it.
#This argument links you to [MENTION=17677]Crucible[/MENTION] and I would be weary to do so if I was you

#What "Church of God" sect teaches Spiritual Israel anyways?
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
I'm not saying chair is not a Jew, I'm saying bloodline is totally irrelevant in the context of the NT.

All adherents of Judaism are Jews, but Judaism is not a Christian religion.

Ok... that's an improvement... but sill flawed...

Rm. 11:28-29 directly refutes your assertion and challenges you to call God a Promise breaker... or liar.
 

Crucible

BANNED
Banned
[MENTION=5868]chair[/MENTION] is a Jew by blood.

:rotfl:

Jews are not a race

Chair is a Semite by blood, and probably not even in majority because most Jews are straight up western decended white people giving that 1/10th Semite in their blood precedence over what they actually are.

You see, because being a Jew for some reason evokes privilege- people like yourself worship them :rolleyes:
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
:rotfl:

Jews are not a race

Chair is a Semite by blood.
[MENTION=17677]Crucible[/MENTION],

Your lack of education on this matter astonishes me.

# In awww of your lack of effort to research a matter before you vehemently press it.

#Proverbs 17:28... not calling you this, but saying you could learn from it

Jew is derived from the Yiddish word for "Judah" and this is as old as 860 BCE... it roots directly into Semites... so... there... Your welcome... be ignorant no longer!
 

chair

Well-known member
:rotfl:

Jews are not a race

Chair is a Semite by blood, and probably not even in majority because most Jews are straight up western decended white people giving that 1/10th Semite in their blood precedence over what they actually are.

You see, because being a Jew for some reason evokes privilege- people like yourself worship them :rolleyes:

You are a bigoted Jew-hater, irrespective of what you call it. You make up facts to match your hate.
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
@Romsonmonson,

Would you please expand on the "Esau" part of your exigesis to ensure its 100 percent on point and copy and paste it into this thread?

I would immensely appreciate it.

#You're appreciated
 

jamie

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Rm. 11:28-29 directly refutes your assertion and challenges you to call God a Promise breaker... or liar.

Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. (Romans 11:28-29)​

Do you believe the Father has called the election to Christ?

Paul claims God's election is not based on circumcision of the flesh but of the heart. Paul's claim is based on Deuteronomy 30.
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. (Romans 11:28-29)​

Why do you believe the Father has called the election to Christ?

Paul claims God's election is not based on circumcision of the flesh but of the heart. Paul's claim is based on Deuteronomy 30.

Israel was widowed when Messiah was murdered, and a new bride arose... Don't think God will allow the widow to die!

God made promises that are irrevocable! It's in the quoted Romans passage... Rm. 11:28-29

Israel is the persistent widow Christ speaks of.

Wake up house of cross and flame!
 
Top