Posted on 10/27/2022 3:59:23 AM PDT by Roman_War_Criminal
We’re saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ—and this is not of ourselves but the gift of God…lest any of us should boast. Not martyrdom (or any other work).
Still, from front to back the Scripture is filled with believers who stood by the stuff and suffered for it. God commended them for their faithfulness and it will be rewarded.
I think The Point is this:
The Israeli Government IS NOT the “Israel” to whom God reiterates The Promises made to Abraham and Isaac.
Israel as a national corpus isn’t the “Israel” to whom God made The Promises.
The blood descendants of Jacob — firstly — are the “Israel” to whom The Promises devolve. [Yes, there’s more to this point, but one thing at a time, please.]
And — for THAT matter — Israel and Jew are badly conflated in the Christianese dictionary, so...
What, for instance, actually IS “a Jew”?
Not all Jews are Israelites — foreigners could be proselytes and adherents to The Covenant, and far and away MOST Israelites AREN’T Jews.
We don’t see the label “Jew” until after the Northern Kingdom (Israel) is taken away into Assyrian Captivity leaving only Judah and Benjamin. These two later are exiled to Babylon, where the label becomes prominent, and only about 42,000 ever returned.
The term “Jew” was never contemporaneously applied to the Israelites of any of the ten tribes of the Northern Kingdom, and it is a Category Error to apply it retroactively.
No Jew was ever a slave in Egypt, though ancestors of some present-day Jews were.
No Jew wandered 40 years in the Wilderness with Moses.
No Jew fought alongside King David, or worked on — or in — the Temple Solomon built.
Israelites of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin were called “Jews” in Babylon, and the term continued to apply to the 42,000 who returned to the land under Ezra and Nehemiah, and to their descendants, and persisted through Roman occupation into the present, but it has become carelessly used in modern Christian circles where inexactitude has sown considerable confusion.
So, when we speak of “supporting Israel”; what does that phrase even MEAN?
The idea of supporting the existence of a nation State encompassing the land that Jews historically regard as “Home” is sound; that land has been “in the family” for 3000 years, so it has relevant, present-day importance on that score. Still we should acknowledge that, when we talk about “Jews,” we’re pretty much only talking about the tribes of Judah and Benjamin; that there’s still an entire swathe of humanity living with the blood of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in their veins and they’ve NO idea.
There is archaeological evidence of descendants of Jacob appearing in the islands in the Aegean about 1500BC, and another wave of arrivals just ahead of the Assyrian conquest of the Northern Kingdom. Are you Greek? You might be of the House of Israel and not know it. Other sorts of records exhibit similar migrations of former Israelite tribal peoples. Irish History records five distinct waves of foreign tribal immigration/invasion on the Emerald Isle, one in particular being called the “Tribe of Dan,” and a later wave of arrivals bears traces to the tribe of Judah. Are you of Irish descent? You might be of the stock of Israel and not know it. The Spanish city of Cadiz is not inhabited by “Cadizitanos” but “Gaditanos” and was established by a Phoenician bunch that called themselves “Gadir.” Indeed, southern Spain is peppered with names rooted in “Gaud” the Spanish for Gad. Do your roots extend to Southern Spain? You might be a Child of Israel by bloodline, and not know it.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
And not only for the so-called “Lost Tribes” but for those of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin who chose not to come back from Babylon.
Where didja come from? Where dija go?
Where didja come from Cotton Eye Joe?
You are correct. The Scripture makes it very clear that when Jesus comes back (His 2nd Coming) everyone will see Him. “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” Matthew 24:30,31. There is no imminent secret part way coming of Jesus to take the Church out before the Great Tribulation. The Church will go through the Tribulation. We will not go through the Wrath of God. Big difference there. It’s unfortunate that there is division in the Body because of this wrong teaching.
Differences Between the Rapture and the Second Coming
by Dr. Thomas Ice
https://www.pre-trib.org/pretribfiles/pdfs/Ice-DifferencesBetweenTheRapt.pdf
I would comment folks will choose whatever.
Luke 21:34-36
🔝
Is the term “Jews” a generic title for only the two tribes, Judah and Benjamin? Are the other 10 tribes still the “lost sheep” of the house of Israel?
Answer from Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum:
The concept of the ten lost tribes of Israel is actually a myth, and they were never lost. This is quite clear historically.
When the northern kingdom went into Assyrian captivity, they were settled in specific cities in Assyria. When Babylon conquered the Assyrian empire, all ten tribes fell under the Babylonian sovereignty. Babylon also conquered Judah, thus subduing the remaining two tribes. So all twelve tribes were under the same sovereign authority of Babylonia.
When the Medo-Persian empire conquered Babylonia, all twelve tribes fell under Medo-Persian authority. The Persians allowed the Jews to return to their home country, and most members of all twelve tribes did indeed return to the Land. However, other members of all twelve tribes stayed where they were.
Luke 2 refers to Anna as being “of the tribe of Asher,” one of the so called “ten lost tribes.” Quite obviously, Anna was not lost.
James addressed his epistle “to the twelve tribes of the Dispersion.” He did not need to look for the “lost tribes” in order to deliver the letter to them.
By later New Testament times, personal identification by once distinguishable tribal names became less prominent. Thus, Paul called himself a Hebrew, and he also called himself an Israelite. In Philippians 3:5, he identified himself as a Benjaminite, but he also called himself a Jew, which became a generic term for the members of all the tribes of Israel.
So, all those who call themselves Jews today can come from any of the twelve tribes of Israel and not just two.
What you are doing, RWC, is accusing those of us who believe in a singular undivided 2nd coming, of “wanting” the great tribulation that Jesus said precedes that coming.
In this, you are borrowing the tactic the left uses, accusing others of what they are guilty of themselves. Pretribs accuse others of “wanting” to go through the tribulation, when it is they who do the wanting. Disregarding what Jesus actually says in his Olivet Discourse, they let what they DO NOT WANT guide them
As a former pretribber myself, I know this is true. I did not want to go through the trib, but upon serious study of the Word and supported by early church history, I admitted it is not a matter of what I wanted, but what the Bible actually teaches.
“Not wild.”
I consider the scholastic method of Bart Ehrman “wild” as in ridiculous. He WANTS to find some ridiculous 19th century novelty in history, so he goes to some passage that was not even accepted as genuine as to its supposed author, NEVER quoted by any of the fathers, and then runs around like a dripping naked Archimedes shrieking “EUREKA!!!” This is the same version of integrity which would pull up a passage from the book of mormon and say “see.... Christians believed in Jesus being a man who became God”.... except the book of mormon is more widely read than pseudoEphraem by a factor of ..... say ...., about a thousand (more, really). This is the kind of “scholarship” which makes Ice such a lightweight and laughed at.
“Many throughout the centuries.”
Yeah? Name one.
“So you do not believe in the teaching of imminent Return of Christ to remove his believers from the wrath to come?” It depends on how much you are willing to twist “imminent return of Christ” around “remove his believers from the wrath to come” That is, it depends on the meaning you attach to these phrases. I answer, of course, “yes, I do” at the same time I reject the silly Scofieldism that twists these phrases into something profoundly unbiblical.
“Do you believe in the wrath to come?”
Of course I do. I just don’t believe in some magic ejection from earth in a secret halfway “coming” of Jesus to deliver plan A so God can get back to plan A. The CLEAR and UNMISTAKABLE teaching of the church (which you should look at for yourself, rather than running to a lightweight like Thomas Ice) for millennia has been that the children of Abraham are the children of faith, whether Semitic or non-Semitic. All the barriers are torn down and the two are one. This is called the “covenant” structure of the bible, which teaches one God, One Savior, one method of salvation, one faith, one people of God..... in essence one message. Many people (me included) believe that the “time of the Gentiles” will lead to a regrafting of Israel BACK into the people of God... which may lead to an even greater “fullness of the Gentiles.” THAT kind of teaching is common, and appears from Papias and Tertullian to various proto reformers on to people like George Eldon Ladd and others who would be “historical” premil folks. The kind of silliness which insists on a re-incorporation of an ethnic people who still reject the messiah as again the “chosen people of God” and a re-establishment of a political entity along OT lines is not only silly, but unheard of, even if you take up a heretical pseudepigraphal source like pseudoEphraem.
Sorry, that dog just won’t hunt.
“OH look at the noob who claims he’s a Christian (you’re really a CINO or atheist) and hates Israel.”
You related to Charles Ryrie? Just asked because your reasoning skills and strategies seem somehow similar?
“Genesis 12:3 curses you.”
Well, I am reading Gen 12: and the only person I can hear cursing me is YOU :) .
I am just confused here. I always thought it was CHILDREN OF FAITH who are truly the children of Israel (and thus the recipients of the blessing). Maybe you can help me remember where I picked up that idea?
No. Next question?
Perhaps Israel is "diabolical and evil" because it "oppresses" the Arabs?
Kind of a loaded question. I am not a manichean when it comes to Israel and the Arabs. If you force me to assign relative guilt, I would have to go for Arabs being "more" guilty. However, I have a friend who is a Christian from South Lebanon (a physician here in the USA). He says Israelis were the most arrogant, abusive, disrespecting of basic rights and just plain ugly people he ever met... and he has ZERO for muslims. So, I think when you ask me if I wanna play black or white, I will just decline both on that one.
On your comments on Noahide and all, we will just let that one go. If you are embracing the Messiah who has come as the Savior of the world (and YOUR savior) due to his tasting death for every man, and offering life eternal to every man due to a righteousness apart from the law, I don't care if you choose to embrace Noahic proscriptions (you have some jutification for that in Acts 15, btw).
Paul says the dead in Christ will rise first and then the rest of us who are alive will be caught up to meet Christ in the middle of the air.
He also said we shall not all sleep but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in a twinkling of an eye..at the last Trumpet.
So for me...the rapture happens. The argument is simply when it happens.
I take the above statements including the statement of Christ who told us that the coming of the son of man will occur at a time when men would least expect that he should come and I conclude that there is a coming rapture but I don’t assign a specific time to it. Christ gave us some clues but he simply tells us to keep watch and stay ready.
So keep watch and stay ready my brother...amen!
The Bible teaches that there will be rising of the dead in Christ first and it teaches those who are alive will be changed and rise with them. However the time of this catching up is really at dispute with many folks but the Bible does say such a rapture does happen. It also teaches that those dead without Christ stay dead another 1000 years(after the armegeddon war and Christ establishes 1000 years of enforced rule upon the Earth) until God sets up his great white thone judgment and the lamb’s book of life is opened.
Don’t confuse what the actual words of the bible says with doctrinal opinions manmade as to when the rapture should occur.
The Bible in several places mentions a time when the dead in Christ shall arise first, and then those who were alive also are taken up. The Bible mentions the “day of resurrection” when all in Christ are given incorrutible bodies and we are like him for we see him as he is. Revelations says these changed people Rule with Christ judging both men and angels on the Earth for 1000 years while those dead without Christ stay dead during that 1000 years.
Matthew 24 offers some clarity on the rapture issue but Christ himself did not and would not give a precise time for all the wonders and horrors concerning the “days of the coming of the son of man”.
There will be a “snatching up” of the elect. Christ never gives a precise time for it because he wants us watching and diligently working at God’s business when he comes.
Who are these snatched up people...the body of believers or the church of course.
You can read the OT as to the importance of Israel in the days after the Son of Man’s foot touches down on the mount of Olives and the mountain splits in half. Israel is so important that once a year if a tribe doesn’t send a delegation to the new Jerusalem, then their lands will receive no rain. That tells me that Messiah indeed rules with a rod of iron during those times!
“I am just confused here. I always thought it was CHILDREN OF FAITH who are truly the children of Israel (and thus the recipients of the blessing). Maybe you can help me remember where I picked up that idea?”
Matthew 12”48 He replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” 49 Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”
Then you deny Ezekiel 36-38 as being true scripture which teaches the physical return of Israel from the nations they were scattered in and then a spiritural return to faith by those same “ethnic” people. You deny God’s power. The Establishment of Israel in 1947 should have been seen by anyone “of faith” as God placing his guantlet down into our present time stream reminding us that he intends to keep his promises to Israel and to those gentiles adopted as Hebrews under Abraham’s inheritance thru the spirit of adoption.
You are off base!
That’s correct, we don’t know just how bad it will get before that last trump.
I agree!
Genesis 12:3 calls for people to Bless Israel and Jews. You did the opposite with your initial post.
Your quote
“I am just confused here. I always thought it was CHILDREN OF FAITH who are truly the children of Israel”
What you subscribe to is Replacement Theology.
Maybe that’s why we disagree massively.
What is replacement theology / supersessionism?
https://www.gotquestions.org/replacement-theology.html
Just think... Luther, Matthew Henry, Calvin, Knox Zwingli, Augustine, Spurgeon...... all of them "denied Ezekiel 36-38 as being true scripture." Gee. Whoulda thunk it?
Any other sections of scripture I am denying as true scripture because I don't buy into the "prophetic" yawlps of some Scottish milkmaid. (hint: Margaret Macdonald is the earliest source of the "rapture" doctrine. She was a charismatic follower of Edward Irving (a tried and convicted heretic) whose "revelation" at a camp fire meeting got Darby on the track for his new doctrine of end times. Around the year 1824 or so. Look it up. It is pretty well documented.
A Dallas Seminary student researched this, came to the conclusion that this whole system was unheard of, and wound up leaving dispensationalism. I happen to know the guy. Nice man, btw.
It is not “replacement” theology, as gentiles never “replaced” the Semitic children of faith. This is a false charge. Romans clearly teaches that gentiles are grafted in and now all are one. The promises made to Israel are made to ALL Abraham’s children. Take it up with Paul if you don’t like it. He is the one who said it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.