Covenant and controversy - The great rage

If anyone on here is uncertain about the modern state of Israel being a miracle of re-birth, they should watch this film recently produced and check their hearts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0iTHHKqFRs

"Covenant and Controversy' is produced by FAI STUDIOS, exploring the history and theology of the enduring controversy over the Jewish people, the Land of Israel, and the city of Jerusalem. 'The Great Rage' features Dalton Thomas, Stephanie Quick, Michael Reynolds, Joel Richardson, Dr. Michael Brown, Barry Horner, and Scott Volk."

Where there is many words, there is much error. Just watch the film.
It has nothing to do with Jewish roots movement!

I bought the DVD and it's deep. It was enlightening and sad at the same time. Every Christian should watch it.

julius21 wrote:
Note-2: narrator says not all, but the majority of atrocities committed against the Jews can be put in the category of anti-semitism. Since Christians know who the true source behind these atrocities is, what would they in the natural, call their atrocities?

The thing about this DVD (I believe), is all the narrators are Jewish. If that is true, this documentary is from a Jewish perspective, that is their truth.

God bless,
Lisa

I am unable to download Youtube, So I am very interested and look forward to your overall review of the video.

Watch the documentary "With God on our Side" if you're interested in an uncensored, unbiased, objective presentation of the modern state of Israel.

http://www.withgodonourside.com/videos/

quote: " if you're interested in an uncensored, unbiased, objective presentation of the modern state of Israel."

You have got to be kidding! If you think this is objective and unbiased you are really deceived! All films are biased one way or another. This one is biased toward anti-Semitism.

The other film is biased toward the Jews having a TINY strip of real estate as a homeland after millennia of persecution living in other nations. The so called 'Palestinians' NEVER were a nation state. They are a mixture of Arabs from neighbouring countries that have 100 times more real estate to live in.

Only an anti-Semite would deny the Jews the right to their own land and blame them for a conflict with a people who want to wipe every Jew from the face of the earth. Try watching the film I posted and check your heart.

Julius, Why can't you just watch the film through and let others do the same? Why do you feel the need to give a minute by minute commentary? You write far too much stuff that it is impossible for most of us (who have other things to do) to keep up with. Just watch it and make one point that can be considered and responded to. You don't need to critique everything. The more you say, the more you will get wrong. It's a simple equation really.

[edited]

"Only an anti-Semite would deny the Jews the right to their own land and blame them for a conflict with a people who want to wipe every Jew from the face of the earth."

Was Jesus an anti-semite?

Jesus said,

33"Listen to another parable. There was a landowner who PLANTED A VINEYARD AND PUT A WALL AROUND IT AND DUG A WINE PRESS IN IT, AND BUILT A TOWER, and rented it out to vine-growers and went on a journey. 34"When the harvest time approached, he sent his slaves to the vine-growers to receive his produce. 35"The vine-growers took his slaves and beat one, and killed another, and stoned a third. 36"Again he sent another group of slaves larger than the first; and they did the same thing to them. 37"But afterward he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ 38"But when the vine-growers saw the son, they said among themselves, ‘This is the heir; come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.’ 39"They took him, and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. 40"Therefore when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vine-growers?” 41They said to Him, "He will bring those wretches to a wretched end, and will rent out the vineyard to other vine-growers who will pay him the proceeds at the proper seasons.”

42Jesus said to them, "Did you never read in the Scriptures,
‘THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED,
THIS BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone;
THIS CAME ABOUT FROM THE LORD,
AND IT IS MARVELOUS IN OUR EYES’?

43"Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people, producing the fruit of it. 44"And he who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust.”

45When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard His parables, they understood that He was speaking about them. 46When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet.

Jesus also said,

47"Woe to you! For you build the tombs of the prophets, and it was your fathers who killed them. 48"So you are witnesses and approve the deeds of your fathers; because it was they who killed them, and you build their tombs. 49"For this reason also the wisdom of God said, ‘I will send to them prophets and apostles, and some of them they will kill and some they will persecute, 50so that the blood of all the prophets, shed since the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the house of God; yes, I tell you, it shall be charged against this generation.’ 52"Woe to you lawyers! For you have taken away the key of knowledge; you yourselves did not enter, and you hindered those who were entering.”

53When He left there, the scribes and the Pharisees began to be very hostile and to question Him closely on many subjects, 54plotting against Him to catch Him in something He might say.

RE: ///Was Jesus an anti-semite? ///

Absolutly not! and neither was Paul!

That is why they laid down there lives to give the Jewish people the Gospel, Because it is the only Hope for Israel.

I find no Biblical evidence for the : "Day of the Lord" to be any hope for the unconverted gentile or the unconverted jew,
but a glorious day for the converted Jew as well as the converted Gentile.

Brother Dave,
I very much appreciate your posting this and can without exception agree with the findings of this presentation of facts. To our shame the church has failed miserably in so many ways but none so shameful as not provoking our Jewish brethren to jealousy.

Art Katz has a very strong sermon on this called The God who devastates, the first time I listened to it here on SI several years ago it paralyzed me, I felt as tho I had been spiritually sandblasted,... laid bare and raw. It was before church one morning that I first heard it and going to church after was quite a step down from where brother Katz had taken the listener.

So thank you for posting and know that our God is faithfull and I pray that we may we walk worthy of the gospel that saved us.

You may find it historically beneficial to study out the Armenian genocide carried out by the Turks. It preceded the holocost and the Germans came and learned from them how to systematically carry out their plans of death. It has been said that the spirit of the antichrist was transmitted to the Germans through this.
Incidentally it was then that the church Paul founded in Smyrna was destroyed which is extremely accurately spoken of in the Revelations letters to the churches.

PP said "That is why they laid down there lives to give the Jewish people the Gospel, Because it is the only Hope for Israel.

I find no Biblical evidence for the : "Day of the Lord" to be any hope for the unconverted gentile or the unconverted jew,
but a glorious day for the converted Jew as well as the converted Gentile."

I absolutely agree with you and if you could watch the film they also say that only through faith in Christ Jesus is anyone, including a Jew saved.

I think you misunderstand, no one on the previous thread or this film is saying otherwise. I know there are some extreme Christian Zionist types like Hagee who say this, but that is not the majority view of pre-millennialists.

The scripture teaches that a remnant of the nation of Israel will receive Jesus as their Messiah in the last days and be saved. see Zechariah 12:10.

BTW, I think you can watch it on vimeo if you can get that.

I did check out Justyn Martyr a bit more and although I was focusing on his millennial view, it does seem he may not have had in mind the Jewish nation. That said there was a definite belief in an earthly kingdom with Jerusalem as it's capital among these early church fathers.

JFW, thanks. some interesting points about the Armenians. I have heard something about this, but worth looking into more.

I think some too easily dismiss the anti-Semitism as within the false church and Roman Catholic in particular. The evidence shows it included most mainstream churches, and particularly reformed churches such as the Lutheran church. What Martin Luther wrote about the Jews was abhorrent and it was this that helped justified the Nazis in what they did in the holocaust.

What the film shows is the direct connection of replacement theology to anti- Semitism. It may not be that people who hold to replacement theology are anti-Semitic, but one opens wide the door to the other. I am always perplexed to see that Christians who hold to the view that Israel has no national future in God's plan more often than not are anti-Israel in these days. They seem to see very little wrong with all the atrocities committed by the Palestinian Islamists, but make much of Israel trying to defend themselves. Why are they anti-Israel?? This is very worrying and can only be a spiritual thing. You don't see them anti any other nation in particular.

RE:///What the film shows is the direct connection of replacement theology to anti- Semitism. It may not be that people who hold to replacement theology are anti-Semitic, but one opens wide the door to the other. ///

I think that we need to becareful with sterotyping.
the phrase replacement theology means different things to different people.

If we are to say that the gentiles have replaced the jews as Gods chosen people than we are totally out of touch and indeed are full of anti- Semitism.

The understanding that the Church (True Israel of God) made up of both believing Jews and Gentiles is Gods Holy nation of whom recieves the promises, That view is seems to be historic Christianity.

Christian supersessionist like Dietrich Bonhoeffer actively resisted the racist actions of the Nazi regime :

'Protestant theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer stands out among the Christian leaders during the Nazi era, for he was one of the few to actively resist the racist actions of the Nazi regime.'...

...In 1931, Bonhoeffer took a teaching position with the theological faculty in Berlin. There he produced many of his theological writings, in which he took a traditional viewpoint in Jewish-Christian relations, believing that the Jewish people must ultimately accept Jesus as the Messiah. This theological work greatly increased his prominence in the Christian German community...

...Bonhoeffer's defense of the Jews, however, was based on Christian supersessionism - the Christian belief that Christianity had superseded Judaism as the new chosen people of God. Despite his outspoken defense of victims of Nazi persecution, Bonhoeffer still maintained, on a religious level, that the "Jewish question" would ultimately be solved through Jewish conversion to Christianity. The Church strongly advocated this view, as did the ecumenical movements most responsible for aiding Jewish refugees fleeing Nazism.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/Bonhoeffer.html

PP, interesting facts on Bonhoeffer. I'm not sure how much it was that he was against Nazism per say and how much it was because of their antisemitism.

Yes Christianity has replaced Judaism, in that the NT has replaced the OT, but it completely different to say that God has transfered His promises to ethnic Israel to the Church. These go back before the Mosaic covenant.Judasim is not a people, it is a religion.

"I think that we need to becareful with sterotyping.
the phrase replacement theology means different things to different people.

If we are to say that the gentiles have replaced the jews as Gods chosen people than we are totally out of touch and indeed are full of anti- Semitism.

The understanding that the Church (True Israel of God) made up of both believing Jews and Gentiles is Gods Holy nation of whom recieves the promises, That view is seems to be historic Christianity.”

Amen. The term "replacement theology” is very misleading imo. I personally prefer "continuation theology” or "fulfillment theology” for the view I and many other believers hold and have held throughout the Church’s history; meaning that the New Testament Church is a continuation of the Church or People of God of the Old Testament (despite the fact that there is indeed a New Covenant through the blood of Christ we are one with the OT saints -see Acts 7:38 which mentions the "ekklessia"/church in the wilderness in the OT; Ps. 22:2; Heb. 2:12; Heb. 12:22-23); and Jesus Christ is the ultimate fulfillment of Old Testament Israel; Jesus is the truest Israelite of whom national Israel was a type and shadow (see Isa. 42; Isa. 49:3; Hos. 11:1; Matt.2:15); Jesus Christ is the truest of all Jews who perfectly fulfilled all the Old Covenant precepts on behalf of His people, both Old and New Testament saints. We become spiritual Israel (Abraham’s spiritual seed) by virtue of faith in Christ (see Gal. 3:7-9,14,16,28).

It’s sad to note how many believers are quick to label us anti-Semitic or semi-anti-Semitic for our stance, a stance which is based on us seeing the Scriptures clearly teaching this viewpoint. I mean, surely if you are Dispensational you should at least understand that we at least have seemingly good reasons for holding to this view in light of so many Scriptures we point to.

In regard to "ethnic Israel," what does this mean? We are 100s of generations from when the original promises were made. What % Jewish lineage must one have to be considered "Jewish?" For example, if s Jew marries a non-Jew and their children marry non-Jews etc are the offspring several generations down "Jewish?" Just a practical question.

Brother Dave,
Yeah replacement theology never found a place of peace with me, nor does dispensationalism... Just couldn't get either of them to jive with scripture. For me whatever position I take has to to find harmony with scriptures from beginning to end without exception. When I find an exception in scripture, it's me that needs adjusting and I must humble myself before the word and allow the Lord to grow me as He will.
So often I've found brethren to be stubborn when confronted by the word and this, it seems, stems from a predisposition (sometimes anti-semtism) that they find scriptures to justify themselves erroneously in these positions. It's not only sad but truly an affront to the cause Christ.

It's not a coincidence (as the film mentions) that the "human rights" groups have much to criticize Israel for in their defending their own people from attacks but so little about Syria for example,... there really does seem to be a bias that supersedes rational discourse.

Quote: "In regard to "ethnic Israel," what does this mean".

It means the same as an ethnic Kurd, or an ethnic Chinese! Again, why is this type of question is only directed to Jews, never other ethnic groups?
you got to ask yorself what us behind this sort of questioning!

You see it never stops at a theological concept of whether there is a future kingdom, it always becomes personal to question possibility of there even being a truly Jewish race.

A few months ago I learned that there are multitudes of orthodox Jews, including many many orthodox rabbis (you can easily find their videos and articles online) who are opposed to Zionism (which has been the case since at least the 1800s when Zionism began as a concept from what I understand). They have accepted their dispersion among the nations as God's judgment against them. They see Zionism as being responsible for fueling anti-Semitic sentiments among the nations. They feel that Zionists have twisted the Old Testament Scriptures to promote and advance their secular, atheistic political interests and agenda and much blood has been unnecessarily shed as a result. I thought that that was interesting to say the least.

quote;

"Again, why is this type of question is only directed to Jews, never other ethnic groups?
you got to ask yorself what us behind this sort of questioning!"

Calm down there. I ask this because this is what we are talking about. I could easily ask the same question about Chinese, Hungarian or Outer Slabovian if we were talking about them.

Personally, I have a pretty limited idea of my lineage other than there is some English and German and Dutch and possibly some Swiss thrown in for good measure.

Please don's assign evil motives to those who view things differently than you. Why would I or any other true Christian, have any desire to be anti-Semitic?

I agree there is rampant anti-Semitism in the world and always has been. That may be the devil's work (but Art Katz thought it was God's work). But again I ask why would a true believer be anti-Semitic? It doesn't make any sense, at least to me. Martin Luther was a true believer but he was very badly mistaken in this area and was likely a product of his times.

"If we are to say that the gentiles have replaced the jews as Gods chosen people than we are totally out of touch and indeed are full of anti- Semitism.

The understanding that the Church (True Israel of God) made up of both believing Jews and Gentiles is Gods Holy nation of whom recieves the promises, That view is seems to be historic Christianity"

The only chosen people are those who are of faith in Christ.

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.

In that new creation there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, slave nor free man, but Christ is everything and is in all of us. Col. 3:11

28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29And if ye are Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

by Julius21-Again, true believers have not done this. He is talking about the religious system that has committed it's own identity theft of Christianity. (There is an identity theft story to talk about) The false religious system of Christianity! They never differentiate even one time that the early church did not engage in these things. In fact, it was the Jews (Judaizers) that persecuted the early church. Saul was a persecutor until he got saved. It wasn't until Christianity was taken over by the State, and Christianity was co-opted at that time and became a religious system called Catholicism and they still claimed the name of Christianity (They are the TRUE Church) and they began to persecute Jews. This is never mentioned. All the pain and suffering of Jews is blamed on pagans, Islam and Christianity (they seldom, very seldom mention Catholicism).

_____________________________________

Greetings
I do not want to take the thread off topic but I think you have brought up such an important topic here. I agree with what you have shared in this paragraph. Thank you for taking the time to share this with us here.

God bless
mj

Brother Julius,

Thank you for sharing your perspective and I'd imagine you'd find agreement from most (including myself) here on SI, tho I would like to point out a few things for integrities sake-
While it's true what you say about the Catholic Church's role, it isn't the only group of Christians who maintain this perspective. Unless I'm misreading you (and I may be) you seem to isolate this phenomenon to the CC and that would not be accurate.
As for the HRM's agenda being a potential motivating force for this film or their desire to spread the gospel to the Jews is a lil presumptuous. As you admit you're "not sure what their gospel is"....but then to go on to a definitive statement of "it must be the HRM gospel" is seemingly an out of character remark from such a salty saint as yourself.

You wrote;"They don't talk about the Apostle Paul at all and for good reason because Paul specifically says (in Hebrews) what would not be good for their movie. Paul would contradict them severely (and does in Hebrews) regarding "covenantal promises".

Hmmm, Brother this is just simply not so...not sure if you missed part of it or what,... actually it (Romans 11) was the axis upon which they pivot in expounding on the point they're trying to make on behalf of our Semitic brethren and the churches arrogance and utter failing in provoking them.

Btw- I don't think Paul wrote Hebrews;) syntactically it is inconsistent with his other writings, imo-

Edit for spelling

Julius21, just want to also express my appreciation of your review of the film.

from the film....
I have many dear beloved friends who hold to what I believe is just basic replacement theology. If I made that assertion to them, they would recoil and say, "Dalton, this is not replacement theology, this is covenant or fulfillment or inclusion theology."

If your theology of Israel divests them of their National, ethnic, territorial or identity or destiny, you have embraced replacement theology. You may not use the term, you may not use the language, you may not even believe you believe it...

The end result of fulfillment theology is the same result as replacement theology, namely that there are no promises that remain for the Jewish people on a National level.

It's almost as though the Gentile church was a little envious, it lacked the privileges, it took it over and it's wanted to hang on to it. So in other words, there's been rank identity theft.

When we sit down to eat a meal at the table, if one of our kids is missing, we don’t start our meal until that child is there. I think sometimes that we don’t realize that there’s somebody missing from our table, we’re eating and we’re enjoying the meal without even realizing that our child, our brother, Israel, is missing. If our family is ready to leave a place, if all the children except one are in the car, we don’t just leave and go because we feel that one of our kids are missing.

The church today has a great need to recognize that Israel is missing from our bus, Israel is missing from our dinner table, let’s grab hold of God’s apostolic heart for Israel and let’s believe with Him for the salvation of His people... all Israel shall be saved.

The Holocaust of the nineteen thirties and forties was by no means a one-off atrocity and it was by no means an aberration of history, it was one event in a long series of events in a long historical continuum of Christian anti-Judaism and pagan anti-Semitism. Now at the end of the age we are facing a mingling together of anti-Semitism, anti-Judaism and anti-Zionism.

We understand that we need to take responsibility for Jewish suffering of the past and own it and repent of it and we need to prepare for Jewish suffering in the future so that we are found faithful by the Lord and we are found helpful to the Jewish people when that great hour of suffering befalls them.

I post this quote again along with the names of videos that shows the persecution of Jews in Canada and England.... "we need to prepare for Jewish suffering in the future so that we are found faithful by the Lord and we are found helpful to the Jewish people when that great hour of suffering befalls them."

I had no idea that they were being treated this despicably. We will need to be prayed up to help "when that great hour of suffering befalls them."

Titles to search for on youtube:

title 1: Crossing The Line (UK)

title 2: Crossing the Line 2: The New Face of Anti-Semitism on Campus

God bless,
Lisa

Well Julius, I am disappointed but not really surprised at your reaction.

Why have you set yourself up as THE impartial reviewer of this film as if your synopsis is one to be accepted by those who have not even watch it? Everyone has their own bias based on their own particular preconceptions. Yours are blatantly clear. You come to this film with a view that all future prophecy is not to be taken literally, there is no physical promise for Jew or gentile and not even a literal new heaven and earth. Everything is 'spiritual' whatever that means! I wonder if you live your life floating around in some ethereal vaporous state. lol.
There really will be a physical resurrection of our bodies you know! The belief that that there is no (physical)resurrection of the dead is a major error that Paul tackles in 1 Corinthians 15.

Based on your bias you have reacted against a historically accurate presentation in an inaccurate way. You say they place the guilt trip on 'true' Christians, but the truth is a large portion of the Christian church has been guilty of anti-Semitism (and those churches include within them 'true Christians). THEY who made the film are Christians! I am a Christian and do not feel guilty, because I see them as 'beloved for the sake of the fathers' (Rom. 11:28). So why do you feel guilty?? Was Martin Luther a true Christian? Did he write anti-Semitic literature? Yes and Yes!

Again, why would you react when the truth about what the 'church' did against the Jews in the name of Christ is presented, instead of feel remorse and want to warn that church. It's just too easy to say "they're not the real church"! So when Jesus wrote to the churches in Revelation and rebuked them, were they not true churches? Yes there were some within that did not soil their garments with the rest, but that does not take away from the reality that Jesus rebuked HIS church.

Here is an example of your unwarranted criticism: You state the film never mentions the persecution of Christians (implying they don't regard that as an issue). However the subject of the film is the persecution of the Jews, not Christians! That's like accusing the makers of a film on the persecution of the Kurds as not mentioning the persecution of Jews. It's not a rational point.

HeyDave wrote:
Based on your bias you have reacted against a historically accurate presentation in an inaccurate way. You say they place the guilt trip on 'true' Christians, but the truth is a large portion of the Christian church has been guilty of anti-Semitism (and those churches include within them 'true Christians). THEY who made the film are Christians! I am a Christian and do not feel guilty, because I see them as 'beloved for the sake of the fathers' (Rom. 11:28). So why do you feel guilty?? Was Martin Luther a true Christian? Did he write anti-Semitic literature? Yes and Yes!

Thank you for posting this. When it was originally shared with the link on Vimeo, I was disappointed because I was unable to purchase it. I am very thankful that they were able to make it availabe for free.

I have listened to/watched part of this and it has been a blessing. It sounds very similar to the way that Art Katz taught on this topic. I noticed the name Scott Volk, is brother related to the one who worked with Art on "The Spirit of Truth?"

I hope all parts of this work will become available for everyone.

EDIT: Scott Volk relates how his uncle, Paul, was disinherited by his father when he became a believer.

I also want to also express my appreciation of your review of the film.

I look forward to your transcript of notes

I am well aware of the Jewish roots agenda and the tactics that they are useing in trying to revolutionize christianity.

Several families that have left our fellowship have got caught up with this movement in different degrees.

PP, you have not seen the film and have misled. This film has NOTHING to do with the Hebrew Roots movement. In fact Michael Brown speaks against the extremes of the Hebrew Roots movement (not on the film), but in general. None of the speakers on the film mention anything remotely about what the Hebrew roots movement advocates.

It is undeniable that the roots of Christianity is Jewish, but that is NOT the Hebrew roots movement.

Please refrain from slandering what you don't know.

RE: ///This film has NOTHING to do with the Hebrew Roots movement. In fact Michael Brown speaks against the extremes of the Hebrew Roots movement ///

I did not use the word Hebrew Roots, I used the word (((Jewish roots))) !!!

I listened to this audio before posting : A Revolutionary Return to Jewish Roots by Michael Brown : http://www.oneplace.com/ministries/in-the-line-of-fire/listen/a-revolutionary-return-to-jewish-roots-336823.html

I am currently listening to Scott Volk Does Thoroughly Jewish Thursday on Friday
http://www.lineoffireradio.com/2015/05/29/scott-volk-does-thoroughly-jewish-thursday-on-friday/

PP, thanks for posting these audios.
I listened to the Scott Volk one. It's very good. I'm glad others will have the opportunity to listen.

So you see the difference between Jewish roots truth and the HRM?

I understand that many of those whom will admitt to promoting the Jewish roots movement will deny being HRM,
from what I recall researching in the past there is not a clear line that distinguishes the two from each other.
But I relieze that many would say that being labled HRM is mislabeling but I do not believe any of them would be offended by being labeled "Jewish roots" so I correctly used the term "Jewish roots"

There main goal (however extreme or less extreme) seems and can be summerized by elshaddai ministries statement and that is "to fight replacement theology by restoring the Jewishness of Yeshua"

What they mean by "replacement theology" is that view that we have recorded by almost all christians up untill the 19th century concerning this issue. And that is why they are smearing christianity has a whole.

Would you consider doing a review of the documentary "With God on our Side".

Yes it is!

Thanks Julius

I would also be intersted in that review.

I think it is very misleading to say that the desedence of Jacob are still not a chosen people .

Paul clearly says has God rejected his people it is still a present tense question which he answered by no means ,,,so to say that the church is now just the chosen but Israel Jacobs decendents are not in some also is to twist scripture

1I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin.

Another verse worth dwelling on ,,,

my brothers,a my kinsmen according to the flesh. 4They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. 5To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen..

What is being said here ,is never said to any other nation and it is spoken in a present tense context,

It says Israel according to the flesh ,to these belong the adoption ,and the promises ,Paul is saying this about not the spritual Israel , but Israel after the flesh ,but we all know the truth he teaches about that ,we can't take away from that but neither can we take away from this parallel truth, Paul is teaching two truths this should not be neglected ......

And this scripture which I feel is mis interpreted due to an early teaching in Romans ,

not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but "Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 8This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. 9For this is what the promise said: "About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.” 10And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad””in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls”” 12she was told, "The older will serve the younger.” 13As it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”.

The main thrust of what Paul is saying is that God chooses Jacob and his offspring to inherit the adoption and the promise and to bare the Christ ,not Esau linage who are called here the children of the flesh ,in contrast to Jacobs linage who are the children of the promise .

This is a fundamental truth being taught ,along side other spiritual truths ,like the tares and the weat ,being two lineages within the spiritual Israel who is the church, , and the pesacutiion with in both ordained systems that God has chosen , we don't need to raise up one truth at the expense of neglecting the other ,,,,that is the thrust of Paul's in tension, .

Not to boast against the branches ,which is Israel after the flesh ,who are Paul's kinsman ..

It's not hard to remember ,that God made the the new covenant with the

Hebrews 8:10
But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day, says the LORD: I will put my laws in their minds, and I will write them on their hearts.

He didnt actually make the Covent to any body else any other nation ,but we are only privlaged to enter in to the Covenent ,,because of pure grace and a Jewish Christ through who we partake in ,and who's life is accounted to us ,,and this one will hurt ,I'll need a helmit for this .......
And I faith once delivered to the saints a faith that gods deals to us by measure according to only his grace ..

Rom 12:3
ASV\tFor I say, through the grace that was given me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think as to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to each man a measure of faith.

Amen !!

Julius, your posts have been tripping over themselves and you have had to recant statements and judgements you made. I encourage you to slow down so you don't judge prematurely or unnecessarily offend any brethren.

Remember that this PART 1. There are more messages that will clarify the implications and application of what these brethren are trying to communicate to the Church both whole hearted and superficial or apostate.

I am concerned with the tone of some of the speakers but I have only been able to watch the first 60 minutes. I feel that the reason they are drilling in that Christians have worked to destroy the Jews is because we have. I do not identify personally with the groups that killed Jews but because I am Christian, Jews identify me with them as well as non-Christians. This is a fundamental reality of being a Christian. We are part of nation that has been largely unfaithful. It is the same as identifying with the crimes of your people. Germans must identify with the Holocaust their leaders and ancestors performed.

I don't know if they will cover this but the persecution of the Jews has to be viewed in light of God's judgement. God who appointed Babylon is able to use apostate Christians too.

Jeremy221 wrote:

I feel that the reason they are drilling in that Christians have worked to destroy the Jews is because we have. I do not identify personally with the groups that killed Jews but because I am Christian, Jews identify me with them as well as non-Christians

1. Do you think Christians - by that, I mean true believers of every tribe and tongue - should take responsibility and apologize for the atrocities committed by colonial adventurers from the "Christian" West? - e.g. annihilation of Native Americans and Aborigines, massacre of Indians, Opium Wars in China, funding of various jihadists groups (e.g. al-Qaeda, ISIS) for geopolitical purposes, etc.

If you were to visit these countries and ask for their views, you could find some members of these ethnic groups identifying such immoral conduct with Western "Christians". It could be a source of tremendous confusion trying to reconcile the unscrupulous conduct of Western "Christians" with real Christians who are preaching the gospel.

2. It is a fact stated in the Bible that many Jews sought to destroy the early church in the 1st century. Would it be just to claim that Jews are responsible for the persecution of Christians? Are they required to apologize on behalf of some of the 1st-century members of their tribe?

3. It is also a fact that many Jews in great positions of authority in today's world have been hostile towards Christianity, abetting the harassment and even persecution of Christians. Examples: the left-wing media, "liberal" academics, unscrupulous bankers, Silicon Valley tycoons, and Supreme Court justices (3 of the 5 justices who almost irreversibly imposed same-sex marriage on USA were Jews). The nation of Israel also has various groups (e.g. ultra-orthodox Jews, secular/atheist Jews) who are antagonistic against Christians.

Again - would it be just to claim that Jews persecute Christians? Should every Jew apologize for the conduct (past, present, future) of their ethnic brethren?

Or is such negative stereotyping similar to the errors made by the Nazis? In which case, those who claim that Christians are responsible for the persecution of Jews are committing the same reprehensible error.

these verses come to my mind

30And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. 32Fill ye up then the measure of

The correct approuch is those whom done those wicked things are not our fathers.

Proudpapa:

these verses come to my mind

30And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. 32Fill ye up then the measure of

The correct approuch is those whom done those wicked things are not our fathers.

Amen!

The correct approuch is those whom done those wicked things are not our fathers.

Hello PP, I was struck by this comment of yours and immediately Daniel came to mind. From what I can tell in Scripture he was a man of devotion and integrity from his youth and yet his prayer in Daniel chapter 9 is an amazing example and confession and repentance, even for "our fathers". How would this fit into your statement that I have quoted?

In Christ,

RE:/// Hello PP, I was struck by this comment of yours and immediately Daniel came to mind. From what I can tell in Scripture he was a man of devotion and integrity from his youth and yet his prayer in Daniel chapter 9 is an amazing example and confession and repentance, even for "our fathers". How would this fit into your statement that I have quoted? ///

when I wrote : 'The correct approuch is those whom done those wicked things are not our fathers'

I am speaking of those whom have persecuted the Jews, they are not of the the true olive tree.

Why should the true olive tree identify with the thorns that where never part of it ?

by InTheLight on 2015/10/28 15:56:55

The correct approuch is those whom done those wicked things are not our fathers.

Hello PP, I was struck by this comment of yours and immediately Daniel came to mind. From what I can tell in Scripture he was a man of devotion and integrity from his youth and yet his prayer in Daniel chapter 9 is an amazing example and confession and repentance, even for "our fathers". How would this fit into your statement that I have quoted?
__________________________________________________________

Yes exactly Ron! It's a cop out. The whole attitude from those who don't agree with the film has been 'It's not us true Christians, it's those Catholics!' If a Jewish person asked them, "well what about the Lutherens and other churches that promoted similar views?". Their response would be "well they are not 'real' Christians like me either."

It's no different to how most Muslims react about the Islamist terrorists. I hear them say consistently "These are not true Muslims and they don't follow the true teaching". However, even though most Muslims are not Jihadist, the problem is that their religion teaches things that promote the Jihadist agenda. The point is the same, you cannot distance the replacement theology (I use this term in the same way others feel OK to use the term Jewish roots) from the effect it has had on some to use this as a justification of anti-Semitism....and we should acknowledge that!

Certainly it is a noble aspiration to remember the people of Israel and the benefit we as Gentiles have derived from their legacy and covenant, but let's not forget that "some" of what has befallen to them as a people is a result of God's judgment upon them. In fact, God Himself stated that because they did not remain in His covenant he "neglected" them. The Greek word means He did not provide benevolent care for them.

They are still loved "because of the patriarchs" but they are and have been a stiff necked and gain saying people who have been offered more and refused more than any other people on the earth.

God Himself has poured out on them a spirit of stupor and God can and will awaken them and grant them repentance for His own sovereign purpose.

So, even as we soberly consider our own culpability in any neglect or mistreatment of the people of Israel, don't forget that God Himself has treated them as severely as any group we can accuse.

To whom much is given, much is required. Israel is a servant who knew the master's will and deserved a more severe chastening. Paul was right in "wishing" that he could be accursed from CHRIST if it would result in salvation for Israel, but he could not and neither can we. We can hope that our joy in the Messiah will provoke some of them to jealousy. May we continue to hope that God will grant them repentance so that they will turn towards the Lord so that He will remove the veil that lies upon their heart.

There are consequences to refusing God's favor and persistently refusing His attempts to turn us back to Him. Much of what the Jewish people have experienced is related to their refusal of God's mercy.

When we make the accusation "why did the church not intervene when they knew what was going on" - what is the implication towards God? God saw every atrocity and every murder. He was more aware than any group that has been mentioned and He chose His own course of action. He had knowledge of all that was happening and power to stop it......?????

If men are wrong for doing nothing - what of God?

Mak

What happens if they rebuild the temple
and a man with super natural abilities says he is there messiah and they all believe him and he brings in global peace and makes Israel a place of prominence ?

Are we going to follow him ?

InTheLight:

Hello PP, I was struck by this comment of yours and immediately Daniel came to mind. From what I can tell in Scripture he was a man of devotion and integrity from his youth and yet his prayer in Daniel chapter 9 is an amazing example and confession and repentance, even for "our fathers". How would this fit into your statement that I have quoted?

The Bible is clear on individual culpability for sin (Deuteronomy 24:16, Ezekiel 18:20).

Proudpapa:

What happens if they rebuild the temple
and a man with super natural abilities says he is there messiah and they all believe him and he brings in global peace and makes Israel a place of prominence ?

Are we going to follow him ?

Heydave:

The whole attitude from those who don't agree with the film has been 'It's not us true Christians, it's those Catholics!' If a Jewish person asked them, "well what about the Lutherens and other churches that promoted similar views?". Their response would be "well they are not 'real' Christians like me either.

Ultimately, the identity of believers is not in any denomination or local church group, but *in* Jesus Christ. He is my Lord and my brother, who has placed me in His body - the true Israel.

yuehan wrote:

Jeremy221 wrote:
"I feel that the reason they are drilling in that Christians have worked to destroy the Jews is because we have. I do not identify personally with the groups that killed Jews but because I am Christian, Jews identify me with them as well as non-Christians"
This sentiment has been expressed by several people in this thread. I want to challenge that, and encourage everyone to think about the implications of such a belief:

1. Do you think Christians - by that, I mean true believers of every tribe and tongue - should take responsibility and apologize for the atrocities committed by colonial adventurers from the "Christian" West? - e.g. annihilation of Native Americans and Aborigines, massacre of Indians, Opium Wars in China, funding of various jihadists groups (e.g. al-Qaeda, ISIS) for geopolitical purposes, etc.

If you were to visit these countries and ask for their views, you could find some members of these ethnic groups identifying such immoral conduct with Western "Christians". It could be a source of tremendous confusion trying to reconcile the unscrupulous conduct of Western "Christians" with real Christians who are preaching the gospel.

2. It is a fact stated in the Bible that many Jews sought to destroy the early church in the 1st century. Would it be just to claim that Jews are responsible for the persecution of Christians? Are they required to apologize on behalf of some of the 1st-century members of their tribe?

3. It is also a fact that many Jews in great positions of authority in today's world have been hostile towards Christianity, abetting the harassment and even persecution of Christians. Examples: the left-wing media, "liberal" academics, unscrupulous bankers, Silicon Valley tycoons, and Supreme Court justices (3 of the 5 justices who almost irreversibly imposed same-sex marriage on USA were Jews). The nation of Israel also has various groups (e.g. ultra-orthodox Jews, secular/atheist Jews) who are antagonistic against Christians.

Again - would it be just to claim that Jews persecute Christians? Should every Jew apologize for the conduct (past, present, future) of their ethnic brethren?

Or is such negative stereotyping similar to the errors made by the Nazis? In which case, those who claim that Christians are responsible for the persecution of Jews are committing the same reprehensible error.

Many people around the world think that the US is a Christian nation and they try to lump Christianity with certain wicked US policies and/or customs. For example, the US leads the world in abortions, pornography, etc. Are we to agree that the US is indeed a Christian nation and take responsibility and apologize to others for those vile acts sanctioned by this government? This nation has never been a Christian nation. It was taken over and founded by Free Masons who used the Bible to advance their own geo-political agenda (it doesn’t take too much research to learn this).

For us to take responsibility like that would be comparable to Christians living in the first century taking responsibility for the vile acts sanctioned by the Roman Empire. It doesn’t make any sense.

proudpapa wrote:

What happens if they rebuild the temple
and a man with super natural abilities says he is there messiah and they all believe him and he brings in global peace and makes Israel a place of prominence ?

Are we going to follow him ?

To say that every Christian needs to side with Israel against any nation that comes against them is comparable to living in the first century and saying that Christians needed to side with the Pharisees and Sadducees and Jewish zealots against the Roman Empire. Christians have no business getting involved in such things. We are to love all people and reach out to all people with the Gospel, regardless of their ethnicity.

Forgot I wanted to comment on this portion of yuehan’s post:

2. It is a fact stated in the Bible that many Jews sought to destroy the early church in the 1st century. Would it be just to claim that Jews are responsible for the persecution of Christians? Are they required to apologize on behalf of some of the 1st-century members of their tribe?

3. It is also a fact that many Jews in great positions of authority in today's world have been hostile towards Christianity, abetting the harassment and even persecution of Christians. Examples: the left-wing media, "liberal" academics, unscrupulous bankers, Silicon Valley tycoons, and Supreme Court justices (3 of the 5 justices who almost irreversibly imposed same-sex marriage on USA were Jews). The nation of Israel also has various groups (e.g. ultra-orthodox Jews, secular/atheist Jews) who are antagonistic against Christians.

Again - would it be just to claim that Jews persecute Christians? Should every Jew apologize for the conduct (past, present, future) of their ethnic brethren?

Or is such negative stereotyping similar to the errors made by the Nazis? In which case, those who claim that Christians are responsible for the persecution of Jews are committing the same reprehensible error.

Well it seems that some things just don't change.... This film and its title "controversy" is being displayed quite clearly here on SI, which is sadly surprising to me- perhaps I'm naive to think differently.
I mean how is it that we expect to provoke anyone to jealousy much less our Hebrew brethren when we bicker and strive against one another?
So much confusion... and we know our God is not the author of this so where does it come from,...huh?

One of the first messages I heard from Art Katz was one where he recalled a time where he was withstood and sharply rebuked by the rabbi's at the place he was speaking, sharing the gospel. They tore into him with an almost venomous attack and with all the authority they had and tho he knew he was "right" he said nothing! He just stood there and took it, in all meekness and gentleness and tho' this experience had really rocked him, weeks later a Jewish woman who heard of it (his lack of defense) came to speak with him and Art shared the gospel with her and she came to faith in Christ Jesus:)
So perhaps we'd do well to ask ourselves if we are walking in faith to such an extent that we are willing to be made a spectacle of, for His glory,...or are we out to flaunt our knowledge attempting to steal it (His glory) for our own just to be "right" in the eyes of men? Are we in our silence also as radiant with the love our God has shed abroad in our hearts as we are in our speech?
I mean we will give an account of every "unemployed" word we speak and by our words we will be either justified or condemned- so in light of this fact given to us by our Lord in Matthew 12:36-37 how ought we who claim His name speak to one another?

While this is not an attempt to advocate passivity, or suggesting we should blindly agree with everything, it is nonetheless an attempt encourage us all to exercise ourselves unto godliness which is profitable in all things by being meek in spirit, humble before man being ready to give an answer for our hope. We are not called to strive with one another, but to strive to maintain unity of the common faith we all share in. This is what will be provocative of jealousy that will lead the lost to faith in Christ.

One more quick thing I forgot to mention. I watched some of the film (in all honesty I don’t think I can bear to watch the whole thing - I commend Julius21 for exhibiting much patience in this regard). This scripture comes to mind which points out something that has been mentioned throughout this thread:
"Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, "Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down.”-Rev. 12:10

The enemy is certainly still at work in these last days seeking to accuse the brethren day and night despite the fact that he has been cast down from the presence of God. The film certainly does a good job of appealing to the emotions of Christians, with all the dramatic sound in the background and all. Brethren, we need to be discerning when it comes to these types of accusations against the Body and Bride of Christ.

Proudpapa:

Quote:
these verses come to my mind

30And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. 32Fill ye up then the measure of

The correct approuch is those whom done those wicked things are not our fathers.

The division at the end of the day is not between Jews and Gentiles, but between those who are in Christ and those who are not. This has always been the real division - between true Israel and the world (Romans 9:6, Romans 11:26).

As I have read this thread, a couple of thoughts have come to me.

First: Our brother is correct here in my opinion. The ultimate test of righteousness will not be Jew or Gentile. Even if the nation of Israel were to reestablish the temple and begin to offer sacrifices according to the law, this would not be acceptable in God's sight for righteousness. The old covenant is forever laid to rest at the foot of the cross, for both Jew and Gentile. God does not deal differently with Jews and Gentiles where salvation is concerned. The gospel was first preached to Jews, and then to Gentiles. One day they will look on Him whom they pierced and will mourn for Him. Those who will be saved will do so because they turn to their true Messiah and receive His grace, just as I did one day.

Second: I just finished reading through the Bible again. What struck me this time was the vast number of times that it was prophesied that God would NOT forever cast off His chosen people, Israel. Paul made this a very clear NT reality in the book of Romans. They have returned to the land. This is significant and a fulfillment of prophecy. God will one day remove the blinders, and they will see clearly the plan of salvation that has been revealed to the Gentiles. There is just too great a weight of scripture that plainly declares that they remain His chosen, despite their many backslidings. Remember, they could NEVER have kept their covenant, and God knew that. That was the whole point of the law and the old covenant in the first place.

Third: (or maybe just a combination of the first two observations) The fact that God chose Israel does not indicate blessing in that God will grant them special salvation privileges. In fact, being chosen was almost more of a curse than a blessing. Yet they continue to be His chosen people. They are special in His eyes. We cannot say that the church has now become "spiritual Israel" and that physical Israel is no longer significant to God or to the prophetic timeline.

I think sometimes we fall into ditches. We want to throw them out and replace them with the church, or we want to join them and somehow put ourselves back under the old covenant. Neither is the correct stance in my opinion.

Travis,

Thank you for putting this so clearly. This is exactly what I believe and also the maker's of the film made clear they believe, despite being totally misrepresented by some on here.

I do hope folk watch this for themselves and see that this is so, because the discussion has become rediculous in putting forward statements that are not even in the content or spirit of the film. Some folk haven't even seen the film and are making wild accusations based anothers distorted report.

would you please expound on your understanding of the following verse :
Romans 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:

add: also expound what your thoughts are on what is meant by : 'until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.'

PP, I'll do this tomorrow as I can't get to it tonight and I want to do it properly in context with the chapter.
Thanks.

Heydave, thankyou

Let us establish first this principle I am sure we can all agree on…..
"For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him." Romans 10:12
Principle = God will respond richly to all who call on Him, whether Jew or Gentile.

To consider what Romans 11:26 - "And so all Israel shall be saved” means we need to work through Romans 11 to see what Paul meant by ‘Israel’ here and what he meant by ‘All Israel’.

However let us start in Romans 10:21, as we know this is one letter and there were no chapter divisions originally and this defines who Paul is talking about at this point.

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

So Israel here we would agree is Israel the nation (or ethnic Israel), as it cannot be a synonym for the church, seeing they are a disobedient people. I am going to use the term ‘ethnic Israel’ to distinguish from ‘spiritual Israel’.

Next verse is Romans 11:1 "I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.”

So has God cast away his people? Which people? This must be ethnic Israel based on context and Paul defines that he is one of them by natural lineage. GOD HAS NOT CAST THEM AWAY, because Paul is proof, being one of them.

Romans 11:2-5: "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,”

"Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.”
"But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.”

"Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.”

So Paul makes the point here that although it may appear that ethnic Israel has completely rejected the LORD (like in the days of Elijah), in actual fact there is a remnant that God has within ‘ethnic Israel’ who remain faithful. This remnant would include the Jewish apostles, the Jew Paul and all the early Church that was by majority Jewish at the beginning. This remnant are these elected (chosen) by grace.

Romans 11:11: "I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.”

Who is Paul talking about as having stumbled? It is not gentiles, it is not the faithful remnant of Israelites, but the rest, the majority of his people Israel. However Paul says they have not stumbled to the point of a fall (God forbid). This is where the KJV confuses the issue, because he seems to contradict himself by saying, "but through their ‘fall’ salvation has come to the gentiles”. The second word 'fall' here is different and is better translated ‘ sin’. When he says "that they should not fall” the word fall is to fall away completely.

Romans 11:12: "Now if the fall (sin) of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?”

Now in vs. 17-21 Paul use the analogy of the olive tree.
"And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;"

"Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.”

"Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in."

"Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:"

"For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.”

So we note here Paul is talking about a ‘natural’ olive tree with ‘natural’ branches as an analogy for natural (ethnic) Israel and natural (ethnic) Isralites (or Jews) compared to a ‘wild’ olive tree and branches(gentiles).

Romans 11:24-25 "For if thou (gentiles) wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these (ethnic Israel), which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?”

"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.”

We are told not to be ignorant about the fact that this blindness to Israel is only in part, UNTIL the fulness of the gentiles comes in. This can only mean that there is a time (in God’s pre-determined plan) when all those who are gentile by nature have come into the church (the body of Christ). Note: fullness of the gentiles is completely different to ‘the times of the gentiles’. Fullness of the gentiles is to do with believers in this context. 'Times of the gentiles' is spoken of the unbelieving nations that dominate the people of Israel.

ROMANS 11:26 Now we are here! So we have seen the context and consider what this means.

"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:”

First we have seen that ‘Israel’ all the way through this chapter has always meant ‘ethnic Israel’, therefore it would be without warrant to change this meaning half way through a sentence.
Let’s also clarify the words ‘and so’ in this verse. It is the greek word ‘houtō’ and means ‘in this way’. So ‘in this way’ (after the fullness of the gentiles has come in) Israel will no longer be blinded and be grafted back in. Because "the deliverer shall turn ungodliness from Jacob”. Notice it says ‘Jacob’ This reinforces the fact Paul is clearly talking about his brothers after the flesh (ethnic Israel).

All Israel in the context of all we have looked at in this chapter, must mean all those within natural (ethnic) Israel who will be the true (spiritual)Israel through faith and obedience to Christ. In the same way there will be a fullness of the gentiles within the church, there will also be a fullness of Israel (the 'all') who make up the church and we will be one church (Jew and gentile). We have not reached this point of the fullness of gentiles yet and ungodliness being taken away from Jacob, but the re-gathering of Israel into the land is part of that process. We see an increasing number of Jewish churches and fellowships in the land of Israel . it is estimated that today there are over 20,000 Jewish believers and over 150 messianic congregations in the land of Israel, compared to less than a handful in the 1970s. Are we seeing the beginning of this blindness being taken away?

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.”

In the context of all Paul has told us about Israel, he says the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. God has not and will not change His mind in regard to Israel.

HeyDave - thanks for sharing your understanding of Romans 11:26.

I agree with large parts of what you've written. I too believe that God cares about ethnic Israel, and that there will be a time for the "fullness of the Jews" (so to speak) to come into the body of Christ. Paul emphasizes the significance of this future event in Romans 11:15 - "For if their being cast away is the reconciling of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?"

However, I believe that Romans 11:26 refers to spiritual Israel. Here is my understanding:

1. Paul had earlier wrote about the "olive tree" metaphor in Romans 11:16-24, with her natural and wild branches - representing both Jews and Gentiles - being grafted into one tree.

Romans was written to a primarily Gentile audience in mind, and Paul continues: "For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved..."

The "all Israel will be saved" verse is linked to the preceding verse which implies a union of "the fullness of the Gentiles" + "(ethnic) Israel". So I believe that the context shows that "all Israel" refers to spiritual Israel, with the "all" emphasizing that it is composed of both Jews and Gentiles.

2. If "all Israel" were to refer to ethnic/national Israel, that would mean that there is a future generation of Jews where *all* members recognize Yeshua Ha-Mashiach.

I find that difficult to reconcile with verses such as John 5:43, Matt 24:15-22, 2 Thess 2:4. As much as there will a significant remnant of Jews who will be saved, there will also be others who will accept the antichrist.

Further, if all ethnic Israel is to be saved, then it seems that God would be showing partiality as there is no indication that all Gentiles will be saved. But scripture says God does not show partiality.

yuehan,

Thanks for your reply.
You wrote "The "all Israel will be saved" verse is linked to the preceding verse which implies a union of "the fullness of the Gentiles" + "(ethnic) Israel". So I believe that the context shows that "all Israel" refers to spiritual Israel, composed of both Jews and Gentiles.

2. If "all Israel" were to refer to ethnic/national Israel, that would mean that there is a future generation of Jews where *all* members recognize Yeshua Ha-Mashiach. "
___________________________________________________________

Not necessarily does it follows that 'all' means every single Jewish person. As I pointed out, in the same way the fullness of (or all) the gentiles, does not by any means mean all gentiles, so 'all' Israel in the context means the same thing, all those within ethnic Israel (Jews) who are true Israel. Scriptures such as Zechariah (they will look on me whom they pierced) does seem to indicate that the remnant that is left of Israel in those last days will all turn to Messiah Jesus. Then both, 'all' these Jews and gentiles will be one true spiritual Israel if you like.
What it does make clear to me is that there is a coming time (after the fullness of the gentiles) that God will turn blindness away from Israel.
I deliberately went through the whole chapter to show that Israel consistently means ethnic Israel here. You cannot change it just because it suits a doctrinal position.

I see the modern state of Israel, although in unbelief and imperfect, to be part of God's doing to bring these events to a climax. To say as some do, that they are a self fulfilled prophecy of Christian Zionists is pushing credibility too far. Their restoration and survival is an obvious miracle. The superpowers of today can't even produce what they are trying to do in the Middle East. How much less could Israel with precious little help survive if it were not God who was behind it!

TMK wrote: "Further, if all ethnic Israel is to be saved, then it seems that God would be showing partiality as there is no indication that all Gentiles will be saved. But scripture says God does not show partiality."
___________________________________________________________

Read through the OT and tell me God does not show partiality with nations in how He deals with them.

Fixing to go to work no time now.

One quick question : "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:"

Has this already happened or do you see this as a future event ?

Julias, nice cut and paste!

I took time to go through a study and explain the whole passage in context. To understand what someone means you have to listened (read) all they are saying. It makes no linguistic sense to come to that conclusion when you read it through.

having understood what Paul is saying in ch.11, we can also understand what he meant in ch. 9:6 when he said "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel"

Not all Israel that ARE OF Israel. So he is still talking about natural Israel, but within natural is there is a spiritual 'true' Israel. He is no way is teaching in Romans that there is no natural Israel, but makes clear that just being a natural descendant does not make one an heir of the promise. They need to receive the promise by faith.

There are too extremes of error. 1. Those who think Israel by just being ethnic descendants of Jacob will inherit salvation. 2. Those who say that Israel and all that means now has become 'the church' and God does not have any future dealings with the descendants of Jacob.
Both are wrong.

PP, future, unless you think the fullness of the gentiles has already happened.

Heydave:

I deliberately went through the whole chapter to show that Israel consistently means ethnic Israel here. You cannot change it just because it suits a doctrinal position.

However, I just want to point out that your observation regarding the word usage of "Israel" in Romans 11 has a parallel in Romans 9, where Paul consistently uses Israel to refer to "ethnic Israel" except for one instance in Romans 9:6. The meaning of "Israel" thus depends on the surrounding context.

I see the modern state of Israel, although in unbelief and imperfect, to be part of God's doing to bring these events to a climax.

Key questions:

(i) What is the purpose of the restoration of national Israel?

(ii) Is this a permanent restoration of Israeli territory to the descendants of Abraham, or will that only happen when Jesus returns (particularly if you believe in a literal millennial reign)?

This is where I don't always agree with many Zionists.

Julius,
Quote: "I know you don't subscribe to Hagee or Parsley or others like them, but when they pray for physical war regarding Israel's "enemies", something is wrong."

Yes I agree that this is wrong.

Quote: "I don't know how many in your country subscribe to this view but at least 70 million Christians in America seem to subscribe to Christian Zionism and they have no problem sending their sons into physical battle to protect "Israel". Is this why God raised up America?"

I doubt there are 70 million Christians in the USA, let alone Christian Zionist! That's about 25% of the population. Where does this figure come from?
I think there are probably multitudes in America who are not true Christians, but have a 'form of godliness' and pick up on all aspect of Christian theology, distorting it in some way. We should not let our experience and reaction to this form our theology.

Quote: "Yes, in my book, this is the "strong delusion" spoken of in 2 Thess. 2, and I never really understood it, until now."

I don't see how that can be an accurate exegesis of that verse. The context is the anti-Christ in the last days performing signs and wonders to deceive those who do not love the truth. I don't see this happening now, or that those who don't agree with your view don't love the truth. You are reading the current topic into the text in a way it does not make sense.

Yuehan,

Yes I don't always agree with many Zionist either. I think you, like me, want understand what the bible teaches, rather than subscribe to a particular theological camp, be that Zionism, replacement / covenant theology or whatever.

Quote: "(i) What is the purpose of the restoration of national Israel?"

I think (and I probably need to think longer about it) it is tied up to the millennium and the fulfilment of the earth being ruled as a theocracy with Israel serving their God as King of Kings in the Messianic reign of Christ. There are so many Scriptures that talk about the reign of Messiah subduing the nations. Israel was always supposed to be that host nation for the Messiah in this way and it never happened yet.

Quote: "(ii) Is this a permanent restoration of Israeli territory to the descendants of Abraham, or will that only happen when Jesus returns (particularly if you believe in a literal millennial reign)?"

I think ultimately it will only happen when Jeus returns.

What do you think?

Dave wrote:
"ultimately it will only happen when Jeus returns."

I am curious as to when you believe the resurrection will take place in relation to the second coming. Do you think we will have our resurrected bodies at that point? If so, does that mean we will be waking around in our new bodies among unbelievers?

I find this discussion pretty fascinating.

Heydave:

Quote: "(i) What is the purpose of the restoration of national Israel?"

I think (and I probably need to think longer about it) it is tied up to the millennium and the fulfilment of the earth being ruled as a theocracy with Israel serving their God as King of Kings in the Messianic reign of Christ. There are so many Scriptures that talk about the reign of Messiah subduing the nations. Israel was always supposed to be that host nation for the Messiah in this way and it never happened yet.

Quote: "(ii) Is this a permanent restoration of Israeli territory to the descendants of Abraham, or will that only happen when Jesus returns (particularly if you believe in a literal millennial reign)?"

I think ultimately it will only happen when Jesus returns.

What do you think?

Some further thoughts:

1. The promise which God extended to Abraham and his descendants concerning the land of Israel was unconditional, and predates the Old Covenant (Gen 15:18). Who are Abraham's descendants?

Notwithstanding God's purposes for the Jews and the modern state of Israel, I believe the answer is stated in Romans 4:11-18 - Abraham being the father of all who believe, and also the father of many nations.

Hence my take on this issue is that the land of Israel has been given to Christians by God through Abraham. But we do not have the prerogative to take the land by force - there is no need for that, because Christ will reclaim the land Himself when He returns. This especially makes sense if you believe that the 1000-year reign of Jesus Christ on earth would be fulfilled literally.

2. The Zionist v.s. anti-Zionist debate tends to focus on the political dimension of things - both sides have an emphasis on defining territorial boundaries, and finding a long-lasting political solution through diplomatic and military efforts.

I can't help seeing a parallel between this and the expectation of 1st-century Jews, who were hoping for a political messiah to remove the shackles of the Roman Empire and re-establish Jewish rule in Israel. Those who harbour similar expectations today will likely face the same disappointment.

In his epistles, Paul was never occupied with political or territorial matters concerning Israel. His overarching concern for the Jews was their spiritual standing with God (Romans 9), and I believe he displayed the mind of God in this matter.