Menu

The Whoopi Goldberg debacle- Are Jews a Race?

T
TMK

https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/deep-shtetl/61f992de9277230021ae11f7/are-jews-a-race-whoopi-goldberg-holocaust/

Are Jews a Race?
Whoopi Goldberg’s Holocaust comments reflect how Jews don’t fit into Western boxes

By Yair Rosenberg
FEBRUARY 01, 2022

This is an edition of Yair Rosenberg’s newsletter, Deep Shtetl. Sign up here.

Yesterday, celebrated actor and TV host Whoopi Goldberg caused a minor meltdown on ABC’s The View when she asserted that the Holocaust "isn’t about race.” Later that day, she joined The Late Show With Stephen Colbert and expanded on these remarks in an uncomfortable exchange, insisting that "the Nazis were white people, and most of the people they were attacking were white people.”

As countless commentators pointed out, this line of thinking is profoundly mistaken. The Nazis were obsessed with race and defined the Jews as their racial inferiors, which is how they justified exterminating them. This is why the Nazis targeted anyone with a Jewish grandparent, regardless of whether the person identified as Jewish or not. Nazism was a blood-based doctrine of racial supremacy, and its consequence was the genocide of the Jews. The very term anti-Semitism, which casts Jews in racial terms, was popularized by a German anti-Jewish activist who wanted to give his hatred a scientific sheen. Race is a social construct, and this is how it was constructed in Nazi Germany and much of Europe.

To her credit, Goldberg apologized last night on Twitter, and then again this morning on The View, alongside Jonathan Greenblatt from the Anti-Defamation League, who talked through the issue with the panelists.

How Do You Define Jews?

Goldberg is not an anti-Semite, but she was confused””and understandably so. In my experience, mistakes like hers often happen because well-meaning people have trouble fitting Jews into their usual boxes. They don’t know how to define Jews, and so they resort to their own frames of reference, like "race” or "religion,” and project them onto the Jewish experience. But Jewish identity doesn’t conform to Western categories, despite centuries of attempts by society to shoehorn it in. This makes sense, because Judaism predates Western categories. It’s not quite a religion, because one can be Jewish regardless of observance or specific belief. (Einstein, for example, was proudly Jewish but not religiously observant.) But it’s also not quite a race, because people can convert in! It’s not merely a culture or an ethnicity, because that leaves out all the religious components. And it’s not simply a nationality, because although Jews do have a homeland and many identify as part of a nation, others do not.

Instead, Judaism is an amalgam of all these things””more like a family (into which one can be adopted) than a sectarian Western faith tradition””and so there’s no great way to classify it in English. A lot of confusion results from attempts to reduce this complexity to something more palatable for contemporary conceptions.

This is just my off-the-cuff explanation. One could write a book about this topic””scholars have””and still not exhaust its nuances. Over the years, smart people have used terms like "civilization” or "peoplehood” or "tribe” to describe the Jewish collective, but because those words are not as straightforward to the average person, I prefer "family.” Whichever label one employs, I hope that the above explanation provides a starting point for those trying to understand the nature of Jewish identity, and helps them avoid the trap of imposing outside ideas on it.

Goldberg was right to apologize, and probably wishes she hadn’t raised this subject. But I’m glad her misstep has provided a public opportunity to address it. We need to have more conversations about these topics going forward, not fewer. Conversation dispels confusion and leads to greater understanding, and given recent events, we need a lot more understanding about Jews in our public discourse.

D
drifter

The Jews are a distinct ethnic group, while Judaism is an organized religious system. One may be the former, the latter or both.

On a related note, does anyone have reliable data on how many ethnic Jews are in the world? When I search for an answer on Google it says there are 15.2 million Jews in the world, but that number always stays the same when I search for how many people practice Judaism. It is quite obvious that not every person that has Jewish ancestry practices Judaism. The number just seems low to me; God promised Abraham his offspring would be "as the sand of the sea", yet there are 436 million Arabs (not every Arab is Muslim) as opposed to 15.2 million Jews. I am aware of the Diaspora and the fact that many more people may have some Jewish ancestry than people realize.

In regards to Whoopi (her real name is Caryn Johnson, by the way); I don't hate her, but she is a shameless race grifter who is causing division and hatred.

D
docs

It makes me think of the church's past error and maybe even today in some places that if a Jew becomes a Christian, they are no longer Jewish!

T
TMK

That’s always what I’ve wondered is why I posted the article- when prophetic types talk about promises for the "Jewish people” what are they talking about? Does ethnic group = race? I am not sure about that. I do not believe that it is.

Like I said in a previous post on another thread my dad’s DNA test came back at 1% eastern Jew.

There are countless persons who have some small % of Jewish blood. Perhaps that’s where the sands of the seashore come in - but I don’t think the people who talk about promises for the Jewish people are talking about 1 or half percenters like me and my dad. The problem is, I have no idea who they are talking about. No one has ever answered this question. Perhaps because it is not answerable.

D
drifter

I don't know what percentage of a person's ancestry has to be to make them Jewish. I don't think 1% cuts it though (sorry Todd).

Maybe this is why the Jews were so precise in keeping genealogical records. We also see many instances in scripture of non Jews being integrated into Israel; if they married a Jew their offspring would be considered fully Jewish.

I think it's pretty clear, though, that there are physical descendants of Abraham even today.

D
drifter

Agreed David. Replacement theology is very erroneous. I thank God there are many Messianic Jews today.

B
BranchinVINE


Hi Todd,

Paul would tell you to totally disregard the one percent and half percent.

After all, he was 100% Jewish with much to boast (Phil. 3:4-6) but when he became a Christian he considered these things which were once valuable to him as worthless. "Yes,” he said, "everything else is worthless when compared with the infinite value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have discarded everything else, counting it all as garbage, so that I could gain Christ” (Phil. 3:7-8).

When Paul said that "if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new” (2 Cor. 5:17), I would think that even your half percent has passed away.

Because there is no room in the new creation for anything else but Christ alone.

Col. 3:10-11 ”“
and have put on the new man who is renewed in knowledge according to the image of Him who created him, where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcised nor uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave nor free, but Christ is all and in all.

Christ is all and in all.

Ps. 115:1 ”“
Not to us, O LORD, not to us,
But to Your name give glory
Because of Your lovingkindness, because of Your truth.


Blessings

B
BranchinVINE


Maybe this is why the Jews were so precise in keeping genealogical records.

Interesting thought.

Do the old genealogical records still exist?

B
BranchinVINE


THE SANDS OF THE SEASHORE

Gal. 3:16 ”“
Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds,” as referring to many, but rather to one, "And to your seed,” that is, Christ.

Gal. 3:29 ”“
And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Rev. 7:9 ”“
After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation and all tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, and palm branches were in their hands;

D
docs

BranchinVINE,

After his conversion and also being the writer of Colossians 3:10-11, why do you think Paul continued to introduce himself as a Jew in Acts 21:39 and 22:3?

D
drifter

Jade, I agree that in one sense christians are most definitely "Abraham's seed"; we are spiritual Jews. We are grafted into the commonwealth of Israel (Romans 11). But scripture is often meant by God to be taken in several ways (the manifold wisdom of God). So while God's promise to Abraham in Genesis 22:17 is fulfilled in God grafting in Gentile believers, it also refers to the physical descendents of Abraham. The church in no way replaces Israel; rather, we are grafted into their promises and are used as an instrument of God to "provoke them to jealousy" to embrace Jesus as their promised Messiah (Romans 11:11).

From Wikipedia:

"To this day there are Jews who trace their descent from the ancient tribe of priests (kohanim) and levites (leviim) of the Jewish Bible and who still receive special recognition in areas such as the Jewish synagogue service."

Also we know from reading the genealogies in both the Old and New Testaments that Jews did keep ancestral records.

B
BranchinVINE


docs,

After his conversion and also being the writer of Colossians 3:10-11, why do you think Paul continued to introduce himself as a Jew in Acts 21:39 and 22:3?


In Acts 21:39, Paul was telling the commander he was a Jew of Tarsus and not the Egyptian who was stirring up a revolt some time ago as the commander thought he was.

In Acts 22:3, Paul was narrating his history to the Jews starting with "I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia……”

He was speaking to non-believers to whom he could not speak deep Christian truths.


Speaking to Christians, Paul said in 2 Cor. 5:16 ”“ Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh.


Blessings


D
docs

BranchinVine,

Do you believe Paul was no longer Jewish when he became a Christian!?

B
BranchinVINE


docs,

This is how Paul regarded himself when he became a Christian:

Gal.2:20 ”“
I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me.

D
docs

But was Paul still a Jew when he wrote Gal 2:20?

It's not just gotcha questions I'm trying to hurl at you. I believe our perspectives and beliefs in this area have important implications for how the church has and presently treats the Jewish people.

Thank you.

B
BranchinVINE


He would still be a Jew after the flesh but he no longer regarded himself after the flesh (2 Cor. 5:16).

He said: "For both circumcision and uncircumcision mean nothing; what matters instead is a new creation" (Gal. 6:15).

Col. 1:27 -- "Christ in you, the hope of glory" -- is the only true hope for all people, Jews and Gentiles.

Gal. 3:28 -- "for you are all one in Christ Jesus" -- is how Christians should treat each other.

John 15:12 --"This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you" -- eliminates all hate and prejudice..

M
MrBillPro

The entire show needs to be cancelled as it only spreads hate.

D
docs

So he no longer regarded himself as that which he still was?

B
BranchinVINE


Certainly the outward man is perishing but the inward man is renewed day by day.

P
Platy

Galatians 3:28 - There 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.

Jade how about gender?

C
ccchhhrrriiisss

Good point, Platy.

I would also consider the passage from Romans 11:29.


25 For I do not want you, brothers and sisters, to be uninformed of this mystery””so that you will not be wise in your own estimation””that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; 26 and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written:

"The Deliverer will come from Zion,
He will remove ungodliness from Jacob.”
27 "This is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”

28 In relation to the gospel they are enemies on your account, but in relation to God’s choice they are beloved on account of the fathers; 29 for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.

Romans 11:25-29 NASB


25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

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:

27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father's sakes.

29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

Romans 11:25-29 KJV


25 I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in, 26 and in this way all Israel will be saved. As it is written:

"The deliverer will come from Zion;
he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.
27 And this is my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.”

28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, 29 for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.

Romans 11:25-29 NIV

Verse 29 is a popular verse oft-used by Calvinists in reference to the idea of a foreknown "eternal" nature of salvation for believers. However, this verse is specifically referring to the blessings of the physical seed of Abraham.

Moreover, Paul makes many distinctions between Jews and Greeks/Gentiles. For instance, the writer of Acts (likely Luke) introduced Timothy in Acts 16:1. He wrote, "Now Paul also came to Derbe and to Lystra. And a disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek..." (Acts 16:1 NASB).

In fact, Paul (in his defense to King Agrippa) said the following:


2 "Regarding all the things of which I am accused by the Jews, King Agrippa, I consider myself fortunate that I am about to make my defense before you today,
3 especially because you are an expert in all customs and questions among the Jews; therefore I beg you to listen to me patiently.

4 "So then, all Jews know my way of life since my youth, which from the beginning was spent among my own nation and in Jerusalem,
5 since they have known about me for a long time, if they are willing to testify, that I lived as a Pharisee according to the strictest sect of our religion.
6 And now I am standing trial for the hope of the promise made by God to OUR fathers;
7 the promise to which OUR twelve tribes hope to attain, as they earnestly serve God night and day. For this hope, O king, I am being accused by Jews.
8 Why is it considered incredible among you people if God raises the dead?

Acts 26:2-8 NASB

Notice that Paul uses the word "our" in verses 6 and 7 (i.e., "our fathers" and "our twelve tribes").

If you do a search at BibleGateway for the word "Greek," you'll find that many of the results are in making a distinction between "Jews and Greeks."

Consider I Corinthians 1:23-25 (NASB).

23 "...but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block, and to Gentiles foolishness,
24 BUT TO THOSE WHO ARE THE CALLED, BOTH JEWS AND GREEKS, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than mankind, and the weakness of God is stronger than mankind."

There is an earthly distinction between Jews and Greeks. However, this physical distinction doesn't mean that the physical seed of Abraham is part of the church on account of that physical, genetic heritage. After all, despite the irrevocable "gifts and calling" of God, there were consequences for sin.

Look at the 40-year wandering journey from the Red Sea to the Jordan. Many people -- despite being the seed of Abraham -- died as a consequence of their sin.

Not only did none (except Joshua and Caleb) die in the wilderness before inheriting the promised land, but many were directly executed for reasons of sin and disobedience. As Keith Green quipped in a song ("So You Want To Go Back To Egypt"), "the ground opened up and had some of us for lunch."

Why?

Ezekiel 18:19-20 makes this very clear:

19 "Yet you say, ‘Why should the son not suffer the punishment for the father’s guilt?’ When the son has practiced justice and righteousness and has kept all My statutes and done them, he shall certainly live.
20 THE PERSON WHO SINS WILL DIE. A son will not suffer the punishment for the father’s guilt, nor will a father suffer the punishment for the son’s guilt; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself."

Salvation is found in only one name -- Jesus Christ. This is true whether you're Jew or Gentile. This doesn't mean that distinctions are lost in terms of "earthly" attributes (e.g., gender, earthly citizenship, race/ethnicity, etc.) or even spiritual heritage (i.e., the promise to Abraham of his seed).

This is clear in Romans...


1 I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? Far from it! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
2 God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew.

Romans 11:1 NASB

Paul declares in this epistle that "I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham of the tribe of Benjamin" (verse 1). This is a reference to a physical tribal ethnicity -- and the promise to Abraham.

Yet, we must consider what really matters -- knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. As such, we count all such things loss (Phillippians 3:1-11).

C
ccchhhrrriiisss

I should add one last thing (in reference to Romans 11:1-2.


11 I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
2 God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew.

God has NOT rejected His people; however, many of His people have rejected God -- particularly in the form of our Messiah. After all, salvation is only found in Christ Jesus our Lord.

D
drifter

I don't know Bill. As much as I hate the content on The View, God gives every man free speech. I would like it to be cancelled, but maybe from lack of interest/ratings. I also would like all of the ungodly filth from Hollywood piled in a big heap and set on fire (just the movies/music etc, not the people!)

M
MrBillPro

Nigel, I agree with the free speech thing, I was just expressing my opinion/free speech. I also agree with you on Hollywood, but I'm guessing all them will just end up eating their own, just like some politicians in this country, this will probably be how the story ends with Hollywood and some of our politicians.

D
drifter

I agree 100% Bill.

T
TMK

I am certainly not arguing that Paul magically lost his Jewish heritage after the Damascus road.

My only point is that no one today can say who exactly these supposed promises to Abraham apply to **today.**

There has been extreme "watering down” of Abraham’s bloodline over the last several thousand years.

So I ask once again- who do these promises apply to "today?”

And please don’t answer "the Jewish people” because that is simply re-begging the question.

P
Platy

Genesis 41:45 - And Pharaoh called Joseph’s name Zaphnath-paaneah; and he gave him to wife Asenath the daughter of Poti-pherah priest of On. And Joseph went out over all the land of Egypt.

Genesis 41:50-52 - [50] And unto Joseph were born two sons before the years of famine came, which Asenath the daughter of Poti-pherah priest of On bare unto him. [51] And Joseph called the name of the firstborn Manasseh: For God, said he, hath made me forget all my toil, and all my father’s house. [52] And the name of the second called he Ephraim: For God hath caused me to be fruitful in the land of my affliction.

Manasseh and Ephraim were mixed and so were the children of Moses. They were counted as Israelites.

What people group did Hitler try to exterminate in the holocaust?

I'm assuming that you believe that God has preserved his written word throughout history. If you believe in that principle then it should make sense to believe that God is able to also to preserve the Jewish people in all the places they have been scattered.

P
Platy

A paragraph taken from "A Body Of Divinity" by Thomas Watson (puritan) on preservation. Mainly talking about the scriptures but also compares it to preservation of the Hebrews in Egypt:

"We may know the Scripture to be the Word of God by its miraculous preservation in all ages. The holy Scriptures are the richest jewel that Christ has left us; and the church of God has so kept these public records of heaven, that they have not been lost. The Word of God has never wanted enemies to oppose, and, if possible, to extirpate it. They have given out a law concerning Scripture, as Pharaoh did the midwives, concerning the Hebrew women’s children, to strangle it in the birth; but God has preserved this blessed Book inviolable to this day. The devil and his agents have been blowing at Scripture light, but could never blow it out; a clear sign that it was lighted from heaven. Nor has the church of God, in all revolutions and changes, kept the Scripture that it should not be lost only, but that it should not be depraved. The letter of Scripture has been preserved, without any corruption, in the original tongue. The Scriptures were not corrupted before Christ’s time, for then Christ would not have sent the Jews to them. He said, ‘Search the Scriptures.’ He knew these sacred springs were not muddied with human fancies."

T
TMK

Platy-

What do *you* mean by "preservation?”

If you say God has "preserved” the Jewish people you once again are begging the question very badly.

*Who* are the Jewish people *today* that are benefactors of the promise made to Abraham?

J
JFW

Seems those like Art Katz would disagree with her, based not only on his disposition but also thru his discourse (sermons).

(for me) Art Katz would provide a better role model for my kids (hypothetically speaking) than Caryn Johnson. The reason being is that, in spite of his failings, which we all have, Art sincerely purposed his heart to know and serve God, the Holy one of Israel, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the Father of our Lord and Savior Jesus the Christ.

How could it be that with most formal reference to Himself or His "people” each are patently Jewish or Hebraic in their very nature yet there is a question wether Jews are a race??
To whom is this in doubt?? The unregenerate, unbelieving, depraved and crooked world,.. and we expect them to arrive at a foundational truth without having their minds illuminated by the word of God ??


I challenge any believer who doubts the Jews are a race or that the very culture of the Kingdom as Hebraic, to listen to this sermon from brother Katz and see if it’s check you could cash 🙏🏻

http://ia800608.us.archive.org/8/items/SERMONINDEX_SID2456/SID2456.mp3

P
Platy

Sorry my understanding was that you were saying that there are no Jews.

God providentially brought back the nation of Israel in the 1940's and the Jews are those who God brought back into the nation of Israel from various parts of the world.

Here is a documentary about the story of Jews in Kerala, India to support my statement above:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLVzynYmBn8

I don't believe there are any Jews left in Kerala today. They all went back to Israel after being in India for hundreds of years ("white" Jews) and thousands of years ("black" Jews). There is also the controversy between "black" Jews and "white" Jews in the video.

The "black" Jews have been there for thousands of years if I remember correctly. Its been a few years since I watched that video so correct me if I'm wrong.

Interesting thing to note is that Kerala may be Ophir in the bible. That is the place where Solomon sent ships to get gold and other goods. Its possible that the "black" Jews date back to the days of Solomon.

Also another interesting thing to note is that the apostle Thomas sailed for India and arrived in Kerala. Possibly another confirmation of it being Ophir in the bible as he probably understood it to be a known ancient route.

There was also a recent thing in the news where they found 1 trillion dollars worth of gold in a temple in Kerala a few years back. Look that one up.

P
Platy

As for the benefactors of the promises in the bible. It will the Jews who turn to Jesus in the future whether they be all the Jews or a remnant.

T
TMK

//As for the benefactors of the promises in the bible. It will the Jews who turn to Jesus in the future whether they be all the Jews or a remnant.//

Of course I agree with you- but this statement is true of any disciple of Jesus Christ, be they Jew, Caucasian, Asian, Pacific Islander, African, Arab, Latin, etc.

P
Platy

Yea as of right now the Jewish people are unsaved:

Romans 11:25-26 - [25] For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. [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:

B
BranchinVINE


Platy,

Galatians 3:28 - There 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.

Jade how about gender?

Good and valid question.

Before I reply, how do you yourself view this verse?


ADD:
===
As you are taking a strong stand against what this verse says, you must be able to give a good reply to support your position.


P
Platy

I'm not taking a strong stand against that verse. I was just forcing you to look at other categories that Paul presented in that verse and see if your theory/explanations fit in. In other words are you able to be consistent with the other categories such as gender?

The context of that verse is the surrounding verses in Galatians and the main issue. The issue is justification by faith. Paul is saying neither Jew nor Greek (race/religion), neither male nor female (gender), neither bond nor free (status) are the basis of being justified before God.

For example the Jews thought themselves to be superior because they had the law and the Greeks thought themselves to be superior because of their wisdom but both are sinners and can only be justified by faith.

Once a person is justified by faith it does not change their gender. A justified woman will still be able to give birth to children and will have to follow the scriptural guidelines that are laid out in the Bible (specifically in the epistles). Same goes for a man. Men are not supposed to have long hair (and women are supposed to cover their head). See 1 Corinthians 11.

Same goes for status and race. If a slave is justified by faith it does not automatically mean he is going to be freed from slavery.

Edit:
In other words let me rephrase the verse to you. All men are sinners and have fallen short of the glory of God whether they be Jew, Greek, male, female, bond, or slave and can only be justified by faith.

B
BranchinVINE


Platy, this verse is about the new creation, about unity with Christ. Verses 26 and 27 set the context.

T
TMK

Bill wrote:
//The entire show needs to be cancelled as it only spreads hate.//

I agree with your sentiment. I can’t watch for more than a minute or I’ll start thinking bad thoughts.

P
Platy

Justification by faith = new birth/being born again. Same thing.

B
BranchinVINE


Do you agree that it is talking about the * new creation * in Christ?

P
Platy

Its talking about unity and being grafted into one body on the basis of justification by faith. You can say its new creation too depending on what you mean by the term "new creation".

I Corinthians 12:13 - For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

What is your definition of new creation?

M
MrBillPro

Anti-Defamation League adopts the trendy new definition of racism. Then they're forced to backtrack when they realize their new definition doesn't apply to the Holocaust.

https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-695487

B
BranchinVINE


Hi Platy,

What is your definition of new creation?

This is the Bible definition:

2 Cor. 5:16-17 ”“
Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.

My View:

The new creation is not earthly but born from above, born of water (comment: heavenly water) and born of the spirit. The new creation is not flesh and blood. The new creation is spirit.

The Holy Spirit indwells the new creation.

Christ lives in the new creation.

The new creation is a son of God in Christ and is conformed to the image of Christ.

There is no self-life in the new creation.

Christ is all in the new creation.

(John 3:3-6; 1 Cor. 15:50; John 14:16-17,20; 1 Cor. 6:19; Gal. 2:20, 3:26-29; Col. 3:10-11)

And now to answer your "gotcha” question:

Galatians 3:28 - There 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.

Jade how about gender?


With the death and resurrection of Christ, the New Covenant has been brought in (Luke 22:20, 2 Cor. 3:5-6) and worship is now in Spirit and truth (John 4:23-24). The Old Testament Jewish form of worship had become obsolete (Heb. 8:13) and with the destruction of the temple and priesthood in AD 70, had passed away.

Gender is different.

The Christian marriage is a picture of the union between Christ and His Church (Eph. 5:31:32). This picture will stand till the end of time as a light to the world.

John 17:23 ”“
I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity (Literally, perfected into one) so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me.

Comment:
Through this unity (Christ and His Church) the world comes to know that God sent Christ, and that God loved them even as He loved Christ. I can’t explain the how of this. But the Holy Spirit can impart this knowledge to human hearts.

The Christian marriage, as a picture of this unity, must also be a picture of God’s great love. Therefore, husbands must love their wives as Christ loves the Church (Eph. 5:25).

Paul said that the "the form of this world is passing away” (1 Cor. 7:31).

The Lord Jesus said in Matt. 22:30 -- "For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.”

I do not think there are male and female angels.

For now, gender remains in the outward realm.

But even now, deep in the spirit, all true Christians have been born again and are each one a new creation in Christ and unless Gal. 3:26-28 is rejected or attempted to be explained away to accommodate man’s own theology, scripture is clear that there is no male or female in the new creation.


Blessings

D
docs

Is Jesus still Jewish? If not, when did He cease being a Jew?

In Revelation, the glorified Jesus is described as the Lion of Judah. This has a distinct Jewish connotation and meaning. Will Jesus ever lose this Jewish designation?

M
MrBillPro

Hopefully we all don't let the evil one that's worked through Whoopi, stir us up to much. :-)

D
deogloria

Good point Bill

It is a tragedy to have such discussions on a christian forum.
Jesus said: "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey all that I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”…Matthew 28:19
We should preach and proclaim Jesus to a dying world and "reject foolish and ignorant speculation, for you know that it breeds quarreling. 2 Timothy 2:23
To use a worldly TV show for the basis of a discussion on a christian forum should be avoided.
If Paul and the other Apostles would simply have discussed Jesus and the Gospel and some theology then we wouldn't be here.
They preached Christ and wanted the lost world to know the Gospel.

Worthy is the lamb !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiohGVxzDPc

P
Platy

"But even now, deep in the spirit, all true Christians have been born again and are each one a new creation in Christ and unless Gal. 3:26-28 is rejected or attempted to be explained away to accommodate man’s own theology, scripture is clear that there is no male or female in the new creation."

I hear statements like this all the time "man's own theology". Anything else except my own theology is wrong theology. Is that what you are saying? Not a safe mindset to have and its why many people end up stuck in erroneous positions (if they are in it).

Proverbs 11:14 - Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety.

I gave you an interpretation of Galatians 3:26-28 in context of the surrounding verses and the issue presented in the letter itself. You are free to compare what I said to commentaries.

Scripture is clear that there is no marriage in heaven but it isn't clear about gender. At least I can't think of any verses that state it clearly. For example, how would you recognize your grandfather or grandmother in there glorified bodies? My opinion is that male and female characteristics will be seen in heaven in some form. Anyway this is a different topic and probably not worth speculating about.

You say gender is different. Different from the other categories? How about slaves and masters? Just as there are commands for the wife to submit to the husband and the husband to treat the wife well there are commands that command that the slave to submit to his master and the master to treat his slave well.

I Timothy 6:1-2 - [1] Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. [2] And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort.

Ephesians 6:5-9 - [5] Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; [6] Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; [7] With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: [8] Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. [9] And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.

Paul writes there is neither bond nor free and then he gives the above commands to make distinctions between slaves and masters and how they are to behave. Your thoughts on this?

B
BranchinVINE

Platy,

There will be slaves and masters until this present world system is dismantled at the end of time.

(Or do you think the slaves and masters will retain their positions in heaven as you think there will still be male and female in heaven?)

Regarding submission, this is actually a Christian virtue.

Matt. 20:25-28 ”“
But Jesus called them to Himself and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. It is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave; just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

Mat. 23:12 ”“
Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted.

Phil. 2:3 ”“
Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself.


Note this command:

Eph. 5:21 ”“
Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.

This command is for ALL Christians. Also, note that there are no exceptions regarding the ones to submit and the ones to be submitted to.


You are free to compare what I said to commentaries.

I have read the commentaries. There is a lot of human reasoning and human wisdom in many commentaries. In my view, it is safer to let scripture interpret scripture.


Anyway, I am leaving this thread as it is divisive.

God loves and cares for all people equally irrespective of their race, gender or social position and its is God’s will for all men to be saved.

Blessings to all.

P
Platy

Hi Jade,

Not all commentaries are bad.

The following paragraph is taken from Vol. 1 of George Whitefield's biography by Arnold Dallimore (page 128). On Matthew Henry’s commentary:

"In fact, Whitefield in the pulpit was a but a reflection of Whitefield in the study. The hours on his knees with the Bible, the Greek New Testament and some rich Puritan volume spread out before him, were his preparation for this pressing and powerful ministry. So fully had he drunk of the wells of Biblical exposition in Matthew Henry that much of his public utterance was little more than the thought of the great commentator ”“ thought that had become assimilated in his own mind and soul, and poured forth spontaneously both as he prepared and as he preached his sermons.”

A short audio biography of Matthew Henry:

https://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=417151016265

If you can’t listen to the whole thing listen starting at 9:50 to about 11:25 on the effect of Matthew Henry’s influence on the great awakening. It seems God used Matthew Henry long after he was dead as a major force behind the great awakening.

Anyway thanks for your thoughts.

B
BranchinVINE


Platy,

"Not all commentaries are bad."

Agree.

But no commentary is infallible.

I have much respect for Matthew Henry, but the Bible alone is infallible.

As I know the Bible more and more, I find myself having to discard some beliefs that I had acquired through listening to sermons and reading books.

Blessings

P
PaulCanPat

This is a very important and pertinent question. I won't necessarily answer at the moment but I will say this: far too many pastors and Christian leaders have dodged around this important question for centuries because answering it would open up a can of worms that they want to avoid entirely.

This discussion is archived and closed to new replies. Start a new discussion to carry the subject on.
Archived
1 of 51 posts

Everything we make is available for free because of a generous community of supporters.

Donate