Let GOD Be GOD!

[OldRegular]

God has always saved Gentiles. But until the resurrection of Christ, a Gentile had to become a Jew by conversion (Proselyte) in order to be saved. After Jesus went to the Father, anyone, Gentile or Jew was saved through faith In Christ and did not have to become a Jew first.

So, Jesus did come to just the Jews, but later the kingdom was opened up to anyone who had simple faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ, without having to be circumcised and follow the Law.

You are incorrect Amy.

You are ignoring all those who lived before the call of Abraham!

You are ignoring Job!

You are ignoring those who lived in Salem under the priesthood of Melchizedek!

You are ignoring those in Nineveh who responded to the preaching of Jonah!


Salvation is not "simple faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ". It is a supernatural act of GOD. Remember that even the devils also believe, and tremble.

 

[OldRegular]

Maybe this will help the Calvinists.

Your quote really had nothing to do with the OP!

 

[donnA]

if God's people are the jews, where does that put us?

 

[OldRegular]

if God's people are the jews, where does that put us?

Only the Jews who are Christians are among GOD's people. The ones who are unbelievers are just like all unbelievers.

 

[Amy.G]

Did both Jew and Gentile have to keep the Law to be saved? If so, how was this possible?

What do you mean how was it possible? The Jews were required to keep the Law. Do you disagree?

 

[Amy.G]

Your quote really had nothing to do with the OP!

Why not? You say that Jesus didn't come to the Jews, but came to "His own", meaning all people.

Calvin's commentary agrees with me that Jesus did in fact come to the Jews, which is what is meant by "His own".

 

[OldRegular]

Why not? You say that Jesus didn't come to the Jews, but came to "His own", meaning all people.

Calvin's commentary agrees with me that Jesus did in fact come to the Jews, which is what is meant by "His own".

Amy

Please read my earlier post regarding your comments on John 1:11. Also I have never said that HE came to "all people".

John*1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible
John 1:11
Verse 11. He came unto his own. His own land or country. It was called his land because it was the place of his birth, and also because it was the chosen land where God delighted to dwell and to manifest his favour. See Isa 5:1-7. Over that land the laws of God had been extended, and that land had been regarded as peculiarly his, Ps 147:19-20.
His own. His own people. There is a distinction here in the original words which is not preserved in the translation. It may be thus expressed: "He came to his own land and his own people received him not." They were his\ @people, because God had chosen them to be his above all other nations; had given to them his laws; and had signally protected and favoured them, De 7:6; 14:2.

Received him not. Did not acknowledge him to be the Messiah. They rejected him and put him to death, agreeably to the prophecy, Isa 53:3-4.

You are correct Amy in respect to John 1:11. However, Scripture does not contradict itself, neither does it lie, so in Matthew 1:21 "HIS people" does not refer to the Jews but to those given to HIM by GOD the Father!

 

[Jerome]

Luke 2:28-33
"Simeon was there. He took the child in his arms and praised God, saying, "Lord, now I can die in peace! As you promised me, I have seen the Savior you have given to all people. He is a light to reveal God to the nations, and he is the glory of your people Israel!" Joseph and Mary were amazed at what was being said about Jesus."

 

[OldRegular]

Luke 2:28-33
"Simeon was there. He took the child in his arms and praised God, saying, "Lord, now I can die in peace! As you promised me, I have seen the Savior you have given to all people. He is a light to reveal God to the nations, and he is the glory of your people Israel!" Joseph and Mary were amazed at what was being said about Jesus."

Isn't Scripture wonderful, particularly when understood.

Now I ask you Jerome: Are all people saved?

 

[AresMan]

What do you mean how was it possible? The Jews were required to keep the Law. Do you disagree?

Yes, the Jews were required to keep the Law as a nation. However, was this the means of salvation? If so, how do you rectify the New Testament explanation that the Law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, that under the Law was sin and death, and that no one could be justified by the Law.

Do you believe it is possible for someone to keep the whole Law to obtain salvation?

 

[OldRegular]

Getting back to the OP: Let GOD Be GOD

GOD tells us in Matthew’s record of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ:


Matthew 1:20-23
20.But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
21. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
22. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
23. Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Note particularly Verse 21:

21. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Also note that Verse 23 tells us that through this virgin born son GOD is with us.

In Verse 21 we are told that this Virgin born son, JESUS, shall save his people from their sins.

Now who are HIS people whom HE will save. They are those given to HIM by GOD the Father:

John 6:39 And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

John 17:24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.

John 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

So let GOD be GOD! Scripture clearly tells us that Jesus Christ came to save HIS people and HIS people only.

 

[Grasshopper]

Winman you disappoint me. I thought that you used only Scripture and here I find you are using Jamieson Fausset-Brown! Have you been doing this all along but keeping it a secret? Shame on you, you have repeatedly chastized those who quoted other than SCRIPTURE. Now look at you.

Yes, I also received that lecture. I didn't believe him then and since that time he has gone to Matthew Henry(said he had not picked up in 15 years) now he quotes JFB. Hard to trust a guy who decieves about the smallest things. He also said this:

I agree that God always intended to save the Gentiles, but not at the time Matthew 1:21 was written.

I wonder if all the other non-cals agree with that statement. Perhaps "all" doesn't mean "all" after all. At least up until Paul. I guess Gentiles before Paul died without salvation because God never inteneded to save them.

 

[Skandelon]

God always intended to save Gentiles. The Jews' rejection of God and their subsequent rejection of Christ was all part of the plan.

That is right Archangel!

And how did God ensure that HIS PLAN would come to pass? How did God guarantee that the Jews would reject Christ and his message? Did he just let them be born in their natural "Totally Depraved" condition knowing that if he just left them alone they would never believe the gospel? NO!!!!

HE TEMPORARILY BLINDED THEM FROM THE GOSPEL! HE HID THE GOSPEL IN PARABLES. HE SENT THEM A SPIRIT OF STUPOR AND MADE THEM "UNABLE TO SEE, HEAR, UNDERSTAND OR REPENT, OTHERWISE THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN SAVED."

Why would he have needed to do this if indeed they were born spiritually dead in that they were deaf, blind and unable to understand the gospel unto salvation? Please explain that.

Calvinists misinterpret scripture by taking this hardened condition of the Jew as if it is the natural condition of all man from birth, but that is NEVER once supported in the text. Please just look at it objectively and really reconsider your position on this. PLEASE.

 

[Winman]

Originally Posted by OldRegular
Winman you disappoint me. I thought that you used only Scripture and here I find you are using Jamieson Fausset-Brown! Have you been doing this all along but keeping it a secret? Shame on you, you have repeatedly chastized those who quoted other than SCRIPTURE. Now look at you.

Well, I came to realize that many here hold the writings and philosophies of men in much higher regard than the scriptures. So, if you have noticed in the last few weeks I have been quoting men quite a bit. That is for you, not for me.

If I would have posted that Matt 1:21 was primarily speaking of the Jews (which it was), you would have accused me of misinterpreting the scriptures. So I posted a well known commentary to show this has always been the understanding of this verse.

 

[Winman]

You posted this:

​

The passage you claim as Matthew 1:22-23 is not Matthew 1, it is Matthew 15. I myself inadvertently referred to it as Matthew 10. It is Matthew 15.



Maybe it is you who needs a new Bible. In my Bible, Genesis comes before the epistles of Paul.



As if you don't. Your typical ugliness is not appreciated. I guess the more wrong you are the uglier you get?

The Archangel

I have no idea what you are talking about. I showed Matthew 15:24

Matt 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

This is what is meant in John 1:11 when it says he "came unto his own, and his own received him not".

Perhaps you do not know this, but Jesus only came to preach to the Jews. That is exactly what Jesus is saying unless you think him a liar. It was after the Jews rejected Christ that the gospel was sent to the Gentiles.

When Jesus sent his disciples out, he instructed them to only preach to the Jews.

Matt 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

I am amazed that anyone who calls himself a Baptist pastor does not know this.

 

[The Archangel]

That is right Archangel!

And how did God ensure that HIS PLAN would come to pass? How did God guarantee that the Jews would reject Christ and his message? Did he just let them be born in their natural "Totally Depraved" condition knowing that if he just left them alone they would never believe the gospel? NO!!!!

HE TEMPORARILY BLINDED THEM FROM THE GOSPEL! HE HID THE GOSPEL IN PARABLES. HE SENT THEM A SPIRIT OF STUPOR AND MADE THEM "UNABLE TO SEE, HEAR, UNDERSTAND OR REPENT, OTHERWISE THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN SAVED."

Why would he have needed to do this if indeed they were born spiritually dead in that they were deaf, blind and unable to understand the gospel unto salvation? Please explain that.

Calvinists misinterpret scripture by taking this hardened condition of the Jew as if it is the natural condition of all man from birth, but that is NEVER once supported in the text. Please just look at it objectively and really reconsider your position on this. PLEASE.

As if you are infallibly objective? Certainly not.

Answer me this (and since you are keeping count and yipping about the Romans 11 thing, I'll remind you I asked this several times and got no response from you):

How is it, then, that man is said to have a heart with intentions that are "only evil continually?"
Genesis 6:5 "The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."

How is it, then, that man is said to have a heart that is desperately sick and un-understandable?

Jeremiah 17:9"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?

How can a heart--described by the simple quoting of scripture, mind you, be able to long for God and the things of God? It cannot.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[The Archangel]

I have no idea what you are talking about. I showed Matthew 15:24

Matt 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

This is what you said:

This is a misuse and misinterpretation of scripture. In Matt 1:21 "his people" means the Jews.

Matt 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

When the woman from Canaan came to Jesus because her daughter was vexed with a devil, Jesus would not at first even speak to her.

Matt 1:22 And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.
23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.

And this is when Jesus said he was only sent unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

I have emboldened, italicized, and underlined and I have made the font larger. Certainly you must be able to see your simple clerical error now.

You were quoting Matthew 15, not Matthew 1. It's a simple goof, you left off the "5."

Or, perhaps your narcissistic hubris is such that you can't even admit to a simple clerical error.

Perhaps you do not know this, but Jesus only came to preach to the Jews. That is exactly what Jesus is saying unless you think him a liar. It was after the Jews rejected Christ that the gospel was sent to the Gentiles.

When Jesus sent his disciples out, he instructed them to only preach to the Jews.

Matt 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Perhaps you should try reading more than one verse or one passage at a time. Several occurrences exist of Jesus engaging Gentiles.

I am amazed that anyone who calls himself a Baptist pastor does not know this.

Again, the ugliness factor on your part is spiking. Perhaps it is because you are descending further into wrongness, if that were possible.

The Archangel

 

[Winman]

I have emboldened, italicized, and underlined and I have made the font larger. Certainly you must be able to see your simple clerical error now.

You were quoting Matthew 15, not Matthew 1. It's a simple goof, you left off the "5."

Or, perhaps your narcissistic hubris is such that you can't even admit to a simple clerical error.

If you will notice, the phrase "his people" does not occur in Matt 15:24. What I was trying to show you (unsuccessfully) is that "his people" in Matt 1:21 and "his own" in John 1:11 refers to the Jews and not all believers.

Then I showed that Jesus would not at first answer the woman from Canaan.

Jesus did not come to preach to the Gentiles, he came to preach to his own people the Jews. He instructed his disciples to only preach to the Jews. It was only after Jesus was rejected and crucified that the gospel was sent out to the Gentiles.

And, did Jesus save 100% of his people the Jews? No.

 

[menageriekeeper]

Ya'll have all gone off on some rabbit trails while I was cleaning my house and baking. So in attempt to clarify where ya'll are going, I'm going to post what I THINK some of you are saying and then ya'll can correct me where I'm wrong.

Part of the arguement seems to be whether the angel was referring to the elect or to the Jews when he told Mary that Jesus would save "his people" from their sins. Winman in post number 2 gave what I believe to be the true meaning of the phrase ie, the angel is referring to the Jewish nation.(more on that in a minute)

Then things seem to have disintegrated into an arguement over whether God intended to save the Gentiles from "the beginning" or if Christ was sent only to save the Jews.

So let me give you my view from "the beginning".

There have always been Jews, from the beginning. That is what all those endless geneologies tell us. Adam to Noah (Gen 5), Noah to Abram (gen 10-11). It was only in Abram's time that God decided that this one linage was the one He would call out as "His people" and made a covenant with Abram to that effect IF Abram agreed to it (obeyed) and followed God's commands. It wasn't until Moses' time that God began to fullfil the promises He made to Abraham and called out Abraham's decendents to make a holy people (Lev 20:26) and gave to them the law.

Furthermore, your interpretation presupposes that God never intended to save Gentiles until the Jews rejected Christ. This is absurd. In Genesis 12--the call of Abraham--God tells him:

And I will make of you a great nation,
and I will bless you and make your name great,
so that you will be a blessing.

I will bless those who bless you,
and him who dishonors you I will curse,
[so that] in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed
​

God always intended to save Gentiles. The Jews' rejection of God and their subsequent rejection of Christ was all part of the plan. The Jews were intended to be a "Kingdom of Priests" and, therefore, a missionary nation--spreading and showing God's word to the nations. They failed...long before they rejected Christ.

This I agree with. The Jewish people were intended to show God's glory to the nations of the earth. Yes, they failed and they suffered the consequences of that failure and were scattered many times from the land they were promised. It can't be denied that there are still promises yet to be fulfilled to the Jewish people. (not the direction we are going however)

During all these times of failure however, one thing remained the same: The Jews were still the people God intended to use to bring Christ into the world. Moses to David, David to Christ. (Matt 1) God's intention to use the Jewish people is clear. It doesn't get any clearer.

So when Matt 1:21 tell us that Jesus will save His people from their sins following immediately after giving us His linage how then do we interpret it to mean the elect? (as meant by the Calvinists on the board)

Then to add to it is this passage from Romans:

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

What about to the Jew FIRST isn't clear?

Amy said that those in the OT who wanted salvation had to become Jews for that to happen. Someone disagreed and said she was ignoring all those who were saved before the Law was given. No, she isn't. God says and has always said "if you love me keep my commandments". God may have changed some of the requirements along the way, but whatever the commandments were at that particular time in history, man was always expected to keep them and trust God for the rest.

By faith, Hebrews 11 teaches us, were all those from Abel to Christ's death kept from damnation. But it wasn't until Christ was resurrected that they recieved "the promise". (Hebrews 11:39-40) So far, God hasn't ignored anyone, Jew or Gentile. BUT HE PUTS THE JEW FIRST.

Now we can talk about Matt 15:

Mat 15:22 And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.
Mat 15:23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Mat 15:25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
Mat 15:26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
Mat 15:27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.
Mat 15:28 Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.

Now, who does Christ say He was sent to? It seems awfully plain to me. He was sent to the "lost sheep of Israel".

Yes, He went on and healed the woman's daughter. Why? "Great is thy faith". Even though Christ was sent to the Jews first, He still had compassion on the Gentile. You can't use this passage to support the veiw that Matt 1:21 means Christ was sent to save His "elect" (as Cals define elect)

Christ Himself just told you He was sent to the Jews!


Joh 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

Here again, if Christ was come to the elect in Matt 21, then the above verse must mean that the elect received Him not. How can that be?

Originally Posted by menageriekeeper
I agree with Winman on this one. You have misinterpreted the scripture to make it agree with how you believe.

Then you should show how I have misinterpreted the Scripture otherwise you have falsely accused me!

Hopefully, I've just answered you.

 

[Jerome]

Matthew 2:6
And thou Bethlehem, land of Judah, art in no wise least among the princes of Judah: for out of thee shall come forth a governor, who shall be shepherd of my people Israel.