Brother Bob
New Member
They still had to "receive" Him first, to receive the Power to become the sons of God. If they were elect, why were they not already His sons?
I am interested in the ones who refused Him, are they lost for good?
BBob,
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Why is all Israel not Israel???
- Thread starter Brother Bob
- Start date
I am interested in the ones who refused Him, are they lost for good?
BBob,
Brother Bob
New Member
How come you say that????
Jhn 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
Jhn 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:
BBob,
TC; scripture says the election were saved. I take it to mean all the "elect", in that day.
Rom 11:7What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
Brother Bob
New Member
Yes, I know and if this be the case and only branches were blinded, then Israel as a Spiritual nation was not blinded but only a part of them who were non-elect. Right?
BBob,
Brother Bob said:
1. From physical Israel, God elected some for salvation, and I guess we can refer to them as spiritual Israel (Rom 2:29).
2. Some have been saved during the ministry of Jesus and the apostles, but there now exists a partial hardening until the end times according to Romans 11:25.
3. This is what I believe.
Brother Bob
New Member
When do you think this partial hardening took place?
Show me where it says until "end times"??
Apostle Paul said that he might "save" some of them, he must of thought the blindness was over. I know Jesus told Peter not to call common or unclean, that which He had cleaned (past tense) up. Of course He meant the Gentiles, for Peter didn't believe they had a right to salvation, until he was converted.
Its ironic that some of you believe that all Israel will be saved in MK and the Jews believe all Christians are going to hell.
BBob,
Last edited by a moderator:
Brother Bob
New Member
And they that received Him, gave he power. Plainly says they that received Him was first and a "condition".
Looks like it says: "as many as received Him" to me. And they that received Him, He gave them power to become the sons of God. May not say "first", but thats how it reads. KJV. Makes a lot more sense that they were all His own, in some way.
Also, they that "received Him" did something on their own before receiving the "Power".
Those that "rejected" Him, did something on their own also.
You don't have a good answer, so you throw up something that might be Western step logic, I don't know what it is but don't make sense.
BBob,
Last edited by a moderator:
Brother Bob said:
Well, go on with your quest then. Your conclusions are not the conclusions at which the Jews reading that passage in the First Century would arrive.
If you don't understand step logic and block logic, just google the terms and a wide array of literature will pop up to help you understand it.
Brother Bob
New Member
Truthfully, the Jews in the first century would not even read it, with the exception of those who received Him. The others said then and say now, that Jesus was not the Messiah.
Thanks for the step logic, I never went and looked at the original Greek text, it could have a different meaning, I don't know but with KJV, the "Power" was after the "receiving Him".
I must admit that "step logic" is new to me.
BBob,
Brother Bob said:
1. When the disciples asked the risen Lord when was the time for the kingdom to be restored to Israel (eschatological), He didn't say anything about spiritualizing.
2. Rather, His reply was that it was not for them to know the times or the seasons.
3. So far, the kingdom has not been restored and all the biblical data points to what is commonly called premillennialism (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Zechariah, Romans 9-11, Rev. 4-22).
4. Have you seen the fulfilment of all those promises and prophecies? I haven't!
Brother Bob
New Member
Yes, inwardly but the flesh or body is still waiting on its redemption. They were looking for a Kingdom for the flesh. Jesus said the Kingdom is within you and I do not believe in several Kingdoms. I believe He is my King now, and certainly do not believe he will only reign a thousand years.
Mat 6:33But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
Mat 13:11He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
Rom 15:12And again, Esaias saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust.
1Cr 15:25For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
BBob,
Last edited by a moderator:
Brother Bob said:
1. So you have completely overturned what the Jews meant by kingdom and have managed to manufacture a new meaning for the kingdom of Acts 1:6.
2. On one occasion Jesus said to His disciples that they would reign on 12 thrones, and now you're saying that only referred to some flesh-redemption concept. Where is your Scripture for this assertion?
3. I quite agree with Edersheim and others who maintain that the Jews concept of the Kingdom was primarily the rule of God. The question before us is this: How does God choose to manifest His rule?
4. According to Ladd who has done extensive work on the Kingdom, we are living in the mystery phase of the kingdom.
5. And we have seen that all through Scripture. God's promises to the Gentiles have not cancelled out His eschatological plans for Israel.
6. Take the whole of Scripture together, my good brother.
7. I recommend Dwight J. Pentecost, Things to Come.
Brother Bob
New Member
I told you that it is a spiritual Kingdom and the flesh has yet to become spiritual and have its part in the Kingdom.
For one point, we are kept by the Power of God, another OSAS, We were once dead, now we are alive, which is Spiritual and inwardly.
He seems to have a handle on the fact that we are in the Kingdom, that is good and unlike others who are still looking for it.
Then Gentiles did not replace Israel, but according to scripture the two, became as one.
What about Calvin??
John Calvin (1536)
"But a little later there followed the chiliasts, who limited the reign of Christ to a thousand years. Now their fiction is too childish either to need or to be worth a refutation. And the Apocalypse, from which they undoubtedly drew a pretext for their error does not support them. For the number "one thousand" (Rev. 20:4) does not apply to the eternal blessedness of the church but only to the various disturbances that awaited the church, while still toiling on earth."
"For when we apply to it the measure of our own understanding, what can we conceive that is not gross and earthly? So it happens that like beasts our senses attract us to what appeals to our flesh, and we grasp at what is at hand. So we see that the Chialists (i.e. those who believed that Christ would reign on earth for a thousand years) fell into a like error. Jesus intended to banish from the disciples' minds a false impression regarding the earthly kingdom: for that, as He points out in a few words, consists of the preaching of the Gospel. They have no cause therefore to dream of wealth, luxury, power in the world or any other earthly thing when they hear that Christ is reigning when He subdues the world to Himself by the preaching of the Gospel.It follows from this that His reign is spiritual and not after t he pattern of this world." - Comm. on Acts 1:8 (Torrance, VI, 32).
BBob,
Brother Bob said:
1. I see no evidence in Scripture that the kingdom promised to Israel was nothing but spiritual.
2. I do not doubt that.
3. At one level we are in the kingdom, but at another we are not, for it is awaiting its ultimate consummation.
4. In respect to the church, correct.
5. What about Calvin?
6. If Calvin teaches the truth on a matter, then Go Calvin!
7. All Amils would definitely appreciate Calvin at this point, even if they disagree with him on others.
8. Like all other Amils, Calvin hermeneutics have failed him here.
Brother Bob
New Member
Luk 17:21Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
Who was He talking to?? Even you said we were going through the mystery part of the Kingdom.
Waiting on what I said: The body to be delivered. Glad to see you admit we are in the Kingdom.
Is not the "elect" of Israel part of the church???
Now you would not make a happy camper for Calvin......
Calvin had help in his belief.
Philip Schaff (1877)
"Though millenialism was supressed by the early church, it was nevertheless from time to time revived by heretical sects." (Schaff's History, pg. 299 )
Eusebius (A.D.325)
"This same historian (Papias) also gives other accounts, which he says he adds as received by him from unwritten tradition, likewise certain strange parables of our Lord, and of His doctrine and some other matters rather too fabulous. In these he says there would be a certain millennium after the resurrection, and that there would be a corporeal reign of Christ on this very earth; which things he appears to have imagined, as if they were authorized by the apostolic narrations, not understanding correctly those matters which they propounded mystically in their representations. For he was very limited in his comprehension, as is evident from his discourses; yet he was the cause why most of the ecclesiastical writers, urging the antiquity of man, were carried away by a similar opinion; as, for instance, Irenaeus, or any other that adopted such sentiments. (Book III, Ch. 39)
BBob,
Last edited by a moderator:
Brother Bob said:
1. If you look in the Translations Archive, you'll see that I debate in favor of the reading of among you. Within Jesus came the beginning of the end, the real presence of the eschatological kingdom, whose fulfilment is yet future.
2. He was adddressing some Pharisees and the kingdom was not in them but among them in the person of Jesus.
3. I am only echoing Paul (Col 1:13). :thumbs:
4. In the church age, Yes!
Now you would not make a happy camper for Calvin......
Calvin had help in his belief.
Philip Schaff (1877)
"Though millenialism was supressed by the early church, it was nevertheless from time to time revived by heretical sects." (Schaff's History, pg. 299 )
Eusebius (A.D.325)
"This same historian (Papias) also gives other accounts, which he says he adds as received by him from unwritten tradition, likewise certain strange parables of our Lord, and of His doctrine and some other matters rather too fabulous. In these he says there would be a certain millennium after the resurrection, and that there would be a corporeal reign of Christ on this very earth; which things he appears to have imagined, as if they were authorized by the apostolic narrations, not understanding correctly those matters which they propounded mystically in their representations. For he was very limited in his comprehension, as is evident from his discourses; yet he was the cause why most of the ecclesiastical writers, urging the antiquity of man, were carried away by a similar opinion; as, for instance, Irenaeus, or any other that adopted such sentiments. (Book III, Ch. 39)
BBob,
5. So, are you going to argue for infant baptism, since many of the Fathers did, for that would prove consistency on your part.