[wmfights]

Rom 9:6 is teaching that “there is an ‘Israel’ within ethnic Israel.”[5] Paul is not saying that believing Gentiles are now part of Israel. Instead, believing Jews are the true Israel. William Sanday and Arthur C. Headlam make this point:

[wmfights]

Ping

[wmfights]

Ping

[Eccl 10:2]

Israel is Israel. It is not the church. It is most certainly not the Catholic Church. It is most certainly not the Black church.

Israel is Israel. We are done here.

[.45 Long Colt]

Surely others will post Scripture to counter your post—there’s plenty of it. I’ll merely point out that the majority opinion of Christians through the centuries has been the polar opposite of the dispensational understanding of Israel.

I support Israel as much as anyone, but not because of my eschatology. I fear many will miss Christ due to their obsession with the modern secular state named Israel. There are many who know the dispensational end-times timetable like the back of their hand yet they don’t understand original sin, substitionary atonement, propitiation, and all the other great doctrines upon which our faith is built.

Bottom line: My ancestors were Scots-Irish, but I’m Israel because I’m in Christ, the true Israel.

[slumber1]

Thus, the true Israelite is one who is a Jew ethnically and one has believed in Jesus Christ (see Romans 2:28–29)

I'm looking at Romans 2:28-29 and that is not what it says.

Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither [is that] circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he [is] a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision [is that] of the heart, in the spirit, [and] not in the letter; whose praise [is] not of men, but of God.

It is amazing the lengths some people will go to make the scriptures say something that they clearly do not say. The above verses specifically exclude ethnicity as a qualifier for Jewishness yet the author adds to the Word of God by claiming ethnicity is still a part of the equation. NO, the true Jew is one who has received the promise of Christ by faith alone period, Bloodline no longer matters. The true Israel of God is made up of all (both ethnic Jew & ethnic gentile) who receive the promise by faith.

Eph 2:12-13That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition [between us]; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, [even] the law of commandments [contained] in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, [so] making peace;

One new man in Christ - not two

[count-your-change]

“Thus, the true Israelite is one who is a Jew ethnically and one has believed in Jesus Christ (see Romans 2:28–29). Romans 9:6, therefore, is not a supporting text for Replacement Theology.”

Nay, not so. That Israel was to be made up of people of all nations, Jews too, was precisely the point of Paul's argument. Hence he made the point elsewhere that no longer was any distinction being made on the basis of Jew, Greek, slave or freeman.

“Israel” was going to going receive the kingdom that was taken away from the Jewish nation.

[AnalogReigns]

How ridiculous is dispensational theology.

Is there one people of God? Or two?

When we look at the book of Revelation—the consummation of all things—is there one glorified people—from every tribe and nation, praising God eternally, or some arbitrary separation of Jew and Gentile (forever?)?

Is God a segregationist? Or did the Jewish Messiah come to graft in the gentiles to the root of Abraham?

Ask yourself, if a Jew believes in Jesus marries a gentile believer in Jesus is there any sin in that? OF COURSE NOT! In Christ there is no Jew or Greek—and God is not a segregationist. Are there believing Children Jew or Gentile? Does their ethnic heritage mean they called to worship differently and not be a part of the fellowship of believers? Did the early Church separate Jewish and Gentile believers?

There is no “replacement theology” as gentiles have never replaced the Jews—we have only been grafted into the tree that came before Jesus, from Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses... Ethnic Jews who rejected (and still reject) Jesus have cut themselves off from that tree of faith... Nor is “dispensationalism” biblical, as it is separatism, or really, 19th Century ideas of segregation...writ large.

There is one people of God, saved by one Savior on one cross, and one good news—for all people, “for I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God to salvation to every one that believes; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” (Romans 1:16)

The book of Acts is absolute proof of that there is one people of God, not two...

[GiovannaNicoletta]

I see I'm going to have to post some more Biblical truth that the replacement theologists are not going to like:

http://www.defendproclaimthefaith.org/blog/?p=1605

The epistle of 1 John clearly tells us the method to determine of someone was from God regarding the first coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. The test was whether Jesus Christ literally came in the flesh. Those that believed He did were of God.

1 John 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

Conversely, those that did not believe that He came in the flesh were not of God, but were of the spirit of antichrist. This is a very simple test that revolved around the literalness of Bible prophecy.

1 John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

This was aimed at the gnostics which believe that Jesus Christ was just a spirit being that did not have a body, but notice that it was the literal interpretation of the Bible that is what the Apostle John was defending. There was much more than the Lord Jesus came in the flesh because if He was merely a man, He could not redeem mankind. EVERYTHING about the first coming of the Lord Jesus was LITERAL. This is what John is driving at in showing who is from God and who is manifesting the spirit of antichrist. It was over the literalness of Christ’s first coming according to the Bible.

There is really no scripture about Christ’s first coming that was not literal. The following are just a few verses to show the Old Testament scriptures prophesying the Lord’s coming as a man were all literal. There is no spiritualizing the first coming of the Lord Jesus. It is all literal!

Isaiah 7:14 He was born of a virgin Micah 5:2 He was born in Bethlehem
Isaiah 9:1,2 His ministry would be from the Galilee
Isaiah 42:6,7 His healing ministry opened the physical eyes of the blind
Zechariah 9:9 He presented Himself to Israel as King riding on a donkey.
Isaiah 53:9 He was sinless
Isaiah 53:10 He was made an offering for sin
Psalm 22:14-17 He died on the cross as described in these verses.
Psalm 16:10 Jesus Christ bodily rose from the dead.

The above verses show what it means that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. Any denial of these verses means that this person is of the spirit of antichrist and not of God. For example, how can someone deny the virgin birth, and yet “confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh”? He had to be born from a virgin, so He could be the sinless Son of God to redeem mankind? To deny He was born from a virgin was to deny that Jesus Christ came in the flesh.

Now let us look at the glorious Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

By applying the test for His first coming, we can determine whether a doctrine of His Second Coming is from God or the spirit of the antichrist. The test is centered on the literalness of His coming. The Old Testament was literal about His first coming, so what changed about the literalness of His Second Coming? Can the first coming of Jesus Christ be literal, and yet, somehow the Second Coming is now switched to being spiritualized? Jesus Christ is coming the second time literally just as His first coming was.

Luke 21:24 Jesus Christ stated that the destruction of Jerusalem and dispersion of the Jews was temporary.
Zechariah 14:3,4 Jerusalem will be the literal location of His Second Coming.
Zechariah 12:6 Jerusalem will be the capital of a Jewish state.
Zechariah 12:6 Israel will be a great military power.
Ezekiel 36:16-24 God will restored the Jews back to Israel in unbelief before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.
Romans 11:26,27 At the Second Coming all Israel will be saved.
Ezekiel 36:8-15 The land of Israel will be greatly blessed.
Ezekiel 38:8 The Jews will be restored to Israel from all nations in the latter-day.
Daniel 7:13,14 Jesus Christ will return with the “Clouds of Heaven,” His church to establish a kingdom on earth.
Revelation 19:5-9 After the Marriage Supper of the Lamb, His bride will return with Him to Jerusalem.
Revelation 20:3-5 His kingdom will last of 1000 years.
Revelation 19:11-15 He is returning bodily.
Zechariah 14:12 When Jesus Christ returns, He will annihilate the armies gathered to destroy the Jews and Jerusalem.
Ezekiel 43:7 He will rule on the throne of David from His temple on Mount Zion.

There are many more scriptures but the ones posted above show what is needed to believe in the literal Second Coming of Jesus Christ. An integral part of Christ’s Second Coming is the restoration of the nation of Israel as He is returning to Jerusalem, and all of Israel will call upon Him as their Savior! This is the time when all Israel and not the church will be saved. How is it possible to spiritualize Romans 11:25-28?

Romans 11:25 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. (26-27) 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: 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 fathers’ sakes.

The First and Second Coming of Jesus Christ together:

Zechariah 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

Zechariah 9:10 And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off: and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river even to the ends of the earth.

Based on Replacement Theology, is one suppose to believe that verse nine is literal, while the following verse is now spiritualized to mean something else? That Ephraim and Jerusalem now mean the church? The Lord Jesus came literally to Jerusalem in verse 9, but somehow Jerusalem in verse 10 is not to be understood literally? These two verses together show the fallacy of Replacement Theology. They both are literal.

Any person that tampers with the literalness of Christ’s Second Coming is playing with spiritual fire and is falling under the danger being condemned as being from the spirit of antichrist. How can someone claim to being led by the Holy Spirit and deny the literalness of Christ’s Second Coming, and in many cases actively hinder the fulfillment of God’s prophetic word? How can someone claim Jesus Christ as his Savior, and yet refuse to see the connection between the everlasting covenant and modern Israel?

The nation of Israel was twice destroyed in 600 BC and 70 AD. The second dispersion lasted for 1900 years, but now Jerusalem is once again the capital of Israel. They speak Hebrew which had been an extinct language. They even have shekels once again for money. The unbelief of Replacement Theology is very, very powerful. With Israel once again a nation, it takes a greater unbelief to deny Israel, then it does to believe the nation is the fulfillment of prophecy and covenant.

The Lord Jesus stated the coming destruction of Jerusalem, in His day, was only temporary until the “times of the Gentiles were fulfilled”. Current events are indicating that the “times of the Gentiles” are coming to an end.

Luke 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Just as apostates in the Apostle John’s day refused to believe the literalness of Christ’s first coming, now in our day there are huge numbers of people who refuse to believe in the literalness of Christ’s Second Coming. These people are in great spiritual danger. They share the same unbelief as Muslims as they refuse to believe the Bible. The Muslims reject modern Israel as does Replacement Theology. Because of this unbelief, God is in the process of merging these two groups. This can clearly be seen in the rhetoric and actions in many of the Replacement Theology camp. They and Muslims both use the very same rhetoric and arguments against Israel. They both are actively trying to delegitimize Israel.

Islam is being led by the spirit of antichirst, and now many of the Replacement Theology camp have merged with them. They face the same judgment as Islam. Whoever interferes with God’s prophetic plan for Israel faces judgment from the Holy God of Israel. The reason for this is the Second Coming of Jesus Christ is directly tied to the nation of Israel. He is returning to Jerusalem!

Obadiah 1:15 For the day of the LORD is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done (To Israel), it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head.

Replacement theologists are not true believers in Christ, any more than Muslims or anyone else who denies and does not believe the Word of God is a Christian.

We need to remember that when these threads are posted.

[HarleyD]

This verse, though, is not a supporting text for supersessionism as most commentators on Romans 9:6 acknowledge.

Which commentators?

His argument is very weak and never really address the whole text. He limits it to Romans 9:6. Note what Paul states in Romans:

Rom 9:6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, Rom 9:7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but "Through Isaac shall your offspring be named." Rom 9:8 This 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.

So if an Israelite is 1) a child of Israel and 2) a Christian as this author states, then what does Paul means when he states, "the children of the promise are counted as offspring"?

I was wondering, do you believe Rahab or Ruth to be children of the promise? Neither was a "true" Israelite. They were both Gentiles. Yet both are in the lineage of Christ and Rahab is in the roll call of faith in Hebrews.

[editor-surveyor]

While parts of Israel are definitely in the “church,” The church is definitely not Israel.

The 144,000 will not be made up of gentiles; they all will be genuine Israelites from each of the tribes as stated in Revelation.

The Israel that is within ethnic Israel is called the Remnant. Note that Christ spoke of tares within the church. That is why the church and the Bride of Christ are not one and the same. The church is a corrupt and fallible body.
.

[fatboy]

Fron the NASB Luke 2:22-25 And when the days for their purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they brought Him up to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord (as it is written in the Law of the Lord, “EVERY firstborn MALE THAT OPENS THE WOMB SHALL BE CALLED HOLY TO THE LORD”), and to offer a sacrifice according to what was said in the Law of the Lord, “A PAIR OF TURTLEDOVES OR TWO YOUNG PIGEONS.” And there was a man in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon; and this man was righteous and devout, looking for the consolation of Israel; and the Holy Spirit was upon him.

[fatboy]

Fron the NASB Luke 2:22-25 And when the days for their purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they brought Him up to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord (as it is written in the Law of the Lord, “EVERY firstborn MALE THAT OPENS THE WOMB SHALL BE CALLED HOLY TO THE LORD”), and to offer a sacrifice according to what was said in the Law of the Lord, “A PAIR OF TURTLEDOVES OR TWO YOUNG PIGEONS.” And there was a man in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon; and this man was righteous and devout, looking for the consolation of Israel; and the Holy Spirit was upon him.

[Lee N. Field]

When I first spotted this thread, it had 7 responses. I looked it over, and thought I'd maybe post a response after I got back from my bike ride. While I was gone, it ballooned to 50 posts, mostly the usual stuff.

Thus, the true Israelite is one who is a Jew ethnically and one has believed in Jesus Christ (see Romans 2:28–29). Romans 9:6, therefore, is not a supporting text for Replacement Theology.

I maintain one cannot reach this conclusion without having come to the text with the dispensational root assumption firmly in place.

A few things for you to contemplate.

• When reading through the New Testament, make note in passing how many times terms and phrases that in the Old Testament were applied to Israel, are applied to the Church.
• Who is the "true circumcision"?
• Who is Jesus talking about when he twice mentions, in the letters to the churches in Revelation, "the synagogue of Satan, those who say they are Jews and are not"?
• 2 Corinthians ch.6 v. 16-18. Where did Paul get this, and who is he applying it to?
• And, a thought experiment: pick a year, safely at least a human lifetime away from any date of eschatological significance to any system. Say, 1825. A Jew hears the gospel preached, is by the grace of God regenerated to saving faith. What is his duty and status then? Is he not to join the Christian Church?
• Again, Calvin, Institutes, Book II, chapters 10 & 11.

Aaaand, I fully expect there'll be a hissing denunciation in my ping list by the time I post this.

[Quix]

OF COURSE.

[.45 Long Colt]

I wish every American Christian, particularly dispensationalists, would listen and take these two sermons to heart.

Who Are The Hebrews? The Israel of God.

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=11290611655

He Is a Jew

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=41107162134