Who Really Stands with Israel?

American Vision ^ | 6/07/2006 | Gary DeMar

[topcat54]

David Brog has written Standing with Israel: Why Christians Support the Jewish State. The ten reviews I read on Amazon were quite favorable, and it is being advertised on WorldNetDaily. The fact that the Foreword was written by John Hagee, author of Jerusalem Countdown, From Daniel to Doomsday, Beginning of the End, and Final Dawn over Jerusalem, is a clear indication that the book’s thesis fits with the modern-day prophetic system known as dispensational premillennialism. I doubt that the book covers what this article reveals.

In my debate with Tommy Ice at American Vision’s Worldview Super Conference (May 26, 2006), Ice pointed out that one of the unique features of the dispensational system is that near the end of a future, post-rapture, seven-year tribulation period, Israel will be rescued by God. After nearly 2000 years of delayed promises, God will once again come to the rescue of His favored nation. Ice and other dispensationalists imply by this doctrine that they are Israel’s best friend, and anyone who does not adopt their way of interpreting the Bible is either anti-Semitic (Hal Lindsey) or a methodological naturalist (Tommy Ice).

In the debate, I wanted Tommy to explain how a belief in Israel’s glorious future results in the slaughter of two-thirds of the Jews living at the time the Great Tribulation nears the end of its seven-year run. I quoted the following dispensational writers to show that there is no glorious future for “all Jews who are under siege,” to use Tommy’s words, in the dispensational version of the Great Tribulation.

• According to the Tim LaHaye Prophecy Study Bible, of which Tommy is an editor, “Prior to Israel’s conversion, Zechariah [13:8] predicts that two-thirds (‘two parts’) of the Jewish people in the land will perish during the tribulation period. Only one third of the Jewish population will survive until Christ comes to establish His kingdom on earth” (991).
• In his book The Living End, Charles Ryrie writes the following in a chapter he titles “A Bloodbath for Israel”: “Jacob’s trouble [Great Tribulation] is that coming period of distress described by Jesus as He spoke to His disciples on the Mount of Olives. Jeremiah labeled it ‘Jacob’s trouble’ and said it would be unique in all history (Jeremiah 30:7). Jesus called it a period of unprecedented tribulation (Matthew 24:21). This will be the time of Israel’s greatest bloodbath” (81).
• In his Israel in Prophecy, John Walvoord writes: “The purge of Israel in their time of trouble is described by Zechariah in these words: ‘And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith Jehovah, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein. And I will bring the third part into the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried’ (Zechariah 13:8, 9). According to Zechariah’s prophecy, two thirds of the children of Israel in the land will perish, but the one third that are left will be refined and be awaiting the deliverance of God at the second coming of Christ which is described in the next chapter of Zechariah” (108).
• Eugene Merrill, in his Exegetical Commentary: Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, writes: “The restoration and dominion cannot come until all the forces of evil that seek to subvert it are put down once and for all. Specifically, the redemption of Israel will be accomplished on the ruins of her own suffering and those of the malevolent powers of this world that, in the last day, will consolidate themselves against her and seek to interdict forever any possibility of her success. The nations of the whole earth will come against Jerusalem, and, having defeated her, will divide up their spoils of war in her very midst” (342).

There are geopolitical implications to the dispensational system that some people have picked up on.

Convinced that a nuclear Armageddon is an inevitable event within the divine scheme of things, many evangelical dispensationalists have committed themselves to a course for Israel that, by their own admission, will lead directly to a holocaust indescribably more savage and widespread than any vision of carnage that could have generated in Adolf Hitler’s criminal mind.(1)

Dispensational theology as it relates to Israel is alarming to some Jewish leaders as well. Rabbi David Saperstein, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, asks, “To what extent will a theological view that calls for Armageddon in the Middle East lead [evangelicals] to support policies that may move in that direction, rather than toward stability and peaceful coexistence?”(2) The most probable scenario is that prophetic futurists will sit back and do nothing as they see Israel go up in smoke since the Bible predicts an inevitable holocaust. It is time to recognize that these so-called end-time biblical prophecies have been fulfilled, and Zechariah 13:7–9 is certainly one of them. Those Jews living in Judea prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and who fled before the assault on the temple were saved (Matt. 24:15–22).

1. Grace Halsell, Prophecy and Politics: Militant Evangelists on the Road to Nuclear War (Westport, CT: Lawrence Hill & Co., 1986), 195.

2. Quoted in Jeffery L. Sheler, “Odd Bedfellows,” U.S. News & World Report (August 12, 2002), 35.

Gary DeMar is president of American Vision and the author of more than 20 books. His latest is Myths, Lies, and Half Truths.

Permission to reprint granted by American Vision P.O. Box 220, Powder Springs, GA 30127, 800-628-9460.

[Alamo-Girl]

Oh, and it's gonna be "y'all" now, is it? Not "youse guys"?

Well, er, I am Texan you know... LOL!

Thank you so much for your reply and for sharing your views!

[blue-duncan]

"Prove us wrong. E.g., stop speaking of modern Israel in absolute prophectic terms."

I have not spoken of modern Israel in "absolute prophetic terms". What I have repeatedly said is that after the rapture of the church (whenever that is)God will deal with the nation of Israel again and out of it a remnant of believing Israel will be saved. I don't know nor have I said that the current State of Israel is the prophetic Israel. What I do believe is the universal promise to Abraham that God will bless those that bless him (and by extension, his elect progeny) and curse those that curse him.

"However, your logical disconnect is that they were punished for their own, specific sin which they committed in the wilderness of Sinai. God did not preserve them that they might sin. He did not kill them just because they were Jews. And God certainly did not fortell via prophecy thousands of years beforehand that they would be killed."

The Israelites were punished for their own sin. Joshua and Caleb did not sin and were protected, those too young to be accountable were exempt and Moses died for his own sin. It was prophesied to them (Ex. 19-24) what would happen to them if they disobeyed God and even had examples of God's wrath for murmuring and complaining and disobedience before the mass disobedience. Of course God knew that mature Israel would sin and that only a remnant of Israel would enter the promise. He has used the killing of disobedient Israel over and over again as an example of His justice.

[Buggman]

Gentiles were grafted into the Jews-we are one.

Not precisely. Nowhere in the NT does any author say that Gentile believers become Jews, "spiritual Jews," "the real Jews," or any of the other catchphrases that Replacement Theology regularly uses to get around the clear Biblical promises to the natural seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Indeed, Sha'ul (Paul) repeatedly uses "Jew and Gentile" and "circumcised and uncircumcised" to refer to believers in the Messiah, indicating that there is indeed a practical difference (just as there is between male and female)--but while maintaining, and rightly so, that we are still all one Ekklesia, one Body, co-heirs together, and that Jewishness and Gentileness is nothing compared to the importance of keeping God's commands.

Remember, even in the illustration of the olive tree (Rom. 11), Sha'ul still notes that the Gentiles who are grafted in are of a wild olive tree, and distinct from the natural branches. Moreover, he warns us against arrogance over the natural branches, whether they are broken off or not, and reiterates God's promise that "all Israel will be saved, as is written," even though they are currently "enemies of the Gospel for your sakes, but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes."

Now, in regards to my "what slander" statement, let's review the context: You said that it borders on blasphemy to suggest that the Jews are held in special esteem by God; I pointed out that Sha'ul himself said that they are, which means that you have three choices:

a) Continue to insist that it is borderline blasphemy to say that the Jews have a special place in God's heart, and thereby accuse (and slander) Sha'ul as a near-blasphemer (in which case, why do you consider his writings to be canon);

b) admit that you spoke in error, and change your position; or

c) try to divert attention from your error by trying to claim some sort of victim status because I pointed out that your "near-blasphemy" statement amounts to slandering Sha'ul.

So far, you seem to be going for option c). If you want to, okay, but I'll continue to point out that you in fact have no counter-argument to my own other than a weak "argument by outrage."

I understand completely what Paul is saying about the Jews and anyone who has ever known any true Jew who has become a Christian understand it as well.

Then you don't understand what Sha'ul is saying at all, since we're right back at the point (never answered, by the way) of the previous thread: Is the Jewish believer in the Messiah, whether he identifies himself as a mainline Christian or a Messianic Jew, an enemy to the Gospel because of Gentile inclusion (Rom. 11:28)?

No.

Therefore, clearly Sha'ul is saying that the unbelieving Jewish people are still, "as touching the election . . . beloved for the fathers' sakes"!

So what does this mean? It means that while indeed Gentiles who have put their trust in the Messiah are indeed grafted into Israel--just as, in national terms, Syria would be "grafted into" Israel if that nation surrendered to and were annexed by a Jewish King--that we have neither replaced the Jewish branches nor are we "the new Israel." Rather, to put it in geographical/political terms again, we are a province of the greater commonwealth of Israel--but the original kingdom, though currently in rebellion against her King, still retains the right to that name, insofar as the King has promised to restore them.

To put it another way, there is currently a rift in the Kingdom of God. Those to whom the Kingdom first belonged were blinded by God for the express purpose of bringing the Gospel to the Gentiles and enabling the Gentiles to be included in that greater Kingdom. However, there will indeed be a day when the Kingdom will return to Israel (Acts 1:6-7)--not to the exclusion of the Gentiles of the Kingdom, but to include both so that God's family is even larger.

To put it yet another way, we have been adopted into God's family. The firstborn son (Exo. 4:22) is currently out of the house due to a long-ago act of rebellion--but he is still the firstborn son, the one born into the household. We who were adopted did not replace him at all, any more than my adopted younger brother replaced me. The Father has promised that the firstborn will be brought back into the house, therefore the firstborn is still Israel.

Now, if you want to argue that because we are adopted into the father's household that we are part of Israel in a broad sense that does not preclude the name to the firstborn, I would agree. In which case I would advise you to keep the commands that the firstborn was commanded to keep and which the Father never recinded. Not for inclusion--you're already adopted--but because those are the rules the Father set.

But if by the term you mean that the firstborn, all natural Israel, has been cast out of the house forever, and we, the adopted children, have replaced him--then you are dead wrong. You are even more so when we can see that the firstborn has been given a place by the Father by virtue of seeing him returning to the Land.

God retained a remnant for His sake and glory-not because of their actions.

Funny you should mention that. He says just that about bringing Israel back into the Land in the Last Days (Ezk. 36:22). So you admit that for the sake of His Name, Israel is still blessed and even returned to the Land, just as they were blessed with forgiveness for the sin of the Golden Calf for the sake of YHVH's Name.

God came to seek and save what He had lost. It wasn't because they were good.

And yet, Yeshua was still a blessing, the Seed through whom all the nations of the world, including Israel, are blessed. And He came when Israel was in a state of disobedience.

[blue-duncan]

"Can someone point me to an article by someone who is not dispensational but is decidedly pretrib?"

This from Wikipedia, is crude but gives an overview of Dispensationalism.

"Dispensationalism seeks to address what many see as opposing theologies between the Old Testament and New Testament. Its name comes from the fact that it sees biblical history as best understood in light of a series of dispensations in the Bible.

the dispensation of innocence (Gen 1:1–3:7), prior to Adam's fall,
of conscience (Gen 3:8–8:22), Adam to Noah,
of government (Gen 9:1–11:32), Noah to Abraham,
of patriarchal rule (Gen 12:1–Exod 19:25), Abraham to Moses,
of the Mosaic Law (Exod 20:1–Acts 2:4), Moses to Christ,
of grace (Acts 2:4–Rev 20:3 – except for Hyperdispensationalists), the current church age, and
of a literal, earthly 1,000-year Millennial Kingdom that has yet to come but soon will (Rev 20:4–20:6).
Each dispensation is said to represent a different way in which God deals with man, often a different test for man. "These periods are marked off in Scripture by some change in God's method of dealing with mankind, in respect to two questions: of sin, and of man's responsibility," explained C. I. Scofield. "Each of the dispensations may be regarded as a new test of the natural man, and each ends in judgment—marking his utter failure in every dispensation."

A dispensationalist is one who affirms all seven dispensations in which God has worked and is working. Pretrib rapture is only a subset of the last, "of a literal, earthly 1,000-year Millennial Kingdom that has yet to come but soon will (Rev 20:4–20:6)." One can believe in a pretrib rapture and not affirm the whole Dispensational system.

[topcat54]

One can believe in a pretrib rapture and not affirm the whole Dispensational system.

Well, I'm sure that is the case, but since the pretrib theory sprang from dispensationalism, and it part and parcel with the dispensational views on Israel and the church, why one who is not dispensational would adopt such a theory is puzzling to me.

There is no reason to believe in the pretrib rapture unless one assumes the basic tenets of dispensationalism. You might not adopt all the details in the Wikipedia article, but if you accept the basics then you are dispensational.

Pretrib is a basic, along with the radial distinction between Israel and the church. Whether there are 2 or 7 or 10 dispensations is less material.

[HarleyD]

Well, just when I thought I've seen about everything I came across some Reformed (yes, Calvinist) Messianic Jews. My head gets dizzy simply thinking about all this. I would refer you to To The Jew First: A Reformed Perspective by Dr. Richard L. Pratt, Jr. for a Reformed Messianic Jewish review of the grafting in of the Gentiles.

There's hope for you Buggman. If you won't switch to a Presbyterian or Reformed Baptist; perhaps you'll switch to a Reformed Messianic Jew.

Do they have these issues in other religions?

[blue-duncan]

"There is no reason to believe in the pretrib rapture unless one assumes the basic tenets of dispensationalism"

Are you then saying the Donald G. Barnhouse was a Dispensationalist because he believed in a pretrib rapture and yet affirmed Reformed doctrine?

[P-Marlowe]

Many of us once sat where they sat, and thought as they did. Then, we got a taste of God's glory, of His wonderful purposes for our lives. Purposes that extended beyond the realm between our ears, and embraced objective reality.

IOW dispys have never had a taste of God's glory; Dispys have never had a taste of the wonderful purposes in their lives.

IOW preterists are better Christians and more spiritual than Dispys.

[Buggman]

I've only just started on it, but so far it looks interesting. It's almost certainly worthy of its own thread for discussion, and definitely more edifying than DeMar's slurs that TC's been posting for the last couple of weeks. I'll get back to you after I've had time to peruse it.

In the meantime, do you have an answer of your own for my arguments?

Do they have these issues in other religions?

Yep. The only ones which claim not to are those whose religions have no mutually-accepted source of authority, as we have the Bible, or whose theology is so mushy that it does not lend itself to discussion or refinement.

[topcat54]

Well, just when I thought I've seen about everything I came across some Reformed (yes, Calvinist) Messianic Jews.

I know Ilya Lizorkin and Fred Klett. In fact, I have worshipped with them at Rock of Israel. They are not what is commonly known as "Messianic Jews". (Fred is a gentile.) I do not believe the article in question teaches some of the basic tenets of Messianic Judaism, i.e., that Jews who convert to Christ should continue to practice the "Torah" regulation that were peculiar to the old covenant as a sign of the covenant relationship.

I do not think you will find the term "Messianic Jew" anywhere in their literature. They are, in fact, reformed Presbyterians in good standing. They are decidedly covenantal in their approach to the Bible, not (semi-)dispensational. They do not disavow "gentile Chrisianity" or run from the name "Christian".

Rather, they are a model example for how Jews and gentiles can work together in advancing the gospel in a particular cultural setting (Russian Jews in Philadelphia area). They help folks understand the historic and cultural setting of the Bible without feeling the need to pressure gentiles into becoming Jewish in their practices.

The theology of Messianic Judaism, as practiced by such groups as the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations (UMJC), would be much closer to dispensationalism than covenantal. And my interaction with Messianic Jews has led me to the conclusion that they view the new testament people of God primarily as a cultural extension of old covenant Judaism, rather than as a place where old covenant forms have been largely abandoned and people from every nation, tribe, etc can worship together without pressure to adopt one form or another.

[topcat54]

definitely more edifying than DeMar's slurs that TC's been posting for the last couple of weeks.

Just for the record, you have not identified any "slurs" in DeMar's articles. But perhaps you were too busy coming up with terms like "Replacement Theologists" and "uninstrumented colonoscopy" to notice.

Matthew 7:12

[Buggman]

IOW dispys have never had a taste of God's glory; Dispys have never had a taste of the wonderful purposes in their lives.

IOW preterists are better Christians and more spiritual than Dispys.

That does seem to be what he's saying, doesn't it?

While I'm not a Dispy, I do get mistaken for one a lot, and I know many Dispys whose experiences parallel my own: I've seen a woman healed of AIDS, the spirits of the Adversary flee at Yeshua's Name, and lives completely changed by the Gospel. I've seen prophecy come to pass, received dreams (twice), and known long-estranged brothers to reconcile the day after they were prayed for. I've prayed in tongues and felt the Spirit move to bind up the broken-hearted.

I've watched holes torn through the wall that separates the Christian and the Jew, and seen Gentiles weep for joy at rediscovering their Jewish spiritual heritage and Jews weep for joy at the evidence that God has not forgotten His promises to their people. I've seen Jew and Gentile sit down together at one table to eat of feasts that are but a foretaste of the glory that will be known at the Wedding Feast of the Lamb, and seen them love each other as brothers born.

I've known Dispy missionaries that have seen contests between the Spirit and the local powers of darkness of Biblical proportions. I've seen the Gospel penetrating into territory that has been held in darkness by the Adversary for six thosand years.

And in the midst of all that, on the dawning of the day when the Great Commission will be completed and the Gospel truly preached to all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues, I see Israel back in the Land in fulfillment of God's promises that He would bring them back first for His Name's sake, and only after that bring them into the New Covenant and put His Spirit within them.

Yeah, clearly Dispys never know the taste of God's glory.

I will tell you this, Tom: When I have kept my eye on the signs of the times, when I have worked with the sense of urgency that comes from knowing that the time is short but there is so much more to do, I have walked closest with God. It is when I take my eyes off the prize, when I slip into the thinking that He is not, in fact, coming back all that soon, that I'm most apt to goof off. That, I think, is why the Apostles always used imminent language to describe the Coming--they didn't know for certain when He would come, but they wanted everyone to be "Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat" (2 Pt. 3:12).

[Buggman]

Just for the record, you have not identified any "slurs" in DeMar's articles.

I refer you again to my post #28.

[TomSmedley]

Many of us once sat where they sat, and thought as they did. Then, we got a taste of God's glory, of His wonderful purposes for our lives. Purposes that extended beyond the realm between our ears, and embraced objective reality.

IOW dispys have never had a taste of God's glory; Dispys have never had a taste of the wonderful purposes in their lives.

IOW preterists are better Christians and more spiritual than Dispys.

Good question. Since, in the dispensational view, God's Kingdom is entirely subjective in this era, a phenomenon that occurs only between the ears (excuse me, "in the heart") of the believer, their experience of His Kingdom does seem rather mystical and deracinated. If nothing is supposed to be happening around us except for dramas being acted out half a world and another dispensation away, life must get awefully dull after a while! "My experience is bigger than your experience," the mystical among us might say, like middle-school lads comparing "special talents" in the locker room.

Granted, dispys have had a taste of something. Something powerful enough to provide mystical thrills, maybe. But not powerful enough to drive back the darkness around them, or to enable any permanent human progress. Their situation reminds me of G K Chesterton's wonderful comment from his book Orthodoxy.

Of all conceivable forms of enlightenment the worst is what these people call the Inner Light. Of all horrible religions the most horrible is the worship of the god within. Any one who knows any body knows how it would work; any one who knows any one from the Higher Thought Centre knows how it does work. That Jones shall worship the god within him turns out ultimately to mean that Jones shall worship Jones. Let Jones worship the sun or moon, anything rather than the Inner Light; let Jones worship cats or crocodiles, if he can find any in his street, but not the god within. Christianity came into the world firstly in order to assert with violence that a man had not only to look inwards, but to look outwards, to behold with astonishment and enthusiasm a divine company and a divine captain. The only fun of being a Christian was that a man was not left alone with the Inner Light, but definitely recognized an outer light, fair as the sun, clear as the moon, terrible as an army with banners.

It is with great passion that I shout, "Jesus is LORD!" and add sotto voce "and Lord is NOT a synonym for guru!" The Lordship of the reigning Christ is too big to confine to my own precious experiential zone. My Lord governs the nations, today, humiliating proud regmes and dismantling "every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God." A Kingdom this extensive surely demands more loyalty than a personal mystical experience! A Kingdom whose reign applies to every detail of life keeps me "on task" 24/7, not just during my "quiet time."

Let me repeat myself:

Many of us once sat where they sat, and thought as they did. Then, we got a taste of God's glory, of His wonderful purposes for our lives. Purposes that extended beyond the realm between our ears, and embraced objective reality.

The traffic is only going in one direction. Once you are apprehended by a faith big enough to apply to ALL of life, the stylites' pillar loses its attraction.

[topcat54]

DB Barnhouse was a dispensationalist in theology for most of his career. Towards the end he made some comments disavowing dispensationalism, but the reasons why he did so were not so clear. Perhaps it was that he was a member of the (liberal) United Presbyterian Church, and his fundamentalist friends were calling all the fundamentalists to leave the liberal denominations. Barnhouse could never go this far.

At one point Barnhouse wrote, "It was a tragic hour when the Reformation churches wrote the Ten Commandments into their creeds and catechisms and sought to bring Gentile believers into bondage to Jewish law, which was never intended either for the Gentile nations or for the church." No Westminater man would ever utter those words. They are thoroughly dispensational.

[TomSmedley]

I will tell you this, Tom: When I have kept my eye on the signs of the times, when I have worked with the sense of urgency that comes from knowing that the time is short but there is so much more to do, I have walked closest with God. It is when I take my eyes off the prize, when I slip into the thinking that He is not, in fact, coming back all that soon, that I'm most apt to goof off.

Interesting point. I see in myself a tendency to goof off, to get distracted. However, my walk with God has been far more satisfying since I've focused on incremental faithfulness, learning to take consistent steps every day, day by day, year after year, willing to wait decades or generations for the harvest of the seed I sow. Yes, I was the deranged Jesus Freak who dropped out of college and quit work to "spread the gospel" since "time is short." When Jesus didn't come down to earth in 1975, I had to -- burned out and embittered and bewildered. I rediscovered the core elements of the gospel then, at the lowest point of my life, and began to rebuild. Being introduced to "big picture" Christianity, "calvinism on steroids," transformed my disposition, marriage, and vocation. God is faithful.

[blue-duncan]

"IOW preterists are better Christians and more spiritual than Dispys."

"Good question. Since, in the dispensational view, God's Kingdom is entirely subjective in this era, a phenomenon that occurs only between the ears (excuse me, "in the heart") of the believer, their experience of His Kingdom does seem rather mystical and deracinated"

That pretty much ends this discussion!

[topcat54]

No slur there. DeMar is basing his comments on historical precedent. If you study the history of dispensationalism in America leading up to and during WWII you'll see many of them were content to let Hitler have his way in Europe based on their understanding of end-times events wrt Jews/Israel.

See Dwight Wilson's book Armageddon Now! for documentation.

[TomSmedley]

To The Jew First: A Reformed Perspective by Dr. Richard L. Pratt, Jr.

I was at the home prayer meeting where Richard Pratt met Jesus -- and that guy has sure made things happen since!

[HarleyD]

Do I have an argument for your post????

HD-Gentiles were grafted into the Jews-we are one.

Buggman-Not precisely. ....

Sha'ul...notes...Gentiles who are grafted in are of a wild olive tree, and distinct from the natural branches......

indeed Gentiles who have put their trust in the Messiah are indeed grafted into Israel....

To put it yet another way, we have been adopted into God's family...

if you want to argue that because we are adopted into the father's household that we are part of Israel in a broad sense...

Quite frankly this is a confusing mess. And my mind is already messed up to find out about Reformed Messianic Jews. I take it you can't disagree with me but you don't wish to come out and say that we have been indeed grafted in with the Jews.

Only a Calvinist would understand that there is a hardening on the heart of Jews until the time of the Gentiles are complete. (I thought God wants all men saved.) But that's another story.

You said that it borders on blasphemy to suggest that the Jews are held in special esteem by God

I'm not trying to divert attention away from anything nor am I trying to melodramatic. I stand by what I stated. God shows no partiality and He is no respecter of person. (Acts 10:34)

Is the Jewish believer in the Messiah, whether he identifies himself as a mainline Christian or a Messianic Jew, an enemy to the Gospel because of Gentile inclusion (Rom. 11:28)?

I thought I answered that. Jew or Gentile-it makes no difference. If you want to go to the synagoue on Saturdays to worship, be my guest. If you want to give up pork or you want to circumcise yourself, have at it. You are free in Christ to do what you want to do. But if you think any of these works or actions are pleasing to God then you better stop and think again. What is worst is purporting that others should do them as something that is pleasing to God. A Christian rest upon the saving works of Christ-all of our actions are as filthy rags.

But if by the term you mean that the firstborn, all natural Israel, has been cast out of the house forever, and we, the adopted children, have replaced him--then you are dead wrong.

I didn't say that we replaced Israel. I said we are grafted in WITH Israel.