Postrib vs Dispy

[Fenris]

Respectfully, you're ignoring the bulk of the Scriptures I gave, indicating the covenant of marriage between God and Israel was, under the Law, cancelled.

There is no place where the covenant says that the law can be *cancelled*. None. Exile is part of the covenant, not a cancelation of it. Lev 26:44 specifically says that the covenant will never be canceled.

Again, the Abrahamic Covenant will *never* be cancelled. However, the Law, as a prohibiting element, could be cancelled, and was cancelled.

This is not in the bible.

And it was cancelled by necessity, not only because Israel failed their part in the contract, 

Israel didn't fail. They fell short, but God specifically says that they can redeem themselves. How? By following the law. Deuteronomy 30 (again)

When all these blessings and curses I have set before you come on you and you take them to heart wherever the Lord your God disperses you among the nations,  and when you and your children return to the Lord your God and obey him with all your heart and with all your soul according to everything I command you today,  then the Lord your God will restore your fortunes and have compassion on you and gather you again from all the nations where he scattered you.

See? Obedience to the law ends the exile.

More: You will again obey the Lord and follow all his commands I am giving you today.  Then the Lord your God will make you most prosperous in all the work of your hands and in the fruit of your womb, the young of your livestock and the crops of your land. The Lord will again delight in you and make you prosperous, just as he delighted in your ancestors,  if you obey the Lord your God and keep his commands and decrees that are written in this Book of the Law and turn to the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

but also because all nations would fail in the same way.

The nations were never expected to follow the Sinai covenant.

Fulfilling the Abrahamic Covenant, on behalf of Israel and on behalf of all nations of faith, would be impossible if the Law remained in effect forever.

Lev 26:44 and Deut 30 explicitly say otherwise.

The Law was proof that mankind had fallen and would thereafter be disqualified from eternal life. Unless the Law was cancelled, and mercy alone established in its place, the covenant of international salvation could never be achieved. For mercy alone to be established, the Law's temporary provision for atonement had to be abandoned for a final provision for atonement, which became available through Christ's death and forgiveness.

This is Christian dogma. That's fine. It isn't Judaism however. We believe the opposite, that God gave us many laws to follow so that we could include Him in every part of our day, everywhere and anywhere we go.

I've already proven that false. A simple reading of the blessings of obedience to the Law will show any objective party that part of the purpose of obeying the Law was for Israel to remain in their land, blessed, and free of outside oppression.

The "purpose" of the law was to be God's holy people:

Israel at Sinai (Ex 19) Now if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, you will be My treasured possession out of all the nations—for the whole earth is Mine. And unto Me you shall be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’

Lev 11 For I am the LORD your God; consecrate yourselves, therefore, and be holy, because I am holy. You must not defile yourselves by any creature that crawls along the ground.

Lev 20 Consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am the Lord your God. Keep my decrees and follow them. I am the Lord, who makes you holy.

etc etc

The covenant was broken, period.

God said He wouldn't break it. Why should I listen to a person and not God?

The fact of the Law's being broken, even while parts of it were still obeyed, is indicated in the fact the temple, the priesthood, and the sacrifices had been taken away. How is the loss of that meaning that the Law was still in operation?

Just because there's no temple doesn't mean there's no law. There was no temple between 586BC and 516BC yet the law remained in effect. And it's a good thing it did, because if everyone stopped following the law then, there would be no Jews left in the first century, no temple, and no Jesus.

At best, only parts of the Law remained in effect

Oh and we're allowed to just pick and choose? LOL, no.

As you know, I believe that Christ was God's chosen means of final atonement for sin

I don't believe in "final atonement".

[agnostic]

There is no place where the covenant says that the law can be *cancelled*. None.

He keeps claiming this, but also keeps failing to actually quote where it says it when repeatedly asked. If only he would quote where the Torah says what he claims it says, this would be put to rest. Patterns of dishonesty running amuck right now...

[RandyPNW]

There is no place where the covenant says that the law can be *cancelled*. None.

He keeps claiming this, but also keeps failing to actually quote where it says it when repeatedly asked. If only he would quote where the Torah says what he claims it says, this would be put to rest. Patterns of dishonesty running amuck right now...

What a ruse. I'm "dishonest" because you disagree with my answer. Again, the words used to express the cancellation of the Law are words that you don't think mean cancellation. But to me they do--it's obvious to see that these words can mean cancellation.

So you just disagree. To call it "dishonest" is a ruse. And I don't respect that. Honest disagreements should be acknowledge as such. For Fenris and you to agree on this is just called "piling on." And I respect neither of you for it.

So I reiterate, just to defend myself for others--I don't expect anything good out of you. Here are the words that mean "cancellation."

Isaiah called it a divorce, meant to apply not just to N. Israel, but also to Judah. The argument that God was willing to forgive did not nullify the divorce--it just meant mercy would be applied *after* the divorce.

The curses of the Law given late in Deuteronomy indicate the nation would go into captivity, if the process of deterioration could not be stopped. This exile is a word that expresses the *cancellation* of the blessings promised for keeping the Law intact.

When an agreement to preserve a nation in their land is broken by one of the parties, then God can surrender the agreement, or cancel it. And the sign it is cancelled is when the nation is no longer blessed in the land, when they are exiled.

You may not like the line of reasoning, but I know it's reasonable. You just don't like it. And so you resort to ad hominem, which I don't respect at all. Be happy with yourself. I hope you sleep well at night?

I won't continue to argue with a bad spirit, without a generous spirit that is cooperative and respectful.

[Fenris]

Isaiah called it a divorce

He says the opposite. We've discussed this already.

“Where is your mother’s certificate of divorce with which I sent her away? Or to which of my creditors did I sell you? Because of your sins you were sold; because of your transgressions your mother was sent away."

The curses of the Law given late in Deuteronomy indicate the nation would go into captivity, if the process of deterioration could not be stopped. This exile is a word that expresses the *cancellation* of the blessings promised for keeping the Law intact.

The exile is punishment for not obeying. On the other hand, Deuteronomy says when we obey again, the exile ends. Magic!

In a more meta sense, Deuteronomy says that we have a choice to make: See chapter 11 Behold, I set before you today a blessing and a curse. The blessing, that you will heed the commandments of the Lord your God, which I command you today; and the curse, if you will not heed the commandments of the Lord your God, but turn away from the way I command you this day, to follow other gods, which you did not know.


The fact that God presents it as a choice means that it's not impossible. Then God would just say "You guys can't do this. Give up."

When an agreement to preserve a nation in their land is broken by one of the parties, then God can surrender the agreement, or cancel it.

I know this seems very clever to you, but it isn't in the bible. God in fact says the opposite. Lev 26, again.

[RandyPNW]

Isaiah called it a divorce

He says the opposite. We've discussed this already.

“Where is your mother’s certificate of divorce with which I sent her away? Or to which of my creditors did I sell you? Because of your sins you were sold; because of your transgressions your mother was sent away."

Yes, we've discussed it. But you ignore the part where it says "because of your sins you were sold." That is a synonym for "divorce!"

I recognize that the verse also says "where is the certificate of divorce?" This isn't denying the divorce happened--only suggesting that at some point it will no longer be recognized. It will purposely get lost!

So who is right in this? I am. The verse plainly states, as a matter of fact, that the divorce happened. "You were sold." This isn't a matter of opinion. This is a matter of believing what is said.

The curses of the Law given late in Deuteronomy indicate the nation would go into captivity, if the process of deterioration could not be stopped. This exile is a word that expresses the *cancellation* of the blessings promised for keeping the Law intact.

The exile is punishment for not obeying. On the other hand, Deuteronomy says when we obey again, the exile ends. Magic!

We both agree that exile was punishment for not obeying. But I'm saying something beyond this. I'm saying that "exile" was a synonym for "divorce," and was used as such, as a legal abrogation of an agreement to bless in the land.

In a more meta sense, Deuteronomy says that we have a choice to make: See chapter 11 Behold, I set before you today a blessing and a curse. The blessing, that you will heed the commandments of the Lord your God, which I command you today; and the curse, if you will not heed the commandments of the Lord your God, but turn away from the way I command you this day, to follow other gods, which you did not know.


The fact that God presents it as a choice means that it's not impossible. Then God would just say "You guys can't do this. Give up."

When did I ever say the Hebrew people could not obey the Law? The fact that they could not extinguish sin from their lives kept them from eternal salvation. But temporal examples of salvation, such as victory in war, were certainly possible by keeping the Law.

I think you're arguing against some misconstrued Christian expressions about this. Clearly, Israel could keep the Law. They just couldn't get eternal salvation for the nation without the atonement Christ came to bring. That act covered their sin nature, allowing them access to eternal life.

When Israel, however, turned against the Law as a nation, national apostasy resulted, and the Law was cancelled. It was a failed agreement, a nullified contract. When one of the parties fails to perform, the contract is dead.

Israel's failure under the Law, through national apostasy, was, as you suggest, forgivable, and Israel could and was restored. Today restoration is in process, but is not yet complete.

When an agreement to preserve a nation in their land is broken by one of the parties, then God can surrender the agreement, or cancel it.

I know this seems very clever to you, but it isn't in the bible. God in fact says the opposite. Lev 26, again.

It has nothing to do with being "clever." I want to see Israel saved for all time--not be clever! This is just contract law 101, and you know it. A broken contract is used as a metaphor and also as a reality in the Law. When a party broke the contract, it failed, and Isaiah said Israel was sent away, which was intended to mean "divorce."

This could and has been fixed. But fixing it today obviously is a different animal. It only took 70 years to return from Babylon. But it's been 2000 years since the fall to the Romans in 70 AD. Is it any coincidence that this was the time that Jesus was crucified? He was descended from Abraham, brother--he was a Jew!

[Fenris]

Yes, we've discussed it. But you ignore the part where it says "because of your sins you were sold." That is a synonym for "divorce!"

Not in English or Hebrew. Maybe ancient Greek?

I recognize that the verse also says "where is the certificate of divorce?" This isn't denying the divorce happened--only suggesting that at some point it will no longer be recognized. It will purposely get lost!

You're just making this up as you go.

So who is right in this? I am. The verse plainly states, as a matter of fact, that the divorce happened. "You were sold."

"Where is the certificate of divorce? You were sold for your sins." The oppsite of what you said. Again.

We both agree that exile was punishment for not obeying. But I'm saying something beyond this. I'm saying that "exile" was a synonym for "divorce," and was used as such, as a legal abrogation of an agreement to bless in the land.

You're saying it. But God said the opposite. Who should I listen to?

Yet in spite of this, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or abhor them so as to destroy them completely, breaking my covenant with them. I am the Lord their God

When did I ever say the Hebrew people could not obey the Law?

You've said that it was impossible.


quote] The fact that they could not extinguish sin from their lives kept them from eternal salvation.[/quote]The bible doesn't say anything about "extinguishing sin" or "eternal salvation". 

I think you're arguing against some misconstrued Christian expressions about this. Clearly, Israel could keep the Law. They just couldn't get eternal salvation for the nation without the atonement Christ came to bring.

Buuuut that isn't in the bible. I mean, you have to accept the NT as holy writ to believe that.

When Israel, however, turned against the Law as a nation, national apostasy resulted, and the Law was cancelled. It was a failed agreement, a nullified contract. When one of the parties fails to perform, the contract is dead.

But that's not what the bible says.

It has nothing to do with being "clever." I want to see Israel saved for all time--not be clever!

Has nothing to do with what the bible says, though.

This is just contract law 101, and you know it.

Uh, I would be very careful about applying human laws to God. Just saying.

This could and has been fixed. But fixing it today obviously is a different animal. It only took 70 years to return from Babylon. But it's been 2000 years since the fall to the Romans in 70 AD. Is it any coincidence that this was the time that Jesus was crucified?

Jesus wasn't crucified in the year 70.

He was descended from Abraham, brother--he was a Jew!

And he was crucified by the Romans, just as another 100,000 Jews were.

[Not Worthy]

Like... if God wanted to tell Israel that their laws were an everlasting command, never to be revoked, never to be "transformed", never to be terminated once they were "spiritually fulfilled" by a messiah centuries later... how else could he have possibly said it than "this is an everlasting command", "you must keep these commands forever in all your generations", "do not ever change these commands"?

Well, this is the crux of it. It's one of the reasons that Christianity is a hard sell to observant Jews.

The Hebrew word in those verses is ‛ôlâm. Almost every time the word ôlâm appears in the tôrâh (the Law), the King James, as well as a number of other English versions of the Bible, translate the word variously as "forever", "everlasting", or "eternal”, but depending on the context of the verse where it appears, that’s not necessarily what ôlâm means.

In the ancient Hebrew text it’s employed whenever the beginning or the end of any period being spoken of, is not known. It’s “the vanishing point” of that period, and there are many parts of Biblical scripture where it does not mean "forever and ever", for example,

1 Samuel 27:8
"And David and his men went up and invaded the Geshurites, and the Gezrites, and the Amalekites. For they were of old (ôlâm) the inhabitants of the land, as you come into Shur, even into the land of Egypt."

Joshua 24:2
"And Joshua said unto all the people, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the flood in old time (ôlâm), Terah, the father of Abraham, and the father of Nachor: and they served other gods."

Deuteronomy 32:7
"Remember the days of old (ôlâm); consider the years of many generations. Ask your father, and he will show you; your elders, and they will tell you."

Psalm 143:3
"For the enemy has pursued my soul; he has beaten my life down to the ground; he has made me dwell in darkness, as those long (ôlâm) dead”

Deuteronomy 15:12, 16 & 17
 If your brother (a Hebrew man or a Hebrew woman), is sold to you and serves you six years, then in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you.

 But if he loves you and your house because it has been good for him with you, and he says to you, “I will not go away from you”, then you shall take an awl and put it through his ear to the door, and he shall be your servant forever (ôlâm). And you shall do the same for your slave-girl."

Young’s Literal Translation of verse 17:

“..and he hath been to thee a servant age-during (ôlâm); and also to thy handmaid thou dost do so."

1 Kings 9:3 (regarding the temple Solomon built):
"And the Lord said to him (to Solomon), I have heard thy prayer and thy supplication, that thou hast made before me: I have hallowed this house, which thou hast built,

to put my name there for ever (ôlâm); and mine eyes and mine heart shall be there all the days."

There are many other examples, but you probably already think that I'm going to stay on this road “for ôlâm”, so before we turn off this road, let’s quickly look at a few verses where ôlâm DOES mean “forever & ever in perpetuity”:-

Proverbs 8:22-23
"The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting (ôlâm), from the beginning, or ever the earth was."

Genesis 21:33
"And Abraham planted a tree in Beer-sheba, and called there on the name of the LORD, the everlasting (ôlâm) God."

Deuteronomy 32:40
"For I lift up My hand to Heaven and say, I live forever (ôlâm)"

The covenant based on the Law was the marriage-covenant between God and Israel, but it was based on obedience to tôrâh and was repeatedly broken because the "wife" repeatedly broke her "vow":

Exodus 24:7-8
"And he (Moses) took the book of the covenant, and read in the ears of the people.

And they said, All that the LORD has said we will do, and be obedient.

And Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD has made with you concerning all these words."

The elect did not obey because like all who are born of the flesh and begotten of a descendant of Adam, they could not obey:

Romans 7:14-23
"For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do, I know not. For what I desire, that I do not do; but what I hate, that I do.

If then I do that which I do not desire, I consent to the law that it is good. But now it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwells in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwells no good thing. For to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I do not find.

For I do not do the good that I desire; but the evil which I do not will, that I do. But if I do what I do not desire, it is no more I working it out, but sin dwelling in me.

I find then a law: when I will to do the right, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man; but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin being in my members."

Isiah 24:5
"And the land is defiled under its people; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, and have broken the everlasting (‛ôlâm) covenant."

Young's Literal Translation: “They have made void a covenant age-during (‛ôlâm)."

They BROKE the covenant. But God, in His mercy, promised a NEW Covenant:

Jeremiah 31:31-32 "Behold, the days come, says the LORD, that I will cut a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant that I cut with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; WHICH COVENANT OF MINE THEY BROKE, although I was a husband to them, says the LORD."

The first covenant was ratified with blood – the blood of an animal:

Exodus 24:8 "Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD has made with you concerning all these words."

Christ's blood is the blood of the New Covenant:

Matthew 26;28 "For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."

Romans 7:2-4 "For the married woman was bound by tôrâh to the living husband. But if the husband is dead, she is set free from the tôrâh of her husband. So then if, while her husband lives, she is married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress.

But if the husband dies, she is free from the tôrâh, so that she is no adulteress by becoming another man's wife.

So, my brothers, you also have become dead to the tôrâh BY THE BODY OF CHRIST so that you should be married to Another, even to Him raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit to God."

2 Corinthians 5:17
"So that if any one is in Christ, that one is a new creature; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new."

Hebrews 10:1a "For  the tôrâh which has a shadow of good things to come, not the very image of the things,"

Colossians 2:16-17 "Therefore let no one judge you in food or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbaths.  For these  are a shadow of things to come, but  the body  is of Christ."

The shadow of the Law (tôrâh) was abolished in the flesh of Christ (Eph 2:15):

"having abolished in His flesh the enmity (the Law of commandments contained in ordinances) so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, making peace between them"

Romans 2:27 "And if the uncircumcized fulfill (Greek: teléō) the Law (tôrâh), shall this fact not judge you, who through the letter of tôrâh and your circumcision become transgressors of tôrâh?"

What does this mean, “if the uncircumsized fulfill (Greek: teléō) the Law”? Is it a contradiction of the above things?

No. It’s not a contradiction. The Greek word used by Paul in Romans 2:27 is not hypakoḗ (obey), but teléō (fulfill), which is the same word Christ used as He died on the cross when He said, “It is teléō (fulfilled, finished)” (John 19:30).

The word teléō does not mean obey, it means to fulfill: The Strong’s Greek Dictionary defines it as: to end, i.e. complete, execute, conclude, discharge (a debt):--accomplish, make an end, expire, fill up, finish, go over, pay, perform.

When asked, "Master, which is the great commandment in tôrâh (the Law)?", Jesus replied,

Matthew 22:37-40 "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment.

And the second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets."

Both of the above Jesus Himself fulfilled completely, and to its completion: John 15:13 "No one has greater love than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."

Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to destroy but to fulfill.".

"Then when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, It is teléō! (fulfilled, finished). And He bowed His head and gave up the spirit." (John 19:30).

The only way the Law can be fulfilled is if it’s obeyed. We could not obey the Law. Jesus obeyed it for us and on our behalf:

These two laws, of which the entire tôrâh is the shadow, is fulfilled in us by Christ in us:

John 15:4-5 "Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it remains in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me. I am the Vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, the same brings forth much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing."

Philippians 2:13 "For it is God who works in you both to will and to do of His good pleasure."

Galatians 5:22-25 "But the fruit of the Spirit is: love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faith, meekness, self-control; against such things there is no law. But those belonging to Christ have crucified the flesh with its passions and lusts.

If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit."

Romans 13:8-10 "Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. For: "Do not commit adultery; do not murder; do not steal; do not bear false witness; do not lust;"  and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this word, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

Love works no ill to its neighbor, therefore love is the fulfilling of the law."

Galatians 5:14 "For all the Law (tôrâh) is fulfilled in one word, even in this, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

The tôrâh is the shadow. Christ is the body. We live by faith in Christ. The Law and the covenant based on obedience to it, is gone, and that which has become old is ready to fade away (Hebrews 8:13).

This was the gospel from the beginning, the gospel of Christ and His apostles (which is why so many Jews of the first century rejected Christ, and why so many have rejected Christ ever since):

“Israel, who followed after a law of righteousness did not arrive at a law of righteousness. Why? Because it was not of faith, but as it were by the works of the Law. For they stumbled at that Stumbling-stone;

as it is written, "Behold, I lay in Zion a Stumbling-stone and a Rock-of-offense, and everyone believing on Him shall not be put to shame." (Romans 9:31-33)

[Not Worthy]

I'm Postrib and also believe in the future salvation of national Israel. I think it's important to state this because many Postribs reject Israel in prophecy altogether, or reinterpret it to apply to the international Church.

Let me say, first of all, that there is a difference between the biblical view of national salvation and the biblical view of individual salvation. National salvation has more to do with the survival of the entire society rather than with spiritual salvation.

But these things are obviously tied together. God said that without spirituality and without obedience, a nation will not be saved. It will ultimately perish or suffer significant judgment.

Many get confused about this because they think that saving a society is not important in relation to saving an individual. Actually, both are important to God--both nations and individuals. The nation protects the individual, and thus provides a healthy spiritual climate for the individual if the nation is itself generally spiritual, or tolerant of spirituality.

The problem with Postribs who deny the place of national Israel in prophecy is that God did indeed promise this to Abraham. And God doesn't break His promises. Though the Early Church gave up hope in Israel's future salvation because Israel didn't repent, this does not mean that after many generations God cannot begin again with Israel, and ultimately refine her through the fires of His judgment.

So I do believe in Israel's future salvation, and also in the salvation of other nations--primarily Christian nations. Like Israel, many Christian nations have fallen on hard times, and have come under divine punishment. If Israel can be saved, so can these former Christian nations.

So where in the Bible do we see the salvation of Christian nations? We don't, because when the Bible was written Christian nations did not yet exist. And yet God promised them to Abraham. He was promised he would become father of a multitude of nations.

The problem I see with Pretribs and their Dispensationalism is that not only are they wrong about Pretrib itself, but also wrong to emphasize Israel's salvation through the lens of OT realities. They see Israel as returning to the Law, and they see Israel as still an exclusive nation in a sea of pagan nations.

That reality has changed, although some of it remains true. Whereas the nations ultimately capitulate to paganism it is not true that other nations did not become nations of God. Many nations have become Christian nations. They just ultimately fall, as Israel did. All nations do, ultimately, turn against Israel.

So the idea is to recognize that Israel is no longer alone in prophecy, and the future will involve not just Israel's recovery, but also the recovery of many other nations, formerly of faith. And most certainly, there will be no return to the Law. If all nations oppose Israel, they also oppose the idea of "Christian nations." They will stand not in opposition to the practice of the Law of Moses, but rather, in opposition to Christ and to those promised to Christ.

I'm Premil, Non-Disp Post-Trib (I think Keraz is too, which I think is the basis of his interpretations of prophetic scripture). But so is something else I agree with Keraz about, and I posted this in his thread, but will repeat it here, to let you know why I partially agree and partially disagree with you:

Judah/Judea and the tribes of Judah and Benjamin are only one part of Messiah's Kingdom. The New Covenant in Jer 31:31 was promised to both the house of Israel and the house of Judah. Ephraim's seed was going to become a multitude of nations (or "fullness of the Gentiles" in the Hebrew text), Gen 48:19.

The house of Israel is called both Ephraim (collectively) in scripture as well as the house of Israel. Paul applied the prophecy in Hosea 1:9-10 which referred only to the house of Israel (not to the house of Judah) to Gentiles in Romans 9:24-26, and he wrote this even before he wrote about the "unnatural branches" who believe in Jesus being grafted in among the believing remnant of the natural branches (Rom 11:17).  "Unnatural branches" = "Not genetically descended".

So I do believe that Israel is made up of the house of Israel and the house of Judah, the house of Israel having now become a multitude of nations: Gentiles who are grafted into Israel through faith in Christ, regardless of their genetic ancestry.

But Israel can only be those who are in Christ. I hope too for the grafting in of of all Jews, ie "National Israel" or all the genetic seed, and because Paul seems to imply this is going to happen (and for other reasons), I believe there is a Biblical basis for this hope.   

[Fenris]

The Hebrew word in those verses is ‛ôlâm. Almost every time the word ôlâm appears in the tôrâh (the Law), the King James, as well as a number of other English versions of the Bible, translate the word variously as "forever", "everlasting", or "eternal”, but depending on the context of the verse where it appears, that’s not necessarily what ôlâm means.

Ummm yeah. So, we know how to read Hebrew and we know what the word "Olam" means.

In the ancient Hebrew text it’s employed whenever the beginning or the end of any period being spoken of, is not known. It’s “the vanishing point” of that period, and there are many parts of Biblical scripture where it does not mean "forever and ever", for example,

1 Samuel 27:8
"And David and his men went up and invaded the Geshurites, and the Gezrites, and the Amalekites. For they were of old (ôlâm) the inhabitants of the land, as you come into Shur, even into the land of Egypt."

The word is מֵֽעוֹלָ֔ם  "May-Olam". It means "from forever" and is obviously a poetic way of saying "a long time ago". 

Joshua 24:2
"And Joshua said unto all the people, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the flood in old time (ôlâm), Terah, the father of Abraham, and the father of Nachor: and they served other gods."

Same as above.

Deuteronomy 32:7
"Remember the days of old (ôlâm); consider the years of many generations. Ask your father, and he will show you; your elders, and they will tell you."

Again, this means "a very long time ago. You're not being very convincing here.

Psalm 143:3
"For the enemy has pursued my soul; he has beaten my life down to the ground; he has made me dwell in darkness, as those long (ôlâm) dead”

Again, a past event "a long time ago". This is getting boring.

Deuteronomy 15:12, 16 & 17
 If your brother (a Hebrew man or a Hebrew woman), is sold to you and serves you six years, then in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you.

 But if he loves you and your house because it has been good for him with you, and he says to you, “I will not go away from you”, then you shall take an awl and put it through his ear to the door, and he shall be your servant forever (ôlâm). And you shall do the same for your slave-girl."

"Forever" obviously means "for the rest of his life".

There are many other examples, but you probably already think that I'm going to stay on this road “for ôlâm”, so before we turn off this road, let’s quickly look at a few verses where ôlâm DOES mean “forever & ever in perpetuity”:-

OK, I have a better idea. You're mostly quoting the NT here, which I do not consider holy writ.  So here's my challenge. This is a quote from Lev 23, speaking about the observance of Yom Kippur. It says the following: You shall not perform any work. This is an eternal statute throughout your generations in all your dwelling places.

Note the specific phraseology. "Eternal statute" "throughout your generations" "in all your dwelling places". That seems, to me, to mean "forever". But let's pretend you're right, it's temporary. If God intended it to be forever, what else could He say that would be to your satisfaction to mean "forever"?

[Not Worthy]

The Hebrew word in those verses is ‛ôlâm. Almost every time the word ôlâm appears in the tôrâh (the Law), the King James, as well as a number of other English versions of the Bible, translate the word variously as "forever", "everlasting", or "eternal”, but depending on the context of the verse where it appears, that’s not necessarily what ôlâm means.

Ummm yeah. So, we know how to read Hebrew and we know what the word "Olam" means.

In the ancient Hebrew text it’s employed whenever the beginning or the end of any period being spoken of, is not known. It’s “the vanishing point” of that period, and there are many parts of Biblical scripture where it does not mean "forever and ever", for example,

1 Samuel 27:8
"And David and his men went up and invaded the Geshurites, and the Gezrites, and the Amalekites. For they were of old (ôlâm) the inhabitants of the land, as you come into Shur, even into the land of Egypt."

The word is מֵֽעוֹלָ֔ם  "May-Olam". It means "from forever" and is obviously a poetic way of saying "a long time ago". 

Joshua 24:2
"And Joshua said unto all the people, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the flood in old time (ôlâm), Terah, the father of Abraham, and the father of Nachor: and they served other gods."

Same as above.

Deuteronomy 32:7
"Remember the days of old (ôlâm); consider the years of many generations. Ask your father, and he will show you; your elders, and they will tell you."

Again, this means "a very long time ago. You're not being very convincing here.

Psalm 143:3
"For the enemy has pursued my soul; he has beaten my life down to the ground; he has made me dwell in darkness, as those long (ôlâm) dead”

Again, a past event "a long time ago". This is getting boring.

Deuteronomy 15:12, 16 & 17
 If your brother (a Hebrew man or a Hebrew woman), is sold to you and serves you six years, then in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you.

 But if he loves you and your house because it has been good for him with you, and he says to you, “I will not go away from you”, then you shall take an awl and put it through his ear to the door, and he shall be your servant forever (ôlâm). And you shall do the same for your slave-girl."

"Forever" obviously means "for the rest of his life".

There are many other examples, but you probably already think that I'm going to stay on this road “for ôlâm”, so before we turn off this road, let’s quickly look at a few verses where ôlâm DOES mean “forever & ever in perpetuity”:-

OK, I have a better idea. You're mostly quoting the NT here, which I do not consider holy writ.  So here's my challenge. This is a quote from Lev 23, speaking about the observance of Yom Kippur. It says the following: You shall not perform any work. This is an eternal statute throughout your generations in all your dwelling places.

Note the specific phraseology. "Eternal statute" "throughout your generations" "in all your dwelling places". That seems, to me, to mean "forever". But let's pretend you're right, it's temporary. If God intended it to be forever, what else could He say that would be to your satisfaction to mean "forever"?

Well the New Testament and words of Christ and His apostles and death and resurrection of Christ and promise of the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31:31-33 etc etc etc etc is proof that the way you choose to interpret olam in all the Law containing that word is a matter of belief, but the way you're interpreting it sometimes as "since a very long time ago" etc and sometimes as "forever and ever in perpetuity" is inconsistent. At least the Young's  Literal translation is 100% consistent in that it always translates it as "age-during" ie enduring until the end of the age, whatever the time-span was for the age.

[Fenris]

...

So...you're not going to answer my question, then.

[RandyPNW]

I'm Postrib and also believe in the future salvation of national Israel. I think it's important to state this because many Postribs reject Israel in prophecy altogether, or reinterpret it to apply to the international Church.

Let me say, first of all, that there is a difference between the biblical view of national salvation and the biblical view of individual salvation. National salvation has more to do with the survival of the entire society rather than with spiritual salvation.

But these things are obviously tied together. God said that without spirituality and without obedience, a nation will not be saved. It will ultimately perish or suffer significant judgment.

Many get confused about this because they think that saving a society is not important in relation to saving an individual. Actually, both are important to God--both nations and individuals. The nation protects the individual, and thus provides a healthy spiritual climate for the individual if the nation is itself generally spiritual, or tolerant of spirituality.

The problem with Postribs who deny the place of national Israel in prophecy is that God did indeed promise this to Abraham. And God doesn't break His promises. Though the Early Church gave up hope in Israel's future salvation because Israel didn't repent, this does not mean that after many generations God cannot begin again with Israel, and ultimately refine her through the fires of His judgment.

So I do believe in Israel's future salvation, and also in the salvation of other nations--primarily Christian nations. Like Israel, many Christian nations have fallen on hard times, and have come under divine punishment. If Israel can be saved, so can these former Christian nations.

So where in the Bible do we see the salvation of Christian nations? We don't, because when the Bible was written Christian nations did not yet exist. And yet God promised them to Abraham. He was promised he would become father of a multitude of nations.

The problem I see with Pretribs and their Dispensationalism is that not only are they wrong about Pretrib itself, but also wrong to emphasize Israel's salvation through the lens of OT realities. They see Israel as returning to the Law, and they see Israel as still an exclusive nation in a sea of pagan nations.

That reality has changed, although some of it remains true. Whereas the nations ultimately capitulate to paganism it is not true that other nations did not become nations of God. Many nations have become Christian nations. They just ultimately fall, as Israel did. All nations do, ultimately, turn against Israel.

So the idea is to recognize that Israel is no longer alone in prophecy, and the future will involve not just Israel's recovery, but also the recovery of many other nations, formerly of faith. And most certainly, there will be no return to the Law. If all nations oppose Israel, they also oppose the idea of "Christian nations." They will stand not in opposition to the practice of the Law of Moses, but rather, in opposition to Christ and to those promised to Christ.

I'm Premil, Non-Disp Post-Trib (I think Keraz is too, which I think is the basis of his interpretations of prophetic scripture). But so is something else I agree with Keraz about, and I posted this in his thread, but will repeat it here, to let you know why I partially agree and partially disagree with you:

I disagree with Keraz on a number of matters, not the least of which is his notion that the lost tribes of Israel, the N. Kingdom, now comprises the Gentile Church. This is a switch in definitions of "Israel" to something other than Israel. And so, it is confusing and incorrect, as I see it.

Judah/Judea and the tribes of Judah and Benjamin are only one part of Messiah's Kingdom. The New Covenant in Jer 31:31 was promised to both the house of Israel and the house of Judah. Ephraim's seed was going to become a multitude of nations (or "fullness of the Gentiles" in the Hebrew text), Gen 48:19.

Of course the promise was made to both Israel and Judah, because both were part of the nation Israel. It was predicted that they would eventually become one nation again, in the future. Judah later became associated with the remnant of Israel, coming to represent the Jewish People from all 12 tribes. After the N. and S. kingdoms split, many came down to Judah from the N. Kingdom to worship the Lord, properly, in Jerusalem. And thus, Judah eventually came to represent the union of both kingdoms into one nation, consisting of all 12 tribes.

The house of Israel is called both Ephraim (collectively) in scripture as well as the house of Israel.

The N. Kingdom of Israel was referred to as "Ephraim" at times because Ephraim was one of the largest and most important tribes in the N. Kingdom. A major source of idol worship was located there to unify religion, illicitly, in the N. and not, properly, in the S.

Paul applied the prophecy in Hosea 1:9-10 which referred only to the house of Israel (not to the house of Judah) to Gentiles in Romans 9:24-26, and he wrote this even before he wrote about the "unnatural branches" who believe in Jesus being grafted in among the believing remnant of the natural branches (Rom 11:17).  "Unnatural branches" = "Not genetically descended".

Paul quoted these verses in connection with the Jewish People. He was showing, in principle, that if Israel could be saved after being cut off, then those currently cut off, namely the Gentiles, could be grafted in.

So I do believe that Israel is made up of the house of Israel and the house of Judah, the house of Israel having now become a multitude of nations: Gentiles who are grafted into Israel through faith in Christ, regardless of their genetic ancestry.

No, Israel is not the Gentiles and never is this equation made. This confuses terms. Furthermore, Israel and Judah long ago ceased being divided into two entities--as far back as the Persian Restoration.

But Israel can only be those who are in Christ. I hope too for the grafting in of of all Jews, ie "National Israel" or all the genetic seed, and because Paul seems to imply this is going to happen (and for other reasons), I believe there is a Biblical basis for this hope.

Well yes, God specifically promised it, and Paul said God's promises cannot be broken. Israel must be restored. That's why I'm premillennial--there has to be a time when this happens. That's why Satan must be bound, so that it can happen. That's why Christ returns, so that the wicked can be cut off from within Israel and from outside of Israel, enabling the full restoration and spiritual revitalization of Israel.

[Not Worthy]

I disagree with Keraz on a number of matters, not the least of which is his notion that the lost tribes of Israel, the N. Kingdom, now comprises the Gentile Church. This is a switch in definitions of "Israel" to something other than Israel. And so, it is confusing and incorrect, as I see it.

I don't believe and will never believe that any human - Jew or Gentile - who is not in Christ is considered "Israel" by God. God is no respecter of persons, not even of Abraham's unbelieving genetic descendants. John the Baptist pointed that out, Jesus stated it, and Paul stated it.

Judah later became associated with the remnant of Israel, coming to represent the Jewish People from all 12 tribes. After the N. and S. kingdoms split, many came down to Judah from the N. Kingdom to worship the Lord, properly, in Jerusalem. And thus, Judah eventually came to represent the union of both kingdoms into one nation, consisting of all 12 tribes.

The prophecy in Hosea 1:6-11 does not refer to the small minority you are talking about who remained part of Israel by being amalgamated into the house of Judah:

"And she conceived again and bore a daughter. And God said to him, Call her name No-mercy, for I will no more have mercy on the house of Israel. But I will utterly take them away."

"utterly take them away" = utterly take them away.

But I will have mercy on the house of Judah, and will save them by the LORD their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, by horses, nor by horsemen.

And when she had weaned Lo-ruhamah, she conceived and bore a son. And He said, Call his name Not-my-people. For you are not My people, and I will not be for you.

Yet the number of the sons of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered. And it shall be, in the place where it was said to them, You are not My people, there it shall be said to them, You are the sons of the living God.

Then the sons of Judah and the sons of Israel shall be gathered together, and shall set over themselves one head, "

[ The rest of the verse, "and they shall come up out of the land. For great shall be the day of Jezreel."  is a repeat of what had already been said about the defeat of the N Kingdom (Ephraim/the house of Israel) by the Assyrians, which is typical of the style of prophetic language, i.e to repeat something already said earlier, again at the end of the prophecy, especially since it was the main thrust of God's prophetic Word to Ephraim/the house of Israel. ]

So only by a very long stretch of the imagination can the above prophecy be referring to the small remnant who were later to be exiled in Babylon with the Jews.

No, Israel is not the Gentiles and never is this equation made. This confuses terms. Furthermore, Israel   

The equation is indeed made that the Gentiles who believe in Jesus are Israel as much as Jews who believe in Jesus are Israel, and this is stated repeatedly, for example John 8:39; Eph 2:19; Gal 3:7 (through Jesus, as stated in Gal 3:16); Gal 3:29, etc (still more places).

Judah long ago ceased being divided into two entities--as far back as the Persian Restoration.

Only with regard to the small minority which fled to Judah when Assyria invaded. Again, Hosea 1:6-11 is not talking about them, unless one employs an imagination to re-interpret the plain meaning of the prophecy, and misinterprets it in the process. 

The N. Kingdom of Israel was referred to as "Ephraim" at times because Ephraim was one of the largest and most important tribes in the N. Kingdom.

That does not change the fact that the N Kingdom is sometimes called "the house of Israel" and sometimes "Ephraim" in scripture, so your point is moot:

"For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within sixty-five years Ephraim shall be broken so that it shall not be a people. And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliah's son. If you will not believe, surely you shall not be established." Isa 7:8

A major source of idol worship was located there to unify religion, illicitly, in the N. and not, properly, in the S.

Which is why Ephraim was destroyed and the vast majority exiled, over time become scattered among the nations where their descendants intermarried with Gentiles, so that there are no genetically "pure Israelites" anywhere anymore.

Ephraim has become a multitude of nations, or "the fullness of the Gentiles" as the Hebrew words state in Gen 48:19. 

Paul applied the prophecy in Hosea 1:9-10 which referred only to the house of Israel (not to the house of Judah) to Gentiles in Romans 9:24-26, and he wrote this even before he wrote about the "unnatural branches" who believe in Jesus being grafted in among the believing remnant of the natural branches (Rom 11:17).  "Unnatural branches" = "Not genetically descended".

Paul quoted these verses in connection with the Jewish People. He was showing, in principle, that if Israel could be saved after being cut off, then those currently cut off, namely the Gentiles, could be grafted in.

Exactly. That's why your insistence that there are two "Israel's" is moot, because the remnant of the one and the same Israel, which was the house of Judah (which remained after Ephraim/the house of Israel had been exiled and, as the prophecy stated, ceased to be a nation before God), ,

is the remnant of the house of Judah who were left after the unbelieving Jews had been broken off,. and this remnant of the house of Judah is the same remnant among whom the believing Gentiles were grafted in.

There is no "Gentiles Israel" + another Israel called "Jewish Israel" because Israel are ALL those who are in Christ - but there is indeed a "house of Israel/Ephraim" and a "house of Judah" which together are ONE Israel IN CHRIST whom Paul calls ALL ISRAEL in Romans 11:26.

Your "two Israels" creation is extra-Biblical.

"National Israel" in actual fact = the genetic seed who through faith in Christ are in Christ + the Gentiles who through faith in Christ are in Christ,

but I've granted that you are referring to the genetic seed of Abraham who are NOT in Christ when you talk about "national Israel". 

So the only thing regarding the identity of Israel that we agree on then, is the possibility that all the genetic seed will one day believe, and hence once again be counted among God's Israel (Christ's flock) - but to me that is no reason to believe in a literal millennium. My belief in a literal millennium is based only upon Christ and His Kingdom, and what He has revealed - and no one who does not believe in Him is part of His Kingdom now, or will ever be.

[RandyPNW]

I don't believe and will never believe that any human - Jew or Gentile - who is not in Christ is considered "Israel" by God. God is no respecter of persons, not even of Abraham's unbelieving genetic descendants. John the Baptist pointed that out, Jesus stated it, and Paul stated it.

The prophecy in Hosea 1:6-11 does not refer to the small minority you are talking about who remained part of Israel by being amalgamated into the house of Judah...

So only by a very long stretch of the imagination can the above prophecy be referring to the small remnant who were later to be exiled in Babylon with the Jews.

No, Israel is not the Gentiles and never is this equation made. This confuses terms. Furthermore, Israel   

The equation is indeed made that the Gentiles who believe in Jesus are Israel as much as Jews who believe in Jesus are Israel, and this is stated repeatedly, for example John 8:39; Eph 2:19; Gal 3:7 (through Jesus, as stated in Gal 3:16); Gal 3:29, etc (still more places).

Judah long ago ceased being divided into two entities--as far back as the Persian Restoration.

Only with regard to the small minority which fled to Judah when Assyria invaded. Again, Hosea 1:6-11 is not talking about them, unless one employs an imagination to re-interpret the plain meaning of the prophecy, and misinterprets it in the process. 

Paul quoted these verses in connection with the Jewish People. He was showing, in principle, that if Israel could be saved after being cut off, then those currently cut off, namely the Gentiles, could be grafted in.

Exactly. That's why your insistence that there are two "Israel's" is moot, because the remnant of the one and the same Israel, which was the house of Judah (which remained after Ephraim/the house of Israel had been exiled and, as the prophecy stated, ceased to be a nation before God), ,

is the remnant of the house of Judah who were left after the unbelieving Jews had been broken off,. and this remnant of the house of Judah is the same remnant among whom the believing Gentiles were grafted in.

There is no "Gentiles Israel" + another Israel called "Jewish Israel" because Israel are ALL those who are in Christ - but there is indeed a "house of Israel/Ephraim" and a "house of Judah" which together are ONE Israel IN CHRIST whom Paul calls ALL ISRAEL in Romans 11:26.

Your "two Israels" creation is extra-Biblical.

"National Israel" in actual fact = the genetic seed who through faith in Christ are in Christ + the Gentiles who through faith in Christ are in Christ,

but I've granted that you are referring to the genetic seed of Abraham who are NOT in Christ when you talk about "national Israel". 

So the only thing regarding the identity of Israel that we agree on then, is the possibility that all the genetic seed will one day believe, and hence once again be counted among God's Israel (Christ's flock) - but to me that is no reason to believe in a literal millennium. My belief in a literal millennium is based only upon Christ and His Kingdom, and what He has revealed - and no one who does not believe in Him is part of His Kingdom now, or will ever be.

This is difficult to discuss, since you alter definitions of words like "Israel." You make "Israel" out to mean Christian Gentiles. That is Replacement Theology, and I disagree with it. Words mean what they mean, and you can't use biblical ideas to change the meaning of words!

I'm not talking about 2 Israels--you are! Israel was promised Abraham--a single nation! They were divided after the reign of Solomon, but only temporarily. God promised, through Ezekiel, that they would be restored to a single nation again.

That nation then was an evolved form of the S. Kingdom of Judah, which by that time had come to include a remnant of all 12 tribes. Those who had wanted to faithfully worship God in the S. Kingdom, in Jerusalem, had moved there. The N. Kingdom perished from history. Judah became the new unified Kingdom of Israel.

The verses used to prove a NT definition of the Gentile Church as "Israel" are sketchy, and don't provide definitive evidence. It's questionable whether certain NT texts are referring to the Gentile Church when mentioning "Israel." Or, it is conceivable that "Israel" is used metaphorically for the Church, but not literally.

Obviously, there are about 200 nations on earth right now, and biblical truth doesn't make their names meaningless. "Israel" does not become meaningless just because it isn't a Christian nation!

However, God's plan is to return the nation Israel into a godly nation once more. The idea of Israel's restoration is not a new concept, since Israel was restored from apostasy more than once. Israel can be called "Israel" even in a state of apostasy. And that's where Israel is today, just before Christ returns to restore her in the Millennium.

[RabbiKnife]

Romans 9-11 is not really that tough.  We just have to get rid of our preconceived notions.

Original tree
Branches removed and stump left
Some wild olive branches grafted in
Some original olive branches granted back in

This is not complicated, yet we try to make this eschatological to match Chart 37-A, foldout B-14, Chart 11.

It simply says what it says.