SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : General Topics : The Israel Christian Hoax? Are modern Jews the Old Testament chose people of God?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re:

One person on here, some pages back, brought up the DNA testing.

I wonder how accurate that is ... does anyone know ?

Because I really doubt, that many that call themselves Jews are 'ancestrally' Israel.

I'm part Jew, as I'm told, but who knows if that's not Kasher (sp?) Jewish or something, so since Paul said "There is NO difference", between Jew and Greek... I just thank God I somehow got grafted in, whatever mixed up blood I have or don't have.


And I'm still hoping, someone would post about the 1/3. As some would call 'the remnant' of Jews.


'Thanks', all of you.
Annie

 2005/9/15 18:33
gllorente
Member



Joined: 2005/8/23
Posts: 5
Rowland Heights, CA

 Re:

In light of this old argument that the Apostle Paul had to face of the church in Rome, I think he gives a much better explanation of what a really matters pertaining to one's Jewish DNA/Heritage:

Romans 2:17-29

17 But if you bear the name “Jew” and rely upon the Law and boast in God, 18 and know His will and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Law, 19 and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, 20 a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature, having in the Law the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth, 21 you, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that one shall not steal, do you steal? 22 You who say that one should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who boast in the Law, through your breaking the Law, do you dishonor God? 24 For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” just as it is written. 25 For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 26 So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 27 And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law? 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

Clearly, the idea of being a Jew--even from way in the begging of this Abrahamic covenant--had to do with the "circumcision of the heart." In fact, there's nothing special about having a Jewish DNA or any hint of heritage thereof found in your blood. Abraham wasn't always a Jew; he was a pagan out of the land of Ur, in the Mesopotamia. God was the one who "called Abram" out to follow God. And even so, circumcision came "after" God had made a covenant with Abraham--as a mere sign of the covenant between him and God.

Hence the Apostle Paul said, "28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God." (Rom. 2:28-29)

Paul also clarifies this issue when he reprimanded the church in Galatia:

Galatians 3:28-29
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to promise.

Clearly, this speaks of a "Spiritual Nation of Israel" and not just a physical one--although, I am not despising the fact that God did choose the physical Israel. He did so to be this "Holy" or "Separate" people who belonged to God; being united as One in Him, they were supposed to be a people whom the nations look to and see the Glory of God. But, even if we as Gentiles were the Jews whom God had separated to be, we would probably do the same things they did--because inevitably man's heart is "deceitfully wicked, who can even know it?" (Jer. 17:9).

So, I believe and know for a fact that God has always been looking for a people whose hearts are circumcised to Him. In other words, the God of Love who died for the mankind (John 3:16) did so by sending His only begotten Son to propitiate for our sins (Rom. 3:21-24)—but in return, Jesus Christ asks us the same question that He asked Peter: “Do you AGAPEO me?” Our response should not be like Peter, who mere responded by saying, “Yes Lord, I do PHILEO You…” (Agapeo being a covenant-commitment-unconditional type of love, versus Phileo as a mere brotherly-benefit type of love).

Thus, Jesus doesn’t care much of who is Jewish physically by DNA or tradition (or one who became a proselyte to Judaism). God cares about our HEARTS circumcised or pierced and covenantally-commited to HIM.


“IT’S ALL ABOUT GOD!”

Glenn Llorente



_________________
Glenn Llorente

 2005/9/15 21:52Profile
ginnyrose
Member



Joined: 2004/7/7
Posts: 7464
Mississippi

 Re:

Robert, I understand perfectly what you mean. And I think we all need to have that mentality regardless of our views on eschatology. Revelation is a fascinating book to study and people can get so bent out of shape when others will not agree with their interpretion. To me the message is there will be a lot of calamities BUT Jesus will emerge victorious.

Now let's see.... there is a thousand year reign, the beast, the city 1500 miles square, the harlot..... :-D Wanna have a discussion? On the other hand, I am not interested..:-)

ginnyrose


_________________
Sandra Miller

 2005/9/15 22:59Profile









 Re:This thread is about the Jews.

Excellent post Glenn.

I've had to write about this in the past, because of many discussions between myself and other Christians and Messianics.

I had noticed, just within the last so many years, that in certain circles, if one came on a forum or other meeting place with Christian gentiles, that there would be an aire of "one-up-manship", and the more they wanted to present or Pronounce that image, the more Hebrew they would speak in or post in.

Paul, said, "I become all things to all men." ... so if a Messianic comes unto a Gentile Christian Forum, they should knock off the Hebrew and just speak plain ol' English, and not flaunt their Jewishness, so to speak.... IF they are 'in' Christ. And some had never spoke Hebrew in their lives, until they went from being maybe a Baptist or something, to suddenly being Messianic. (?)

The reason I asked about the DNA, was precisely for that reason. Who of these, that flaunt their "Jewishness", can say with complete certainty, that they are in fact of Israel's bloodline?

And that is why I said, I've been told I'm 1/4 Jew, but how do I know if I'm not just one of those from Russia or somewhere, who "converted to Judaism" later on in world history .

So, your post is where I was headed. I just didn't want to post too much at the time, because on some threads, I just like to read and learn and see what others post, so I understand their thinking.

These were the scriptures I had compiled on the subject, though (funny enough), it's out of my Eschatology e-book. Ho-hum. But this thread is about the Jews and I'm looking forward to and have enjoyed reading, and your post Glenn is very good. [u]Thank you ![/u]

_________________________________________________


Topic 5a ~ Did Paul teach a difference between the Jew & Christian ?

Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is [u]no difference[/u]:


Rom 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
Rom 2:7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life:
Rom 2:8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
Rom 2:9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
Rom 2:10 But glory, honor, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
Rom 2:11 [u]For there is no respect of persons with God.[/u]


Rom 4:1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?
Rom 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
Rom 4:3 For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
Rom 4:4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth
the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.


Rom 10:11 For the Scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
[u]Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek[/u]: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.


Rom 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
Rom 11:14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.
Rom 11:15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
Rom 11:16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
Rom 11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
Rom 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Rom 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
Rom 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
Rom 11:21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Rom 11:22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
[u]Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
Rom 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?[/u]
Rom 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, [u]until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.[/u]


Gal 3:6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
Gal 3:7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the
children of Abraham.
Gal 3:8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
Gal 3:9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.


Gal 3:14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
Gal 3:15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. [u]He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.[/u]


[u]Gal 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.[/u]
Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
[u]Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.[/u]


Col 3:10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:
[u]Col 3:11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, [/u]Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.
Col 3:12 Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;
Col 3:13 Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye.


God Bless ya. Thanks again.

My e-sword is inoperatable (?) right now, but there are promises to the Jews and the land of Israel, that I do hope will come out here as well though.


And again, the 1/3.

God Bless ya. Thanks again.

 2005/9/16 1:03









 Re:Repeat of first post above.

Wanted to thank "all" on this thread again.


Just reading it through again, and I do believe, will read it through again.

Gleaning.


Thanks :-)

 2005/9/16 3:12
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Hi Ron,

Quote:
I have a deep sorrow for the remnants of natural Israel.



This is exactly where I am also.

Quote:
Moses has authority
Heb. 8:5 (KJVS) Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.
but Rabbinic Judaism has none. I don't mean to be offensive in this. I am not questioning their integrity or motive, I am simply saying that we can eliminate Rabbinic Judaism from this enquiry. The modern synagogue then has no validity, biblically.



We are absolutely agreed in this. The question for me has not been if it is valid or not- but exactly how can light be shed on this whole web of deception to expose the falsehood. You and I see it as a matter of indisputable fact that the Rabbi's have no biblical authority; but there are some variables in play that we do not acknowledge or 'give weight to' that many Jews believe absolutely in, one of which is the whole issue of Oral Law. The authority the have has been assumed and bolstered by tradition. It is a fortress of ideals really.

To the Rabbinic Jews there is an addition to what they call the [i]Tenach[/i] (Old Testament) know as the “Oral Law” that was added to the teachings of the Rabbi’s in the second century. It is purported by the Jews that the “Oral Law” was given to Moses on the Mount and was to be communicated to each person in leadership and then down to the people until everyone had been taught it 4 times. This is supposed to have taken place all the way down to the second Century CE. We find this impossible to believe, but it is a fundamental aspect of Rabbinic Judaism. It is supposed to be an extended interpretation designed to elaborate on the written law.

I will post a seperate little blurb from the last thread to bring folk up to speed on the "Oral Law." I believe this is the place where the first blow of the axe would have to fall. Many Messianic Jews and even my former non-Jewish teachers spoke of the Oral Law as though it we legit. To may that would be like validating the D&C and Pearl of Great Price to the Mormons. When we talk about authority doctrinal resources have to be established or exposed as false (in this case).


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/9/16 8:23Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Note, please be advised, article is in its raw form.

[b]A Brief History of "The Oral Law"[/b]
r.w.

There are a multitude of arguments that can be presented that refute the authenticity of the Oral Law, but perhaps the most practical one I have come up with is that the thing which the Children of Israel was legally bound to was the written covenant that was written down, rehearsed and agreed upon by the people, and finally the covenant was sealed in the blood of sprinkling. To then offer a “manual” (as it were) for the interpretation of that covenant some 100+ years after Christ is as great of error as to believe in the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. This was supposed to be a covenant that was rehearsed to the people 4 times each and it was to “supposedly” be memorized and transferred to each generation. If the enemy had a “Bible commentary” it would be the Oral Law that he has used to cut the LIGHT down coming off the Old Covenant and the Tenach.

Consider this quote from Menahoth 29b:

Rav Judah said in the name of Rav, When Moses ascended on high he found the Holy One of Blessing, engaged in affixing coronets to the letters. [6] Said Moses, "Lord of the Universe, Who stays your hand?" He answered, "There will arise a man, at the end of many generations, Akiba b. Joseph by name, who will expound upon each tittle heaps and heaps of laws." "Lord of the Universe," said Moses; "permit me to see him." He replied, "Turn around." Moses went and sat down behind eight rows [and listened to the discourses upon the law]. Not being able to follow their arguments he was ill at ease, but when they came to a certain subject and the disciples said to the master "Whence do you know it?" and the latter replied "It is a law given to Moses at Sinai" he was comforted. Thereupon he returned to the Holy One of Blessing, and said, "Lord of the Universe, you have such a man and you give the Torah by me!" He replied, "Be silent, for such is my decree." Then said Moses, "Lord of the Universe, you have shown me his Torah, show me his reward." "Turn around," said He; and Moses turned around and saw them weighing out his flesh at the market-stalls. "Lord of the Universe," cried Moses, "such Torah, and such a reward!" He replied, "Be silent, for such is my decree." [7]

This depicts Akiba to be greater than Moses and creates a story with which to pass off the whole farce. It is almost blasphemy of the word of God to suggest a man who believed in a false prophet could actually be “greater” than Moses. The passage itself is an indictment on those who promoted the concept (Akiba, etc.). It wreaks with cultish deception. It is the Oral Law that in a sense codified the traditions that made the word of God of none effect by the Rabbi’s. To this fact I must sharply disagree with Dr. Ron Moseley in his condoning of such a book or at the least to present it with any validity at all. [u]It is clearly standing in the way of the Jews and the perfect law that converts the soul. The Jews are VICTIMS of such a horrible teaching and this revelation SHOULD NOT be used as ammo to fuel anti-semitic causes![/u] It is for the purpose of bringing an awareness to help win the Jews to their Messiah. There is literally nothing more unChristlike than hatred and especially of the Jews. For us as believers in Christ these things may seem almost laughable; but they are a deeply entrenched and rooted system of beliefs that exist in Judaism and we have to deal with that reality. Putting together your own personal study of the Oral Law and its falsehood is a vital tool in the hand of anyone trying to lead a Jew to their Messiah. You have to learn their language and you must use caution in addressing the sensitive areas that they are dealing with concerning Christians (in a later lesson we will look at some of those). However, it must begin with the illumination of the Holy Spirit and once that is in place YOUR apologetic will come into play as a necessity to help point them in the direction of truth once their eyes begin to come open.

*notes

Daniel Gruber, Rabbi Akiba’s Messiah Elijah Publishing c1999

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0411/4_49/68738707/p2/article.jhtml?term=


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/9/16 8:26Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Ron B

Hi Ron,

Quote:
I have studied Jewish history too, for many years. On occasion I am accused of being 'anti-semitic' because I cannot give my approval to pre-millenniel dispensationalist views of 'Israel' but I know in my spirit that I am not. I have wept my way through Auschwitz, more than once, and made my pilgrimage to Maedenik. I have a deep sorrow for the remnants of natural Israel. To me they represent to ultimate 'might have been' tragedy.



I do not believe you are anti-semetic at all. It is sort of the same as some in my camp that were once concerned that I was becoming Jewish just because I was studying with them.

Trying to sort things out biblically leads people to wrong conclusions if we don't listen long enough. Thats the key- we have to keep listening to the person and not make quick summaries.

God Bless,

-Robert


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/9/16 8:42Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 GrannieAnnie & Glenn

Hi GrannieAnnie and Glenn,

Between you both, you covered a lot of ground we needed to in this study. :-)

One passage I have always struggled with is:

In relation to the Good News, the Jews are God's enemies for your sakes; but in relation to God's choice they are dearly loved for the [u]sake of their forefathers[/u] (Romans 11:28 WEY).

This is as close to the RSV in the underlined portion as I could readily find.


From here we are entering into the whole Art Katz eschatology discussion I think. Is God going to save every single living Jew at some point in history, or is the whole thrust of God's purpose in the earth in relation to Jew and Gentile a generation by generation purpose?


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/9/16 8:56Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re: GrannieAnnie & Glenn

Is natural 'Israel' the blood line from Abraham or is it the people who were 'baptised into Moses'? The second half of this question may seem a strange way of expressing the question, but I am quoting from “Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea,” (1Cor. 10:1-2, NKJV) The continuing thought is found a little later in a well known verse“For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.”(1Cor. 12:13, NKJV)This second quotation speaks of a 'baptism' (I am deliberately being vague so as not to start another theme going. ;-)) which constitutes an entity. Sorry if that sounds a bit technical but something is happening in this verse which sets the direction of the 'baptised'; the goal is one body under one head. Another way of expressing this would be to speak of the role of 'mediator'. This 'new entity' is dependent upon its mediator for its beginnings. The mediator of the 'first covenant' was Moses; the mediator of the 'second covenant' is Christ. In each event many individuals are brought into a single unity. In Christ they are brought into 'one body'; in Moses they were brought into 'Israel'.

The 'genetic' aspect of this thread can be examined a little here. Sometimes the Bible uses a phrase out of its strict chronological order; this grammatical feature is called prolepsis. A classic illustration of this is found in place names. Abraham pitched his tent in between Ai and Bethel according to Gen 12:8 but according to Gen 28:18 it did not receive this name until many years later; that is prolepsis where the use of a name is used in anticipation of its proper origin. I might say, living where I do, that the Romans marched through southern England, south of Reading. In fact, neither England, nor Reading existed at that time. The phenomena of prolepsis is widespread in the Bible. The reason for this elaborate detail is because I want to draw attention to “For they were departed from Rephidim, and were come to the desert of Sinai, and had pitched in the wilderness; and there Israel camped before the mount.” (Ex. 19:2, KJVS)Israel at this point are the people who have been freed from Egyptian slavery and have been gathered at the foot of Sinai. 'Israel' are about to become 'Israel' in another sense.

Who were these people? Well, certainly they were bloodline descendants of Abraham; the family of Jacob/Israel who had taken residence in Egypt during the time of Joseph. But there are clues that they were not exclusively the bloodline of Abraham. One of the clearest is the man Caleb. Caleb was selected to represent the tribe of Judah in the reconnoitering of the promised land. The 'prince' of Judah at this time was a fascinating character named Naashon, but Caleb was chosen for the task. According to the qualifications demanded by Moses he must have been a recognised and highly respected leader within the tribe of Judah which was the premier tribe in numbers and influence.“And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Send thou men, that they may search the land of Canaan, which I give unto the children of Israel: of every tribe of their fathers shall ye send a man, every one a ruler among them.” (Num. 13:1-2, KJVS)The subsequent history of Caleb is well known; he is one of Israel's all time heroes.

There are a few places where Caleb is introduced more fully eg“Then the children of Judah came unto Joshua in Gilgal: and [u]Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite[/u] said unto him, Thou knowest the thing that the LORD said unto Moses the man of God concerning me and thee in Kadeshbarnea.” (Josh. 14:6, KJVS) The full list is Num. 32:12; Josh. 14:6,14; 15:17; 1Chr. 4:15. Caleb's father is described as being a Kenezite. This is important information as the Kenezites were descendants not of Jacob/Israel but of Esau!“These were the chiefs of the sons of Esau. The sons of Eliphaz, the firstborn son of Esau, were Chief Teman, Chief Omar, Chief Zepho, [u]Chief Kenaz[/u],” (Gen. 36:15, NKJV) Othniel, Caleb's brother and also a high profile character in Judah is also described as being 'a son of Kenaz'.

How did a descendant of Esau come to be a leading figure in the tribe of Judah the son of Jacob? In fact, Caleb's genealogy can not be made to link up with the tribe of Judah and we must conclude that Caleb and his brother Othniel had somehow been 'adopted' or 'co-opted' into the tribe of Judah. There is no evidence of a bloodline to link him to Jacob/Israel, and yet there is no doubt that Caleb was 'baptised into Moses' and thus became part of the covenant community. There is another interesting clue in that the name Caleb means 'a dog'. If we examine the use of this idea we find that 'pure-bloods' often used this disparaging term to describe 'the gentile'. How did that 'gentile dog' become one of the heroes of 'Israel'?

There are more clues. Ex. 12:38 (KJVS)
And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.
Num. 11:4 (KJVS)
And the mixt multitude that was among them fell a lusting: and the children of Israel also wept again, and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat? There are different words used here but it seems that each passage is speaking about the same people. Who are they? and what happened to them? If they are present in Numbers 11 they must be part of the covenant community en route for the promised land. Is this distinguishing between the 'sons of Israel' (the Jacob/Israel blood line) and others who although not part of that bloodline were still part of the covenant community?

We know that others could 'join' the covenant community but with varying times of quarantine. (Deut 23) The conditions relating to the Moabite are significant because David's great-grandmother was a Moabite, and his great-great-grandmother (Rahab) was a Canaanite. (Ruth 4:17) It looks as though that ought to have banned him from being recognised as part of the congregation of Israel. However the Ruth passage is interesting for another reason... Ruth's child Obed was reckoned to be the 'son of Naomi' (Ruth 4:17). This blood-line thing begins to get a bit muddy to say the least. ;-)

The events of Sinai brought into existence a new entity; Israel. This entity was not exclusively the blood-line of Abraham although it contained it. (this is an important concept to be revisited later). The entity came into existence as the result of definite conditions being fulfilled and the entity was able to continue because of the provision of a priesthood.

I have a illlustration which comes to mind; seed and husk. Within the 'husk' of the covenant community founded at Sinai there existed 'the seed'. The promises and conditions of Sinai apply to all the seed and the husk, and the husk will be blessed because of its proximity to the seed. The purpose of the husk, in some ways, is to protect 'the seed', but there are promises relating to 'the seed' which the husk does not share. We will need to be able, in our minds, to separate between promises for the 'seed' and promises to the covenant community.

another pause...


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/9/16 9:56Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy