Are Jews still God's Chosen People?

[free spirit]

There is really no need for me to corrupt your fountain. God has chosen you, not me. Therefore only you should speak.

I do not know if this is for me. But whosoever goes to God, God will make him welcome. I hope we will speak again.

 

[roger1440]

Yes the "He " is God and No the "You" would be the whosoever.

Then how would you explain:
"The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. (Jeremiah 31:31)

 

[free spirit]

Then how would you explain:
"The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. (Jeremiah 31:31)

In God's eyes there are the descendants of Jacob and the descendants of Esau, or the people of Israel and the Gentiles; The new covenant was given to both of them

 

[Noel]

i personally believe that the Jews used to be the people of God, but which Jesus Christ was crucified and risen, all of humanity earned the right to be called his children, or his people.

 

[Noel]

Right, hence the New Covenant. Though I consider it to be a continuation Covenant, not replacing the previous one.

In some ways yes, as we still keep the 10 commandments (including the one jesus gave), but Christ death gave us freedom from Hebrew law (example- No pork, No tattoos, no trimming the sides of your beard, ect)

 

[free spirit]

Supercessionism and universalism is just arrogance and religious imperialism.

Few things are quite so offensive as someone saying "Mine is the only truth, only my way leads to God."

It's all the more ironic to say that you think the Jews failed in keeping the commandments, so the answer is to worship a man and call him a god....

1) Religion imperialism; Yes, God wants that the gospel to be preached all over the world.
2) Only God can lead us to God.
3) I never said that! What I said could be interpreted ... put on his character and you would be in God.

 

[Desert Snake]

In some ways yes, as we still keep the 10 commandments (including the one jesus gave), but Christ death gave us freedom from Hebrew law (example- No pork, No tattoos, no trimming the sides of your beard, ect)

Technically I do not believe this to be entirely true. Some previous laws were abolished, some modified etc. I adhere to some OT 'rules' but not all. Generally it isn't important enough to argue, however, as different Xians have different traditions anyways.

 

[free spirit]

Mt 7:15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.

Some of Paul’s letters are really “hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort. 2Pe 3:16”

I need to show you the wisdom given to me by the Lord, you be my judge. You have a bible compare the two versions, I use the NASB.
This devotional sacrifice of worship to God has been hidden by the enemy of Christ for centuries. Because it is an exceptional way of self-denial with which we get closer to our Lord, for we read in 1Corinthians 7:32-38: “But I want you to be free from concern. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord;
33 but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife, and his interests are divided.
34 And the woman who is unmarried, and the virgin, is concerned about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how she may please her husband.
35 And this I say for your own benefit; not to put a restraint upon you, but to promote what is seemly, and to secure some believers for an undivided devotion to the Lord.
36 But if any man thinks that he is acting unbecomingly towards his celibacy, if he should be of full age, and if it must be so, let him do what he wishes, he does not sin; let him marry.
37 But he who stands firm in his heart, being under no constraint, but has authority over his own body, and has decided this in his own heart, to keep his own body chaste, he will do well.
38 So then both he who gives his own body in marriage does well, but he who does not give himself in marriage will do better.”
As you can see, the last four verses 35-38, with the inserted Italics are the obvious restorations needed, which enable us to understand the connection and the true intended meaning of the previous verses of 32-34. Thus if any person, male or female, is willingly prepared and able to freely undertake the sacrifice of celibacy as their sacrifice of worship, that sacrifice is acceptable to God, this is confirmed in Matthew 19:10-12: “The disciples said to Him, ‘If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.’ But He said to them, ‘Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother’s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this let him accept it.’”
Romans 12:1 also urges us to keep our body holy by saying: “I urge you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship.”

 

[free spirit]

I don't know how to deal with Galatians and Philippians, since Torah is clearly the only text that provides any basis for any of the NT books to begin with. The value of the Pauline letters is that they discuss things. In that discussion can be found many complex and ideas and exhortations, but they are not basic beginner materials. They're complex and don't substitute for basic readings but build on them.

I now understand you better, many people cannot understand Galatians because in my opinion an enemy of Christ has inserted lies amongst God's word. Here is one big fat lie.
in Galatians 3:13 we read, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us, for it is written: ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.’”
It is ludicrous to say that He redeemed us from the curse of the law by allowing Himself to become a curse for us, just by dying while hanging on a tree.
Before we go any further it is important for us to understand that the tree is only a tool to administer death to a condemned man. We must surely know that it is the sins that the man has committed that makes him accursed and not the way he dies. That is why the law became a curse for us, because we could not keep it and consequently we merited death because of our transgressions, not because the law in itself was bad. (So death is not a curse, but it’s the consequence of sin). He came to fulfil the law for us and by fulfilling the law He absorbed the law in Himself. Therefore He became a blessing for us, because He freed us from the curse of the law written on tablets of stone, having replaced them with the law of the spirit of Himself (the Holy Spirit). I am fully convinced that it is correct for the above verse of Galatians 3:13 to read: “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having fulfilled the law for us.”
We all know that our Lord became flesh for us and consequently He was made sin, because the flesh and sin are one and the same. Also our Lord (who is a type of Adam) took those of us who are faithful in Himself on the cross. He also took the sin of the whole world on the cross for the justification of all humanity as He fulfilled the law by being obedient even to death. But none of the above is a curse in itself. However, the law became a curse to us because we could not keep it. By doing all of the above He became a blessing for all those who believe and obey Him.
We would certainly and clearly see the error if we read Deuteronomy 21:23 in context with verse 22. We will then discover that part of verse 23 doesn’t apply to our Lord, for we read in Deuteronomy 21: 22-23: “And if a man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, (23) his corpse shall not hang all night on the tree, but you shall surely bury him on the same day (for he who is hanged is accursed of God), so that you do not defile your land which the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance.” We can all sorely see that the above underlined scripture of verse 23 doesn’t apply to our Lord because our Lord was not guilty of having “committed a sin worthy of death,” required in the previous verse. In fact He was sinless, regardless of how He appeared to those who witnessed, or condemned Him to death. (Yes, He was made sin but never committed sin. Isn’t that something that we should rejoice about? For by doing that, Jesus stripped sin of the power of the law.)
Furthermore the testimony of 1Corinthians 12:3 reinforces that He didn’t become accursed for it is written: “That no one speaking by the spirit of God says, Jesus is accursed.” With those undisputable proofs in hand we should only come to one obvious conclusion: that the Scriptures suggesting that our blessed Lord become a curse for us is nothing but a “blasphemous diversion” working against the knowledge of the accomplished works of our Lord. As you know the debate of Grace verses Law has been going on since Paul was alive, and the debate has continue to our days because of the ambiguities inserted in the epistles. The ambiguities were inserted by a Jew because he seems to have a good knowledge of the old testament.
In conclusion grace is more efficient than the law, because grace is the character of our Lord, the holy character, and if you have the holy character in you why would you need the law, for with that character you will always do the things that pleases God.

 

[Kolibri]

Eh, Let me try this again, from a different tact. Just irks me that Paul, and all the Scriptures, either from the Hebrew and Aramaic or in Greek portions are being accused of being polluted from the get-go. I may be just letting my peace be disturbed and maybe should drop it as I am not being demanded to defend my faith. And I want to show respect for people even though I have a confidence that may not be shared by them. (1 Peter 3:15)

That said, I do not accept that Galatians 3:13 conflicts with 1 Corinthians 12:3. Paul is developing arguments for two different points.

In 1 Corinthians 12:3 Paul is in complete harmony with 1 John 4:2,3. Both accounts are talking about resisting apostasy. Jesus is our Lord, anyone that pronounces a curse on Jesus or denies who and what he was and is does not speak as one possessing God's holy spirit. Both Paul and John were telling us to watch out for apostasy and those that deny the already established truths about the Christ.

Galatians 3:13 is not about Anti-christ warnings but about how the Jews needed special consideration as they had been held under a double curse.
Curse 1 - All men are cursed to die because of inherited imperfection stemming from being offspring of Adam (Romans 5:12)
Curse 2 - What Paul says in Galatians 3:10: "All those who depend on works of law are under a curse, for it is written:'Cursed is everyone who does not remain in all the things written in the scroll of the Law by doing them.'" Here Paul is quoting De 27:26 - a curse binding only to Jews and not to mankind in general.

Thus the Christ had to die in a specific manner to release the Jews. Christ could have died in any manner for the rest of mankind but out of consideration of the second curse he HAD to die on a torture stake to satisfy it's legal requirement.
--------------------------------------------
Personal Notes
Galatians 3:10 quotes De 27:26 and is in harmony with Acts 15:10 and James 2:10
Galatians 3:11 quotes Habakkuk 2:4, Paul quotes it again at Romans 1:17 and Hebrews 10:38
Galatians 3:12 quotes Le 18:5 and is in harmony with De 30:16
Galatians 3:13 quotes De 21:23; Jesus' manner of death specified at Acts 5:30

 

[free spirit]

Eh, Let me try this again, from a different tact. Just irks me that Paul, and all the Scriptures, either from the Hebrew and Aramaic or in Greek portions are being accused of being polluted from the get-go. I may be just letting my peace be disturbed and maybe should drop it as I am not being demanded to defend my faith. And I want to show respect for people even though I have a confidence that may not be shared by them. (1 Peter 3:15)

That said, I do not accept that Galatians 3:13 conflicts with 1 Corinthians 12:3. Paul is developing arguments for two different points.

In 1 Corinthians 12:3 Paul is in complete harmony with 1 John 4:2,3. Both accounts are talking about resisting apostasy. Jesus is our Lord, anyone that pronounces a curse on Jesus or denies who and what he was and is does not speak as one possessing God's holy spirit. Both Paul and John were telling us to watch out for apostasy and those that deny the already established truths about the Christ.

Galatians 3:13 is not about Anti-christ warnings but about how the Jews needed special consideration as they had been held under a double curse.
Curse 1 - All men are cursed to die because of inherited imperfection stemming from being offspring of Adam (Romans 5:12)
Curse 2 - What Paul says in Galatians 3:10: "All those who depend on works of law are under a curse, for it is written:'Cursed is everyone who does not remain in all the things written in the scroll of the Law by doing them.'" Here Paul is quoting De 27:26 - a curse binding only to Jews and not to mankind in general.

Thus the Christ had to die in a specific manner to release the Jews. Christ could have died in any manner for the rest of mankind but out of consideration of the second curse he HAD to die on a torture stake to satisfy it's legal requirement.
--------------------------------------------
Personal Notes
Galatians 3:10 quotes De 27:26 and is in harmony with Acts 15:10 and James 2:10
Galatians 3:11 quotes Habakkuk 2:4, Paul quotes it again at Romans 1:17 and Hebrews 10:38
Galatians 3:12 quotes Le 18:5 and is in harmony with De 30:16
Galatians 3:13 quotes De 21:23; Jesus' manner of death specified at Acts 5:30

You are so far from the truth that is so hard for me to understand what are you reading from. You must be a contortionist to get what you wrote.
1) death is not a curse: it is the wages of sin.
2) The law is not a curse: it became a curse because we could not keep it.
3) please re-read this, 'Cursed is everyone who does not remain in all the things written in the scroll of the Law by doing them" The key words here are: "who does not remain." Jesus managed to remain, for he never sinned.
4) It is written Cursed is everyone, So were do you get the notion that, this only applies to the Jews.
5) You wrote: "Thus the Christ had to die in a specific manner to release the Jews. Christ could have died in any manner for the rest of mankind but out of consideration of the second curse he HAD to die on a torture stake to satisfy it's legal requirement. "This is pure fabrication"
This is what Jesus came for and did.
The mission that Jesus undertook was to die sinless and fulfil God’s law, thus depriving sin of the power of the law. As a result of that, He also freed the flesh from the slavery of sin.
We must also understand that in the case of the last Adam (namely Jesus) the same rule applies retrospectively, as well as in the future. Therefore, because Jesus kept all of God’s law while He was in sinful flesh, He reversed what Adam did. Hence the entire human race has justification of life. For that reason, all who ever lived on the face of the earth will be resurrected on the last day to face judgement for their life’s deeds, because all humans inherited from Adam the knowledge of good and evil, so cancelling all excuses for those who willingly do evil. In addition to that universal act of justification of the entire world, Jesus has also embraced and forgiven all of the sins of whoever would believe in Him for eternal life, including past, present and future faithfuls. (John 3:14-21.)
Yet He did more! For there are some believers, who from their mother’s womb were chosen of God to serve Him, because they were known to God to believe in Him before the foundation of the world. Therefore, in order to purchase these chosen faithfuls, Jesus took them with Him on the cross. Galatians 2:20 confirms what you have just read, for it says: “I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and delivered Himself up for me.”
You wrote: " he HAD to die on a torture stake to satisfy it's legal requirement." You cannot imagine how offensive what you imputed to God, to the Lord and to the true Christians. He died a slow death on the cross, because all things had to be fulfilled, then at that time not before, He chose to die. " it is finished"

 

[Noel]

Technically I do not believe this to be entirely true. Some previous laws were abolished, some modified etc. I adhere to some OT 'rules' but not all. Generally it isn't important enough to argue, however, as different Xians have different traditions anyways.

Deuteronomy, Chapter 14:8-10:

And the pig, because it has a split hoof, but does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. You shall neither eat of their flesh nor touch their carcass.

These you may eat of all that are in the waters; all that have fins and scales, you may eat.

But whatever does not have fins and scales, you shall not eat; it is unclean for you.

Who choses to abolish it?

 

[Brickjectivity]

In some ways yes, as we still keep the 10 commandments (including the one jesus gave), but Christ death gave us freedom from Hebrew law (example- No pork, No tattoos, no trimming the sides of your beard, ect)

James talked about a perfect law that gives freedom. In the days when arguments were made about freedom from law, the laws of Rome and Greece were chaotic. There was a history of changing regimes, and I can see why people would be interested in a life free of government corruption. They still are today. The temple priesthood was also corrupt (from what I have heard, not that I know). I think that has something to do with the arguments about freedom from the law. The Jews of the time actually had more freedom by means of their laws, but the ideal of a law that grants freedom to everyone was enshrined in the feast of trumpets since ancient times. It was always an ideal.

Explaining the details of why 'No pork' or 'No circumcision' or 'Circumcision' is very complicated to me. I feel like some important information has been lost, perhaps through the deaths of so many people. I think you're trying to 'Rebuilt the temple in three days' out of a lot of disagreeing and discouraged people. I just want to pull my loved ones out. I don't want to hurt anybody else either, or destroy anybody's church or kill or steal.

 

[metis]

Free spirit, do you believe you are saved by believing about Jesus as your personal savior? Also, what do you believe about the relationship between Jesus and the Mosaiic Law, all 613 of them? IOW, do you believe Jesus upheld the Law and told others to do the same, or did he tell his followers that it wasn't necessary?

 

[Levite]

1) Religion imperialism; Yes, God wants that the gospel to be preached all over the world.
2) Only God can lead us to God.
3) I never said that! What I said could be interpreted ... put on his character and you would be in God.

We know what God wants of the Jews: Torah. That covenant is eternal and unbreakable, and is absolutely incompatible with Christian scripture and theology.

And embracing religious imperialism is just bigotry in the name of God.

 

[JM2C]

No, Paul wrote the truth, but the enemy of the truth altered Paul's message.

You claimed that Romans 11:11 and Romans 11:26 were lies and now you are saying “Paul wrote the truth, but the enemy of the truth altered Paul’s message” without any proof at all that it was really altered.

 

[JM2C]

I am not distorting the word, Paul is not distorting the word; an enemy of Christ has distorted the word in the first or second century. Here is an example.
In Matthew 27:52-53 we trustfully read: “And the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.”
I believe that the above two verses report something which never took place and therefore those lies are used to divert our attention from the Lord, because it is impossible for it to have occurred before or after the resurrection of the Lord, for we read in 2Timothy 2:18 about: “Men who have gone astray from the truth saying that the resurrection has already taken place, and thus they upset the faith of some.”
In Acts 2:29, Peter says, “Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day.” So Peter effectively says some time after the day of Pentecost that the body of David is still in his tomb (Confirmed by Acts 2:30-36) It is reasonable for us to assume that if the body of King David did not qualify for that alleged resurrection we can be certain that it never took place.
In addition to that, the numbers of anomalies that those two verses contain are also an indication that our Lord never dictated them because:
1) The resurrection of the body will take place on the last day (Read John 11:24, 1Corinthians 15:52, and all of chapter 20 of Revelation.)
2) It should be obvious to anyone that even if those verses in Matthew were true, they are written in the wrong place and therefore are not in harmony with what was actually taking place. Jesus had just died and the alleged resurrection supposedly took place after His resurrection, so why write it there?
3) If the alleged resurrection was after the Lord’s resurrection, why is it conveniently connected with the strange natural things that were happening in relation with the Son of God’s death? (Earthquake etc.)
4) Also if those verses were true, the resurrection of our Lord with His heavenly body would become one of many and no longer one of a kind.
5) Any Christian writer would have known that Jerusalem was no longer the “HolyCity” because the presence of God was no longer in the temple (read Matthew 23:38) and the city’s destruction had been foretold (read Mark 13:2).
6) We should also consider that the above verses do nothing to advance the knowledge of God but they are used extensively by the untaught to promote their own useless fantasies. Those who do not understand the Word preach best through their fleshly imagination by abandoning themselves to colourfully speculate what Jesus supposedly did while He was dead in the tomb.
2 Corinthians 10:4-5 says it all: “For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses. We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the Knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ.”
In other words, speculations are to be treated with the contempt they deserve, but the truth is supported by a variety of thought (or Scriptures) which are relevant to our every day lives and behaviour pleasing to Christ.
*edit*

You are moving away from the main argument by preaching. Please stick to the argument at hand..

 

[JM2C]

I am not a prophet, I use reason to make you think for yourself, and that reason that I offers is confirmed by scripture, you will know if it is false or true by the revelation of understanding that it gives you. The book speaks about God but you must remember that it is not God.

“The book speaks about God but you must remember that it is not God” What are you saying?

 

[Kolibri]

Just because something is offensive to our sensibilities, does that make it wrong? I am reminded of De 32:4. "The Rock, perfect is his activity, For all his ways are justice..."
As Job put it. "It is unthinkable for the true God to act wickedly, For the Almighty to do wrong!" - Job 34:10 Even in showing love and mercy, Jehovah never invalidates his sense of Justice.

Whether or not death is a curse or the law is a curse isn't for us to choose. I mean we can. But, quoting Joseph, "Do not interpretations belong to God?" If it is truly from God, at least the way I was persuaded to believe, then there should be no conflict between scripture. If there is a seeming conflict than it is our understanding of them that is at fault. (Ge 40:8).

1) Yes "the wages sin pays is death," maybe I should reword that: The inability to escape inherited sin itself is the curse that needed lifted. The wages is the stipulated penalty. Psalms 51:5 reads "With error I was brought forth with birth pains, and in sin my mother conceived me." Or as Romans 5:19 put it: "For just as through the disobedience of the one man many were made sinners,..."
We needed the "a corresponding ransom," a second Adam to pay the penalty for the curse of sin. That was true for all of us because we all stem from Adam.

2) Now that brings us to De 27:26: "'Cursed is the one who will not put the words of this law in force by doing them.' (And all the people must say, 'Amen!')" Or how it is put at Galatians 3:10; "For all those who depend upon works of the law are under a curse; for it is written:'Cursed is every one that does not continue in all the things written in the scroll of the Law in order to do them.'" Paul was not saying "everyone," he was saying "everyone that had been required to keep that Law." Paul was speaking as a Jew when he said "Christ by purchase released us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse instead of us."

Jehovah is a God of Justice. Loving and merciful, he went to great extremes to redeem us all, both Jew and non-Jew alike. I can't imagine with his deep perception how terrible those days were for him as he empathized with his son's experiences. All of that because he values us.

 

[metis]

Paul was speaking as a Jew when he said "Christ by purchase released us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse instead of us."
.

But for those of us whom are Jewish, the Law remains, and Torah has it that we have no option but to follow it as well as we can.