Who understands and can explain the meaning of Romans 9:3-4?

[Kenny]

But what does that verse mean for Christians?

IMV, Romans is a compendium on righteousness. Sometimes it talks about the Jews and sometimes the Gentiles and sometimes both. I don't think that vs 3&4 are necessarily applying to Christians as he is specifically talking about Israelites.

Do you have a different take?

 

[Kilk1]

Who are the Gentiles? Do you know? If you check, I just explained who they are.

The word Gentile never appeared in your OP. However, you did talk about Israelites, saying, "The Israelites are the people who are the descendants of ancient Israel." However, doesn't this contradict the very chapter in question, in verses 9:6, which says that "not all who are descended from Israel are Israel" (NIV, emphasis mine)? And again, how do you explain the conclusion of the chapter, verses 30-33 (NKJV, emphasis mine):

30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone. 33 As it is written:

“Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense,
And whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”

 

[Enoch07]

See my post to Rival, #115 above.

That's not what I was talking about but I can see how you might mistake it. Though it may be what the OP is talking about, I am not sure. The Black Hebrew Israelites is a relatively new idea. I might be inclined to take their claims more seriously but their members have been caught on camera harassing non-blacks (whites, asians, jews, mexicans) on the street. Making threats of violence and just saying horrible, horrible things. I would classify them as a hate group unfortunately.

 

[Sundance]

So you're a Christian pretending to be a Jew. Got it.

I think this cat, @Amikam Israel is either one of those British Israelite types or a Black Hebrew Israelite. Either way, I would disregard it as complete nonsense.

 

[Amikam Israel]

Ye saith:

Then we can conclude that all true Christians are the real children of Israel through the resurrection power of Jesus Christ.

I see what you're trying to say, but lets see what the Bible saith:

Bible saith:

Matthew 15:24
But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

What does this imply? It implies only Israel not any other nation. And what did he tell his disciples to do? Let's see:

Matthew 10:6
But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Oh he told the disciples to preach to the Israelites who were lost. Where did he mention Christians? And the disicples did preach to the Jews first in their land and then to the Gentiles - the other LOST tribes of Israel who were scattered to other lands (such as Greece and Rome). The lost of Israel were among the Greeks and Romans. Paul was preaching to all the Gentiles, all his brethren who were among the Greeks and Roman people. The Gentiles represent the northern kingdom of Israel, the other tribes of Israel who lost their identity through the captivity of the Greeks and Romans. The disciples were trying to wake up those lost. Were the Greeks and Romans lost? NO Who was that lost their land, their identity, their status as a nation of people? It was the Israelites. The purpose of the mission was (as still is) to gather the lost of Israel from the other nations who were responsible for bringing us into captivity. Did Jesus say he was sent to all people? If you quote anything other than Matthew 15:24 in this regard, you are a liar. Matthew 15:24 says it all.

Ye say:

if you're not a member of His body you're not yet risen and so you will not be considered as the real Israelite no matter who your mommy or daddy is.

But who does Christ say are members of his body? Well, we just went over Matthew 15:24 and Matthew 10:6. So far it's Israel. Then he says

John 8:30-31
As he spake these words, many believed on him. Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;

You see that? The Jews and Israel who believe are members of his body. Not the JeWISH not Christians. Jesus calls by name the people who are relevant to his body. The question is, "Are YOU a member of his body?" You should examine yourself to make sure you're really a part of this. His body consists of the repented Jews John 8:31 and Gentiles Acts 5:31 the scattered remnant of his people, the lost sheep, the lost tribes of Israel of which other nations are definitely not a member. Check Revelation 21:10-12.

Revelation 21:10-12
[10]And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
[11]Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
[12]And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:

You see that? The great city has the glory of God and we know the only people to whom pertaineth the Glory of God are the Israelites. The bible is pretty consistent in this regard.

This is why Jesus said to Nicodemus (who was Hebrew) "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Yes, that's right. Nicodemus WAS a Hebrew Israelite like Paul. Glad you pointed that out. Jesus was not dealing with any other nation besides Israel.

So Jesus told the Hebrew Nicodemus that he had to be born again.

That's right. He did do that, but when did he tell other nations they had to be born again? That's the question to which there is no answer because Jesus never told other nations to be born again. Why is that? Go back to Romans 9:4 for the answer. Paul was lobbying for his brethren, the Israelites to repent because the laws, covenants, service of God, and the promises pertaineth to them ONLY.

Which proves that his earthly lineage was of no worth in this case.

Quite the opposite actually. Jesus proved that Israel are the only people worthy of the kingdom. Check Matthew 15:24 again. It's Matthew 15:24 that proves who is worthy and who is not. You have it all backwards. What was Jesus doing when he was on this Earth? Let's see:

Matthew 4:23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.

Oh he was preaching the gospel of the kingdom. And who is worthy of that? Check Romans 3:1-2 and Revelation 21:12

Romans 3:1-2
What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

That's how much Jews are worth right there.

He would never be the real Israel until he was born again.

What does the real Israel consist of? Repented Jews and the remnant of Israel. Do you even know what it means to be born again? I doubt it. To be born again, the first qualification is that ye be of Israel. That's why Jesus was talking to Nicodemus (a Jew) about being born again. The second qualification is for those who are Israel to repent. Jesus only asked his people Israel to be born again. Let's say only 1/3 of Israel repent, then it means 1/3 of Israel is the real Israel who will enter the kingdom and the other 2/3 of un-repented Israel will be destroyed. Where is other nations in this? They're not.

 

[Amikam Israel]

Paul was addressing his Christian brothers in Rome......

Where's the verse that says his brothers were Christian?

Circumcision is, in fact, of benefit only if you practice law; but if you are a transgressor of law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.

Uh huh, okay. And which of the laws do Christians practice and please do not say all of them. Be more specific than that. Ye say Christians are practitioners of the law, but Paul said the laws only pertaineth to the Israelites. And please stop mis-quoting Romans 3:28-30. Gentiles is not synonymous for all nations. Please discontinue using versions of the bible King James did not authorize. The Gentiles are the non-Jews of Israel who were lost because they were removed from their land and lost their true identity while under the captivity of other nations. That's who the Jews are. This is what Romans 3:28-30 actually says:

Romans 3:28-30
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.

Jews (Tribe of Judah) + Gentiles (Lost Scattered Remnant of Israel). Remember Paul was continuing Jesus's ministry and Jesus clearly instructed his disciples to do the following:

Matthew 10:6-7 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Which means if Paul is doing something other than this he is preaching to other nations then he is not continuing the ministry of Jesus.

 

[Deeje]

Where's the verse that says his brothers were Christian?

Ummmm....his words are recorded in Christian scripture....hello.

Paul's letter to the Christians in Rome was not merely a general letter written to the Roman congregation with no specific aim toward them, as some suppose, but it evidently dealt with the things they needed under the circumstances. The Roman congregation would be able to grasp the full meaning and force of the apostle’s counsel, for they were doubtless wrestling with the very questions he answered. It is obvious that his purpose was to settle the differences in viewpoint between Jewish and Gentile Christians and to bring them toward complete unity as "one man" in Christ Jesus.

Uh huh, okay. And which of the laws do Christians practice and please do not say all of them. Be more specific than that.

Christians are not under Jewish law. Jesus summed up a Christian's obligation by condensing all of the laws given to Israel, into just two....'Love for God with our whole heart, mind and soul....and to love our neighbor as ourselves'. He said that the whole law was based on these two. (Matthew 22:35-40)

Ye say Christians are practitioners of the law, but Paul said the laws only pertaineth to the Israelites. And please stop mis-quoting Romans 3:28-30. Gentiles is not synonymous for all nations.

It seems your understanding of the term "Gentile" does not fit the Biblical definition. It referred to people of the nations...anyone who was not Jewish.

Your interpretation does not agree with scripture. No one who was not born Jewish was ever considered "Jewish". Converts did not qualify to be "Jews" even when they lived under the same laws as Jews did. They did not have the same status as natural born Jews. I think you need to stop misquoting Christian scripture.

Paul indicated that "Jews" in the Christian arrangement included Gentiles....people of the nations. The "Israel of God" were both Jewish and Gentile Christians. (Galatians 6:16)

Please discontinue using versions of the bible King James did not authorize.

Who the heck is King James that I should subscribe to his completely outdated version of the Bible? I don't speak archaic English, although I see that you find it appealing somehow....? Is English not your first language?

The Gentiles are the non-Jews of Israel who were lost because they were removed from their land and lost their true identity while under the captivity of other nations. That's who the Jews are.

Not according to my understanding. When the circumcision issue arose among the mixed congregations, dissension was getting heated when Jewish Christians were trying to impose circumcision on Gentile Christians. If the Gentiles were really just lost Jews, then why were they not following the law even in those basic requirements? The Samaritans e.g. had their own version of the Pentateuch which incorporated the Law of Moses. Why did the apostles need to reiterate serious issues like the consumption of blood, sexual immorality, and eating unbled meat? (Acts 15:28-29)

This is what Romans 3:28-30 actually says:
Jews (Tribe of Judah) + Gentiles (Lost Scattered Remnant of Israel). Remember Paul was continuing Jesus's ministry and Jesus clearly instructed his disciples to do the following:
Which means if Paul is doing something other than this he is preaching to other nations then he is not continuing the ministry of Jesus.

Your misinterpretation of Christian scripture is understandable. You are trying to make the Jews into heroes of this sad and sorry tale of serial disobedience throughout their entire history. It just doesn't wash.

It was Jesus and his disciples who were originally sent only to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel" (those not considered worthy of the attention of Israel's self righteous shepherds.) Read Matthew 23 and see the condemnation and contempt in which Jesus held these men. He consigned them to Gehenna!

Jesus repeatedly stated that he was sent exclusively to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel,” not just to the lost sheep of the house of Judah, but to all twelve tribes. There is also record of a prophetess Anna, “of Asher’s tribe,” serving at the temple. And when Jesus was impaled on the torture stake we find the terms “King of the Jews” and “King of Israel” used interchangeably. (Matthew 10:6; Luke 2:36; Matthew 27:37; 42)

Consider also.....if only those of the two tribes had returned to Palestine, why would Peter on the day of Pentecost say: “Therefore let all the house of Israel know for a certainty that God” made this Jesus Lord and Christ? And if ten of the twelve tribes had gone to the British Isles and were lost, why would James, under inspiration, address his letter to the twelve tribes? Note also Paul’s words: “Our twelve tribes are hoping to attain to the fulfillment of this [resurrection] promise by intensely rendering him sacred service night and day.” How could Paul make such a statement if ten of the twelve tribes were lost and no longer trying to serve God? (Acts 2:36; Acts 26:7; James 1:1)

So your definition of "Gentile" fits Jesus' original commission.....that he was sent to all the tribes of Israel. That makes the Gentiles those of any other nation.

With the conversion of Cornelius, the first Gentile Christian convert, Acts 15:14 was fulfilled.

 

[Amikam Israel]

Christians are not under Jewish law. Jesus summed up a Christian's obligation by condensing all of the laws given to Israel, into just two....'Love for God with our whole heart, mind and soul....and to love our neighbor as ourselves'. He said that the whole law was based on these two. (Matthew 22:35-40)

Right and do ye think that these two commandments replace the laws? Is that what Christ was saying? Nay. Here's what he did say:

Matthew 22:40
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Christians are not under Jewish law.

You see this is why Christians are not Israelites because what is the Love of God? Doth ye not know?

1 John 5:3
[3]For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

Oh but ye thought you only had to keep two. Nay, Jesus did not come here teaching a doctrine different from his father. God of Israel did not send his son here to tell his people to disregard the commandments of God and only keep two. Christianity is teaching a different doctrine from what Jesus was teaching. He NEVER said "love God" and "love thy neighbor" REPLACES all the commandments God told his people to keep. Christians are under a strong delusion, a spell full of lies that has nothing to do with what the Bible actually teaches.

BTW, as for "love thy neighbor as thyself". That means ye brethren that ye consider close to thee, make sure they are also keeping the commandments. This is the reason why the two commandments summarizes all the law and the teaching of the prophets. Jesus loved to teach in similitudes. Well this particular teaching was no different. Bible doesn't mean anything Christians think it means.

 

[Deeje]

Right and do ye think that these two commandments replace the laws? Is that what Christ was saying? Nay. Here's what he did say:

You are going to tell Christians what Jesus said? Really....?

Since when does a Jew teach Christianity? Jesus said that the whole of the Law has those two commandments as its foundation. Think about it....you cannot break one law of God without transgressing either one or both of those two most important commandments.

Again...what is with the Archaic English? Are you a time traveler lost in the wrong century or something?

You see this is why Christians are not Israelites because what is the Love of God? Doth ye not know?

Oh, but I do knoweth .....the love of God means to keep his commandments. The Law was given only to Jews, not to Gentiles. We keep the Commandments that Jesus told us to keep.

There was no Sabbath commanded for Christians....no circumcision.....no prescribed sacrifices.....because the Law has ended. It is no longer binding except on those who failed to acknowledge Christ as Messiah. They are stuck in the past and cannot move on until they do. Its been almost 2,000 years now....and no sign of it ever happening.

At Romans 10:1-4....Paul is addressing his Christian brothers and telling them of his sincere wish that the Jews be saved.....

"Brothers and sisters, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. 2 I can testify that they have a zeal for God, but it is not enlightened. 3 For, being ignorant of the righteousness that comes from God, and seeking to establish their own, they have not submitted to God’s righteousness. 4 For Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes." (NRSVACE)

He spoke of their zeal for God but their knowledge of him, having come from corrupt sources, was not enlightened. They substituted their own righteousness for God's righteousness, and failed to obey his commands. Christ ended the Law...and introduced the New Covenant without them.

Oh but ye thought you only had to keep two. Nay, Jesus did not come here teaching a doctrine different from his father.

Oh yes, he did not. When Jesus' teachings deviated from what the Pharisees taught, it wasn't Jesus who was wrong. His constant condemnation of the religious leaders proved that it was the Pharisees who had it all wrong.

God of Israel did not send his son here to tell his people to disregard the commandments of God and only keep two.

You are joking...right? Whilst Christ was in the flesh, he was as Jewish as any man could be. He abided by the whole law. But he did away with the law by virtue of his shed blood. He inaugurated the new covenant and abolished the old one, which served its purpose and was now obsolete. Jeremiah foretold this. (Jeremiah 31:31-34) Why do Jews pretend that the old covenant is still in force even though they have no Temple, no priesthood, and can no longer offer the prescribed sacrifices under the Law? How did that happen?

Christianity is teaching a different doctrine from what Jesus was teaching. He NEVER said "love God" and "love thy neighbor" REPLACES all the commandments God told his people to keep. Christians are under a strong delusion, a spell full of lies that has nothing to do with what the Bible actually teaches.

Oh dear....I fear that the delusion is much older than Christianity. It's as alive and well today as it was long before Jesus arrived on the earthly scene. He was not sent to Israel's leadership, because they were incorrigible. He was sent to the ones that the religious leaders had neglected as unworthy of their time and attention.

How long had it been since God had sent a prophet to Israel? Why did God not send any prophets for hundreds of years? There was no point in view of what Jesus said in Matthew 23:37-39.

As the last book of the inspired Hebrew Scriptures, Malachi points forward to events surrounding the coming of the Messiah, whose appearance more than four centuries later provided the reason for the writing of the Christian Greek Scriptures. As recorded at Malachi 3:1, Yahweh said: “Behold, I send my messenger to prepare the way before me.” Speaking under inspiration, the aged Zechariah showed that this had a fulfillment in his son, John the Baptizer. (Luke 1:76) Jesus Christ confirmed this, stating at the same time: “There has not been raised up a greater than John the Baptist; but a person that is a lesser one in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he is.” John had been sent, as Malachi foretold, to ‘prepare the way,’ so that he was not among those with whom Jesus later made a covenant for a Kingdom. (Matthew 11:9-12; Luke 7:27-28; Luke 22:28-30) He is not going to be among those ruling in the Kingdom of Heaven.

Your beliefs are as clouded as Jewish belief has always been regarding the Messiah. You will believe some day.....but I am sure it won't be in the way that you imagine. Time will tell, won't it?

 

[sooda]

Ye saith:
I see what you're trying to say, but lets see what the Bible saith:

Bible saith:


What does this imply? It implies only Israel not any other nation. And what did he tell his disciples to do? Let's see:



Oh he told the disciples to preach to the Israelites who were lost. Where did he mention Christians? And the disicples did preach to the Jews first in their land and then to the Gentiles - the other LOST tribes of Israel who were scattered to other lands (such as Greece and Rome). The lost of Israel were among the Greeks and Romans. Paul was preaching to all the Gentiles, all his brethren who were among the Greeks and Roman people. The Gentiles represent the northern kingdom of Israel, the other tribes of Israel who lost their identity through the captivity of the Greeks and Romans. The disciples were trying to wake up those lost. Were the Greeks and Romans lost? NO Who was that lost their land, their identity, their status as a nation of people? It was the Israelites. The purpose of the mission was (as still is) to gather the lost of Israel from the other nations who were responsible for bringing us into captivity. Did Jesus say he was sent to all people? If you quote anything other than Matthew 15:24 in this regard, you are a liar. Matthew 15:24 says it all.

Ye say:


But who does Christ say are members of his body? Well, we just went over Matthew 15:24 and Matthew 10:6. So far it's Israel. Then he says



You see that? The Jews and Israel who believe are members of his body. Not the JeWISH not Christians. Jesus calls by name the people who are relevant to his body. The question is, "Are YOU a member of his body?" You should examine yourself to make sure you're really a part of this. His body consists of the repented Jews John 8:31 and Gentiles Acts 5:31 the scattered remnant of his people, the lost sheep, the lost tribes of Israel of which other nations are definitely not a member. Check Revelation 21:10-12.




You see that? The great city has the glory of God and we know the only people to whom pertaineth the Glory of God are the Israelites. The bible is pretty consistent in this regard.




Yes, that's right. Nicodemus WAS a Hebrew Israelite like Paul. Glad you pointed that out. Jesus was not dealing with any other nation besides Israel.

That's right. He did do that, but when did he tell other nations they had to be born again? That's the question to which there is no answer because Jesus never told other nations to be born again. Why is that? Go back to Romans 9:4 for the answer. Paul was lobbying for his brethren, the Israelites to repent because the laws, covenants, service of God, and the promises pertaineth to them ONLY.

Quite the opposite actually. Jesus proved that Israel are the only people worthy of the kingdom. Check Matthew 15:24 again. It's Matthew 15:24 that proves who is worthy and who is not. You have it all backwards. What was Jesus doing when he was on this Earth? Let's see:


Oh he was preaching the gospel of the kingdom. And who is worthy of that? Check Romans 3:1-2 and Revelation 21:12


That's how much Jews are worth right there.

What does the real Israel consist of? Repented Jews and the remnant of Israel. Do you even know what it means to be born again? I doubt it. To be born again, the first qualification is that ye be of Israel. That's why Jesus was talking to Nicodemus (a Jew) about being born again. The second qualification is for those who are Israel to repent. Jesus only asked his people Israel to be born again. Let's say only 1/3 of Israel repent, then it means 1/3 of Israel is the real Israel who will enter the kingdom and the other 2/3 of un-repented Israel will be destroyed. Where is other nations in this? They're not.

"Paul said, I am a man which am a Jew of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia" (Acts 21:39 KJV)

"I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin." (Romans 11:1 KJV)

 

[sooda]

Remember, Jesus told them to avoid the tribulation and flee to the mountains. (they went to Pella)

The ones who left Jerusalem at the abomination of desolation were saved, but those who gathered around the city to make war with the Romans were destroyed.

The Kingdom Of God only pertained to the 12 tribes of Israel because it is identified with the rule of King David in both the past and future (2 Samuel 7).

Moreover, the Promised Land only referred to the geographic area between the Euphrates and the Nile (Genesis 15:18) where David ruled and the 12 tribes were allotted their Land inheritances.

There is no "worldwide" aspect to the Kingdom at all except that the children of Israel were scattered in "every nation under heaven" and God promised to regather them back into their own Land (Ezekiel 34, 36). These prophecies also show that the location of the Kingdom was the Land of Israel and not the rest of the world. There would be no reason for God to "regather" His people to "their own Land" if His purpose had been to redeem the rest of the nations.