Muslims in Balkan Should Promote Europe of Peace and Hope

[Philosopher]

I can't see any passage that God has forsaken Israel as a nation for all eternity. The whole idea of divorce is also contrary to His nature and even though you may be using it for want of a better word, God has clearly made promises to Israel as a nation that would also be contrary to His nature if He were to break them.

In the Old Covenant, God also speaks about “eternal” statutes concerning dietary laws, Sabbaths, and other Jewish ceremonial laws. Yet, in the New Covenant, the apostles tell us that these were shadows of the law and are now “loosed”, and thus not to be observed.

Is this a contradiction? How would you explain this? Jews look at the commands of God in the Old Covenant and believe these laws are still binding eternally on the Jews.

It is clear from the New Covenant that God has taken the kingdom from Israel and given it to the church.

Jesus Christ stated in Matthew 21.43:

Because of this I say to you, that the reign of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth its fruit.

What else can this mean?

And what Age ends in Matthew 24?

And when he is sitting on the mount of the Olives, the disciples came near to him by himself, saying, 'Tell us, when shall these be? And what is the sign of thy presence, and of the full end of the age?'

God’s unconditional promises are not invalidated by the unfaithfulness of man. Nothing we do is ever a surprise to God, and He does not need to adjust His plans according to the way we behave. God is sovereign over all things—past, present and future—and what He has foreordained for both Israel and the Church will come to pass, regardless of circumstances.

God's plans for the nation of Israel has already been fulfilled. The nation of Israel has nothing to do with the present or future world. God divorced the nation of Israel in 70 AD.

In particular, there is the promise of Deuteronomy 30:1–10, which I believe is yet to happen and is an end times promise for the nation of Israel.

The passage in Deuteronomy is no longer applicable to the nation of Israel, anymore than the shadows of the Old Testament law. God has divorced the nation of Israel. If we are to interpret the passages in Deuteronomy, we would have to conclude that these passages are only applicable in a spiritual sense to the spiritual house of Israel, which is composed of both Jews and non-Jews.

Why is that a problem?

It is a problem because it gives unbelieving Jews redemption at the second coming but to no other people. Unless of course you believe when Jesus returns the whole world will be saved because everyone will believe in the supernatural return of Jesus Christ. There is not one passage in Scripture—not even one—that states the nation of Israel will be saved when Jesus Christ resturns.

Seeing as that has been prophesied, why would you dispute it?

Because it is not prophesied at all.

I believe that Zechariah 12:12-13:1 clearly speaks of the clans and families of the Jewish nation, not spiritual Israel/the Church - if you have a different view, I would like to see your reasoning and any supporting passages.

These passages were fulfilled in the days of Jesus Christ and his crucifixion. These passages are not referring to a future, post 2000 years event, where the Jews in Israel wake up from their slumber and believe in Jesus Christ.

Again, refer to Zechariah 12:12-13:1. Also see Zechariah 8:1-8, Isaiah 11:12 and Ezekiel 37. If you don't think that these passages refer to the nation of Israel than I would like to hear your reasoning as to why not and see any supporting passages.

Zechariah 12 and 13 do not speak about the second coming of Christ. Zechariah 8 is not about Jewish faith and repentance at the second coming either. Isaiah 11.10-12 states:

And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.
11 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

This prophecy was already fulfilled in the days of Jesus Christ. It is not speaking about the second coming, nor is it speaking about a second exodus of Jews to Palestine.

Having read and reread these passages, I agree - the scripture is very clear. Paul talks about the HOUSE of Israel and the HOUSE of Judah. A house refers to a family (biological) and in this instance the nation of Israel. Further, he also refers specifically to Israel and Judah and if we start giving new meanings to the words Israel and Judah, then there is no end to how we might interpret the Bible.

So you are of the opinion that the New Covenant Jesus established 2000 years ago was with the biological nation of Israel? Or are you of the opinion that the New Covenant has not yet been established, but will be in the future when “all Israel” accepts Jesus Christ at his second coming? If so, this would mean that all believers for the last 2000 years having been living under the Old Covenant.

God has made his New Covenant with the church, who Paul identifies as the “Israel of God”. Peter tells us that Christian are now the chosen people of God; and Paul states we are now the beloved.

Paul does indeed state this in his example of the olive tree.

No, he doesn't. He specifically states that not all who are of Israel are of Israel. Jews are natural branches as the promises were made to their forefathers, but the natural branches are not all of the seed of Abraham. Paul is very clear that only a remnant of Jews – who are of the spiritual seed of Abraham – will be saved. God has no plan for the nation of Israel – only a small remnant of Jews who are of the spiritual seed of Abraham. For example, God had plans for Paul, who was a Hebrew, but not for the nation of Israel.

Israel is only temporarily set aside, "until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in".

Only a remnant of the nation of Israel are of spiritual Israel. There is nothing at all to indicate the whole nation of Israel will come to faith in Christ. This is not found anywhere in the Bible; and it is direct contradiction to the writings of Paul in Romans and elsewhere.

[George S.]

The baton has been passed to jews and gentiles alike.%he fact that the ceremonal things areb't practiced anymore and other things like fasting is that jesus paid the price the penalty of death for sins.Jesus did it to bring man closer to god.Man can have a relationship to his maker.
Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of god.Man must be reborn into the kingdom of god.

[Vangelovski]

I think we will just have to disagree on this.

But I am curious as to two things.

Zechariah 12 and 13 do not speak about the second coming of Christ. Zechariah 8 is not about Jewish faith and repentance at the second coming either.

If you don't think these passages are about the second coming of Christ, then what do you believe they are referring to?

This prophecy was already fulfilled in the days of Jesus Christ. It is not speaking about the second coming, nor is it speaking about a second exodus of Jews to Palestine.

Where in the days of Jesus was there a regathering of Jews to Israel? I have never come across anything that could suggest such an event.

And two clarifications:

So you are of the opinion that the New Covenant Jesus established 2000 years ago was with the biological nation of Israel? Or are you of the opinion that the New Covenant has not yet been established, but will be in the future when “all Israel” accepts Jesus Christ at his second coming? If so, this would mean that all believers for the last 2000 years having been living under the Old Covenant.

No, you missed my point about 'to the Jew first'.

No, he doesn't. He specifically states that not all who are of Israel are of Israel. Jews are natural branches as the promises were made to their forefathers, but the natural branches are not all of the seed of Abraham. Paul is very clear that only a remnant of Jews – who are of the spiritual seed of Abraham – will be saved. God has no plan for the nation of Israel – only a small remnant of Jews who are of the spiritual seed of Abraham. For example, God had plans for Paul, who was a Hebrew, but not for the nation of Israel.

Only a remnant of the nation of Israel are of spiritual Israel. There is nothing at all to indicate the whole nation of Israel will come to faith in Christ. This is not found anywhere in the Bible; and it is direct contradiction to the writings of Paul in Romans and elsewhere

That small remnant of Jews who will be saved are the future nation of Israel. I have never suggested that those who have died without coming to Christ will be saved and I'm not sure why you keep implying that I have.

[Philosopher]

My friend, here is the problem. You read the Old Covenant and then the New Covenant. I read the New Covenant and then the Old. What I mean is that I am interpreting the Old Covenant in light of the New. And you are interpreting the New in light of the Old.

Let me give you an example. In Jeremiah 23.5-6, God states

5 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.
6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, The Lord Our Righteousness.

At face value, when reading these two verses, the only logical conclusion is that the Messiah, the righteous branch, would reign as a king, and in his day Judah was to be saved and Israel too.

Would you agree or disagree with this?

Here is the problem though. For the Jew who reads this, they see the life of Jesus and they do not see a king. They see Jesus, and in his day Judah was not saved and Israel did not dwell in safety. In fact, Israel was destroyed from being a nation in 70 AD. For the Jew, this removes Jesus as a candidate for Messiah, for in his lifetime neither Judah nor Israel was saved.

This presents a potential problem. Was Judah saved in his Jesus' lifetime? If you believe the “Judah” spoken of is the biological nation of Judah and Israel, then no, they were not. What alternative explanations exist? Dispositional Christians would argue that Jeremiah's prophecy refers to the second coming and in Jesus' second coming Judah will be saved. The problem with this interpretation is that there is no indication whatsoever that the context of Jeremiah 23 is about a second coming. In fact, it is about the first coming – God fulfilling the promise to David that a righteous branch would be born.

To those who interpret the meaning of “Judah” and “Israel” in Old Testament prophetic passages as the spiritual houses of Judah and Israel, the meaning is obvious. Jesus saved spiritual Judah and Israel at the cross – but he did not save the nation of Israel. The biological house of Israel in fact was destroyed in 70 AD for their crimes against God.

So if we interpret these Old Covenant prophetic passages in light of the New Covenant, we come to very different explanations than Jews come to by reading the Old Covenant alone.

Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that they shall no more say, The Lord liveth, which brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt; 8 But, The Lord liveth, which brought up and which led the seed of the house of Israel out of the north country, and from all countries whither I had driven them; and they shall dwell in their own land.

Verses 7-8 speak of a second Exodus, greater than the first. Note the context of these scriptures. It is after the Messiah has saved Judah and Israel. The meaning is inescapable. John tells us in 9.52:

And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; 52 And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.

The children of God that were scattered abroad is the meaning of Jeremiah's second exodus. As you know, Moses was a type of Jesus as he led the children of Israel out of bondage in Egypt. Jesus led the spiritual children of Israel out of spiritual Egypt. Jesus was also prefigured by the Passover lamb. As Moses introduced the Old Covenant after the exodus, Jesus instituted the New Covenant with the Israel of God (the church). It was this Israel of God that is spoken of in Jeremiah and in his pronouncements of the second exodus.

If you don't think these passages are about the second coming of Christ, then what do you believe they are referring to?

And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn. 11 In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon. 12 And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart.

This Scripture can be understood in two senses. Literally, it is referring to the events of the crucifixion in 33 AD or so. Symbolically, it refers to all believers in all times in the realization that our sins have crucified the Son of God.

Where in the days of Jesus was there a regathering of Jews to Israel? I have never come across anything that could suggest such an event.

See my earlier explanation in Jeremiah.

And two clarifications:

No, there is no misunderstanding here at all. I understand your comments about the Jew first. And I did not think – nor have I suggested – that you believe unbelieving dead Jews will be saved. You believe that Jews (the nation of Israel) alive at the second coming will be saved. I understand you very well. No misunderstanding.

We just disagree brother.

[George S.]

The 12 tribes of israel dispersed from their place all over the world.They can be traced to various nations.

[Tomche Makedonche]

I could not imagine an intelligent Christian to think otherwise.

I could imagine an intelligent Christian would accept some parts of the Bible are definitely up for interpretation and question how literal some parts must be embraced.

Personally I don’t like to look at “faith” too much from an “intelligence” perspective, I think to do that would be akin to looking at “love” from an “intelligence” perspective.

This view however has no bearing on the intelligence of people who have faith, as opposed to those who don't. Someone who does not have faith in God, does not make them more "intelligent" then someone who has faith in God, or vice versa.

[Risto the Great]

Personally I don’t like to look at “faith” too much from an “intelligence” perspective, I think to do that would be akin to looking at “love” from an “intelligence” perspective.

I was talking specifically about your comment here:

I consider myself a Christian (or at least I try to be) therefore it would be disingenuous on my part as a Christian to not say that I believe that "the Bible is the Word of God and that all of it is true".

I think appreciating the Bible as the Word of God, particularly when appreciating its supposed "types and shadows", does appeal to intellectual types.

It doesn't mean the reader understands what they are reading, (as evident on this thread when interpretations clearly differ dramatically and fundamentally), but it does seem to nurture a kind of person at a point in their life.

You have to get your Christian faith from somewhere. If it isn't from the Bible, then it would have to be a misguided faith for a Christian in my opinion. And I doubt you can cherry pick the sections of the Bible that appeal and reject others that seem offensive to you.

I don't think it is correct to compare "love" and intelligence in the same way as "faith" as there is no book about it. Though there was this Playboy magazine I saw at my uncle's place when I was 10 ....

This view however has no bearing on the intelligence of people who have faith, as opposed to those who don't. Someone who does not have faith in God, does not make them more "intelligent" then someone who has faith in God, or vice versa.

Perhaps it is easier to turn it upside down and say only an idiot would say they are Christian and then doubt that "the Bible is the Word of God and that all of it is true".

[George S.]

Its anod and a wink if you dont understand the bible.

[makedonche]

Vangelovski

Be assured, that the only way to Heaven is through Jesus - i.e., recognising that you are a sinner, repenting of your sin and trusting Jesus and Him alone with your salvation on the basis that He is God and that He paid the penalty for your sins on the cross and rose on the third day to show that He is who He says He is.

This appears to say that Jesus is God? Or am I misinterpreting? I was always taught that Jesus was the son of God.

[George S.]

Yeah yhat id rihht ee shall all be sons of gof.god is simply reproducing homself.god in us

[Vangelovski]

Vangelovski

This appears to say that Jesus is God? Or am I misinterpreting? I was always taught that Jesus was the son of God.

Jesus is God. God is one God in three persons - God the Father, God the Son (Jesus or Son of God) and God the Holy Spirit. Below is part of an article that I think might help.

***

The most difficult thing about the Trinity is that there is no way to perfectly and completely understand it. The Trinity is a concept that is impossible for any human being to fully understand, let alone explain. God is infinitely greater than we are; therefore, we should not expect to be able to fully understand Him. The Bible teaches that the Father is God, that Jesus is God, and that the Holy Spirit is God. The Bible also teaches that there is only one God. Though we can understand some facts about the relationship of the different Persons of the Trinity to one another, ultimately, it is incomprehensible to the human mind. However, this does not mean the Trinity is not true or that it is not based on the teachings of the Bible.

The Trinity is one God existing in three Persons. Understand that this is not in any way suggesting three Gods. Keep in mind when studying this subject that the word “Trinity” is not found in Scripture. This is a term that is used to attempt to describe the triune God—three coexistent, co-eternal Persons who make up God. The following is what God’s Word says about the Trinity:

1) There is one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; 1 Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:5).

2) The Trinity consists of three Persons (Genesis 1:1, 26; 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8, 48:16, 61:1; Matthew 3:16-17, 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14). In Genesis 1:1, the Hebrew plural noun "Elohim" is used. In Genesis 1:26, 3:22, 11:7 and Isaiah 6:8, the plural pronoun for “us” is used. The word "Elohim" and the pronoun “us” are plural forms, definitely referring in the Hebrew language to more than two. While this is not an explicit argument for the Trinity, it does denote the aspect of plurality in God. The Hebrew word for "God," "Elohim," definitely allows for the Trinity.

In Isaiah 48:16 and 61:1, the Son is speaking while making reference to the Father and the Holy Spirit. Compare Isaiah 61:1 to Luke 4:14-19 to see that it is the Son speaking. Matthew 3:16-17 describes the event of Jesus' baptism. Seen in this passage is God the Holy Spirit descending on God the Son while God the Father proclaims His pleasure in the Son. Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 are examples of three distinct Persons in the Trinity.

3) The members of the Trinity are distinguished one from another in various passages. In the Old Testament, “LORD” is distinguished from “Lord” (Genesis 19:24; Hosea 1:4). The LORD has a Son (Psalm 2:7, 12; Proverbs 30:2-4). The Spirit is distinguished from the “LORD” (Numbers 27:18) and from “God” (Psalm 51:10-12). God the Son is distinguished from God the Father (Psalm 45:6-7; Hebrews 1:8-9). In the New Testament, Jesus speaks to the Father about sending a Helper, the Holy Spirit (John 14:16-17). This shows that Jesus did not consider Himself to be the Father or the Holy Spirit. Consider also all the other times in the Gospels where Jesus speaks to the Father. Was He speaking to Himself? No. He spoke to another Person in the Trinity—the Father.

4) Each member of the Trinity is God. The Father is God (John 6:27; Romans 1:7; 1 Peter 1:2). The Son is God (John 1:1, 14; Romans 9:5; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:8; 1 John 5:20). The Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4; 1 Corinthians 3:16).

5) There is subordination within the Trinity. Scripture shows that the Holy Spirit is subordinate to the Father and the Son, and the Son is subordinate to the Father. This is an internal relationship and does not deny the deity of any Person of the Trinity. This is simply an area which our finite minds cannot understand concerning the infinite God. Concerning the Son see Luke 22:42, John 5:36, John 20:21, and 1 John 4:14. Concerning the Holy Spirit see John 14:16, 14:26, 15:26, 16:7, and especially John 16:13-14.

6) The individual members of the Trinity have different tasks. The Father is the ultimate source or cause of the universe (1 Corinthians 8:6; Revelation 4:11); divine revelation (Revelation 1:1); salvation (John 3:16-17); and Jesus' human works (John 5:17; 14:10). The Father initiates all of these things.

The Son is the agent through whom the Father does the following works: the creation and maintenance of the universe (1 Corinthians 8:6; John 1:3; Colossians 1:16-17); divine revelation (John 1:1, 16:12-15; Matthew 11:27; Revelation 1:1); and salvation (2 Corinthians 5:19; Matthew 1:21; John 4:42). The Father does all these things through the Son, who functions as His agent.

The Holy Spirit is the means by whom the Father does the following works: creation and maintenance of the universe (Genesis 1:2; Job 26:13; Psalm 104:30); divine revelation (John 16:12-15; Ephesians 3:5; 2 Peter 1:21); salvation (John 3:6; Titus 3:5; 1 Peter 1:2); and Jesus' works (Isaiah 61:1; Acts 10:38). Thus, the Father does all these things by the power of the Holy Spirit.

[George S.]

Easy pidy I can explain it all.god is a family of divine beings.gofs goal in man is to teproduce himdelf.we must be born of god if we are yo inherit yhe kingdom of heaven.so the trinity beleif id s fslse doctrine.easy as pie

[George S.]

God is one but msny personsges.simple isnt it?

[makedonche]

Vangelovski
That makes it a bit clearer, but still leaves much room for interpretation in my view!

[Vangelovski]

Vangelovski
That makes it a bit clearer, but still leaves much room for interpretation in my view!

For example?