www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Would the Jews have been more secure someplace else?

I suppose it helps to recall that they see it as coming home.

If I am understanding correctly, several of you indicate that since the church is now fulfilling God's original mandate for the Jews as the "light to the nations," therefore the Jews no longer enjoy or deserve any particularly elevated status or recognition. The once and for all Sacrificial Lamb has been slain, the temple veil torn asunder, and the elect have obtained what Israel did not.

So far, so good. But how are you understanding St. Paul's instruction to the Romans in chapters 9, 10, and 11 (particularly 11)? According to St. Paul, we Gentiles are "ingrafted branches." Is he talking about someone other than the same people we call "Jews" when he says that they are "Branches...broken off so that I could be grafted in"? He states in verse 24 that the natural branches of that tree will be readily grafted back in.

Many of you are great theological scholars, but my simple understanding of this lengthy passage is that Israel's rejection of God's salvation is temporary until the full number of Gentiles has come in, and after that, they too will enter, and even resume their preeminent position on the basis of their original promises, "for God's gift and his call are irrevocable." (11:29)

Now that salvation is available to all through Christ and the Church, and the Jews have hardened their hearts against it, their role in the world is very different. But St. Paul leads us to believe the best is yet to come in regard to the Jews: "If their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?" (11:15)

Dear Learning As I Go,

Excellent post!

Zenovia

I do not see the existence of "the Jewish State" as the problem. I see it as radical Islam.

This is not intended as a blanket approval of all things Israel. They treat the Christian Arab populatuion lousy.

The USA supports Israel because of the guilt of not doing anything to stop Hitler before the Nazis got started.

Radical Islam has terrroized everyone in its path, taking whatever it can and trying to destroy what it cannot.

The situation of the poor Palestinain Arabs is deplorable. It is worth mentioning that they aren't really welcome in any Arab country and none of them do much to help Palestinain Arabs.

It is a tenet of radical Islam that any land once controlled by Muslims must always be Muslim land.
It took Spain nearly 800 years to drive out the infidels. On several occasions, Islam's forces attacked Europe. Remember who has the Hagia Sophia. Vienna was under attack by the Muslim Turks in 1683, when, on September 11, King Jan III Sobieski of Poland and his Hussars routed the invaders.

Hitler did not have a Pope, but he did have a Mufti, who was an uncle of Yasir Arafat.

...he did have a Mufti.......

At last! Someone *remembered*........

Staro

What do you expect?

He's a Steelers fan!!

Near to Pittsburgh, is nearer to God's omniscience!!

I'll bet he even read a book!! :p

Eli

If King Jan did that today, the "enlightened ones" in our society would be in torment over the damage to Muslim self-esteem.

God has fulfilled all the promises regarding the land of Israel. There is absolutely no Scripture to support that any of those promises are ever lasting. Furthermore, the modern nation of Israel is a tiny chunk of the former northern and southern kingdoms, and Israel will never get even most of that land back. Even the old covenant no longer applies, read Hebrews chapter 8. The vast majority of Jews live outside Israel, and it is depopulating as we speak. Most estimates are between 5-8 Jews leaving for every one that moves in. Given the relative minority status now, in time it will simply be abandoned.
The safest and most charitible solution is for those of us in western Europe and North America to invite Jews living in Palestine to immigrate here. The only reason some evangie groups are so pro-Zionist (a non-religious ethnic supremicist philosphy not unlike National Socialism) are mistaken and heretical beliefs concerning the end times (dispenstationalism to be exact).

Heh! A Steelers fan! His soul is saved. Let him not fall from the true path! Tak budet!

I'd have to disagree with that. Israel is the only country in the region that is decidedly pro-western. We won't count the attack on the USS Liberty for the purposes of this discussion. As such it's more of an intelligence base in the midst of the Muslim world. Guilt over the holocaust has little to do with it.

It's not radical Islam, just plain odd fashioned Mohammedian Islam. Many people say that Christianity has fringe groups, and that to an extent is true. The difference is that Christian Identity groups are composed of tiny cells, usually far less than 100 people. They have no funding and no public sympathy. This is true of any so called "Christian" fringe group. The so called "radical Muslim minority" is a huge funded network of religious zealots with strong public support in the population at large. At last I checked no western universities were holding suicide bomber simiars. However, the biggest difference I suppose is that there is nothing within the Theology of Christianity that would support these fringes or violence. However, the views of Osama Bin Laden and the like are completely within Islamic orthodoxy.

While this is true, I don't think "several" grasps the epic scale of the wars, and the number, that Islam waged against Christianity.

Muslims were quite sympathic in general to the Nazis, and there were many Muslim volunteers in Hitler's Waffen SS foreign legions.

On the Way,

We certainly agree that the old covenant has been made obsolete, according to Hebrews 8. However, this does not negate a straightforward reading of Romans 9,10, and 11, which seems to indicate that God is not yet through with the Jews, but that they - "the natural branches" - will be again readily grafted into their own "olive tree," once the full number of Gentiles has come in.

Nothing in this passage describes a re-establishment of the old covenant as is awaited by certain evangelicals. I am not arguing for that theological construct, but am simply stating that it does not appear the final chapter has not been written in regard to the Jews as a particular people.

While I await your charitable and well-reasoned response, my plea is that we not throw out the baby (the Jews) with the bathwater (the old covenant)!

Robert

Robert,

I agree with you. I don't think that agreement forces us to agree with either the establishment of the modern state of Israel or that everyone in that modern state are following even the old covenant. Nevertheless, Romans 11 should be very sobering to those who wish to make an end to Jewish connection with God.

If a Jew is also an Atheist I have little trouble making an effort to bring him to Christ. If a Jew is a strong believer in God I share my faith but with greater circumspection.

CDL

OOPS: My previous post should read, "It does not appear that the final chapter has been written..."

Dan, thanks for your support

Of course we can't use any of this to argue for a foreign policy in which Israel is the sole consideration, as many evangelicals seem to advocate.

Having said that, if as a junior prince, I knew that my prodigal elder brother would someday return to assume his rightful position in the kingdom (or rejoin the family in any capacity whatsoever), I might be inclined to keep a watchful eye out for his interests, both temporal and eternal.

In fact, I might want to do so even if that elder brother's return was NOT expected!

God is never "through" with anyone. While the construct of "replacement theology" is usually a strawman, there have been times when the understanding of the end of the old covenant have been taken to a radical extreme and stated that God has written off the Jews. In truth God doesn't desire anyone to be lost, and I'm sure He has a plan by which many will come to Christ, just as He has a plan by which many more Gentiles will come to Christ.
The problem with the "particular people" idea is ethnically the Jews simply aren't anymore.


It's not my place to write anyone off, and I do hope that Jews, like everyone, will come come to Christ.

Is there anyone who might be interested in responding to my sincere question regarding the "Jews" referred to in Romans 9-11?

What else might these chapters mean other that that the Jews' rejection of God's salvation is temporary while the Gentiles are being brought in, and that later there will be a "coming home" on their part?

If St. Paul's prediction is believed to have already been fulfilled, when is it supposed to have happened?

As to the Jews no longer being identifiable, I would posit that this argument could have been made many times throughout Jewish history before these chapters were written; the Jews have had an almost continual history of exiles and "diasporas," and whomever St. Paul was referring to, there is no indication that they would somehow cease to exist.