Romans verse-by-verse playlist: ruclips.net/p/PLtzt3JhaK2U4IiKdFZzd0lPZtYBiS1KPK Transcript: opentheo.org/i/3692951694443819945/romans-91-913 Romans 9 NKJV Israel’s Rejection of Christ 9 I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, 2 that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my [a]countrymen according to the flesh, 4 who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; 5 of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen. Israel’s Rejection and God’s Purpose 6 But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, 7 nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called.” 8 That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed. 9 For this is the word of promise: “At this time I will come and Sarah shall have a son.” 10 And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac 11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), 12 it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.” Footnotes Romans 9:3 Or relatives
These 'titles' in NKJV seem misleading They should be rather read: Israel's (according to the flesh, or Israelites) Rejection of Christ and Israel’s (according to the flesh, or Israelites) Rejection and God’s Purpose KJV: God's Sovereign Choice (God is not replacing Israel with a church. God 'modifies' / make alterations to Israel, His chosen Ones; see Rom 11)
I gave up dispensationalism when confronted by the logical implications of Hebrews 11:6. It was one of the best things I have ever done. At first I was disoriented and it took me almost a year to get my bearings. However, eventually the sensation of liberation was truly amazing. Try it. You will not regret it. And Steve, keep up the good work.
Discovering that one's system of belief was seriously out of kilter is not a good feeling. Having tied up a serious amount of psychological investment in Darby's system and realizing that a good portion was probably baloney leaves a person grasping for theological straws, to coin a phrase. The way out of this was helped by my dad, that was a seminary professor, that insisted I read a book entitled "Dispensationalism in America," by KRAUS. It was here that I was confronted by the implications of dispensationalism that if Hebrews 11:6 was true then the so-called time frames, dispensations, could not possibly be true. Another issue involves the supposed events that must take place before Jesus returns. Again, an impossibility since if any unfulfilled prophecy is yet to take place then by way of implication Jesus cannot return this very second because the event(s) have not yet occurred. I have no idea what dispensational preachers do with the words of Jesus from the cross, "It is finished." (John 19:30) So, a heretic out of the Church of England wants me to believe that Jesus actually meant to say, "It is finished, except for these and these future events, that will be recognized by..." and on and on. Another item that becomes problematic is the near pathological preoccupation with the identity of the antichrist and the unfolding of a host of different events related with him. A careful study of dispensationalism will reveal that the events associated with the end of ages actually requires not only a second coming, but also a third "second coming," and possibly a fourth "second coming," if one reads a little between the lines. Investigation will reveal that dispensational preachers are realizing some problems and are turning against other dispensational preachers, some of them even to the point of violent accusations. The contribution of John Nelson Darby and dispensationalism has been to lead hundreds of millions worldwide to seek for so-called prophetic signs and the appearance of the antichrist rather than setting at liberty their friends, neighbors, even their own children, according to the words of the prophet Moses, and in the meantime looking up for the return of the King Of Kings. What a waste. What a shame. In the meantime, I have become worried that much that passes for preaching has missed an important point. The first and second century Christian churches were persecuted by the Roman Empire for almost three hundred years. Christians were thrown to lions, burned to death, decapitated, and crucified among others. Women, old men, even children. No one was spared. Then Constantine came on the scene and said, "You can have your kingdom over there and I will have my kingdom over here." The survivors said, "It's a deal" and the persecutions ended and nothing has been the same ever since. The fact that the civil authorities do not persecute the church is proof that the objective of the modern Christian church has absolutely nothing to do with the objective of the first and second century churches. Someone is bound to say, "Hold it there fellah. Do you not know that there are Christians being persecuted and some killed even recently?" I answer, "Yes, you are absolutely correct. However, not for the same reason." And this is what the problem is. I realize that this statement may be difficult to stomach. We as christians are not being persecuted so we tend to get relaxed and unconcerned. Most people in the churches are paying a lot of attention to the words of the sermon even down to the inflexions or the pauses between words. All of this to catch anything that will allow them to enter heaven without loving God and without loving their neighbor as themselves. The near totality of churches are preoccupied exclusively with attendance and income; more and greater ministries. The real problems are way down the line of concern. You will notice, as the astute individual I know you are (I really believe this and I am not trying to flatter you) that I have not revealed what I think the major problem the modern church has. I am willing to leave such a task to your creativity and would be pleased to no end if you discovered what it was without my help. Nevertheless, if you reach a point with no further hints, then I will indicate the location. In the meantime I will suggest (1) They beheaded the Apostle Paul; why? (2) Deuteronomy 17, somewhere. You'll find it. Perhaps what I have written is profitable to you in some way.
@randylplampin1326 Dispensation is in the KJB which is 200 plus years older than Darby. In fact, Dispensation is in the Wycliffe English translation which is 250 years older than the KJB. We are not Israel. Israel is Israel. Israel is a nation. We are not a nation. We are a Spiritual Body. The Body of Christ Church is not the same Church as Israel, the called out assembly of Israel. That's why our Gospel, Paul's Gospel of Grace, is different than Israel's Gospel of the Kingdom. Two churches, with two Gospels for two completely different purposes. This is what right division is all about.
@@randylplampin1326I have a cute proof as to why Jesus Christ must be the Prophet like unto Moses in my community section on my channel, and it also shows why it is dangerous to believe in two Israels side by side, rather than embrace (“replacement theology”, “supersessionism” or “fulfilment theology”). The two Israel’s will be at war, and the Esau class Israel will be guilty of murdering the Jacob class Israel.
Randy, please help me out. I’m still not following you. How is it that “if Hebrews 11:6 is true, then the time frames, dispensations, cannot possibly be true?” Dispensationalists have never said that people were saved differently in the time frames, only that God gave different commands at different times. For example, people before Moses were not commanded to follow the law of Moses, but they were all saved the same way that Abraham was, by believing and it being counted as righteousness. So I’m still not understanding what you mean by if Hebrews 11:6 is true then the time frames can’t be true…….?
How is it that some disciples of Christ who believe that God established Jesus as Christ the King also believe that God establishes people who are vehemently opposed to Jesus as Christ the King?
I grew up as a pentecostal. Later about 11 years of age I made an individual commitment to Christ. I began reading a lot of the Scofield Study Bible. For many,many years I adopted Mr Scofield's explanations and biblical footnotes as authoritative. It was not until about age 30 when I have a real I mean a Damascus road experience. Scales fell from my eyes and a supernatural understanding came to me. It contradicted almost 100% of the things I used to know especially by the Scofield dispensationalism. I was horrified. I was completely blown away. I mean this scriptural voice began to walk me through the scripture and proved exactly how those teachings were not only erroneous but dangerous. I trembled like a leaf. I could not believe millions upon millions christians are so deceived. Scofield's teachings had given me such a Love and admiration for Israel to the point where I was wishing I had been born a Jew. However, when the Holy Spirit became my teacher it was revealed to me that a Jew holds no special privileges with God. That all favours with God are conferred freely upon all who believes God through faith in Jesus Christ. This revelation changed my life completely, completely. A revelation is not a scriptural insight or deduction one makes with his mind. A revelation is an understanding of the way God is working. Trust me when I say revelations are life-changing and the first thing that happens is it shows you how utterly and dangerously contrary man's views on any biblical issue are from the one God holds. God and man (meaning fleshly mind)are never,never in agreement no matter how biblical, religious or even righteous it seems. Another thing that blew my mind(and I throw this in just for good measure) was when the Holy Spirit revealed to me the dispensational understanding of a SECRET RAPTURE is completely and utterly false. There is no secret rapture. I leave it at that. But I said these things only to confirm the point 100% of the teachings within evangelical circles are wrong. I know this sounds harsh and presumptuous but I have to say it. The first thing I did after Jesus opened my eye to the truth was to get rid of my study bible or bible with footnotes. I began to read my Bible and rely upon God for understanding. First thing I noticed is that the new testament is extremely clear on every topic it teaches to the point where you can just read and understand. The commentators are the ones who have corrupted scriptural truths with their charts and chronological interpretations- this comes first then this follows etc, etc. But I thank God for solid teachers of the word who remain humble and simple allowing God to do his work. God bless you brother as you continue to rely upon his abundant grace. God blessings upon all the listeners and all who are faithful in Christ Jesus our Lord.
I appreciate your receiving a love of the truth and your willingness to respond to the Spirit of Truth and be corrected to the text of Scripture but that is called "sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth" (2Thes 2:13, 1Pet 1:2). It _begins_ with humility and exclusively continues with abiding in the Word, lest ye become "barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2Pet 1:1-12) Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth. ...and yes the Holy Spirit guides us in our studies, no doubt, but I have sat with Mormons who equally echo your convictions that you have been given "revelation" as they attribute their supernatural "burning in the bosom" to convictions confirming _errors_ as well. I caution you because of this comment you wrote: "God and man (meaning fleshly mind)are never,never in agreement no matter how biblical, religious or even righteous it seems." That is a blatant *_gnostic_* lie. God gave us the Scriptures: "to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." (2Tim 3:15-17) I appreciate your enthusiasm for the work of the Spirit of Truth in the lives and study of The Word that sanctifies the ENTIRE Body of Christ but be careful.... "the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets" (1 Cor 14:32)... When apologetics begin with "the Holy Spirit revealed to me..." instead of "I saw this in Scripture"... you are already elevating yourself above that which is written.. so pipe down! "that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another." (1Cor 4:7) " For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) *_Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the KNOWLEDGE of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the OBEDIENCE of Christ_* And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled....For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, *_are not wise._* But we will not boast of things without our measure, but according to the measure of the rule which God hath distributed to us". (2 Cor 10:3-6, 12-13) AND THAT is *_THE WORD GOD..._*
Paul does teach of a secret rapture, but you say you got a supernatural revelation that there is no secret rapture. Sorry, but I'm leaning towards some guy you listened to convinced you to not believe the mysteries revealed to Paul. Scripture sure doesn't teach that. It must be from some other guy who also does not believe the Dispensation of Grace given to Paul for the Gentiles because Israel fell in unbelief.
@@bugsocsollie1694 I am begging you in the mercies of Jesus Christ our Lord to do one thing. Please, don't take my word for it. Go talk to Jesus because he is real and he is the TEACHER for he said, "call no man Rabbi (teacher)on earth". Ask him if his return is secret or if it it open for all to behold him giving rewards to the faithful who look for his return and damnation to those who are caught unawares and therefore unprepared.
this teaching is one of the best Ive ever heard, its the key to desrtoying dispensationalism. the bible does not teach a great revival amoung jews OR gentiles during the end times, and nothing is mentioned about a regathered nation of israel.
I am a very new reborn Christian, less than a year. I latched on early to the pre mil rapture crowd, but it was extremely short lived as soon as I read my Bible and actually studied both views. The Bible is a complete story and pristine work of Jesus Christ. I can’t believe this is actually a debate. Jesus is the door to the father (Jn 10:7), enter via the narrow gate.
Thank you, I learn a lot from your lecture. Remark: The way you speak about 'going to heaven or hell' seems too easy to me. The subject of going to heaven or hell is too delicate and complicated for us humans to say something about or to judge about. The Lord deals with every person and makes His judgement.
I think all we can gather from Hebrews 12:16 is that when Esau sold his birthright he was a profane person. It doesn't say anything about who he became after that.
I disagree in part. Some things are obvious, not all Jews are saved but, just because most haven’t accepted Yeshua as HaMashiach, doesn’t mean they can’t or won’t be saved. This is like only seeing or taking only a small part of a work of art & ignoring the rest. You miss the big picture. Don’t forget, that as a result of the sins of Israel, God’s mercy is extended to the gentiles.
yes, true scofield/darby dispensationalism teaches there are 2 peoples and that Jews ARE saved simply by being Jewish. they teach that the old covenant is a " UNCONDITIONAL, ETERNAL, IRREVOKABLE" covenant. however, ALL dispensationalists believe God loves and values all Jews above all non jews. all dispensationalists are heretics and preach false doctrine.
There's only one verse that could infer 2 unique ways of salvation for Jews and Gentiles. Romans 3:29-31 KJV- Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: 30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision 👉by faith,👈 and uncircumcision👉 through faith.👈 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. Jews= "through faith." Gentiles=" by faith." You would need to believe in Unconditional Election to ratify the "through" and "by" faith because this would mean "faith" is not originated with man, but is a Person, the Lord Jesus Christ. This is not a dual covenant. One must be born again from above in this life as a new creature in Christ. Its a aspect of the faith OF Christ gifted to elect Jews and Gentiles, the true Israel of God.
God is the God of Jews AMD Gentiles WHO HAVE FAITH IN HIM. paul is not saying that God is literally the God of EVERY Jew and gentile.. I totally reject calvinism. God love and calls every human on earth, Jesus died for every human on earth. HOWEVER, we AQUIRE that salvation when we choose to have faith in christ.. I do not EARN my salvation when I have faith in christ I aquire salvation. Jesus alone paid the price for my salvation. calvinism DENIES the atonement of christ for most people. you cannot be a christian and deny the atonement of christ. now to the calvinists.....How do they KNOW Christ died for them?? @@ManassehJones
@jamesba-xd7xf Nobody mentioned Calvinism. There was only scriptures referenced. You need to stop following the doctrines of men and stay Sola Scriptura. There's ONLY ONE salvific faith. Man cannot generate salvific faith. Faith IS "substance," not an imagination. ONLY Jesus Christ posesses salvific faith, and ONLY those whom God gifts His effectual grace with are imputed with the salvific faith OF Christ. The for "whom" the LORD did foreknow to be the Bride of Christ.
@jamesba-xd7xf The question you should be asking God is...."is my faith imaginary, or is it the faith of Jesus Christ, the substance of which is imputed as a gift from God by Gods effectual grace?" Romans 5:17 KJVS - For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more 👉they which receive abundance of grace👈 and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ). John 12:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, 👉it abideth alone:👈 but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.
I want to honor Steve for being the great teacher that he is... *BUT I think he has got something significantly wrong in certain critical places in his interpretation here* Romans 9 is very familiar territory for me (I was a Calvinist for 15 years - and a Presbyterian pastor for 9 of those years... To be clear, I am no longer a Calvinist - AND I know that Steve isn't either) And - I fully acknowledge that my interpretation of Romans 9-11 could just be wrong - but here is my take on it at this point in my life... At 68 years of age - only within the last few years have I come to see there is something very enigmatic going on within these three chapters. There are underlying paradoxes and polarities that I think have to be recognized and faced in order to "get" what Paul is saying overall (you might say the "sum" of Paul's message and meaning here - remembering that "The sum of thy word is Truth") I think Paul uses the word "Israel" in a somewhat obviously enigmatic way - he calls the disobedient and hardened Israel - as well as suggesting that the elect, obedient remnant are the "true" Israel of God. But the full scope of God's promises are to "all" Israel - not just the remnant. (for me) *THE* central and most critical verse - the "key", if you will, to unlocking Paul's meaning and intent is, "If the first fruits is holy, the lump is holy" (Romans 11:16) The only parallel to this is Paul's enigmatic statement that if the unbelieving spouse is married to a believer - then the unbelieving spouse [and their children] are holy! (see 1 Corinthians 7:14-16) Those who are cut off are NOT beyond hope -Why? God is able! (to graft them in again) *God is able!* While I am no longer a Calvinist - I do still retain something of their respect for God's sovereignty - and we are promised that in spite of the partial hardening that ALL Israel will be saved! And - in context - I cannot see that this means only "the remnant". "Israel has experienced a hardening in part" (11:25) How could anyone fail to see that Paul is back to using the word "Israel" in its fullest sense - speaking of ALL Jews in this case? The the "sovereign" part: “The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. 27And this is f my covenant with them when I take away their sins.” This cannot(!) mean the obedient remnant! The grand sweep of chapter 11 just seems to contradict what Steve is saying - he seems to not let chapter 11 inform his interpretation of chapter 9. The consummation of Paul's message here is "mercy on all"! "For from him and through him and TO him are ALL things" God uses the "elect" first fruits (Jew and Gentile) to bring salvation to "the whole lump" (the remainder of the harvest). I am NOT a "dispensationalist" - but God's promises given to Israel (ALL Jews, even to those who are disobedient to the Gospel - Rom.9:4) are irrevocable (11:29) They ARE "enemies" - YET "beloved of God"! (11:28) - I do not feel Steve is keeping this paradox in mind when he seems to say that only the remnant of Israel (at least when it comes to the Jews) are ultimately saved - and only they are (ultimately) the "true" Israel. Finally - it is very significant to me that Paul only uses the Greek word for "lump" TWO times in the entirety of Romans: 11:16 and 9: 21. And what seems to be a final destiny of doom in Romans 9 (vessels of wrath) becomes a destiny of Mercy in Romans 11. *"For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all."* (11:32) Thanks for your patience - I hope this helps someone consider another perspective that (again) looks at Romans 9 *through* 11 as a whole... Blessing in Christ! wayne
Its not the Israel of today that Paul is talking about in Romans. It is the Israel that Paul knew. It was the House of Israel that split off of the House of Judah 1000 years before and which were divorced by God and dispersed 700 years before. They began being remarried under the New Covenant starting on the Day of Pentecost 33 AD. That Israel has in fact being remarried to the glory of God every since. They became the Christian nations of Europe and have taken the Gospel to the world. To the glory of God.
Steve, I sent you a draft of "Jacob and Esau Two Nations and the Inheritance" a while back without response. In this published work, I demonstrate how and why the two "nations" in Rebekah's whom were actually Israel and the Church, which is exactly why Paul quotes Malachi while explaining how Israel missed righteousness and Gentiles gained it by faith. Jesus told the Jews their kingdom would be taken from them and given to a "nation" that would bear its fruit. Peter says the Church is not the holy "nation" of God. Paul quotes Deut 32 in Romans 10, stating that Israel would be made angry and jealous by a foolish "nation". This happens in acts 13 and Jesus reiterated in in parable form in the prodigal on story. Of course, the elder brother is Israel and became angry and jealous at the "salvation" of his younger brother. You, of all people, will understand this book and appreciate it, I'm sure. Blessings
Hello, Steve! Hey, do you remember a guy you interupted, and HUNG UP on, back several years ago, when correcting you on the trinity? Yeh------Probably NOT! Well, anyway, I'm that guy, and I would like the opportunity to DEFEND myself without being Shut down before I can Finish. GOD bless.
I am not Steve. May name is Jason. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but just guessing from your comment, you were probably belligerent and wouldn't let him answer without interruption. In my experience, that's the type of callers he has had to mute in order to answer. They pretend like it's their show and they're the ones paying for it. But if you can in again and are polite, and he has the the time in the program, he would be willing to go back and forth with you.
Most miss that the Israel Paul is referring to in Romans 9-11 is the House of Israel that was divorced in the 700s BC and sent into captivity. This is who Hosea was giving his prophecies to in his book back then. Under Torah Law, a man was not allowed to remarry the one he had divorced. This produced a question that people in Paul's day had, namely how could these former Israelites be in covenant with God again once they had been divorced. Paul gives us the answer in Romans--the Groom would have to come and die and be resurrected so He could remarry them under a New Covenant. In Romans 2-3 Paul is addressing Jews and the House of Judah. In Romans 9-11 Paul is clearly addressing the House of Israel. We know this because he only uses the word Jew once but always uses Israel instead. In Romans 2-3 he never uses the word Israel but only Jew. Also, in Romans 9-11 he quotes from Hosea 1, which was addressed not to Jews but to the House of Israel.
I think Paul is referring to Israel as the gathered together of both Judha and Israel: all 12 tribes. Romans 11: I also am an Israelite...of the tribe of Benjamin. Wouldn't that be a Jew if still divided?
Yes, but do you understand the meaning behind God’s rejection of the older brother siblings of the younger brothers whom God chose to be His central figures, throughout His Providence? When we look at the process of the Fall of Man, we see some kind of illicit relationship took place between the chaperone angel depicted figuratively as a talking serpent and Eve. Then a premature relationship between Eve and Adam developed, which moreover was not initiated by God. The interaction between the angel and Eve was totally unprincipled whereas the relationship between Adam and Eve was premature. Adam and Eve eventually were to experience sex face to face. This process of the Fall of Man was a violation of the order of creation. Adam who was to perfect his individuality by not eating the fruit of the figurative Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil which represented the sexual desire of Adam and Eve, until God lifted this temporary injunction, was to thereby become a true lord or god with a lower case g, fulfilling God’s prerequisite for the complex male-female relationship occurring on the family level through his individual perfection which was gained through adherence to God’s instruction: “Do not eat, do not touch” which was to only be lifted by God. Only God was to initiate and preside over the marriage union of His children. God wanted Adam to become His second self. Then God would experience the corporeal universe including Adam’s beloved children and grandchildren as His own. God modulating perfectly with Adam would have experienced Adam’s offspring through Adam’s senses substantially as His own. Then in a very real way, Eve would have become the wife of God Who was one with Adam. The conceptual desire of God for sonship, family, lineage and good company would have then been fulfilled substantially if Adam and Eve would have waited to start their family life through God’s initiation. Satan who is the fallen chaperone angel was to remain as a successful servant who was fundamentally necessary for Adam and Eve’s perfection. In other words, the violation of the order of creation took place when Adam who was to perfect himself as a true lord became a servant, and the angelic servant became a lord, Therefore God allowed the first born son, who was originally supposed to receive the successful birthright of true parents to represent the unprincipled relationship between Eve and the angel and God allowed the second son to represent the relationship between Eve and Adam as a formula to subjugate Satan. This is why God places the first born in the position that does not necessarily result in the lineage of the Messiah. If the elder brother does not act out of fallen nature and rather unites with the younger brother, perhaps God can use his lineage in case the younger brother fails. Satan undermined Noah’s efforts and God’s desire to indemnify the shame involving the Fall of Man, claiming the second born Ham through his shame of his great father who simply fell asleep naked, so too it seems God took Abraham who was fist born, who Satan was more attached. The elder brother who was initially blessed by God to receive the parents first blessing had to remove the fallen nature not through perfected parents but rather through his younger brother. This is the formula God used against Satan to cleanse the lineage and rightfully give birth to Jesus, who exactly like Adam was not a product of sinful ancestors. This is actually why Jesus is the Messiah. Jesus’ authority has to do with how he was born sinless more than any other theological claims. God hated the totally unprincipled relationship between His daughter and an angel. God divided good and evil based on the motivation and process of the Fall of Man. The Fall of Man can be explained as: 1. The failure to take God’s viewpoint (in loving others) the angel did not love Adam and Eve; rather he became envious of their knowledge, position, property, affection, though these qualities were not yet affirmed (developed) in Adam and Eve. Failure to take God’s viewpoint is the sin of falsehood, disbelief and rebellion. 2. Leaving proper position. Sin of adultery 3. Reversal of dominion. This represents the sin of murder 4. Multiplication of Evil, representing theft. The difference between Adam and Jesus is that Jesus did not throw away his mission. Jesus overcame what caused Adam to forfeit his position as lord of creation. It is very difficult for the elder brother to receive guidance and instruction from the younger sibling operating in a parental stead and we should understand that the younger brother was most likely not aware of the high road he should take for his brother’s sake, which could easily then be perceived as arrogance due to the elder brother’s aspects of fallen nature like for example: insecurity. Nevertheless, the elder brother was required to accept God’s reverse order of restoration. Conversely the younger brother, ultimately represented by the Messiah-Jesus, had to be prepared to wrest the elder brother from Satan’s material Kmart even if it took torture and martyrdom.
I stopped reading at two paragraphs because you were just writing a story you made up or repeating a story someone else made up and are trying to interject it into the biblical account.
At 52 minutes: "God has always chosen, for special purposes, a smaller group within the larger race." ...uhh, isn't that what the Calvinist believes? 😂😅
We're you not listening at all? If you didn't pay attention to the whole lecture but just backed up 5 seconds, you'd know Steve was talking about God choosing a smaller group for an earthly role, not for salvation.
@@SteveGreggVideos do you think I started at 52 minutes? I am aware of the context. I was comparing the thoughts, and how easy it is for Steve to believe in God's sovereign choice in earthly matters but not in soteriological matters. It was meant to be ironic, but I suppose I missed the mark, or my audience.
There's a distinct difference between a smaller group within a larger race being chosen for a purpose, that group being the faithful remnant chosen to bless the world, than a smaller group within a larger race being chosen unto salvation. Calvinists believe the smaller group being chosen has to do with people chosen unto salvation but that's not what the text says or what Steve taught. The smaller group being chosen is the faithful remnant (saved people) being chosen to bless the world.
God dealt with nations, as Israel was such. That all ended when he left them desolate,, MATT 23:38. he died for individuals. I received him and upon doing I am an heir of all that is promised to his children. We give account of ourselves and no one can speak for us... as individuals having nothing to do with race or nationality we stand before him as naked and unmarked by anything but the blood. I wear a vesture dipped in blood, and my hope is to one day carry the two edged sword and end the wicked.
God said, Jacob I have loved... Essau I have hated! God knew who would obey Him because of the spirit God placed (election) in Jacob. Essau was of his father the devil (spiritually). We are either like Jacob or Essau.....
" Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but He sent me. Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. [speaking to "JACOB". Jesus continues----->] *_Ye are of your father the devil_* and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not." (John 8:4-45) "God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believes on him is not condemned: but he that believes not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that does evil hates the light, neither comes to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that does truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." (John 3:17-21)
Jacob was chosen for his descendants to be the channel of the world's redeemer as Rom 9: 5 says, "of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came." Esau was not selected for that purpose, nor was he hated of God for that reason. Esau's descendants were judged per Malachi 1:2 when the verb "hate" is used. Literal hate? God, the perfect example, commands Israel to "not abhor an Edomite; for he is thy brother." Idiomatic hate, as per the Lord's words in Luke 14:26. You're left to ponder. Try not to grab one supposed proof text as the paramount revelation on a topic settling everything about it without considering the immediate context and how the vocabulary appears in the rest of the Bible. Some do this defining the human heart as "deceitful above all things, desperately wicked" because a verse in Jer 17 says so, ignoring the fact the word occurs 830 times in KJV. Example 1: The lawless Gentiles in Rom 2:14 who, by nature, obey the law at times. Consider the state of their heart at that time. Example 2: Abimelech answers back to God, asserting the integrity of his heart, and God concurs that Abimelech did not sin owing to the integrity of his heart. At this time Abraham's heart might have been lacking integrity as he lies about Sara and is willing to be a cornuto. Abraham also overestimated the depravity of Gerar in Gen 20:11 "I thought, Surely the fear of God is not in this place." Try not to be one of the ideologues that takes a Biblical concept, like depravity, and exaggerates it beyond what Scripture explicitly reveals.
Romans verse-by-verse playlist: ruclips.net/p/PLtzt3JhaK2U4IiKdFZzd0lPZtYBiS1KPK
Transcript: opentheo.org/i/3692951694443819945/romans-91-913
Romans 9 NKJV
Israel’s Rejection of Christ
9 I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, 2 that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my [a]countrymen according to the flesh, 4 who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; 5 of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.
Israel’s Rejection and God’s Purpose
6 But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, 7 nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called.” 8 That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed. 9 For this is the word of promise: “At this time I will come and Sarah shall have a son.”
10 And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac 11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), 12 it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.”
Footnotes
Romans 9:3 Or relatives
Great teachings
These 'titles' in NKJV seem misleading
They should be rather read:
Israel's (according to the flesh, or Israelites) Rejection of Christ
and
Israel’s (according to the flesh, or Israelites) Rejection and God’s Purpose
KJV: God's Sovereign Choice
(God is not replacing Israel with a church. God 'modifies' / make alterations to Israel, His chosen Ones; see Rom 11)
Steve Gregg is one of the most thorough Bible teachers I’ve ever heard
Steve is a national treasure. Excellent teacher.
I gave up dispensationalism when confronted by the logical implications of Hebrews 11:6. It was one of the best things I have ever done. At first I was disoriented and it took me almost a year to get my bearings. However, eventually the sensation of liberation was truly amazing. Try it. You will not regret it. And Steve, keep up the good work.
Please explain. I'd like to hear more.
Discovering that one's system of belief was seriously out of kilter is not a good feeling. Having tied up a serious amount of psychological investment in Darby's system and realizing that a good portion was probably baloney leaves a person grasping for theological straws, to coin a phrase. The way out of this was helped by my dad, that was a seminary professor, that insisted I read a book entitled "Dispensationalism in America," by KRAUS. It was here that I was confronted by the implications of dispensationalism that if Hebrews 11:6 was true then the so-called time frames, dispensations, could not possibly be true. Another issue involves the supposed events that must take place before Jesus returns. Again, an impossibility since if any unfulfilled prophecy is yet to take place then by way of implication Jesus cannot return this very second because the event(s) have not yet occurred. I have no idea what dispensational preachers do with the words of Jesus from the cross, "It is finished." (John 19:30) So, a heretic out of the Church of England wants me to believe that Jesus actually meant to say, "It is finished, except for these and these future events, that will be recognized by..." and on and on. Another item that becomes problematic is the near pathological preoccupation with the identity of the antichrist and the unfolding of a host of different events related with him. A careful study of dispensationalism will reveal that the events associated with the end of ages actually requires not only a second coming, but also a third "second coming," and possibly a fourth "second coming," if one reads a little between the lines. Investigation will reveal that dispensational preachers are realizing some problems and are turning against other dispensational preachers, some of them even to the point of violent accusations. The contribution of John Nelson Darby and dispensationalism has been to lead hundreds of millions worldwide to seek for so-called prophetic signs and the appearance of the antichrist rather than setting at liberty their friends, neighbors, even their own children, according to the words of the prophet Moses, and in the meantime looking up for the return of the King Of Kings. What a waste. What a shame.
In the meantime, I have become worried that much that passes for preaching has missed an important point.
The first and second century Christian churches were persecuted by the Roman Empire for almost three hundred years. Christians were thrown to lions, burned to death, decapitated, and crucified among others. Women, old men, even children. No one was spared. Then Constantine came on the scene and said, "You can have your kingdom over there and I will have my kingdom over here." The survivors said, "It's a deal" and the persecutions ended and nothing has been the same ever since. The fact that the civil authorities do not persecute the church is proof that the objective of the modern Christian church has absolutely nothing to do with the objective of the first and second century churches. Someone is bound to say, "Hold it there fellah. Do you not know that there are Christians being persecuted and some killed even recently?" I answer, "Yes, you are absolutely correct. However, not for the same reason." And this is what the problem is.
I realize that this statement may be difficult to stomach. We as christians are not being persecuted so we tend to get relaxed and unconcerned. Most people in the churches are paying a lot of attention to the words of the sermon even down to the inflexions or the pauses between words. All of this to catch anything that will allow them to enter heaven without loving God and without loving their neighbor as themselves. The near totality of churches are preoccupied exclusively with attendance and income; more and greater ministries. The real problems are way down the line of concern.
You will notice, as the astute individual I know you are (I really believe this and I am not trying to flatter you) that I have not revealed what I think the major problem the modern church has. I am willing to leave such a task to your creativity and would be pleased to no end if you discovered what it was without my help. Nevertheless, if you reach a point with no further hints, then I will indicate the location. In the meantime I will suggest (1) They beheaded the Apostle Paul; why? (2) Deuteronomy 17, somewhere. You'll find it.
Perhaps what I have written is profitable to you in some way.
@randylplampin1326 Dispensation is in the KJB which is 200 plus years older than Darby. In fact, Dispensation is in the Wycliffe English translation which is 250 years older than the KJB.
We are not Israel. Israel is Israel. Israel is a nation. We are not a nation. We are a Spiritual Body.
The Body of Christ Church is not the same Church as Israel, the called out assembly of Israel. That's why our Gospel, Paul's Gospel of Grace, is different than Israel's Gospel of the Kingdom.
Two churches, with two Gospels for two completely different purposes. This is what right division is all about.
@@randylplampin1326I have a cute proof as to why Jesus Christ must be the Prophet like unto Moses in my community section on my channel, and it also shows why it is dangerous to believe in two Israels side by side, rather than embrace (“replacement theology”, “supersessionism” or “fulfilment theology”). The two Israel’s will be at war, and the Esau class Israel will be guilty of murdering the Jacob class Israel.
Randy, please help me out. I’m still not following you. How is it that “if Hebrews 11:6 is true, then the time frames, dispensations, cannot possibly be true?” Dispensationalists have never said that people were saved differently in the time frames, only that God gave different commands at different times. For example, people before Moses were not commanded to follow the law of Moses, but they were all saved the same way that Abraham was, by believing and it being counted as righteousness. So I’m still not understanding what you mean by if Hebrews 11:6 is true then the time frames can’t be true…….?
How is it that some disciples of Christ who believe that God established Jesus as Christ the King also believe that God establishes people who are vehemently opposed to Jesus as Christ the King?
Glory be to God for teachers like mister Gregg.
I grew up as a pentecostal.
Later about 11 years of age I made an individual commitment to Christ. I began reading a lot of the Scofield Study Bible. For many,many years I adopted Mr Scofield's explanations and biblical footnotes as authoritative. It was not until about age 30 when I have a real I mean a Damascus road experience. Scales fell from my eyes and a supernatural understanding came to me. It contradicted almost 100% of the things I used to know especially by the Scofield dispensationalism. I was horrified. I was completely blown away. I mean this scriptural voice began to walk me through the scripture and proved exactly how those teachings were not only erroneous but dangerous.
I trembled like a leaf. I could not believe millions upon millions christians are so deceived. Scofield's teachings had given me such a Love and admiration for Israel to the point where I was wishing I had been born a Jew. However, when the Holy Spirit became my teacher it was revealed to me that a Jew holds no special privileges with God. That all favours with God are conferred freely upon all who believes God through faith in Jesus Christ. This revelation changed my life completely, completely. A revelation is not a scriptural insight or deduction one makes with his mind. A revelation is an understanding of the way God is working. Trust me when I say revelations are life-changing and the first thing that happens is it shows you how utterly and dangerously contrary man's views on any biblical issue are from the one God holds. God and man (meaning fleshly mind)are never,never in agreement no matter how biblical, religious or even righteous it seems.
Another thing that blew my mind(and I throw this in just for good measure) was when the Holy Spirit revealed to me the dispensational understanding of a SECRET RAPTURE is completely and utterly false. There is no secret rapture. I leave it at that. But I said these things only to confirm the point 100% of the teachings within evangelical circles are wrong. I know this sounds harsh and presumptuous but I have to say it. The first thing I did after Jesus opened my eye to the truth was to get rid of my study bible or bible with footnotes. I began to read my Bible and rely upon God for understanding.
First thing I noticed is that the new testament is extremely clear on every topic it teaches to the point where you can just read and understand. The commentators are the ones who have corrupted scriptural truths with their charts and chronological interpretations- this comes first then this follows etc, etc.
But I thank God for solid teachers of the word who remain humble and simple allowing God to do his work.
God bless you brother as you continue to rely upon his abundant grace. God blessings upon all the listeners and all who are faithful in Christ Jesus our Lord.
I'm grateful for what you wrote. Thank you. I'm curious what other teachers are you grateful for? I've found Steve Gregg and Chuck baldwin so far
I appreciate your receiving a love of the truth and your willingness to respond to the Spirit of Truth and be corrected to the text of Scripture but that is called "sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth" (2Thes 2:13, 1Pet 1:2). It _begins_ with humility and exclusively continues with abiding in the Word, lest ye become "barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2Pet 1:1-12) Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth.
...and yes the Holy Spirit guides us in our studies, no doubt, but I have sat with Mormons who equally echo your convictions that you have been given "revelation" as they attribute their supernatural "burning in the bosom" to convictions confirming _errors_ as well.
I caution you because of this comment you wrote:
"God and man (meaning fleshly mind)are never,never in agreement no matter how biblical, religious or even righteous it seems." That is a blatant *_gnostic_* lie.
God gave us the Scriptures:
"to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." (2Tim 3:15-17)
I appreciate your enthusiasm for the work of the Spirit of Truth in the lives and study of The Word that sanctifies the ENTIRE Body of Christ but be careful....
"the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets" (1 Cor 14:32)...
When apologetics begin with "the Holy Spirit revealed to me..." instead of "I saw this in Scripture"... you are already elevating yourself above that which is written.. so pipe down!
"that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another." (1Cor 4:7)
" For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)
*_Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the KNOWLEDGE of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the OBEDIENCE of Christ_*
And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled....For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, *_are not wise._*
But we will not boast of things without our measure, but according to the measure of the rule which God hath distributed to us". (2 Cor 10:3-6, 12-13)
AND THAT is *_THE WORD GOD..._*
Paul does teach of a secret rapture, but you say you got a supernatural revelation that there is no secret rapture. Sorry, but I'm leaning towards some guy you listened to convinced you to not believe the mysteries revealed to Paul. Scripture sure doesn't teach that. It must be from some other guy who also does not believe the Dispensation of Grace given to Paul for the Gentiles because Israel fell in unbelief.
@@bugsocsollie1694 I am begging you in the mercies of Jesus Christ our Lord to do one thing. Please, don't take my word for it. Go talk to Jesus because he is real and he is the TEACHER for he said, "call no man Rabbi (teacher)on earth". Ask him if his return is secret or if it it open for all to behold him giving rewards to the faithful who look for his return and damnation to those who are caught unawares and therefore unprepared.
I went through pretty much the same thing you did, it is liberating coming out from the dispensational false doctrine
Good work Steve.
This is a perfect understanding of the truth of God's word. How marvelous it is. Our God is not a racist!
Your debate with James White was amazing! I’ve never heard anyone respond to him so succinctly before. You did a great job!
Thanks to Steve, I read Romans with a better understanding.
this teaching is one of the best Ive ever heard, its the key to desrtoying dispensationalism. the bible does not teach a great revival amoung jews OR gentiles during the end times, and nothing is mentioned about a regathered nation of israel.
Good stuff Steve! God bless you!
I am a very new reborn Christian, less than a year. I latched on early to the pre mil rapture crowd, but it was extremely short lived as soon as I read my Bible and actually studied both views. The Bible is a complete story and pristine work of Jesus Christ. I can’t believe this is actually a debate. Jesus is the door to the father (Jn 10:7), enter via the narrow gate.
If the spirit teaches us all things why is there so much division in the church? Everyone seems to be a teacher and yet there is only one truth.
Remember there's evil spirits in this world trying to confuse God's Word so just pray & study for yourself ✝️🙏🤗
Very good lesson!
Praise the Lord
Oh lovely, God has ordained the hearing ears and the seeing eye. Stop fighting God. Be happy if you hear and see.
Huh?
And Rev. 2:9 and 3:9 are those Jews who are not this Faithful remnant metioned in Romans..
Thank you, I learn a lot from your lecture.
Remark:
The way you speak about 'going to heaven or hell' seems too easy to me. The subject of going to heaven or hell is too delicate and complicated for us humans to say something about or to judge about. The Lord deals with every person and makes His judgement.
Regarding the question of Esau’s salvation…doesn’t the writer to the Hebrews say that Esau was “unholy”? Heb. 12:16
I think all we can gather from Hebrews 12:16 is that when Esau sold his birthright he was a profane person. It doesn't say anything about who he became after that.
In Romans 9 Paul tells us which Israel will and which Israel will not be saved.
I disagree in part. Some things are obvious, not all Jews are saved but, just because most haven’t accepted Yeshua as HaMashiach, doesn’t mean they can’t or won’t be saved. This is like only seeing or taking only a small part of a work of art & ignoring the rest. You miss the big picture. Don’t forget, that as a result of the sins of Israel, God’s mercy is extended to the gentiles.
Did classical
Dispensationalism teach that there are 2 ways of salvation? One for the Jews and one for the gentiles?
yes, true scofield/darby dispensationalism teaches there are 2 peoples and that Jews ARE saved simply by being Jewish. they teach that the old covenant is a " UNCONDITIONAL, ETERNAL, IRREVOKABLE" covenant. however, ALL dispensationalists believe God loves and values all Jews above all non jews. all dispensationalists are heretics and preach false doctrine.
There's only one verse that could infer 2 unique ways of salvation for Jews and Gentiles.
Romans 3:29-31 KJV- Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision 👉by faith,👈 and uncircumcision👉 through faith.👈
31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
Jews= "through faith."
Gentiles=" by faith."
You would need to believe in Unconditional Election to ratify the "through" and "by" faith because this would mean "faith" is not originated with man, but is a Person, the Lord Jesus Christ.
This is not a dual covenant. One must be born again from above in this life as a new creature in Christ. Its a aspect of the faith OF Christ gifted to elect Jews and Gentiles, the true Israel of God.
God is the God of Jews AMD Gentiles WHO HAVE FAITH IN HIM. paul is not saying that God is literally the God of EVERY Jew and gentile.. I totally reject calvinism. God love and calls every human on earth, Jesus died for every human on earth. HOWEVER, we AQUIRE that salvation when we choose to have faith in christ.. I do not EARN my salvation when I have faith in christ I aquire salvation. Jesus alone paid the price for my salvation. calvinism DENIES the atonement of christ for most people. you cannot be a christian and deny the atonement of christ. now to the calvinists.....How do they KNOW Christ died for them?? @@ManassehJones
@jamesba-xd7xf Nobody mentioned Calvinism. There was only scriptures referenced. You need to stop following the doctrines of men and stay Sola Scriptura.
There's ONLY ONE salvific faith. Man cannot generate salvific faith. Faith IS "substance," not an imagination. ONLY Jesus Christ posesses salvific faith, and ONLY those whom God gifts His effectual grace with are imputed with the salvific faith OF Christ. The for "whom" the LORD did foreknow to be the Bride of Christ.
@jamesba-xd7xf The question you should be asking God is...."is my faith imaginary, or is it the faith of Jesus Christ, the substance of which is imputed as a gift from God by Gods effectual grace?"
Romans 5:17 KJVS - For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more 👉they which receive abundance of grace👈 and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ).
John 12:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, 👉it abideth alone:👈 but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.
I want to honor Steve for being the great teacher that he is...
*BUT I think he has got something significantly wrong in certain critical places in his interpretation here*
Romans 9 is very familiar territory for me (I was a Calvinist for 15 years - and a Presbyterian pastor for 9 of those years... To be clear, I am no longer a Calvinist - AND I know that Steve isn't either)
And - I fully acknowledge that my interpretation of Romans 9-11 could just be wrong - but here is my take on it at this point in my life...
At 68 years of age - only within the last few years have I come to see there is something very enigmatic going on within these three chapters.
There are underlying paradoxes and polarities that I think have to be recognized and faced in order to "get" what Paul is saying overall (you might say the "sum" of Paul's message and meaning here - remembering that "The sum of thy word is Truth")
I think Paul uses the word "Israel" in a somewhat obviously enigmatic way - he calls the disobedient and hardened Israel - as well as suggesting that the elect, obedient remnant are the "true" Israel of God.
But the full scope of God's promises are to "all" Israel - not just the remnant.
(for me) *THE* central and most critical verse - the "key", if you will, to unlocking Paul's meaning and intent is, "If the first fruits is holy, the lump is holy" (Romans 11:16)
The only parallel to this is Paul's enigmatic statement that if the unbelieving spouse is married to a believer - then the unbelieving spouse [and their children] are holy! (see 1 Corinthians 7:14-16)
Those who are cut off are NOT beyond hope -Why? God is able! (to graft them in again)
*God is able!*
While I am no longer a Calvinist - I do still retain something of their respect for God's sovereignty - and we are promised that in spite of the partial hardening that ALL Israel will be saved! And - in context - I cannot see that this means only "the remnant".
"Israel has experienced a hardening in part" (11:25) How could anyone fail to see that Paul is back to using the word "Israel" in its fullest sense - speaking of ALL Jews in this case? The the "sovereign" part:
“The deliverer will come from Zion;
he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.
27And this is f my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.”
This cannot(!) mean the obedient remnant!
The grand sweep of chapter 11 just seems to contradict what Steve is saying - he seems to not let chapter 11 inform his interpretation of chapter 9.
The consummation of Paul's message here is "mercy on all"! "For from him and through him and TO him are ALL things"
God uses the "elect" first fruits (Jew and Gentile) to bring salvation to "the whole lump" (the remainder of the harvest).
I am NOT a "dispensationalist" - but God's promises given to Israel (ALL Jews, even to those who are disobedient to the Gospel - Rom.9:4) are irrevocable (11:29)
They ARE "enemies" - YET "beloved of God"! (11:28) - I do not feel Steve is keeping this paradox in mind when he seems to say that only the remnant of Israel (at least when it comes to the Jews) are ultimately saved - and only they are (ultimately) the "true" Israel.
Finally - it is very significant to me that Paul only uses the Greek word for "lump" TWO times in the entirety of Romans:
11:16 and 9: 21. And what seems to be a final destiny of doom in Romans 9 (vessels of wrath) becomes a destiny of Mercy in Romans 11.
*"For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all."* (11:32)
Thanks for your patience - I hope this helps someone consider another perspective that (again) looks at Romans 9 *through* 11 as a whole...
Blessing in Christ!
wayne
Its not the Israel of today that Paul is talking about in Romans. It is the Israel that Paul knew. It was the House of Israel that split off of the House of Judah 1000 years before and which were divorced by God and dispersed 700 years before. They began being remarried under the New Covenant starting on the Day of Pentecost 33 AD. That Israel has in fact being remarried to the glory of God every since. They became the Christian nations of Europe and have taken the Gospel to the world. To the glory of God.
Steve, I sent you a draft of "Jacob and Esau Two Nations and the Inheritance" a while back without response. In this published work, I demonstrate how and why the two "nations" in Rebekah's whom were actually Israel and the Church, which is exactly why Paul quotes Malachi while explaining how Israel missed righteousness and Gentiles gained it by faith.
Jesus told the Jews their kingdom would be taken from them and given to a "nation" that would bear its fruit. Peter says the Church is not the holy "nation" of God. Paul quotes Deut 32 in Romans 10, stating that Israel would be made angry and jealous by a foolish "nation". This happens in acts 13 and Jesus reiterated in in parable form in the prodigal on story. Of course, the elder brother is Israel and became angry and jealous at the "salvation" of his younger brother.
You, of all people, will understand this book and appreciate it, I'm sure.
Blessings
Hello, Steve! Hey, do you remember a guy you interupted, and HUNG
UP on, back several years ago, when correcting you on the trinity?
Yeh------Probably NOT! Well, anyway, I'm that guy, and I would like
the opportunity to DEFEND myself without being Shut down before
I can Finish.
GOD bless.
I am not Steve. May name is Jason. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but just guessing from your comment, you were probably belligerent and wouldn't let him answer without interruption. In my experience, that's the type of callers he has had to mute in order to answer. They pretend like it's their show and they're the ones paying for it. But if you can in again and are polite, and he has the the time in the program, he would be willing to go back and forth with you.
The terms Jew and Israel are not synomois. Resd the history.
Most miss that the Israel Paul is referring to in Romans 9-11 is the House of Israel that was divorced in the 700s BC and sent into captivity. This is who Hosea was giving his prophecies to in his book back then. Under Torah Law, a man was not allowed to remarry the one he had divorced. This produced a question that people in Paul's day had, namely how could these former Israelites be in covenant with God again once they had been divorced. Paul gives us the answer in Romans--the Groom would have to come and die and be resurrected so He could remarry them under a New Covenant.
In Romans 2-3 Paul is addressing Jews and the House of Judah. In Romans 9-11 Paul is clearly addressing the House of Israel. We know this because he only uses the word Jew once but always uses Israel instead. In Romans 2-3 he never uses the word Israel but only Jew. Also, in Romans 9-11 he quotes from Hosea 1, which was addressed not to Jews but to the House of Israel.
I think Paul is referring to Israel as the gathered together of both Judha and Israel: all 12 tribes. Romans 11: I also am an Israelite...of the tribe of Benjamin. Wouldn't that be a Jew if still divided?
Yes, but do you understand the meaning behind God’s rejection of the older brother siblings of the younger brothers whom God chose to be His central figures, throughout His Providence?
When we look at the process of the Fall of Man, we see some kind of illicit relationship took place between the chaperone angel depicted figuratively as a talking serpent and Eve. Then a premature relationship between Eve and Adam developed, which moreover was not initiated by God. The interaction between the angel and Eve was totally unprincipled whereas the relationship between Adam and Eve was premature. Adam and Eve eventually were to experience sex face to face.
This process of the Fall of Man was a violation of the order of creation. Adam who was to perfect his individuality by not eating the fruit of the figurative Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil which represented the sexual desire of Adam and Eve, until God lifted this temporary injunction, was to thereby become a true lord or god with a lower case g, fulfilling God’s prerequisite for the complex male-female relationship occurring on the family level through his individual perfection which was gained through adherence to God’s instruction: “Do not eat, do not touch” which was to only be lifted by God.
Only God was to initiate and preside over the marriage union of His children. God wanted Adam to become His second self. Then God would experience the corporeal universe including Adam’s beloved children and grandchildren as His own. God modulating perfectly with Adam would have experienced Adam’s offspring through Adam’s senses substantially as His own. Then in a very real way, Eve would have become the wife of God Who was one with Adam. The conceptual desire of God for sonship, family, lineage and good company would have then been fulfilled substantially if Adam and Eve would have waited to start their family life through God’s initiation. Satan who is the fallen chaperone angel was to remain as a successful servant who was fundamentally necessary for Adam and Eve’s perfection. In other words, the violation of the order of creation took place when Adam who was to perfect himself as a true lord became a servant, and the angelic servant became a lord,
Therefore God allowed the first born son, who was originally supposed to receive the successful birthright of true parents to represent the unprincipled relationship between Eve and the angel and God allowed the second son to represent the relationship between Eve and Adam as a formula to subjugate Satan. This is why God places the first born in the position that does not necessarily result in the lineage of the Messiah. If the elder brother does not act out of fallen nature and rather unites with the younger brother, perhaps God can use his lineage in case the younger brother fails. Satan undermined Noah’s efforts and God’s desire to indemnify the shame involving the Fall of Man, claiming the second born Ham through his shame of his great father who simply fell asleep naked, so too it seems God took Abraham who was fist born, who Satan was more attached.
The elder brother who was initially blessed by God to receive the parents first blessing had to remove the fallen nature not through perfected parents but rather through his younger brother.
This is the formula God used against Satan to cleanse the lineage and rightfully give birth to Jesus, who exactly like Adam was not a product of sinful ancestors. This is actually why Jesus is the Messiah. Jesus’ authority has to do with how he was born sinless more than any other theological claims.
God hated the totally unprincipled relationship between His daughter and an angel. God divided good and evil based on the motivation and process of the Fall of Man.
The Fall of Man can be explained as:
1. The failure to take God’s viewpoint (in loving others) the angel did not love Adam and Eve; rather he became envious of their knowledge, position, property, affection, though these qualities were not yet affirmed (developed) in Adam and Eve. Failure to take God’s viewpoint is the sin of falsehood, disbelief and rebellion.
2. Leaving proper position. Sin of adultery
3. Reversal of dominion. This represents the sin of murder
4. Multiplication of Evil, representing theft.
The difference between Adam and Jesus is that Jesus did not throw away his mission. Jesus overcame what caused Adam to forfeit his position as lord of creation.
It is very difficult for the elder brother to receive guidance and instruction from the younger sibling operating in a parental stead and we should understand that the younger brother was most likely not aware of the high road he should take for his brother’s sake, which could easily then be perceived as arrogance due to the elder brother’s aspects of fallen nature like for example: insecurity. Nevertheless, the elder brother was required to accept God’s reverse order of restoration. Conversely the younger brother, ultimately represented by the Messiah-Jesus, had to be prepared to wrest the elder brother from Satan’s material Kmart even if it took torture and martyrdom.
I stopped reading at two paragraphs because you were just writing a story you made up or repeating a story someone else made up and are trying to interject it into the biblical account.
At 52 minutes: "God has always chosen, for special purposes, a smaller group within the larger race." ...uhh, isn't that what the Calvinist believes? 😂😅
We're you not listening at all? If you didn't pay attention to the whole lecture but just backed up 5 seconds, you'd know Steve was talking about God choosing a smaller group for an earthly role, not for salvation.
@@SteveGreggVideos do you think I started at 52 minutes? I am aware of the context. I was comparing the thoughts, and how easy it is for Steve to believe in God's sovereign choice in earthly matters but not in soteriological matters. It was meant to be ironic, but I suppose I missed the mark, or my audience.
There's a distinct difference between a smaller group within a larger race being chosen for a purpose, that group being the faithful remnant chosen to bless the world, than a smaller group within a larger race being chosen unto salvation. Calvinists believe the smaller group being chosen has to do with people chosen unto salvation but that's not what the text says or what Steve taught. The smaller group being chosen is the faithful remnant (saved people) being chosen to bless the world.
God dealt with nations, as Israel was such. That all ended when he left them desolate,, MATT 23:38. he died for individuals. I received him and upon doing I am an heir of all that is promised to his children. We give account of ourselves and no one can speak for us... as individuals having nothing to do with race or nationality we stand before him as naked and unmarked by anything but the blood. I wear a vesture dipped in blood, and my hope is to one day carry the two edged sword and end the wicked.
God said, Jacob I have loved... Essau I have hated! God knew who would obey Him because of the spirit God placed (election) in Jacob. Essau was of his father the devil (spiritually). We are either like Jacob or Essau.....
We read of Jacob disobeying God a lot! What evil did Esau do? Where do we read he was of the devil?
Elected to what? It's not a soteriological statement.
" Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but He sent me.
Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
[speaking to "JACOB". Jesus continues----->] *_Ye are of your father the devil_* and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not." (John 8:4-45)
"God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
He that believes on him is not condemned: but he that believes not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
For every one that does evil hates the light, neither comes to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
But he that does truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." (John 3:17-21)
Jacob was chosen for his descendants to be the channel of the world's redeemer as Rom 9: 5 says, "of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came." Esau was not selected for that purpose, nor was he hated of God for that reason. Esau's descendants were judged per Malachi 1:2 when the verb "hate" is used. Literal hate? God, the perfect example, commands Israel to "not abhor an Edomite; for he is thy brother." Idiomatic hate, as per the Lord's words in Luke 14:26. You're left to ponder.
Try not to grab one supposed proof text as the paramount revelation on a topic settling everything about it without considering the immediate context and how the vocabulary appears in the rest of the Bible. Some do this defining the human heart as "deceitful above all things, desperately wicked" because a verse in Jer 17 says so, ignoring the fact the word occurs 830 times in KJV. Example 1: The lawless Gentiles in Rom 2:14 who, by nature, obey the law at times. Consider the state of their heart at that time. Example 2: Abimelech answers back to God, asserting the integrity of his heart, and God concurs that Abimelech did not sin owing to the integrity of his heart. At this time Abraham's heart might have been lacking integrity as he lies about Sara and is willing to be a cornuto. Abraham also overestimated the depravity of Gerar in Gen 20:11 "I thought, Surely the fear of God is not in this place." Try not to be one of the ideologues that takes a Biblical concept, like depravity, and exaggerates it beyond what Scripture explicitly reveals.