Genesis Lesson 9 - Brothers
What is the significance to God referring to Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? Is He not the God of all humans?
As the God of Abraham, He declares that He is the One who receives the worship of the faith-filled. Abraham had one great thing going for him, he had faith. Out of all the tribes of the earth, Abraham was taken out of them all and claimed as the father of the faith. Like the disciples of Jesus’ day and the disciples of our day, Abraham was invited to leave everything and go to a place he did not know of. He knew that the encounter he had with God was so real that he could stake his life on it. His faith passed to his son.
As the God of Isaac, He declares Himself to be the God of revival. Isaac did two great things, and is overlooked quite often. First, he was willing to be sacrificed as a young man (I think was 33, but the evidence in Genesis allows for him to be between 30 and 37 years old). His father, Abraham, was 100 years older than he was. If for any moment Isaac had a change of mind and didn’t want to trust his father’s encounter with God, who Abraham felt could raise him from the dead, Isaac could have easily overpowered his father. But Isaac, in true Messianic fashion, willingly carried the wood to the hill of the Lord – Moriah was likely to later be named “Golgotha”. Then, after the Lamb was provided, Isaac grew up and in his later years was said to have “re-dug the wells of his father” – Isaac was a revivalist. He took what his father had done and brought it back. In God’s identifying with Isaac, He is saying that He is the God that is worthy of life-endangering faith and the God of revival of the ancient ways. On to Jacob.
As the God of Jacob, He declares Himself the God who will get down and dirty with man and the God who alters men’s lives, giving them a new name. Jacob was a stubborn bloke. He lusted for the blessings. He would get blessed shrewdly or by force, but one way or another, he was going to be blessed. God will wrestle with us, not because we can beat Him, but because He loves to be with His people. When Jesus called His disciples, Mark wrote that He called them “so that they could be with Him.” Fellowship, even the uncomfortable kind, is what is on His heart. But He doesn’t ever come in contact with us and not change us. It isn’t because He is trying to change us necessarily, but in His Presence we cannot help but be changed. When we come out of an encounter or a season in His Presence, we come out the other end with a new identity, rather a new understanding of our eternal identity in Him. We, then, become who we are.
Beyond the individual connections, He shows that He can unite generations. This is one of the centerpieces of His purposes in the earth before His Return – the restoration of the generations. Jesus, referring back to the prophet Malachi’s word concerning the mission of Elijah, that is John the Baptist and the final generation, says that the turning of the hearts of the sons to the fathers and the fathers to the sons is “all things” in Matthew chapter seventeen. If just two generations can unite, He can do great things, but He unified three generations in the faith that He is the God of the resurrection.
2. What is a birth right? What value did Esau place on his birthright? How did Jacob obtain it?
The birthright was the inheritance. His father was rich, and the 'family farm' went to the first born son
Esau was only interested in the temporal aspects of life, living and hunting for the day, for a bowl of soup. He had no desire to plan for the long term which included birthright, the first born privilege of inheriting his father's possessions. It appeared as if he took the entire privilege for granted. Jacob had an intrinsic desire to search for things beyond the temporal, for something eternal, like that which the privilege of birthright provided in the long term. Jacob valued something far deeper and more valuable than the temporal things Esau saught. And that is when God took notice of this desire in Jacob's heart. Although Jacob was not on his best behavior throughout most of his life, this fire for the things of God was what opened the door for Jacob, not Esau, to receive his father's blessing. This blessing turned out to be far greater than Jacob ever imagined
3. How did Jacob obtain Abraham’s blessing?
God chose Jacob, the second-born of Isaac's twins, to receive the birthright inheritance that is usually reserved for the firstborn. This bestowed on him the right to become the family's patriarch upon Isaac's death (Genesis 25:29-34). The birthright blessing made Jacob the direct heir of Abraham and the recipient of the divine commitments to Abraham and his posterity.At the time Jacob received the blessing he still had not committed himself to live by faith in God. Though God had designated Jacob as heir of Abraham's blessing shortly before his birth (verse 23), Jacob and his mother were both weak in faith and resorted to deceit to obtain the blessing from Isaac (Genesis 27). This earned Jacob the hatred of his brother. Esau seethed with anger and set out to kill him (verse 41). Their mother heard about Esau's plans, so she asked Isaac to send Jacob to stay with relatives far away so he would be safe (verses 42-46).So Isaac and Rebekah sent Jacob back to Rebekah's family in northern Mesopotamia. Apparently the only reason they mentioned to their large household was that they wanted Jacob to find a wife from among Rebekah's relatives. This was true, but Rebekah was also trying to prevent Esau from killing Jacob.Before sending Jacob away, however, Isaac summoned his overly ambitious and crafty son and blessed him again. Isaac apparently forgave his son's previous deceptive behavior and this time willingly repeated his original blessing. By this time Isaac had probably remembered and acknowledged that God had designated Jacob, even before his birth, as the heir.Then Isaac rehearsed some of the key covenant promises that God had made to him and Abraham (Genesis 28:1-5). In doing so Isaac openly announced to the family that Jacob was indeed inheriting the prime responsibility for the family's everlasting relationship with God (Genesis 17:19).God was making sure no one forgot His promises to Abraham. He was formally passing them from one generation to the next.Isaac passed on the key covenant promises to Jacob: 'May God Almighty bless you and make you fruitful and numerous, that you may be a company of peoples. May he give to you the blessing of Abraham, to you and to your offspring with you, so that you may take possession of the land where you now live as an alien-land that God gave to Abraham' (Genesis 28:3-4, NRSV).As Jacob hurriedly left home, he possessed both the birthright promise and a special blessing. But his life had suddenly turned upside down. What did it all mean? Would his grandfather's and father's God really be there for him too?Jacob must have thought about the stories he had heard while growing up about his family's encounters with this awesome, divine being. Would that same great God honor what he had worked so deceitfully to obtain, even though God had promised it to him before he was born?It was at this point in his life that God personally revealed Himself to Jacob. '(Jacob) came to a certain place and stayed there for the night, because the sun had set. Taking one of the stones of the place, he put it under his head and lay down in that place. And he dreamed that there was a ladder set up on the earth, the top of it reaching to heaven; and the angels of God were ascending and descending on it.'And the LORD stood beside him and said, 'I am the LORD, the God of Abraham your father and the God of Isaac; the land on which you lie I will give to you and to your offspring; and your offspring shall be like the dust of the earth, and you shall spread abroad to the west and to the east and to the north and to the south; and all the families of the earth shall be blessed in you and in your offspring. Know that I am with you and will keep you wherever you go, and will bring you back to this land; for I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.''Then Jacob woke from his sleep and said, 'Surely the LORD is in this place-and I did not know it!' And he was afraid and said, 'How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.' So Jacob rose early in the morning, and he took the stone that he had put under his head and set it up for a pillar and poured oil on the top of it. He called that place Bethel ...' (Genesis 28:11-19, NRSV). Jacob now knew for certain that he was the officially confirmed heir of the promises made to Abraham
4. Explain the statement, “Jacob I loved and Esau I hated”. (Rom 9:13 & Mal 1:2,3)
The Bible indicates that God hates Esau and the descendants of Esau for a long period of time. But even if he still hates the descendants of Esau today it is hard to be sure who are the true descendants of Esau today. You can't assume that his descendants make up all the nations apart from Israel. There were many other people alive at the time of Esau that would have had descendants, which formed non-Israeli nations.
Rom. 9:13 'As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.' Mal 1:2 I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? [Was] not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob, Mal 1:3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. In Mal 1:4 God indicates that he hates the decendense of Esau for many or all generations. It should be noted that the word ever does not always mean eternal. It can also mean an age or a long period of time. Mal 1:4 Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished, but we will return and build the desolate places; thus saith the LORD of hosts, They shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, The people against whom the LORD hath indignation for ever.
5. Read Romans chapter 9. Can a person be saved by his birth (nationality)? Can a person be saved by his own effort (good works)? Can a person be saved by the work of another?
No By birth we are not saved and neither by our own efforts nor saved by the work of another.
When people come to know Christ as their Savior, they are brought into a relationship with God that guarantees their salvation as eternally secure. Numerous passages of Scripture declare this fact. (a) Romans 8:30 declares, 'And those He predestined, He also called; those He called, He also justified; those He justified, He also glorified.' This verse tells us that from the moment God chooses us, it is as if we are glorified in His presence in heaven. There is nothing that can prevent a believer from one day being glorified because God has already purposed it in heaven. Once a person is justified, his salvation is guaranteed - he is as secure as if he is already glorified in heaven.(b) Paul asks two crucial questions in Romans 8:33-34 'Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died more than that, who was raised to life - is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.' Who will bring a charge against God's elect? No one will, because Christ is our advocate. Who will condemn us? No one will, because Christ, the One who died for us, is the one who condemns. We have both the advocate and judge as our Savior.(c) Believers are born again (regenerated) when they believe (John 3:3; Titus 3:5). For a Christian to lose his salvation, he would have to be un-regenerated. The Bible gives no evidence that the new birth can be taken away. (d) The Holy Spirit indwells all believers (John 14:17; Romans 8:9) and baptizes all believers into the Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13). For a believer to become unsaved, he would have to be 'un-indwelt' and detached from the Body of Christ.(e) John 3:15 states that whoever believes in Jesus Christ will 'have eternal life.' If you believe in Christ today and have eternal life, but lose it tomorrow, then it was never 'eternal' at all. Hence if you lose your salvation, the promises of eternal life in the Bible would be in error. (f) For the most conclusive argument, I think Scripture says it best itself, 'For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord' (Romans 8:38-39). Remember the same God who saved you is the same God who will keep you. Once we are saved we are always saved. Our salvation is most definitely eternally secure!
Eg: These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.
(1 Jn. 5:13 NASB)
4 For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that has overcome the world--our faith. 5 Who is the one who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?
(1 Jn. 5:4-5 NASB)
13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation--having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God's own possession, to the praise of His glory. (Ephesians 1:13-14 NASB)
6. In Romans chapter 9 is Paul speaking of physical or spiritual Israel when he speaks that all will be saved? If Paul believed that all of physical Israel be saved, why would he be willing to give up his own salvation if God would save them?
I begin at the ends of Romans 8 where Paul speaks of the unchanging love of God in Christ Jesus, a love that will keep believers with Christ until the end. The problem arises, however, in the next chapter. Paul presents the tension in 9:1-5, the question being, God’s word to Israel. How is God’s unchanging love evinced with them? Has God not kept His promise? or as Paul puts it, “Has the word of God failed?” In verse 6 Paul answers that the word of God has not failed. Why is it that it has not failed?For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring… it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. (9:6-8)Paul’s response to the tension of God’s supposed rejection of Israel is not that God will keep His promise to every single physical Israelite, but that not all Israel is, in fact, Israel. The children of Abraham were children according to God’s election and promise, not according to the flesh. Thus in verses 12-13, Paul speaks of God’s love for Jacob and hatred for Esau. This was before they were born, so that God’s sovereign and gracious election would be clearly demonstrated.The rest of chapter 9 certainly speaks of God’s election, but to what purpose? To show that God’s election of the remnant is according to His gracious will rather than according to flesh or works. In addition to the fact that only an elected remnant from among the Jews are saved, in verse 30 Paul now includes the Gentiles:What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone… (9:30-33)So it is made clear, that God’s word has not failed. It has not failed, not because God will save every physical Israelite, but because not all Israel are Israel. From the beginning true Israel was never based merely on ethnic origin, but on faith. Yes, God chose a physical people. God chose Israel and Paul even states clearly that:They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship and the promises. To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen. (9:4-5)But in the same vein, Paul is able to say, very explicitly, that “not all who are descended from Israel belong… not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring…” What are we to make of this? On the one hand he clearly acknowledge their physical identity and even has great anguish for them, yet in the following verses he clearly states that despite their being Abraham’s offspring they are not all his children.In chapter 10 Paul, having spoken of the Gentiles inheriting what the Israelites did not, goes back to his desire for his physical brothers. In 10:1-4, however, there seems to be no indication or promise that these physical Israelites will be saved. Why? Because they seek righteousness not by faith, but by their own works. “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes” (10:4). They are not counted as children of God because they are not descendants of Abraham according to the seed who is Christ (Gal. 3:16). The rest of the chapter speaks of righteousness based on faith. That all who believe in the Lord and call upon His name will be saved. This “salvation” referred to in this passage is what physical Israel, those who were not of the remnant, are missing out on, and what the Gentiles, by faith, are entering into. This gospel message must go out to all the Gentiles and be preached, says Paul. But again, he returns to Israel. While the rest of the Gentiles hear and believe, what of physical Israel? “All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.” (10:21) They still are not part of the remnant!In Romans 11, Paul asks a slightly different question. In chapter 9 he asks whether God’s word has failed, the answer is an emphatic no, God has not failed because God’s promise to Israel stands and the Gentiles are receiving the promise of Abraham, they are all being saved by faith. Though not all physical Israel are inheriting this salvation, this is no problem for Paul since God’s promise was to Abraham’s children, who are children not by flesh, but by faith. Here, then, he asks whether God has rejected His people. Again, the answer is in the negative, “By no means!” Paul responds that he is himself “an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin.” He is clearly referring to his physical lineage! No, God has not rejected Israel, and Israel can still inherit this salvation (that the non-remnant are currently not inheriting) by faith! Paul himself is evidence that God is still allowing physical Israel to be part of this remnant, this seed of Abraham, the true children of promise. And rather than point to future fulfillment as some would have it, Paul rather points again to this idea of a remnant. He cites 1 Kings 19:10, stating that even in the days of Elijah God did not save all of physical Israel, but extended His promise to the remnant. And the rest he hardened by His own sovereign will. Why did he harden the rest? So that he might demonstrate his mercy. Because through the failure of the Israelites salvation has come to the Gentiles. How so? Well, up until Christ’s incarnation true religion was in Israel only. To them (as mentioned earlier) was given the Law and the prophets and the promise, etc. Yet, again and again they proved to be failures, constantly turning away from God and rejecting His prophets. What was the result of this? God needed to send His Son who would write the Laws on their hearts rather than give it to them merely externally. Thus, was Christ sent, and with Christ came the fulfillment of the Law, what the Israelites failed to do, Christ did. His “exodus” from Egypt, His baptism, His temptation in the wilderness, all these incidents point to a fulfillment of what Israel failed to do. Christ perfectly obeyed the Law and took on our sins. He faced the wrath of God and to us, by faith, is given His imputed righteousness. All this Christ did, because the Israelites did not and because we, as sinful humans under the Law, could not.Finally, perhaps, the most important passage in all of this, the conclusion of chapter 11. In verses 25-27 there is an indication of a partial hardening that has taken place among Israel. This is evident because so many of them are not only rejecting the gospel, but persecuting the Church of Christ. This will be “until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.” This does not go against, but rather supports the idea of the remnant, and depicts the pattern of God in relation to Israel throughout redemptive history. This is the reason why some began to wonder in the beginning of chapters 9 and 10 whether God’s word had failed, and whether God rejected Israel. And this hardening of the Jews, evident especially throughout Christ’s life, death and resurrection, and in the early Church, will remain until that fullness comes in. And in this way, that is, in physical Israel being partially hardened until all the Gentiles come in, will “all Israel be saved.” In verse 26 Paul gives the definite answer to both questions found in chapters 9 and 10. All Israel will be saved, but one must recognize that “all Israel” are not all Israel according to the flesh, but according to faith. God has not rejected Israel, but has sought to save them in this manner, so that the remnant Israel will join with the Gentiles who are the seed of Abraham by faith in Christ, and so “all Israel (the remnant) will be saved” and God’s word will be shown true.Verses 28-32 seem to go back to the fact that God has not rejected Israel. Paul is clearly speaking of Physical Israel in verse 28, “As regards the gospel, they are enemies of God for your sake. But as regards election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” What does this mean? That God will not forsake all of Israel, remember the hardening is partial. This is indicative of God’s plan to save all whom He has elected, all who have now been “consigned to disobedience in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy.” The reference to “all” is, contextually speaking, not all without exception. For not all people everywhere who are consigned to disobedience are shown a saving mercy. Rather, it is in regards to all the elect. It is all without distinction not all without exception. The problem enters when Paul’s statement that God has not rejected Israel is taken to mean that He has accepted all of them. What Paul seems to mean is that God has not rejected Israel entirely, but in accordance with Old Testament history, a remnant still remains, and the remnant will be saved. Thus a partial hardening.So God’s word has not failed, His promise stands and is fulfilled in the remnant, those who are, in Christ, the seed of Abraham. God has not rejected Israel. Rather, God has expanded the remnant to still include Israelites (such as Paul) as well as Gentiles. And we are now, by faith in Christ, Abraham’s seed. The true people of God does not consist of a Church that has replaced physical Israel since it never was physical Israel to begin with, but in a Church that has expanded on the remnant which includes both Jews and Gentiles. So Paul continues to work to preach salvation to the Gentiles, as well as to incite jealousy in his fellow Jews that they may likewise inherit the kingdom. What’s the whole point of Romans 9-11? As mentioned in the earlier post, through such an understanding of the passage we are able to discern the basis for Paul’s theology of history and missions.So how does this all come together? God’s promise finds its fulfillment in the remnant. Thus the physical people of Israel will not all see the kingdom of heaven, nor is there any reason to expect a future kingdom for physical Israel. Since now in Christ “there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all bestowing his riches on all who call on Him” (10:12). The people of God are one. In this sense there is continuity with the Old Testament. God’s remnant within physical Israel has expanded to include Gentiles. These people consist of Christ’s body, and these are the promised “seed of Abraham.” God’s promises to Israel in the Old Testament find fulfillment in Christ and are applied to believers.
7. List the 12 sons of Jacob in the order of the birth, telling the relationships of their mothers to Jacob.
The order of Jacob's children (listed by mother)LEAH (Jacob's first wife)1. Reuben (Born first, he inherited the family birthright, but later lost it)2. Simeon3. Levi4. Judah5. Issachar6. Zebulun7. DinahRACHEL (Jacob's second wife, his favorite)1. Joseph, (Jacob gave him the family birthright after he saved the family)1. Manasseh2. Ephraim (Inherited the family birthright following Jacob's blessing)2. Benjamine BILHAH (Rachel's slave girl)1. Dan,2. Naphtali ZILPAH (Leah's slave girl)1. Gad2. Asher
Jacob (Israel) fell in love with Rachel and wanted to marry her, but her father Laban tricked Jacob into marrying his older daughter, Leah, first.Later Jacob was able to marry his first choice (Rachel). She was always his favorite (the woman he loved); and her son Joseph was Jacob's favorite son. Jealous of this, his other brothers (the other tribes of Israel as it were) sold Joseph into slavery. In slavery, Joseph was taken to Egypt and later became the overseer of all the grain in Pharaoh's storehouse. A famine threatened to wipe out the family of Jacob and they went to Egypt seeking food. There they found Joseph. He forgave his brothers and was reunited with his birth family.The order of Jacob's children and grandchildren (listed by date of birth)01. Reuben (Born first, he inherited the family birthright, but later lost it to Joseph)02. Simeon03. Levi04. Judah05. Dan06. Naphtali07. Gad08. Asher09. Issachar10. Zebulun11. Joseph12. Benjamine13. Dinah (Girls were not eligible for tribal status)14. Manasseh15. Ephraim (The birthright passed to him from Joseph through Israel's blessing)Final order of The Twelve Tribes of Israel (by birthdate)01. Reuben 02. Simeon03. Judah04. Dan05. Naphtali06. Gad07. Asher08. Issachar09. Zebulun10. Benjamine11. Manasseh12. EphraimNon-land-owning Tribes00. Levi (This tribe elevated to form the Priesthood of the country)00. Joseph (Elevated to 'Patriarch' status by Jacob (Israel).The Four Patriarchs01. Abraham02. Isaac03. Jacob (Israel)04. Joseph Because he saved the family, Jacob took the birthright from Simeon (who had sold Joseph into slavery) and gave it to Joseph. Jacob made Joseph a patriarch like himself by adopting Joseph's two sons giving them equal status with his own sons, i.e., adding them to the 12 tribes of Israel.Each of these 12 sons was the eponym of a tribe of Isrealites. Though to be more accurate, Joseph was the ancestor of 2 tribes, of which his sons were the eponyms.Just before he died, Jacob decreed Joseph's younger son, Ephraim to be greater than his older brother Manasseh. When Joseph tried to tell Jacob (Israel now) that he was giving the greater blessing to the youngest, Israel told him,'I know, my son, I know. He (Manasseh) too shall become a people; he too shall be great. Yet his younger brother (Ephraim) shall be greater than he, and his descendants shall become a multitude of nations.' (Genesis 48:19-20).In this way the lineage of Israel passed down from Joseph through Ephraim. It did not go to Judah.After blessing Ephraim and Manasseh, Israel called his other sons in and told them what lay in store for them in the future. To Judah part of what he said was this:'The sceptre shall not pass from Judah nor the mace from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs, to whom the peoples shall render obedience.' (Genesis 49:10).There are important allegories in this sequence. We have listed them all in our previous writings, especially Joseph's symbolic relationship with Christ and divine food.Another important allegory relates to Ephraim and Manasseh. They stand for the second generation of the tribes of Israel: i.e., what they evolved to under Christ. These two represent the two houses of Israel. The younger (Ephraim) represents the Christians and Manasseh, the older of the two, represents the Jews. The birthright passed to the Christians through Ephraim by spiritual symbolism. They obeyed God and accepted His King. The result was an enormous quantity of Christian nations.This allegory (Ephraim & Manasseh) talks to us in today's terms. We do not see twelve tribes nowadays because most are invisible. But we do see an Israel divided into two houses (Christians and Jews).Judah became the base of power as far as the tribes of Israel were concerned (the sceptre was put in the hands of Judah and the mace between his feet). It was a power made visible in Solomon's and Herod's temples. But, as the prophecy said, that power belonged to another; the Messiah.Jesus, of course, was born into the tribe of Judah just as Israel's blessing predicted. The prophecy shows that the sceptre belonged to Him. Jesus is King of all mankind. As predicted, His people have become a multitude of nations.With the physical rebuilding of Jerusalem as the signal to return, both houses of Israel are being called back to the Holy Land in a great ingathering that will encompass (in symbolism) all the tribes of Israel.So it is not just the Jews who are being called back to Jerusalem. It is all the tribes of Israel. This is the ingathering that will bring all Christians and all Jews to the Holy Land for the Second Appearance of Jesus Christ. All the nations will gather there as well because it is the time of the Judgement.Many people say that the Jews are God's favorites, but nowhere in the Bible is this stated. In fact, just the opposite. Almost every book in scripture from the Torah to the Book of Revelation testifies that God has no favorites.Jesus said it is behavior that determines the people of God.
8. When was Jacob’s name changed to Israel and what was the significance of this event?It is written, AND HE (Jacob) ROSE UP THAT NIGHT, AND TOOK HIS TWO WIVES, AND HIS TWO WOMENSERVANTS, AND HIS ELEVEN SONS, AND PASSED OVER THE FORD JABBOK. AND HE TOOK THEM, AND SENT THEM OVER THE BROOK, AND SENT OVER THAT HE HAD. AND JACOB WAS LEFT ALONE; AND THERE WRESTLED A MAN WITH HIM UNTIL THE BREAKING OF THE DAY. AND WHEN HE SAW THAT HE PREVAILED NOT AGAINST HIM, HE TOUCHED THE HOLLOW OF HIS THIGH; AND THE HOLLOW OF JACOB'S THIGH WAS OUT OF JOINT, AS HE WRESTLED WITH HIM. AND HE SAID, LET ME GO, FOR THE DAY BREAKETH. AND HE SAID, I WILL NOT LET THEE GO, EXCEPT THOU BLESS ME. AND HE SAID UNTO HIM, WHAT IS THY NAME? AND HE SAID, JACOB. Jacob confessed his name, which means 'supplanter' or 'deceiver.' We may say, he admitted he was a sinner. After Jacob confessed his name, then the man said...THY NAME SHALL BE CALLED NO MORE JACOB, BUT ISRAEL: FOR AS A PRINCE HAST THOU POWER WITH GOD AND WITH MEN, AND HAST PREVAILED. Jacob’s name was changed from 'deceiver' to 'Israel,' which means, 'God rules; or strives with God; or a prince of God; or overcomes and prevails; or God’s fighter.' AND JACOB ASKED HIM, AND SAID, TELL ME, I PRAY THEE, THY NAME. AND HE SAID, WHEREFORE IS IT THAT THOU DOST ASK AFTER MY NAME? AND HE BLESSED HIM THERE. AND JACOB CALLED THE NAME OF THE PLACE PENIEL: FOR I HAVE SEEN GOD FACE TO FACE, AND MY LIFE IS PRESERVED. AND AS HE PASSED OVER PENUEL THE SUN ROSE UPON HIM, AND HE HALTED UPON HIS THIGH. THEREFORE THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL EAT NOT OF THE SINEW WHICH SHRANK, WHICH IS UPON THE HOLLOW OF THE THIGH, UNTIL THIS DAY: BECAUSE HE TOUCHED THE HOLLOW OF JACOB'S THIGH IN THE SINEW THAT SHRANK-Gen 32:22-32. AND GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN, WHEN HE CAME OUT OF PADAN-ARAM, AND BLESSED HIM. AND GOD SAID UNTO HIM, THY NAME IS JACOB: THY NAME SHALL NOT BE CALLED ANY MORE JACOB, BUT ISRAEL SHALL BE THY NAME: AND HE CALLED HIS NAME ISRAEL. AND GOD SAID UNTO HIM, I AM GOD ALMIGHTY: BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY; A NATION AND A COMPANY OF NATIONS SHALL BE OF THEE, AND KINGS SHALL COME OUT OF THY LOINS; AND THE LAND WHICH I GAVE ABRAHAM AND ISAAC, TO THEE I WILL GIVE IT, AND TO THY SEED AFTER THEE WILL I GIVE THE LAND-Gen 35:9-12.
9. Investigate the words Hebrew and Jew using the Blue Letter Bible or other
resources. Where did these names come from and what do they mean in relationship to Israel?
The first time the word 'Hebrew' is used in the Bible is in Gen 14:13. Just as Abraham is first called a 'Hebrew' in Gen 14:13, so also the disciples first called Christians in Acts 11:26.
The etymological origin of 'Hebrew' is uncertain. The most likely origin of word 'ibri' [Hebrew] is derived from 'br' which means 'to cross over a boundary'. (ISBE, revised, Hebrew) Included in this thought is that a 'Hebrew' would be one 'who crossed over' or one who went from place to place, a nomad, a wanderer, an alien. This designation that would fit some aspects of patriarchal behavior. If this is correct, then a Hebrew is one who travels into another land as a nomad and resides as an alien. It also means that the term has origins outside of Palestine and is a common expression that was etymologically modified from a nomad to specific ethnic group (Jews) whose origin was nomadic through Abram.
The likely fact that the word Hebrew means 'sojourner' underscores the importance of the land promise. Further, while possessing the land, they would always be reminded by the root meaning of their name, 'Hebrew' that the land was a gift given to their forefathers who, for 500 years, were literally 'Hebrews' in the 'alien' sense of the word. This means that calling Palestine 'the land of the Hebrews' in Gen 40:15 was a deliberate paradox, for sojourners don’t have a land! Notice the powerful history of the Jewish people as sojourners: (Hebrews)
Abram, crossing the Euphrates or Jordan, when he was told by God to leave the land of Ur in central Mesopotamia: Heb 11:9-10
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were all characterized by nomadic living in a foreign land: Heb. 11:13f
The word 'Hebrew' is used exclusively in the New Testament as a literal ethnic sect and never in a spiritualized way, (as the word 'Israel' and 'Jew' are spiritually applied to Christians: Rom 2:28; 9:6.) Having said this, Christians are described as offspring of Abraham by faith, not flesh in Galatians 3:7,27. This strongly implies that Christians are Hebrews, although the NT never calls them such. Further Eph 2:12-14 teaches that Christians are part of the 'commonwealth of Israel.'
There are two other secondary uses of the concept of one who 'crosses over' that may be an allusion to the original meaning of the word 'Hebrew' as one who 'crosses over'.
The idea of 'crossing over' is also used twice of Hades as a barrier between saved and lost: Luke 16:26.
Jehovah calls Himself 'the God of the Hebrews' (ie God of those who cross over or nomads) to Moses in Ex 3:18, perhaps in a deliberate double play on words in preparation for their soon 'crossing over' the Red Sea (Heb 11:29). Moses walks in and says to Pharaoh that the 'God of the nomads [Hebrews]' demands that he release His people so that they can resume their 'sojourning'. Perhaps the message Pharaoh got was that having 'Hebrews [nomads]' in Egypt, where they cannot sojourn, is like caging a bird or preventing pigs from wallowing. God’s people are by nature, sojourners.
Christians likewise 'cross the sea' at baptism: 1 Cor 10:1-2 in an unmistakable antitype. Just as the Hebrews 'crossed over' from darkness of Egypt to the neutral light of Egypt... then again the Jordan to the positive light of Palestine, so too Christians IN LIKE MANNER earn their 'HEBREW' name by crossing the Red Sea of baptism, from darkness of sin to the light of salvation. Christians are currently in the 'wilderness' awaiting to cross the Jordan into eternal rest at the second coming of Christ!
The idea of 'Abram the Hebrew', as a nomad/wanderer and alien/sojourner (Hebrews 11:13-16), is also directly applied to Christians in 1 Pet 1:1,17; 2:11; Eph 2:19, with Abram as a foreshadow.
Abram was a physical/literal sojourner up until Gen 15:8,18, when he was told he would personally not inherit the land, but his descendants would 500 years later. After Gen 15:18 Abram changed from a physical sojourner to a spiritual sojourner as Heb 11:13-16 clearly teaches. Up until Gen 15, Abram was looking for a physical inheritance. After Gen 15, Abram started looking for a spiritual inheritance... JUST like Christians!
Yet even when the Jews finally did inherit the physical land in Joshua 1:2, they really hadn’t 'entered into the rest' that God intended for them. (Heb 4:8) Like Abraham, they were still sojourning for that spiritual land of heaven! (Heb 11:13-16)
So Abram changed from a physical sojourner to a spiritual sojourner when he learned he would never inherit the physical land in Gen 15; and the Jews changed from a physical to spiritual sojourner the moment they crossed the Jordan to actually inherit the physical land. So God’s people, from Abram to the Jews, to Christians have always been 'Hebrews' or aliens sojourning for the heavenly land!
Eph 2:11-19 adds another interesting point to all this. It says that the Gentiles were once 'Hebrews' [strangers and aliens] in regard to the physical Jews [commonwealth of Israel], but not as Christians, they are NO LONGER 'strangers and aliens' but are fellow citizens of the true promised land: Heaven (Phil 3:20). In other words, Christians in one sense, have inherited heaven now in that they are citizens now, but in another sense, they must wait for the second coming to enter into that spiritual kingdom that God will grant the righteous!
The term 'Jew' (Heb. Yehudi) can be used differently in different contexts. In its narrowest interpretation it would mean someone from the tribe of Judah (Heb. Yehudah).1
In a broader sense it refers to anyone from the kingdom of Judah,2 which included within it people from the tribe of Benjamin, Levites and Priests as well. A biblical example of this is Moredechai who is called a Jew even though he was from the tribe of Benjamin.3
In an even broader sense, especially in contemporary times, the word Jew has come to mean anyone who is part of the 'Children of Israel', also known as Israelites, descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, or 'people of the book'.
This probably has to do with the fact that the northern kingdom of Israel with its Ten Tribes were exiled and lost. The remaining Israelites were all from the kingdom of Judah.
· 1.Judah is one of the twelve tribes/sons of Jacob.
· 2. After the passing of King Solomon the Davidic dynasty only ruled over southern Israel, which became known as the Judean Kingdom. The northern part of Israel was known as the Israelite Kingdom, and included within it the other ten tribes.
10. Do a phrase search (study) over the Internet on “Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism.” What are the main differences between “covenant Theology” and “Dispensationalism”?
Covenant theology is based on the theory that God has only one covenant with men (the covenant of grace) and only one people, represented by the Old and New Testament saints—one people, one church and one plan for all. These beliefs require the adherents of Covenant Theology to interpret prophecy in a nonliteral way. Dispensationalism, on the other hand, is a system of theology with two primary distinctives: (1) a consistently literal interpretation of Scripture, especially Bible prophecy, and (2) a distinction between Israel and the Church in God's program.Those who hold to Covenant Theology believe that there is, and has always been, only one people of God. They believe that Israel was the Church in the Old Testament, and the Church is Israel in the New Testament. The promises of land, many descendants, and blessing to Israel in the Old Testament have been “spiritualized” and applied to the Church in the New Testament because of Israel’s unbelief and rejection of their Messiah. Those who hold to Covenant Theology also do not interpret prophecy in a normal sense. As an example, in Revelation 20, the thousand year reign of Christ is spoken of. Covenant Theology would say that the number 1,000 is symbolic and really does not mean a literal 1,000 years. They would say that we are in the millennium right now, that the reign of Christ with his saints is going on in heaven right now, and that the 1,000 year period is symbolic, beginning with the first coming of Christ and ending when He returns.Scripturally, Covenant Theology is wrong in both how Israel is viewed and how prophecy is interpreted. The proper method for interpreting Scripture is to read it in a normal sense. Unless the text indicates that it is using some kind of figurative language, it should be taken literally. When Scripture speaks of Israel, it is not referring to the Church, and when the Church is spoken of, it is not referring to Israel. God has one plan for Israel and another for the Church. Also, with reference to prophecy, all prophecies that have been fulfilled were fulfilled literally, not figuratively. Christ literally fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah when He came 2,000 years ago. There is no reason to think that unfulfilled prophecies are to be understood in a figurative sense. As with those in the past, future prophecy will be fulfilled literally in the future.In Romans 11:1, Paul poses the question of Israel’s future and answers it definitively: “I ask then: ‘Did God reject his people?’ By no means!” The rest of the chapter makes it clear that Israel has been “hardened” or temporarily set aside “in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in” (Romans 11:25). Israel did not become the Church; rather, the Church was “grafted in” (v. 17) to the root of God’s family, creating one body out of the two, while they remain separate in origin, although united in the faith. If the Church was to replace Israel, the imagery would be as a tree (Israel) uprooted and replaced by another (the Church). But the imagery of a branch grafted into a tree is perfectly clear. This is the “mystery” Paul speaks of in verse 25. A mystery in the New Testament refers to something previously not revealed, and the idea of another group of people becoming part of the chosen people of God was unheard of to the Jews at that time. Will God cast away His people Israel? No, God will not cast away His people. On the contrary, verse 25 and following says, 'God will save his people.' At some future point, “the deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.” Here is God’s promise to His chosen people for their future restoration. What a glorious plan! No wonder the contemplation of it caused Paul to burst forth with “Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!” God is faithful, He is merciful and His plans are perfect, and one day both Jew and Gentile will worship the Lord Jesus Christ as one body.
Dispensationalism is a system of theology that has two primary distinctives. (1) A consistently literal interpretation of Scripture, especially Bible prophecy. (2) A distinction between Israel and the Church in God's program.(1) Dispensationalists claim that their principle of hermeneutics is that of literal interpretation. 'Literal interpretation' means giving each word the meaning it would commonly have in everyday usage. Symbols, figures of speech and types are all interpreted plainly in this method, and they are in no way contrary to literal interpretation. Even symbolisms and figurative sayings have literal meanings behind them.There are at least three reasons why this is the best way to view scripture. First, philosophically, the purpose of language itself seems to require that we interpret it literally. Language was given by God for the purpose of being able to communicate with man. The second reason is Biblical. Every prophesy about Jesus Christ in the Old Testament was fulfilled literally. Jesus' birth, Jesus' ministry, Jesus' death, and Jesus' resurrection all occurred exactly and literally as the Old Testament predicted. There is no non-literal fulfillment of these prophecies in the New Testament. This argues strongly for the literal method. If literal interpretation is not used in studying the Scriptures, there is no objective standard by which to understand the Bible. Each and every person would be able to interpret the Bible as they saw fit. Biblical interpretation would denigrate into 'what this passage says to me...' instead of 'the Bible says...' Sadly, this is already the case is much of what is called Biblical interpretation today.(2) Dispensational Theology believes that there are two distinct peoples of God: Israel and the Church. Dispensationalists believe that salvation has always been by faith (in God in the Old Testament; specifically in God the Son in the New Testament). Dispensationalists hold that the Church has not replaced Israel in God’s program and the Old Testament promises to Israel have not been transferred to the Church. They believe that the promises God made to Israel (for land, many descendants, and blessing) in the Old Testament will be ultimately fulfilled in the 1,000 year period spoken of in Revelation 20. They believe that just as God is in this age focusing His attention on the church, He will again in the future focus His attention on Israel (Romans 9-11).Using this system as a basis, Dispensationalists understand the Bible to be organized in seven dispensations: Innocence (Genesis 1:1 – 3:7), Conscience (Genesis 3:8 – 8:22), Human Government (Genesis 9:1 – 11:32), Promise (Genesis 12:1 – Exodus 19:25), Law (Exodus 20:1 – Acts 2:4), Grace (Acts 2:4 – Revelation 20:3), and the Millennial Kingdom (Revelation 20:4 – 20:6). Again, these dispensations are not ways of salvation, but manners in which God relates to man. Dispensationalism, as a system, results in a premillennial interpretation of Christ’s Second Coming, and usually a pretribulational interpretation of the Rapture.
Difference are:
DP always see references to 'Israel' as referring to Old Covenant ethnic Israel. In this system of theology no member of the 'church dispensation' can say they are a part of 'Israel' in any sense. Contrasted to that, CT do recognize an ethnic Israel, but they see a 'spiritual Israel' that consists of all the redeemed throughout all the ages. This 'spiritual Israel' is shorthand for the church.
DP would say that God's main purpose in history is ethnic Israel while CT would say that God's main purpose in history is his son and by extension his elect. While neither side would minimize their respective focuses, each of those theological presuppositions guide their conclusions.DP see redemptive history focusing on God's work with ethnic Israel. The classical version would go so far to say that, as a result of Israel rejecting her messiah, God has inserted a 'parenthetical' time of salvation to gentiles but will return to ethnic Israel in the millennium described in Rev 20.1 A more progressive version of DP would soften this distinction but would still see God returning to ethnic Israel in the millennium. CT focus all revelation around the revelation of Jesus in history. By stating that God's main focus is his son and by extension his elect means that God is most concerned with his son and all the redeemed he has chosen since the foundation of the world.
As the God of Abraham, He declares that He is the One who receives the worship of the faith-filled. Abraham had one great thing going for him, he had faith. Out of all the tribes of the earth, Abraham was taken out of them all and claimed as the father of the faith. Like the disciples of Jesus’ day and the disciples of our day, Abraham was invited to leave everything and go to a place he did not know of. He knew that the encounter he had with God was so real that he could stake his life on it. His faith passed to his son.
As the God of Isaac, He declares Himself to be the God of revival. Isaac did two great things, and is overlooked quite often. First, he was willing to be sacrificed as a young man (I think was 33, but the evidence in Genesis allows for him to be between 30 and 37 years old). His father, Abraham, was 100 years older than he was. If for any moment Isaac had a change of mind and didn’t want to trust his father’s encounter with God, who Abraham felt could raise him from the dead, Isaac could have easily overpowered his father. But Isaac, in true Messianic fashion, willingly carried the wood to the hill of the Lord – Moriah was likely to later be named “Golgotha”. Then, after the Lamb was provided, Isaac grew up and in his later years was said to have “re-dug the wells of his father” – Isaac was a revivalist. He took what his father had done and brought it back. In God’s identifying with Isaac, He is saying that He is the God that is worthy of life-endangering faith and the God of revival of the ancient ways. On to Jacob.
As the God of Jacob, He declares Himself the God who will get down and dirty with man and the God who alters men’s lives, giving them a new name. Jacob was a stubborn bloke. He lusted for the blessings. He would get blessed shrewdly or by force, but one way or another, he was going to be blessed. God will wrestle with us, not because we can beat Him, but because He loves to be with His people. When Jesus called His disciples, Mark wrote that He called them “so that they could be with Him.” Fellowship, even the uncomfortable kind, is what is on His heart. But He doesn’t ever come in contact with us and not change us. It isn’t because He is trying to change us necessarily, but in His Presence we cannot help but be changed. When we come out of an encounter or a season in His Presence, we come out the other end with a new identity, rather a new understanding of our eternal identity in Him. We, then, become who we are.
Beyond the individual connections, He shows that He can unite generations. This is one of the centerpieces of His purposes in the earth before His Return – the restoration of the generations. Jesus, referring back to the prophet Malachi’s word concerning the mission of Elijah, that is John the Baptist and the final generation, says that the turning of the hearts of the sons to the fathers and the fathers to the sons is “all things” in Matthew chapter seventeen. If just two generations can unite, He can do great things, but He unified three generations in the faith that He is the God of the resurrection.
2. What is a birth right? What value did Esau place on his birthright? How did Jacob obtain it?
The birthright was the inheritance. His father was rich, and the 'family farm' went to the first born son
Esau was only interested in the temporal aspects of life, living and hunting for the day, for a bowl of soup. He had no desire to plan for the long term which included birthright, the first born privilege of inheriting his father's possessions. It appeared as if he took the entire privilege for granted. Jacob had an intrinsic desire to search for things beyond the temporal, for something eternal, like that which the privilege of birthright provided in the long term. Jacob valued something far deeper and more valuable than the temporal things Esau saught. And that is when God took notice of this desire in Jacob's heart. Although Jacob was not on his best behavior throughout most of his life, this fire for the things of God was what opened the door for Jacob, not Esau, to receive his father's blessing. This blessing turned out to be far greater than Jacob ever imagined
3. How did Jacob obtain Abraham’s blessing?
God chose Jacob, the second-born of Isaac's twins, to receive the birthright inheritance that is usually reserved for the firstborn. This bestowed on him the right to become the family's patriarch upon Isaac's death (Genesis 25:29-34). The birthright blessing made Jacob the direct heir of Abraham and the recipient of the divine commitments to Abraham and his posterity.At the time Jacob received the blessing he still had not committed himself to live by faith in God. Though God had designated Jacob as heir of Abraham's blessing shortly before his birth (verse 23), Jacob and his mother were both weak in faith and resorted to deceit to obtain the blessing from Isaac (Genesis 27). This earned Jacob the hatred of his brother. Esau seethed with anger and set out to kill him (verse 41). Their mother heard about Esau's plans, so she asked Isaac to send Jacob to stay with relatives far away so he would be safe (verses 42-46).So Isaac and Rebekah sent Jacob back to Rebekah's family in northern Mesopotamia. Apparently the only reason they mentioned to their large household was that they wanted Jacob to find a wife from among Rebekah's relatives. This was true, but Rebekah was also trying to prevent Esau from killing Jacob.Before sending Jacob away, however, Isaac summoned his overly ambitious and crafty son and blessed him again. Isaac apparently forgave his son's previous deceptive behavior and this time willingly repeated his original blessing. By this time Isaac had probably remembered and acknowledged that God had designated Jacob, even before his birth, as the heir.Then Isaac rehearsed some of the key covenant promises that God had made to him and Abraham (Genesis 28:1-5). In doing so Isaac openly announced to the family that Jacob was indeed inheriting the prime responsibility for the family's everlasting relationship with God (Genesis 17:19).God was making sure no one forgot His promises to Abraham. He was formally passing them from one generation to the next.Isaac passed on the key covenant promises to Jacob: 'May God Almighty bless you and make you fruitful and numerous, that you may be a company of peoples. May he give to you the blessing of Abraham, to you and to your offspring with you, so that you may take possession of the land where you now live as an alien-land that God gave to Abraham' (Genesis 28:3-4, NRSV).As Jacob hurriedly left home, he possessed both the birthright promise and a special blessing. But his life had suddenly turned upside down. What did it all mean? Would his grandfather's and father's God really be there for him too?Jacob must have thought about the stories he had heard while growing up about his family's encounters with this awesome, divine being. Would that same great God honor what he had worked so deceitfully to obtain, even though God had promised it to him before he was born?It was at this point in his life that God personally revealed Himself to Jacob. '(Jacob) came to a certain place and stayed there for the night, because the sun had set. Taking one of the stones of the place, he put it under his head and lay down in that place. And he dreamed that there was a ladder set up on the earth, the top of it reaching to heaven; and the angels of God were ascending and descending on it.'And the LORD stood beside him and said, 'I am the LORD, the God of Abraham your father and the God of Isaac; the land on which you lie I will give to you and to your offspring; and your offspring shall be like the dust of the earth, and you shall spread abroad to the west and to the east and to the north and to the south; and all the families of the earth shall be blessed in you and in your offspring. Know that I am with you and will keep you wherever you go, and will bring you back to this land; for I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.''Then Jacob woke from his sleep and said, 'Surely the LORD is in this place-and I did not know it!' And he was afraid and said, 'How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.' So Jacob rose early in the morning, and he took the stone that he had put under his head and set it up for a pillar and poured oil on the top of it. He called that place Bethel ...' (Genesis 28:11-19, NRSV). Jacob now knew for certain that he was the officially confirmed heir of the promises made to Abraham
4. Explain the statement, “Jacob I loved and Esau I hated”. (Rom 9:13 & Mal 1:2,3)
The Bible indicates that God hates Esau and the descendants of Esau for a long period of time. But even if he still hates the descendants of Esau today it is hard to be sure who are the true descendants of Esau today. You can't assume that his descendants make up all the nations apart from Israel. There were many other people alive at the time of Esau that would have had descendants, which formed non-Israeli nations.
Rom. 9:13 'As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.' Mal 1:2 I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? [Was] not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob, Mal 1:3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. In Mal 1:4 God indicates that he hates the decendense of Esau for many or all generations. It should be noted that the word ever does not always mean eternal. It can also mean an age or a long period of time. Mal 1:4 Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished, but we will return and build the desolate places; thus saith the LORD of hosts, They shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, The people against whom the LORD hath indignation for ever.
5. Read Romans chapter 9. Can a person be saved by his birth (nationality)? Can a person be saved by his own effort (good works)? Can a person be saved by the work of another?
No By birth we are not saved and neither by our own efforts nor saved by the work of another.
When people come to know Christ as their Savior, they are brought into a relationship with God that guarantees their salvation as eternally secure. Numerous passages of Scripture declare this fact. (a) Romans 8:30 declares, 'And those He predestined, He also called; those He called, He also justified; those He justified, He also glorified.' This verse tells us that from the moment God chooses us, it is as if we are glorified in His presence in heaven. There is nothing that can prevent a believer from one day being glorified because God has already purposed it in heaven. Once a person is justified, his salvation is guaranteed - he is as secure as if he is already glorified in heaven.(b) Paul asks two crucial questions in Romans 8:33-34 'Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died more than that, who was raised to life - is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.' Who will bring a charge against God's elect? No one will, because Christ is our advocate. Who will condemn us? No one will, because Christ, the One who died for us, is the one who condemns. We have both the advocate and judge as our Savior.(c) Believers are born again (regenerated) when they believe (John 3:3; Titus 3:5). For a Christian to lose his salvation, he would have to be un-regenerated. The Bible gives no evidence that the new birth can be taken away. (d) The Holy Spirit indwells all believers (John 14:17; Romans 8:9) and baptizes all believers into the Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13). For a believer to become unsaved, he would have to be 'un-indwelt' and detached from the Body of Christ.(e) John 3:15 states that whoever believes in Jesus Christ will 'have eternal life.' If you believe in Christ today and have eternal life, but lose it tomorrow, then it was never 'eternal' at all. Hence if you lose your salvation, the promises of eternal life in the Bible would be in error. (f) For the most conclusive argument, I think Scripture says it best itself, 'For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord' (Romans 8:38-39). Remember the same God who saved you is the same God who will keep you. Once we are saved we are always saved. Our salvation is most definitely eternally secure!
Eg: These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.
(1 Jn. 5:13 NASB)
4 For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that has overcome the world--our faith. 5 Who is the one who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?
(1 Jn. 5:4-5 NASB)
13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation--having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God's own possession, to the praise of His glory. (Ephesians 1:13-14 NASB)
6. In Romans chapter 9 is Paul speaking of physical or spiritual Israel when he speaks that all will be saved? If Paul believed that all of physical Israel be saved, why would he be willing to give up his own salvation if God would save them?
I begin at the ends of Romans 8 where Paul speaks of the unchanging love of God in Christ Jesus, a love that will keep believers with Christ until the end. The problem arises, however, in the next chapter. Paul presents the tension in 9:1-5, the question being, God’s word to Israel. How is God’s unchanging love evinced with them? Has God not kept His promise? or as Paul puts it, “Has the word of God failed?” In verse 6 Paul answers that the word of God has not failed. Why is it that it has not failed?For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring… it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. (9:6-8)Paul’s response to the tension of God’s supposed rejection of Israel is not that God will keep His promise to every single physical Israelite, but that not all Israel is, in fact, Israel. The children of Abraham were children according to God’s election and promise, not according to the flesh. Thus in verses 12-13, Paul speaks of God’s love for Jacob and hatred for Esau. This was before they were born, so that God’s sovereign and gracious election would be clearly demonstrated.The rest of chapter 9 certainly speaks of God’s election, but to what purpose? To show that God’s election of the remnant is according to His gracious will rather than according to flesh or works. In addition to the fact that only an elected remnant from among the Jews are saved, in verse 30 Paul now includes the Gentiles:What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone… (9:30-33)So it is made clear, that God’s word has not failed. It has not failed, not because God will save every physical Israelite, but because not all Israel are Israel. From the beginning true Israel was never based merely on ethnic origin, but on faith. Yes, God chose a physical people. God chose Israel and Paul even states clearly that:They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship and the promises. To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen. (9:4-5)But in the same vein, Paul is able to say, very explicitly, that “not all who are descended from Israel belong… not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring…” What are we to make of this? On the one hand he clearly acknowledge their physical identity and even has great anguish for them, yet in the following verses he clearly states that despite their being Abraham’s offspring they are not all his children.In chapter 10 Paul, having spoken of the Gentiles inheriting what the Israelites did not, goes back to his desire for his physical brothers. In 10:1-4, however, there seems to be no indication or promise that these physical Israelites will be saved. Why? Because they seek righteousness not by faith, but by their own works. “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes” (10:4). They are not counted as children of God because they are not descendants of Abraham according to the seed who is Christ (Gal. 3:16). The rest of the chapter speaks of righteousness based on faith. That all who believe in the Lord and call upon His name will be saved. This “salvation” referred to in this passage is what physical Israel, those who were not of the remnant, are missing out on, and what the Gentiles, by faith, are entering into. This gospel message must go out to all the Gentiles and be preached, says Paul. But again, he returns to Israel. While the rest of the Gentiles hear and believe, what of physical Israel? “All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.” (10:21) They still are not part of the remnant!In Romans 11, Paul asks a slightly different question. In chapter 9 he asks whether God’s word has failed, the answer is an emphatic no, God has not failed because God’s promise to Israel stands and the Gentiles are receiving the promise of Abraham, they are all being saved by faith. Though not all physical Israel are inheriting this salvation, this is no problem for Paul since God’s promise was to Abraham’s children, who are children not by flesh, but by faith. Here, then, he asks whether God has rejected His people. Again, the answer is in the negative, “By no means!” Paul responds that he is himself “an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin.” He is clearly referring to his physical lineage! No, God has not rejected Israel, and Israel can still inherit this salvation (that the non-remnant are currently not inheriting) by faith! Paul himself is evidence that God is still allowing physical Israel to be part of this remnant, this seed of Abraham, the true children of promise. And rather than point to future fulfillment as some would have it, Paul rather points again to this idea of a remnant. He cites 1 Kings 19:10, stating that even in the days of Elijah God did not save all of physical Israel, but extended His promise to the remnant. And the rest he hardened by His own sovereign will. Why did he harden the rest? So that he might demonstrate his mercy. Because through the failure of the Israelites salvation has come to the Gentiles. How so? Well, up until Christ’s incarnation true religion was in Israel only. To them (as mentioned earlier) was given the Law and the prophets and the promise, etc. Yet, again and again they proved to be failures, constantly turning away from God and rejecting His prophets. What was the result of this? God needed to send His Son who would write the Laws on their hearts rather than give it to them merely externally. Thus, was Christ sent, and with Christ came the fulfillment of the Law, what the Israelites failed to do, Christ did. His “exodus” from Egypt, His baptism, His temptation in the wilderness, all these incidents point to a fulfillment of what Israel failed to do. Christ perfectly obeyed the Law and took on our sins. He faced the wrath of God and to us, by faith, is given His imputed righteousness. All this Christ did, because the Israelites did not and because we, as sinful humans under the Law, could not.Finally, perhaps, the most important passage in all of this, the conclusion of chapter 11. In verses 25-27 there is an indication of a partial hardening that has taken place among Israel. This is evident because so many of them are not only rejecting the gospel, but persecuting the Church of Christ. This will be “until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.” This does not go against, but rather supports the idea of the remnant, and depicts the pattern of God in relation to Israel throughout redemptive history. This is the reason why some began to wonder in the beginning of chapters 9 and 10 whether God’s word had failed, and whether God rejected Israel. And this hardening of the Jews, evident especially throughout Christ’s life, death and resurrection, and in the early Church, will remain until that fullness comes in. And in this way, that is, in physical Israel being partially hardened until all the Gentiles come in, will “all Israel be saved.” In verse 26 Paul gives the definite answer to both questions found in chapters 9 and 10. All Israel will be saved, but one must recognize that “all Israel” are not all Israel according to the flesh, but according to faith. God has not rejected Israel, but has sought to save them in this manner, so that the remnant Israel will join with the Gentiles who are the seed of Abraham by faith in Christ, and so “all Israel (the remnant) will be saved” and God’s word will be shown true.Verses 28-32 seem to go back to the fact that God has not rejected Israel. Paul is clearly speaking of Physical Israel in verse 28, “As regards the gospel, they are enemies of God for your sake. But as regards election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” What does this mean? That God will not forsake all of Israel, remember the hardening is partial. This is indicative of God’s plan to save all whom He has elected, all who have now been “consigned to disobedience in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy.” The reference to “all” is, contextually speaking, not all without exception. For not all people everywhere who are consigned to disobedience are shown a saving mercy. Rather, it is in regards to all the elect. It is all without distinction not all without exception. The problem enters when Paul’s statement that God has not rejected Israel is taken to mean that He has accepted all of them. What Paul seems to mean is that God has not rejected Israel entirely, but in accordance with Old Testament history, a remnant still remains, and the remnant will be saved. Thus a partial hardening.So God’s word has not failed, His promise stands and is fulfilled in the remnant, those who are, in Christ, the seed of Abraham. God has not rejected Israel. Rather, God has expanded the remnant to still include Israelites (such as Paul) as well as Gentiles. And we are now, by faith in Christ, Abraham’s seed. The true people of God does not consist of a Church that has replaced physical Israel since it never was physical Israel to begin with, but in a Church that has expanded on the remnant which includes both Jews and Gentiles. So Paul continues to work to preach salvation to the Gentiles, as well as to incite jealousy in his fellow Jews that they may likewise inherit the kingdom. What’s the whole point of Romans 9-11? As mentioned in the earlier post, through such an understanding of the passage we are able to discern the basis for Paul’s theology of history and missions.So how does this all come together? God’s promise finds its fulfillment in the remnant. Thus the physical people of Israel will not all see the kingdom of heaven, nor is there any reason to expect a future kingdom for physical Israel. Since now in Christ “there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all bestowing his riches on all who call on Him” (10:12). The people of God are one. In this sense there is continuity with the Old Testament. God’s remnant within physical Israel has expanded to include Gentiles. These people consist of Christ’s body, and these are the promised “seed of Abraham.” God’s promises to Israel in the Old Testament find fulfillment in Christ and are applied to believers.
7. List the 12 sons of Jacob in the order of the birth, telling the relationships of their mothers to Jacob.
The order of Jacob's children (listed by mother)LEAH (Jacob's first wife)1. Reuben (Born first, he inherited the family birthright, but later lost it)2. Simeon3. Levi4. Judah5. Issachar6. Zebulun7. DinahRACHEL (Jacob's second wife, his favorite)1. Joseph, (Jacob gave him the family birthright after he saved the family)1. Manasseh2. Ephraim (Inherited the family birthright following Jacob's blessing)2. Benjamine BILHAH (Rachel's slave girl)1. Dan,2. Naphtali ZILPAH (Leah's slave girl)1. Gad2. Asher
Jacob (Israel) fell in love with Rachel and wanted to marry her, but her father Laban tricked Jacob into marrying his older daughter, Leah, first.Later Jacob was able to marry his first choice (Rachel). She was always his favorite (the woman he loved); and her son Joseph was Jacob's favorite son. Jealous of this, his other brothers (the other tribes of Israel as it were) sold Joseph into slavery. In slavery, Joseph was taken to Egypt and later became the overseer of all the grain in Pharaoh's storehouse. A famine threatened to wipe out the family of Jacob and they went to Egypt seeking food. There they found Joseph. He forgave his brothers and was reunited with his birth family.The order of Jacob's children and grandchildren (listed by date of birth)01. Reuben (Born first, he inherited the family birthright, but later lost it to Joseph)02. Simeon03. Levi04. Judah05. Dan06. Naphtali07. Gad08. Asher09. Issachar10. Zebulun11. Joseph12. Benjamine13. Dinah (Girls were not eligible for tribal status)14. Manasseh15. Ephraim (The birthright passed to him from Joseph through Israel's blessing)Final order of The Twelve Tribes of Israel (by birthdate)01. Reuben 02. Simeon03. Judah04. Dan05. Naphtali06. Gad07. Asher08. Issachar09. Zebulun10. Benjamine11. Manasseh12. EphraimNon-land-owning Tribes00. Levi (This tribe elevated to form the Priesthood of the country)00. Joseph (Elevated to 'Patriarch' status by Jacob (Israel).The Four Patriarchs01. Abraham02. Isaac03. Jacob (Israel)04. Joseph Because he saved the family, Jacob took the birthright from Simeon (who had sold Joseph into slavery) and gave it to Joseph. Jacob made Joseph a patriarch like himself by adopting Joseph's two sons giving them equal status with his own sons, i.e., adding them to the 12 tribes of Israel.Each of these 12 sons was the eponym of a tribe of Isrealites. Though to be more accurate, Joseph was the ancestor of 2 tribes, of which his sons were the eponyms.Just before he died, Jacob decreed Joseph's younger son, Ephraim to be greater than his older brother Manasseh. When Joseph tried to tell Jacob (Israel now) that he was giving the greater blessing to the youngest, Israel told him,'I know, my son, I know. He (Manasseh) too shall become a people; he too shall be great. Yet his younger brother (Ephraim) shall be greater than he, and his descendants shall become a multitude of nations.' (Genesis 48:19-20).In this way the lineage of Israel passed down from Joseph through Ephraim. It did not go to Judah.After blessing Ephraim and Manasseh, Israel called his other sons in and told them what lay in store for them in the future. To Judah part of what he said was this:'The sceptre shall not pass from Judah nor the mace from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs, to whom the peoples shall render obedience.' (Genesis 49:10).There are important allegories in this sequence. We have listed them all in our previous writings, especially Joseph's symbolic relationship with Christ and divine food.Another important allegory relates to Ephraim and Manasseh. They stand for the second generation of the tribes of Israel: i.e., what they evolved to under Christ. These two represent the two houses of Israel. The younger (Ephraim) represents the Christians and Manasseh, the older of the two, represents the Jews. The birthright passed to the Christians through Ephraim by spiritual symbolism. They obeyed God and accepted His King. The result was an enormous quantity of Christian nations.This allegory (Ephraim & Manasseh) talks to us in today's terms. We do not see twelve tribes nowadays because most are invisible. But we do see an Israel divided into two houses (Christians and Jews).Judah became the base of power as far as the tribes of Israel were concerned (the sceptre was put in the hands of Judah and the mace between his feet). It was a power made visible in Solomon's and Herod's temples. But, as the prophecy said, that power belonged to another; the Messiah.Jesus, of course, was born into the tribe of Judah just as Israel's blessing predicted. The prophecy shows that the sceptre belonged to Him. Jesus is King of all mankind. As predicted, His people have become a multitude of nations.With the physical rebuilding of Jerusalem as the signal to return, both houses of Israel are being called back to the Holy Land in a great ingathering that will encompass (in symbolism) all the tribes of Israel.So it is not just the Jews who are being called back to Jerusalem. It is all the tribes of Israel. This is the ingathering that will bring all Christians and all Jews to the Holy Land for the Second Appearance of Jesus Christ. All the nations will gather there as well because it is the time of the Judgement.Many people say that the Jews are God's favorites, but nowhere in the Bible is this stated. In fact, just the opposite. Almost every book in scripture from the Torah to the Book of Revelation testifies that God has no favorites.Jesus said it is behavior that determines the people of God.
8. When was Jacob’s name changed to Israel and what was the significance of this event?It is written, AND HE (Jacob) ROSE UP THAT NIGHT, AND TOOK HIS TWO WIVES, AND HIS TWO WOMENSERVANTS, AND HIS ELEVEN SONS, AND PASSED OVER THE FORD JABBOK. AND HE TOOK THEM, AND SENT THEM OVER THE BROOK, AND SENT OVER THAT HE HAD. AND JACOB WAS LEFT ALONE; AND THERE WRESTLED A MAN WITH HIM UNTIL THE BREAKING OF THE DAY. AND WHEN HE SAW THAT HE PREVAILED NOT AGAINST HIM, HE TOUCHED THE HOLLOW OF HIS THIGH; AND THE HOLLOW OF JACOB'S THIGH WAS OUT OF JOINT, AS HE WRESTLED WITH HIM. AND HE SAID, LET ME GO, FOR THE DAY BREAKETH. AND HE SAID, I WILL NOT LET THEE GO, EXCEPT THOU BLESS ME. AND HE SAID UNTO HIM, WHAT IS THY NAME? AND HE SAID, JACOB. Jacob confessed his name, which means 'supplanter' or 'deceiver.' We may say, he admitted he was a sinner. After Jacob confessed his name, then the man said...THY NAME SHALL BE CALLED NO MORE JACOB, BUT ISRAEL: FOR AS A PRINCE HAST THOU POWER WITH GOD AND WITH MEN, AND HAST PREVAILED. Jacob’s name was changed from 'deceiver' to 'Israel,' which means, 'God rules; or strives with God; or a prince of God; or overcomes and prevails; or God’s fighter.' AND JACOB ASKED HIM, AND SAID, TELL ME, I PRAY THEE, THY NAME. AND HE SAID, WHEREFORE IS IT THAT THOU DOST ASK AFTER MY NAME? AND HE BLESSED HIM THERE. AND JACOB CALLED THE NAME OF THE PLACE PENIEL: FOR I HAVE SEEN GOD FACE TO FACE, AND MY LIFE IS PRESERVED. AND AS HE PASSED OVER PENUEL THE SUN ROSE UPON HIM, AND HE HALTED UPON HIS THIGH. THEREFORE THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL EAT NOT OF THE SINEW WHICH SHRANK, WHICH IS UPON THE HOLLOW OF THE THIGH, UNTIL THIS DAY: BECAUSE HE TOUCHED THE HOLLOW OF JACOB'S THIGH IN THE SINEW THAT SHRANK-Gen 32:22-32. AND GOD APPEARED UNTO JACOB AGAIN, WHEN HE CAME OUT OF PADAN-ARAM, AND BLESSED HIM. AND GOD SAID UNTO HIM, THY NAME IS JACOB: THY NAME SHALL NOT BE CALLED ANY MORE JACOB, BUT ISRAEL SHALL BE THY NAME: AND HE CALLED HIS NAME ISRAEL. AND GOD SAID UNTO HIM, I AM GOD ALMIGHTY: BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY; A NATION AND A COMPANY OF NATIONS SHALL BE OF THEE, AND KINGS SHALL COME OUT OF THY LOINS; AND THE LAND WHICH I GAVE ABRAHAM AND ISAAC, TO THEE I WILL GIVE IT, AND TO THY SEED AFTER THEE WILL I GIVE THE LAND-Gen 35:9-12.
9. Investigate the words Hebrew and Jew using the Blue Letter Bible or other
resources. Where did these names come from and what do they mean in relationship to Israel?
The first time the word 'Hebrew' is used in the Bible is in Gen 14:13. Just as Abraham is first called a 'Hebrew' in Gen 14:13, so also the disciples first called Christians in Acts 11:26.
The etymological origin of 'Hebrew' is uncertain. The most likely origin of word 'ibri' [Hebrew] is derived from 'br' which means 'to cross over a boundary'. (ISBE, revised, Hebrew) Included in this thought is that a 'Hebrew' would be one 'who crossed over' or one who went from place to place, a nomad, a wanderer, an alien. This designation that would fit some aspects of patriarchal behavior. If this is correct, then a Hebrew is one who travels into another land as a nomad and resides as an alien. It also means that the term has origins outside of Palestine and is a common expression that was etymologically modified from a nomad to specific ethnic group (Jews) whose origin was nomadic through Abram.
The likely fact that the word Hebrew means 'sojourner' underscores the importance of the land promise. Further, while possessing the land, they would always be reminded by the root meaning of their name, 'Hebrew' that the land was a gift given to their forefathers who, for 500 years, were literally 'Hebrews' in the 'alien' sense of the word. This means that calling Palestine 'the land of the Hebrews' in Gen 40:15 was a deliberate paradox, for sojourners don’t have a land! Notice the powerful history of the Jewish people as sojourners: (Hebrews)
Abram, crossing the Euphrates or Jordan, when he was told by God to leave the land of Ur in central Mesopotamia: Heb 11:9-10
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were all characterized by nomadic living in a foreign land: Heb. 11:13f
The word 'Hebrew' is used exclusively in the New Testament as a literal ethnic sect and never in a spiritualized way, (as the word 'Israel' and 'Jew' are spiritually applied to Christians: Rom 2:28; 9:6.) Having said this, Christians are described as offspring of Abraham by faith, not flesh in Galatians 3:7,27. This strongly implies that Christians are Hebrews, although the NT never calls them such. Further Eph 2:12-14 teaches that Christians are part of the 'commonwealth of Israel.'
There are two other secondary uses of the concept of one who 'crosses over' that may be an allusion to the original meaning of the word 'Hebrew' as one who 'crosses over'.
The idea of 'crossing over' is also used twice of Hades as a barrier between saved and lost: Luke 16:26.
Jehovah calls Himself 'the God of the Hebrews' (ie God of those who cross over or nomads) to Moses in Ex 3:18, perhaps in a deliberate double play on words in preparation for their soon 'crossing over' the Red Sea (Heb 11:29). Moses walks in and says to Pharaoh that the 'God of the nomads [Hebrews]' demands that he release His people so that they can resume their 'sojourning'. Perhaps the message Pharaoh got was that having 'Hebrews [nomads]' in Egypt, where they cannot sojourn, is like caging a bird or preventing pigs from wallowing. God’s people are by nature, sojourners.
Christians likewise 'cross the sea' at baptism: 1 Cor 10:1-2 in an unmistakable antitype. Just as the Hebrews 'crossed over' from darkness of Egypt to the neutral light of Egypt... then again the Jordan to the positive light of Palestine, so too Christians IN LIKE MANNER earn their 'HEBREW' name by crossing the Red Sea of baptism, from darkness of sin to the light of salvation. Christians are currently in the 'wilderness' awaiting to cross the Jordan into eternal rest at the second coming of Christ!
The idea of 'Abram the Hebrew', as a nomad/wanderer and alien/sojourner (Hebrews 11:13-16), is also directly applied to Christians in 1 Pet 1:1,17; 2:11; Eph 2:19, with Abram as a foreshadow.
Abram was a physical/literal sojourner up until Gen 15:8,18, when he was told he would personally not inherit the land, but his descendants would 500 years later. After Gen 15:18 Abram changed from a physical sojourner to a spiritual sojourner as Heb 11:13-16 clearly teaches. Up until Gen 15, Abram was looking for a physical inheritance. After Gen 15, Abram started looking for a spiritual inheritance... JUST like Christians!
Yet even when the Jews finally did inherit the physical land in Joshua 1:2, they really hadn’t 'entered into the rest' that God intended for them. (Heb 4:8) Like Abraham, they were still sojourning for that spiritual land of heaven! (Heb 11:13-16)
So Abram changed from a physical sojourner to a spiritual sojourner when he learned he would never inherit the physical land in Gen 15; and the Jews changed from a physical to spiritual sojourner the moment they crossed the Jordan to actually inherit the physical land. So God’s people, from Abram to the Jews, to Christians have always been 'Hebrews' or aliens sojourning for the heavenly land!
Eph 2:11-19 adds another interesting point to all this. It says that the Gentiles were once 'Hebrews' [strangers and aliens] in regard to the physical Jews [commonwealth of Israel], but not as Christians, they are NO LONGER 'strangers and aliens' but are fellow citizens of the true promised land: Heaven (Phil 3:20). In other words, Christians in one sense, have inherited heaven now in that they are citizens now, but in another sense, they must wait for the second coming to enter into that spiritual kingdom that God will grant the righteous!
The term 'Jew' (Heb. Yehudi) can be used differently in different contexts. In its narrowest interpretation it would mean someone from the tribe of Judah (Heb. Yehudah).1
In a broader sense it refers to anyone from the kingdom of Judah,2 which included within it people from the tribe of Benjamin, Levites and Priests as well. A biblical example of this is Moredechai who is called a Jew even though he was from the tribe of Benjamin.3
In an even broader sense, especially in contemporary times, the word Jew has come to mean anyone who is part of the 'Children of Israel', also known as Israelites, descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, or 'people of the book'.
This probably has to do with the fact that the northern kingdom of Israel with its Ten Tribes were exiled and lost. The remaining Israelites were all from the kingdom of Judah.
· 1.Judah is one of the twelve tribes/sons of Jacob.
· 2. After the passing of King Solomon the Davidic dynasty only ruled over southern Israel, which became known as the Judean Kingdom. The northern part of Israel was known as the Israelite Kingdom, and included within it the other ten tribes.
10. Do a phrase search (study) over the Internet on “Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism.” What are the main differences between “covenant Theology” and “Dispensationalism”?
Covenant theology is based on the theory that God has only one covenant with men (the covenant of grace) and only one people, represented by the Old and New Testament saints—one people, one church and one plan for all. These beliefs require the adherents of Covenant Theology to interpret prophecy in a nonliteral way. Dispensationalism, on the other hand, is a system of theology with two primary distinctives: (1) a consistently literal interpretation of Scripture, especially Bible prophecy, and (2) a distinction between Israel and the Church in God's program.Those who hold to Covenant Theology believe that there is, and has always been, only one people of God. They believe that Israel was the Church in the Old Testament, and the Church is Israel in the New Testament. The promises of land, many descendants, and blessing to Israel in the Old Testament have been “spiritualized” and applied to the Church in the New Testament because of Israel’s unbelief and rejection of their Messiah. Those who hold to Covenant Theology also do not interpret prophecy in a normal sense. As an example, in Revelation 20, the thousand year reign of Christ is spoken of. Covenant Theology would say that the number 1,000 is symbolic and really does not mean a literal 1,000 years. They would say that we are in the millennium right now, that the reign of Christ with his saints is going on in heaven right now, and that the 1,000 year period is symbolic, beginning with the first coming of Christ and ending when He returns.Scripturally, Covenant Theology is wrong in both how Israel is viewed and how prophecy is interpreted. The proper method for interpreting Scripture is to read it in a normal sense. Unless the text indicates that it is using some kind of figurative language, it should be taken literally. When Scripture speaks of Israel, it is not referring to the Church, and when the Church is spoken of, it is not referring to Israel. God has one plan for Israel and another for the Church. Also, with reference to prophecy, all prophecies that have been fulfilled were fulfilled literally, not figuratively. Christ literally fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah when He came 2,000 years ago. There is no reason to think that unfulfilled prophecies are to be understood in a figurative sense. As with those in the past, future prophecy will be fulfilled literally in the future.In Romans 11:1, Paul poses the question of Israel’s future and answers it definitively: “I ask then: ‘Did God reject his people?’ By no means!” The rest of the chapter makes it clear that Israel has been “hardened” or temporarily set aside “in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in” (Romans 11:25). Israel did not become the Church; rather, the Church was “grafted in” (v. 17) to the root of God’s family, creating one body out of the two, while they remain separate in origin, although united in the faith. If the Church was to replace Israel, the imagery would be as a tree (Israel) uprooted and replaced by another (the Church). But the imagery of a branch grafted into a tree is perfectly clear. This is the “mystery” Paul speaks of in verse 25. A mystery in the New Testament refers to something previously not revealed, and the idea of another group of people becoming part of the chosen people of God was unheard of to the Jews at that time. Will God cast away His people Israel? No, God will not cast away His people. On the contrary, verse 25 and following says, 'God will save his people.' At some future point, “the deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.” Here is God’s promise to His chosen people for their future restoration. What a glorious plan! No wonder the contemplation of it caused Paul to burst forth with “Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!” God is faithful, He is merciful and His plans are perfect, and one day both Jew and Gentile will worship the Lord Jesus Christ as one body.
Dispensationalism is a system of theology that has two primary distinctives. (1) A consistently literal interpretation of Scripture, especially Bible prophecy. (2) A distinction between Israel and the Church in God's program.(1) Dispensationalists claim that their principle of hermeneutics is that of literal interpretation. 'Literal interpretation' means giving each word the meaning it would commonly have in everyday usage. Symbols, figures of speech and types are all interpreted plainly in this method, and they are in no way contrary to literal interpretation. Even symbolisms and figurative sayings have literal meanings behind them.There are at least three reasons why this is the best way to view scripture. First, philosophically, the purpose of language itself seems to require that we interpret it literally. Language was given by God for the purpose of being able to communicate with man. The second reason is Biblical. Every prophesy about Jesus Christ in the Old Testament was fulfilled literally. Jesus' birth, Jesus' ministry, Jesus' death, and Jesus' resurrection all occurred exactly and literally as the Old Testament predicted. There is no non-literal fulfillment of these prophecies in the New Testament. This argues strongly for the literal method. If literal interpretation is not used in studying the Scriptures, there is no objective standard by which to understand the Bible. Each and every person would be able to interpret the Bible as they saw fit. Biblical interpretation would denigrate into 'what this passage says to me...' instead of 'the Bible says...' Sadly, this is already the case is much of what is called Biblical interpretation today.(2) Dispensational Theology believes that there are two distinct peoples of God: Israel and the Church. Dispensationalists believe that salvation has always been by faith (in God in the Old Testament; specifically in God the Son in the New Testament). Dispensationalists hold that the Church has not replaced Israel in God’s program and the Old Testament promises to Israel have not been transferred to the Church. They believe that the promises God made to Israel (for land, many descendants, and blessing) in the Old Testament will be ultimately fulfilled in the 1,000 year period spoken of in Revelation 20. They believe that just as God is in this age focusing His attention on the church, He will again in the future focus His attention on Israel (Romans 9-11).Using this system as a basis, Dispensationalists understand the Bible to be organized in seven dispensations: Innocence (Genesis 1:1 – 3:7), Conscience (Genesis 3:8 – 8:22), Human Government (Genesis 9:1 – 11:32), Promise (Genesis 12:1 – Exodus 19:25), Law (Exodus 20:1 – Acts 2:4), Grace (Acts 2:4 – Revelation 20:3), and the Millennial Kingdom (Revelation 20:4 – 20:6). Again, these dispensations are not ways of salvation, but manners in which God relates to man. Dispensationalism, as a system, results in a premillennial interpretation of Christ’s Second Coming, and usually a pretribulational interpretation of the Rapture.
Difference are:
DP always see references to 'Israel' as referring to Old Covenant ethnic Israel. In this system of theology no member of the 'church dispensation' can say they are a part of 'Israel' in any sense. Contrasted to that, CT do recognize an ethnic Israel, but they see a 'spiritual Israel' that consists of all the redeemed throughout all the ages. This 'spiritual Israel' is shorthand for the church.
DP would say that God's main purpose in history is ethnic Israel while CT would say that God's main purpose in history is his son and by extension his elect. While neither side would minimize their respective focuses, each of those theological presuppositions guide their conclusions.DP see redemptive history focusing on God's work with ethnic Israel. The classical version would go so far to say that, as a result of Israel rejecting her messiah, God has inserted a 'parenthetical' time of salvation to gentiles but will return to ethnic Israel in the millennium described in Rev 20.1 A more progressive version of DP would soften this distinction but would still see God returning to ethnic Israel in the millennium. CT focus all revelation around the revelation of Jesus in history. By stating that God's main focus is his son and by extension his elect means that God is most concerned with his son and all the redeemed he has chosen since the foundation of the world.
Comments
Post a Comment