I'm sorry Art. I tried really hard to understand how you got to where you are on this, and thought I had a degree of success. Having read less than half of your responses, I now understand less of your thinking than when I started.
Art,
Having read, reread, and re-reread all that you have posted in this thread, I have a question — In your insistance on national Isreal are you saying that, in spite of God's revelation of the "tares in the wheat", and that the tares are to be left in the wheat until harvest, we should forget that there are tares in the wheat when we read about Isreal?
This being, I know the second, and I believe the third, time that you have, shall we say … been unimpressed; I don't see why you would want to here again. For my part, I will pass.I would love to hear your take on the Ezekiel passage and Romans 11.
I don't disagree with Christ.In that parable, do you see the field as the world or the Church?
I don't disagree with Christ.
ObfuscationismI'm sorry Art. I tried really hard to understand how you got to where you are on this, and thought I had a degree of success. Having read less than half of your responses, I now understand less of your thinking than when I started.
In that parable, do you see the field as the world or the Church?
I don't disagree with Christ.
On this we agree as well as election of His people and Him being our God. We just see differently on the co-existence of His people being distinguished as Jews and Gentiles and that he is their God and our God.
I, unlike you can see both sides. I can't deny what I believe. Even though I can see the other belief.
You on the other hand deny that you can't even see it, the other belief. It would be different if you said that you understand the belief concept of national Israel but don't believe it. I would be OK with that. But to deny that you don't understand it or are even unwilling to try is where my problem exist.
You have also heard my belief on this concept twice or maybe three times and still seek questions from me on certain aspects of my belief in which I unselfishly respond.
Yet when I ask the same of you, you either don't understand the concept of my belief or are willing to further explain yours.
You would think that maybe a heart felt response from you may show another reader another way to the truth and light. It does take the Holy Spirit but it could be the Spirit working through you to show this enlightenment.
That is if you believe the Holy Spirit also uses man as well as divine intervention.
I believe he uses both. He can call someone from an isolated island or he can use men to call one from a neighboring Gentile nation next to Israel.
God can directly reveal to one that he is God or he can use the nation of Israel that he is God by removing all evil from Israel and make them prosper with no more famine. The neighboring nations will see what he has done and know that he is God.
Two different ways of election directly from God and indirectly through man.
Maybe that's the way God works. Paul needed divine intervention. Paul needed a direct calling from God. Then through Paul's revelation others were lead to see. Just as through Israel's restoration others will be lead to see. The other nations will know that God is God by His restoration of Israel.
Maybe one's effectual calling can be direct as with Paul or indirect through one such as Paul or through a nation such as Israel.
I simply meant that I accept the plain words of scripture: "37 And He [Christ] said, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man, 38 and the field is the ______; and as for the good seed …"I don't disagree with Christ.
Reflecting back a couple of years to paraphrase a man whose opinion I respect, "I fear much worse".Obfuscationism
Spiritual Jews.
Romans 2:28-29
28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Obfuscationism
When I said
I simply meant that I accept the plain words of scripture: "37 And He [Christ] said, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man, 38 and the field is the ______; and as for the good seed …"
The remainder of your post reflects a similar failure to observe what is plainly in view.
You can add to your list the meaning of your statement.Christ said the field is the world. Now I see why you have trouble understanding things.
You can add to your list the meaning of your statement.
You can add to your list the meaning of your statement.