Dear Gavin:
(1) In B.2), B.3), B.4), C.) and D.) you mention “hermeneutics.” I am convinced that if I held your hermeneutics I would believe what you believe. Our real difference is hermeneutics.
(2) You ask, “C.) What Hermeneutic do you employ to interpret the unconditional language of a continued ethnic group (and Geo-Political by subsiquence) that is stated in Jer. 31:37, "This is what the LORD says: 'Only if the heavens above can be measured and the foundations of the earth below be searched out will I reject all the descendants of Israel because of all they have done,' declares Adonai"
I do not believe that God has ever promised anyone, either a Jew or Christian parent, one single spiritual blessing on the ground of their nationality or birth. Sovereign election determines whether Jacob or Esau are part of the “Israel” to whom the promises are made. They are “blue blood Jews,” the twin grandsons of Abraham. One of them was indeed rejected because “all Israel is not Israel.” Jer. 31:37 does not guarantee the election unto salvation of the nation Israel or any one Jew. That nation, as a nation, was rejected by God. Likewise, in Romans 11:1 God Paul asks this question, “Did God reject his people”? In verse 2 he qualifies that by saying, “God did not reject his people, WHOM HE FOREKNEW.” In verse 5, the people who have not been cast off are the “remnant according to the election of grace.” I assume, unless God has two “elect peoples” that the people “foreknown” in Romans 11:2 are the same as those “foreknown” in Romans 8:29. I assume in both cases that “foreknow” means chosen unto salvation. Romans 11 is teaching that God cannot and will not ever reject any person whom he has “foreknown,” or chosen in Christ as a sheep. You cannot be in a saving covenantal relationship and ever be cast off. There are some Jewish sheep among that “people whom he foreknew.” However, I repeat, being a part of that group who have been foreknown has nothing to do with who your parents are or what ceremonies have been performed over you.
(2) You continue under D). “I understand that your hermeneutic sees many of those Jeremiah 31 type texts fulfilled in the NC people, because of NCS such as 1 Peter 2:9. And, I agree that the Church must be in the heart of those OC texts in some sense. However, I do not see that the fulfillment of those OC texts in the NCS is to the ending or replacing of the ethnic/geo-political group Israel.
The outworking of your theology appears to be no different that covenant/replacement theology in this area. If it is different I would like, truly, to know how.
I do indeed believe that texts like Jeremiah are clearly fulfilled according to texts like I Peter. However, it is a clear and complete specific promise / specific fulfillment. It is not “in some sense” but is the sum total intended in the promise. The true and ultimate objects of the Old Testament promises are the one people “foreknown” in sovereign grace. Jeremiah was talking about the true “Israel of God” which I believe is the Church and you do not. I reject any and all notions of two peoples and two programs.
I totally reject the “covenant/replacement” theology. The Church did not replace Israel. The church is the true fulfillment of the promise of the Gospel made to Abraham and his true seed who is Christ himself and all who are “foreknown” in him. A specific fulfillment of a specific promise is not covenant/replacement in the sense you use those words.
You said, “E.) I understand that your hermeneutic allows you to conclude that certain parts of Scripture are incorrect.” Sorry, that is out of bounds! You may say, “It appears or implies. . . .,” but you may not accuse me of knowingly concluding some parts of Scripture are incorrect simply because I disagree with your theology.
JGR writes: 2) The kingdom promised David has come and David's son is seated on the throne of David just as the Davidic covenant promised. Again, there may another fulfillment of the Davidic covenant in a future earthly kingdom, however, again, to believe that as an article of faith instead of a possibility would require
clear evidence in the NTS.
You respond: Jeremiah 31 may have been fulfilled, but it is not yet completed.
(1) I don’t believe you have responded to what I said about David’s throne. Specifically, do you believe that Christ is presently seated on David throne in fulfillment of the prophecy in II Sam 7? (2) Is there any evidence of a future assuming that throne by either Christ or David? (3) Please tell me exactly what part of Jer. 31 has not yet been fulfilled.
Your use of Zech 9:9 will force me to rephrase my statement about “all” prophetic language. Your point is well taken in the light of my statement.
> John, I write this as one sitting at your feet. Hopefully it comes across that way.
> Blessings! Gavin.
Gavin, nobody sits at anyone’s feet in e-mail discussions. We are all learners and we are all teachers. Give it your best shot and then duck. No holds barred! Blessings on you and yours. John
--
Read the Sound of Grace pages at
http://www.soundofgrace.com
To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...
To view our online archive go to our web page at
http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace