39 thoughts on “Who Are God’s Chosen People and Why Are They Chosen?”

1. Hey Adam

   Excellent subject, i had not noticed before the parallel language of Exodus 19:5-6 and 1 Peter 2:9-10.I think Peter wrote a TIMELESS message,that applied to ALL who trusted in Christ in that age (when the letter was written) and to All who trust in Christ today,Jew and non Jew alike.

   However, i do not believe that what the Apostle Paul wrote in Romans 9:27 is TIMELESS. Paul spoke of a ‘short work’ upon the Earth (land) in 9:28. Perhaps referring to a time that has past already?

   It is false (as you have indicated) for anyone to believe that a Jew who comes to faith in Christ naturally has greater standing (double blessing) before God than a non Jew who comes to faith.

   Many believe that the Jew whom comes to faith TODAY,is of a REMNANT,and is of the original olive tree,even the root,which supports all the grafted in branches).

   Some take the phrase ‘ALL Israel’ will be saved,either applying it to ethnic Jews who come to faith in Christ or spiritual Israel,ALL people who have faith in Christ.I am not sure (anymore) that All Israel will be saved,applies to ANYONE or any particular group TODAY.

   Taking from what you have already written Adam,i add,that i believe that Romans 9:27 and 11:1-32 was fulfilled in the 1st century,either in the 144,00 of Rev or in the devout Jews ‘ regathered ‘ at Pentecost.

   Therefore God’s chosen people Today are those spoken of in 1 Peter 2:9-10 which includes both Jew and Gentile TODAY without distinction,as Paul has also written in Romans 10:12.

   Seroled

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Hi Seroled!

     Thanks for your reply. Amen to what you said about Peter writing a timeless message for all who trust in Christ. Indeed, there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile among those who belong to Christ, that is, among God’s one chosen people. Romans 10:12, which you mentioned, is crystal clear that God’s blessings and riches are poured out equally upon all who call on Him, regardless of ethnicity.

     My thinking on Romans 9:27-29 seems to be much the same as yours. I believe Paul was hinting toward what was soon to take place, and what took place in 70 AD with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. As discussed elsewhere on this blog, the phrase “the earth” in verse 28 can just as well be translated “the land,” meaning the land of Israel/Palestine. At that time, only a remnant was saved. There is perhaps also application of this passage beyond the events of that time, if Paul’s intent here was also to say that the total number of “the sons of Israel” will never be saved, but only a remnant. Just a thought, but I’m not sure…

     Whether or not Romans 11:26 (“…all Israel will be saved…”) was fulfilled in the first century, and is connected to the 144,000 of Revelation 7 and 14, I’m not 100% certain. I’ve considered that possibility, especially in light of verse 25, which speaks of the partial hardening upon Israel, a hardening which I believe was temporary and parallel to the indictment that Jesus and the apostles placed upon their own faithless generation (e.g. Matthew 23:29-36, I Thess. 2:14-16, etc.).

     At this present time I lean toward the idea that the fulfillment of Romans 11:26 is ongoing. In other words, I take the language of verses 26b and verse 27 to be a reference to Christ’s work on the cross (Jesus came from Zion in order to banish ungodliness from His people, He established a New Covenant in which sins are taken away from all who believe). Since that quote from Isaiah 59 is used to explain verse 26a, it seems to me that we are being told that it’s in this manner that “all Israel” (all who trust in Christ; see Romans 9:6-8) will be saved (i.e. is being saved even at this present time). Do you have any further thoughts on that?

     LikeLike

     Reply
2. Hi Adam!

   I have to agree with you Adam,since Romans 11:26b and 27 does refer to Jesus’ work on the cross,then absolutely All Israel(all who believe in Christ)are being saved at this present time.No event(past)is greater than the cross,Jesus is saving all who believe today.

   As we have agreed before,that the regathering of Israel took place at Pentecost,so there is but an ongoing ‘gathering’ of the church of God,both Jew and non Jew.

   Which means to me,that there can be no future ‘regathering’ of ethnic Israel.There is no Remnant ‘at this present time'(Romans 11:5) And certainly no blinded people who are Jews ‘unto this day’ (Romans 11:8) God has but one chosen people today (Romans 10:12)

   Thanks Adam

   Seroled

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Amen, Seroled. This great gathering of Jews and non-Jews is ongoing, and you and I are privileged to be a part of it.

     Regarding the partial hardening upon Israel, and the fullness of the Gentiles (Romans 11:25), have you read the article by Mike Blume titled “When and What Are the ‘Times of the Gentiles’?” I highly recommend it:

     http://mikeblume.com/timesgen.htm

     There’s one idea toward the end of the article that I’m not sure about, but otherwise I think he did an excellent job, especially in his comparison of three parallel passages: Luke 21:24, Romans 11:25, and Revelation 11:2. He also does well to point out that Scripture never ties the phrase “fullness of the Gentiles” in with salvation of Gentiles, nor does it equate this time period with the Church age. In Mike’s view, and mine as well, the “times of the Gentiles” ended in 70 AD rather than beginning at that time (as those with a futuristic interpretation of Luke 21:24 often assert).

     LikeLike

     Reply
3. Hey Adam,

   Thanks for the article! I think that he did a good job as well – with the exception of the ‘manner’ in which Jews would be saved.I do not believe that Paul intended as doctrine – that the manner in which Jews are saved is by provoking them to jealousy with Gentile salvation.

   I agree with what you wrote previously.

   ‘ At this present time I lean toward the idea that the fulfillment of Romans 11:26 is ongoing. In other words, I take the language of verses 26b and verse 27 to be a reference to Christ’s work on the cross (Jesus came from Zion in order to banish ungodliness from His people, He established a New Covenant in which sins are taken away from all who believe). Since that quote from Isaiah 59 is used to explain verse 26a, it seems to me that we are being told that it’s in this manner that “all Israel” (all who trust in Christ; see Romans 9:6-8) will be saved (i.e. is being saved even at this present time).’

   Thanks again,Adam

   Seroled

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. Hi again Adam,

   There was one another thing in Mike Blume’s article that did not set right.He said that God took the remnant out of Israel and placed it into the church and that Paul himself was of that remnant.

   Considering the ethnic make-up of the church at it’s inauguration on the day of Pentecost, including the 3000 thousand souls that were added to the church (Acts 2:5-11,41)it seems to me that the church began with believing Jews first.

   What do you think?

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Seroled,

     You and I both found the same point of disagreement with Mike Blume’s article, i.e. his idea that Paul meant for us to understand that the manner in which first-century Jews (his apparent definition of “all Israel”) were saved had to do with them being provoked to jealousy by Gentile conversions. We both agree that the manner in which “all Israel” (believing Jews and Gentiles) are being saved is explained by the prophecy from Isaiah 59 which follows after Paul’s statement in Romans 11:26a.

     Regarding your last comment, I agree that the Church began with believing Jews first, particularly those (and they were all Jews) who were converted on the Day of Pentecost. I looked, however, for where Mike Blume said the following (or anything like it):

     “…God took the remnant out of Israel and placed it into the church and…Paul himself was of that remnant.”

     I couldn’t find where he said that, though. Is it toward the end of the article? Here’s the closest thing I could find where he said anything similar to that, but here Mike was saying something different–that Paul didn’t see a future time when Israel would be brought into the Church:

     “And that was the very thing Paul was doing, giving us the understanding that Paul’s words had nothing to do with a future time when Israel might come into the Church. He was the one who wrote the words of the times of the gentiles being fulfilled. And he fully believed that would occur in his day.”

     So I agree with you about the Church beginning with believing Jews first. I’m just trying to find where Mike Blume may have said otherwise. Thanks.

     LikeLike

     Reply
5. Good morning Adam,

   Mike Blume stated that (Paul taught) that God took (a) remnant out of Israel and put them in the church. (My mistake – i changed his words)

   See below…

   Paul taught that God took a remnant out of Israel and put them in the church. He was one of them! (verse 5). And verse 7 says that Israel did not obtain what it looked for. The remnant or election obtained it instead. Why? Israel rejected Jesus. The rest of the people of Israel were blinded. Now, we must not forget about Romans 1 when we read about the blinding of Israel. Romans 1 teaches us that God presents truth to people, and then awaits their reaction. If they accept the truth and glorify God with it, then He reveals His righteousness to them, and saves them. But if they hold the truth and refuse to honour God with it, but continue on as though nothing has changed, then God reveals wrath to them. He gives them over. It is in this sense that Romans 11 says that God blinded Israel. They refused Jesus. Therefore God revealed wrath against them and blinded them.

   Thanks Adam,

   Seroled

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Seroled,

     Good morning to you too. Thanks for that quote. I found it in the article now. It’s about halfway through. I was looking further down in the article. You quoted him quite accurately.

     You’re right. The way that line reads makes it sound like there was already a significant Gentile Church body before God did His work among the Jews gathered at Pentecost. I suppose a more correct way of stating it is that God began the Church with a remnant saved out of Israel.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • Hi Adam,

       I’m glad you saw that.

       Yes,God began the church with a remnant saved out of Israel,that sounds a more correct way of stating it.

       Reading Romans 9-11, it seems that Paul (at least in part) was answering some (non Jews) in the churches in Asia minor or the Province of Rome – who believed even then, in a form of replacement theology…

       We are blessed (Today) and have a great advantage over those first century Christians to whom this letter was originally written.We have all of the letters and the Gospels! Just knowing that the inauguration of the church took place some 25 years before Paul wrote Romans is amazing, even if he was not referring specifically to the Jews of Pentecost as the Remnant,in this letter.

       Again,this was a great discussion you folks had on facebook,Adam.Thanks for sharing it.And always thank you for teaching!

       Seroled

       LikeLike

     • Seroled,

       Yes, we sure are blessed today. You’re welcome for sharing this discussion. I’m grateful to have your input here.

       Adam

       LikeLike

6. […] Who Are God’s Chosen People and Why Are They Chosen? […]

   LikeLike

   Reply
7. Hi Adam,

   I had stumbled upon your blog through Google-ing for “Vespasian” and “dragon” just two days ago — what a rich research of references and cross-references and how grateful I am that your blog is available! I derived great personal application of your exposition on “the abomination of desolation” too, but this would be off topic here…

   I’d just like to leave a comment here on “why God’s chosen people are presently chosen”, because this post immediately prompted me to re-examine the passage in the gospels about the Gentile woman whose daughter Jesus healed (Mark 7:24-30, Matthew 15:21-28). Jesus’s two statements had always puzzled me, until just before now!

   He said:
   “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”
   and,
   “It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs.”

   It was such joy to me to realize that when He said “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel”, that He said this to initiate His choice, which is on condition of her acceptance of it, to which she responded with worship.

   This joy materialized because then I also realized that his next statement was an affirmation of her worship — “It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs” — which is acknowledging that she is of the house of Israel, even though she is not descended from the bloodline of Israel, and although she is an acquired item inside the house of Israel, yet she is of the house of Israel.

   And the statement for which Jesus praises her faith — “Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs eat the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.” is that she sees a master for who he is — he who acquires the little dogs will be faithful to take care of them.

   So, that’s just how my thoughts played out after encountering your blog and the framework that you laid out so clearly with the different passages about God’s plan for the Jew and for the Gentile, so that I think I would articulate “chosen” to mean that it is God who chooses the conditions on which we can interact with him (if you are a lost sheep of Israel, you worship Him; if you worship Him, you acknowledge Him as your Master), and it is God’s mercy that He helps us fulfill our need of Him to be our Master who cares for us.

   Sophia

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Hi Sophia,

     Thank you for your comment here, and for your kind words about what’s available at this blog. Your thoughts on the Gentile woman whose daughter Jesus healed are interesting food for thought. Forgive me for not replying to you earlier.

     Feel free to express your thoughts as well under the post on the Abomination of Desolation.

     LikeLike

     Reply
8. Though I’m no scholar and I’m not well educated in theology, I rather enjoyed reading this forum and following the debate and I must say that I agree with your beliefs on this subject Adam. I also liked what Manuel had to add to the conversation and I wonder where Dan was coming from when he said the things he said about Israel.

   I too think you should consider writing a book on the topic as Nadia had suggested.

   I’ll continue reading 😀

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Corinne,

     I’m glad you enjoyed following this debate. I thought it turned out to be a great conversation. Dan and I do see things quite differently on this subject, but for the record I think he’s a great guy and I consider him to be a friend. He attends the church I grew up in back in Ohio. We had a great time over coffee when I went back to Ohio for a visit this last Christmas. As far as writing a book on the subject, we’ll have to see. I don’t know that I would add anything new that hasn’t been published by others.

     LikeLike

     Reply
9. Hello Adam,

   If you decide at some point to do a follow up on the this great post-here are two articles that you may find more than helpful.

   http://karleenp.tripod.com/askoldtimer/root.htm

   http://www.jcblog.net/romans/11/396-romans-1117-grafted-in-sharing-the-nourishing-sap-of-the-olive-root

   I held the position (most recently) that Jesus was the true elect of God – the Firstfruit to which God himself planted. Also that non Jews were ‘ grafted ‘ into the church that was inaugurated at the first Harvest festival after Jesus’ ascension. In a ‘ sense ‘ these things may be true. No matter, for it is evident by the scriptures and brought to light in these articles – is that non Jews like Jews who believe are grafted into Christ ALONE.

   He is the ROOT (Romans 11:13,16-24). The Firstfruits, the elect/chosen of God were the Fathers.They are the reason that the nation of Israel was beloved by God (Romans 11:28). Moreover, Jesus told his disciples that he was the TRUE VINE – as such they were branches abiding in him (John 15:1-7). So too, James made the argument that those who are brought forth by the word were also ‘ a kind of first fruits ‘ onto God (James 1:18).

   These articles say it so much better.

   Seroled

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Hi Seroled,

     Thanks for the articles and new feedback! We are “grafted into Christ ALONE.” I hear you! The first article at the “karleenp” website is most helpful, as we can see the Old Testament basis (Isaiah 11 and 53) for Paul’s description of the olive tree root. It’s very interesting that Paul in Romans 11 uses the word “root” in the singular and not in the plural. He doesn’t say “roots.” I think I passed over that before. Thanks again!

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • Hi Adam,

       Yes that article caused me to read Romans 11:16 again ‘ ROOT ‘ in the singular! i had not noticed that either.
       Also as you have said the premise is Isaiah 11 and 53!

       Seroled

       LikeLike

10. QUICK REBUTTLE TO DISPENATIONALISM

    We could spend the entire day and provide you scripture that would plainly counter (especially Old Testament verses cited by Premillennial Dispensationalist, but will only touch briefly on a few.

    (1)Dispensationalsists believe God deals in different ways with different people at different times denying the glory of a God who is the same, today yesterday and forever!

    (2) The eternal promise to Abraham was in regard to eternal salvation in that it would be fulfilled through his “seed” not his ethnic descendants: 16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,”[a] meaning one person, who is Christ, (Galatians 3:16).

    Sadly, dispensationalists use this verse in an inferential manner to have their minions believe that all of God’s promises were made primarily to ethnic Jews and need to be fulfilled before Christ returns. They never follow the road that all promises were fulfilled though Jesus Christ. It would take volumes to cite them all. But we highly recommend (to serious Bible students) that they purchase Hans K. La Rondelle’s book, “The Israel of God in Prophecy” which breaks down the varying exegetical and hermeneutical approaches used by dispensationalists as opposed to the orthodox means interpreting of the Bible.

    (3) Christian theorists try to make many points by using (actually misusing or abusing) cherry-picked verse and applying them in a haphazard manner. They admonish that all Christians should believe that Jesus has told them that we must deal with Israel from both a land and a people perspective.
    (a) Land: The entire issue of land has been settled and recorded in the Bible. Every land promises God made to Abraham all the way down to the 12 tribes of Israel was fulfilled. You can study the totality of the Book of Joshua to see this in explicit detail. The caveat God gave them after He fulfilled ALL of His land promises, Joshua relayed to his people thus:
    14 “Now I am about to go the way of all the earth. You know with all your heart and soul that not one of all the good promises the LORD your God gave you has failed. Every promise has been fulfilled; not one has failed.15 But just as every good promise of the LORD your God has come true, so the LORD will bring on you all the evil he has threatened, until he has destroyed you from this good land he has given you. 16 If you violate the covenant of the LORD your God, which he commanded you, and go and serve other gods and bow down to them, the LORD’s anger will burn against you, and you will quickly perish from the good land he has given you.”
    The people of Israel and its land occupiers violate God’s covenant daily! Inherent in those promises God made to Abraham was a deeper and more profound message. And it is not solely a “spiritual” one as many imply and infer, but the message that God’s TRUE PROMISED LAND was not going to be a restored ‘Old” Jerusalem, but a heavenly city, a country of their own, who’s architect is God Himself as we CLEARLY and ever so succinctly read in Hebrews 11:8-16):

    8 By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going. 9 By faith he made his home in the promised land like a stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. 10 For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God. 11 By faith Abraham, even though he was past age—and Sarah herself was barren—was enabled to become a father because he[a] considered him faithful who had made the promise. 12 And so from this one man, and he as good as dead, came descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as countless as the sand on the seashore.13 All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth.14 People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. 15 If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.

    In Hebrews 13, we read about this city (which is confirmed in Revelation 21:1-4) and ever so clearly noted “The high priest carries the blood of animals into the Most Holy Place as a sin offering, but the bodies are burned outside the camp. 12 And so Jesus also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood. 13 Let us, then, go to him outside the camp, bearing the disgrace he bore. 14 For here we do not have an enduring city, but we are looking for the city that is to come.”

    Old Jerusalem is not The Promised Land! The wars and contentions going back after Rome razed Jerusalem in 70 AD rages on because the Jews (and Christan Zionists) would rather believe the Pharisaical cabal of money-changers who have strived to get the power back Jesus took away from them when He paid the price and redeemed God’s Kingdom forever!

    (b) This is so easy I fail to comprehend how Bible-believing Christians cannot understand what happened when Christ ascended to Heaven after His resurrection. There is no longer any Jew or Gentiles that have to be considered in prophetic discussions, as we see CLEARLY in Ephesians, Chapter 2 (Replacement Theology? Never! We Are All One in Christ):

    11 Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” by those who call themselves “the circumcision” (that done in the body by the hands of men)— 12 remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17 He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.
    19 Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21 In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22 And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit, (Ephesians 2:11-22):
    What is the relationship the Patriarchs (the faith-believing remnant) were looking forward to, that God intended to accomplish: We see again clearly in Hebrews 11:39, which states:
    39 These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. 40 God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect, (Hebrews 11:39).
    In conclusion: We can continue to focus (eschatologically) on the political machinations we were warned not to concern ourselves with, which divides the church of God as no other issue) or we can believe in Jesus Christ, who fulfilled ALL prophecy on the cross.
    But, yet, unfortunately the devil is deceiving so easily the church that it makes one wonder how they will deal when ‘the man of lawlessness’ appears on the scene and begins to seduce and deceive so many in the church. This is happening now on such a grand scale, and this is why I wrote my book as a clarion call, and to explain that by abiding in Christ (and His word) we will be protected by God through what I call The End Times Passover. Many do not understand this and many will not be prepared to deal with the imminent persecutions in the immediate horizon, which is why I wrote the above book’s sequel, Why Christians Will Suffer Great Tribulation
    In His Peace,
    Joe Ortiz –

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Hi Joe. Thanks for stopping by, and for your comment. Amen to your point that all promises are fulfilled through Jesus Christ. Indeed, all the land promises were fulfilled long before Christ came the first time. I know there’s another reference in Nehemiah saying the same thing. As you said, the theology and the misguided activism of Christian Zionism is doing a lot to perpetuate the conflict happening right now in the Middle East.

      I have a question about something you said toward the end of your comment. You said that Jesus “fulfilled ALL prophecy on the cross.” Then you said that ‘the man of lawlessness’ will appear on the scene. Since you phrased that as a futuristic prophecy, I’m just wondering how you reconcile these two statements. Thanks!

      LikeLike

      Reply
11. […] http://kloposmasm.com/2010/09/23/who-are-gods-chosen-people-and-why-are-they-chosen/ […]

    LikeLike

    Reply
12. absolutely great stuff adam ! really enjoyed reading these posts, this is the first time i have read them as i came across it via ‘Israel today’
    enjoyed selored’s posts too, utterly fabulous !
    much love in Jesus christ our lord and saviour.
    Margaret

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Thanks, Margaret! I’m glad to know that you were blessed by this article. Yes, Seroled has shared lots of good thoughts here at this site. Love in Christ to you as well.

      LikeLike

      Reply
13. It seems very clear that in Romans 11 regards the Jews in an ethnic sense, as reflected in his reference to his own tribe of Benjamin and his comparison with the gentiles He is emphatic that the Jews remain beloved because of the Patriarchs and that the gifts and callings of God are without repentance. It couldn’t be clearer.. He also makes this clear in Romans 15 b y pointing out to the gentiles that if they benefited from the Jews’ spiritual blessings, it is only right that the Jews ( the Jewish saints in Jerusalem ) should benefit from the gentile’ spiritual blessings. However,we understand from Romans 9 that not all Jews are saved just because they are Jews., but from Romans 11 that we may expect a significant number to return. The 144000 reference in Revelation bears witness to this. The well known argeuemt that these tribes do not represent physical Israel also does not hold water. Dan is omitted because of the history of the tribe of Dan. Ephraim is omitted because as Jooseph’s firstborn he represents his father’s tribe. ( very correct in Judaic thinking ) Judah is listed at the top because it is the physical tribe of our Lord Jesus. The references to Israel’s history are too obvious to entertain any doubts as to the tribes not pertaining to real Jews.

    Paul

    Paul

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Hi Paul,

      Thanks for chiming in on the subject of Romans 11. I agree that the apostle Paul was speaking quite a bit about ethnic Jews, his people, in this chapter. I also agree with your observation of Paul’s argument in Romans 9. You might have to clarify what you mean when you say that “from Romans 11…we can expect a significant number to return.” I’m not sure what kind of a return you’re talking about.

      Do you have thoughts on the main subject of this post: “Who are God’s chosen people?”

      LikeLike

      Reply
14. Hi Adam

    I really like the questions that you have posed on this subject because I believe it touches the heart of message of the Bible – God’s faithfulness and our Lord Jesus, full of Grace and Truth. Of course, as Spurgeon once said, none of us has an airtight theology and we can all learn from each other.
    ‘
    In answer to the question, who are God’s chosen people, I would say that the Jews ‘ choseness is a picture of our choseness..
    I believe the Jews remain chosen for the following reasons. They are chosen as a result of God’s promise to the Patriarchs. In Deut.10:15 we read ” and the Lord set His affection on your forefathers and He chose you, their descendants , above all the nations, as it is today.’ Clearly this promise remains the same , because God’s relationship with Abraham has not changed. Moreover, we cannot claim that this applies to a spiritual Israel, as Paul refers to this in Romans 11 in regard to physical ethnic Israel, and included the whole of Israel, even its unsaved state. They are beloved because of the patriachs. It is an unconditional promise. I think the problem comes when we think of the Old and New Testaments as two covenants only when in fact there are 5 covenants, , four of which remain in place. The Mosaic covenant has been annulled,by the new Covenant but the Abrahamic Covenant remains. Paul draws on the strength of this Covenant in Hebrews, so there is no doubt in his mind that it is actual .Mary refers to it in the Gospels. By contrast, although the Jews remain chosen because of an unconditional promise to Abraham, their tenancy of the land is conditional. It is clear that the ownership of the land remains Jewish as this is part of Abrahamic covenant – the land and the promise to his descendants is connected. Yet even here we see that the conditions may be met after the return to the land. It is clear in Ezra that the Jews only put off their strange wives and practices after their return to the land, and we see a significant shift in Israel now with many thousands of Jews who believe in Jesus, including some important rabbis,. As in the time of the first exile, the return to the land is gradual. At no point in Biblical history did God allow His people to live in the land without His permission. He is sovereign .

    Finally, on this issue, one is reminded of the promise given to the Jews in Jeremiah 31:35 ; ” This is what the Lord says: He who appoints the sun to shine by day, Who decrees the moon and the stars to shine by night, Who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar – the Lord Almighty is His Name – “only if these decrees vanish from my sight”, declares the Lord will the descendants of Israel ever cease to be a nation before Me ” In case there is any doubt that this applies to ethnic Israel, rather than a spiritual Israel, it is followed by ” Only if the heavens above can be measured or the earth below searched out will I reject the descendants of Israel because of all they have done.” This is a clear promise that even takes into account ethnic Israel’s disobedience, but God’s faithfulness. Yes, it is conditional – as long as natural law is in place, which I think we can agree ,still is.

    Does this mean that we believing gentiles are not chosen? Decidedly not, as evidenced by 1 Peter , 2: 9-11 I rather like the way David Pawson explains it in is his book ” Defending Christian Zionism, Pg 77 . ” In reference to Sizer he writes ” Take for example his valid claim that Old Testament descriptions of Israel are used of the Church in the New. That is obviously true and beyond dispute .But how is that to be understood? There are at least two ways to interpret its significance.

    On one hand ,it can be seen as the transfer of one people to another , ,from Israel to the Church. That is the way anti Zionists take it. It is a fundamental assumption of “replacement” or “supersessionist theology.” But the logic is flawed. It is a considerable leap from the transfer of some functional language, and a limited amount at that, to believe that everything said to and about Israel in the Old Testament has also been transferred, and an even bigger one to believe it has all been taken away from Israel. It is a slender argument. On the other hand , it can be understood in an inclusive rather than an exclusive way, meaning the Church now shares in the function that is still God’s purposes for Israel, namely to be a light to the world ( Isaiah 42:6,49:6 Matthew %:14, Luke 2:32, Acts 13:4726:23. This application is much more aligned to statements in the New Testament that Christian s are now fellow citizens WITH God’s people (ie Israel ) ( Ephesians2:19, not “instead of” or “part of” but “with”: that gentile Christians have been grafted into the one olive tree of God, alongside the Jewish branches, ( Romans 11:17-18 )and she will one day fulfill it. So the transfer of functional language taken in the context of the whole New Testament, far from demolishing the Zionist case, actually builds on it! ”

    This takes us to the second question posed on your website – ” Why are they chosen? ”

    I think the answer is stated din Romans 9 :4-6 . They produced the patriarchs, the prophets, to them the very words of God had been entrusted and from them the human ancestry of Jesus Christ is traced. This follows them into the future, if any doubt should ever be cast on their current relevance in Revelation12 5-6 It is clear that the male child is Jesus as only He will rule all nations with a rod of iron, and only He has been caught up to the throne of God. The woman mentioned here is Israel, the Jewish people, Many try to claim that this is the Church, but the Church cannot be said to have brought forth the Messiah. He is God, the Second person of the Trinity. Only the Jews can be said to be the source from which he sprang in the flesh . ( From them is traced the human ancestry of Christ ” ) It is evident here that Satan will turn his wrath towards Israel as a nation having been unsuccessful in attempting to destroy the Male Child. The 144000 , which I mentioned in my last post , are unmistakably Jewish, and also speak of God’s dealings with the Jews in the Last Days. Jesus said ” Salvation is of the Jews” His name means salvation in Hebrew.
    ”
    Even their disobedience has been used, as they fell with a purpose. Romans 11 says ”if their fall means riches for the gentiles, what will their return be but life from the dead? In other words, their rejection of the Messiah opened the way for the Gospel to be brought to the world. Did this surprise God ” God has not cast away His people, whom He foreknew.( Romans 11 )

    Finally, you asked if I would clarify what I meant by all Israel being saved. I think it is best answered by Paul’s comment in Romans 11 25-29 . Specifically, ‘ Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of gentiles has come in. And so, all Israel will be saved ” If Israel has experienced a hardening ” in part ”, clearly their unsaved numbers are partial , not complete. How long will this hardening last? . The answer is clearly ” until the full number of gentiles has come in.” As we can hardly say that the full number of gentiles who will ever be saved has been completed, we know that this return on a national basis is still in the future, and is clearly connected to the completion of gentile believers. We need not deduce from this that every single person in Israel will be saved. Sadly, it does not seem that every gentile will either. It refers, as with the gentiles , to the full number of Jews who will come in. Then , as Jesus says ” The two shall be one flock ” Paul says that if their fall meant riches for the gentiles, . what will be their return be but life from the dead?” So the nature of this return can be expected to have an even greater effect for the Kingdom of God than their fall.

    But what of verses like,” there is no Jew or Greek, slave nor free? I think this applies to us on an individual basis, both Jew and Gentile, for God is no respecter of persons, but is distinct from his Divine purpose for Israel as a nation. It applies, I think, to all believers, Jew and Gentile , in one flock.

    All best

    Paul

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Hi Paul,

      In regard to what God has done concerning Israel and the church, I see [1] a cutting off, [2] expansion, and [3] continuity.

      [1] God cut off from His people those who won’t listen to and believe His Son: “For Moses truly said to the fathers, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear in all things, whatever He says to you. And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people” (Acts 3:22-23). This included the majority of the Jewish people.

      [2] However, God preserved and has saved a remnant from among the Jewish people, those who have trusted in Christ. They are part of God’s chosen people, along with non-Jews who also have trusted in Christ. “Yes, and all the prophets, from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also foretold these days. You are sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.’ To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.”

      [3] The concept of God’s people, and the concept of being chosen, continued and never ceased, but it’s all wrapped up in Jesus, not in ethnicity. Jesus and Paul were crystal clear that being ethnically tied to Abraham counts for nothing and does not automatically qualify a person to be a recipient of God’s promises, blessings, or salvation.

      Nothing is lost from Jeremiah 31:35 in this view. God never completely rejected the ethnic descendants of Abraham. He kept a remnant from among them, as Paul points out in Romans 11. God’s nation also continues, but who are the descendants of Abraham according to the New Testament? They are those who trust in Christ, regardless of ethnicity. Galatians 3, for example, describes this truth very clearly.

      Regarding Isaiah 42:6, Isaiah 49:6, Ephesians 2;19, etc., I believe it’s a serious mistake to assume that the church joins the entire political nation of Israel in these roles. Rather, the roles of being God’s people and being a light to the world only belong to the church, the body of Christ. Jewish believers, Palestinian believers, Australian believers, and any other believers (in Christ) living in Israel have these roles, as do all believers living in any other country, but all unbelievers (Jewish or otherwise) living in Israel have nothing to do with these roles.

      Romans 11:25-29 is a fairly difficult passage, but I’ll just say that I favor the translation of verse 25 that says “the fullness of the Gentiles,” rather than “the full number of Gentiles.” I see that expression as parallel to Luke 21:24 and Revelation 11:2. I believe this goes back to Daniel’s and Nebuchadnezzar’s visions of the four Gentile nations (Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome) that would have dominance over Israel until the time that God would set up an everlasting kingdom. Those days have come and gone (but His kingdom remains). So I don’t believe that “the fullness of the Gentiles” or “the times of the Gentiles” is related to Gentiles being saved. A very good article on this subject, I believe, is this one: http://mikeblume.com/timesgen.htm

      LikeLike

      Reply
15. Hi Adam

    You are correct in your comments that those Jews who do not accept Jesus are cut off ( as mentioned in Romans !!. Jesus said that God could of these stones raise up children of Abraham. The point here is that anyone as an individual could be cut off. Being a Jew does not ensure salvation. Paul makes this warning to the gentiles as well. These warnings apply to the individual and are not connected to God’s plan for the nation of Israel. They have not lost their chosenness as a nation, and their disobedience does not disqualify Israel from this role, only unbelieving individuals within it. Paul makes this indisputably clear when he states ” As far as the Gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account, but as far as ELECTION is concerned, they are loved on account of the Patriarchs for God’s gifts and calling are irrevocable. Any other interpretation would require a manipulation of the text.
    I also cannot agree that the term ” fullness of the gentiles” does not refer to gentiles being saved. The entire context of Romans 11 is about Jews and gentiles being saved. This is particularly true in the verse you have just mentioned regarding the full number of gentiles coming in. ” And so, all Israel will be saved ” The Greek word used here is “hautos ” meaning SO, IN THIS WAY “.all Israel will be saved. It show the relationship between what has preceeded to what follows. If the preceeding statement has nothing to do with Gentiles being saved, this further strengthens the position that ALL ISRAEL refers to the Jews , which only weakens the replacement position even further.

    I do not agree with you that Jesus and Paul made it clear that being ethnically tied to Abraham counts for nothing. They made it clear that a Jew cannot assume he is saved just because he is a Jew. If Paul thought being ethnically tied to Abraham counted for nothing, he would not have said they are beloved because of the Patriarchs. It is , in any event, more about descent. Of course, many promises are spiritual, but there is a danger in spiritualising promises that are literal. Acts 2 29 states that David being a prophet knew that ” God had promised him on oath that He would place one of his descendants on the throne” The Greek word for this is accurately translated as of his loins, IN THE FLESH ” Jesus is the physical descendant of David. .As this promise has yet to take place , Jesus has yet to reign, as the descendant of David, the Jewish King of Israel’s throne. David’s throne was a physical one, and a Jewish one. As Jesus remains a descendant of David, that in itself is enough in my view to see the chosenness of the Jews is still in place. The Angel Gabriel said ” Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the House of Jacob forever. As David Pawson asks, did Gabriel get his wires crossed.? Was this a false message, soon to be out of date and misleading? The promise made to David was based on descent. So was the promise made to Abraham regarding the Jews. Yes, we Gentiles too are Abraham’s seed because we are in Christ. But if we look at Genesis, we find that the word seed in Hebrew is always in the singular grammatically. Thus we can only tell when it is plural or singular by the use of the third person for instance surrounding it. Genesis 22:17 shows both usages, and in the context of our Lord Jesus.I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven .and as the sand which is upon the sea shore.and thy Seed shall possess the gates of HIS enemies

    But that is a subject for another day!

    All best

    Paul

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Paul,

      I have to disagree with your assertion that Jesus is not reigning now. Ephesians 1:20-22, for examples, tells us that Jesus is sitting “in the heavenly places” at the right hand of the Father, “head over all things to the church.” This was true already in Paul’s day. See also Hebrews 10:12-13, Acts 2:25-36, and Revelation 3:21, among other New Testament texts. Daniel saw a vision of Jesus ascending to the Father and “then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom the one which shall not be destroyed” (Daniel 7:13-14). Jesus was given the authority to reign when He ascended to the Father, He has been reigning ever since, and He will reign forever.

      LikeLike

      Reply
16. Hi

    Yes indeed, Ephesians 1;20-22 speaks of the ascension, exaltation, and enthronement of Christ, and His sovereign dominion. As it says in Hebrews, He holds all things together with the word of His power. My reference is to His millennial reign and beyond As you will see from the following verses in Ephesians one, Paul mentions the prince of the power of the air – who now works in the sons of disobedience. We see in Revelation 20 that the resurrected saints will reign with Jesus for a thousand years, during which time satan will be bound and without influence in the world.. This can hardly be said to be the case now. although satan is already a defeated foe, this period is yet to come.

    Similarly your reference to Daniel 7:13-14 speaks of a future event. Our Lord Jesus spoke of this in Matthew 24:30 ” then the sign of the Son of Man shall appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth shall mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of Heaven and in great glory.” You will see from this chapter that this event follows the tribulation, which can hardly be said to be a past event, much less the events in the skies that will be witnessed. first.

    All best

    Paul

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Hi Paul,

      The 1000 year period spoken of in Revelation 20 makes for a tough subject. I’ll just point out that this passage does not speak of a beginning or an end to Jesus’ reign. It only shows the saints who didn’t worship the beast living and reigning together with Christ for “a thousand years.” Jesus was already reigning when they began “to live and reign” with Him, and He has continued to reign after their time to reign with Him was up.

      As for Satan, his ability to deceive the nations was cut off for a time. That’s all we’re told about what he was unable to do during this time. I don’t find that to be an easy subject either.

      Jesus does indeed make reference to Daniel 7:13-14 in Matthew 24. Daniel’s vision clearly shows Jesus ascending to the Father, not descending to the earth. How could that be a future event to us? Furthermore, Jesus said that “ALL these things” He shared in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21) would be fulfilled before His generation would pass away. He is a true prophet and He kept His word. If you have the time and are interested, you can read here about the fulfillment of all those things:

      http://kloposmasm.com/olivet-discourse/

      All the tribes of Israel (i.e. of “the land” or “the earth”) did indeed witness the Lord’s coming in judgment. As Adam Clarke [1762-1832] said regarding verse 30: “The plain meaning of this is, that the destruction of Jerusalem will be such a remarkable instance of Divine vengeance, such a signal manifestation of Christ’s power and glory, that all the Jewish tribes shall mourn, and many will, in consequence of this manifestation of God, be led to acknowledge Christ and his religion.” And as Kevin Daly of Messianic Good News (South Africa) wrote, “The fall of Jerusalem was itself the sign (evidence) that Jesus was enthroned at the right hand of the Father in heaven, bringing judgment on the city.”

      Besides the link to our Olivet Discourse studies above, there is also valuable information here concerning the 3.5 year great tribulation (February 67 AD – August 70 AD) predicted in detail in the book of Revelation:

      http://kloposmasm.com/revelation/

      LikeLike

      Reply
17. Hi Adam

    That’s a lot of material to discuss, and , as you say, tough subject.
    Regarding the reference to Daniel 7:13 as evidence of the Ascension of our Lord after the resurrection ( which is what I assume you mean ) poses a number of insoluble problems. Firstly, linguistically the Son of Man comes WITH the clouds ( the Hebrew word is ‘im)
    No suggestion of ascent is made here. Apart from this, and more importantly, our Lord Himself makes it clear that this is a future event. The first problem this poses is that this view would contradict Acts 1:11 which specifically says ” Why stand ye gazing up into Heaven ?The same Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as you have seen Him go into Heaven.” So clearly , Jesus will return to earth.

    The chronology of these events as our Lord presents it, also does not support the idea that this has already taken place.

    1)Our Lord predicted that some believers would be put to death. Even the disciples were only martyred after the Ascension. Jesus places this event before His coming in the clouds.
    2)Our Lord said ‘ The Good news will be preached in all the world, unto all nations, and then the end will come” If the coming in the clouds referred to His ascension, why was his last command before he ascended to preach the Gospel throughout the world beginning at Jerusalem? The Gospel certainly hadn’t been preached throughout the world , even at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
    3)Our Lord said ” Except those days be shortened there should no flesh be saved.” If those days meant that period, no one else would have been saved since.

    This discourse also points out that ‘ the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel, the prophet ” would stand in the Holy Place. This happened once in the time of Antiochus, but Jesus could not have been referring to this, as that happened approx 250 BC. It seems unlikely that it referred to the sacking of Jerusalem, as the city was utterly destroyed.It therefore must refer to a rebuiliding of the physical temple in the future. This becomes a complex discussion, because Luke 21 speaks of Jerusalem being trampled by the gentiles and the Jews taken captive to all parts of the earth .Most prophecy however speaks of two time events often in a single paragraph.Take Isaiah and Zecheriah for example

    Now, for the verse ” This generation shall not pass away until all be fulfilled’ Given that our Lord clearly states that all these other event must take place first, such as the Good news being preached throughout the earth to all nations, the matrydom of believers, the destruction of Jerusalem etc ,there is no place to assume that the coming in the clouds refers to the Ascension, which took place before these events. ” This generation” must be taken to mean the generation that lives in this time. It will all take place within one generation.

    The reference to all the tribes of the earth being the Jews in 70 AD makes no sense to me, as firstly this implies gentiles. However, lets assume it does mean the Jews. This is referred to in Zecheriah where the inhabitants of Jerusalem will have poured out on them the Spirit of grace and supplications, and will mourn for the One they have pierced as one mourns a long lost son. The inhabitants of Jerusalem did not do this in 70 AD. They ran.The Jews remain at the moment, largely unconverted, so placing this event in 70 AD doesnot fit in with the rest of the text.

    I’ll take a look at the website you suggested meanwhile. Sounds interesting. Meanwhile, tell me what you think of revelation 3:21 and Revelation 12:5,

    All best

    Paul

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Hi Paul,

      I just realized that I never answered your comment from January 4th. My apologies. At the same time, I don’t want to go on much longer, as our discussion here is no longer related much to the main post (“Who are God’s chosen people, and why are they chosen?”).

      Regarding Daniel 7:13, I will quote this verse here so we can clearly see what it says:

      “I was watching in the night visions, and behold, One like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him.”

      Jesus is shown coming TO His Father who is seated on His throne. The next verse goes on to show Jesus receiving an eternal kingdom. When Jesus makes reference to this verse in Matthew 24, I believe He is communicating that the kingdom He would receive at His ascension would be given to His church at His coming (Parousia) nearly ONE GENERATION LATER at the time of Jerusalem’s judgment. This mirrors what He said in Matthew 21:43-44 about taking the kingdom away from the religious rulers of Israel and giving it to a fruit-bearing people (His church) at the time when Israel would be crushed.

      You said that “the Gospel certainly hadn’t been preached throughout the world, even at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.” Scripture, however, says otherwise:

      [1] “Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven… And they were amazed and astonished, saying… ‘we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God’” (Acts 2:5-11).

      [2] “First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is proclaimed in all the world” (Romans 1:8).

      [3] “Now to Him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations…” (Romans 16:25-26).

      [4] “…the word of the truth, the gospel, which has come to you, as indeed in the whole world it is bearing fruit and growing… (Colossians 1:5-6).

      [5] “…if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel that you heard, which has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister (Colossians 1:23).

      Blessings,
      Adam

      LikeLike

      Reply
18. Dear Adam

    Thank you for your response. I agree with you that this discussion has probably gone on long enough, so I will not be contributing further to this website apart from what follows. I do not agree however that it has departed from the subject of the Jews as all these aspects are connected with them. One’s view of the Jews affects one’s view of Grace, predestination, justification by faith, and the fulfillment of prophecy. We can can agree that everything our Lord says is TRUE. We may fail when we do not always understand it, but His Word endures forever.

    Let me address your first comment regarding Matthew 21 and Israel being replaced by the Church. Firstly , that replacement is temporary and intended to bring back the Jews to their Messiah. Romans 10:19 gives this the required context.” I will provoke you to jealousy by those who are not a nation, I will move you to anger by a foolish nation” Hence, Romans 11 deals with the way gentiles are used to bring Jews back to their Messiah. God has a purpose, and His Word will never fail. It will happen.

    Now, as far as the reference to Daniel is concerned, we have already covered why it should not be confused with the Ascension. As I pointed out to you, Acts 1 says ” Men of Galilee, why stand you gazing up into Heaven/ The same Jesus whom you who was taken up from you into Heaven, will come in like manner as you saw Him go into Heaven.” The Ascension was seen by some 500 people. His coming will be seen by the world, and certainly by the entire nation of Israel. Jesus Himself refers to His coming as a) something that will be seen, and b) with Him coming in the clouds seated at the Right Hand of the Power. Thessalonians also makes it clear that the Lord will descend from heaven with a shout. Some Preterists , I understand even believe that the resurrection was a past event. I do not think they would not be able adequaately to explain how Paul expects that also those who are alive at His coming will be caught up to meet Him,

    Jesus was not seen in 70 AD. To regard the judgment of Jerusalem as evidence of His coming is to deny what He Himself says about it. The Greek word used, from which we get the word optometrist tells of a literal seeing. There is another Greek word for seeing in terms of understanding. They will look on the One Whom they have pierced. Jesus refers to his appearance as lightening that shines so His return is seeable and undeniable. Again the Greek words here imply literal seeing. Matthew 24 also tells us that the elect will be gathered from the 4 winds. At 70 AD the opposite happened. They were dispersed. Four winds in Hebrew thinking means from the extremities of the earth. No attempt to spiritualise the meaning can be made here. They were already a part of Jesus’s heavenly Kingdom, a point emphasized in Colossians. The signs in the sky were also not seen . Peter expands on this by describing the Day of the Lord, coming like a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat and the works that are therein shall be burnt up.” Was this recorded in 70 Ad. Descriptions of a few shooting stars and a few earthquakes do not match Peter’s description. Also,the enemies of God are destroyed at this time. At 70 Ad the Romans emerged intact. Most of the Jews by the way did not live in Israel at this time. About one million lived in Judea, and 7 million in the Empire, mostly Rome.

    This brings us to the discussion on timing. Our Lord said that He would come like a thief in the night. The complexity of this discussions lies in the fact that the disciples asked Jesus more than one question which he therefore answered simultaneously.a) When will these things be? ( the destruction of the Temple ) b) what will be the sign of your coming, and c) and of the end of the age.

    One could assume that one generation meant the current generation who saw the destruction of Jerusalem. Clearly, Our Lord predicted this. The order presented in Matthew and mark would allow for the interpretation that ” THESE things ” apply to the fall of Jerusalem, and THOSE things apply to the Second Coming.David Prson explains it this way. However, Luke states that this generation shall not pass away tell all be fulfilled. The answer perhaps lies in a look at the semitic conception of the word generation. Remember the disciples were not Greek, they were Jews. Although the NT was written in Greek it was transcribed from Hebrew and Aramaic conversations and has to be interpreted in a Jewish way. The word for generation in Hebrew, apparently implies something circular, without a specific end, and therefore applies to a particular type of person, not a group of contemporary people. This is how it is often used throughout the Bible. Psalm 21 therefore says ” Preserve us from THIS generation FOREVER.” It is often used in a pejorative sense, as our Lord uses it throughout Matthew. ie ” Wherefore behold, I send unto you prophets and wise men and scribes: and some of them you shall kill and crucify, and some of them you shall scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them form city to city: that upon you shall come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zecherias , son of Barachias whom you slew between the Temple and the alter.” Verily I say unto you, all these things will come upon this generation.” Now clearly, the Pharisees are the generation on which these things will come. But they were not there, when Abel was murdered. ( In fact Jews did not exist as a race at this time. The Pharisees, whom our Lord was addressing, were also not born when our Lord said they murdered Zacheriah. There is a simultaneous usage here, the Pharisees themselves, and the type of person they represent down the ages. Hence the use of the term, the generation of the wicked and the generation of the righteous. The same generation s to be seen down the ages. In this sense, it seems logical to see that the generation of the wicked will not pass away until all these things be fulfilled. This is also in keeping with the Jewish usage of the word and the way it is often used in the Bible.

    This is connected with the important points you made about the references by Paul to the Gospel having already been preached in all the world. The term , in Greek, ekoumene can be understood in three ways’ The Roman world, as in Luke 2, the cultural Greek world, or the inhabited world. It is used in more than one way in the New Testament. Paul’s usage of it is a turn of phrase, common at the time, meaning ”everywhere” , somewhat similar to the French phrase, partout. In Luke, it refers to the Roman world.In Acts 17:31, it refers to the final judgement of the world at the end of time.” He has appointed a Day in which he will judge the World ( not just the Jews, in righteousness. To understand what is meant by ekoumene in the Olivet Discourse, it might be helpful to consider what was meant by the end of the Age. Remembering again that our Lord Jesus and His disciples were Jews, we must look for what was understood in Jewish terms. Age in Greek is translated as aeon, and could mean period or age. In Hebrew, the word “olam” means much more than period. The end of the olam means the end of the world. This is how our Lord Jesus uses it only a few chapters before in Matthew 13:40 when referring to the judgement of the world. It does not mean as Preterists claim, the end of the Jewish age in 70 AD. The end of the ” Jewish age” by which one can only mean the Mosaic Covenant, took place at the Cross, not 70 AD.

    Well, thank you Adam for allowing me to discuss these things with you, I have learnt from it, and thanks to you, it has made me think. I wish you all the best and many blessings.

    Paul

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Adam does a thorough job of explaining the use of ‘generation’…
      https://adammaarschalk.com/2013/02/26/jesus-use-of-this-generation-in-the-olivet-discourse-is-no-different-than-anywhere-else/

      LikeLiked by 1 person

      Reply
19. Bonjour Adam, je me permets de vous donner “ma version ” concernant les élus.
    Mais commençons par les appelés.
    On sait qu il y a beaucoup d appelés mais peu d élus.
    Je crois que les appelés étaient tout l Israël terrestre.
    Plus précisément, les appelés étaient l église.
    L église étant littéralement les appelés hors de.
    Hors de quoi, hors du règne des ténèbres.
    Pourquoi s agit il d Israël seulement?
    Parce que c est le peuple choisi, élu.
    Il y a eu une élection terrestre, et une céleste.
    Ce que je crois aussi, c’est que ceux qui sont appelés païens, et dépendaient du ministère de Paul, étaient des israélites ayant perdu leur lignée suite aux différentes dispersion au cours de l histoire du peuple hébreu .
    Jésus n était venu que pour les brebis perdues de la maison d Israël, mais qu il avait des brebis de deux bergeries différentes.
    Les élus étaient tous ceux qui auraient reçu la révélation du Nom.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • Hi Regis,

      Thank you for your comment. I used “Google Translate” to read your comment because I only know a few words in French. I’m familiar with what is known as the “Israel Only” view, but I don’t agree with it. In recent months I’ve seen people proposing that view, and I’m slowly preparing to respond to it. I’ll probably post my response(s) here at this site. Others who hold this view say that no one has been added to God’s kingdom or the new covenant since AD 70. Is that your view as well, or are you just saying that God is only calling ethnic Israelites to Himself (until the present time)? I see the words “were” and “had” in your comment, so I think you’re saying that God only called people (Israelites) to know Him in the past, but I want to make sure and not assume things about your belief.

      LikeLike

      Reply
20. 
    https://polldaddy.com/js/rating/rating.jsIt is important to study the “philology” of the word ‘Jew’ as it does NOT have the same meaning TODAY as it did in Biblical times. THEN it referred to citizens of Judea or anyone of the Tribe of Judah. TODAY it means ANYONE who practices Judaism. And ANYONE can convert to Judaism (a man made religion). Hence, the reason why there are Chinese Jews, Ethiopian Jews etc. Most Christians believe Jews are a race today and nothing could be further from the truth. Even the word ‘anti Semitic ‘ is misapplied as one must be of the 12 Tribes of Israel in order to be scriptural in the meaning of ‘Semitic’. Judaism today admits it is incorrect to call a Jew an ancient Israelite or Hebrew. They also admit 90-95% of European Jews are of Ahkenazi descent (Khazar). The waters have been so muddled over this little word.
    http://www.whatjewsbelieve.org/explanation9.html
    When a person coverts to Christianity they are no longer ‘Jewish’.

    LikeLike

    Reply