Who are the Sheep?

[Joleneakamama]

If what Jesus said about His sheep hearing His voice and following Him is true, Christians are the sheep He was sent to and must be Israelites.
Where then is the Biblical foundation for the current prevailing teaching in the churches that the Jews are Gods chosen people?
I ask because some would have us believe certain scriptures only apply to Jews or even Jews living in Israel but based on what Jesus said if you reject Him and refuse to follow Him you are not one of His sheep.

 

[Anonymous]

If what Jesus said about His sheep hearing His voice and following Him is true, Christians are the sheep He was sent to and must be Israelites.
Where then is the Biblical foundation for the current prevailing teaching in the churches that the Jews are Gods chosen people?

This is apparently a very sensitive subject for some people and it's difficult to answer this question without stepping on someone's theological toes. Anyone who is likely going to find a way to be offended at the truth can stop reading here.

=======

The whole of NT Scriptures teach that ethnic considerations are no longer the deciding factor for the "Israel of God". Physical descendants of Abraham are not the Israel of God, but the spiritual descendants of Abraham are. In some cases, they are one and the same and in that case, a physical descendant of Abraham is ALSO a spiritual descendant of Abraham and is the true Israel of God. But one does not ensure the other. It is entirely on a person by person basis. One's national or ethnic background gives absolutely no credit under the New Covenant of Messiah.

It's a lot like looking at the type and shadow of circumcision. In the type (Mosaic), physical circumcision was the mark of Israel. In the antitype (Messianic), spiritual circumcision is the mark of Israel. There will be cases where a person is both physically and spiritually circumcised, but the physical type bears no significance any longer. The type was to point to the antitype, not the other way around.

To answer your question, the physical descendants of Judah today (if they are outside of Messiah) have no special significance in anything related to the Kingdom. They are simply physical descendants of Abraham, Issac and Jacob. To have relationship with God, one must be a follower of the Messiah, period. Thus, Germans, French, Africans, Jews, Arabians and whomever else are all in the same boat as equals and all need the same savior. It makes no difference what people or nations choose to call themselves. They are either IN or they are OUT.

The true Israel of God, God's chosen people, are those who are followers of His Son, period. They have inherited the promise through the Seed of Abraham. There is no second seed. To receive the promise, one must be a part of the One to whom the promise was given. Anyone who teaches otherwise, due to lack of understanding prophecy or due to bad theology, is in error. I would be happy to provide all necessary Scripture references but I don't want to cause division among the body. If anyone is going to be offended, tell me to shut up and I will. However, you can e-mail me and I will provide all the Scriptures that solidify this position. Stay blessed!

In His love,
David

 

[ravmoshe]

This is very simple if we want it to be, friends. Israel is neither exclusively physical or spiritual, but BOTH. All born again believers are part of the Israel of YHWH and if that is so, they are all spiritually regenerated and physical HUMANS, making them both physical and spiritual Israel.

Who is who is solely defined by what is what. If the body of Messiah is the Commonwealth of Israel, see Ephesians 2, which it is, then all members are Israel. The total is the sum of its parts.

The best way to grasp this is through the extensive and liberating 2 house message as I have outlined at http://www.yourarmstoisrael.org. Moreover, if the church claims to actually be Israel replacing the Jews, which it is not, and has not, then it ought to show the fruits of Israelite living, and live like Yahshua/Jesus did by celebrating His Father's FEASTS and not pagan X Mass and such. One cannot claim to be Israel doctrinally and yet follow the feasts and Sabbath of Rome. It's either/or, folks. Shalom all
rm

 

[Anonymous]

There is an old Messianic parable that a bundle of tares, a stack of stubble, and a pile of chaff, were arguing about the ownership of a field. The tares said the field belonged to them. The stack of stubble said the field belong to them. And the pile of chaff said the field belonged to them. The argument went on and on with no side conceding. Standing to one side was a sheaf of wheat that had been harvested from the field and which was listening to all the arguments. Finally the tares, the stubble, and the chaff asked the wheat its opinion. The wheat said to them all: You can argue all you want about which of you the field belongs to but we shall all see who it belongs to when the owner arrives.

Matt. 21:33-43: "Hear another parable: There was a certain man, a householder who planted a vineyard and placed a hedge around it, and dug a winepress in it and built a watchtower. And he leased it to farmers and went abroad. And when the season of the fruits drew near, he sent his servants to the farmers, to receive its fruit. And the farmers took his servants and beat one, and they killed one, and they stoned another. Again he sent other servants, more than the first, and they did likewise to them. And at last he sent his son to them, saying, 'They shall respect my son.' But when the farmers saw the son, they said among themselves, 'This is the heir. Come, let us kill him, and let us possess his inheritance.' And they took him, and threw him out of the vineyard, and killed him. Therefore, when the master of the vineyard comes, what shall he do to those farmers?" They said to Him, "Evil ones! He shall bring them to evil destruction, and lease the vineyard to other farmers who shall give to him the fruits in their seasons." Yahushua said to them, "Did you never read in the Scriptures, 'The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone. This was from Yahweh, and it is marvellous in our eyes'? Because of this I say to you: the reign of Elohim shall be taken from you and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits of it."

Rom. 2:28-29: "For he is not a Yehudite who is so outwardly, neither is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But a Yehudite is he who is so inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in Spirit, not literally, whose praise is not from men but from Elohim. "

Love in Him,
David

 

[Joleneakamama]

Hello again,
These are a few points from this thread that I cannot reconcile with the word as I understand it.
ravmoshe said...
'Moreover, if the church claims to actually be Israel replacing the Jews, which it is not, and has not, then it ought to show the fruits of Israelite living, and live like Yahshua/Jesus did by celebrating His Father's FEASTS and not pagan X Mass and such. One cannot claim to be Israel doctrinally and yet follow the feasts and Sabbath of Rome. It's either/or, folks.'

Hosea 2:11 says I (God) will cause all her (Israel's) mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her Sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts.
If you read in Jer 31:31 it prophesies about the ten tribes coming back in with the new covenant, and Ezekiel in 36:26-27 describes the new covenant.
Paul and Peter both identified the Gentiles as the ten tribes. Rom 9:24-26 and Rom 2:14-15 1 Peter 1:10 (when was there ever a prophesy of grace coming to non Israelites?) 1 Pet 2:9-10 (V10 sounds like the same verses from Hosea Paul quoted in Rom 9:24-26)
Isaiah said 62:2 that His people would be called by a new name.
So I do believe there is scripture to support a claim to be Israel without keeping the feasts. All they told the Gentile Israelites when they came back in under the new covenant is in Acts 15:12, 28-29 and it didn't include the feasts.
djanakes said...
'The whole of NT Scriptures teach that ethnic considerations are no longer the deciding factor for the "Israel of God".Physical descendants of Abraham are not the Israel of God, but the spiritual descendants of Abraham are.'
The reason that Jesus called some Jews claiming Abraham for their father 'children of their father the devil'' was that these were not Israelites (see Jn 8:33) John the Baptist called them a generation of vipers when they came out to see him Mt 3:7-10
One had to be a descendant of Jacob/Israel not only Abraham (see Rom 9:7-13) and Paul calls the descendants of Ishmael and Esau 'not the children of God.'

djanakes said...
'One's national or ethnic background gives absolutely no credit under the New Covenant of Messiah.'

The new covenant was with the houses of Israel and Judah Jer 31:31 and it is made plain in Eze 36:17-27 that God would save Israel not because they were better then anyone else and deserved it, but because they represented Him.
So I think if you read the prophesies about Edom (Esau's descendants) like in Obadiah and then read those about even the cast off house of Israel in Ezekiel you will see a huge distinction God puts between Jacob who He loved and Esau who He loved less (the Bible says hated and it is that extreme)

Given what God said He would do for His holy name's sake in Eze 36:22 and what He says He will do to Esau in Obadiah I think national background does make a difference.

So now I am wondering, how do others here see these verses fitting the 'God looks at everyone the same' doctrine? Jolene

 

[welltan]

I think a purely theological discussion on this subject must include the whole chapter 11 in Romans. After reading this chapter completely consider this.

Paul wrote this after Christ's work on the cross, and the church was already in existance.

The grafting that is spoken of is usually discussed from whatever is being grafted in. We should also consider that it is impossible to graft anything into dead stock, but it must be alive stock.

The most difficult scriptures here to accept in this chapter are:

28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father's sakes.

29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

Also it should be noted that anything that is grafted in shares the life but not the look. Grafted in branches rarely look like the stock they are grafted into. And as what is grafted in is by faith, and since it is impossible to please God without faith. Then the root stock shares the life produced by faith and it is acceptable and pleasing to God. Asking what is grafted to look like the root stock infers a process that might displease God.

This discussion is not a new one, but it will always be a failure if either side seeks to pluck out what is grafted, deny the stock with the roots, stand alone without the other, or insist that the grafted and the stock look alike or have the exact same fruit.

It also puts a whole new meaning on "what God has joined together, let not man part asunder" Ha!

 

[Joleneakamama]

If the grafted in branches are the same kind (like the olive trees in the analogy) the look would not be very different, and the fruit would be the same too.
I believe Paul was referring to the ten tribes here.
And anyway, aren't we all to be conformed to the image of His son? (Rom 8:29)
And though there are different gifts of the spirit, the fruits of the spirit should all be the same.
In Rev 22:16 Jesus says He is the root and offspring of David.
Ironic no, that some people that will have nothing to do with THE 'root' are the ones Christians seem to view as having roots?

Why did Jesus tell them in Mt 10:5 not to go into the way of the Gentiles and specifically tells them not to go to any city of the Samaritans (I believe it was because they were the people that replaced the deported Israelites and likely didn't have any 'lost sheep' in them) but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel? Then He tells them 'ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the son of man be come' (V 23).
The point I am trying to make is that he sent them to the lost sheep of the house of Israel and He said His sheep hear his voice and he knows them, and they follow Him.
So unless you are going to say He was mistaken those Israelites (including those that the Jews called 'Gentiles') fulfilled the prophesies that said Israel and Judah would come together and became one in Christ, ( Eze 37:15-27 Jer 31:31 Hos 1:11) taking the new name for His people, Christian. (Isaiah 62:2)
I have no problem with others being saved with Israel. Isaiah 56:3-8 says that He will call and gather others and He calls them strangers.
Most of the prophesies however that are to and about the ten tribes people quote and apply to non Israelite people, or even when they are Israelites people call them Gentiles and don't realize their true identity.
I believe those that say Israel has not yet obtained salvation are confused and don't realize that the cast off ten tribes were never called Jews, did not return from captivity, and were not even called Israel at the time He came.
So when Paul says that 'Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness,' he is not talking about the ten tribes, but only the returned of Judah.
When Jesus said that 'the kingdom would be taken from the Jews and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof,' why is it assumed that this nation would be non Israelite when Ephraim alone was to become a multitude of nations? (Gen 48:19)
And just in case you haven't put it together yet, Gentiles means Nations!