We all believe there will be a rapture, a parousia, a last day, a coming of the Lord to gather together His elect - call it what you will.

What many don't believe is this mystical nonsense perpetuated by the whole "Left Behind" hysteria, where Christians are suddenly taken away to I do not know what, while the other poor people who made the wrong decision are left to languish and face some tribulation or other.

I have made my position perfectly clear and you are the one constantly muddying the waters.

Once again, I have a list of questions, and want to know your answers. Try to ignore everything else and just answer the questions.

Is there any profit in being a Jew if you are not a Christian? By that I mean, will an ethnic Jew who dies outside of Christ receive any different treatment from God just because of his Jewish ethnicity?

If a Jew is a Christian does that make him more of a Christian because of his Jewishness?

I could re-state the questions below but they all amount to the same problem, which you refuse to answer.

Does God deal with people differently because of their physical ethnicity or because of their relationship with Christ or both?

Casob wrote:
Lone Wolf, I have a simple question for you before I answer your question.
Do you hold that gentile Christians are Jews (Spiritual or otherwise) and that Jewish unbelievers are gentiles?

Another classic case of Casob refusing to answer questions and trying to re-direct the discussion.

I have (against my better judgement) answered his questions on the appropriate site. This thread pertains to the doctrine of the Rapture.

Question; if all believers are raptured away and all unbelievers are "Left behind", who is going to preach to the unbelievers? They can, according to Free Will doctrine, only be converted if someone tries to get them to make a decision.

Maybe Billy Graham will be left behind. He is giving every indication of not being a true believer, so the possiblity is there.

If He is the only Way, then what is the position of those who are not in Christ? Are they not lost and hell-bound?

Is there a distinction between Christian Jews and Christians who are not ethnic Jews?

Is there a distinction between ethnic Jews who are out of Christ and those who are likewise out of Christ but are not ethnic Jews?

Can someone be saved because they are ethnic Jews yet not converted to Christ? Then Christ is not the only Way.

If it is true that an ethnic Jew who is an unbeliever is hellbound, is he not on par with an unbelieving non-Jew?

I am not interested in apologies. I am interested in the truth of God.

Paul says clearly, that if you are not a spiritual Jew (circumcised in the heart) then you are not a true Jew. To be circumcised in the heart is another way of describing regeneration.

Therefore if you are regenerate, ie a Christian, then you are circumcised in the heart. You have received the true circumcision.

This has gone far enough!

It matters not what your ethnic origin is. ALL people of God are registered by God as being born in Zion (Ps 87).

God no longer recognises physical ethnicity or being from a particular race as making any difference. He has cast off unbelieving Jews and ingrafted believing Gentiles into spiritual Israel. Ethnic Israel no longer has any meaning for they are outside of Christ. How many parables (eg the wedding feast) did Jesus speak to teach this truth? Many will come from east and west and sit down with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

It is not our earthly, physical ethnicity that changes, for the physical and literal are not the true reality - they are but signs of the spiritual reality.

DJC49 wrote:
BTW, thanks for your input and answer of 4/30/08 5:40 PM, *Preacher*

In the Old Testament there were two kinds of people - Jews and non-Jews.
In the New Testament it is clear that there is but one way and that is Christ. There is but one body and that is Christ. That body is made up of believers from all nations, tribes and tongues. How can anyone deny that unless you are in Christ you are lost, and if you are lost you are in the same position that the Gentiles were in the Old Testament. So to call a non-Christian Jew a gentile is no insult to him. Most Jews these days are not religious and many are atheists.

Psalm 12:6,7 - I have recently read an amazing book called "The Final Authority" defending the King James. I would like to say that these days we have many versions of the Bible, but only one translation. I had been led to believe that there was essentially little difference between all the versions, but know now I have been duped.

You sir, have shown no respect to anyone, have displayed none of the fruits of the Spirit and are in need of serious repentance.

I know you will treat this post as you did all my others, with sneering contempt. But one that thing you will never be able to say, is that you haven't been told.

Romans 9:30 - Moreover whom He PREDESTINED, these He also called.

Ephesians 1:5 - Having PREDESTINED us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself.

Ephesians 1:11 - Being PREDESTINED according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will.

From the Greek - to predetermine or ordain beforehand someone's destiny.

Couple this with "ELECT", mentioned some 2 dozen times in the Bible and CHOSEN mentioned numerous more times one wonders why anyone would ask the question, "Does the Bible teach predestination?" One might just as well ask, "Does the Bible teach CREATION?"

Now I know that the words ELECT and PREDESTINED and CHOSEN are words that many hate, you must either accept them or try to explain them away.

But by the same token there are many who hate the words CREATE and CREATION just as much; along with MIRACLES and DEITY. They don't explain them away, they just refuse to acknowledge them as the Word of God.

We call these people "LIBERALS". Now that is a word that makes me upset.

But what would you call someone who asks the abovementioned question as if it is up for debate?

I do not see the need to run people down, attack theologians of the past, or get smart alec just for the sake of it. A debate is a debate and there is nothing wrong in agreeing to disagree. But when you search the Scriptures, build your case, show a fully developed argument complete with several clear proof texts only to be mocked and ridiculed while not even being engaged in serious mature debate you tend to feel a little jaded.

MurrayA wrote:
JD, alias Casob,
"Do we use MurrayA's rules? He is consistent in his hermeneutic, he doesn't believe anything literally in this book so Jews meaning Jews is out."
Here you go again! It's not enough for you to import your Dispensational scheme into Scripture, and grossly misinterpret texts, such as Eph.2:16, to make them mean the opposite of what they say, but you presume to impute to me positions which I have never stated and do not hold. Well, Paul is not around to set the record straight with the likes of you, but I am.
I will not tolerate you twisting my words to make them mean something other than what I have so clearly stated on many occasion, including just recently, e.g. on the subject of Romans 11. "Jews" there means "Jews"! Can you get that straight, or does that too go through your Dispy filter to make me say that there "Jews" means something else?
Your persistent misrepresentations and distortions are reprehensible, and if you continue in this vein I will have no option but to hit the abuse button on the grounds of distortion.

Derek wrote:
But it was the Reformed Catholics who left the rule of England to come to another country to do what they left, enslave to a Religion.

By the way, the argument you use about how people treated each other 400 or so years ago, is the same argument atheists use when they bring up the crusades.

I do not appreciate being accused of making it up as I go along and deliberately misusing Scripture. If you don't want to respond to my posts, that is fine. But don't accuse others of something, and then refuse to engage them in point by point discussion.

They said they were Jews, but they were not. For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God" (Rom 2:28,29).

That last part is a play on words as "Jew" is literally "praise".

So the Jews you are referring to in the Revelation of St John the Divine, were Jews outwardly and only circumcised outwardly and their Jewishness (their praise) was from men and not from God.

"For you are all sons of God thorugh faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Gal 3:26-29).

Is clearer language possible? I still cannot fathom how clear texts like this can still leave people with the impression that those Jews who are not Christians are still somehow the people of God.