identities

[eliyahu]

I have heard different ideas of what some of you believe about our new identity in Jesus through the gospel. I am specifically referring to Ga 3:38 and Col 3:11. Ga 3:28, "There is niether Jew nor Greek, there is niether slave nor freeman, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." and Col 3:10b-11, "... according to the image of the One who created him- a renewal in which there is no distinction between Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and freeman, but Christ is all, and in all."
I take this to mean that our earthly identies (as listed in sample) are not part of the equation of our relatedness to one another once we are found in Christ by faith. The Jew in Christ is not superior nor inferior to Gentiles in Christ. The man is not somehow advantaged over a female when one is in Christ. In other words, any person in Christ is on perfectly equal footing with God along with every other person who has faith in the gospel. We do not look at people "after the flesh." New Covenant faith levels the playing field in that sense. Since there is only one Christ and people of faith are all counted by God as "in" him, we are legally and spiritually "equal." There are not different Christs or gospels for different kinds of people.
This does not eliminate the different identities and consequent roles that each person has in Christ's one body, like male and female. The role of the man and woman is highly respected and recognized as different in Paul's epistles. The same line of logic in these verses applies to Jew and Gentile.
Paul's epistles are all written in this same vain of unity in the body yet retaining a specific role and calling for our genders, freedom or lack thereof, and our Jewishness or Gentile ethnicity.
These verses cannot be used to argue that there is no difference between a Jew or Gentile in Christ any more than arguing that there is no longer any gender distinction once a person is in Christ. That reminds me of the political correctness movement gender neutral language bit! No disrespect indended toward any one.
Christ and the Father are "one" in a similar sense of these verses. Jesus is not the Father and the Father is not the Son, but they are in perfect unity and one in Spiritual fellowship. If you "see" the son than you have "seen" the Father. All believers are received into that fellowship by faith in the gospel. In light of that there is no male or female as divisions like in the temple's quarters, but we are all "one" in Christ. In the one messiah each individual has perfect fellowship with God and thus every other believer.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I have heard different ideas of what some of you believe about our new identity in Jesus through the gospel. I am specifically referring to Ga 3:38 and Col 3:11. Ga 3:28, "There is niether Jew nor Greek, there is niether slave nor freeman, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." and Col 3:10b-11, "... according to the image of the One who created him- a renewal in which there is no distinction between Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and freeman, but Christ is all, and in all."
I take this to mean that our earthly identies (as listed in sample) are not part of the equation of our relatedness to one another once we are found in Christ by faith. The Jew in Christ is not superior nor inferior to Gentiles in Christ. The man is not somehow advantaged over a female when one is in Christ. In other words, any person in Christ is on perfectly equal footing with God along with every other person who has faith in the gospel. We do not look at people "after the flesh." New Covenant faith levels the playing field in that sense. Since there is only one Christ and people of faith are all counted by God as "in" him, we are legally and spiritually "equal." There are not different Christs or gospels for different kinds of people.
This does not eliminate the different identities and consequent roles that each person has in Christ's one body, like male and female. The role of the man and woman is highly respected and recognized as different in Paul's epistles. The same line of logic in these verses applies to Jew and Gentile.
Paul's epistles are all written in this same vain of unity in the body yet retaining a specific role and calling for our genders, freedom or lack thereof, and our Jewishness or Gentile ethnicity.
These verses cannot be used to argue that there is no difference between a Jew or Gentile in Christ any more than arguing that there is no longer any gender distinction once a person is in Christ. That reminds me of the political correctness movement gender neutral language bit! No disrespect indended toward any one.
Christ and the Father are "one" in a similar sense of these verses. Jesus is not the Father and the Father is not the Son, but they are in perfect unity and one in Spiritual fellowship. If you "see" the son than you have "seen" the Father. All believers are received into that fellowship by faith in the gospel. In light of that there is no male or female as divisions like in the temple's quarters, but we are all "one" in Christ. In the one messiah each individual has perfect fellowship with God and thus every other believer.

Hi Elijahu!

That is a very interesting and well thought out response to the assertion that Jewish and Gentile Christians do not have "different roles" to fulfill here on earth.

But there is one essential piece of this puzzle still missing. I am well aware of the Scriptures that can be interpreted to imply a continuing difference in leadership and teaching roles for men and woman. Is there anything like that concerning the differences between Jewish and Gentile Christians? What role do Jewish Christians fulfill that is different than Gentile Christians?

Richard

[eliyahu]

What role a Jew plays compared to a Gentile is relative. My point is that these verses preserve the identities of believers as being Jewish or Gentile, male or female, etc. That being the case, there is definitely still a distictiveness that the circumcision or being Jewish brings as opposed to being a Gentile. A Gentile is not is any sense now a Jew once they are found in Christ and vise versa. Yes, we are all "one new man" in Christ. But the reality of that completely looses its purpose when we eliminate the ethnic distinctiveness through the covenant of circumcision Jews have. We are still "Jew" or "Gentile." Our diversity brought into Spiritual unity in Christ is the glory, not losing our identities.
What makes a Jew a Jew is the covenant of circumcision. That is what their ethnicity as being "Jewish" is dictated by. The purpose for this continues today and forever and did not ever "end." What makes a Jew a true Jew "inwardly" is genuine faith, both under the old covenant with Israel and continuing into the new one with Israel. We must recognize that there is a difference between the Jew and Gentile both in the old covenant and forever. I am not saying that this difference is somehow Spiritually advantagous for either group.

[eliyahu]

Hi RichardAs you know i am a premillenial futurist. The role which God had called Israel in the past to play remains in effect. The role which both Jews and Gentiles have in the new covenant is the same calling with the exeption that now, before the millenial reign of Jesus (not nec literally 1,000 yrs of course) and Israel's national salvation being accomplished, the church is to fulfill the calling to be a light to the nations as His united body and not a specific ethnic nation. This is a very deep subject and is not simple. The church is to fulfill God's call in a Spiritual sense only in this age. However, Israel's call is to be fulfilled nationally as a complete ethnic group ruled by King Jesus in the land of Israel in peace for the duration of the millenium. They are to fulfill the call through the power of the Spirit as Jews, as a Jewish nation obeying the Messiah among all other nations. Just as the predominant population of Gentile believers in the church age are to demonstate the glory of Jesus in the gospel to Israel and thus help "provoke Israel to jealousy" now. The ewish nation is to be a national witness as compared to the church's current call to be witnesses in and among all nations which are not submitted to the faith, this present darkness. The Jewish calling as a redeemed nation has a significant role to be fulfilled in the future. God's faithfulness to his promises and the fullness of the glory of his mercy and wrath are yet to be demonstrated through the national death and resurrection of His son Israel in a literal and spiritual sense. Sorry for the run ons here.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

What role a Jew plays compared to a Gentile is relative. My point is that these verses preserve the identities of believers as being Jewish or Gentile, male or female, etc. That being the case, there is definitely still a distictiveness that the circumcision or being Jewish brings as opposed to being a Gentile.

I agree in the same sense as there is a "distinction" between Spanish and French, but that means nothing in terms of the Gospel.

A Gentile is not is any sense now a Jew once they are found in Christ and vise versa. Yes, we are all "one new man" in Christ. But the reality of that completely looses its purpose when we eliminate the ethnic distinctiveness through the covenant of circumcision Jews have.

Here I vigorously disagree. The Jews do not "have" [present tense] a "covenant of circumcision" with God. The "testator" (Christ) DIED and that fulfilled the Old Covenant and brought in the New. This is why God destroyed the Temple and the Levitical priesthood. Indeed, the author of Hebrews predicted the soon destruction of the entire Old Covenant system when he said it "decayeth and waxeth old" and was "ready to vanish away." That prophecy was fulfilled in 70 AD.

Think about it. Do you really believe that God would honor the Old Covenant with a bunch of people that rejected the death of His Son?

We are still "Jew" or "Gentile." Our diversity brought into Spiritual unity in Christ is the glory, not losing our identities.

Yes, we are "Jew" or "Gentile" in the ethnic sense of who our parents were. But we are not "Jew" or "Gentile" in the Biblical sense of having different relationship to God. So from a Biblical point of view, I see no distinction between Jew or Gentile. I don't see how such labels denote anything but a fleshly heritage.

What makes a Jew a Jew is the covenant of circumcision. That is what their ethnicity as being "Jewish" is dictated by. The purpose for this continues today and forever and did not ever "end."

What purpose? Did not the Old Covanant ended with the death of Christ?

What makes a Jew a true Jew "inwardly" is genuine faith, both under the old covenant with Israel and continuing into the new one with Israel. We must recognize that there is a difference between the Jew and Gentile both in the old covenant and forever. I am not saying that this difference is somehow Spiritually advantagous for either group.

I still don't know what the difference is other than mere facts concerning heritage. You said that the Jew who comes to Christ is just another Christian, so what it the point of focussing on the Chinese, Spanish, French, Jewish, or Arminian? I don't get it. But I certainly am glad to try to work it out with you!

Richard

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi RichardAs you know i am a premillenial futurist.

Yes, and I'm a preterist. And that's one reason I'm really glad you are here to present your view because it challenges my view and such challenges help all of us both move closer to a fuller and truer understanding of God's Word.

The role which God had called Israel in the past to play remains in effect.

I would say they completely fulfilled their role, and I would prove it by the New Testiment that teaches the Jews purpose was to bring forth the Messiah, who now is Savior of the World for everyone. Contrary to the view of a future role in salvation history for ethnic Israel, the New Testament moved from Abraham, to the 12 tribes, and then to the whole world. Going back to ethnic Israel seem utterly senseless from a New Testament perspective which teaches that the Old Covenant was just a shadow of better things to come, that is, Christ. He is the purpose it all, so there is no purpose for an "ethnic Israeli earthly millennium" as far as I can see. It also is not taught anywhere in the Bible to my knowledge. I would very much like to know your best argument for why I should believe in your eschatology.

The role which both Jews and Gentiles have in the new covenant is the same calling with the exeption that now, before the millenial reign of Jesus (not nec literally 1,000 yrs of course) and Israel's national salvation being accomplished, the church is to fulfill the calling to be a light to the nations as His united body and not a specific ethnic nation. This is a very deep subject and is not simple. The church is to fulfill God's call in a Spiritual sense only in this age. However, Israel's call is to be fulfilled nationally as a complete ethnic group ruled by King Jesus in the land of Israel in peace for the duration of the millenium.

I am not aware of anything in the New Testament teaching that would support your claim (highlighted red). As noted above, it seems entirely contrary to the entire thrust of God's Gospel plan for the planet. He is done with "ethnic kingdoms." They served their purupose, now the Gospel and Christ has come. What purpose would be served by an earthly ethnic millennial rule of Christ?

They are to fulfill the call through the power of the Spirit as Jews, as a Jewish nation obeying the Messiah among all other nations. Just as the predominant population of Gentile believers in the church age are to demonstate the glory of Jesus in the gospel to Israel and thus help "provoke Israel to jealousy" now. The ewish nation is to be a national witness as compared to the church's current call to be witnesses in and among all nations which are not submitted to the faith, this present darkness. The Jewish calling as a redeemed nation has a significant role to be fulfilled in the future. God's faithfulness to his promises and the fullness of the glory of his mercy and wrath are yet to be demonstrated through the national death and resurrection of His son Israel in a literal and spiritual sense.

This is my primary disagreement with futurism. That system seems to denigrate the Gospel which is the fulfillment of ALL God's promises in Christ. I do not see how another ethnic kingdom is going to "fulfill" anything not already fulfilled in CHrist.

It would be very interesting if you tried to show me an actual promise that has yet to be fulfilled. In my experience, every promise that folks have shown me obviously was a prophecy of the Church and or Christ. He is the point of all Scripture.

Sorry for the run ons here.

No problem there! We got all the harddrive space for thousands of "run on" talkers like you!

Talk away bro! Speak freely! Let us test the quality of our understanding of God's most excellent Word!

Richard

[eliyahu]

Hi Richard. I've got nothing to do right now so its a great opportunity to chat. I will try the quotes thing.
Think about it. Do you really believe that God would honor the Old Covenant with a bunch of people that rejected the death of His Son?
How do I use the quotation feature?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi Richard. I've got nothing to do right now so its a great opportunity to chat. I will try the quotes thing.
Think about it. Do you really believe that God would honor the Old Covenant with a bunch of people that rejected the death of His Son?
How do I use the quotation feature?

Hi Eliyahu,

Glad you got some time. If you click the "quote" button in the lower right corner of the post you want to reply to, it will put the whole post in quote tags between square brackets, which look like this:

[quote=eliyahu;5151] ... stuff ... [/quote]

The opening tag begins with the square bracket. The equals sign shows who is being quoted. The number after the colon puts a link back to the post that was quoted. All that info can be ignored (you can just use the quote tags without any other info).

Then when you post it, it will look like this:

... stuff ...

You can add more brackets anywhere you want to just quote the part you want to respond to.

Let me know if you need more info. You are not the only one who needs to learn to use the quote feature.

Richard

[eliyahu]

hi again, just trying to figure this out.

I agree in the same sense as there is a "distinction" between Spanish and French, but that means nothing in terms of the Gospel.

Here I vigorously disagree. The Jews do not "have" [present tense] a "covenant of circumcision" with God. The "testator" (Christ) DIED and that fulfilled the Old Covenant and brought in the New. This is why God destroyed the Temple and the Levitical priesthood. Indeed, the author of Hebrews predicted the soon destruction of the entire Old Covenant system when he said it "decayeth and waxeth old" and was "ready to vanish away." That prophecy was fulfilled in 70 AD.

Think about it. Do you really believe that God would honor the Old Covenant with a bunch of people that rejected the death of His Son?

Yes, we are "Jew" or "Gentile" in the ethnic sense of who our parents were. But we are not "Jew" or "Gentile" in the Biblical sense of having different relationship to God. So from a Biblical point of view, I see no distinction between Jew or Gentile. I don't see how such labels denote anything but a fleshly heritage.

What purpose? Did not the Old Covanant ended with the death of Christ?

I still don't know what the difference is other than mere facts concerning heritage. You said that the Jew who comes to Christ is just another Christian, so what it the point of focussing on the Chinese, Spanish, French, Jewish, or Arminian? I don't get it. But I certainly am glad to try to work it out with you!

Richard

[eliyahu]

hi again, just trying to figure this out.

I agree in the same sense as there is a "distinction" between Spanish and French, but that means nothing in terms of the Gospel.

Here I vigorously disagree. The Jews do not "have" [present tense] a "covenant of circumcision" with God. The "testator" (Christ) DIED and that fulfilled the Old Covenant and brought in the New. This is why God destroyed the Temple and the Levitical priesthood. Indeed, the author of Hebrews predicted the soon destruction of the entire Old Covenant system when he said it "decayeth and waxeth old" and was "ready to vanish away." That prophecy was fulfilled in 70 AD.

Think about it. Do you really believe that God would honor the Old Covenant with a bunch of people that rejected the death of His Son? Richard

I believe that the old covenant being honored by God was unconditional. AD 70 was a perfect example of God's faithfulness to the old covenant's curses for disobedience. That was because it was still a reflection of God's character and ways. The old cov't curses have been being visited upon Israel increasingly since the crucifixion. Its blessings still remain as applicable well. Obviously, only through new covenant faith and obedience will the blessings fully come upon Israel.

[QUOTE=RAM;5148]Yes, we are "Jew" or "Gentile" in the ethnic sense of who our parents were. But we are not "Jew" or "Gentile" in the Biblical sense of having different relationship to God. So from a Biblical point of view, I see no distinction between Jew or Gentile. I don't see how such labels denote anything but a fleshly heritage.

What purpose? Did not the Old Covanant ended with the death of Christ?

I still don't know what the difference is other than mere facts concerning heritage. You said that the Jew who comes to Christ is just another Christian, so what it the point of focussing on the Chinese, Spanish, French, Jewish, or Arminian? I don't get it. But I certainly am glad to try to work it out with you!