THE HOPE OF ISRAEL - The Preterist Archive

THE HOPE OF ISRAEL - The Preterist Archive THE HOPE OF ISRAEL - The Preterist Archive

preteristarchive.com
from preteristarchive.com More from this publisher
30.05.2014 Views

: ' " 204 The Hope of Israel: What Is It? the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman," were a prophecy that the natural descendants of Abraham should not share the inheritance with his spiritual seed, the elect remnant. Manifestly therefore, those who now maintain that the natural Israelites as such are the heirs of God's to understand promise to Abraham, do not only fail the allegorical significance of his family history, but they also close their eyes to the clear explanation thereof in Galatians 4 :21-31. In Romans 9:6-8 the same truth is stated in these words : "For they are not all 'Israel,' which are of Israel. Neither because they are the seed of Abraham are they all children; but in Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed." This Scripture gives us, in addition to the important truth that not all Israelites are included in the "Israel" of God's prophetic purposes, the closely allied truth that "the children of God," that is, those who are saved by the gospel, are "the children of the promise" (definite article in the original) ; and that they are "counted for the seed" (of Abraham). By this passage it is also seen that Romans IX continues a subject that was begun in Chapter VIII, the inheritance of the whole redeemed creation by the children of God. For in Chapter VIII it is written: J : "-/' ""*"". " .'!_" ?t77J "The Spirit Himself beareth wtness with our spirit that we are the children of God : and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ" (Rom. 8:16, 17). And the suceeding verses show that the inheritance here referred to is the entire creation of God, which

The Hope of Israel: What Is It? 205 is hereafter to be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. Here is another Scripture which never could have been written if there were to be a Jewish millennium intervening between "the sufferings of this present time" and "the glory which shall be revealed in (or to) us" (v. 18). HATH GOD CAST AWAY His PEOPLE? If therefore, God had cast out the bondwoman and her son (Israel after the flesh) and had decreed that the son of the bondwoman was to have no share in the inheritance promised to Abraham ("the world"), could it be said that He had "cast away His people" ? Manifestly if the natural descendants of Abraham were "His people," the answer would be, Yes. But Paul's answers to that question is an emphatic and indignant, "God forbid." And he goes on to explain that the natural Israelites were not His people; but that "His people which He foreknew" was that very small "remnant according to the election of grace" which believed in Jesus Christ (Rom. 11 :l-7). The plain and decisive answer given by the apostle in this passage is, that God had not cast away His people, because the apostate nation which He had cast was not His people. Those were "the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction," which for centuries past He had "endured with much longsuffering" (Rom. 9:22), and to whom He had said through Isaiah, "All day long I have stretched forth My hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people" (10:20-21). Those were not His people, and they never were, for when Elijah made intercession against "Israel," and in-

<strong>The</strong> Hope of Israel: What Is It? 205<br />

is hereafter to be delivered from the bondage of corruption<br />

into the glorious liberty of the children of God.<br />

Here is another Scripture which never could have<br />

been written if there were to be a Jewish millennium<br />

intervening between "the sufferings of this present<br />

time" and "the glory which shall be revealed in (or<br />

to) us" (v. 18).<br />

HATH GOD CAST AWAY His PEOPLE?<br />

If therefore, God had cast out the bondwoman and<br />

her son (Israel after the flesh) and had decreed that<br />

the son of the bondwoman was to have no share in the<br />

inheritance promised to Abraham ("the world"), could<br />

it be said that He had "cast away His people" ? Manifestly<br />

if the natural descendants of Abraham were<br />

"His people," the answer would be, Yes. But Paul's<br />

answers to that question is an emphatic and indignant,<br />

"God forbid." And he goes on to explain that the<br />

natural Israelites were not His people; but that "His<br />

people which He foreknew" was that very small "remnant<br />

according to the election of grace" which believed<br />

in Jesus Christ (Rom. 11 :l-7). <strong>The</strong> plain and decisive<br />

answer given by the apostle in this passage is, that<br />

God had not cast away His people, because the apostate<br />

nation which He had cast was not His people. Those<br />

were "the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction," which<br />

for centuries past He had "endured with much longsuffering"<br />

(Rom. 9:22), and to whom He had said<br />

through Isaiah, "All day long I have stretched forth<br />

My hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people"<br />

(10:20-21).<br />

Those were not His people, and they never were, for<br />

when Elijah made intercession against "Israel," and in-

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!