Sure but what does this prove? That Jacob was referred to as goy before he received the title Israel? I mean, it makes sense that there was a point where Israel started, just like Abraham was a pagan Canaanite before he was anointed by Melchizedek.
I was playing dumb - I know what SwampRanger was getting at and I know his dispensational views. He was obviously being dishonest by saying Israel IS a goy too. It's similar to saying Christ wasn't a Christian - that's a false argument treading on semantics. Jacob is the first person who differentiated from the category goy and created a new category Israel just like Christ created a new category of Christian.
It proves that the english word nation is translated to the Hebrew word goy.
Goy has become a slur God did not intend.
Israel is a people group of 12 tribes and throughout time some of them have represented a remnant of those faithful to the Most High God.
Some other times many fell away.
God doesn't care about words and languages because those are human creations - He cares about meaning and concepts which are part of His logi (divine ideas).
What matters is what the word 'goy' signifies in the given context.
Israel is a people group of 12 tribes and throughout time some of them have represented a remnant of those faithful to the Most High God. Some other times many fell away.
That's the meaning of Israel until Christ. The NT makes clear that Israel is now the Church - the heavenly Kingdom of God here on Earth and Christians are the new adopted sons of Jacob - not by blood but by the Spirit. This renders the previously accurate term goy blasphemous because as Paul says there are no jews or gentiles for we're all one in Christ. Of course jews and zionist Christians reject this and they stick to the OT definition, hence why we have an actual state of Israel and a new Temple about to be built where they will anoint their false messiah - the Antichrist.
No, I'm saying Israel is among the Nations rather than apart from the Nations, and Torah proves it (there are other such passages). I'm also not dispensational; the word translated "dispensation" in the Bible refers only to two eras, which Jesus calls the present age and the coming age, which is not a uniquely dispensational system. HTH.
I don't see new categories as you do, but new blessings. As a covenantalist I see one people throughout history. Jacob gave that people a national aspiration and Christ gave it an organic foundation and a new spiritual unity; at other times the same people has made other quantum leaps into new blessings. The fact that we give semantic terms like "Israelite" and "Petrine" to these experiences, and argue over when the term fully begins to apply, is tangential. As an Orthodox you may see more in the organic foundation event "thou art Peter" than I do, but I trust you won't see something that isn't there.
Do you agree that a word can have different meanings depending on context? Do you think Jeff Epstein used the world goyim in the same sense as it was used in the Bible? I already told you that what was appropriate in the OT (categorizing people as jews and gentiles in relation to God) is no longer appropriate after Christ, because the tribal distinction was transcended by the ultimate distinction between Christians vs. non-Christians. After they produced the Messiah, jews no longer have a covenantal relation with God - their covenant was fulfilled. They still have a role in the eschatology though but they're no longer God's people - Christians are.
The fact that we give semantic terms like "Israelite" and "Petrine" to these experiences, and argue over when the term fully begins to apply, is tangential.
Again, it's not arguing over semantics but over God's covenant and our eschatological progression through history. I notice Protestants really struggle with historicity which makes sense since they reject tradition and latch onto abstract ideas that aren't grounded historically (e.g. the Solas). Protestantism is necessarily ahistorical and this makes it breeding ground for various heresies that would otherwise be easy to root out.
One such heresy is judaizing and dispensationalism which comes from lack of proper understanding of covenantal continuity in the Old and New Testaments, the role of Israel and the ending of OT law with Christ and OT worship with the destruction of the Temple (yes, the period between the Resurrection and the 70AD was transitory and given to the jews to acclimate themselves to the new covenant and to become fully Christian).
I didn't get that.
https://imgur.com/a/bcmkg0b
Copy of text from blueletterbible.com on this verse.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/25/1/
Forgive the add on memes, I can't link around it and the other 2 image boards I had found are unusable.
Sure but what does this prove? That Jacob was referred to as goy before he received the title Israel? I mean, it makes sense that there was a point where Israel started, just like Abraham was a pagan Canaanite before he was anointed by Melchizedek.
I was playing dumb - I know what SwampRanger was getting at and I know his dispensational views. He was obviously being dishonest by saying Israel IS a goy too. It's similar to saying Christ wasn't a Christian - that's a false argument treading on semantics. Jacob is the first person who differentiated from the category goy and created a new category Israel just like Christ created a new category of Christian.
It proves that the english word nation is translated to the Hebrew word goy.
Goy has become a slur God did not intend.
Israel is a people group of 12 tribes and throughout time some of them have represented a remnant of those faithful to the Most High God. Some other times many fell away.
God doesn't care about words and languages because those are human creations - He cares about meaning and concepts which are part of His logi (divine ideas).
What matters is what the word 'goy' signifies in the given context.
That's the meaning of Israel until Christ. The NT makes clear that Israel is now the Church - the heavenly Kingdom of God here on Earth and Christians are the new adopted sons of Jacob - not by blood but by the Spirit. This renders the previously accurate term goy blasphemous because as Paul says there are no jews or gentiles for we're all one in Christ. Of course jews and zionist Christians reject this and they stick to the OT definition, hence why we have an actual state of Israel and a new Temple about to be built where they will anoint their false messiah - the Antichrist.
No, I'm saying Israel is among the Nations rather than apart from the Nations, and Torah proves it (there are other such passages). I'm also not dispensational; the word translated "dispensation" in the Bible refers only to two eras, which Jesus calls the present age and the coming age, which is not a uniquely dispensational system. HTH.
I don't see new categories as you do, but new blessings. As a covenantalist I see one people throughout history. Jacob gave that people a national aspiration and Christ gave it an organic foundation and a new spiritual unity; at other times the same people has made other quantum leaps into new blessings. The fact that we give semantic terms like "Israelite" and "Petrine" to these experiences, and argue over when the term fully begins to apply, is tangential. As an Orthodox you may see more in the organic foundation event "thou art Peter" than I do, but I trust you won't see something that isn't there.
Do you agree that a word can have different meanings depending on context? Do you think Jeff Epstein used the world goyim in the same sense as it was used in the Bible? I already told you that what was appropriate in the OT (categorizing people as jews and gentiles in relation to God) is no longer appropriate after Christ, because the tribal distinction was transcended by the ultimate distinction between Christians vs. non-Christians. After they produced the Messiah, jews no longer have a covenantal relation with God - their covenant was fulfilled. They still have a role in the eschatology though but they're no longer God's people - Christians are.
Again, it's not arguing over semantics but over God's covenant and our eschatological progression through history. I notice Protestants really struggle with historicity which makes sense since they reject tradition and latch onto abstract ideas that aren't grounded historically (e.g. the Solas). Protestantism is necessarily ahistorical and this makes it breeding ground for various heresies that would otherwise be easy to root out.
One such heresy is judaizing and dispensationalism which comes from lack of proper understanding of covenantal continuity in the Old and New Testaments, the role of Israel and the ending of OT law with Christ and OT worship with the destruction of the Temple (yes, the period between the Resurrection and the 70AD was transitory and given to the jews to acclimate themselves to the new covenant and to become fully Christian).