The Israel of Revelation

Keiw1

Well-known member
This is not literal Israelite religion. Jesus assured them at Matt 23:38, they are cut off of being Gods chosen unless they do verse 39--They have outright refused to this day. It is spiritual Israel being spoken of in Revelation-proof= Galation 3:27-29 = ALL who put on Christ are Abrahams offspring= spiritual Israel. That includes any Jewish person who leaves judaism and joins Jesus' 1 real religion, and gentiles.= put on Christ.
If you are being taught literal Israel is spoken of in Revelation, you are being taught by blind guides-RUN FROM THEM. Do you believe the bible?
 
This is not literal Israelite religion. Jesus assured them at Matt 23:38, they are cut off of being Gods chosen unless they do verse 39--They have outright refused to this day. It is spiritual Israel being spoken of in Revelation-proof= Galation 3:27-29 = ALL who put on Christ are Abrahams offspring= spiritual Israel. That includes any Jewish person who leaves judaism and joins Jesus' 1 real religion, and gentiles.= put on Christ.
If you are being taught literal Israel is spoken of in Revelation, you are being taught by blind guides-RUN FROM THEM. Do you believe the bible?
The word "Israel" occurs only three times in the book of Revelation, so it might be useful and helpful to cite those examples and explain their meaning and significance relevant to this op.
 
The word "Israel" occurs only three times in the book of Revelation, so it might be useful and helpful to cite those examples and explain their meaning and significance relevant to this op.
Gal 3:27-29 is now Gods chosen= spiritual Israel. The Israel mentioned in Revelation.
 
Gal 3:27-29 is now Gods chosen= spiritual Israel.
Where can I find the phrase "spiritual Israel" in the Bible? I do not read that phrase anywhere in Galatians 3.
The Israel mentioned in Revelation.
If you mean to say the Israel" referenced in the book of Revelation is NOT geo-political nation-state Jewish Israel, then I agree.

BUT that does not mean there is such a thing as "spiritual Israel" or that it is spiritual Israel to which Revelation is referring with its three mentions of "Israel." Rather than you thinking I am being deliberately obtuse or obfuscating, let me offer an explanation with which you can agree and we con proceed from there, however the degree of agreement plays out.



The word "Israel" simply means "God perseveres," or "God prevails" and that meaning has relevance and importance every time we read that word in the Bible. Additionally, the word "Israel" is employed by God centuries before the geo-political nation-state Israel ever existed. Therefore, the nation does not define the term. Instead, every time we read the word in the Bible we are necessarily reading about a person or people in whom God prevails or perseveres because that is the definition of the word. This is how Paul can say not all Israel is Israel and, correspondingly, not everyone who is descended from Abraham is a descendant of Abraham's as God spoke of them. That is because those who belong in the lineage of Abrahm or the membership of Israel are those of God's promise, not those of bloodline, the Law, geo-political nation-state affiliation, or their fleshly performance called "works." Paul and others cover all these bases to qualify and identify who is and isn't Israel as God defines that group. In its simplest meaning Israel is anyone in whom God has prevailed. More broadly, Israel is anyone who lives by faith in the promised seed of Abraham, the promised Messiah, Jesus. The righteous live by faith, and they live by faith regardless of geo-political nation-state affiliation. There is no Jew or Gentils in Christ and members of both people groups have been grafted into the tree that is Jesus (some mistakenly think the tree is Israel), the tree of life.​


Does that work for you? Anything to add, or something I need to amend? Anything specific that is factually incorrect and in need of correction? if not, then let's go back to the op with a shared view of Israel as it is used in the book of Revelation. :cool:
 
Where can I find the phrase "spiritual Israel" in the Bible? I do not read that phrase anywhere in Galatians 3.

If you mean to say the Israel" referenced in the book of Revelation is NOT geo-political nation-state Jewish Israel, then I agree.

BUT that does not mean there is such a thing as "spiritual Israel" or that it is spiritual Israel to which Revelation is referring with its three mentions of "Israel." Rather than you thinking I am being deliberately obtuse or obfuscating, let me offer an explanation with which you can agree and we con proceed from there, however the degree of agreement plays out.



The word "Israel" simply means "God perseveres," or "God prevails" and that meaning has relevance and importance every time we read that word in the Bible. Additionally, the word "Israel" is employed by God centuries before the geo-political nation-state Israel ever existed. Therefore, the nation does not define the term. Instead, every time we read the word in the Bible we are necessarily reading about a person or people in whom God prevails or perseveres because that is the definition of the word. This is how Paul can say not all Israel is Israel and, correspondingly, not everyone who is descended from Abraham is a descendant of Abraham's as God spoke of them. That is because those who belong in the lineage of Abrahm or the membership of Israel are those of God's promise, not those of bloodline, the Law, geo-political nation-state affiliation, or their fleshly performance called "works." Paul and others cover all these bases to qualify and identify who is and isn't Israel as God defines that group. In its simplest meaning Israel is anyone in whom God has prevailed. More broadly, Israel is anyone who lives by faith in the promised seed of Abraham, the promised Messiah, Jesus. The righteous live by faith, and they live by faith regardless of geo-political nation-state affiliation. There is no Jew or Gentils in Christ and members of both people groups have been grafted into the tree that is Jesus (some mistakenly think the tree is Israel), the tree of life.​


Does that work for you? Anything to add, or something I need to amend? Anything specific that is factually incorrect and in need of correction? if not, then let's go back to the op with a shared view of Israel as it is used in the book of Revelation. :cool:
There is no phrase spiritual Israel, Galatians shows who it is. All who put on Christ are Abrahams offspring. John the writer of revelation had no clue who that would be here in these last days or what Jesus' 1 religion would be called, so he referenced Israel, just carrying the meaning-Gods chosen.
Glad you can see that literal Israel is not the ones mentioned in Revelation.
 
There is no phrase spiritual Israel,
Well done. Thank you for saying that and saying it immediately and directly. However....
Galatians shows who it is. All who put on Christ are Abrahams offspring.
That s true, but the Galatians verses cited should not be proof-texted because 1) other scripture has much to add on that subject and 2) whole scripture is the standard (not selectively used scripture).
John the writer of revelation had no clue who that would be here in these last days or what Jesus' 1 religion would be called, so he referenced Israel, just carrying the meaning-Gods chosen.
I disagree, and I hope that statement is not intended to imply you know more than John, or that readers of your posts should subordinate John to your posts.
Glad you can see that literal Israel is not the ones mentioned in Revelation.
Which is the point made many posts ago.

The Israel of Revelation is the people of promise in whom God prevails, and that Israel is neither Jew nor Gentile. There is no Israel apart from faith in God's anointed one.
 
Well done. Thank you for saying that and saying it immediately and directly. However....

That s true, but the Galatians verses cited should not be proof-texted because 1) other scripture has much to add on that subject and 2) whole scripture is the standard (not selectively used scripture).

I disagree, and I hope that statement is not intended to imply you know more than John, or that readers of your posts should subordinate John to your posts.

Which is the point made many posts ago.

The Israel of Revelation is the people of promise in whom God prevails, and that Israel is neither Jew nor Gentile. There is no Israel apart from faith in God's anointed one.
Which makes them-spiritual Israel not Literal Israel--see my point?
 
Which makes them-spiritual Israel not Literal Israel--see my point?
I understood the point when it was first pointed. Because language is important, I think the language of scripture is paramount and "spiritual Israel" is not the language scripture uses. Sometimes an extra-biblical term is necessary, but not on this occasion. "Spiritual Israel" is ambiguous, and therefore inherently problematic for many reasons and purposes. You and I happen to share a common, firmly-couched-in-whole-scripture point of view (even though neither of us knew that when we began this exchange). You know as well as I do many will dispute the position. Some will demand a justification (as I have) but many won't. It is, of course, not our job to bother with the rancorous and intentionally divisive, but it is incumbent upon us to be clear and articulate to avoid unnecessary disputes of our own creation (and equally important not to blame others for our own mistakes.

See my point?

It's a difficult task because whole scripture is necessary to define the Israel that is Israel (and the Israel that is not Israel) and most folks have an affinity for proof-texting and little patience for the kind of conversation we just had. A LOT of our siblings don't use much scripture, preferring to define Israel as their eschatology tells them to define it :cautious:.

See my point?

Lastly, that which is spiritual does not preclude other aspects of ontology and teleology. We are not of this world, but we are decidedly living in this world and living in this world with a divine mandate to transform it (ala the cultural mandate and/or great commission) as the Spirit leads. The Word decries fleshly works, but that does not mean creatures made of flesh and blood cannot think, choose, speak, and act according to the Spirit. The Israel that is Israel of promise and not bloodline or Law is both spiritual and flesh and blood. False dichotomies are to be avoided. If the term "spiritual Israel" is not clarified it leads to real and/or perceived fallacies like those I've alluded to above.

See my point?

The Israel of Revelation were/are real live people of flesh and blood living in the world, not just "spiritual" people, and definitely not spirits.
 
I understood the point when it was first pointed. Because language is important, I think the language of scripture is paramount and "spiritual Israel" is not the language scripture uses. Sometimes an extra-biblical term is necessary, but not on this occasion. "Spiritual Israel" is ambiguous, and therefore inherently problematic for many reasons and purposes. You and I happen to share a common, firmly-couched-in-whole-scripture point of view (even though neither of us knew that when we began this exchange). You know as well as I do many will dispute the position. Some will demand a justification (as I have) but many won't. It is, of course, not our job to bother with the rancorous and intentionally divisive, but it is incumbent upon us to be clear and articulate to avoid unnecessary disputes of our own creation (and equally important not to blame others for our own mistakes.

See my point?

It's a difficult task because whole scripture is necessary to define the Israel that is Israel (and the Israel that is not Israel) and most folks have an affinity for proof-texting and little patience for the kind of conversation we just had. A LOT of our siblings don't use much scripture, preferring to define Israel as their eschatology tells them to define it :cautious:.

See my point?

Lastly, that which is spiritual does not preclude other aspects of ontology and teleology. We are not of this world, but we are decidedly living in this world and living in this world with a divine mandate to transform it (ala the cultural mandate and/or great commission) as the Spirit leads. The Word decries fleshly works, but that does not mean creatures made of flesh and blood cannot think, choose, speak, and act according to the Spirit. The Israel that is Israel of promise and not bloodline or Law is both spiritual and flesh and blood. False dichotomies are to be avoided. If the term "spiritual Israel" is not clarified it leads to real and/or perceived fallacies like those I've alluded to above.

See my point?

The Israel of Revelation were/are real live people of flesh and blood living in the world, not just "spiritual" people, and definitely not spirits.
It doesn't have to use that language, bible facts point it out to be correct. It just carries the meaning-Gods chosen.
Billions have been mislead throughout by a word-trinity not found in the bible.
 
It doesn't have to use that language, bible facts point it out to be correct. It just carries the meaning-Gods chosen.
Billions have been mislead throughout by a word-trinity not found in the bible.
That's a common retort, but comparisons with the word "Trinity" are false equivalences. The doctrine of the Trinity is well articulated and firmly couched in a valid exegetical rendering of scripture. There is no doctrine of "spiritual Israel."


Keep in mind, I completely agree with your take on the identity of Israel. See HERE. I simply dissent of the label "spiritual Israel." It implies there's another Israel of valid ecclesiological import and there isn't. Never has been. The Jewish belief the nation of Israel is what God was talking about ecclesiologically has always been wrong. This is especially true of the Israel of Revelation (and the Israel of revelation). Despite or disagreement over the label, we agree on the substance.

So, I will, therefore, agree to disagree and move on to other op-relevant matters.
This is not literal Israelite religion. Jesus assured them at Matt 23:38, they are cut off of being Gods chosen unless they do verse 39--They have outright refused to this day. It is spiritual Israel being spoken of in Revelation-proof= Galation 3:27-29 = ALL who put on Christ are Abrahams offspring= spiritual Israel. That includes any Jewish person who leaves judaism and joins Jesus' 1 real religion, and gentiles.= put on Christ.
Yep.

  • Israel was cut off..... or, more accurately, the Israel that is not Israel was cut off.
  • Jesus did forewarn and declare their removal from both God's covenant (assuming they were ever included thereof) and his body.
  • They did refuse Jesus' many admonitions and continue to do so to this day.
  • Galatians 3 does explain the descendants of Abraham are those of promise (not bloodline or the Law).
  • Jews who leave Judaism and come to Christ are included as descendants of Abraham as Paul described in Galatians 3.

There's some ambiguity regarding to the last line because "literal" Israel would be whatever is accurate Israel. In other words, "spiritual Israel" would literally be Israel. The literal nation-state Israel would not literally be the Israel of God's promise, the literal Israel of Galatians 3 or the literal Israel of Revelation. Certain literalists (I leave unnamed for the time being) redefine literalism. What they mean when the say "literal" is more accurately called literalistic. They're accusations against allegory and/or figurative approaches are unfounded because the three are not, necessarily mutually exclusive. They create false dichotomies where none exist exegetically. This is easily established and witnessed with the New Testament authors' treatment of the Old Testament texts and the principle we should apply is plain.


Where the New Testament authors treated Old Testament scripture literally, then we should do the same. Where they treated the text figuratively or allegorically, we should do the same. In other words, we're to follow their precedent. Sadly, many do not, and that is a big part of why there exists such a huge divide in eschatology (especially among modern futurists and everyone else). When it comes to Revelation, this is obvious because - as I noted in my op-reply - there are only three mentions of "Israel" in the book of Revelation and not a single one of them is specifically about the geo-political nation-state Israel. The Israel f Revelation is the Israel that is Israel, not the Israel that is not Israel.


And you are correct: The Israel that is Israel has to do with the descendants of Abraham as described in Galatians 3 (and Romans 9).
....you are being taught by blind guides-RUN FROM THEM. Do you believe the bible?
1 Corinthians 10:23 and the tou. It's not helpful to insinuate blindness, it violates the tou and runs the risk of becoming self-indicting. It's best to keep the conversation about the Israel of Revelation.


Just saying
 
That's a common retort, but comparisons with the word "Trinity" are false equivalences. The doctrine of the Trinity is well articulated and firmly couched in a valid exegetical rendering of scripture. There is no doctrine of "spiritual Israel."


Keep in mind, I completely agree with your take on the identity of Israel. See HERE. I simply dissent of the label "spiritual Israel." It implies there's another Israel of valid ecclesiological import and there isn't. Never has been. The Jewish belief the nation of Israel is what God was talking about ecclesiologically has always been wrong. This is especially true of the Israel of Revelation (and the Israel of revelation). Despite or disagreement over the label, we agree on the substance.

So, I will, therefore, agree to disagree and move on to other op-relevant matters.

Yep.

  • Israel was cut off..... or, more accurately, the Israel that is not Israel was cut off.
  • Jesus did forewarn and declare their removal from both God's covenant (assuming they were ever included thereof) and his body.
  • They did refuse Jesus' many admonitions and continue to do so to this day.
  • Galatians 3 does explain the descendants of Abraham are those of promise (not bloodline or the Law).
  • Jews who leave Judaism and come to Christ are included as descendants of Abraham as Paul described in Galatians 3.

There's some ambiguity regarding to the last line because "literal" Israel would be whatever is accurate Israel. In other words, "spiritual Israel" would literally be Israel. The literal nation-state Israel would not literally be the Israel of God's promise, the literal Israel of Galatians 3 or the literal Israel of Revelation. Certain literalists (I leave unnamed for the time being) redefine literalism. What they mean when the say "literal" is more accurately called literalistic. They're accusations against allegory and/or figurative approaches are unfounded because the three are not, necessarily mutually exclusive. They create false dichotomies where none exist exegetically. This is easily established and witnessed with the New Testament authors' treatment of the Old Testament texts and the principle we should apply is plain.


Where the New Testament authors treated Old Testament scripture literally, then we should do the same. Where they treated the text figuratively or allegorically, we should do the same. In other words, we're to follow their precedent. Sadly, many do not, and that is a big part of why there exists such a huge divide in eschatology (especially among modern futurists and everyone else). When it comes to Revelation, this is obvious because - as I noted in my op-reply - there are only three mentions of "Israel" in the book of Revelation and not a single one of them is specifically about the geo-political nation-state Israel. The Israel f Revelation is the Israel that is Israel, not the Israel that is not Israel.


And you are correct: The Israel that is Israel has to do with the descendants of Abraham as described in Galatians 3 (and Romans 9).

1 Corinthians 10:23 and the tou. It's not helpful to insinuate blindness, it violates the tou and runs the risk of becoming self-indicting. It's best to keep the conversation about the Israel of Revelation.


Just saying
No trinity god exists. Corrupt translations try to make the blind believe it.
 
That's a common retort, but comparisons with the word "Trinity" are false equivalences. The doctrine of the Trinity is well articulated and firmly couched in a valid exegetical rendering of scripture. There is no doctrine of "spiritual Israel."


Keep in mind, I completely agree with your take on the identity of Israel. See HERE. I simply dissent of the label "spiritual Israel." It implies there's another Israel of valid ecclesiological import and there isn't. Never has been. The Jewish belief the nation of Israel is what God was talking about ecclesiologically has always been wrong. This is especially true of the Israel of Revelation (and the Israel of revelation). Despite or disagreement over the label, we agree on the substance.

So, I will, therefore, agree to disagree and move on to other op-relevant matters.

Yep.

  • Israel was cut off..... or, more accurately, the Israel that is not Israel was cut off.
  • Jesus did forewarn and declare their removal from both God's covenant (assuming they were ever included thereof) and his body.
  • They did refuse Jesus' many admonitions and continue to do so to this day.
  • Galatians 3 does explain the descendants of Abraham are those of promise (not bloodline or the Law).
  • Jews who leave Judaism and come to Christ are included as descendants of Abraham as Paul described in Galatians 3.

There's some ambiguity regarding to the last line because "literal" Israel would be whatever is accurate Israel. In other words, "spiritual Israel" would literally be Israel. The literal nation-state Israel would not literally be the Israel of God's promise, the literal Israel of Galatians 3 or the literal Israel of Revelation. Certain literalists (I leave unnamed for the time being) redefine literalism. What they mean when the say "literal" is more accurately called literalistic. They're accusations against allegory and/or figurative approaches are unfounded because the three are not, necessarily mutually exclusive. They create false dichotomies where none exist exegetically. This is easily established and witnessed with the New Testament authors' treatment of the Old Testament texts and the principle we should apply is plain.


Where the New Testament authors treated Old Testament scripture literally, then we should do the same. Where they treated the text figuratively or allegorically, we should do the same. In other words, we're to follow their precedent. Sadly, many do not, and that is a big part of why there exists such a huge divide in eschatology (especially among modern futurists and everyone else). When it comes to Revelation, this is obvious because - as I noted in my op-reply - there are only three mentions of "Israel" in the book of Revelation and not a single one of them is specifically about the geo-political nation-state Israel. The Israel f Revelation is the Israel that is Israel, not the Israel that is not Israel.


And you are correct: The Israel that is Israel has to do with the descendants of Abraham as described in Galatians 3 (and Romans 9).

1 Corinthians 10:23 and the tou. It's not helpful to insinuate blindness, it violates the tou and runs the risk of becoming self-indicting. It's best to keep the conversation about the Israel of Revelation.


Just saying
The bible assures, many blind guides would arise. Its obvious Gods chosen were blind when Jesus came. Errors started getting in after Jesus died. If Gods spiritual scholars were blinded, don't ever think you can't be.
Spiritual Israel is now Gods chosen.
 
The bible assures, many blind guides would arise. Its obvious Gods chosen were blind when Jesus came. Errors started getting in after Jesus died. If Gods spiritual scholars were blinded, don't ever think you can't be.
That may be true, but it has nothing to do with the identity and nature of Israel in Revelation.
Spiritual Israel is now Gods chosen.
The word "now" implies that has not always been the case so, again, I disagree. God's Israel has always been the Israel that is Israel and never the Israel that is not Israel. I've been having a conversation in another forum with someone who has asserted the position the nation of Israel was temporarily God's chosen people. Despite my and a few others pointing out the "temporary" implies God abandons His chosen people, implies there are two chosen peoples, and implies chosenness may not be permanent for anyone if it is temporary he cannot see the flaws in that position (and he will not discuss the implications of it). it has been pointed out to Him God chooses many people for many things but that does not mean they are God's chosen people. Babylon and Assyria were chosen by God as instruments of His judgment. That did not make them His chosen people. It simply made them a people chosen for a purpose other than being God's own. Similarly, scripture states the nation of Israel served God's purpose bringing a bloodline for the Jesus' birth, but that does not make them God's own, God's chosen people. There isn't a single verse in the entire Bible stating the geo-political nation-state of Israel is God's people. As a consequence of these many points, he's tried to separate the types of people, i.e., the Church is God's soteriological people while the nation of Israel is some other type of people (he hasn't specified what that might be or proven the position with scripture). He's muddied the discussion with appeals to label he doesn't justify or explain like it was a covenant nation.

ALL of the above is avoided by understanding the fact not all Israel is descended from Israel. There is, therefore, an Israel that is descended from Israel and an Israel that is not descended from Israel. The Israel that is descended from Israel has always existed. There is no "was," to it. Neither is there any "now" that implies the Israel that is Israel was always God's Israel. As I have already posted, the Israel that is Israel existed long, long before the nation ever existed. God expands upon the identity of the Israel that is Israel in three ways. God does this when He names Israel "Israel," or "God perseveres," or "God prevails." This is too allegorical for some, but Hebrew is inherently an idiomatic language. It almost always creates meaning additional to the plain reading of the words. God's people are the ones in whom He perseveres and prevails. The second way God shows the Israel that is Israel existed prior to the existence of a geo-political nation-state is by having Paul trace the lineage of the Israel that is Israel to Abraham, a man who lived centuries before the Hebrews were a people group, long before they'd left Egypt, long, long before they became a nation-state. The third way God defines the Israel that is Israel is by having Paul exclude bloodline, the Law, and works. None of those three conditions qualify a person as a member of the Israel that is descended from Israel. In the place of those three conditions Paul asserts the agency of God's promise(s) and the conditions imputed by faith (righteousness, justification, etc.). Paul goes back to Abraham, but the author of Hebrews goes even further back. He goes all the way back to Abel and Enoch and brings those persons, those who lived by God's promise and faith thereof, those who in whom God prevailed - God, through the author of Hebrews, brings them into the Church.




The point being, the Israel that is Israel has always been that Israel. It is not only "now" God's chosen because God's chosen have always existed and His chosennness is not a temporary condition. It is eternal, not temporal. To bring all this back to the op, The Israel of Revelation is not a "now" kind of thing. That Israel, as we both seem to agree, is definitely NOT the geo-political nation-state of Israel and it never was going to be the geo-political nation-state called "Israel." It was, is, and always will be the Israel that is descended from Israel by the agency of God's promise and the faith in those promises God has gifted those people as He prevails in their lives. This is evident in the seven letters of Revelation in the one theme each of those letters have in common: be overcomers. The nation of Israel clearly did not overcome.

faith
 
That may be true, but it has nothing to do with the identity and nature of Israel in Revelation.

The word "now" implies that has not always been the case so, again, I disagree. God's Israel has always been the Israel that is Israel and never the Israel that is not Israel. I've been having a conversation in another forum with someone who has asserted the position the nation of Israel was temporarily God's chosen people. Despite my and a few others pointing out the "temporary" implies God abandons His chosen people, implies there are two chosen peoples, and implies chosenness may not be permanent for anyone if it is temporary he cannot see the flaws in that position (and he will not discuss the implications of it). it has been pointed out to Him God chooses many people for many things but that does not mean they are God's chosen people. Babylon and Assyria were chosen by God as instruments of His judgment. That did not make them His chosen people. It simply made them a people chosen for a purpose other than being God's own. Similarly, scripture states the nation of Israel served God's purpose bringing a bloodline for the Jesus' birth, but that does not make them God's own, God's chosen people. There isn't a single verse in the entire Bible stating the geo-political nation-state of Israel is God's people. As a consequence of these many points, he's tried to separate the types of people, i.e., the Church is God's soteriological people while the nation of Israel is some other type of people (he hasn't specified what that might be or proven the position with scripture). He's muddied the discussion with appeals to label he doesn't justify or explain like it was a covenant nation.

ALL of the above is avoided by understanding the fact not all Israel is descended from Israel. There is, therefore, an Israel that is descended from Israel and an Israel that is not descended from Israel. The Israel that is descended from Israel has always existed. There is no "was," to it. Neither is there any "now" that implies the Israel that is Israel was always God's Israel. As I have already posted, the Israel that is Israel existed long, long before the nation ever existed. God expands upon the identity of the Israel that is Israel in three ways. God does this when He names Israel "Israel," or "God perseveres," or "God prevails." This is too allegorical for some, but Hebrew is inherently an idiomatic language. It almost always creates meaning additional to the plain reading of the words. God's people are the ones in whom He perseveres and prevails. The second way God shows the Israel that is Israel existed prior to the existence of a geo-political nation-state is by having Paul trace the lineage of the Israel that is Israel to Abraham, a man who lived centuries before the Hebrews were a people group, long before they'd left Egypt, long, long before they became a nation-state. The third way God defines the Israel that is Israel is by having Paul exclude bloodline, the Law, and works. None of those three conditions qualify a person as a member of the Israel that is descended from Israel. In the place of those three conditions Paul asserts the agency of God's promise(s) and the conditions imputed by faith (righteousness, justification, etc.). Paul goes back to Abraham, but the author of Hebrews goes even further back. He goes all the way back to Abel and Enoch and brings those persons, those who lived by God's promise and faith thereof, those who in whom God prevailed - God, through the author of Hebrews, brings them into the Church.




The point being, the Israel that is Israel has always been that Israel. It is not only "now" God's chosen because God's chosen have always existed and His chosennness is not a temporary condition. It is eternal, not temporal. To bring all this back to the op, The Israel of Revelation is not a "now" kind of thing. That Israel, as we both seem to agree, is definitely NOT the geo-political nation-state of Israel and it never was going to be the geo-political nation-state called "Israel." It was, is, and always will be the Israel that is descended from Israel by the agency of God's promise and the faith in those promises God has gifted those people as He prevails in their lives. This is evident in the seven letters of Revelation in the one theme each of those letters have in common: be overcomers. The nation of Israel clearly did not overcome.

faith
Literal Israel- reject Jesus--enough said.
 
There is no phrase spiritual Israel, Galatians shows who it is. All who put on Christ are Abrahams offspring. John the writer of revelation had no clue who that would be here in these last days or what Jesus' 1 religion would be called, so he referenced Israel, just carrying the meaning-Gods chosen.
Glad you can see that literal Israel is not the ones mentioned in Revelation.
There are many such Jewish themes in the book of Revelation. For example Yochanan writes, "I turned around to see who was speaking
to me; and when I had turned, I saw seven gold menorahs," (Rev. 1:12). Although most translations translate this as "lampstands" the
menorah, the seven-branched light in the Temple, was indeed a lampstand. Also when Revelation 1:13 mentions Yeshua's priestly robe,
he is depicted as the priest maintaining the lights of the seven messianic congregations, just as the priests serving the Temple kept
its lights lit. Likewise the twenty-four elders in Revelation 4:4, represent the twenty-four divisions of the priesthood described in
1 Chronicles 24:4 "There were sixteen divisions of the descendants of El'azar, headed by clan leaders, and eight divisions of the descendants
of Itamar, according to their clans. "Furthermore, the "sea of glass" in Revelation 4:6 is, in fact, the laver (a washbasin) from the Temple.
The incense burned in 5:8 and the censor and alter of incense seen in 8:3 are also based on the Tabernacle/Temple.
In Revelation 11:19 Yochanan announces, "Then the Temple of God in heaven was open, and the Ark of the Covenant was seen in his Temple;
and there were flashes of lightning, voices, peals of thunder, an earthquake and violent hail." This was a reminder of the words describing
the giving of the Torah on Sinai.

The Temple of God in Yerushalayim is a true picture of what reality will be in the Messianic Age when, as the heavenly Tabernacle, becomes
the earthly throne of Yeshua, whereas now the throne of Adonai is in heaven, Revelation 21:3 concludes: "I heard a loud voice from the
throne say, "See God's Sh'khinah is with mankind, and he will live with them. They will be his people, he himself, God-with-them,
will be their God."
Baruch Hashem Adonai ברוך השם אדונאי
Shabbat Shalom שבת שלום
 
Literal Israel- reject Jesus--enough said.
Revelation 21:1-6 In the book of Revelation, it's easy to overlook its Jewish themes. In contrast to the prophets whose visions
were Isra'el-centered, Revelation speaks to all peoples. Yochanan assumed his readers knew and accepted the Old Testament
as a matter of course. He focused on Israel's centrality in future events, while writing to a growing community of Messianic
Gentile believers.

The Temple has been gone for two thousand years. Or has it? From the revelation given to Yochanan on Patmos, a pattern emerged
in Yochanan's visions of the throne of the Hole One, where God is seated in his Temple. This is the heavenly Temple much like the earthly
one in the Torah. Therefore, when Moshe built the first Tabernacle, he was called by God to base it on a specific pattern. The writer
of Hebrews adopted this imagery.

Blessings in our Messiah ברכות במשיחנו
Shabbat Shalom שבת שלום
 
There are many such Jewish themes in the book of Revelation. For example Yochanan writes, "I turned around to see who was speaking
to me; and when I had turned, I saw seven gold menorahs," (Rev. 1:12). Although most translations translate this as "lampstands" the
menorah, the seven-branched light in the Temple, was indeed a lampstand. Also when Revelation 1:13 mentions Yeshua's priestly robe,
he is depicted as the priest maintaining the lights of the seven messianic congregations, just as the priests serving the Temple kept
its lights lit. Likewise the twenty-four elders in Revelation 4:4, represent the twenty-four divisions of the priesthood described in
1 Chronicles 24:4 "There were sixteen divisions of the descendants of El'azar, headed by clan leaders, and eight divisions of the descendants
of Itamar, according to their clans. "Furthermore, the "sea of glass" in Revelation 4:6 is, in fact, the laver (a washbasin) from the Temple.
The incense burned in 5:8 and the censor and alter of incense seen in 8:3 are also based on the Tabernacle/Temple.
In Revelation 11:19 Yochanan announces, "Then the Temple of God in heaven was open, and the Ark of the Covenant was seen in his Temple;
and there were flashes of lightning, voices, peals of thunder, an earthquake and violent hail." This was a reminder of the words describing
the giving of the Torah on Sinai.

The Temple of God in Yerushalayim is a true picture of what reality will be in the Messianic Age when, as the heavenly Tabernacle, becomes
the earthly throne of Yeshua, whereas now the throne of Adonai is in heaven, Revelation 21:3 concludes: "I heard a loud voice from the
throne say, "See God's Sh'khinah is with mankind, and he will live with them. They will be his people, he himself, God-with-them,
will be their God."
Baruch Hashem Adonai ברוך השם אדונאי
Shabbat Shalom שבת שלום
God is not literally coming to Earth to live. He doesn't have to be on Earth to be with his people. Rev 21:3 shows what it means--Gods full protection forever, that is how he is with them.
 
Revelation 21:1-6 In the book of Revelation, it's easy to overlook its Jewish themes. In contrast to the prophets whose visions
were Isra'el-centered, Revelation speaks to all peoples. Yochanan assumed his readers knew and accepted the Old Testament
as a matter of course. He focused on Israel's centrality in future events, while writing to a growing community of Messianic
Gentile believers.

The Temple has been gone for two thousand years. Or has it? From the revelation given to Yochanan on Patmos, a pattern emerged
in Yochanan's visions of the throne of the Hole One, where God is seated in his Temple. This is the heavenly Temple much like the earthly
one in the Torah. Therefore, when Moshe built the first Tabernacle, he was called by God to base it on a specific pattern. The writer
of Hebrews adopted this imagery.

Blessings in our Messiah ברכות במשיחנו
Shabbat Shalom שבת שלום
Any can claim to follow Jesus, hundreds of different religions make that claim. Jesus is only with 1.
 
Back
Top Bottom