God, the Jew, and You - Romans 9:1-26 - Skip Heitzig
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 08. 2024
- We now come to the third major section of Paul’s letter to the Romans that reveals God’s plan for Jew and Gentile. The early church in Jerusalem was entirely Jewish, but by this point, in most other parts of the world, it had become predominantly non-Jewish. But if God made so many promises to the Jewish nation, does that mean those promises are all now annulled? How does Israel’s rejection of Jesus as Messiah fit into God’s sovereign strategy, and where do we fit in?
This teaching is from our series Heart & Soul: A Study through Romans with Skip Heitzig from Calvary Church.
Thank you Pastor Skip for not skipping (no pun intendant) the difficult passages and making them clear.
God bless Skip,he makes the scriptures clearer for me
Amen, thank u Lord 🙏
Thank you Pastor Skip, this was so helpful but you're right we don't know how all things works sometimes but IT MAKES SENSE! THANK YOU LORD!!!
What a Wonderful sermon . I am learning from brother Skip how to share the Word of God to others .. Thank you and God Continue to bless you brother Skip .
Praise God for all those salvation.
Hallelujah! A much as I love brother Skips preaching it doesn't beat that altar call with so many coming to Jesus! ❤️
I discovered Skip on the radio in Amarillo, and I LOVE your preaching style.
An analogy that came to mind: As a teacher, I know I will have more and more students over the decades, and I elect to teach them all regardless. When I became a teacher, I decided I will do whatever it takes to educate even though I have not yet met my students. I just hope they will allow me and choose me to be their teacher.
Thanks
but analogy of holding the rope is not what the Bible says in sin we are dead how we can save ourselves but holding the rope?
Amen 🎉🎉🎉
At the point where the presenter mentioned that he didn't agree with everything Israel does politically, I winced. That's the sort of comment that requires either a good deal of elaboration and explanation, or else shouldn't be mentioned at all. Otherwise, 'tis an enlightening and educational exposition; my thanks to the presenter!
I should add that I by no means see eye to eye with the presenter, but that's a discussion for another time! ; )
Totally agree with you as far as the statement you alluded to needs more explanation. If I may offer my opinion I would say I agree with that statement. The presenter is more concern with the subject matter of the message. Like any human government, there are decisions we may or may not disagree with. For example, if he says that he believes the Jewish people should take sole possession of the land, including Palestinian towns, some will dismiss the message. In the other hand if he believes the Jews are wrong by allowing the Palestinians to coexist with the Jews others may also disagree and dismiss the message. At the end, the main message is what he is more concern with. I personally agree with the fact that the whole land belongs to the Israelis.
What polling book is he referencing in this sermon?
Jacob I have loved, Esau I have HATED.... AMEN AND AMEN... THE PROMISE OVERIDES THE FLESH.... ISAAC AND ISMAEL... ISAAC THE PROMISE, ISMAEL THE FLESH....Edom and the Amalakites... Election and Predestination.... This must be preached... Jesus was born to die to save sinners... YHWH/Adonai/Elohim = Agape
And notice in the election the one who keeps his bloodline Covenant is the one the Covenant goes with for example Esau and jacob, Genesis 28 1 through 5 Abraham instructs both sons to only take a wife from their own house if they're going to receive the promise at the coming of the Christ..
Genesis 281¶And Isaac called Jacob, and blessed him, and charged him, and said unto him, Thou shalt not take a wife of the daughters of Canaan.
2Arise, go to Padanaram, to the house of Bethuel thy mother's father; and take thee a wife from thence of the daughters of Laban thy mother's brother.
3And God Almighty bless thee, and make thee fruitful, and multiply thee, that thou mayest be a multitude of people;
4And give thee the blessing of Abraham, to thee, and to thy seed with thee; that thou mayest inherit the land wherein thou art a stranger, which God gave unto Abraham.
Now Jacob goes to his own house and takes a wife and their bloodline Covenant continues with Jacob..
Esau on the other hand defies his father's instruction and goes after the women of Canaan Daughters of Ishmael. And as a result is hated of God and the bloodline stops..
Genesis 288And Esau seeing that the daughters of Canaan pleased not Isaac his father;
9Then went Esau unto Ishmael, and took unto the wives which he had Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael Abraham's son, the sister of Nebajoth, to be his wife.
Now in Genesis 17 Ishmael are the children of the flesh who would not be heirs with the children of the promised bloodline which is isaac,
This is Genesis 17.18And Abraham said unto God, O that Ishmael might live before thee!
19¶And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.
20And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.
21But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year.
Now notice Genesis 17:18 Abraham asked for Ishmael to be heir to the Covenant and God completely rejected him because he was not the pure seed from Genesis 3:15, yet Abraham and Sarah is half sister were the seed or bloodline of Seth...
And we see it again in Galatians chapter 4 referencing the children of the flesh which are Ishmael and the children of Promise which are Isaac..
In the text Paul is stating the scribes and Pharisees are the children of Canaan AKA descendant of the mixed bloodline of Ishmael who were persecuting the true children of Isaac as the prophecy foretold..
Galatians 428¶Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
29But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
30Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman
This is the t a r e s who were trying to take Israel AKA Isaac's Covenant through Force by the law which is why Paul is focused on the law and how it can't take away their promise because it's a bloodline Covenant..
Genesis 16:12 KJV - And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.
So in conclusion the letters are talking about how the children of Isaac are heirs to the promises and the children of the flesh aka the fake Jews who are the synagogue of Satan couldn't be part therefore that good news Paul was preaching upset them and caused them to beat them and jail them and kill them demanding they quit teaching that..
The religious community is good news gospel is worthless and just not accurate and there's no salvation in replacement theology
Thank you for your teachings. I am edified by them often. I do want to offer a point of correction. The first time Pharaoh's heart was hardened...it was by the Lord. Exodus 4:21 Not by Pharaoh. The Word of God is clear that Pharaoh's purpose was that God could "display my (God's) power in you (Pharaoh) that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth. Yes, Pharaoh (as we all are) was sinful and prideful and God chose to solidify his rebellion verses choose to have mercy on Him. This was the sovereign choice of the Lord. You said that God will not save anyone who does not want to be saved. He absolutely will. Paul's salvation was proof of that! so does Romans 9:19"For who is able to resist His will?" God saves whom he choses. Romans 9:15 is very clear that God saves whom he choses and that (Verse 16) "It does NOT, therefore, depend on human DESIRE or effort. Romans9:20 "But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' Does not the Potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use? What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects (he created) for his wrath - prepared for destruction?" We must not try to revamp what God's purpose in election to make it easier for us to swallow. You only quoted the 2nd part of John6:37...the verse in it's entirety says "All those the Father gives me WILL come to me and whoever come to me I will never drive away." Verse 44 reads "No one CAN come to me unless the Father who sent me DRAWS THEM and I will raise them up in the last day." Let scripture speak, it is clear. We sometimes don't like it and over complicate it trying to make it more palatable.
Amen!
This is complete heresy. Free-will is the doctrine from hell. Free-will and election are diametrically opposed. God is sovereign in salvation. Man contributes nothing to salvation. Man cannot come to Christ unless the Father calls him. Man does not choose God, God chooses man according to His eternal decree from before the foundations of the world. Sola Scriptura.
Also see Hebrews 9:15, it states Jesus only died for those under the first Covenant..
15And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death👈for the👉redemption of the transgressions👈that were under
the👉first testament👈they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
There's no salvation in stealing other people's letters and inserting yourself into them...
That’s incoherent.
Who’s letters were stolen? Jews?
I promise they don’t mind, they deny the entire New Testament and parts of the old. They often teach from the Talmudic.
The Talmudic stories make fun of Jesus’ birth from a virgin, fervently contest his claim to be the Messiah and Son of God, and maintain that he was rightfully executed as a blasphemer and idolater. They subvert the Christian idea of Jesus’ resurrection and insist he got the punishment he deserved in hell - and that a similar fate awaits his followers.
I’m not sure what bible reading
Hebrews 9:15
“Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal Inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.”
The Greek word means both covenant and will; also verses 16 and 17
Calvinism
Terrible teaching. Misses Paul’s points entirely. Teaches a message 180 degrees opposite of Paul’s intent.
How so? I disagree
@@codythompson759 This "preacher" is a deceiver, a liar, and a con man. He is preaching the opposite of what Paul wrote. Interestingly, he starts out his sermon by saying that men are predisposed to lying - which should be a red flag.
Romans 9 tells how the covenants (old testament and new), the promises, the glory, the Law, the prophecies, and Christ, are exclusively with one race (ESV). That race would always be known by Isaac's name - that is God's promise. Isaac's Sons we know today as Saxons. The J--ws are not, never have been, never will be Israel. They killed our kinsman redeemer. They are the anti-Christs. According to Jesus, Jn. 8, they are impostors of Israel, AND, they are the offspring of satan.
The word 'gentile' has been corrupted. Paul would have used the word ethnos, which was translated to gentile in English. Both words, however, are common root words of English today. Gens/gentilis - Latin, denotes birth, race, offspring... as demonstrated in the words genesis, genetics, genealogy, and even gentleman, which even today's dictionary definition is ' a man of good racial stock". The word Ethnos - Greek, is the root of ethnicity, which means race, or belonging to a race or tribe.
So how does the word Gentile mean literally the opposite today in churches? Corruption. By false preachers like this guy, leading his flock straight to help with him. Timothy strongly cautions us "do not be deceived, brethren". It is incumbent on each of us to study, to look at words used in the bible and draw our own conclusions. Gentiles, when Paul wrote, was referring to the tribes of Israel who were already dispersed to mainly Europe. Paul was a Benjamite, living with other Benjamin and Judah Israelites. Jesus commanded him to preach the Gospel to the gentiles, meaning he was to bring the news of Christ to the kin, brethren, etc. Even the word "brethren", or " brothers", which even Christ used, is the Greek word "adelphos", which has a racial connotation in that the word literally means " from the same womb". Jesus commanded us to love God foremost, but to love our brethren, which is our fellow Anglosaxon.
I assume you talked to Paul and he told you what his intent was?
@@4godisholy lol, yes, I would say - he wrote me a note!
@@4godisholy as I’m revisiting this just for starters, at about 7:30 he says that the issue at stake is “did God reject the Jews?” That’s not it. Paul’s message has always been that unlike the common knowledge of his day, the Jews were not chosen AND the Gentiles were NOT CHOSEN. Paul received the revelation of the solution of the great, terrible ancient mystery of why did God (only) choose the Jews. The answer is he didn’t. He didn’t NOT choose the Gentiles. The same blessings he gave the Jews directly through Abraham, Moses, Isaac and Jacob, he gave to the Gentiles through Christ. Paul knows that he just referenced in detail in Romans 8 a bunch of blessings that heretofore had only been know to apply to the Jews. And when Paul preached in every town that these blessings had come to the Jews he got stoned. Usually. The Jews HATED Paul’s message. So when he rattles off this list in Romans 8 he doesn’t next think, but does this mean God is rejecting Israel? No, he thinks, sheesh, this is where the Jews all start throwing things at me. What follows in chapter 9 is Paul’s recounting of all of his arguments with those unbelieving Jews and his winning arguments against them. This context makes a difference.