Notes on Pastor Lawrence's Bible Study Course
Fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant Promise:
TO BECOME MANY NATIONS, Part 2
Pastor Don Elmore's Review Notes
We continue in our study of the many nations promise that originally was made to Abraham then passed on to Isaac, then to Esau who lost it, then to Jacob/Israel, then to Reuben, who lost it, then to Joseph and his son, Ephraim, the younger. But to the mainstream churches these verses mean nothing. They totally ignore them. The most common view is "That's the Old Testament." We believe "that the New Covenant is made with all races of the world; all believers. All who believe are of the faith of Abraham."
Let's study the scriptures and see what they say, for our purpose it to develop and form a consistent biblical theology based on the examination of the evidence of the Old and New Covenant Scriptures through objective interpretaion of what the Bible says and what it means by what it says.
There were two promises to Abraham that the Apostle Paul writes to the Israelites who were in the church at Rome in Romans 4:17-18:
17) (As it is written, I HAVE MADE THEE A FATHER OF MANY NATIONS,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.
18) Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.
What is the relationship between these two promises? Was it the seed (descendants) of Abraham that were to be the many nations that he would become the father of? And didn't we learn that Jacob/Israel blessed Ephraim (Joseph's son) that he would be the father of a MULTITUDE OF NATIONS?
Isn't this what the Apostle Paul was writting about in Romans, chapter 4? The physical offspring of Abraham would become a multitude of nations of Ephraim--the firstborn blessing! This is shocking to the average Christian who in the last 150 years has seen the Christian church been turned around almost 180 degrees. From feminism, homosexuality, aborticide, Christmas, Easter, dispensationalism, rapture theory, miscegenation--this is just another large error that the church did not believe until it became Catholicized (Universal)!
In Romans 9:24, Paul asks who were called: "Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?" Who are the Jews and who are the Gentiles? The mainstream churches differ from what the Bible says--and this is very difficult--for Paul says in verse 25, "As he saith also in Hosea...." and quotes Hosea 2:23 and part of 1:10. Hosea is one scripture where the translators got it right--for it says that he taught about the different destinies of the House of Judah and the House of Israel. The House of Israel was to cease being a nation, uncircumcised, divorced from God, no longer his people but they would after about 700 years of captivity once again be placed back in the covenant by a new one. The House of Judah would be shown mercy and be saved from captivity by the Assyrians by divine intervention.
When the Apostle Paul used the quotes from Hosea, he was saying that the Jews (House of Judah) and the Gentiles (House of Israel) were both called. He also says that he was "...not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew (House of Judah) first, and also to the Greek" (House of Israel)--Romans 1:16.
In Romans, chapter 2, verse 14: "For when the Gentiles (House of Israel) which have not the law...which shew the work of the law written in their hearts...." he is identifying the House of Israel who were without any hope, without God in the world until our Savior came and died and was resurrected for them and for the House of Judah. It was the House of Israel who was without the law for 700 years when they were cut off from the covenant. For they broke the first covenant: but it was an everlasting covenant. Hosea had said that they would be put back into the covenant once again--those who were not the people of God would be the people of God again.
Jeremiah had said in 31:31-33:
31) Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32) Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
33) But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
In Romans 3, Paul again addresses the differences between these two kingdoms:
29) Is he the God of the Jews (House of Judah) only? Is he not also of the Gentiles (House of Israel)? Yes, of the Gentiles (House of Israel) also:
30) Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision (House of Judah) by faith, and uncircumcision (House of Israel) through faith.
The House of Judah had kept the law of God even thought they were guilty of sinning--transgressing the law of God, also. But even though they were more treacherous than their divorced brothers--they had come back to Jerusalem and tried to keep the law. That is what the Apostle Paul was referring to in 4:16:
"Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law (House of Judah), but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham (House of Israel); who is the father of us all."
The "faith of Abraham" looked back to the moment God promised to Abraham that he would be the father of many nations. At that moment Abraham believed what God promised him and also looked forward to that promise by faith being fulfilled in the physical descendants of Abraham (through Isaac and jacob) "according to that which had been spoken", and "so shall your descendants be" (Romans 4:17, 18).
The new covenant was made with the House of Judah and the House of Israel not with all races of the earth; not with any of the seed with whom are father told us NOT to marry or make any covenant. Is the covenant important and necessary? "Jews" and "Gentiles" or "Jews" or "Greeks" when written together are very poor translations; for in the vast majority of places it should have been translated much more accurately as the House of Judah and the House of Israel.
It is no wonder when one goes back in history a little more that a century and a half, he finds a very different church: he find the Christian church (not Rome) to be separated; with its members being Israelites only...and then the enemy came to the seminaries and also began to teach their law to our people. But when one goes back in church history to just over one hundred years ago; he will find that they did not have any women as preachers, and teachers of the men; they hated Christmas and Easter; they taught against homosexuality and aborticide; and while the arminian churches taught that Jesus died for everyone of all races at least the calvinistics churches taught that Jesus Christ did not die or love everyone. The majority of churches now even teach that the law of God was nailed to the cross of Jesus--our people consider it a Jewish law. Blashphemy!