Gospel Confusion...

[Musicmaster]

The Jewish people, AND the "Nations"

Rom 10:9: That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Obviously Jesus and Paul preached the SAME MESSAGE. the Practical difference is that BEFORE CALVARY, NOBODY could be "Born again of the Holy Spirit", since the ultimate SIN OFFERING (Isa 53:10) hadn't been made - yet.

That's a somewhat perplexing statement. Jesus never preached faith in His resurrection on the third day as a part of what one had to believe in for salvation as did Paul in 1 Cor. 15: 1-4.

Where did Jesus ever preach that alone as the basis for salvation?

John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Paul never once preached the necessity for water baptism as did Jesus and the twelve, even after the cross (Acts 2:38).

Just wanted to throw that in.

MM

 

[Inquisitor]

AI (Artificial Imagination) is of no value here. We don't need a secular creation in programming to tel us what scripture says AND what Holy Spirit says.

MM

How do you understand the following verses?

John 15:1-2
I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit,
He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.

John 15:5-6
I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit,
for apart from Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as
a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.

 

[Inquisitor]

That's a somewhat perplexing statement. Jesus never preached faith in His resurrection on the third day as a part of what one had to believe in for salvation as did Paul in 1 Cor. 15: 1-4.

Where did Jesus ever preach that alone as the basis for salvation?

John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Paul never once preached the necessity for water baptism as did Jesus and the twelve, even after the cross (Acts 2:38).

Just wanted to throw that in.

MM

There were two types of baptism in the N.T.

John's baptism in water which was a physical baptism and was a type.

Then we have the baptism of Jesus which was a spiritual baptism that fulfilled that water baptism of John.

 

[LightBearer316]

In relation to Christ and His offer of salvation there is no Greek nor Jew, etc., but on this earth there are indeed distinctions that do not vanish away, which will become once again lines of division in the future kingdom promised only to Israel, not to Gentile nations. We're all still, in this world, male and female, etc.

MM

MM’s statement is not biblically sound. It reflects a dispensational or even hyper-dispensational interpretation that goes beyond what Scripture actually says.

Scripture Teaches Unity in Christ—Not Future Division

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”​

— Galatians 3:28​

Paul isn’t saying men and women stop existing physically—he’s saying that before God’s saving grace, all distinctions that once separated people are abolished in Christ. There is one covenant family of faith, not two parallel programs (one for Israel and another for the Church).

“For He is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us.”​

— Ephesians 2:14–16​

Paul says Christ broke down the barrier between Jew and Gentile, reconciling both into one body through the cross. That’s the Church—Jew and Gentile believers together.

The “Future Kingdom” Argument Misreads the Prophets

MM’s claim that “distinctions will return” in a future kingdom ignores how the New Testament re-interprets the Old Testament promises:

• The “kingdom promised to Israel” is now fulfilled in Christ (Acts 1:6–8; Luke 17:21).
• The “Israel of God” in Galatians 6:16 includes all who walk by faith, not just ethnic descendants of Jacob.
• Hebrews 12:22–24 says believers (Jew and Gentile alike) have already come to Mount Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem—not waiting for a separate earthly kingdom.

So, biblically, there is no teaching that the Church will someday divide back into ethnic lines. That idea comes from a man-made system, not Scripture.

Earthly Distinctions Exist, But They Don’t Define Covenant Status

It’s true that in daily life, we remain male or female, Jew or Gentile by heritage—but those categories no longer determine one’s standing with God or access to His promises.
Romans 10:12 makes that crystal clear:

“For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon Him.”​

​

Brother, Scripture doesn’t support the idea that ethnic distinctions will once again divide believers in God’s kingdom. The New Covenant unites all in Christ—Jew and Gentile alike—into one body (Ephesians 2:14–16; Galatians 3:28). The promises to Israel find their fulfillment in Christ, not in a return to separation. The Gospel tears down dividing walls, not rebuilds them.​

​

Grace and Peace​

 

[Musicmaster]

How do you understand the following verses?

John 15:1-2
I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit,
He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.

John 15:5-6
I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit,
for apart from Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as
a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.

When Jesus spoke those things, He was addressing ONLY Israel and the proselyte Gentiles who had become Jews given that Israel, under the Kingdom Gospel had to persevere in obedience to the Law:

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

He did not come to preach to the Gentiles, but only Israel. He was speaking of all Jews who would reject Him and His Gospel.

To say that He was also addressing the body of Christ after the fall of Israel, that's just indefensible. Here is Paul speaking to the body of Christ comprised mostly of Gentiles:

Ephesians 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

What so many naysayers miss in this verse is the "commonwealth" part, which is further evidence of that wall of partition that existed at the time when Jesus spoke the words recorded in John that you posted. Gentiles were utter aliens from all that had been given to Israel to minister to the world and to bring Gentiles into the Jewish fold of Israel. Gentiles could not be a part of what Christ promised except that they join with Israel. If that were not the case, then Paul was utterly wrong and lacking in his understanding and should be rejected as do many Hebrew Roots and Messianic Jewish followers of those religions.

Does that answer your question?

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

MM’s statement is not biblically sound. It reflects a dispensational or even hyper-dispensational interpretation that goes beyond what Scripture actually says.

Scripture Teaches Unity in Christ—Not Future Division

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”​

— Galatians 3:28​

Paul isn’t saying men and women stop existing physically—he’s saying that before God’s saving grace, all distinctions that once separated people are abolished in Christ. There is one covenant family of faith, not two parallel programs (one for Israel and another for the Church).

“For He is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us.”​

— Ephesians 2:14–16​

Paul says Christ broke down the barrier between Jew and Gentile, reconciling both into one body through the cross. That’s the Church—Jew and Gentile believers together.

The “Future Kingdom” Argument Misreads the Prophets

MM’s claim that “distinctions will return” in a future kingdom ignores how the New Testament re-interprets the Old Testament promises:

• The “kingdom promised to Israel” is now fulfilled in Christ (Acts 1:6–8; Luke 17:21).
• The “Israel of God” in Galatians 6:16 includes all who walk by faith, not just ethnic descendants of Jacob.
• Hebrews 12:22–24 says believers (Jew and Gentile alike) have already come to Mount Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem—not waiting for a separate earthly kingdom.

So, biblically, there is no teaching that the Church will someday divide back into ethnic lines. That idea comes from a man-made system, not Scripture.

Earthly Distinctions Exist, But They Don’t Define Covenant Status

It’s true that in daily life, we remain male or female, Jew or Gentile by heritage—but those categories no longer determine one’s standing with God or access to His promises.
Romans 10:12 makes that crystal clear:

“For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon Him.”​

​

Brother, Scripture doesn’t support the idea that ethnic distinctions will once again divide believers in God’s kingdom. The New Covenant unites all in Christ—Jew and Gentile alike—into one body (Ephesians 2:14–16; Galatians 3:28). The promises to Israel find their fulfillment in Christ, not in a return to separation. The Gospel tears down dividing walls, not rebuilds them.​

​

Grace and Peace​

This rebuttal is not only biblically unsound, but also intellectually dishonest. I at no time ever said anything about Christ being divided. The word of TRUTH, however, DOES have divisions:

2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Everyone here practices some dividing within the word of TRUTH. Nobody here runs out and offers up animal sacrifices for their sins...or at least, I hope there aren't...

Nobody here practices all the rest of the Mosaic Law. That requirement upon those peope at that time was TRUTH, but we are divided from that TRUTH because we are dead to it.

So, folks, when you see these feeble rushes to smear another on the basis of allegedly negative labels, consider only the scriptures rather than to take mine or anyone else word for anything. Read the scriptures for yourselves, prayerfully, with your understanding enlightened by 1 John 2:27.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

There were two types of baptism in the N.T.

John's baptism in water which was a physical baptism and was a type.

Then we have the baptism of Jesus which was a spiritual baptism that fulfilled that water baptism of John.

Is that what AI taught you?

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

This idea out there that Peter wasn't one to talk about water baptism should really consider the language of the scriptures:

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

That was a call upon those people to DO some action. Spiritual baptism wasn't something anyone could contrive like they do with historic and modern revival meetings. He didn't say that they were spiritually baptized at the point of repentance and faith, but that they were to BE baptized, which gives ample indication that it was something they were to DO. Water baptism, then, was the obedient act that showed their faith, and apart from that, their sins were not remitted.

MM

 

[LightBearer316]

This rebuttal is not only biblically unsound, but also intellectually dishonest. I at no time ever said anything about Christ being divided. The word of TRUTH, however, DOES have divisions:

2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Everyone here practices some dividing within the word of TRUTH. Nobody here runs out and offers up animal sacrifices for their sins...or at least, I hope there aren't...

Nobody here practices all the rest of the Mosaic Law. That requirement upon those peope at that time was TRUTH, but we are divided from that TRUTH because we are dead to it.

So, folks, when you see these feeble rushes to smear another on the basis of allegedly negative labels, consider only the scriptures rather than to take mine or anyone else word for anything. Read the scriptures for yourselves, prayerfully, with your understanding enlightened by 1 John 2:27.

MM

Brother MM, thanks for clarifying. I’m not accusing you of dividing Christ (1 Cor 1:13). My concern is how we interpret “rightly dividing” and whether that leads to two parallel people of God with distinct saving programs, which Scripture does not teach.

What does “rightly dividing” mean?

2 Timothy 2:15 calls us to handle (“cut straight”) the word faithfully—not to carve Scripture into separate gospels for different peoples. We distinguish covenants, genres, and stages of redemptive history, without inventing two saving plans.

• We all agree the Mosaic Law is fulfilled in Christ:
  “For the law having a shadow of good things to come…” (Heb 10:1);
  “Let no man therefore judge you… in respect of an holyday… which are a shadow… but the body is of Christ.” (Col 2:16–17)
  That is fulfillment, not permanent, future re-partitioning of God’s people.

One gospel, one people—revealed fully in Christ

Scripture consistently presents one saving plan in Christ across time, promised beforehand and unveiled in fullness in the New Covenant.

• The promise to Abraham was the gospel in seed form:
  “The scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham…” (Gal 3:8)
• Its fulfillment centers on one Seed—Christ:
  “He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.” (Gal 3:16)
• Jew and Gentile made one new man:
  “For he is our peace, who hath made both one… to make in himself of twain one new man… and that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross.” (Eph 2:14–16)
• The mystery is not two tracks, but Gentile inclusion in the same body:
  “That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel.” (Eph 3:6)

The New Covenant unites— it doesn’t re-erect walls later

The NT does not predict the Church will revert to ethnic partitions in a future “kingdom program.” Rather:

• “There is neither Jew nor Greek… for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal 3:28)
• “There is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.” (Rom 10:12)
• “There is one body, and one Spirit… one Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all…” (Eph 4:4–6)

These are not temporary church-age slogans—they are the New Covenant reality established by Christ’s finished work (Heb 8–10). The shadows (animal sacrifices, ceremonial distinctives) give way to the substance. Distinguishing shadow from substance is good exegesis; re-separating Jew and Gentile in God’s people is not.

About your example (Mosaic Law vs. today)

You’re right—we don’t offer animal sacrifices. Why? Because Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice ended that administration (Heb 10:10–14). That is not proof of two enduring plans, but of one plan progressing to fulfillment in Christ.

Basically: “Rightly dividing” means reading Scripture along the straight line of promise ----> fulfillment in Christ. The New Testament presents one gospel, one body, one New Covenant, with no return to salvation-defining ethnic partitions. The cross didn’t lower the “middle wall of partition” only to build it back later (Eph 2:14–16).

Grace and peace.

 

[Inquisitor]

Is that what AI taught you?

MM

No I worked that out by finding all the verses myself.

Matthew 3:11
As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

That's an easy one.

 

[Inquisitor]

This idea out there that Peter wasn't one to talk about water baptism should really consider the language of the scriptures:

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

That was a call upon those people to DO some action. Spiritual baptism wasn't something anyone could contrive like they do with historic and modern revival meetings. He didn't say that they were spiritually baptized at the point of repentance and faith, but that they were to BE baptized, which gives ample indication that it was something they were to DO. Water baptism, then, was the obedient act that showed their faith, and apart from that, their sins were not remitted.

MM

The physical baptism like circumcision were both physical and outward.

The spiritual circumcision and the spiritual baptism both were fulfilled by Jesus.

If you struggle to understand that Jesus fulfilled all things and in a spiritual way,
then you will not fully comprehend the revelation of Jesus Christ.

 

[LightBearer316]

Inquisitor said:
How do you understand the following verses?

John 15:1-2
I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit,
He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.

John 15:5-6
I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit,
for apart from Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as
a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.

When Jesus spoke those things, He was addressing ONLY Israel and the proselyte Gentiles who had become Jews given that Israel, under the Kingdom Gospel had to persevere in obedience to the Law:

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

He did not come to preach to the Gentiles, but only Israel. He was speaking of all Jews who would reject Him and His Gospel.

To say that He was also addressing the body of Christ after the fall of Israel, that's just indefensible. Here is Paul speaking to the body of Christ comprised mostly of Gentiles:

Ephesians 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

What so many naysayers miss in this verse is the "commonwealth" part, which is further evidence of that wall of partition that existed at the time when Jesus spoke the words recorded in John that you posted. Gentiles were utter aliens from all that had been given to Israel to minister to the world and to bring Gentiles into the Jewish fold of Israel. Gentiles could not be a part of what Christ promised except that they join with Israel. If that were not the case, then Paul was utterly wrong and lacking in his understanding and should be rejected as do many Hebrew Roots and Messianic Jewish followers of those religions.

Does that answer your question?

MM

Jesus’ teaching in John 15 is a timeless truth about union with Him through faith, not a temporary instruction to national Israel under the Law.
To restrict His words to Israel is to miss the heart of the gospel — that through Christ, both Jew and Gentile are one new man (Ephesians 2:15).

Grace and Peace

 

[Inquisitor]

When Jesus spoke those things, He was addressing ONLY Israel and the proselyte Gentiles who had become Jews given that Israel, under the Kingdom Gospel had to persevere in obedience to the Law:

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

He did not come to preach to the Gentiles, but only Israel. He was speaking of all Jews who would reject Him and His Gospel.

To say that He was also addressing the body of Christ after the fall of Israel, that's just indefensible. Here is Paul speaking to the body of Christ comprised mostly of Gentiles:

Ephesians 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

What so many naysayers miss in this verse is the "commonwealth" part, which is further evidence of that wall of partition that existed at the time when Jesus spoke the words recorded in John that you posted. Gentiles were utter aliens from all that had been given to Israel to minister to the world and to bring Gentiles into the Jewish fold of Israel. Gentiles could not be a part of what Christ promised except that they join with Israel. If that were not the case, then Paul was utterly wrong and lacking in his understanding and should be rejected as do many Hebrew Roots and Messianic Jewish followers of those religions.

Does that answer your question?

MM

You quoted the following verse.

Ephesians 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

Somehow you did not read the next verse.

Ephesians 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

Gentiles were brought NEAR and not into the commonwealth of Israel.

Jews according to Paul were the enemies of Christianity.

The law merely grants the knowledge of sin and not any form of righteousness.

Israel only was in a former covenant with YHWH based on the book of the law.

 

[LightBearer316]

If we say Jesus’ words before the cross were only for Israel, we’ve just erased almost everything He taught.
No Sermon on the Mount. No Great Commission. No Lord’s Prayer. No promise of the Spirit.

That’s not rightly dividing the Word — that’s dissecting Christ Himself.
The New Testament never makes that cut. His cross didn’t cancel His words — it fulfilled them and extended them to all nations.

“There is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon Him.” — Romans 10:12​

One Savior. One gospel. One body in Christ.

Even Before the Cross, Jesus Reached the Gentiles

Matthew 8:10–11 — “Many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.”

Jesus foretold Gentiles joining the kingdom long before Pentecost.​

Matthew 8:13 — “As thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee.”

Spoken to a Roman centurion — a Gentile whose faith amazed Jesus.​

Matthew 15:28 — “O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt.”

Said to the Canaanite woman — another Gentile whose faith He rewarded.​

John 4:42 — “This is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.”

Spoken by Samaritans — non-Jews who believed before the cross.​

John 12:32 — “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto Me.”

His mission was never “Israel only” — it was always global redemption.​

Jesus didn’t preach a temporary “Israel-only gospel.”
He was laying the foundation for one kingdom and one body — Jew and Gentile united in Himself.

“For He is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us.” — Ephesians 2:14​

Grace and Peace

 

[Musicmaster]

Brother MM, thanks for clarifying. I’m not accusing you of dividing Christ (1 Cor 1:13). My concern is how we interpret “rightly dividing” and whether that leads to two parallel people of God with distinct saving programs, which Scripture does not teach.

Perhaps I can understand how some people can think that what I've been saying divides the people of God into groupings.

If I may, that's precisely what's going to happen. The body of Christ will not reside on the new earth, but rather in Heavenly places where our treasures are stored up. It is ancient Israel (which included all Gentiles who joined with her to become Jews) before the cross and onward to the fall of Israel at the stoning of Stephen, believing, Messianic Israel and Gentiles after the stoning of Stephen during and after the fall of Israel and that middle wall of partition, and all believing Gentiles afterward as well to this day and beyond. The nations that pass through the tribulation will populate the new earth around the new Jerusalem.

So, pray tell, why do you have issues with the Lord creating those division with different groupings residing in different places for differing purposes...if that is the issue you have with what I've said. BY dispensing with the labels regarding dispensationalists and such, especially given that I don't agree on many points with many of those who identify with that label, we can plod through this with perhaps some greater clarity.

2 Timothy 2:15 calls us to handle (“cut straight”) the word faithfully—not to carve Scripture into separate gospels for different peoples. We distinguish covenants, genres, and stages of redemptive history, without inventing two saving plans.

"to cut new veins in mining; dropping the notion of cutting, to make something new, introduce new things, make innovations or changes, etc.)" (https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g3718/kjv/tr/0-1/)

This definition is identified specifically in relation to the grammatical construct of 2 Tim. 2:15 rather than a host of definitions for each individual to pick and choose from that meshes with personal bias. That is what I like about the use of Thayer's Greek Lexicon so that all others who don't know Greek can go there and see it for themselves and make up their own minds about it from a scholar who was and is still lauded as a great force for consistency with the Greek texts of the Textus Receptus and other numerous sources throughout.

Blessings

MM

 

[LightBearer316]

Perhaps I can understand how some people can think that what I've been saying divides the people of God into groupings.

If I may, that's precisely what's going to happen. The body of Christ will not reside on the new earth, but rather in Heavenly places where our treasures are stored up. It is ancient Israel (which included all Gentiles who joined with her to become Jews) before the cross and onward to the fall of Israel at the stoning of Stephen, believing, Messianic Israel and Gentiles after the stoning of Stephen during and after the fall of Israel and that middle wall of partition, and all believing Gentiles afterward as well to this day and beyond. The nations that pass through the tribulation will populate the new earth around the new Jerusalem.

So, pray tell, why do you have issues with the Lord creating those division with different groupings residing in different places for differing purposes...if that is the issue you have with what I've said. BY dispensing with the labels regarding dispensationalists and such, especially given that I don't agree on many points with many of those who identify with that label, we can plod through this with perhaps some greater clarity.

2 Timothy 2:15 calls us to handle (“cut straight”) the word faithfully—not to carve Scripture into separate gospels for different peoples. We distinguish covenants, genres, and stages of redemptive history, without inventing two saving plans.

"to cut new veins in mining; dropping the notion of cutting, to make something new, introduce new things, make innovations or changes, etc.)" (https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g3718/kjv/tr/0-1/)

This definition is identified specifically in relation to the grammatical construct of 2 Tim. 2:15 rather than a host of definitions for each individual to pick and choose from that meshes with personal bias. That is what I like about the use of Thayer's Greek Lexicon so that all others who don't know Greek can go there and see it for themselves and make up their own minds about it from a scholar who was and is still lauded as a great force for consistency with the Greek texts of the Textus Receptus and other numerous sources throughout.

Blessings

MM

Brother MM,
Thank you for clarifying your view with such detail. I do appreciate your effort to stay true to Scripture. However, I believe your interpretation extends beyond what the text of Scripture actually supports.

Scripture Teaches One Redeemed People of God

The Bible presents one unified people of God, not two eternal classes living in separate realms.

“That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth.”​

— Ephesians 1:10​

Paul doesn’t describe parallel programs but a single divine purpose — to unite all things in Christ. Likewise:

“There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling.”​

— Ephesians 4:4​

Heavenly and earthly destinies are not two different salvations but one family ultimately reconciled under Christ’s headship (Eph. 2:14–16).

“Rightly Dividing” (2 Timothy 2:15) Means Handling Scripture Accurately

The Greek term orthotomounta (“to cut straight”) does not imply creating multiple programs or destinies, but teaching the Word correctly.
Paul’s command is ethical and hermeneutical — not dispensational.

“Study to shew thyself approved unto God… rightly dividing (cutting straight) the word of truth.”​

The imagery is that of a mason cutting a straight path or a farmer plowing a straight furrow — precision and integrity in teaching, not segmentation of God’s people.​

Even Thayer’s Lexicon lists meanings such as to make a straight path, to proceed on straight course, emphasizing correctness, not separation. Your own citation of Thayer confirms this — the secondary “to innovate” sense is unrelated to Paul’s context.

Distinctions in Function ≠ Divisions in Destiny

Scripture acknowledges differences in roles and callings, but not in salvation or eternal belonging.

“For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.” — Ephesians 2:18​

“For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.” — Galatians 3:26​

Israel’s promises find fulfillment in Christ, not apart from Him (2 Cor. 1:20). The New Jerusalem itself contains the names of both Israel’s tribes and the apostles (Rev. 21:12–14) — a perfect symbol of unity, not segregation.

The New Creation Is Unified, Not Segregated

The new heavens and new earth will be filled with righteousness (2 Pet. 3:13). The redeemed from every tribe, nation, and tongue will dwell with God (Rev. 21:3). Scripture never says the Church will remain forever “in heaven” while Israel or Gentile nations occupy the earth separately. That concept is absent from the New Testament.

“Rightly dividing” is not about cutting Scripture into separate gospels or destinies, but about walking the straight path of truth — interpreting all Scripture through the revelation of Christ as the center of God’s redemptive plan.

“For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever.” — Romans 11:36​

Blessings in Christ,

 

[Musicmaster]

Brother MM,
Thank you for clarifying your view with such detail. I do appreciate your effort to stay true to Scripture. However, I believe your interpretation extends beyond what the text of Scripture actually supports.

Scripture Teaches One Redeemed People of God

The Bible presents one unified people of God, not two eternal classes living in separate realms.

I disagree, and here's why:

Ephesians 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

Paul, in that context, was not including all the OT saints, the tribulation saints nor Israel as a whole.

Also this:

2 Corinthians 5:1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

Most who disagree with this do so on the basis of allegorizing it and other sections of scripture into saying what they don't say, such as the new earth and the new Jerusalem will also be in heavenly places, etc., etc. Where it's true that allegory does indeed exist in places throughout scripture, it's taxing to see so many subjectively applying that lens at will on the basis of personal belief.

So, it appears that the idea of believers who existed through this dispensation of grace period, we will dwell in Heavenly places rather than upon the new earth. Why this grates against the sensibilities is something I'm not quite getting in this discussion. Why would anyone object to this? We are all made into one body indeed, but we are made that way by and through the One who is omnipresent, and so us being in Heaven while Israel and the Tribulation saints live upon the new earth, why is that a problem if it's more than daring to read scripture for what it says.

Allegory has no absolute, defining rules for interpretation. A number of scholars throughout history have attempted to try and establish such rules, but mostly have failed other than to retreat back to the commonly accepted rule for "Let scripture interpret scripture," which yet again opens the door to subjectivism as to what scriptures are applied for comparison.

Colossians 1:20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

The key here is "reconcile" in what it means in relation to the context and grammatical construct of the wording:

"to reconcile completely (ἀπό) [others, to reconcile back again, bring back to a former state of harmony;" (https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g604/kjv/tr/0-1/)

This is yet another rabbit hole of discussion to go onward from here along this vein, but our being in Heaven apart from the new earth and new Jerusalem dwellers will have a purpose that's not absolutely addressed in clarity of language for every individual to say that they fully understand.

So, I still find it perplexing as to why this poses a problem in your thinking and your understanding of the scriptures...other than it doesn't mesh with what is commonly taught within almost all of churchianity here in the West.

Paul doesn’t describe parallel programs but a single divine purpose — to unite all things in Christ. Likewise:

Yes, and all things will be united within the One who is in all places at all times dare we consider His very nature and Person. Again, I don't see the dichotomy here.

Heavenly and earthly destinies are not two different salvations but one family ultimately reconciled under Christ’s headship (Eph. 2:14–16).

You believe you will be a dweller within the New Jerusalem, the city with the twelve tribes named up over each of the gates and the foundation stones named after the twelve apostles...Paul not being among them?

His chosen people were chosen for a purpose and were promised what was never promised to Gentiles. Replacement and continued non-distinctness theologies have greatly muddied these waters, thus making this a difficult topic to discuss with those who hold to beliefs fully sold out to the Western mentality in favor of replacement and/or fully joined beliefs about eternity with no distinctions remaining thereafter.

“Rightly Dividing” (2 Timothy 2:15) Means Handling Scripture Accurately

I've already addressed this from a scholastic source rather than mere personal opinion, so I won't belabor it further since I did not point to rightly dividing as the basis for "...multiple programs..." per se. I presented an absolutely logical comparative when speaking of the Mosaic Law and how we do not adhere to that truth for today. If my presentation along that line was in error, then we can discuss that. That "cutting straight" definition doesn't mesh with the text nor its context within the Greek grammar from which it was translated. I cannot allow myself to be drawn into such a subjective acceptance of definitions from a source you didn't even cite, as is the right and proper thing to do when quoting another's work.

Even Thayer’s Lexicon lists meanings such as to make a straight path, to proceed on straight course, emphasizing correctness, not separation. Your own citation of Thayer confirms this — the secondary “to innovate” sense is unrelated to Paul’s context.

Yes, and Thayer's also states which verse each defined meaning applies, and it was not attributed to the verse we are discussing.

Distinctions in Function ≠ Divisions in Destiny

Scripture acknowledges differences in roles and callings, but not in salvation or eternal belonging.

I've shown otherwise to some extent, but not exhaustively, I will admit.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

You quoted the following verse.

Ephesians 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

Somehow you did not read the next verse.

Ephesians 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

Gentiles were brought NEAR and not into the commonwealth of Israel.

Jews according to Paul were the enemies of Christianity.

The law merely grants the knowledge of sin and not any form of righteousness.

Israel only was in a former covenant with YHWH based on the book of the law.

Your AI theology is truly misleading you into some very strange and dark understanding, not to mention your not dealing entirely with what was said.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

If we say Jesus’ words before the cross were only for Israel, we’ve just erased almost everything He taught.
No Sermon on the Mount. No Great Commission. No Lord’s Prayer. No promise of the Spirit.

That’s not rightly dividing the Word — that’s dissecting Christ Himself.
The New Testament never makes that cut. His cross didn’t cancel His words — it fulfilled them and extended them to all nations.

“There is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon Him.” — Romans 10:12​

One Savior. One gospel. One body in Christ.

Even Before the Cross, Jesus Reached the Gentiles

Matthew 8:10–11 — “Many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.”

Jesus foretold Gentiles joining the kingdom long before Pentecost.​

Matthew 8:13 — “As thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee.”

Spoken to a Roman centurion — a Gentile whose faith amazed Jesus.​

Matthew 15:28 — “O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt.”

Said to the Canaanite woman — another Gentile whose faith He rewarded.​

John 4:42 — “This is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.”

Spoken by Samaritans — non-Jews who believed before the cross.​

John 12:32 — “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto Me.”

His mission was never “Israel only” — it was always global redemption.​

Jesus didn’t preach a temporary “Israel-only gospel.”
He was laying the foundation for one kingdom and one body — Jew and Gentile united in Himself.

“For He is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us.” — Ephesians 2:14​

Grace and Peace

I agree with you to the extent that we must, as stated many times, rightly divide the word of truth. When Jesus told the man he had healed to go and offer up the required sacrifice in thanksgiving for his healing, that was clearly ONLY for Israel, and when Jesus spoke with the Canaanite dog:

Matthew 8:4 And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man; but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.

It's strange that those who claim that all Jesus commanded is still binding today.

So, let's look at this again:

Matthew 15:22-28
22 And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.
23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.
28 Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.

In this exchange, the Canaanite didn't say, "But Lord, we Gentiles are fellow heirs with the Jews, and therefore partakers of the good things with your chosen people..."

That mystery of heirship was not yet established and thus revealed until the coming of Paul into the faith because it was the mystery hidden since the creation of the world, and of which Satan and his princes didn't know, because had they known of it, they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory. This, then, clearly shows to us that middle wall of partition that existed all throughout the ministry of Christ on this earth, and that therefore did not apply to Gentiles except that they join in the Messianic faith toward Israel and her Messiah given that Israel was the Lord's chosen portal through which Gentiles had to enter in for salvation. Gentiles were without Christ, aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, without God in the world and without hope EXCEPT that they join with Israel and the
finished work of Messiah through Israel as God's chosen nation of priests.

That Canaanite woman recognized Jesus as God for her to worship Him (some say otherwise because of her allegedly being a pagan in her beliefs), but she recognized that it was ONLY through Israel that Gentiles could be blessed. Because of the foreign-to-scripture sentiments arising from replacement theology, with the many manifestations of it throughout Western thought and religion that has kept the light of revelation from shining in the minds of many upon this important fact about the ministry of Christ on this earth, the truths remain elusive by way of rejection. So many Gentiles the world over see themselves as the ones who were sitting at the feet of Christ and reclining with Him at the "Last Supper," etc. Gentiles were without hope UNTIL something happened, and replacement theology has kept Gentiles from seeing the truths surrounding that change and shift that took place whereby salvation came unto the Gentiles.

Ephesians 2:14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

The problem in the thinking of many is in the timing of this fall of that middle wall. Many think it was the timing of the cross itself at the exclusion of so many things stated throughout, including:

Romans 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

One will search in vain any statement made anywhere that crucifying Christ alone was the point of the fall of Israel.

Most Gentiles assume themselves into the Gospels where their existence in relation to salvation at that time was only as dogs, without hope and without God in the world. They were all lost and without hope except that they join with Israel. Something changed at some point that most Gentiles never even question enough to investigate the scriptures to find the answer. They continue forward assuming all that Jesus spoke was all an address to Gentiles in addition of Israel at that time, which is utterly false. The Gospel of Grace didn't apply, at that time. The Gospel of Grace only applied to Gentiles after the revealing of the mystery to Paul of Tarsus at and beyond Acts 9, which released Gentiles from having to join with Israel from then onward. The situation for Gentiles at the time Peter speaking the Kingdom Gospel to Israel in Acts 2 still required Gentiles to join with Israel. None of the twelve ever stated anything about salvation having come to the Gentiles before it was revealed to Paul.

The rudimentary fallacies behind the belief that it's all the same Gospel between two groupings of people (Jews and their proselytes, and Gentiles the world over) one of whom had the Mosaic Law (for which the Jewish, Messianic believers remained zealous, even after the ascension of Christ and after Pentecost) and the other did not (meaning Gentiles in general who were in the back pocket of Satan before the fall of Israel), the fallacy behind an alleged singular gospel message at the exclusion of the basic differences between them both involving distinctions between them in relation to the elements for salvation, that just ignores so much because of its tap root grown down so deeply into the rotten and poisoned soils of replacement theology.

This is like speaking in a different language in the ears of those indoctrinated into the mainstream, typical Evangelical and Reformed gospel followers. Not all have given themselves over to that fallacy, but many have, and thus being accursed dare they preach that other gospel to the unsaved and among each other.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Here is a comparison between the two gospels: