Messianic Collateral
Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, according to the promise of life in Christ Jesus, 2 Timothy 1:1 NASB
Promise of life – Paul’s second letter opening makes some changes. They are worth noting. First we see that Paul is still an apostle but now this is by the will of God, not by God’s command (as in 1 Timothy 1:1). What’s the difference? Actually, not much. The Greek thelema is distinguished from boulomai by the fact that this verb describes what is not only intended or desired but what is also completed. When thelema is used of God, it means that God’s intention is brought to execution. Man may intend but not complete. God intends and completes. He finishes what He starts. So when Paul uses the Greek thelema of God’s will, he does not mean that God simply desired it. He means that God made it happen – and that is essentially the equivalent of a commandment. From Paul’s perspective, it is what God demands. From God’s perspective, it is what He does.
In the first letter, Paul notes that the commandment that causes him to be an apostle is related to the Messiah who is our hope. Here Paul sees that hope as the promise of life. There seem to be two striking elements in this change. The first is the absence of any suggestion about forgiveness from sin. We might have wondered about this with Paul’s first opening because there he speaks of God as savior, but now, when he is given a second opportunity to mention forgiveness from sin, he doesn’t. Instead, he points us toward the promise of life. What is that promise?
If we remember those passages connecting Yeshua to the cross, we could draw the conclusion that the promise of life is in fact the guarantee that death has been overcome and is no longer the end of the story. We could go on to recognize that if the Messiah is the first fruit of those who follow Him, He guarantees the sanctification of the followers so that they too participate in this life without end. We could remember all of the Messiah’s comments about the kingdom at hand and the power and authority that He has been given after the resurrection. We could reach back to the Garden and realize that the promise of life began there with the tree of life, now realized in the work of the Messiah. We could think of all of this as part of the Jewish consciousness of the living God. And we might draw the conclusion that the role of the embodied Messiah had something to do with life and death, not forgiveness from sin.
Then we would have to reflect on Paul’s use of kata (according to). You remember that word. It is part of the phrase in 1 Timothy 1:1 (“according to the commandment of God our savior”). Paul uses kata in this opening verse too. But whereas before it was “according to the commandment,” now it is “according to the promise.” Interesting. Are we supposed to recognize that the commandment is the promise?
Topical Index: 2 Timothy 1:1, thelema, boulomai, promise of life, cross
Let me be corrected if I am not getting this. I heard a teaching about our Messiah’s death not only wiping out the death results of sin but also being a payment or meeting the requirement for us to be married to Yaweh because He can’t marry the one who is divorced like we were because of disobedience to the Torah. There is no way someone could remarry without the first husband dying or it was considered adultery. Just wondering. I may not have written this in a clear way. I hope you get a basic idea what I mean. Thanks.
Is the church not supposed to be the flower (a new creation) blooming forth from the tree (Israel)?
Try investigating the origin of the idea that the cross is a payment for sin. Look for “penal theory of atonement” and see what you find. You might discover that this is a much later development than you thought.
Light bulb!! :-0 Early 16th century Reformers. Well I’ll be!! It is way newer than I even had a clue. Got my eyes opened a bit when I looked this one up. Thank you for the clue here Skip.
This idea also fits nicely with Universalism.
I love the teaching Babs shares! It ads a whole new layer, dimension, to all that the Messiah is and has done for us!
Hellow Jill.It seems to me that the church has rejected the tree (Isreal).And Paul says you have to be grafted into Isreal.How can the church be grafted into something it rejects?Babs is correct in saying that Yashuah came to bring Isreal back into marrage with Hashem,This could only be done through Yashuahs death.If I am reading Skip correctly,Messiah coming had mostly to do with the commandments,to keep them.The garden had one command don’t eat from this tree.As long as they didn’t,they had a perfect relationship with Hashem.As soon as they did that relationship suffered big time.
I’m new to this group and to Skip’s teaching so be kind to me 🙂 —Could it be that “The will of God”
(of 2 Tim) IS the “command” (in 1Tim) and that Jesus IS “the hope” (of 1 Tim) and “the promise” (in 2Tim)?
I sooooo want to learn truth!
The article is an agrarian one, not a religious one, so there is no bias in the article’s grafting perspective. It’s a short article, provides visual, and well worth the read.
http://www.joe-ray.com/site/motherland/the_road_back_to_tradition_begins_with_a_graft/
Actual grafting is a much more radical process than one may have imagined for those totally unfamiliar with the process.
Paul differentiates the Root from the branches, and as such, based on what I now know about grafting, the branches are the Body of Christ, made up of both Jews and Gentiles, and Christ is the Root. “You do not support the root, BUT THE ROOT SUPPORTS YOU.”
Does Israel support us? No. Jesus does!
What happened to the branches?
THEY WERE BROKEN OFF BECAUSE OF UNBELIEF, and you stand BY FAITH. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. 21For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.”
After the Cross, unbelieving Israel was cut off. Those who believed then and believe now were/are grafted back in, along with believing Gentiles. All were/are grafted in by FAITH, and in the grafting process the branches do not become natural branches. The church is not Israel.
Do they all share in the life that comes from the Root? Yes. The Root bears all life.
Do they maintain their identity? Ethnically, yes.
I am Gentile, I will never be Jewish. I do not look for my Jewish roots, –for I don’t have any!
Not a smidgen.
God decided into which group of people, what time of HiStory, that I would be born. It is no matter, for He is the Creator and Giver of all life, and the life and the position that matters is life in Him, and my position *In Christ*.
I am not anti-Jewish or anti-anything, except anti-lie and anti-trickster-satan.
As believers in Christ we become one tree, Jew and Gentile both grafted in by faith to the ROOT through Whom we receive life. Our primary identity is in Christ, — or lost and undone! Just two ways to be.
Sorry to be long-winded today, I mainly wanted anyone who cares to see the grafting article.
I left out an important word in this sentence:
I left out “wild”
All were/are grafted in by FAITH, and in the grafting process the WILD branches do not become natural branches. The church is not Israel.
Dorothy,
If you being a WILD olive branch have been grafted into this tree and you get all your nourishment and life from that root and the root is Yeshua, is He not “Jewish”? Is this not a “Jewish” root?
K, I knew this was coming, I should have kept typing this AM to save you the question. Lol
I haven’t been back home since this morning.
It is a GOD ROOT, — Jesus was/is God before Bethlehem.
After the Cross, anyone that is part of the tree is not so because of ethnicity; everyone is part of the tree because of FAITH.
Romans 9:30-33
30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the “stumbling stone.” 33 As it is written:
See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes men to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who trusts in Him will never be put to shame.
Rom. 9: 6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 8 In other words, it is not the natural children who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.
Its Abraham’s offspring, not Jacob’s offspring, that Scripture identifies as the children of the promise. Abraham’s seed was not identified as Israel; Jacob’s seed was the first to be identified as Israel. The promise is given to everyone, Israelites and Gentiles alike. Glory to God in the Highest!
K. Gallagher,
Excellent point! 🙂
And who has kept the Scriptures so diligently for us, in spite of the persecutions they faced?
Shalom!
Skip,
Your TD blog today “made my day”!
I suspect that my occasional harping on the Scriptural merit of Universal Reconciliation causes discomfort in some. But as you very well know, the truth sometimes hurts!!
Your exposition on “thelema” surely shows why some of us feel that Paul was a believer in UR.
What you said here today is significant in arguing the merits of UR. I will be sharing your piece with my UR friends! Before I make a few short comments, I cut and pasted your relevant comment as I want everyone to re read it.
“The Greek thelema (Strong’s #2307) is distinguished from boulomai by the fact that this verb describes what is not only intended or desired but what is also completed. When thelema is used of God, it means that God’s intention is brought to execution. Man may intend but not complete. God intends and completes. He finishes what He starts. So when Paul uses the Greek thelema of God’s will, he does not mean that God simply desired it. He means that God made it happen – and that is essentially the equivalent of a commandment. From Paul’s perspective, it is what God demands. From God’s perspective, it is what He does.”
We find Paul using a very similar Greek word (theleo) in 1Tim. 2:3-4
“This is good and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires (theleo – Strongs #2309) all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the .”
As I see it, Strong has both Greek words pretty much meaning the same thing i.e. God will complete what He starts, as you put it.
In arguing UR, I often quote “God our Savior, who desires ALL men to be saved” followed with “God gets what God desires, does He not?” He is Sovereign over all His Creation, right?
What God intends or desires, He completes. HE finishes what HE starts. I pray your TW today will convict a few more souls to question the nonsense of Augustinian “hell fire” etc.,
Shalom
John, the Pope agrees with your point of view.
(I don’t even believe in the Pope)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/pope-francis-good-atheists_n_3320757.html
John,
Isn’t this a doctrine from the Universal Unitarian group?
Are you then saying that no one is resurrected to the resurrection of death–the second resurrection as opposed to the first resurrection being the resurrection to life? Hmmm
What then would be the point of Jesus talking about those thrown into the outer darkness?
Y-H does desire that none should be lost but I don’t believe He ever says that none *will* be lost. What would be the point then of having free will and how would there be any glory for Y-H if people all just simply get saved anyhow? Some joke that would be.
Y-H hates disobedience and the OT is full of Y-H ordered violence to be rid of it. You’re saying that those are somehow just saved in the end? Again, what a joke.
Somehow I don’t see the Almighty Y-H like that. He is righteous and Messiah has the keys to the abyss right now. It has been given to him also to judge-why judge if all are saved?
Just a couple of thoughts off the top of my head.
Shalom Dawn,
I’ve just read your comment to John after I’ve posted to him.
Letter of the Word does say ‘save’ and that all may be saved, though the Hebrew meaning is ‘deliver’, to set free.
To be delivered from our transgression of not walking in YHWH’s ways/will.
“to deliver” (II Sam. 19: 9; A. V. “save “), (I Sam. 19.:11; II Sam. 19: 5; Job 20: 20). “to keep,” “to spare” (Job 2: 6), “to redeem”,”to release.”
Perhaps this is a clearer view of “save”?
I wonder if one can be delivered from not walking in Y-H’s ways by death then?
My use of the word saved in my response to John was the Christian talk, wasn’t really using it in the Hebrew sense although I appreciate your clearer view above.
I agree with you on how the Son has replaced the Father. It makes me give some thought as to whether Christianity has placed an idol above Y-H in doing so?
Shalom Dawn,
Definitely so, and that has caused, and is still the cause of the stumbling block they have placed to, and before the ‘Jews’. And will be held accountable to YHWH too.
Transgressors, or lawlessness are being delivered from folks, but there is still an accountability to guard that deliverance with fear and trembling in walking and doing right before YHWH.
Shalom John, 🙂
Amein! The Almighty Elohim IS not willing that any should perish but that ALL may come to be saved.
And that is His desire. It is Elohim Who saves, He sent His Son.
Then all esteem/honour should be to the Father/ABBA. But YHWH and Son Yahshua are One, so can’t give honour to One above the Other when Yahshua said My Father is greater than I (John 14:28), that appears so from some of the comments. This is a reference to a Son relating to His Father as a clear discipline we need to follow, which Christianity, sadly, seem to have lost sight of. The SON has replaced the Father, or, pushed into the background.
Am I getting this straight.. that we are heading for UNIVERSAL SALVATION for every soul that was born ?
oops, Carol, I wanted this to go right to your email, so I post again….
NO it is not right. UR is a lie from the foul mouth of the serpent himself.
Jesus’ own words say:
“Then they [the unsaved] will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
Matt. 25: 46
The punishment of the unsaved is just as long lasting as the life of the righteous. Forever.
Matthew 25:41 and Mark 9:44 describe hell as eternal and unquenchable fire.
Anyone who chooses to reject God’s Son, do not meet the requirements for salvation (John 3:16, 18, 36).
To say that people who reject God’s provision of salvation through His Son will be saved anyway is to belittle the Holiness and Justice of God and negate the need of Jesus’ sacrifice on our behalf.
Shalom Carol,
I am not for that term-Universal Salvation, whatever that implies.
But here again is my comment to what salvation means-Transgressors, or lawlessness are being delivered from folks, but there is still an accountability to guard that deliverance with fear and trembling in walking and doing what is expected of them, which is guarding ALL HIS commandments/law/Torah before YHWH.
Blessings.
NO it is not right. UR is a lie from the foul mouth of the serpent himself.
Jesus’ own words say:
“Then they [the unsaved] will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
Matt. 25: 46
The punishment of the unsaved is just as long lasting as the life of the righteous. Forever.
Matthew 25:41 and Mark 9:44 describe hell as eternal and unquenchable fire.
Anyone who chooses to reject God’s Son, do not meet the requirements for salvation (John 3:16, 18, 36).
To say that people who reject God’s provision of salvation through His Son will be saved anyway is to belittle the Holiness and Justice of God and negate the need of Jesus’ sacrifice on our behalf.
Thus says Dorothy…
That settles it.
No argument.
Verse. (English rendition)
Verse. (English rendition)
Verse. (English rendition)
Next dogma.
Move along. Nothing else to see here, folks.
“To say that people who reject God’s provision of salvation through His Son will be saved anyway is to belittle the Holiness and Justice of God and negate the need of Jesus’ sacrifice on our behalf.”
I haven’t ‘earned’ a speeding ticket in quite a while now. My age is just slowing me down for my own good, I suppose.
Anyway, I was thinking. If I ever do get another speeding ticket, I think I’ll just satisfy the justice system with some good ol’ substitutionary atoning justice.
Instead of paying the $50.00, $100.00 or whatever, I’ll just offer to sacrifice, via a blood offering, my grandson’s little pinky finger. He loves me. He has a giving heart already at his young age. He’s willing to help out his grandpa. True substitutionary atonement, from the finger of a babe. His blood for my ticket, my running afoul of justice. It should be a fair trade, right? Just a little blood from a little finger for a little ticket. Justice is served. My grandson volunteered to give up his little finger for my injustice. Ahh, freedom.
Fair and satisfactory and atoning and just, no?
[Just a little intellectual mind bump here, folks. Don’t freak out. Don’t hurl any heresy arrows unnecessarily. Those of you know who I’m talking to here!]
Now, now, Michael C, don’t you dare try to hurt your precious grand son! You hear?! Yikes, poor lad.
And don’t you idolize him too. This comment is both gruesome and somehow funny. I see the funny side!
Because you wouldn’t do that!
Shalom!
🙂
…on a Sabbath, no less!
Michael C. No arrows hurled here, (though in my experience shooting them is more damaging than simply throwing them) as I’m learning that every arrow I send in the direction of a brother or sister becomes a boomerang and strikes me; so it is no wonder that I’m getting no where complaining to YHWH about these arrows protruding from me and causing me pain and suffering (but that is not said to minimize the pain and suffering my arrows do inflict upon others and my culpability). So it looks like I’ll move yet another doctrine from the ‘firmly held, fully documented and faithfully practiced” file to the “hmmmm, I need to examine this more closely” file. Interesting how this process works..and sometimes doesn’t, but ultimately will thanks to thelema. (btw that is not Thelma in case someone thinks: “I thought his wife’s name was Arnella… who is this ‘Thelma’ woman?” Shabbat Shalom, Michael S
“So it looks like I’ll move yet another doctrine from the ‘firmly held, fully documented and faithfully practiced” file to the “hmmmm, I need to examine this more closely” file. Interesting how this process works”
Yep, tis true, Michael S. Things firmly held, fully documented and faithfully practiced on my end certainly doesn’t mean it’s true and secure. The process starts with questions and then sometimes leads to cataclysmic shock and awe realizing there can be alternative views. After the unsettling bombshell reverberations wear off somewhat, the search sometimes yields a new way to view and see something. The floor under me becomes less shaky as the simple understanding of truths begin to form a new picture, a new paradigm that just makes sense.
Maybe the parameters of my ‘firmly held, fully documented’ beliefs have boundaries much wider than I have known previously.
What an adventure while going and becoming and being.
Thank you for ALL who commented concerning U.R.
I do not believe it as I do not see it in the WORD of GOD.