Are the Jews still the chosen people?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kilnor
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m more referring to modern revelation. New information since the death and resurrection.
 
The seed is the Word of God. It is God.

It is found in Baptism and in the Eucharist.
 
I think that a lot of the revelation we receive today is when the scripture is opened up to our hearts. When you say revelation since the death and resurrection, do you mean such as charismatic gifts like prophecy?
 
Does he still use the Jews for revelation? If so, its not to the extent he once did.
The age of prophecy is long over, and Catholicism considers revelation closed with the resurrection of Christ.
 
Nope Jews have never beeen Gods chosen people, it’s always been the Church and the Jews were members of the Church during the time of the Old Testament, when Jesus brought the New Convent he shattered the barrier between Jews and Gentiles.
 
Well, we simply disagree, and that’s fine. I believe Jews are and always have been God’s chosen people. God will not break his covenant with them.

We can’t keep going back and forth. We disagree. That’s fine.
 
Last edited:
40.png
FreeMe:
The Jews regard themselves as the Chosen People, why their God does not protect Jerusalem that has been destroyed twice by Babel and Rome.
Many books have been written on this subject. It would be impossible to boil it down to a blog post. Why does God allow evil at all? Especially to innocent persons? I suggest you read The Problem of Evil.
The Jews were not chosen to be better than others but they were chosen to accept more difficult responsibilities and tougher punishment if they failed to obey God. And to also set examples of evil conduct and bad behavior to the world. For example they denied Jesus was their Messiah. This is confirmed in the Bible texts.
 
That is not my belief or even the belief of many Catholics, but we all have to find our own way. So, if that;s what you believe, fine.
 
Last edited:
The Church teaches (because this is what the scripture teaches) that the Jewish people will eventually be brought back into the fold and will come to believe in the same Messiah that the Church now believes in.
I’m not trying to argue with you, but where does the Bible say that? Not arguing, I just want to know. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Hi ConstantLearner, I believe the main verse that this doctrine proceeds from is Romans 11:25-26 which says that after the fullness of the Gentiles has been brought in, then all of Israel shall be saved.

There’s also a belief that the fullness of Israel will be brought in when the Messiah returns because of the verse in Zechariah which says: “Then I will pour out on the house of David and on the residents of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and prayer, and they will look on me, the one they have pierced. They will mourn for him as one mourns an only child, and weep bitterly for him as one grieves a firstborn son.”

This is taken to be speaking of Y’shua whose hands were pierced at the crucifixion. There’s also a reference in this verse to a firstborn son.
 
Last edited:
Of course not. Obviously, you only trust your own reason.
 
Last edited:
The Age of Prophecy ended 350 years before the birth of Jesus. Even my Catholic theologian teachers agree about this.

Prophecy ended upon the death of the last prophets – Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi.
 
Not all people are the ‘People of God’. If that were so the works of God could not be distinguished from human works. The people of God are a continuum of life from Seth to Abraham to Jesus through bonds of blood. From Jesus to His Church through spiritual bonds.
 
Last edited:
St. Thomas Aquinas’ commentary on Romans is a good read on this (sadly, I can’t find it online anymore). Short answer is yes they are because of God’s promises to them. Despite the unbelief of many, in the end they will be converted and saved. Here are some excerpts from St. Thomas (the “he” referenced is St. Paul, the author of Romans):
  1. Someone could belittle the Jews’ prerogative by citing their ingratitude, through which they would seem to have set aside the value of God’s message. Hence he says, what if some were unfaithful? Does this show that the Jew has no advantage, especially in the light of 2 Pt (2:21): “It would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandments delivered to them.”
For they did not believe the Lawgiver: “They had no faith in his promises” (Ps 106:24) or the prophets: “They are a rebellious house” (Ez 2:6) or the Son of God: “If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?” (Jn 8:46).
  1. Then when he says Does their faithlessness (v3b) he excludes this objection by showing the unsuitable conclusion it engenders. For if the Jews’ prerogative were taken away on account of the unbelief of some, it would follow that man’s unbelief would nullify God’s faithfulness – which is an unacceptable conclusion.
In another way, it can be understood as referring to the faith with which God is faithful in keeping His promises: “He who promised is faithful” (Heb 10:23). This faithfulness would be nullified, if it happened that the Jews had no advantage, just because some have not believed.
  1. Then when he says, For the gifts, he excludes an objection.
For someone might claim that even though the Jews were formerly beloved on account of their forefathers, nevertheless the hostility they exert against the gospel prevents them from being saved in the future. But the Apostle asserts that this is false, saying: The gifts and call o God are irrevocable, i.e., without repentance. As if to say: That God gives something to certain ones or call certain ones is without repentance, because God does not change His mind: "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind” (Ps 110:4)
 
Last edited:
It is, in fact, one of the strongest proofs to the veracity of the Biblical narrative that exist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top