Missin the point

[RichardBurger]

Missing the point:

Matthew 15:21-28
21 Then Jesus went out from there and departed to the region of Tyre and Sidon.
22 And behold, a woman of Canaan came from that region and cried out to Him, saying, "Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David! My daughter is severely demon-possessed."
23 But He answered her not a word. And His disciples came and urged Him, saying, "Send her away, for she cries out after us."
24 But He answered and said, "I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."
25 Then she came and worshiped Him, saying, "Lord, help me!"
26 But He answered and said, "It is not good to take the children's bread and throw it to the little dogs."
27 And she said, "Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs eat the crumbs which fall from their masters' table."
28 Then Jesus answered and said to her, "O woman, great is your faith! Let it be to you as you desire." And her daughter was healed from that very hour.
NKJV

(Caption in the NKJV Bible = A Gentile Shows Her Faith)

I made a visit to a Sunday School Class a few weeks ago. It was supposed to be a Bible Study Class that studied the Scriptures. I was disappointed. The scriptures above were used as the text. The lesson focused on the compassion that Jesus showed to a Gentile woman. ---- Is that all it was?

If a person just accepts the ideas expressed about these verses he/she will never really understand the implications of what Jesus said. -- He was saying that He (Jesus) did not come to the Gentiles. But this seem to be glossed over by the ideas taught above.

The truth is that Jesus was not sent to the Gentiles. He was only sent to the house of Israel. He did not come to offer the promised Jewish kingdom to the Gentiles.

Matt 10:5-7 (NKJ)
5 These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying: "Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans.
6 "But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7 "And as you go, preach, saying, 'The kingdom of heaven is at hand.'

The above shows that the kingdom of heaven was only offered to the Jews.

Matt 15:23-24 (NKJ)
23 But He answered her not a word. And His disciples came and urged Him, saying, "Send her away, for she cries out after us."
24 But He answered and said, "I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Rom 15:8 (NKJ) (Paul writing)
8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:

Now if all a person is to get out of Matthew 15:21-28 is that Jesus was compassionate to a Gentile they will miss a very important fact about His ministry and how His ministry was only to set up the promised Jewish kingdom.

IMPORTANT NOTE: -- This is not to say that God did not have another purpose for Jesus' death on the cross. But that purpose was “hidden in God†and revealed to Paul on the road to Damascus by Jesus. (Eph 3:9)

 

[toddm]

IMPORTANT NOTE: -- This is not to say that God did not have another purpose for Jesus' death on the cross. But that purpose was “hidden in God†and revealed to Paul on the road to Damascus by Jesus. (Eph 3:9)

Are you suggesting that no one understood the meaning of the cross until Paul?

 

[RichardBurger]

IMPORTANT NOTE: -- This is not to say that God did not have another purpose for Jesus' death on the cross. But that purpose was “hidden in God†and revealed to Paul on the road to Damascus by Jesus. (Eph 3:9)

Are you suggesting that no one understood the meaning of the cross until Paul?

Yes: God had a hidden secondary purpose for the death of Jesus on the cross. From Jesus, and the preaching of the "Kingdom of Heaven," to this time in which we now live is a new dispensation and it was not mentioned in the O.T. it was not mentioned in the first 4 books of the N.T. nor was it mentioned in the Jewish writings of the 12. This new gospel was ""hidden in God"" and revealed to Paul by Jesus Christ on the road to Damascus, Acts 9:3-6 and Eph 3:8-9.

All that was written "to the Jews" in the O.T. and the N.T. was written "to the Jews," not to the Gentiles. Is it necessary for us to understand them? YES. If we don't then we are missing the foundation for understanding who Jesus is and the shift to the gospel of God's grace. The message of salvation by God's grace, "alone," given to Paul, was without precedence. It was not in the Jewish relationship with God. The Jewish relationship was a religious one of "faith + works to show that faith" (James 2:24). However, the gospel of God's grace requires no works whatsoever. God has done all the works that are necessary on the cross. As Paul said;

Rom 4:5-6 (NKJ)
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,
6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:

Only Paul penned the words "in Christ" for he understood that God places those that believe in Him "in Christ" by the operation of the Holy Spirit (new birth). Man cannot accomplish this new birth. This idea of being "in Christ" was totally new. Up to this time it was all in a religious relationship of works, rituals and ceremonies.

Notice that in Acts 3:21 Peter is proclaiming things made known by the prophets since the world began. In contrast, in the book of Romans, 16:25, Paul is proclaiming things kept secret since the world began. Something made known cannot be a secret and something kept secret has not been made known. Notice that Peter proclaimed the crucifixion of Jesus as something for the Jews to repent of (Acts 2) where Paul proclaimed that he gloried in the cross of Christ (Gal 6:11-15). Clearly, Peter and Paul proclaimed two different messages.

 

[Nick]

Correct me if you're wrong...but are you saying that Jesus came only to save Israel/Jews?

 

[walter]

I think what he is saying, and correct me if Nick's wrong, is that at the time, Jesus came only to the Jews so that their rejection of HIM would be soley on their heads. Of course, not all Jews rejected Him but as a people He was rejected by the Jews.

 

[Nick]

I think what he is saying, and correct me if Nick's wrong, is that at the time, Jesus came only to the Jews so that their rejection of HIM would be soley on their heads. Of course, not all Jews rejected Him but as a people He was rejected by the Jews.

Well yes, He was rejected by the Jews, but I'm sure that ultimately He came to save all - that includes Gentiles.

I get the feeling I"m still missing something here.

 

[toddm]

If the "mystery of the Kingdom" wasn't revealed until it was revealed to Paul, then what was Peter and the other Apostles preaching in the beginning of Acts?

 

[seekandlisten]

26 But He answered and said, "It is not good to take the children's bread and throw it to the little dogs."
27 And she said, "Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs eat the crumbs which fall from their masters' table."

I think understanding the meaning of these two verses and how they related to her faith as to why Jesus healed her daughter is the key.

 

[RichardBurger]

If the "mystery of the Kingdom" wasn't revealed until it was revealed to Paul, then what was Peter and the other Apostles preaching in the beginning of Acts?

Notice that in Acts 3:21 Peter is proclaiming things made known by the prophets since the world began. In contrast, in the book of Romans, 16:25, Paul is proclaiming things kept secret since the world began. Something made known cannot be a secret and something kept secret has not been made known. Notice that Peter proclaimed the crucifixion of Jesus as something for the Jews to repent of (Acts 2) where Paul proclaimed that he gloried in the cross of Christ (Gal 6:11-15). Clearly, Peter and Paul proclaimed two different messages.

Through Paul, God ushered in a new plan of salvation that does not depend on sinful man's ability to live up to God's standards. It all depends on the shed blood on the cross.

A good study is to look at Acts 21 and see that the beliving Jews were only mad at Paul and not James and the Elders. If James and the Elders were teaching the same things that Paul taught then why were the believing Jews only mad at Paul? Looks to me like James and the Elders were still teaching salvation under the law.