In Proposition 61, George Peters states:

“The Kingdom which by promise exclusively belonged to the Jewish nation, the rightful seed of Abraham, was now to be given to an engrafted people.”

Again, this does not mean a complete and thorough rejection of the Jewish nation in favor of a completely new people. To be engrafted demands there is something to be grafted into. What we are grafted into as the branches is the root which is the nation, the Jewish root if you will.

The most notable observation Peters presents in Proposition 61 is the following:

“Men ridicule as “carnal”, “fleshly,”, etc., that we Gentile believers, in virtue of our union with Christ, are grafted in and become members of the Jewish elect nation, virtually becoming believing Jews. Overlooking the covenants exclusively given to the Jews (Rom. 9:4), forgetting that the Kingdom with its ultimate blessings is only tendered to the true Israel, i.e. to the believing and obedient natural descendants (and engrafted and adopted Gentiles,) of Abraham, our opponents point us, in order to sustain their rejection of such a Jewish connection, to Rom. 2:28-29: “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men but of God.” Aside from the expression that we must become “Jews inwardly,” thus confirming our position (for what, excepting this covenanted relationship, could have induced Paul to use this peculiar phraseology, viz.: that, in some way, we must become Jews?), we apprehend, from the very concessions made by many of our opponents, that the expression “for he is not a Jew who is one outwardly” has no reference, as is generally supposed, to birth or descent from Abraham. This is evidenced by the contrast or antithesis “but he is a Jew, which is one inwardly”; the latter indicating the state of the heart, viz.: being faithful and obedient, – the former “outwardly” has also reference to the heart, that it was not right because such an one contented himself with external or outward conformance to the law.”

I have to submit what Peters is addressing here is a rather hot topic. Being one who frequents social media, namely Facebook, I see a constant stream of posts from those who use Rom 2:28-29 as support that anything and everything even remotely related to things of a Jewish nature or content should be rejected. Such a position is derived from the belief that the law (typically described as the Law of Moses in an effort to reject that law in favor of a completely new covenant) has been done away with by the Messiah. This is despite the Messiah clearly stating he did not come to abolish the law (meaning to dissolve or disunite), but rather he came to fulfill it (to show us what it means to fully and completely live according to God’s standards). Thus, why should we have to do anything with that law as after all, isn’t focusing on being obedient akin to salvation by works? Of course nothing could be further from the truth. As an adopted and engrafted people, we are to hold dear the standards of behavior established by that family, in this case the standards established by God. It really is a matter of loving obedience in recognition of God’s gracious adoption of us into the family. Our obedience is not to obtain justification before God. Conversely it flows from the heart out of love for the Father. This is what the people of the true Israel are all about – a people called out to love God, to glorify Him, to declare the message of salvation, and to live a life of holiness given we are kadosh, a set apart people.