Why the Constant Attack?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Job8

Senior Member
Dec 1, 2014
4,634
1,801
✟21,583.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The Covenant that Jesus was speaking of at The Last Supper is the New Covenant of His Blood. This Covenant is not the Covenant of Jer.31 or the Covenant of Heb.6. Both Jer.31 and Heb.6 are the same Covenant, and will be given to Israel and Judah at the 1000 year reign.
There can be only one New Covenant, but it can have several phases. The critical thing is that the New Covenant was established at the Cross, through the shed blood of Christ. The Church is fully within the New Covenant, and future redeemed and restored Israel (Jer 31) will also be under the same New Covenant.
 
Upvote 0

MWood

Newbie
Jan 7, 2013
3,881
7,990
✟122,541.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
There can be only one New Covenant, but it can have several phases. The critical thing is that the New Covenant was established at the Cross, through the shed blood of Christ. The Church is fully within the New Covenant, and future redeemed and restored Israel (Jer 31) will also be under the same New Covenant.
There is a New Covenant mentioned in Jer.31 by the name of New Covenant. We are all, Jew and Gentile alike, are now under the New Covenant of Christ's Blood. The New Covenant of Jer.31 and Heb.6 will be written in the minds and on the hearts of Israel and Judah when Jesus reigns in the millennium after the tribulation.
 
Upvote 0

Danoh

Newbie
Oct 11, 2011
3,064
310
✟40,528.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The confusion is in the fact that in attempting to prove their case; each side has ended up reaching for straws that are simply not the case.

It is clear in Jeremiah 31, Acts 3, and Hebrews 2 (for starters) that Israel's blotting out of their sins is after the return of the Lord; both believing and unbelieving Israel having to go through a testing and purging first, per its covenant with God, Malachi 3 and 4, etc.

What then is the Apostle Paul referring to in 2 Cor. 3's "hath made us able ministers of the new testament..."?

In Romans 5:10, he relates "if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. 5:11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement."

Notice that is not by covenant as had been the case with Israel in their relationship with God as His people.

Rather, we're reconciled while enemies!

Not by covenant with God, but by the death of His Son.

Ours is but to simply believe that Christ died for our sins.

The moment we do...it becomes..

Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: 5:2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

What happens the moment the individual Jew and or Gentile believes this?

By individual Jew I am noting a distinction between that and Israel as a nation.

In Daniel 9, for example, he is suffering Israel's captivity with his nation. Because theirs truly had been one nation under covenant with God - their blessings and their judgement as a nation, c.f. Daniel's prayer as to this collective blessing and curse, in his prayer, in Daniel 9.

We, on the other hand, receive the atonement now - Israel has to wait for.

Through the Cross of Christ.

Galatians 3:1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3:3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?

What happens is we receive the atonement and the Spirit by the hearing of faith.

In contrast to that is this...

Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;

Also, in contrast to this...

Hebrews 2:1 Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip. 2:2 For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward; 2:3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; 2:4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will? 2:5 For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak.

What Paul is actually doing in 2 Corinthians 3 anyway, is reminding them of issues he had preached unto them and that he will later write about in Romans 6-8.

Compare the two; see if this is not the case - especially in Romans 7&8.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MWood
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
In the New Covenant, you are the Ark of the Covenant, because you have God’s Law written not on tablets of stone, but on your heart, just as it was promised to Jeremiah in the Old Testament.

Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

We will find the confirmation of this promise in the New Testament (Covenant).

2Co_3:3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

The verse above confirms that the New Covenant Ark , the box if you will allow, is the believer who is indwelled with the Spirit of the living God, who has written His Law on the hearts of those whom the Savior has purchased with His Blood.

If you have been passed from death to life, through faith in Christ and wish to see the Ark of the New Covenant, then look in the mirror, because it is you.

.
 
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,937
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
BABerean2, you are still willfully ignoring, and not only ignoring, but outright denying, what more scriptures than an be counted explicitly say, that in a coming day Israel will be restored, both to its ancient homeland and to its God. To deny that this will indeed happen is sheer, unvarnished, unbelief.

If Israel will not indeed be restored to its ancient homeland, and to its God, one of two things is unquestionably true.

either:

1. The Old Testament books of prophecy are not the actual words of God.

or:

2. God lied.

Neither of these choices is available to ANY Christian teacher. So we are FORCED to the conclusion that Israel will indeed be restored, both to its ancient homeland, and to its God. To deny this is to deny the FUNDAMENTALS of the Christian faith.
 
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
BABerean2, you are still willfully ignoring, and not only ignoring, but outright denying, what more scriptures than an be counted explicitly say, that in a coming day Israel will be restored, both to its ancient homeland and to its God. To deny that this will indeed happen is sheer, unvarnished, unbelief.

If Israel will not indeed be restored to its ancient homeland, and to its God, one of two things is unquestionably true.

either:

1. The Old Testament books of prophecy are not the actual words of God.

or:

2. God lied.

Neither of these choices is available to ANY Christian teacher. So we are FORCED to the conclusion that Israel will indeed be restored, both to its ancient homeland, and to its God. To deny this is to deny the FUNDAMENTALS of the Christian faith.

You can come to that conclusion by interpreting the New Testament through the Old Testament, instead of vice-versa.

The Old Testament said that Elijah was to come to prepare the way of the Messiah.
Jesus said John the Baptist was that Elijah.


What did the writer of Hebrews say about what Abraham is to inherit?

Heb 11:14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.
Heb 11:15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.
Heb 11:16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

Will Abraham inherit the city of Jerusalem? Yes. The heavenly Jerusalem.

Those that talk about "forever" promises on this rotten, sin-cursed world try to ignore the fact that this world does not last "forever".

Go back and look at the size of the temple described in the book of Ezekiel.
You will find a temple about the size of the modern city of Jerusalem, but yet you insist it is "literal".


In Galatians 3:16 Paul makes it clear that the promises to Abraham were made only to Christ. He makes doubly sure we got the message by stating it does not apply to the "many seeds".

In Galatians 3:29 he clearly states that it is we who inherit the promise, through Christ.
There are many passages that seem to state that the New Heavens and the New Earth may be similar to the garden, before the fall.
This would be a "forever" land promise.


The greatest error of modern Dispensational Theology that cannot be overcome is the claim of a future time when people will come to salvation outside of the Body of Christ, which we call the Church and is found in the words of Christ Himself in Matthew chapter 16.

Joh 10:15 As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.

Joh 10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.



Rom_9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:



Gal_6:16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.



Heb 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.


Heb_8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Act 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.


Act 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?


On the day of Pentecost 3,000 of the house of Israel accepted the New Covenant promise found in Jeremiah 31:31-34.

.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,937
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Again, you are substituting your interpretation of the meanings of a relatively small number of scriptures, which never actually say what you claim they mean, for the explicit statements of a great many more scriptures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danoh
Upvote 0

Danoh

Newbie
Oct 11, 2011
3,064
310
✟40,528.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Again, you are substituting your interpretation of the meanings of a relatively small number of scriptures, which never actually say what you claim they mean, for the explicit statements of a great many more scriptures.

If there is one thing I have learned over the years, it is that illogic ends up its own logic.

At which point, their is no reasoning with such an individual.

Those passages he cited are not even talking about the same things.

But that is the very basis of a logic built out of illogic; of the "what it means to me" school of "interpretation."
 
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,937
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
If there is one thing I have learned over the years, it is that illogic ends up its own logic.

At which point, their is no reasoning with such an individual.

Those passages he cited are not even talking about the same things.

But that is the very basis of a logic built out of illogic; of the "what it means to me" school of "interpretation."
Amen!
 
  • Like
Reactions: MWood
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

Which covenant is found in Romans 11:27, if it is not the New Covenant now in effect?



Mat 26:28 For this is my blood, which ratifies the New Covenant, my blood shed on behalf of many, so that they may have their sins forgiven. (CJB)



Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.


Heb 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.



Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

Heb 13:20 Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,

.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SeventyOne

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
4,675
3,188
✟167,098.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvary Chapel
Marital Status
Married
Which covenant is found in Romans 11:27, if it is not the New Covenant now in effect?



Mat 26:28 For this is my blood, which ratifies the New Covenant, my blood shed on behalf of many, so that they may have their sins forgiven. (CJB)



Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.


Heb 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.



Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

Heb 13:20 Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,

.

The promises given to Israel to restore their land to them physically in the new Kingdom wasn't part of the Mosaic covenant. It was prophecy given later after that covenant was already fully in effect, through such people as Ezekiel and Isaiah. Your argument here is a confusion of subjects on your part.

in geek-speak, this is kind of like saying, "Windows 10 supersedes Windows 8, therefore Firefox is no longer a valid browser."
 
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The promises given to Israel to restore their land to them physically in the new Kingdom wasn't part of the Mosaic covenant. It was prophecy given later after that covenant was already fully in effect, through such people as Ezekiel and Isaiah. Your argument here is a confusion of subjects on your part.

in geek-speak, this is kind of like saying, "Windows 10 supersedes Windows 8, therefore Firefox is no longer a valid browser."

You did not answer the question...


Which covenant is found in Romans 11:27, if it is not the New Covenant now in effect?

.


 
Upvote 0

Danoh

Newbie
Oct 11, 2011
3,064
310
✟40,528.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The promises given to Israel to restore their land to them physically in the new Kingdom wasn't part of the Mosaic covenant. It was prophecy given later after that covenant was already fully in effect, through such people as Ezekiel and Isaiah. Your argument here is a confusion of subjects on your part.

in geek-speak, this is kind of like saying, "Windows 10 supersedes Windows 8, therefore Firefox is no longer a valid browser."

Absolutely on the mark, and hilarious, at the same time.

Bravo!
 
Upvote 0

SeventyOne

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
4,675
3,188
✟167,098.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvary Chapel
Marital Status
Married
You did not answer the question...


Which covenant is found in Romans 11:27, if it is not the New Covenant now in effect?

.


I did answer it, and that answer was it doesn't matter when pertaining to the restoration of Israel, because it's a completely different subject.

That said, verse 26 tells you what covenant this is, when the Deliverer arises out of them, when all of Israel shall be saved, the same covenant we all live under now, and those verses will find their fulfillment at His return, as He stated He would not come again until the Jews say of Him, "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord" Mt 23:39.

Ironically, that's also the time cited in Zechariah 14, when He does return and plants his feet on the Mount of Olives (v.4), destroys the armies surrounding Jerusalem, and restores physical Israel to their promised state. That verse is fulfilled precisely when what you arguing against actually occurs.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I did answer it, and that answer was it doesn't matter when pertaining to the restoration of Israel, because it's a completely different subject.

That said, verse 26 tells you what covenant this is, when the Deliverer arises out of them, when all of Israel shall be saved, the same covenant we all live under now, and those verses will find their fulfillment at His return, as He stated He would not come again until the Jews say of Him, "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord" Mt 23:39.

Ironically, that's also the time cited in Zechariah 14, when He does return and plants his feet on the Mount of Olives (v.4), destroys the armies surrounding Jerusalem, and restores physical Israel to their promised state. That verse is fulfilled precisely when what you arguing against actually occurs.

Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Joh 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.



Act 2:20 the sun shall be turned to darkness and the moon to blood, before the day of the Lord comes, the great and magnificent day. (ESV) (from Joel 3)
Act 2:21 And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.'
(ESV)

Act 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Act 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?


Rom 11:23 And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again.
(ESV)

Rom 11:26 And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, "The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob"; (ESV) (Saved by being grafted back into the Olive Tree at verse 11:23)


Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. (This happened at Calvary.)

2Co 3:6 who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
(ESV)

Heb 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

Rev 1:7 "Behold, He comes with the clouds," and "every eye will see Him, and the ones who pierced" Him, and all the tribes of the earth "will wail on account of Him." Yes, Amen. Dan. 7:13; Zech. 12:10
(LITV-TSP)

.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,937
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
As usual, BABerean2 had derailed this thread with his constant attack, and refuses to submit to explicitly stated scripture which says the very opposite to what he imagines is meant by the scriptures he constantly quotes.

If he had even one scripture which actually states what he imagines these scriptures mean, it would be different. But the language of scripture is very precise. It means what it says, and it says what it means. And it does not mean what it does not say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danoh
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
As usual, BABerean2 had derailed this thread with his constant attack, and refuses to submit to explicitly stated scripture which says the very opposite to what he imagines is meant by the scriptures he constantly quotes.

If he had even one scripture which actually states what he imagines these scriptures mean, it would be different. But the language of scripture is very precise. It means what it says, and it says what it means. And it does not mean what it does not say.

Throughout Romans chapter 11, the Apostle Paul shows that one must be grafted into the Olive Tree to gain salvation.

The Olive Tree is a symbol of the New Covenant Church of Christ.

The branches broken off can be grafted back into the tree through faith in Christ.

In order to make their doctrine work, many Dispensationalists will change one little word in Romans 11:26. Most of those promoting the doctrine have no idea who or where this change was first made. It actually goes back to the document used by Edward Irving to originate the Two Peoples of God doctrine. Since this book is now available online, it is a simple matter to verify the information that will now be presented. Edward Irving had gained access to the Spanish version of the book “Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty” written by Manuel Lacunza, who was a Jesuit priest. Irving had the book translated into English and added his own commentary to Lacunza’s work, before having it published in English during 1827. On page 124-125 of Irving’s commentary we find him reporting that he had taught doctrine from Lacunza’s book at the Albury Prophetic Conference held the year before.

On page 170 of the 2007 edition of his book “Dispensationalism”, Dr. Charles C. Ryrie connects John Nelson Darby to Irving and the Albury Conference.

“It was not until several years after leaving the Church of England that Darby became interested in prophecy. His interest was piqued through conferences at Albury, out of which the Irvingian movement grew.”

In 1966 Brethren Historian F. R. Coad wrote a paper detailing the origin of John Darby’s doctrine. In the early years of the Plymouth Brethren movement Benjamin Newton and John Darby worked together. Edward Irving died as a result of tuberculosis in 1834. Sometime after 1834 John Darby adopted the “Secret Rapture” doctrine of the Irvingites and divided scripture into that for the Jews and that for the Church. When Newton would not accept Darby’s new doctrine, Darby made a personal attack on Newton that split the movement into two groups.

(from pages 23 and 24 of the paper by F.R. Coad)
PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418

"Darby’s solution was to project considerable sections of the New Testament away from the Church, as applicable only to a future dispensation of the restored Jewish remnant, which the Secret Rapture adherents envisaged. This would remove all the difficulties, and those Scriptures in the Gospels and elsewhere which presented such difficulty to adherents of the new teaching were thus simply explained: they referred not to the Church at all, but to the future Jewish remnant. The solution was too facile. If Darby had hoped for Newton’s glad acceptance he was sorely disappointed. Newton saw its weakness at once:—

‘At last Darby wrote from Cork, saying he had discovered a
method of reconciling the whole dispute, and would tell me when
he came. When he did, it turned out to be the “Jewish
Interpretation”. The Gospel of Matthew was not teaching Church
Truth but Kingdom Truth, and so on. He explained it to me and I
said “Darby, if you admit that distinction you virtually give up
Christianity.” Well, they kept on at that until they worked out the
result as we know it. The Secret Rapture was bad enough, but this
was worse.’

The damage was indeed done, and for a moment dispensationalising ran riot, as Tregelles has explained in his accounts of those times. But worse resulted, for Darby, finding his teachings challenged, reacted by vigorous attacks on Newton’s position, until a form of pamphlet war developed."


Around the time of the American Civil War, Darby brought his new doctrine to America. Several decades later the doctrine was incorporated into the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible and as they say… “The rest is history.” Since that time the doctrine has spread through much of the evangelical Church in America, especially Baptist church bodies. Dallas Theological Seminary was built to promote John Darby’s doctrine, as one of its main goals.

On page 349 of Lacunza’s book we find the following change to Romans 11:26.

“When this fulness hath entered in, or the time of the nations are concluded, then all Israel shall be saved.”

Let us compare Lacunza’s words to those of the Apostle Paul.

Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

The Greek word translated to the English word “so” is the Greek word “houto”, which means… “in this manner”.

By switching this one word Lacunza attempted to change the meaning of the passage. He changed the word “so”, which is an adverb of manner, to the word “then”, which is an adverb of time. I have heard pastors make the same change during television broadcasts by saying… “And then all of Israel shall be saved.”

This change is necessary to produce a future time of “national salvation” for the modern descendants of Jacob. There is still just one little problem. Let us look at the next verse.

Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

Which “covenant” is the covenant in Romans 11:27?

Heb 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Heb 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.


Heb 8:12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

The Dispensational interpretation must change the word "so", which is an adverb of manner, to the word "then", which is a adverb of time in order to make the passage work. This change in scripture cannot be allowed.

If the covenant in Romans 11:27 is the New Covenant fulfilled in the blood of Christ at Calvary, the Dispensational interpretation of the passage cannot be correct.

Based on Hebrews 8:12, we find that the New Covenant, now in effect, took away sin.

Paul refers to this same covenant in 2nd Corinthians.


2Co 3:5 Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God,


2Co 3:6 who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. (ESV)


Lacunza, Manuel, “Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty“
http://www.regal-network.com/dispensationalism/pdfs.htm
.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

jimmyjimmy

Pardoned Rebel
Supporter
Jan 2, 2015
11,556
5,728
USA
✟234,973.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
I have noticed that the Dispensationalism sub-forum is filled with attacks and attackers, including everything from denouncing the dispensational interpretation of the scriptures to false allegations about the history of the doctrine. These have often included rules-breaking flames against both the doctrine and its alleged founders.

I do not see such attacks in the Covenant Theology sub-forum, although, as I rarely bother to read the threads there, I do not know that they never happen there.

But my question is, why this one-sided attack? Why do these people find it necessary to continually attack Dispensationalism?

I haven't seen it directly, but my guess would be that many people, myself included, understand dispensationalism as error, so they would want to oppose it. Attacking the errors of dispensationalism should be OK by the rules of CF; however attacking people is not.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,937
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
I haven't seen it directly, but my guess would be that many people, myself included, understand dispensationalism as error, so they would want to oppose it. Attacking the errors of dispensationalism should be OK by the rules of CF; however attacking people is not.

Dispensationalists like myself see your views as error. But we do not constantly invade CV and PP webs with attacks. And we most certainly do not make the kind of false accusations that BABerean2 is constantly posting. I have repeatedly shown him the undeniable proof that these accusations are false, and he continues to post them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MWood
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.