sovereigngrace
Well-Known Member
- Dec 9, 2019
- 9,042
- 3,450
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
I most certainly accept what Galatians 3 says. What I deny is the wrested interpretation you make of this passage. And I continue to stand on the VERY MANY passages that EXPLICITLY say, in PLAIN, CLEAR, words, that God will eventually b ring the entire ancient nation of Israel back to its ancient homeland, and will, after He purges out the rebels from their midst, bring all the rest of them to repentance and bless them IN THEIR ANCIENT HOMELAND. This is NOT interpretation, it is what God ACTUALLY said He would do.
Jesus never taught anything about land promises to national Israel; Paul never mentioned any. None of the New Testament writers did so. While the land was obviously significant during the Old Testament era, it is entirely insignificant in the New Testament. The New Testament reverses the narrow and provincial focus of the Old Testament and broadens it out with a new concern for all nations. The sole focus of the New Testament is Christ and the expanse of the Gospel from the little land of Israel to the whole world.
Jesus made it clear in the Beatitudes that his focus was on the whole earth, and not simply the land of Israel, saying: “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth” (Matthew 5:5). Paul confirms this in Romans 4.13, speaking about Abraham, the great father of the faithful, saying: “For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.”
Upvote
0