Dispensationalism

Status
Not open for further replies.

interpreter

Senior Member
Mar 4, 2004
6,309
157
76
Texas
✟7,377.00
Faith
Anglican
parousia70 said:
So all Israelis are Hebrews?

Are you sure about that?

As i recall, about 98 percent of them are at least 1/8th Hebrew. It is incorporated into the "Law of return" that any Jew wanting to return to Israel must be at least 1/8th Jew (or Hebrew).

Unfortunately, I am 1/16th Hebrew.
 
Upvote 0

Arc

Lover of the Truth
Jun 29, 2003
294
10
50
St. Louis Metro Area, IL
Visit site
✟7,994.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
duster1az said:
Your persoanl ethnicity aside again I ask, were you progenerated by Abraham or were you generated by God upon the principle of faith. If the latter is true, then you're not a descendant of Abraham and the land promises do not pertain to you.
I don't know, it's been a long time since Abraham. It's possible that I have some ethnic Jewish blood in me. How can anyone today know for sure if he is a Jew? They have all interbred with other nations and not longer look "middle eastern" for the most part because of this. If you do some research, you will see it's difficult if not inpossible to determine today if a Jew is actually descended from Abraham, or if he is a Jew because he follows Jewish law.

It's interseting that Paul as I quoted repeatedly disagrees with you. We are heirs by faith. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
It's pretty conclusive. I am Abrahams seed. Because the seed refers to Christ, and the promise belongs to Christ and not ethnic Jews in some exclusive way.
So since I belong to Christ I am Abraham's seed. This is not my opinion but Paul's inspired word.


As he does elsewhere in Romans, Paul is simply acknowlwdging that within the nation Israel are believing and nonbelieving Jews. The contrast is between Jews who don't believe and Jews who do. It's not a contrast between unbelieving Jews and the Church. There's not a Gentile anywhere in view.
There's no talk of "a Jew is not a Jew if he is one outwardly", and "it is not the natural children who are God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring.

We are the children of promise through Christ. The promise is actually to Christ alone. Anyone who believes in Christ is an heir.



Do you even read my posts? I've stated my argument for "the Israel of God" being ethnic Jew previously, with no acknowlegment from you other than Scriptures that bring no additional light to the discussion.
Yes, I read them. I don't understand how you don't see that any ethnic difference between Jews and Gentiles has been removed in Christ.

Develope an understanding of the unconditional covenants God has made with national Israel and you'll see your interpretation is in error.

In Christ,
Tracey
The only unconditional covenant was with God, Abraham and his "seed".
Paul explicitly states that this refers only to Christ, the one who kept the Law. All are sons of Christ by faith.

Show me where there is an unconditional promise to the ethnic Jews as a nation from the Bible that applies to land.

What do you make of: Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.

God sent His Son last, after that the OC was overwritten by the New. National Israel failed to keep it's end of the covenant, so God has the right and made a new one.
 
Upvote 0

duster1az

Active Member
Jun 25, 2003
291
0
63
Southwest
Visit site
✟421.00
Faith
Christian
Arc writes:

The only unconditional covenant was with God, Abraham and his "seed".
Paul explicitly states that this refers only to Christ, the one who kept the Law. All are sons of Christ by faith.
Our difficulty rests in your inability to recognize, or in your choosing to ignore, the nature of the Church and the fact that it's unique to this age alone. Though God has temporarily set aside the nation of Israel and has incorporated believing Gentiles and a believing Jewish remnant into the Church to continue the ministry of the Servant until He returns as the Son of David and the Son of Abraham, it (the Church), in no way replaces national Israel in God's covenant obligations.

In discussions regarding God's unconditional covenants it's important to have a common vocabulary, so I'll share my definitions.

1. A promise is a stated commitment to act in the future for the benefit of a specified recipient.
2. A covenant is a formally stated agreement between specified partners to act in the future for the benefit of the other partner, confirming the agreement by an oath.
3. The agreement can be either unilateral when one partner alone assumes responsibility to meet the provisions toward the other partner, or it can be bilateral when both partners assume responsibility.
4. A covenant is instituted when it's cut, concluded, or given so that provisions of the agreement may now be expected to be met.
5. Fulfillment is either the keeping or the meeting (satisfying) of the commitments in the agreement with the specified recipient or partner.
6. A covenant is inaugurated in fulfillment when all of the provisions agreed upon are kept but in a partial or limited scope.
7. A covenant is fulfilled when all of the provisions are met in the complete, stated scope.

The Abrahamic, Davidic, and new covenants are promissory unilateral covenants in which God assumes responsibility unconditionally to determine Israel's destiny and through Israel the destiny of all nations.

Evidently your position is that these unconditional covenants have been fulfilled sometime in the past prior to or at the first advent of Christ. I disagree. The term "fulfill" is used here to refer to statements, therefore, fulfillment is defined in a literary context where it refers to a commissive statement in which the author commits himself to act in a specified way in the future. Fulfillment then is a satisfying of that commitment. This happens only when it is kept with the one addressed as the recipient of the agreement. Commitments can take different forms of expression; in the Bible it's either a promise or a covenant. In keeping with our definitions a promise is fulfilled when an agreement is kept, but a covenant is fulfilled only when all of the related provisions are kept. Here's an illustration. Suppose I made a promise to make the payments on a new vehicle for my brother. Would the first payment on that vehicle keep the promise? It would in an inaugural sense, but not in an exhaustive one. If I chose at another time to make a payment on a vehicle owned by my brother's wife would I be fulfilling my commitment? No! The initial commitment was with my brother on his vehicle and therefore must be kept with him. The fact I made a payment on my sister-in-law's vehicle is a blessing to her , but it's unrelated to the promise I made to my brother. This illustration is relevant when you claim that the covenant blessings given to the Church constitute an inaugural or fulfillment of a covenant agreed upon with Israel. It's my position that something else must be happening as the Church is blessed.

You read through the respective covenants, keeping in mind the definitions provided, and decide whether or not God has fulfilled all He's said He would on Israel's behalf.

In Christ,
Tracey
 
Upvote 0

@@Paul@@

The Key that Fits:Acts 28
Mar 24, 2004
3,050
72
53
Seattle
✟11,081.00
Faith
Baptist
duster1az said:
someone said it said:
For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.
As he does elsewhere in Romans, Paul is simply acknowlwdging that within the nation Israel are believing and nonbelieving Jews. The contrast is between Jews who don't believe and Jews who do. It's not a contrast between unbelieving Jews and the Church. There's not a Gentile anywhere in view.
In Christ,
Tracey
Paul was not talking about the church at all here. (EDITED) We are not the children of promise... NOTE:
Rom 9:6-8
6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
KJV​
How many childeren did Abraham have??? TWO... one of the flesh,, and one of promise... Ishmael and Isaac. Paul was making if very clear that the promises were to be fullfiled through Isaac's seed.. The promise was made to abraham, and would be carried through with Isaac... NOT ISHMAEL!

We were NEVER promised anything,,, even if you think we are the seed of Abraham today,,, so are the arabs! by default... so are they automatically in?? If we hold to this theory yes,,, all arabs will be saved too... It's "In Isaac shall thy seed be called".. Paul did NOT say you were the seed of Isaac...
Where is Ismael's seed now? Ever wonder why there is so much hate there?
Rom 11:12
12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?​
Paul makes it very clear that Israel will be restored...

There is so much more beauty in our calling today: but everyone wants to spend time re-writing scripture to steal Israel's promises... and for that i have:
...great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. Rom 9:2

God Bless.
 
Upvote 0

Curt

Curt
Jan 26, 2004
491
31
95
Puyallup, Washington
✟792.00
Faith
Non-Denom
God is not a respector of persons, and inspires His Scripture in all our languages so that we can understand them. There is ONE BODY, there is ONE SHEPHERD, There is ONE FOLD, the middle wall of sereration has been TORN DOWN, and The children of Abrahams promise are ALL THE CIRCUMCISED IN THE HEART BELIEVERS regardless of where they are from in this world.
 
Upvote 0

@@Paul@@

The Key that Fits:Acts 28
Mar 24, 2004
3,050
72
53
Seattle
✟11,081.00
Faith
Baptist
Curt said:
God is not a respector of persons, and inspires His Scripture in all our languages so that we can understand them. There is ONE BODY, there is ONE SHEPHERD, There is ONE FOLD, the middle wall of sereration has been TORN DOWN, and The children of Abrahams promise are ALL THE CIRCUMCISED IN THE HEART BELIEVERS regardless of where they are from in this world.

Of course God is no respecter of persons, Peter realized this:
Act 10:34-35 KJV
(34) Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
(35) But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.


But that does not mean that God can not choose who he wants to fulfil his will. Prior to removing the middle-wall in Ephesians, Israel was in first place. Why? because God felt like it.
(Amo 3:2 KJV) You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.

Why did God choose Israel? Why was it that a gentile had to convert to judaism to have any type of a relationship with God?

Paul makes it very clear in Eph 2:12 that gentiles were at one time, without God and had no Hope.

Eph 2:12 KJV
(12) That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:


Was God a respecter of persons in the Old Testament when He choose ONLY the nation of Israel?
 
Upvote 0

Arc

Lover of the Truth
Jun 29, 2003
294
10
50
St. Louis Metro Area, IL
Visit site
✟7,994.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
duster1az said:
Arc writes:

Our difficulty rests in your inability to recognize, or in your choosing to ignore, the nature of the Church and the fact that it's unique to this age alone. Though God has temporarily set aside the nation of Israel and has incorporated believing Gentiles and a believing Jewish remnant into the Church to continue the ministry of the Servant until He returns as the Son of David and the Son of Abraham, it (the Church), in no way replaces national Israel in God's covenant obligations.

In discussions regarding God's unconditional covenants it's important to have a common vocabulary, so I'll share my definitions.

1. A promise is a stated commitment to act in the future for the benefit of a specified recipient.
2. A covenant is a formally stated agreement between specified partners to act in the future for the benefit of the other partner, confirming the agreement by an oath.
3. The agreement can be either unilateral when one partner alone assumes responsibility to meet the provisions toward the other partner, or it can be bilateral when both partners assume responsibility.
4. A covenant is instituted when it's cut, concluded, or given so that provisions of the agreement may now be expected to be met.
5. Fulfillment is either the keeping or the meeting (satisfying) of the commitments in the agreement with the specified recipient or partner.
6. A covenant is inaugurated in fulfillment when all of the provisions agreed upon are kept but in a partial or limited scope.
7. A covenant is fulfilled when all of the provisions are met in the complete, stated scope.

The Abrahamic, Davidic, and new covenants are promissory unilateral covenants in which God assumes responsibility unconditionally to determine Israel's destiny and through Israel the destiny of all nations.

Evidently your position is that these unconditional covenants have been fulfilled sometime in the past prior to or at the first advent of Christ. I disagree. The term "fulfill" is used here to refer to statements, therefore, fulfillment is defined in a literary context where it refers to a commissive statement in which the author commits himself to act in a specified way in the future. Fulfillment then is a satisfying of that commitment. This happens only when it is kept with the one addressed as the recipient of the agreement. Commitments can take different forms of expression; in the Bible it's either a promise or a covenant. In keeping with our definitions a promise is fulfilled when an agreement is kept, but a covenant is fulfilled only when all of the related provisions are kept. Here's an illustration. Suppose I made a promise to make the payments on a new vehicle for my brother. Would the first payment on that vehicle keep the promise? It would in an inaugural sense, but not in an exhaustive one. If I chose at another time to make a payment on a vehicle owned by my brother's wife would I be fulfilling my commitment? No! The initial commitment was with my brother on his vehicle and therefore must be kept with him. The fact I made a payment on my sister-in-law's vehicle is a blessing to her , but it's unrelated to the promise I made to my brother. This illustration is relevant when you claim that the covenant blessings given to the Church constitute an inaugural or fulfillment of a covenant agreed upon with Israel. It's my position that something else must be happening as the Church is blessed.

You read through the respective covenants, keeping in mind the definitions provided, and decide whether or not God has fulfilled all He's said He would on Israel's behalf.

In Christ,
Tracey
Your not answering the question. What promise has God failed to fulfill to national Israel that you see still future? It can't be the OC with Moses. The Davidic was fulfilled when Christ was resurrected and seated on Davids throne (Acts 2:29-36).

The Temple built was the Church of which Christ is the Cheif Corner Stone (1 Pet 2:4-10). God has made His temple with us and dwells in us (John 14:2-3 & 14:23). It's consummation will include all saved nations and is explained in Revelation 21-22.

We covered the Abrahamic covenant and have seen that it is a promise that comes by faith and by no other way or Grace would not longer be Grace. If you had to be born with x amount of Abrahams blood to qualify, then Grace would not apply.

Notice this:
Rom 4:9 Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham's faith was credited to him as righteousness. 10Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them. 12 And he is also the father of the circumcised who not only are circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.
13 It was not through law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith. 14For if those who live by law [Jews] are heirs, faith has no value and the promise is worthless

Since all Jews are circumcized, to whom do you think Paul is directing this? His letter is to Gentiles, he's telling them that they are Abrahams seed by faith. Otherwise, this letter would be completely illogical since Paul is the apostle to the Gentiles.

What do you think "father of all who believe and are not circumcised" means? Who are the uncircumcized in the Bible? The Gentiles!


You also stated that the Church are God's heavenly people and the Jews are God's earthly people. How do you get that when in Revelation it says:
14 "Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city.

Aren't these the Saints? Aren't Saints Christians and Jews?

23 The city had no need of the sun or of the moon to shine in it, for the glory of God illuminated it. The Lamb is its light. 24And the nations of those who are saved shall walk in its light, and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it.

If the saved nations (Gentiles) are in heaven, how did they get on earth?

I understand what a covenant and a promise are. What I need is Biblical quotes. I'm tried to quote the Bible as much as possible. Paul is the one who has interpeted it this way, otherwise he wouldn't be telling the Gentiles this. It wouldn't make much sense for Paul to tell the Gentiles they are Abrahams seed and heirs according to the Promise if he didn't mean it.

As far as the Bible is concerned there are no remaining land promises left to be fulfilled to national Israel. These promises were a "type" for the true heavenly promises to be fulfilled in the future explained in Revelation 21-22.
 
Upvote 0

Arc

Lover of the Truth
Jun 29, 2003
294
10
50
St. Louis Metro Area, IL
Visit site
✟7,994.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
@@Paul@@ said:
Paul was not talking about the church at all here. (EDITED) We are not the children of promise... NOTE:
Rom 9:6-8
6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
KJV​
How many childeren did Abraham have??? TWO... one of the flesh,, and one of promise... Ishmael and Isaac. Paul was making if very clear that the promises were to be fullfiled through Isaac's seed.. The promise was made to abraham, and would be carried through with Isaac... NOT ISHMAEL!

We were NEVER promised anything,,, even if you think we are the seed of Abraham today,,, so are the arabs! by default... so are they automatically in?? If we hold to this theory yes,,, all arabs will be saved too... It's "In Isaac shall thy seed be called".. Paul did NOT say you were the seed of Isaac...
Where is Ismael's seed now? Ever wonder why there is so much hate there?
Rom 11:12
12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?​
Paul makes it very clear that Israel will be restored...

There is so much more beauty in our calling today: but everyone wants to spend time re-writing scripture to steal Israel's promises... and for that i have:
...great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. Rom 9:2

God Bless.
The Church isn't stealing promises. God does not show favoritism, we all recieve the promises by faith in Christ and no other way.

Have you noticed this:
Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!

Who's fullness? Who's fullness does Paul talk about again:

that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.

It's the Gentiles fullness Paul is speaking about, including the remnant.

Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!

Fullness refers to the completion of the Gentiles and Jews together in one body constitute "all Israel" being saved.

For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery (Eph 3:4-6 Gentiles and Jews together in one body), lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26And so all Israel will be saved

All Israel is saved when all the believing Gentiles "come in" to the one body [Jewish] of Christ.

Arabs in automatically? I'm not sure who your directing this at, but my whole point here is always been what Paul says, it's by faith. Are Arab muslims faithful to Christ? I think not! The promise applies to all who believe.
 
Upvote 0

FreeinChrist

CF Advisory team
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Supporter
Jul 2, 2003
144,653
17,337
USA/Belize
✟1,738,312.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Wow, Arc, that is a ....interesting ...way to view Romans 11. I very much disagree.

Rom 11:11 I say then, they did not stumble so as to fall, did they? May it never be! But by their transgression salvation {has come} to the Gentiles, to make them jealous.

Rom 11:12 Now if their transgression is riches for the world and their failure is riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their fulfillment be!

Rom 11:25 For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery--so that you will not be wise in your own estimation--that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in;

Rom 11:26 and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, "THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION, HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB."

Rom 11:27 "THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM, WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS."

Rom 11:28 From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of {God's} choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers;

Rom 11:29 for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.

The "fullness of the Gentiles" has not yet 'come in'.
 
Upvote 0

duster1az

Active Member
Jun 25, 2003
291
0
63
Southwest
Visit site
✟421.00
Faith
Christian
Arc writes:

Your not answering the question. What promise has God failed to fulfill to national Israel that you see still future?
To begin with, the Palestinian (land) covenant wasn't fulfilled at any time in the Old Testament. Some, but not all, who hold to the amillennial position believe that the land promises given to Abraham's physical descendants were literally fulfilled in the past and thus there's no future fulfillment. The time of fulfillment is placed either at Joshua's conquest or in the days of Solomon. ( Oswald Allis, Prophecy and the Church; William Cox, Biblical Studies in Final Things) If their position is correct, then a large number of prophecies concerning the dispersion, regathering, and conversion of Israel are certainly effected. However, their viewpoint isn't very strong, which is probably why not all who hold to the amillenial position don't proclaim it. The Scripture portions of (1 Kings 4:21-24; Joshua 11:23; and Joshua 21:43-45) don't teach the final fulfillment of the Palestinian covenant. Reading the Joshua passages it's obvious that when the statements were made Israel hadn't come close to possessing the land area that was promised to Abraham as both passages are followed by statements that list large areas of the promised land that still needed to be taken (Joshua 13:1-7; 23:4-7), and in fact never were (Judges 1:21-36). The statement in Joshua reflects an Old Testament concept of fulfillment where the promise of God was being fulfilled and that generation was getting their share. But it wasn't the final or ultimate fulfillment of the promise.

The passage in (1 Kings 4) doesn't teach the covenant's fulfillment either. In Solomon's days Israel didn't actually possess and occupy the entire land area. Other kings still ruled even though they paid tribute money to Solomon. Even the land that was possessed at the time wasn't permanently held, which is what the covenant requires for its fulfillment. Something else to consider is that long after the days of Joshua and Solomon, the prophets of God speak of a future possession of the land (Isa. 11:1-12; 14:1-3; 27:12-13; 27:12-13; 43:1-8; 49:8-13; 66:20; Jer. 16:14-16; 23:3-8; 30:1-11; 31:31-40; 32:37-44; Ezek. 20:42; 34:11-16; 39:25-29; Hos. 1:10-11; Joel 3:17-21; Amos 9:11-15; Mic. 4:4-7; Zech. 8:3-8). Certainly these prophets didn't believe the land promises had been fulfilled, but looked ahead to a day when they would be.

The Davidic was fulfilled when Christ was resurrected and seated on Davids throne (Acts 2:29-36).
I don't agree. There were five basic provisions of the Davidic covenant, and even though David's name became great and he experienced rest from his enemies, the promises of a house and a throne and a kingdom that would never pass away haven't been fulfilled. Just as the first two provisions of the covenant had a literal fulfillment the other provisions will be fulfilled in the same manner. Your interpretation that the Acts passage presents Christ as seated on David's throne in heaven has alot working against it. The throne of David and the throne of God aren't the same thing. David's throne had its beginning in (2 Sam), but God's throne in heaven was established long before David's (Ps. 93:2). God's is eternal, but David's isn't, which logically leads to the following observation: Since God's throne in heaven was established long before David's, and since it was established forever (Lam. 5:19), then it was unneccessary for God to promise to establish David's throne forever (2 Sam. 7:16) if they are the same. Another interesting point is the distinction that Jesus makes between His own throne and the throne of the Father. In (Rev. 3:21) Jesus draws a clear distinction between His throne and the throne of God in Heaven where He presently sits. Jesus said, "To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne." Therefore, since it's the throne of David which God has promised to to give Jesus (Luke 1:31-32) it would appear that David's throne is Jesus', and since Jesus draws a distinction between His throne and God's then they must not be the same.

The balance of your post fails to take into consideration the dispensational differences presented in Scripture. I could attempt to explain the divisions, but I'm not interested in expending that much time or energy.

In Christ,
Tracey
 
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

@@Paul@@

The Key that Fits:Acts 28
Mar 24, 2004
3,050
72
53
Seattle
✟11,081.00
Faith
Baptist
Arc said:
The Church isn't stealing promises. God does not show favoritism, we all recieve the promises by faith in Christ and no other way.
Have you noticed this:
Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!
Who's fullness? Who's fullness does Paul talk about again:
WOW, how did “promise by faith in Christ” become the “promises by faith in Christ”? Brother, this is a big one. Does God show favoritism? NO! BUT,, Why did God choose Israel? He spoke to only Abraham, why? God could, just as easily spoke to EVERYONE on the face of the earth and said repent, why didn’t He?
Rom 9:… I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
Because He can. He has a plan and I assure you it’s a big one, it’s far bigger than our little minds can imagine because the foolishness of God is wiser than men.

Obviously it's "their fullness" is referring to Israel, the seed of ISAAC whom the promises were to be fulfilled through.... Did you miss that part?
Arc said:
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
It's the Gentiles fullness Paul is speaking about, including the remnant.
How could the Gentiles also be the remnant of Jews? NOTE:
Luk 21:24 KJV
(24) And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.​
This "fulness" Paul is talking about is the "completion of the Gentiles time on this earth". When the Gentiles time is up, Israel WILL be restored.
Arc said:
Arabs in automatically? I'm not sure who your directing this at, but my whole point here is always been what Paul says, it's by faith. Are Arab muslims faithful to Christ? I think not! The promise applies to all who believe.
One can not say they are the seed of ALL the promises because ALL the promises were to be fulfilled through the seed of ISAAC, not ISHMAL. Only ONE promise was to all the world. Can you find it?
 
Upvote 0

duster1az

Active Member
Jun 25, 2003
291
0
63
Southwest
Visit site
✟421.00
Faith
Christian
@@Paul@@ writes:

WOW, how did “promise by faith in Christ” become the “promises by faith in Christ”?
Failure to use a consistent literal interpretation leads one to the position wherein the Abrahamic covenant is fulfilled in the Church (spiritual seed). As has been presented in an earlier post "fulfillment" answers a previous commitment to act toward a particular people that has now been realized. But in reference to "spiritual seed," where does such a commitment appear? Genesis (13:16; 15:5; 22:17) commit God to multiply Abraham's descendants and those descendants are spiritual in the sense that God provided them, but the focus is that the descendants are "physical or natural." So Genesis doesn't include references to Gentiles as descendants and thus "spiritual fulfillment" should be recognized as simply "spiritual application." An argument for "spiritual fulfillment" isn't neccessary or warranted from the texts involved, but rather Gentiles, as blessed, are a "literal fulfillment" of Genesis (12:3), and the blessing of becoming the seed of Abraham is received as the theological work of Christ (Gal. 3:26-29). Paul doesn't argue that Gentiles are blessed because the promise in reference to multiplied seed has been spiritually fulfilled in Gentiles, rather he argues on the basis of Gentile identification with Christ through whom they are blessed. Paul identifies that blessing because they're now heirs of the "promise" (singular) given to Abraham in (Gen. 12:3).

In Christ,
Tracey
 
Upvote 0

@@Paul@@

The Key that Fits:Acts 28
Mar 24, 2004
3,050
72
53
Seattle
✟11,081.00
Faith
Baptist
duster1az said:
@@Paul@@ writes:
Failure to use a consistent literal interpretation leads one to the position wherein the Abrahamic covenant is fulfilled in the Church. As has been presented in an earlier post "fulfillment" answers a previous commitment to act toward a particular people that has now been realized. But in reference to "spiritual seed," where does such a commitment appear? Genesis (13:16; 15:5; 22:17) commit God to multiply Abraham's descendants and those descendants are spiritual in the sense that God provided them, but the focus is that the descendants are "physical or natural." So Genesis doesn't include references to Gentiles as descendants and thus "spiritual fulfillment" should be recognized as simply "spiritual application." An argument for "spiritual fulfillment" isn't neccessary or warranted from the texts involved, but rather Gentiles, as blessed, are a "literal fulfillment" of Genesis (12:3), and the blessing of becoming the seed of Abraham is received as the theological work of Christ (Gal. 3:26-29).

In Christ,
Tracey
:scratch: I think we are on the same page, but you really confuse me, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Only ONE promise that God made to Abraham is phyically applicable today.Gen_12:3; Gen_22:18; Gen_26:4; Gen_28:14; Act_3:25;
That promise was Christ:
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.​

What was that promise? see verse 16.
Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.​

Is this what you were getting at?

(Act 3:25 KJV) Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.​
Why would Peter quote this?
 
Upvote 0

Curt

Curt
Jan 26, 2004
491
31
95
Puyallup, Washington
✟792.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Quote:
How can one confirm whether he/she has not had a body that died before?

If we had God would have told us so? And He didn't so we didn't.

There is no dispensation in The Bible so it can only come from man.

Prov 3:5-8 TRUST IN THE LORD WITH ALL THINE HEART, LEAN NOT TO YOUR OWN UNDERSTANDING, BE NOT WISE IN YOUR OWN EYES
.
II Tim 3:16-17 ALL SCRIPTURE BY INSPIRATION OF GOD, AND PROFITABLE, THAT THE MAN OF GOD BE PERFECT

2 Pet 1:20 NO PROPHECY OF THE SCRIPTURE IS OF ANY PRIVATE INTERPRETATION

2 Sam 14:14 NEITHER DOTH GOD RESPECT ANY PERSON

Job 37:24 HE RESPECTETH NOT ANY THAT ARE WISE OF HEART.

John 17:22-23 BE ONE, EVEN AS WE ARE ONE, THAT THEY MAY BE MADE PERFECT IN ONE

James 1:22-25 BUT BE YE DOERS OF THE WORD, AND NOT HEARERS ONLY

Josh 24:15
15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, CHOOSE YOU THIS DAY whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.
(KJV)
 
Upvote 0

duster1az

Active Member
Jun 25, 2003
291
0
63
Southwest
Visit site
✟421.00
Faith
Christian
@@Paul@@ said:
:scratch: I think we are on the same page, but you really confuse me, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Only ONE promise that God made to Abraham is phyically applicable today.Gen_12:3; Gen_22:18; Gen_26:4; Gen_28:14; Act_3:25;
That promise was Christ:
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.​

What was that promise? see verse 16.
Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.​

Is this what you were getting at?

(Act 3:25 KJV) Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.​
Why would Peter quote this?
I'm sorry! My intention wasn't to confuse. Before the completion of the post in question I was called away from the computer. Since that time I've edited my post and hopefully the point is now clear.

In Christ,
Tracey
 
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

@@Paul@@

The Key that Fits:Acts 28
Mar 24, 2004
3,050
72
53
Seattle
✟11,081.00
Faith
Baptist
duster1az said:
I'm sorry! My intention wasn't to confuse. Before the completion of the post in question I was called away from the computer. Since that time I've edited my post and hopefully the point is now clear.

In Christ,
Tracey
Crystal clear now... ;)

There was but one promise to the Gentiles, but some people are trying to make "spiritual application" of all the other promises made to Israel... so to some, "the promise by faith of Christ" becomes the "all the promises of Abraham".

:)
 
Upvote 0

Arc

Lover of the Truth
Jun 29, 2003
294
10
50
St. Louis Metro Area, IL
Visit site
✟7,994.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Interesting.

Im am accused of not taking the Bible literally.

Joshua,
21:43 So the LORD gave Israel all the land he had sworn to give their forefathers, and they took possession of it and settled there. 44 The LORD gave them rest on every side, just as he had sworn to their forefathers. Not one of their enemies withstood them; the LORD handed all their enemies over to them. 45 Not one of all the LORD's good promises to the house of Israel failed; every one was fulfilled.

Joshua 23:14 "Now I am about to go the way of all the earth. You know with all your heart and soul that not one of all the good promises the LORD your God gave you has failed. Every promise has been fulfilled; not one has failed. 15 But just as every good promise of the LORD your God has come true, so the LORD will bring on you all the evil he has threatened, until he has destroyed you from this good land he has given you. 16 If you violate the covenant of the LORD your God, which he commanded you, and go and serve other gods and bow down to them, the LORD's anger will burn against you, and you will quickly perish from the good land he has given you."

Well, did they violate the covenant? Yes. Is there now a new covenant? Yes. Does the old covenant still apply? No. Interesting how these passages are not taken literally. Now, how is it that God owes national Israel something? It seems that as long as they are disobedient God owes them nothing. And as far as Israel today well, whoever does not have the Son, does not have the Father either. And Jesus said "If you would have believed Moses you would have believed me, because he wrote about Me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how can you believe what I say"? You see, Jews who don't believe in Jesus, don't believe in the Old Testament either. The ones that do, believe Christ and are true Israel.

It's also interesting how I'm the one who's not taking the Bible literally, yet Galatians 3 & 4 clearly say that we Gentiles are Abrahams seed by faith and there is neither Jew nor Greek but one in Christ, whom is the one that God meant when he told Abraham "your seed". That the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother, but present (back then) Jerusalem is to be cast out as the son of the bondwoman and shall never share in the inheriatance with the free womans son.

Have you ever read this passage:

4 Thus says the LORD my God, "Feed the flock for slaughter, 5whose owners slaughter them and feel no guilt; those who sell them say, "Blessed be the LORD, for I am rich'; and their shepherds do not pity them. 6For I will no longer pity the inhabitants of the land," says the LORD. "But indeed I will give everyone into his neighbor's hand and into the hand of his king. They shall attack the land, and I will not deliver them from their hand."
7So I fed the flock for slaughter, in particular the poor of the flock. I took for myself two staffs: the one I called Grace, and the other I called Unity; and I fed the flock. 8I dismissed the three shepherds in one month. My soul loathed them, and their soul also abhorred me. 9Then I said, "I will not feed you. Let what is dying die, and what is perishing perish. Let those that are left eat each other's flesh." 10And I took my staff, Grace, and cut it in two, that I might break the covenant which I had made with all the peoples. 11So it was broken on that day. Thus the poor of the flock, who were watching me, knew that it was the word of the LORD. 12Then I said to them, "If it is agreeable to you, give me my wages; and if not, refrain." So they weighed out for my wages thirty pieces of silver.
13And the LORD said to me, "Throw it to the potter"--that princely price they set on me. So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the LORD for the potter. 14Then I cut in two my other staff, Unity, that I might break the brotherhood between Judah and Israel.

Notice the 30 pieces of silver. It's the same passage spoken of in the NT. Who was sold for that? Christ. What covenant ended with Christ and what covenant began with Christ?

It would do you some good to read Hebrews as well as Galatians and Ephesians literally. Hebrews (4) explains what is meant by entering the promised land and how what Joshua did pointed to entering God's Sabbath rest. Not a literal physical land this side of Revelation 21-22. Hebrews also clearly states that the "land" looked forward to was heavenly and from God. Just as Rev 21:2 & 21:9-10 say. This is the final future fulfillment of "land promises". And who is the Bride of Christ? The Saints, who are reffered to in the NT as Christians. The Church that is Jewish with Gentiles grafted in are the Bride.

Hebrews 11 also states that:
39 These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. 40 God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.

This is the future fulfillment spoken of in Rev 21-22, when we will all be together.
 
Upvote 0

Arc

Lover of the Truth
Jun 29, 2003
294
10
50
St. Louis Metro Area, IL
Visit site
✟7,994.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
@@Paul@@ said:
Crystal clear now... ;)

There was but one promise to the Gentiles, but some people are trying to make "spiritual application" of all the other promises made to Israel... so to some, "the promise by faith of Christ" becomes the "all the promises of Abraham".

:)
That's taking it literally?

Lets see what God says:
Eph 2:11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh--who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands--12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body [the Body is the Church] through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.
19 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, 20having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, 21in whom the whole building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, 22in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

Eph 3:10 now the manifold wisdom of God might be made known by the church to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places,

So now, were is this division between God's people Israel (you would say Jews only) and Gentiles?
Doesn't making the "two" into "one body" which is called the "Church" makes Jews and Gentiles equal? If they are equal, then how can they at the same time be unequal. If the distinction is destroyed, why live as if there is a difference? You can't avoid this and many other passages like it if you take them literally.
 
Upvote 0

Arc

Lover of the Truth
Jun 29, 2003
294
10
50
St. Louis Metro Area, IL
Visit site
✟7,994.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
FreeinChrist said:
Wow, Arc, that is a ....interesting ...way to view Romans 11. I very much disagree.

The "fullness of the Gentiles" has not yet 'come in'.
I'm sure you do. Even though this same meaning is stated in Acts 15
12The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. 13When they finished, James spoke up: "Brothers, listen to me. 14Simon has described to us how God at first showed his concern by taking from the Gentiles a people for himself. 15The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:
16" 'After this I will return
and rebuild David's fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
and I will restore it,
17that the remnant of men may seek the Lord,
and all the Gentiles who bear my name,

Now we know that gramatically speaking most dispensationalists put this somehow in the future. Even though the very context has to do with Gentiles coming to the Lord then. The Gentiles could not seek the Lord until "After those days". That is why they quote it, because it applied to them. It applied to the Gentile converts.

Also notice verse 17 is saying the same thing as Romans 11:25. There is a remnant (Rom 11:5) that is not hardened that seek the Lord, and the Gentiles (though certainly not all of them seek the Lord either) that seek the Lord.

You are right in that the times of the Gentiles are not yet fulfilled. When both the believing Jews and Gentiles "come in" then "All Israel will be saved" because they will all be saved! (Eph 2-3)

FreeinChrist said:
Rom 11:26 and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, "THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION, HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB."

Rom 11:27 "THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM, WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS."
I don't really know what you want this to mean.

11:26 comes from Isaiah 59:20 which interestingly enough says:
20 "The Redeemer will come to Zion,
to those in Jacob who repent of their sins,"
declares the LORD .
21 "As for me, this is my covenant with them," says the LORD . "My Spirit, who is on you, and my words that I have put in your mouth will not depart from your mouth, or from the mouths of your children, or from the mouths of their descendants from this time on and forever," says the LORD .

What did Jesus say to the Jews? Repent or you will likewise perish. So how do they get their sins taken away? Well, when they repent and believe, when that happends verse 21, "My Spirit" will dwell in them.

This is a typical conversion. Jesus came and did this by taking up our sin on the Cross. Does he need to come again to finnish the job? Jesus comes again to recieve those who are waiting for Him (Heb 9:28). There will be no more time for conversion, it will be time to seperate the wheat from the tares and the renewal of all things (2 Pet 3:10-13).
 
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

duster1az

Active Member
Jun 25, 2003
291
0
63
Southwest
Visit site
✟421.00
Faith
Christian
It seems that as long as they are disobedient God owes them nothing.
Your Scripture quotations were anticipated and answered before you presented them.

As for the quote above, God, being who He is owes nothing to anyone. But He has taken it upon Himself to produce on Israel's behalf and it will certainly come to pass. You did hit upon something which is a critical distinction you might want to keep in mind. If any involved in the covenant relationship chooses not to walk before the Lord they will lose out on the benefits and blessings, but though sin and disobedience causes the loss of blessings it never cancels the covenant. The final fulfillment of all unconditional covenants depends on God alone.

In Christ,
Tracey
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.