Covenant and New Covenant theology

mkgal1 · Sep 12, 2020

Guojing said:
Again my question is, "When did Paul ever called the Body of Christ, the 12 tribes?"

Look carefully at who Paul is addressing here. Also notice what Paul says about who Jesus is. If Israel and the Church are separate.....then who is the Messiah for the Church? Paul says in Acts 13 (v. 23) that Jesus was Israel's promised Savior/Messiah. If the Church and Israel are separate (as is your argument).....then the Church must not be able to claim that promise as fulfilled for them (us).....right? The Church would need their own Savior (going with that argument). Paul is summarizing the Israelite history here. Do you believe there's a separate Church history?

Acts 13

15After the reading from the Law and the Prophets, the synagogue leaders sent word to them: “Brothers, if you have a word of encouragement for the people, please speak.”16Paul stood up, motioned with his hand, and began to speak: “Men of Israel and you Gentiles who fear God, listen to me! 17The God of the people of Israel chose our fathers. He made them into a great people during their stay in Egypt, and with an uplifted arm He led them out of that land. 18He endured their conduct for about forty years in the wilderness. 19And having vanquished seven nations in Canaan, He gave their land to His people as an inheritance. 20All this took about 450 years.

After this, God gave them judges until the time of Samuel the prophet. 21Then the people asked for a king, and God gave them forty years under Saul son of Kish, from the tribe of Benjamin. 22After removing Saul, He raised up David as their king and testified about him: ‘I have found David son of Jesse a man after My own heart; he will carry out My will in its entirety.’a 23From the descendants of this man, God has brought to Israel the Savior Jesus, as He promised.

jgr · Sep 12, 2020

Douggg said:
No plan outside of Christ for salvation. The new covenant is redemption of our souls by Jesus's sacrifice on the cross making atonement for our sins, AND the redemption of our bodies, to come in the resurrection, or by rapture if living, by His resurrection, Jesus being the firstfruits.

God has a plan that the Kingdom of God will be the ruling kingdom here on earth over the nations. Jesus will rule the nations with a rod of iron. But the nations don't become the church.

The Church is a nation. (Matthew 21:43; 1 Peter 2:9)

Believers from every temporal nation comprise the nation of the Church. (Acts 10:34,35)

HARK! · Sep 12, 2020

Douggg said:
Abraham was ancestor to many more people than the twelve tribes. The twelve tribes come from the twelve sons of one of Abraham's grandsons - Jacob. So it is two different issues.

Two different issues. OK, I'll give you that. I threw Abraham in there in loose context. We don't even have to go back as far as Jacob. Let's start with the dispersion. Fair enough? You didn't give me an estimate; so I'll give one, off the top of my head. Remember, this all started with your statement about irrational arguments; so I'll try to be very conservative in my estimate, so as to approach the estimate objectively, if not maybe even biased to try to see it from your perspective.

Let's take a look at some numbers.

According to Wikipedia the 10 tribes were dispersed in ~722 BCE.

The ten lost tribes were the ten of the Twelve Tribes of Israel that were said to have been deported from the Kingdom of Israel after its conquest by the Neo-Assyrian Empire circa 722 BCE.
-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Lost_Tribes

722 + 2020 = ~2740

Lets say that the offspring of the dispersion, each and every one, didn't procreate until they were 20 years old. This is a very generous estimate toward your argument.

2740 / 20 = 136

That's 136 generations since the dispersion.

Lets say that there were only 2 people who composed those 10 tribes at the time of the dispersion. This estimate is crazy generous. Let's say Lets say that for each person there were two offspring per generation. This estimate is conservative, as families tended to be much larger, until very recent history.

Let's see how many times there would have been opportunities to intermarry.

2 * 2^136 = 1.7422457186352049329324779900507e+41

Hmmm... my calculator won't display such a large number in standard notation, sort of like counting sands of the sea. Let's work with a smaller number, to get a standard notation.

Here is the number for just 106 generations. 81129638414606681695789005144064.

That is how many opportunities there were to intermarry in just 106 generations, starting with just 2 people. Staggering! Bear in mind, that if any one of them intermarried; then their offspring would start their own exponential progression.

Looking at it from this very conservative perspective, and understanding that the ten tribes were widely dispersed, Keras' argument doesn't seem at all irrational to me.

Douggg said:
What I a sure of is that everyone goes back to Noah. And before Noah, Adam.

I would agree with that.

Douggg said:
The fact that Israel became a nation in one day, Isaiah 66:7-8, is indication that the two sticks representing the ten northern tribes and two southern tribes, Ezekiel 37, are back together again in the land of Israel, albeit not in full numbers.

Are you sure? Could the two sticks have come from a wild olive and a cultivated olive?

Douggg said:
But in numbers sufficient that Ezekiel 38 can be fulfilled in the parable of the fig tree generation. I mean if a person is looking at eschatology and not to justifying a man-made system called covenant and new covenant theology.

The renewed covenant was presented by YHWH, not man.

keras · Sep 12, 2020

HARK! said:
According to Wikipedia the 10 tribes were dispersed in ~722 BCE.

They were conquered by King Shalmaneser in 722/721 BC.
But their exile, by King Sargon 2, did not happen until about 715, or even later. This shows that the decreed exile of the House of Israel, Ezekiel 4:4-5, of 390 years; plus multiplied by 7 for their continuing sins, Leviticus 26:18, equals 2730 years; which is now completed, so Israel can now return to their heritage. Romans 9:24-26
All of the Lord's true faithful born again believers. from every tribe [of Israel], every race, nation and language. John sees them there - Revelation 7:9

HARK! · Sep 12, 2020

keras said:
They were conquered by King Shalmaneser in 722/721 BC.
But their exile, by King Sargon 2, did not happen until about 715, or even later. This shows that the decreed exile of the House of Israel, Ezekiel 4:4-5, of 390 years; plus multiplied by 7 for their continuing sins, Leviticus 26:18, equals 2730 years; which is now completed, so Israel can now return to their heritage. Romans 9:24-26
All of the Lord's true faithful born again believers. from every tribe [of Israel], every race, nation and language. John sees them there - Revelation 7:9

Thanks for the info. As you probably already know; this aspect of Bible study is one of my strong points; but I'm not going to rework the numbers for this very conservative estimate. :sorry:

No matter how we look at it; it's still a, huge, huge, number of possibilities. Is there anyone on earth who can be sure that they are not descendants of the 10 lost tribes?

Guojing · Sep 12, 2020

mkgal1 said:
That doesn't change Peter’s audience.

1 Peter 1:1 (KJV) ~ Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia

Only Israelites can be scattered people of God, not Gentiles. Israel was a nation born of God (Exodus 4:22, Jeremiah 31:9).

Gentile believers do not belong to any nation that is born of God, so it makes no sense to described them as scattered.

Furthermore, Peter himself agreed in Galatians 2:9 to restrict his ministry only to the circumcision, so he won't be writing a letter to gentile believers after that.

BABerean2 · Sep 12, 2020

Guojing said:
Gentile believers do not belong to any nation that is born of God,

Once again you are attempting to ignore part of Romans 11.

What does the Olive Tree represent in Romans 11?

Were all of the Israelites partially blinded and broken off of the Olive Tree, or did a "remnant" accept Christ?
Were part of the Israelites blinded, and part of the Israelites were not blinded? The answer is found in the "remnant" of Romans 11:5.

Rom 11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
Rom 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Rom 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
Rom 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
Rom 11:21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Rom 11:22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
Rom 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?
Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

.

Guojing · Sep 12, 2020

BABerean2 said:
Once again you are attempting to ignore part of Romans 11.

What does the Olive Tree represent in Romans 11?

Were all of the Israelites partially blinded and broken off of the Olive Tree, or did a "remnant" accept Christ?
Were part of the Israelites blinded, and part of the Israelites were not blinded? The answer is found in the "remnant" of Romans 11:5.

Rom 11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
Rom 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Rom 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
Rom 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
Rom 11:21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Rom 11:22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
Rom 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?
Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

.

So?

You have a habit of not addressing the point that you quoted, which was "Gentile believers do not belong to any nation that is born of God"

Olive tree in the Bible is always used to describe the nation Israel, likewise terms like vineyard and fig trees.

jgr · Sep 12, 2020

Guojing said:
Gentile believers do not belong to any nation that is born of God

Except for these Gentile believers: Genesis 17:12;Exodus 12:48;Exodus 12:49;Leviticus 19:34;Leviticus 24:22.

But you'll never understand that.

Dispensational racialism forbids it.

Guojing · Sep 12, 2020

jgr said:
Except for these Gentile believers: Genesis 17:12;Exodus 12:48;Exodus 12:49;Leviticus 19:34;Leviticus 24:22.

But you'll never understand that.

Dispensational racialism forbids it.

I already stated that, in the OT, a Gentile needed to become part of the nation Israel, in order to be under the covenant.

Salvation for the OT was given corporately to all who are from the nation Israel, not individually like all of us are under now under the grace dispensation (Ephesians 2:11-12)

You disagree with this point and have a different view, I am fine, let's move on from this point.

jgr · Sep 12, 2020

Guojing said:
I already stated that, in the OT, a Gentile needed to become part of the nation Israel, in order to be under the covenant.

Salvation for the OT was given corporately to all who are from the nation Israel, not individually like all of us are under now under the grace dispensation (Ephesians 2:11-12)

You disagree with this point and have a different view, I am fine, let's move on from this point.

Salvation in the OT was extended individually only to those who were faithful and obedient to God and His covenant, irrespective of whether they were inside or outside of Israel.

The corpses of thousands of Israelites within the nation who were unfaithful and disobedient invalidate the claim that "salvation for the OT was given corporately to all who are from the nation Israel".

mkgal1 · Sep 12, 2020

mkgal1 said:
That doesn't change Peter’s audience.

You'd posted:

Do you believe that was 1 & 2 Peter were written to today's geopolitical Israel?

1 Peter 1:1 (KJV) ~ Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia

Guojing said:
Only Israelites can be scattered people of God, not Gentiles. Israel was a nation born of God (Exodus 4:22, Jeremiah 31:9).

Gentile believers do not belong to any nation that is born of God, so it makes no sense to described them as scattered.

Furthermore, Peter himself agreed in Galatians 2:9 to restrict his ministry only to the circumcision, so he won't be writing a letter to gentile believers after that.

You didn't respond to this question,

"Do you believe that 1 & 2 Peter were written to today's geopolitical Israel?"

Because you made the comment about future fulfillment of Israel when referring to Peter’s letters.

Guojing · Sep 12, 2020

jgr said:
Salvation in the OT was extended individually only to those who were faithful and obedient to God and His covenant, irrespective of whether they were inside or outside of Israel.

The corpses of thousands of Israelites within the nation who were unfaithful and disobedient invalidate the claim that "salvation for the OT was given corporately to all who are from the nation Israel".

Yes, they needed to obey the conditions of the covenant, which since Moses, was obeying the law of Moses

belonging to the nation was a necessary condition but not sufficient

the point was that gentiles were worse off than Jews in the ot. They needed to join Israel first, and then obey the law of Moses

Guojing · Sep 12, 2020

mkgal1 said:
You didn't respond to this question,

"Do you believe that 1 & 2 Peter were written to today's geopolitical Israel?" Because you made the comment about future fulfillment of Israel when referring to Peter’s letters.

obviously Peter wrote to the Israel that was existing then, before ad70

I don’t know what you were trying to imply by the term today geopolitical Israel

Guojing · Sep 12, 2020

jgr said:
The Church is a nation. (Matthew 21:43; 1 Peter 2:9)

Believers from every temporal nation comprise the nation of the Church. (Acts 10:34,35)

And you guys can still deny that this is replacement theology

jgr · Sep 12, 2020

Guojing said:
And you guys can still deny that this is replacement theology

Where do you see the word "replace" or "replacement", other than in your imagination?

mkgal1 · Sep 12, 2020

Guojing said:
obviously Peter wrote to the Israel that was existing then, before ad70

Okay....good....we agree.

But look at what's written about that specific group called "Israel":

1 Peter 1:1-2 ~
Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,

To the elect who are exiles of the Dispersion throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, chosen(a) according to the foreknowledge of God the Father and sanctified by the Spirit for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by His blood:

Grace and peace be yours in abundance

V. 10-12
Concerning this salvation, the prophets who foretold the grace to come to you searched and investigated carefully, trying to determine the time and setting to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow. It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves, but you, when they foretold the things now announced by those who preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven.

So wouldn't you also call this group the Body of Christ....the Church?

jgr · Sep 12, 2020

Guojing said:
Yes, they needed to obey the conditions of the covenant, which since Moses, was obeying the law of Moses

True.

Guojing said:
belonging to the nation was a necessary condition but not sufficient

There is no Scripture stating such a condition. Where did you discover that?

Do you think that anyone residing outside of Israel's borders who was faithful and obedient to God and His Covenant was not accepted by Him?

Nineveh lay hundreds of kilometres away from Israel, yet it repented under Jonah's preaching. Did God accept its repentance even though it didn't "belong to Israel" or "join Israel"?

See Jonah 3:10.

Guojing said:
the point was that gentiles were worse off than Jews in the ot. They needed to join Israel first, and then obey the law of Moses

See above.

mkgal1 · Sep 12, 2020

Guojing said:
I don’t know what you were trying to imply by the term today geopolitical Israel

You'd posted this:

"If Peter really meant how you interpret him as saying, that God has no future plans for Israel, then his letters to Israel in 1 and 2 Peter will make no sense"

......and if Peter were writing to a future to us Israel....the only Israel we have today is the modern-day geopolitical Israel.

Guojing · Sep 12, 2020

jgr said:
True.

There is no Scripture stating such a condition. Where did you discover that?

Do you think that anyone residing outside of Israel's borders who was faithful and obedient to God and His Covenant was not accepted by Him?

Nineveh lay hundreds of kilometres away from Israel, yet it repented under Jonah's preaching. Did God accept its repentance even though it didn't "belong to Israel" or "join Israel"?

See Jonah 3:10.

See above.

ephesians 2:11-12 made that clear to me

Covenant and New Covenant theology

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33

Well-Known Member

שמע

Writer of studies on Bible prophecy

שמע

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33

Well-Known Member

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33

Well-Known Member

Similar threads