IS ISRAEL IN THE NEW COVENANT GOD'S CHURCH?

Guojing said:

I see. Would you say you believe in some form of replacement theology?

When you say "The new covenant church is under...the new covenant", making your point true by definition, do you think there was ever an old covenant church in the OT?

Click to expand...

Israel was the "church in the wilderness". Here is mentioned the church and the covenant.

Acts 7:37-39
King James Version

37 This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear.

38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

39 To whom our fathers would not obey, but thrust him from them, and in their hearts turned back again into Egypt,

dp

Guojing said:

I see. Would you say you believe in some form of replacement theology?

Click to expand...

Not really. I believe "Israel" still exists in the form of the scattered descendants of the various tribes, and are still subject to the prophecies concerning them, apart from the NT church, which I believe is made up largely of those descendants.

Guojing said:

I am reading and understanding Hebrews 8:8 literally.

If it speaks the House of Israel and the House of Judah as the recipients of the NC, I don't try to change what it says.

Click to expand...

And that's a claim that your understanding of prophecy is better than the apostles Peter and Paul, who say the prophecy was figurative: that
Israel is not the people of God (Hosea :91), and that the promise to make them his people again (Hosea 2:23) is fulfilled in the Gentiles (Romans 9:24-26; 1 Peter 2:10), not in a supposed future temporal earthly Messianic kingdom.

Your ignorane of the NT allows you to misinterpret prophecy.

RickReads said:

The number I have from my research is about one-third of Bible prophecy is unfulfilled. Quite a bit left for Jesus to do which is why we will have one last Age when this one is over with.

Click to expand...

A author keeps track of the plot lines and brings conclusions to them and often ties the end to the beginning. Now is Genesis we have creation the fall and the curse with enmity between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent and this plot line is concluded with the beast being thrown into the fire and the dragon Satan being bound for a 1000 years at the brightness of the coming of Jesus as king of king and lord of lords. Now this ties together the plot line of the kingdom and David

Clare73 said:

And that's a claim that your understanding of prophecy is better than the apostles Peter and Paul, who knew much prophecy was figurative:
that Israel is not the people of God (Hosea :91), and that the promise to make them his people again (Hosea 2:23) is fulfilled in the Gentiles (Romans 9:24-26; 1 Peter 2:10), not in a supposed future temporal earthly Messianic kingdom.

Your ignorane of the NT allows you to misinterpret prophecy.

Click to expand...

Clare73 said:

And that's a claim that your understanding of prophecy is better than the apostles Peter and Paul, who knew much prophecy was figurative:
that Israel is not the people of God (Hosea :91), and that the promise to make them his people again (Hosea 2:23) is fulfilled in the Gentiles (Romans 9:24-26; 1 Peter 2:10), not in a supposed future temporal earthly Messianic kingdom.

Your ignorane of the NT allows you to misinterpret prophecy.

Click to expand...

Your interpretation of Hosea is a manipulation of the clear intent of the text.
8 Now when she had weaned Lo-Ruhamah, she conceived and bore a son. 9 Then God said:
“Call his name Lo-Ammi,[fn]
For you are not My people,
And I will not be your God.
10 “Yet the number of the children of Israel
Shall be as the sand of the sea,
Which cannot be measured or numbered.
And it shall come to pass
In the place where it was said to them,
‘You are not My people,’[fn]
There it shall be said to them,
‘You are sons of the living God.’
11 Then the children of Judah and the children of Israel
Shall be gathered together,
And appoint for themselves one head;
And they shall come up out of the land,
For great will be the day of Jezreel!

Now who is not my people? Israel and where it was said to them...it will also be said to them you are sons of the living God, This is directed to the same people who were called no my people and to make that the church is a bad interpretation. God makes is clear and says it is the children of Judah and Israel who are gathered together who appoint one head on the day of Jezreel. Jezreel is the same place as Armageddon. This makes no sense to be the church and makes perfect sense for futurist.

I have brought up LUKE 1 a few times and you have not addressed this premise that states Jesus will deliver Israel from their enemies and keep the oaths covenants and promises to the fathers to bring in a time of worshiping and serving the LORD in holiness without fear all their days. I see Jezreel as this fulfillment and this same before and after picture is told many times in many ways.

I think it is very important since Revelation warns not to ad or take away from the book and if this is indeed future and there is a 1000 year reign to come that might not be cool denying it.

Clare73 said:

And that's a claim that your understanding of prophecy is better than the apostles Peter and Paul, who knew much prophecy was figurative: that
Israel is not the people of God (Hosea :91), and that the promise to make them his people again (Hosea 2:23) is fulfilled in the Gentiles (Romans 9:24-26; 1 Peter 2:10), not in a supposed future temporal earthly Messianic kingdom.

Your ignorane of the NT allows you to misinterpret prophecy.

Click to expand...

You misunderstand the timetables of your prophecies.

Hosea 6
1 Come, and let us return unto the Lord: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up.

2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.


A prophetic day is a thousand years. This passage gives the Gentiles 2 thousand years plus a portion of the third thousand-year time period. We are in that third day right now and before it is over the Gentiles will fall and the Messianic Kingdom will be established. It is happening right now, today. Israel has God`s unmerited favor.

RickReads said:

My comments ( )

My intepretation is in agreement with authoritative NT teaching

( As stand-alone interpretations they didn`t make a lot of sense to me. Can you share the authoritative sources? Links?)

Nothing I've stated says the church is reigning.
He is reigning now. . .now is the church age. . .he is reigning over everything in the church age now.

( Ok, fair enough.)

Click to expand...

It would serve you well to give thought to some of the extraneous material presented in post #300.

( I didn`t see any,

Click to expand...

It was about the focus of God being the glory of Christ:
1) on the glorification of his Son through the redemption of God's treasure,
2) the church, his body, the fullness of God, who counts himself incomplete without his treasured possession (Exodus 19:5; Deuteronomy 7:6, Deuteronomy 26:18; Malachi 3:17)--astounding!,
his own personal inheritance (Psalms 33:12; Ephesians 1:18),
the church of his saints both OT and NT (Hebrews 12:22-23).

God's plan for mankind is not about Israel, it's about Christ!
All this yadi yadi about Israel is just a distraction from God's purpose in Christ.

As the fella' said:
if that don't light your fire, your wood's wet!

but we both agree that Jesus is reigning right now so that is at least a place to start.

Click to expand...

You mean the "millennial reign" to you does not mean a future temporal earthly kingdom? Great!

What does Jesus need to do to complete his purpose?

Click to expand...

1 Corinthians 15:25-26.

Who does the covenant belong to? The only person who ever qualified to inherit the covenant is Jesus Himself.)

Click to expand...

Jesus doesn't "inherit" the covenant, the covenant was cut in the sacrifice of his own blood. . .he is the Mediator of the New Covenant (Hebrews 8:6, 9:15, 12:24) the one Mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5) because of the covenant cut in his own blood.

Clare73 said:

It was about the focus of God being Christ related:
1) on the glorification of his Son through the redemption of God's treasure,
2) the church, his body, the fullness of God, who counts himself incomplete without his treasured possession (Exodus 19:5; Deuteronomy 7:6, Deuteronomy 26:18; Malachi 3:17)--astounding!,
his own personal inheritance (Psalms 33:12; Ephesians 1:18)
the church of his saints both OT and NT (Hebrews 12:22-23).

It"s not about Israel, it's about Christ!

As the fella' said:
if that don't light your fire, then your wood's wet!

Click to expand...

What is all that supposed to mean? It`s an eclectic mix of thoughts. And I`ll stop right there.

Clare73 said:

And that's a claim that your understanding of prophecy is better than
the apostles Peter and Paul, who say in Romans 9:24-26; 1 Peter 2:10 that
the prophecy was figurative: they say that

Israel is not the people of God (Hosea 1:9), and that the promise to make them his people again (Hosea 2:23) is fulfilled in the Gentiles, not in a supposed future temporal earthly Messianic kingdom.

Click to expand...

Brian Mcnamee said:

Your interpretation of Hosea is a manipulation of the clear intent of the text.

Click to expand...

WOW!

That was the apostles Peter and Paul's interpretation. . .which "is a manipulation of the clear intent of the text"!

Absolutely distressing to see this kind of ignorance of the NT. . .
I'm thinking you have to be the exception.

Clare73 said:

And that's a claim that your understanding of prophecy is better than the apostles Peter and Paul, who say the prophecy was figurative: that
Israel is not the people of God (Hosea :91), and that the promise to make them his people again (Hosea 2:23) is fulfilled in the Gentiles (Romans 9:24-26; 1 Peter 2:10), not in a supposed future temporal earthly Messianic kingdom.

Click to expand...

RickReads said:

You misunderstand the timetables of your prophecies.

Click to expand...

Take it up with Peter and Paul, it's their timetable, not mine.

RickReads said:

What is all that supposed to mean? It`s an eclectic mix of thoughts. And I`ll stop right there.

Click to expand...

God's plan for and focus on are not a supposed restoration of Israel, separate from the church which has become the almost total focus of many.

God's only focus is on his plan to glorify his Son in the redemption of a precious treasure for his own personal inheritance, in his saints, the church, the one body of Christ, the one olive tree, the one flock of both OT and NT saints.

The authoritative teaching of the NT presents no such dichotomy of church and Israel in God's plan to glorify his Son through the redemption of an inheritance for himself.

That is all a product of human fancy, with absolutely no basis in the NT's authoritative teaching for the New Covenant.

Hi Claire it might be good for you to look up the rules for debate and how to score a debate and then engage in these discussions with that in mind. A point not countered is considered you agree with it and when you do not address issues brought up specifically they go great damage as they are unopposed and they score points for the other side. So when you make statements about Hosea and the church being Israel those arguments were countered with specific quotes right from Hosea that show your context is off. You should go back to Hosea and try to prove that the context is the church in that passage as that is how debate works. I have also brought up Luke 1 and made specific points regarding that. So that is where you should make a counter and then ad other arguments to support your ideas.

Now as far as Hose goes lets look at chatper 3
4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred pillar, without ephod or teraphim. 5 Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the LORD their God and David their king. They shall fear the LORD and His goodness in the latter days.

There are several things to note in this passage. W1st it is a latter day passage and it notes that Israel will go many days without a king or sacrifice. This implies that after many days they will have them again. They will return at that time David will be king. Now in Jesus day the sacrifice was up and running for many years and so the futurist view sees the return of the sacrifice as a key prophetic element necessary for 2 Thes 2 to be fulfilled and the stage for the abomination of desolation to occur in. Now is 3 other passages it refers to the time David is raised up and a study of this will yield much understanding as they are all talking about the same latter day time period.

Clare73 said:

And that's a claim that your understanding of prophecy is better than the apostles Peter and Paul, who say the prophecy was figurative: that
Israel is not the people of God (Hosea :91), and that the promise to make them his people again (Hosea 2:23) is fulfilled in the Gentiles (Romans 9:24-26; 1 Peter 2:10), not in a supposed future temporal earthly Messianic kingdom.

Your ignorane of the NT allows you to misinterpret prophecy.

Click to expand...

Clare,
Romans 9:24-26 is a direct reference to the house of Israel, those of the once Northern Kingdom. The term "gentile" means nations, or, tribes.

RickReads said:

My comments ( )
My intepretation is in agreement with authoritative NT teaching
( As stand-alone interpretations they didn`t make a lot of sense to me. Can you share the authoritative sources? Links?)

Click to expand...

Are you talkng about Revelation 20:1-6 here?

Nothing I've stated says the church is reigning.
He is reigning now. . .now is the church age. . .he is reigning over everything in the church age now.

( Ok, fair enough.)
It would serve you well to give thought to some of the extraneous material presented in post #300.
( I didn`t see any, but we both agree that Jesus is reigning right now so that is at least a place to start.

Click to expand...

What does Jesus need to do to complete his purpose?

Click to expand...

1 Corinthians 15:25-26.

Who does the covenant belong to? The only person who ever qualified to inherit the covenant is Jesus Himself.)

Click to expand...

Jesus doesn't "inherit" the covenant, the covenant was cut in the sacrifice of his own blood. . .he is the Mediator of the New Covenant (Hebrews 8:6, 9:15, 12:24) the one Mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5) because of the covenant cut in his own blood.

Israel and the Church are one and the same, because in Christ there is the one people of God. The former things pointed toward Christ, and thus in Christ is the fullness of Israel, and thus to Christ's Church is the reification of Israel. All that was then, pointing toward its fullness, in Jesus Christ.

The Church is not a continuation of Old Israel.
The Church has not replaced Israel.
But the Church absolutely is Israel; Israel is more Israel in Christ, and thus the fullness of Israel--of being God's people--is found in the fullness and perfection of Jesus Christ.

The identify of God's people was never to be in the former things, but in the One who was to come, for which reason such things were given. It is not the Sabbath, or the Torah, or the Passover, or the sacrifices of lambs, bulls, and doves; it was not the earthly tabernacle, or the Levitical priesthood, that makes Israel Israel. What makes Israel Israel is the promise of God made to our father in the faith, Abraham, and Isaac came from Abraham, and Israel came from Isaac, and the twelve patriarchs from Israel, and Jesus Christ the Son of David, the Root of Jesse, the Seed of Abraham, the Offspring of Eve that crushes the serpent's head.

If the question amounts to the Church being Israel, and therefore the Church is to be ruled by the former covenants which have served their purpose in bringing the Messiah into the world; then the answer is an absolute and unconditional No. That is the heresy of the Judaizers.

But if the question amounts to the Church being Israel in that all things are to be summed up in Christ to the glory of the Father, because in the end every knee will bow and tongue confess that Jesus is King Messiah, Israel's LORD, then yes, absolutely this is true. There is the one Olive Tree, there is a people whose very humanity is found in Jesus who is the New Adam into whose image we are to be conformed to.

For we do not bring sacrifices of bulls and lambs; but rather bring the sacrifices of praise, bearing ourselves--even our very bodies--to be living sacrifices to God. As we are called as priests to offer praise and our whole lives to the mission and work of Jesus Christ in the world as His disciples.

The Sabbatarian provides, at best, an idle, through destructive, distraction and at worst an idol, their own sacred golden calf that they bow before believing themselves righteous for their idolatry. Such is poison that no child of God should ever be made to drink down. For the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath, and our God and Lord, Jesus Christ, has proclaimed Himself Lord of the Sabbath. Our true sabbath is Jesus Christ, for He has called to Himself sinful wretches crushed beneath the weight of condemnation under the Law and the burden of death, to these He has said, "Come and I will give you rest" This is His Gospel. His Gospel is freedom from the condemnation that comes from the Law, it is freedom from the slavery of sin, death, hell, and the devil. Thus the one who is free in Christ is, indeed, free; and it is madness to abandon the freedom of the Son of God in order to return back to slavery. Hence the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews so strongly teaches his readers not to forsake their hope in Jesus Christ and return back to the former ways of Judaism.

Because for a Christian to abandon Christ and return again to that life they had before Christ--whether Jew or Pagan--is to leave the Land of Promise overflowing with milk and honey and return again to captivity in Egypt and Babylon.

-CryptoLutheran

Clare73 said:

Don't recall making that claim. . .please show where it is.

Click to expand...

You certainly offered up the implication HERE:

Clare73 said:

If it was a fulfillment of God's word, they obviously did, unless God is unjust.

Click to expand...

And Claimed you wouldn't argue with God about it HERE:

Clare73 said:

Are there still unfulfilled prohetic curses for them in the word of God?
If so, I'm not going to argue with God, are you?

Click to expand...

Clare73 said:

Acts 1:6 - no "millennial" here
Acts 3:19-21 - no "millennial reign" here
Luke 1:32-33 - that began with the resurrection
Matthew 24:30-31 - no "millennial reign" here

Are you talking about the church age--from the resurrection to the end of time?

Click to expand...

RickReads said:

All of those verses talk about an earthly kingdom that will be directly ruled by Jesus in the future.

Click to expand...

Acts 1:6 - That was the OT belief that the Messiah would come to restore Israel's glory under Solomon, which view Jesus corrected and made clear was not the plan of God for Israel--rejecting their attempts to make him such a king (John 6:15), that the temporal Messianic kingdom he came to set up and did set up (Matthew 12:28) was not an earthly kingdom (John 18:36) but a spiritual invisible kingdom within (Luke 17:21), an everlasting non-ending kingdom both temporal and eternal (Daniel 2:44-45).
Acts 1:6 does not present a future temporal millennial reign.

Acts 3:19-21 - Peter is calling to repentance the Jews who were guilty of murdering Jesus (Acts 3:13-14), so that they would not perish in their sin and would have peace with God at Jesus' soon second coming (even NT writers thought Jesus second coming would be in their lifetime), his having to remain in heaven until it was time for God to restore everything--the new creation (Romans 8:19-23), the new heavens and new earth, the home of righteousness (2 Peter 3:8-13)

Restoration in the NT means restoration of the original creation in the new creation (Matthew 17:11, 19:28 with 1 Corinthians 6:2-3; Ephesians 1:9-10), not restortion of Israel.
Israel was restored after Babylon (Nehemiah 12:43), and is a prophetic type/figure/pattern of the restoration of all creation in the NT (2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 6:15).
The fulfillment of the ages is in the church (1 Corinthians 10:11), not in a future restoration of Israel.

This notion of the restoration of Israel shifts the focus, emphasis and purpose of God from the excellence of his plan in Christ Jesus and his new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17, Galatians 6:15) the church--OT and NT saints--to a supposed plan for a future earthly restoration of Irael.
It sees the promise to Abraham of Genesis 12:3 (to be a blessing to all nations) to be fulfilled in a future restoration of Israel rather than in the promised Seed (Genesis 3:15; Acts 3:25-26; Galatians 3:8) Jesus Christ! (Romans 15:8)
It removes Jesus Christ from the center of God's plan to glorify his Son through the redeeming from this sinful mess of mankind a remnant for God's own treausre and inheritance,
and replaces God's plan for the glory of his Son with the glory of Israel. Anathema (Galatians 1:7-9).

Acts 3:19-21 does not present a future temporal millennial reign.

RickReads said:

All of those verses talk about an earthly kingdom that will be directly ruled by Jesus in the future.
Luke 1:32-33 - that began with the resurrection
Matthew 24:30-31 - no "millennial reign" here

Click to expand...

Luke 1:32-33 - "he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, his kingdom will never end."
If that is a promise of a future millennial reign, then we have two temporal everlasting Messianic kingdoms, because God already established a kingdom that will never end in Daniel 2:44-45 during the Roman empire. It is still in existence, always will be, and Jesus is reigning over that one as we speak.
And it is the house of Jacob, a spiritual kingdom--the house of Israel according to the promise made to Jacob, over which he reigns, not over Israel who chose to reject him.
Jesus didn't come 2,000 years ago to begin his reign over his kingdom more than 2,000 years later.
Luke 1:32-33 does not present a millennial reign.

Matthew 24:30-31 - refers to the second coming with its rapture at the end of time
in "the last day (John 6:39-40, 44, 54), the "day of the Lord" (1 Thessalonians 5:2,
1 Corinthians 1:8); i.e., the Final Judgment.

A future temporal "millennial reign" over Israel after the church has been raptured was not a teaching of the apostles. It is not in NT teaching and was never heard of in the church until it was introduced about 200 years ago.
Matthew 24:30-31 does not present a millennial reign.

The apostles nowhere present a millennial reign.

The authoritative teaching of the NT does not present a millennial reign.
That is a fiction of man, so suitable to his human fancy that he thinks it is a doctrine of God, and labors to show it so.

RickReads said:

Problem is, fulfillment theology only works as replacement theology because many prophecies concerning Israel haven't been fulfilled yet.

You have to either argue that God isn`t going to keep His promises or else argue that prophecy is all subject to interpretations to avoid the language of the text.

Click to expand...

Which does not take into account that the apostles Peter and Paul "avoided the language of the text" in their interpretation of Hosea 1:9, 2:23--the promise made to Israel is fulfilled in the Gentiles.
(Romans 9:24-26; 1 Peter 2:10)

Or that the writer of Hebrews "avoided the language of the text" in his interpretation of Jeremiah 31:31-34--the promise to Israel of a new covenant is fullfilled in the Gentile church, which is the true Israel. (Hebrews 8:6-13, Hebrews 10:15-18)

So here's a third option, and the one I choose:
All interpretion of prophetic riddles (Numbers 12:8) must be in agreement with authoritative NT teaching.
What does not agree with authoritatige NT teaching is misinterpretation, because it sets the word of God against itself in contradiction.

RickReads said:

The link below will take you to a wonderfully well written commentary on who the inheritors of the New Covenant are. I have to link this one because if I posted about it I would just plagiarize.

Inheriting Covenants

Click to expand...

Some issues there:
Where do we find "inheriting the covenent" in Scripture?
Scripture doesn't use that language.
Who came up with this notion?

"We" (Gentiles) were never in any covenant with God, either Abrahamic or Mosaic covenant.
So "we" did not break any covenant and deserve any covenant curses, just as
"we" were not under the Mosaic law and, therefore, not under the curse of the law.

Christ did not inherit the promises to Abraham, they were made to Abraham and to Christ only, his seed. The promises to Abraham and Christ are: blessing to the nations, land, seed.

All the promises to Abraham were made to Christ (Galatians 3:16) and come to us in Christ (Galatians 3:29), just as the Mosaic covenant with the nation Israel came to all in Israel at birth.

I don't see any point established.
Perhaps you can explain it to me.