God's unconditional promises to the ancient nation of Israel

Biblewriter · Sep 8, 2021

Guojing said:
He is determined to reject whatever you say, so it doesn't really matter how you explain. =)

I am aware of that. He simply does not WANT to know the truth.

Clare73 · Sep 9, 2021

Biblewriter said:
My demonstration of this was the multi-part OP of this thread.

Addressed. . .post #8.

Biblewriter · Sep 9, 2021

, member: 309690"]"After the Lord returns" is your personal interpretation of prophecy, it is not in the land promise made personally to each Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.Fulfilled in the return from exile under Ezra.[/QUOTE]

No, the fact that this gathering will be AFTER the Lord comes "with fire, to render Hos anger with fury, and His rebuke with flames of fire" and AFTER Armageddon, which is described, although not named, is clearly stated in Isaiah 66:15-20.

[QUOTE="Clare73, post: 76099884
Ephraim refers to the ten northern tribes, and is also referred to as Israel.
There is no prophecy that any particular group will return, nor that any particular number will return. The prophecy is all in terms of Israel and Judah and, therefore, is fulfilled if only a remnant of each returns, which they did. . .just as the promises to Israel in Romans 11:1-6 are fulfilled in a remnant (Romans 11:25).
God fulfilling his prophecie to Israel in a remnant is not a new thing.[/QUOTE]

Ezekiel 36:1-11 EXPLICITLY says that this will involve absolutely all of them. For doubling the Hebrew word "kol," which translates literally as "all," means ABSOLUTELY ALL.

[QUOTE="Clare73, post: 76099884
In that case, it cannot be literal for either Israel or Judah, for "all the house" was no longer living, many generations having already died of each.
And not being literal, the prophecy is fulfilled if only a remnant returns, which again is not a new thing.
Two things:
the promise was that the mountains shall produce fruit, not that they shall be inhabited, and
we have no way of knowing if those mountains were inhabited or not, nor the duration of such.
Nor can we overstress the fact that God had explicitly promised basically this same plot of real estate personally to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob--each individually, and none of them possessed a foot of ground there (Acts 7:5), because, as we learn in Hebrews 11:13-16, the promise was not of physical land, but of spiritual land in the heavenly country, the heavenly city; i.e., the explicit promise was not literal.[/QUOTE]

Here, you are using YOUR INTERPRETATION of the words of the prophecy as a lame excuse to deny what it EXPLICITLY says. Both Isaiah 4:3-4 and Zechariah 12:10-14 clearly explain that the meaning was all of them that had survived to that time.

And, contrary to your claim, Ezekiel 36:10-11 EXPLICITLY use the word "inhabited."

[QUOTE="Clare73, post: 76099884
And as the understanding is incorrect that the land promised to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the land promise of Genesis was literal, so the understanding is incorrect that the prophecy of Ezekiel is literal.
"Explicit" is not the same as "literal." The land promise made to the patriarchs personally was most "explict," but it was not "literal."
And it is the same here.[/QUOTE]
Here, you are calling Gd a liar. For you are claiming that He will not do what He EXPLICITLY said He would do.

[QUOTE="Clare73, post: 76099884
You should familiarize yourself with Hebrews 11:13-16 where, the land promise made personally each to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Genesis 17:8, Genesis 26:3, 28:4, Genesis 35:12) to specific land--of which they never possessed a foot of ground (Acts 7:5), was fulfilled in the heavenly land, heavenly city.[/QUOTE]

YOU neglected Hebrews 11:8, which CLEARLY says, "By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to the place which he would receive AS AN INHERITANCE. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. Hebrews 11:8 Abraham Isaac, And Jacob most certainly DID receive this land AS AN INHERITANCE for their children.

[QUOTE="Clare73, post: 76099884
Oh, but it is. . .in NT teaching, where

the new creation which is the church is "the Israel of God" (Galatians 6:15-16),
those who obey God's commands are Jews inwardly by heart circumcision (Romans 2:25-29),
those in Christ are Abraham's seed (Galatians 3:29), all of which through Isaac is Israel, &
the Israel and Judah with whom the New Covenant is made is the NT church (Hebrews 8:8).

The NT presents a Fulfillment Theology.

"Israel of God" is close enough (Galatians 6:16).[/QUOTE]

Galatians 6:16 DISTINCTLY differentiates between the two groups mentioned, with the words "and upon" before saying "the Israel of God."

[QUOTE="Clare73, post: 76099884
Prophecy is subject to more than one interpretation.
And that promise was fufilled under Solomon (1 Kings 4:21, 1 Kings 4:24-25).

We have no Biblical warrant for a second "fulfilling."[/QUOTE]

Your claim that ANY of this has already been fulfilled is manifestly false.

ALL of them NEVER returned. Ephraim and Judah have NEVER been reunited, Israel has NEVER had the borders EXPLICITLY promised in Ezekiel 47. And each of "the twelve tribes of Israel" have NEVER receiver the plots of real estate so explicitly promised in Ezekiel 48.

So EVERY claim you made in post #8 was MANIFESTLY incorrect,

Clare73 · Sep 9, 2021

Guojing said:
He is determined to reject whatever you say, so it doesn't really matter how you explain. =)

Or. . .his personal interpretation of prophetic riddles (Numbers 12:8) can't be explained in agreement with authoritative NT teaching.

Biblewriter · Sep 9, 2021

Clare73 said:
Or. . .his personal interpretation of prophetic riddles (Numbers 12:8) can't be explained in agreement with authoritative NT teaching.

YOU are the one who wants to INTERPRET the prophecies. I do not INTERPRET them. I simply BELIEVE them.

Clare73 · Sep 9, 2021

Biblewriter said:
...

Clare73 said:
"After the Lord returns" is your personal interpretation of prophecy, it is not in the land promise made personally to each Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Fulfilled in the return from exile under Ezra.

No, the fact that this gathering will be AFTER the Lord comes "with fire, to render Hos anger with fury, and His rebuke with flames of fire" and AFTER Armageddon, which is described, although not named, is clearly stated in Isaiah 66:15-20.

More personal interpretation of prophetic riddles (Numbers 12:8)
linking Ezekiel 36:1-11 with Isaiah 66:15-20.

Clare73 said:
Ephraim refers to the ten northern tribes, and is also referred to as Israel.
There is no prophecy that any particular group will return, nor that any particular number will return. The prophecy is all in terms of Israel and Judah and, therefore, is fulfilled if only a remnant of each returns, which they did. . .just as the promises to Israel in Romans 11:1-6 are fulfilled in a remnant (Romans 11:25).
God fulfilling his prophecie to Israel in a remnant is not a new thing.

Ezekiel 36:1-11 EXPLICITLY says that this will involve absolutely all of them.
For doubling the Hebrew word "kol," which translates literally as "all," means ABSOLUTELY ALL.

Same argument you made for fulfillment of the return from exile, which does not take into account God's fulfillment of his promises to Israel (Romans 11:29) in a remnant (Romans 11:5).

In what verse of Ezekiel 36:1-11 is this "all" used?

Clare73 said:
And not being literal, the prophecy is fulfilled if only a remnant returns, which again is not a new thing.
Two things: the promise was that the mountains shall produce fruit, not that they shall be inhabited, and
we have no way of knowing if those mountains were inhabited or not, nor the duration of such.
Nor can we overstress the fact that God had explicitly promised basically this same plot of real estate personally to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob--each individually, and none of them possessed a foot of ground there (Acts 7:5), because, as we learn in Hebrews 11:13-16, the promise was not of physical land, but of spiritual land in the heavenly country, the heavenly city; i.e., the explicit promise was not literal.

Here, you are using YOUR INTERPRETATION of the words of the prophecy as a lame excuse to deny what it EXPLICITLY says. Both Isaiah 4:3-4 and Zechariah 12:10-14 clearly explain that the meaning was all of them that had survived to that time.

That is the interpretation of Acts 7:5, which makes it my interpretation also.

And, contrary to your claim, Ezekiel 36:10-11 EXPLICITLY use the word "inhabited."

Which a remnant can do. . .irrelevant.

Clare73 said:
And as the understanding is incorrect that the land promised to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the land promise of Genesis was literal, so the understanding is incorrect that the prophecy of Ezekiel is literal.
"Explicit" is not the same as "literal." The land promise made to the patriarchs personally was most "explict," but it was not "literal."
And it is the same here.

Here, you are calling Gd a liar. For you are claiming that He will not do what He EXPLICITLY said He would do.

So does Acts 7:5, "They never possessed a foot of ground there," according to you.
Litigated in post #8.

Hebrews 11:13-16 addresses precisely that question in showing that God is not ashamed to be called their God because he did fulfill his promise of an everlasting possession in the heavenly city of the heavenly land.
Actually, according to you, it would be Acts 7:5 that "calls God a liar" for not doing what he said he would do in Genesis 17:8.

However, it's not Acts 7:5 that calls God a liar, it is you calling God a liar, because what he did does not agree with your personal interpretation of prophetic riddles (Numbers 12:8).

Clare73 said:
You should familiarize yourself with Hebrews 11:13-16 where, the explicit land promise made personally each to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Genesis 17:8, Genesis 26:3, 28:4, Genesis 35:12) to specific land--of which they never possessed a foot of ground (Acts 7:5), was fulfilled in the heavenly land, heavenly city.

Prophecy is not necessarily literal, it is figurative.

You neglected Hebrews 11:8, which CLEARLY says, "By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to the place which he would receive AS AN INHERITANCE. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. Hebrews 11:8 Abraham Isaac, And Jacob most certainly DID receive this land AS AN INHERITANCE for their children.

Disguised obfuscation. . .one more time. . .they were each promised it for themselves, personally: "you, and your descendants" (Genesis 17:9, Genesis 26:3, Genesis 35:12), and "they (each) never possessed a foot of ground there" (Acts 7:5).
Not all is literal in the promises of God.

The NT teaches that God fulfilled the promise of an everlasting possession to them (Genesis 17:8, Genesis 48:4) in the heavenly city of the heavenly land (Hebrews 11:13-16).

Your personal interpretation of prophetic riddles (Numbers 12:8) is not in agreement with authoritative NT teaching.

And this notion, which is nothing but mere human reasoning, leads to a seriously false conclusion, that “the church” is “spiritual Israel,” (a term found nowhere in the entire Bible)

Clare73 said:
Oh, but it is. . .in NT teaching, where
the new creation which is the church is "the Israel of God" (Galatians 6:15-16),
those who obey God's commands are Jews inwardly by heart circumcision (Romans 2:25-29),
those in Christ are Abraham's seed (Galatians 3:29), all of which through Isaac is Israel, &
the Israel and Judah with whom the New Covenant is made is the NT church (Hebrews 8:8).
The NT presents a Fulfillment Theology.

Galatians 6:16 DISTINCTLY differentiates between the two groups mentioned, with the words "and upon" before saying "the Israel of God

Clare73 said:
"Israel of God" is close enough (Galatians 6:16).

Prophecy is subject to more than one interpretation.
And that original land promise to Abraham was fufilled under Solomon (1 Kings 4:21, 1 Kings 4:24-25).

We have no Biblical warrant for a second "fulfilling."

Your claim that ANY of this has already been fulfilled is manifestly false.

ALL of them NEVER returned. Ephraim and Judah have NEVER been reunited, Israel has NEVER had the borders EXPLICITLY promised in Ezekiel 47.

Wrong. . .

Under Solomon they inhabited the land to the borders (1 Kings 4:21, 24-25; cf 2 Samuel 8:3) originally promised to Abraham (Genesis 15:18-21; Deuteronomy 1:7-11, 11:24; Joshua 1:4), borders from Egypt to the Ephrates River.
The land promise to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was fuflilled under Solomon.

And each of "the twelve tribes of Israel" have NEVER receiver the plots of real estate so explicitly promised in Ezekiel 48.

Uh. . .Ezekiel was written 850 years after Joshua and Eleazar divided the land.
A little late for a re-do.

It's not about Canaan. . .nowhere in Ezekiel 45-48 is the city called Jerusalem, or the land called Canaan.
Ezekiel is not about the old Israel which is done away with, it's about all things being made new, being restored in the new creation, the church (2 Corinthians 5:17).

Ezekiel has nothing to do with the land promise to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, which portions were assigned by lot, which is of the Lord (Proverbs 16:33), and the promise of the land fulfilled, possessed and occupied to the borders of the promise to Abraham. . .over and done. . .fine.

I see the prophetic riddle of Ezekiel in the light of the NT, as about the the two themes of the Bible--judgment and restoration;
judgment on the old creation and restoration in the new creation--i.e., God's plan for mankind;
the sovereignty of God revealing himself
in the judgments he executes (Psalms 9:16):
1) fall of Jerusalem (chps 1-24) and
2) destruction of the nations (chps 25-32),
as a type of God's wrathful judgment of sin in the rebellious, obstinate, stubborn (2:3-4) fallen human race,

and in restoration:
the restoration of Israel (chps 33-48),
as a type of the restoration of the original creation in the new creation, where again we see types of
1) God's purpose in the church (chp 36:16-38)

2) restoration of original creation in new creation (chp 37)--in
a) new life of rebirth (1-14) and
b) unity of Jews and Gentiles in the church (Ephesians 2:15)--(15-28)

3) NEW creation, in the church (2 Corinthians 5:17)-(chps 40-48)--in the
a) NEW Temple, type of the church, the body of Christ (chps 40-44), the
b) NEW Jerusalem, type of the church the bride of Christ (Revelation 1:9-10)--(chp 45-47:12), and the
c) NEW Israel of God (Galatians 6:16), type of the church, the people of God (1 Peter 2:10)--(47:13-48:5).

Unfulfilled prophecy is subject to more than one interpretation, and this is another interpretation, which enjoys agreement with authoritative NT teaching, which yours does not, yours being in disagreement with the fulfillment of the land promise to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the heavenly city of the heavenly land, rather than in the earthly land of Canaan (Hebrews 11:13-16; Acts 7:5).

So EVERY claim you made in post #8 was MANIFESTLY incorrect.

Not in light of the above. . .where they all are Biblically correct.

It is your interpretation of prophetic riddles which requires denial of NT teaching in Acts 7:5; Hebrews 11:13-16, which show that not all promises and prophecies are literal, as you insist they are and (mis)interpret as such.

Clare73 · Sep 9, 2021

Biblewriter said:
YOU are the one who wants to INTERPRET the prophecies. I do not INTERPRET them. I simply BELIEVE them.

You believe OT prophetic riddles (Numbers 12:8), but you don't believe NT plain teaching
(Acts 7:5; Hebrews 11:13-16), which shows that not all promises and prophecies are literal,
as you insist they are and (mis)interpret as such, as in Ezekiel.

Guojing · Sep 9, 2021

Clare73 said:
Or. . .his personal interpretation of prophetic riddles (Numbers 12:8) can't be explained in agreement with authoritative NT teaching.

Learn to distinguish between your interpretation of scripture, and what scripture says.

Obviously, you should choose to follow your interpretation instead of others. But never forget its only your interpretation.

Biblewriter · Sep 9, 2021

Clare73 said:
You believe OT prophetic riddles (Numbers 12:8), but you don't believe NT plain teaching
(Acts 7:5; Hebrews 11:13-16), which shows that not all promises and prophecies are literal,
as you insist they are and (mis)interpret as such.

The OT prophecies I have quoted are NOT riddles. They are all clearly stated in plain words, and most of them are explicitly stated.

But the NT passages you keep quoting never, even once, actually SAY what you claim they MEAN.

YOU are the one INTERPRETING scripture, I am only pointing out what it EXPLICITLY says.

But since you continue to REFUSE to believe what the Bible EXPLICITLY says, I see no point in continuing this useless exchange.

over and out

Clare73 · Sep 9, 2021

Guojing said:
Learn to distinguish between your interpretation of scripture, and what scripture says.

Obviously, you should choose to follow your interpretation instead of others. But never forget its only your interpretation.

Get up to speed. . .Acts 7:5 is not my "interpretation," it is a simple statement of plain fact, which fact is being denied here.

Clare73 · Sep 9, 2021

Biblewriter said:
The OT prophecies I have quoted are NOT riddles. They are all clearly stated in plain words, and most of them are explicitly stated.

But the NT passages you keep quoting never, even once, actually SAY what you claim they MEAN.

YOU are the one INTERPRETING scripture, I am only pointing out what it EXPLICITLY says.

But since you continue to REFUSE to believe what the Bible EXPLICITLY says, I see no point in continuing this useless exchange.

over and out

See Acts 7:5.

Litigated in post #8. . .and re-litigated in post #206.

Enough already. . .

Biblewriter · Sep 10, 2021

Clare73 said:
See Acts 7:5.

Litigated in post #8. . .and re-litigated in post #206.

Enough already. . .

There is a vast difference between "litigated' and "answered." In post #203 I PROVED that every claim you made in post #8 was incorrect, and in Post #206, all you did war repeat these same arguments, that had already been disproved.

Your selective use of Acts 7:5 proves your intellectual dishonesty. For the very next versE, Acts 7:6 explains that these same patriarchs had been told that the promise was not for themselves personally, but for their descendants. And, after tracing through what happened to their descendants, verse 17 BEGINS with the statement "But when the time of the promise drew near which God had sworn to Abraham... (Acts 7:17)

So every argument you have made here has been proven to be incorrect. I have proven, BOTH that God EXPLICITLY made these promises to the nation of Israel, not in "riddles," but in clear, plain words, AND that not even one of the New Testament passages you have given to try to disprove that, actually SAYS what you imagine it MEANS.

You do not have even the imitation of a leg to stand on. So, I repeat, over and out. Your past performance indicates that you will stubbornly refuse to admit defeat. But I have other things to do, So I do not intend to even answer any more of your cavils.

Clare73 · Sep 10, 2021

Clare73 · Sep 10, 2021

Biblewriter said:
There is a vast difference between "litigated' and "answered." In post #203 I PROVED that every claim you made in post #8 was incorrect, and in Post #206, all you did war repeat these same arguments, that had already been disproved.

Your selective use of Acts 7:5 proves your intellectual dishonesty. For the very next versE, Acts 7:6 explains that these same patriarchs had been told that the promise was not for themselves personally, but for their descendants.

Physician, heal thyself.

Acts 7:6 states nothing about the promise, it refers only to slavery in Egypt, while Acts 7:5 states, "God promised him that he and his descendants after him would possess the land."

Talk about intellectual dishonesty. . .

Enough already.

Biblical facts seems to be a "problem" for you, at least the ones that contradict your theology. You maintain that
1) the land promise to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob personally was literally fulfilled in earthly land--WRONG!
(See Acts 7:5; Hebrews 11:13-16)

2) Israel never occupied Canaan to the borders of the origianl land promise--WRONG!
(see 1 Kings 4:21, 24-25)

3) Acts 7:6 states the patriarchs had been told that the promise was not for themselves personally, but for their descendants--WRONG!
(Acts 7:6 states nothing about the land promise, while Acts 7:5 precisely states the land promise was to Abraham.)

Has this kind of sloppy scholarhship always worked for you?

BABerean2 · Sep 16, 2021

Biblewriter said:
Yiu have the right to INTRPRET scripture as you please. But you do not have the right to pretend that your INTERPRETATIONS are what the Bible teaches.

Your INTERPRETATIONS flatly contradict what the scriptures REPEATEDLY and EXPLICITLY say, in plain. clear words.

Jas 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
Jas 1:2 My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
Jas 1:3 Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.

.

Biblewriter · Sep 16, 2021

BABerean2 said:
Jas 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
Jas 1:2 My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
Jas 1:3 Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.

.

The word "brethren" does not necessarily mean a follower of Christ. For when peter began to preach to the unbelieving Jews in Acgts 2, he began by saying,
"Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:" (Acts 2:14) and then, a few verses later, he said, "Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day." (Acts 2:29) And he concluded by saying, "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ." (Acts 2:36)

So there can be zero doubt that here, Peter called the unbelieving Jews "brethren."

BABerean2 · Sep 16, 2021

Biblewriter said:
The word "brethren" does not necessarily mean a follower of Christ. For when peter began to preach to the unbelieving Jews in Acgts 2, he began by saying,
"Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:" (Acts 2:14) and then, a few verses later, he said, "Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day." (Acts 2:29) And he concluded by saying, "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ." (Acts 2:36)

So there can be zero doubt that here, Peter called the unbelieving Jews "brethren."

If you ignore the words "your faith" in the passage, maybe you can make your explanation of the passage work.

However, how would an unbiased witness read the passage knowing that the words "your faith" are in the next verse?

Is this the kind of logic required to make Dispensational Theology work?

.

Biblewriter · Sep 16, 2021

BABerean2 said:
If you ignore the words "your faith" in the passage, maybe you can make your explanation of the passage work.

However, how would an unbiased witness read the passage knowing that the words "your faith" are in the next verse?

Is this the kind of logic required to make Dispensational Theology work?

.

Actually, it is necessary to wrest scripture to make your "theology" work.

This is very clearly NOT a statement that all of "the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad" Are "brethren" in Christ, for in chapter 4, this epistle says to those to whom it s addressed, "Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up." (James 4:8-10)

BABerean2 · Sep 16, 2021

Biblewriter said:
Actually, it is necessary to wrest scripture to make your "theology" work.

This is very clearly NOT a statement that all of "the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad" Are "brethren" in Christ, for in chapter 4, this epistle says to those to whom it s addressed, "Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up." (James 4:8-10)

Are you claiming the letter James wrote was not addressed to the Church?

Are you claiming Christians no longer sin, even though Paul had to correct Peter in the Book of Galatians?

.

Biblewriter · Sep 16, 2021

BABerean2 said:
Are you claiming the letter James wrote was not addressed to the Church?

Are you claiming Christians no longer sin, even though Paul had to correct Peter in the Book of Galatians?

.

James 1:1 EXPLICITLY says whom it was addressed to. Later portions of the epistle make it obvious that he meant those among these twelve tribes who were believers. But it was ONLY addressed to “the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad.”

This is most certainly NOT a statement that even implies that the church is Israel. THAT conclusion comes ONLY from your wresting of scripture.

God's unconditional promises to the ancient nation of Israel

Senior Member

Blood-bought

Senior Member

Blood-bought

Senior Member

Blood-bought

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Blood-bought

Blood-bought

Senior Member

Blood-bought

Blood-bought

Newbie

Senior Member

Newbie

Senior Member

Newbie

Senior Member

Similar threads