Replacement Theology Refuted

[jgr]

Your point is God made a covenant with a mixed multitude. My point is God made a covenant with the the COI only. Here in Ex 14:2 is the first reference in my string of references showing God told Moses to speak to Israel only. I don't know how many passages I need to prove the point.

2 Speak unto the children of Israel, that they turn and encamp before Pihahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, over against Baalzephon: before it shall ye encamp by the sea.

Weren't the COI's progenitors already genetically mixed in Genesis 17:12?

They were. ("...not of thy seed.")

And God extended His covenant to all of them, irrespective of ethnicity, beginning at that time.

Over time, they would have become increasingly mixed through continuing intermarriage.

By the time they became the COI, there was no unmixing what was already mixed. But God still extended His covenant to those of them who were faithful and obedient, ethnic and non-ethnic alike.

They would continue being increasingly mixed over the entirety of their history. But only the faithful and obedient among them would be God's Chosen Covenant People. (e.g. 1 Kings 19:18). The unfaithful and disobedient would be recurrently slain (e.g. Numbers 16:49).

Because the only covenant DNA that God recognizes is spiritual DNA.

Two chromosomes.

Faith and obedience.

 

[Dave L]

Where? It's your issue. You provide the evidence.

If you read through Genesis you will see Moses using Hebrews and Israel interchangeably.

 

[Dave L]

Where?

It's there if you look for it.

 

[ace of hearts]

Weren't the COI's progenitors already genetically mixed in Genesis 17:12?

They were. ("...not of thy seed.")

And God extended His covenant to all of them, irrespective of ethnicity, beginning at that time.

Over time, they would have become increasingly mixed through continuing intermarriage.

By the time they became the COI, there was no unmixing what was already mixed. But God still extended His covenant to those of them who were faithful and obedient, ethnic and non-ethnic alike.

They would continue being increasingly mixed over the entirety of their history. But only the faithful and obedient among them would be God's Chosen Covenant People. (e.g. 1 Kings 19:18). The unfaithful and disobedient would be recurrently slain (e.g. Numbers 16:49).

Because the only covenant DNA that God recognizes is spiritual DNA.

Two chromosomes.

Faith and obedience.

OK some will go to any lengths to void the Scripture and promote their own stuff they like.

 

[ace of hearts]

If you read through Genesis you will see Moses using Hebrews and Israel interchangeably.

You still seem to be saying all Hebrews are Israelites.

 

[ace of hearts]

It's there if you look for it.

Tel me why I need to look for information to support your thesis.

 

[Dave L]

Tel me why I need to look for information to support your thesis.

It depends on how badly you want to know.

 

[Dave L]

You still seem to be saying all Hebrews are Israelites.

Can you show any difference in Moses' use of the terms?

 

[Grip Docility]

Can you show any difference in Moses' use of the terms?

For starters, Moses is believed to have authored the Pentateuch and did not introduce the term Israelite, until after Jacob became Israel, after Joseph became a high official in Egypt... and as for the term “Israelite”... surprise.... Moses didn’t introduce the term. Moses never used it. It isn’t brought up until 2 Samuel 17:25

Now, the term “Israel” is used first in Genesis 32:28, by what is widely accepted to be the “Pre-Incarnate Christophany”. (Verified in 1 Corinthians 10:4)

So... your premise is with the word Hebrew?

Well, the land Promise was first given to Abraham, in reference to his Seeds. Note, this is a different usage than the Seed reference Paul quotes in Galatians.

Genesis 21:10-12 is quoted in Galatians, and cites that Abraham’s offspring shall be named through Isaac.

Note, this means not through Abraham, and in Pauline Epistle, it has two inferences towards Jacob and the future BOC.

Genesis 17:7 almost validates your claim, but it is in reference to all of Abraham’s offspring, and is separate from Paul’s usage in Galatians 3:16, which specifically binds to Genesis 22:18, which uses “Seed” singular, as Paul did.

Genesis 12:7 and Genesis 17:7 is a genetic promise, while Genesis 22:18 is a Spiritual promise.

As for the word “Hebrew”... used towards Abraham in Genesis 14:13... “The word “Hebrew” in the Hebrew language is עברי (Ivrie). The root letters are used to mean cross over, or pass through.“ ~ (https://www.oneforisrael.org/bible-based-teaching-from-israel/what-does-the-word-hebrew-mean/)

Israel ~ on the other hand, means {Contend(ed)(s) with God}.

Upon exhaustive study, it becomes clear you seem to not be getting the idea that Abraham wasn’t named Israel, but was cited as one who “passes through/cross over”, from carnal obedience to Faith.

Hebrews 11 would verify this, as well as Galatians.

The ordinances sealed specifically to Israel are bound in Deuteronomy 31:26, and are a far cry from crossing over from Obedience to Faith. Now you can argue that I’m wrong here, but Galatians 4 backs my premise about crossing over to Faith, pretty solid.

Where does this leave the discussion, now?

Your move.

 

[Dave L]

For starters, Moses is believed to have authored the Pentateuch and did not introduce the term Israelite, until after Jacob became Israel, after Joseph became a high official in Egypt... and as for the term “Israelite”... surprise.... Moses never used it. It isn’t brought up until 2 Samuel 17:22

Now, the term “Israel” is used first in Genesis 32:28, by what is widely accepted to be the “Pre-Incarnate Christophany”. (Verified in 1 Corinthians 10:4)

So... your premise is with the word Hebrew?

Well, the land Promise was first given to Abraham, in reference to his Seeds. Note, this is a different usage than the Seed reference Paul quotes in Galatians.

Genesis 21:10-12 is quoted in Galatians, and cites that Abraham’s offspring shall be named through Isaac.

Note, this means not through Abraham, and in Pauline Epistle, it has two inferences towards Jacob and the future BOC.

Genesis 17:7 almost validates your claim, but it is in reference to all of Abraham’s offspring, and is separate from Paul’s usage in Galatians 3:16, which specifically binds to Genesis 22:18, which uses “Seed” singular, as Paul did.

Genesis 12:7 and Genesis 17:7 is a genetic promise, while Genesis 22:18 is a Spiritual promise.

As for the word “Hebrew”... used towards Abraham in Genesis 14:13... “The word “Hebrew” in the Hebrew language is עברי (Ivrie). The root letters are used to mean cross over, or pass through.“ ~ (https://www.oneforisrael.org/bible-based-teaching-from-israel/what-does-the-word-hebrew-mean/)

Israel ~ on the other hand, means {Contend(ed)(s) with God}.

Upon exhaustive study, it becomes clear you seem to not be getting the idea that Abraham wasn’t named Israel, but was cited as one who “passes through/cross over”, from carnal obedience to Faith.

Hebrews 11 would verify this, as well as Galatians.

The ordinances sealed specifically to Israel are bound in Deuteronomy 31:26, and are a far cry from crossing over from Obedience to Faith. Now you can argue that I’m wrong here, but Galatians 4 backs my premise about crossing over to Faith, pretty solid.

Where does this leave the discussion, now?

Your move.

Moses mentions both Hebrews and Israel in Genesis as synonyms.

 

[Grip Docility]

Moses mentions both Hebrews and Israel in Genesis as synonyms.

Now you’re grasping at straws as Israelites refers to the specific people, while Israel refers to the descendants of Jacob.

Ofcoarse Israelites are Hebrews! We haven’t argued this.

This issue at hand is that you’re trying to force that context into Abraham, while he in no way is a descendant of Jacob, unless “Back to the Future Part Pentateuch” was a thing, and still would be a very odd matter, of Jerry Springer Proportions.

Synonyms in context work, but pulling that text, Exegetically, isn’t what is happening. You’re using it Eisegetically!

 

[Dave L]

Now you’re grasping at straws as Israelites refers to the specific people, while Israel refers to the descendants of Jacob.

Ofcoarse Israelites are Hebrews! We haven’t argued this.

This issue at hand is that you’re trying to force that context into Abraham, while he in no way is a descendant of Jacob, unless “Back to the Future Part Pentateuch” was a thing, and still would be a very odd matter, of Jerry Springer Proportions.

Synonyms in context work, but pulling that text, Exegetically, isn’t what is happening. You’re using it Eisegetically!

We still see Moses using the terms interchangeably.

 

[Grip Docility]

I fully understand Israelites can be used synonymously with Hebrews, but context is king, here.

Point... a group of firemen that are also policemen could also have this exact idea used.

But firemen that aren’t policemen couldn’t enjoy this same synonymous bliss!

 

[Dave L]

I fully understand Israelites can be used synonymously with Hebrews, but context is king, here.

Point... a group of fireman that are also policeman could also have this exact idea used.

But fireman that aren’t policeman couldn’t enjoy this same synonymous bliss!

But Jesus = Abraham'a seed which was also the Hebrews and Israel in the OT.

 

[Grip Docility]

We still see Moses using the terms interchangeably.

Moses called Israelites Hebrews! In penning Genesis, where Abraham is concerned, he had the opportunity to do the same, but didn’t.

We are called “god’s” in Psalms... according to Jesus... see where I’m going with this?
The logic doesn’t work in Exegesis or Systematic, Exhaustive extrapolation!

 

[Dave L]

Moses called Israelites Hebrews! In penning Genesis, where Abraham is concerned, he had the opportunity to do the same, but didn’t.

We are called “God’s” in Psalms... according to Jesus... see where I’m going with this?
Mute logic doesn’t work in Exegesis or Systematic, Exhaustive extrapolation!

We still have a big problem "Houston". Jesus is Abraham's seed which is also called Israel and the Hebrews in the OT.

 

[Grip Docility]

But Jesus = Abraham'a seed which was also the Hebrews and Israel in the OT.

Abraham has two seeds that are referred to in Galatians 4.

At no point is one called the other and neither of them were Jacob.

Jacob was Isaac’s offspring. There’s a reason Exegesis is imperative verses Eisegesis!

 

[Dave L]

Abraham has two seeds that are referred to in Galatians 4.

At no point is one called the other and neither of them were Jacob.

Jacob was Isaac’s offspring. There’s a resin Exegesis is imperative verses Eisegesis!

Just believe Paul. It will all clear up for you.

 

[Grip Docility]

We still have a big problem "Houston". Jesus is Abraham's seed which is also called Israel and the Hebrews in the OT.

No Problem, Houston.

Abraham = Father of Faith
Moses = Messanger/angel/Keeper of the Law
Jacob = Israel

Where’s the rocket trajectory missing the mark, Dave?

 

[Grip Docility]

Just believe Paul. It will all clear up for you.

I do! That’s my point! Romans 9, Romans 10 and Romans 11 are painfully explicit!

I have yet to see Romans 11 exegetically extrapolated by a Supersessionist in honesty or clarity. It becomes a nightmare by verse 25 to the RT believer!