At no time did God ever "place the fulfillment of His promise on sinful man, Israel".
That fulfillment was ever and always realized and fulfilled in His faithful and obedient covenant-keeping remnant within Israel.
They never disappeared from within Israel. God always protected and preserved them. He never "wiped" them. They did not rebel.
They were the true Israel, identified not by physical DNA, but by the spiritual DNA of faith and obedience.
They were the sole and exclusive Chosen People of God.
Dispensationalism depends for its survival and existence upon its obdurate refusal to differentiate between physical DNA and spiritual DNA as God's only criterion for identifying His Chosen People.
That refusal must ultimately and inevitably doom it, as the Church once again begins to recognize and recover its divine calling and destiny as the sole and exclusive Chosen People of God.
In whom "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28)
That is not the way you determine context. This is completely illogical. Just because He was speaking to His disciples doesn't mean what He said only applied to Israel. Do you think everything He said to the disciples only applied to Israel? If not then why would you assume that Matthew 5:5 only is speaking of meek Israelites inheriting the earth?
Jesus was speaking to the Jewish Rabbi Nicodemus when He said this:
John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
So, since Jesus was speaking to a rabbi of Israel there, does that mean John 3:16 only applies to the people of Israel?
So are you saying that God made a mistake by making a new nation and so now discards them but lets the Gentile nations inherit the new earth.
`And the nations of those who are saved shall walk in its light...`(Rev. 21: 12)
You do not understand the view I hold for it is not exactly like what you know as `Dispensationalism.` Remember we both agree that the `wedding` is ON and earth and AFTER the trib. See those are differences.
I am not rejecting and avoiding discussing your scriptures it is just that we are coming from different points of view and need to find what we agree on and go from there. We are discussing various points that are based on other points which we haven`t clarified.
Thus said since we both agree that the `wedding` is on earth and AFTER the trib, perhaps we can go on from there. We both also agree that the Lord then returns. From there we differ. So may I ask you -
Where do you see Christ ruling and reigning from at that time?
And where do you see Christ ruling and reigning then?
The title `Lamb of God,` is Christ, we both agree. It shows His sacrificial heart and the sacrifice He did for sin. It also reveals the true sacrifice, Christ, whereas Israel sacrificed lambs in their tabernacle & temple rituals, which were a type of Christ to come.
As to the `marriage,` glad you don`t take it literally, but what does it mean to you spiritually?
I see God`s people from what ever century as part of His family. And as I`ve said before in families you have different inheritances. And these are all to do with Christ`s rulership in the different realms that He made for Himself.
`For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.` (Col. 1: 16)
If the marriage is not literal how can it happen on physical earth literally at a certain time?As to the `marriage,` glad you don`t take it literally, but what does it mean to you spiritually?
So God made a new nation and expected sinful man to fulfil His laws and when they didn`t He discarded them?
Do you understand the difference between the Baal worshipers and the faithful remnant in Romans 11:1-5?
Have you cut 1 John 2:22-23, and 2 John 1:7-10, and Romans 2:28-29, and Titus 3:9, and Revelation 2:9, and Revelation 3:9, and Revelation 11:8, out of your Bible?
.
He established a new nation.
He granted it free will.
He blessed the faithful and obedient.
He punished the unfaithful and disobedient.
What is the mistake?
The marriage union is the consummation. It is when we meet Him the air in order to inherit to new perfect earth.
If the marriage is not literal how can it happen on physical earth literally at a certain time?
Yes the individuals. So are you saying that God can not yet turn His nation, Israel to Himself, as a nation?
Do you understand the difference between the Baal worshipers and the faithful remnant in Romans 11:1-5?
Have you cut 1 John 2:22-23, and 2 John 1:7-10, and Romans 2:28-29, and Titus 3:9, and Revelation 2:9, and Revelation 3:9, and Revelation 11:8, out of your Bible?
.
Of course He could. But they will not hold a superior position over the rest of us. They must embrace Christ and join the NT Church.
Racial favoritism is over in the New Testament. The whole theocratic focus on Israel / Jerusalem / temple has ended. The land focus of the old covenant is totally gone in the new covenant to focus on the whole globe. Jesus revealed the enormity of the change that was coming throughout His earthly ministry.
The Lord frequently called out the spiritual impotence of national Israel by way of symbol and by way of a parable. In Luke 13:6-9 He used the fig tree to symbolize natural Israel’s demise. He taught: “A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it: And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.”
Contained within these comments was proof that major change was coming. Here Christ is speaking of Israel’s lack of fruitlessness as a fig tree. He presents this as the reason why the fig tree must be cut down. Here, He is referring to how the nation generally rebelled against His message of salvation and hence brought forth no fruit acceptable unto God. That ministry lasted 3 ½ years on this earth and culminated in the Jews crucifying the Messiah. In the parable Christ refers to the length of His ministry.
Yes the individuals. So are you saying that God can not yet turn His nation, Israel to Himself, as a nation?
We discussed Rom. 11: 1 - 5 & saw that Israel as a nation did not obtain what they sought. However reading further on we know that because of Christ they will turn to Him.
`For I do not desire brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that hardening in part has happened to Israel UNTIL the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
And so ALL ISRAEL WILL BE SAVED.` (Rom. 11: 25 & 26)
We can look at the other scriptures later if you like.
You have avoided so many solid posts/points on this thread. This shows how bereft your doctrine is of biblical support. Until you address these we can only interpret this as a sign you are devoid of any biblical support.
There are many inconsistencies in the dispensationalist hermeneutical system. While they passionately insist that the phrase “all Israel shall be saved” (Romans 11:26) relates to the whole nation of national Israel at a future time, they quickly paper-over a similar statement leading to the Gentiles, which says, “the fulness of the Gentiles come in” as having no wholesale meaning.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?