• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

The Barnraising

Status
Not open for further replies.

2Timothy2

Rangers Lead the Way
Aug 20, 2004
2,655
147
58
Texas
✟3,603.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
OK, here is my overly simplified, condensed version:
This seems to be the central issue addressed.

Hi Paul . . . they never fully possessed the land?

Or is it that they never fully occupied the land?

@@Paul@@ said:
I suppose I could promise you an unconditional $5 and never give it to you; all the while claiming it’s yours and I’d already given it to you – you just never possessed it...

...In Genesis chapter 13, we see that God’s promise was a literal piece of land; a land that Abraham could SEE and one that he could walk in. Its borders were determined BY what Abraham could see (vs. 15) and by him walking the length and breadth of it (vs. 16). Here we see the first land promised was pertaining to the land of Canaan (the smaller portion)...

…Here in chapter 15 we see God’s plan for Abraham and the land widening, this time the borders are given by God; from the Nile to the Euphrates...

...In Genesis 15 then, we see that God ALSO gave Israel a larger chuck, which stretches over Saudi Arabia and Iraq to the Euphrates. The land covenant made here was past tense, God GAVE it to Abraham AND to his seed; but never has there been a time in history where Israel has obtained it all OR dwelt in ALL of the land…

…the first two possessions have been fulfilled; leaving the larger one...

...If Israel failed to keep the commandments (which we later learned were a curse and could not be kept)… they would be plucked from the Land. If God had not promised to restore them, I could see a point to your argument – but the entire bible is about the restoration of the nation of Israel into all of the land...

Essentially, the person to which Paul is responding believes Israel has already fulfilled the promise concerning the land. Paul shows the error of this interpretation, or tries to. The crux of Paul's arguement is that Israel has not been in physical posession of all the land God promised, and I think he did a decent job of supporting that arguement.

I like that quote of yours, Paul, which I put in first. That states the case well. So, to summarize, one person says God promised the land to Israel and even though they never physically occupied it, they posessed it. Paul states they must physically occupy to actually posess.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.