Two things... 1, not sure how this relates to my reply to your post. I had simply stated that we in the West tend to take the word 'saved' as ALWAYS dealing with eternal salvation, and that is not the case. It is often dealing with being 'returned' but because of the use of sodzo in Greek it always comes into English as 'saved' and thus we treat it as eternal salvation when that is often not the case based on the context of the OT verses being quoted or inferred in the NT passages. 2, I don't really disagree with what you have shared. I don't see the Davidic covenant as being different than the Abrahamic covenant... I think Psalm 105:8-10 shows a progression of which it would then only be natural to place the Davidic covenant into as well. (IMHO) If you disagree with that, fine... not sure there is much you can say on that to change my view. I base my reasoning in part on this all being God's plan from the beginning, and that He had His covenant (seen in Scripture as "My covenant") that began with Adam with a promise but then as a covenant with Noach on down. Do look up the exact phrase "My covenant" in your bible software and see where it shows up and then place that against Psalm 105:8-10. Then, look at Peter's word choices as compared to Exodus 19. And lastly, do a good search in the Greek word kainos (to make like new) and the Hebrew chadasha (to renew) which are the words used as "new" as pertaining to the phrase "new covenant."
ken,
1. Wasn't the context Romans 11? Paul stated there is a remnant of grace and he did state that Israel had to come back to God though they were the olive tree they could not enter into the covenant and the gentiles were to be careful and not get too high minded like Israel did or else they could lose their salvation. They are blinded and will be as a nation until the fulness of the gentiles comes in for the gifts and callings are without repentance. This means the Abrahamic covenant and the Davidic covenant will be fulfilled in their calling but it is conditioned by repentance. In this context saved being just regathered doesn't fit the whole context. You could say that they are saved as in regathering just as the promise of the covenant and I understand that and have no problem because the gifts and callings are without repentance and many believed that Israel and still do today that they will never be at the head of the nations because the church takes their place and they are incorrect. I don't think I have a problem with that in the immediate context. The overall context is about receiving the unconditional by the conditional which is obedience. Repent and regathering go together in the main thought so I wouldn't say in the proper perspective there is no contradiction in both understandings in this context.
2. David came through the line of Abraham as well as gentiles who get saved. This is why Jesus came through both of these lines.
The land is connected with the kingdom for you cannot have a kingdom if there is no land. The specific promise in Genesis to Abraham was about the land and the seed that was countless as the sand of the sea. The specific promise with David is that he would not build the temple, it would come through Sololmon but the kingdom would be in his name and lineage forever and this is why it is called the Davidic covenant. David was the King of Israel. Isaiah 9:-7 shows this promise through David would keep going and eventually reach its fullness in the millennial kingdom when Joel comes to pass and the rest of the other prophets.
This is the very reason Matthew 1 records these two geneologies. Christ was to restore these two covenants with Israel by the Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God message and they rejected him.
The new covenant came through for the whole world to be saved at Calvary because of Israel's rejection. The new covenant specific with the nation of Israel and their covenants will not happen until Jesus says blessed are they that come in the name of the Lord. Matthew 23:37-39. The covenant of the kingdom will happen at the same time in it's fulfillment of Israel being at the head of the nations. Isaiah 2:2-4. While the two covenants are connected they have specific and separate functions. This is bible but I understand the connection and the thinking and I don't think there is no overall contradiction.
3. God's overall plan of redemption is one plan that comes through different periods of time that he dealt with men in different ways.
There is only one Kingdom of God physical as far as the universe. However, there are many physical kingdoms within in the universal kingdom. The Kingdom of Heaven physical which is the earth meaning under the Heaven and it's rule from the heavens as in the greek word Baselia and Daniel 7:27.
There is only one Kingdom of God that is about repentance and the new birth and salvation for the Kingdom of Heaven the jews were never told to receive spiritually for salvation of their hearts. Matthew 6:33 says; Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you. Luke 17:20 says the kingdom comes without observation. Paul said we are translated into the kingdom of his dear son which is spiritual and Paul never preached the Kingdom of Heaven message but the message of the cross.
4. For the jews the law was forever but not under the Mosaic ethic but under the new covenant. To them it is just the letter of the law and Paul mentions this in Romans 7 and 2 Corinthians 3:1-16. But the letter of the law includes more than just legalistically doing commandments. It is understanding why the covenant was changed and how it is different than the old covenant. This is the very reason the veil is over their eyes because they couldn't stand to see Moses law fade away. This is what they cannot totally understand today and the very reason many are legalistic. I am not against Israel and neither was Paul and there is still an election today of jews and they are actually in the body of Christ just like the gentiles.
I am a gentile believer and I am for Israel and them fulfilling their covenants. I also understand there are great jewish believers who understand the difference between Moses law and the new covenant and then many do not. I believe jews should live for Christ under the guise of the new covenant and they can still be jews culturally and live under the Torah but not under the ethic of the Mosaic law.
I understand Moses wrote the Torah, etc. and I realize the law for the jews is forever under the new covenant and I believe the sacrifices will be done in the millennial kingdom as a remembrance.
5. I am not for Jews trying to make gentiles jews or for gentiles making jews christians. We are christians because of the love of Christ and redemption with all on the same level.
Now this is what I believe and I believe that is right according to the word. We may say things slightly different but I don't think we are contradicting each other in the overall context. God is order and I don't think there is anything wrong with proper perspective and why a person believes how, why and what is very important. The distinctions are important of the Abrahamic covenant and the Davidic covenant and they need to be understood as clearly as can be.
6. Face it, the church will be in the millennial kingdom and this is what we are being trained for now. 2 Timothy 2:12. If we suffer, we shall reign. But, we don't have the same calling and though we will rule we will not be the head of the nations and have the specific land as Israel. God bless! Jerry Kelso
