SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Gal 3 is not about the new covenant. At all.
ECT Israel's New Covenant and the Body of Christ
- Thread starter Jerry Shugart
- Start date
Gal 3 is not about the new covenant. At all.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Threat, with thick irony attached...
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
How do you apply Zech 5A and 5B in your daily life, in comparison to Ezekiel 37D?
"The elect of God are not chosen under the New Covenant according to their physical bloodline, but are chosen according to their faith as Galatians 3 says though in ways that is a little bit subtle."
To say that Galatians 3 is not about the New covenant, is a part of the dialectic game of the dispensationalists on TOL. But saying Galatians 3 is not about the New Covenant in the sense of how the elect are chosen under the New Covenant, as being different from the way the elect were supposedly chosen under the Old Covenant, is an example of the peculiar "Hermeneutics" of dispensationalism. In other words, in their dialectic game, the TOL dispensationalists here have revealed a flaw in their "Hermeneutics." This is defending their theological system by claiming a text is not about the Covenants when in fact it is about how the way God determines who is of his elect is different in the two covenants.
Dispensationalists will talk about Paul's preaching of the Gospel of faith, but then will ignore what Paul says in Galatians 3 since what he says there does not agree with their underlying postulate that God is continuing to determine who is elect by the physical bloodline, or some dispensationalists will say that in the future God will again determine the elect according to whether one is of the physical bloodline,
Also, in Isaiah 55: 3 - God promises that "I will make an everlasting covenant with you." Since the Old Covenant was done away with (II Corinthians 3: 7, 3: 11, Hebrews 10: 9), then the covenant which is to be everlasting is the New Covenant. Isaiah 61: 8, Jeremiah 32: 40, Jeremiah 50: 5,Ezekiel 16: 60 and Ezekiel 37: 26 all repeat the promise that God will make an everlasting covenant with Israel.
But the strange "Hermeneutic" of dispensationalism leads dispensationalists to ignore the promise in the Old Testament that God will make an everlasting covenant with Israel.
Dispensationalists will say that God in the future will return to some kind of "dispensation" of law for the people of the physical bloodline. Their compartmentalization of scripture as part of their "Hermenutics" may prevent them from realizing that God has promised that the New Covenant is everlasting and will not be changed to go back to a "dispensation" of law and/or some other set of doctrines of the Old Covenant
They will also claim that the New Covenant is only for the physical bloodline, ignoring Isaiah 55: 4-5 and Hosea 2: 23 which are Old Testament prophecies saying that God will bring into Israel - his saved group - people not of the chosen bloodline.
To say that Galatians 3 is not about the New covenant, is a part of the dialectic game of the dispensationalists on TOL. But saying Galatians 3 is not about the New Covenant in the sense of how the elect are chosen under the New Covenant, as being different from the way the elect were supposedly chosen under the Old Covenant, is an example of the peculiar "Hermeneutics" of dispensationalism. In other words, in their dialectic game, the TOL dispensationalists here have revealed a flaw in their "Hermeneutics." This is defending their theological system by claiming a text is not about the Covenants when in fact it is about how the way God determines who is of his elect is different in the two covenants.
Dispensationalists will talk about Paul's preaching of the Gospel of faith, but then will ignore what Paul says in Galatians 3 since what he says there does not agree with their underlying postulate that God is continuing to determine who is elect by the physical bloodline, or some dispensationalists will say that in the future God will again determine the elect according to whether one is of the physical bloodline,
Also, in Isaiah 55: 3 - God promises that "I will make an everlasting covenant with you." Since the Old Covenant was done away with (II Corinthians 3: 7, 3: 11, Hebrews 10: 9), then the covenant which is to be everlasting is the New Covenant. Isaiah 61: 8, Jeremiah 32: 40, Jeremiah 50: 5,Ezekiel 16: 60 and Ezekiel 37: 26 all repeat the promise that God will make an everlasting covenant with Israel.
But the strange "Hermeneutic" of dispensationalism leads dispensationalists to ignore the promise in the Old Testament that God will make an everlasting covenant with Israel.
Dispensationalists will say that God in the future will return to some kind of "dispensation" of law for the people of the physical bloodline. Their compartmentalization of scripture as part of their "Hermenutics" may prevent them from realizing that God has promised that the New Covenant is everlasting and will not be changed to go back to a "dispensation" of law and/or some other set of doctrines of the Old Covenant
They will also claim that the New Covenant is only for the physical bloodline, ignoring Isaiah 55: 4-5 and Hosea 2: 23 which are Old Testament prophecies saying that God will bring into Israel - his saved group - people not of the chosen bloodline.
Last edited:
Hebrews 11: 1-22 on faith, could be interpreted to imply that God chose his saved elect by faith rather than by their physical bloodline in the Old Covenant. The people of faith discussed in Hebrews 11 can be called the remnant of Israel (Isaiah 10: 22-23, Zephaniah 3: 12-13).
But - "From the time of Christ’s rejection by Israel until the time when God deals specifically with Israel again in the seventieth week it is not possible to refer to a remnant of the nation Israel." Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology, 1965, by J. Dwight Pentecost
Christian Zionism does not deal with the remnant as a small number who continue to be faithful to Christ in a time of apostasy, except the Christian Zionists do have their own version of the remnant called the 144,000 in Revelation 7 and 14. They link that remnant to their end time scenario saying that God will turn back to the physical descendants of Abraham to deal with them again. So, the 144,000 in Christian Zionism are all of the physical bloodline in orthodox dispensationalism.
But - "From the time of Christ’s rejection by Israel until the time when God deals specifically with Israel again in the seventieth week it is not possible to refer to a remnant of the nation Israel." Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology, 1965, by J. Dwight Pentecost
Christian Zionism does not deal with the remnant as a small number who continue to be faithful to Christ in a time of apostasy, except the Christian Zionists do have their own version of the remnant called the 144,000 in Revelation 7 and 14. They link that remnant to their end time scenario saying that God will turn back to the physical descendants of Abraham to deal with them again. So, the 144,000 in Christian Zionism are all of the physical bloodline in orthodox dispensationalism.
Interplanner
Well-known member
That's all good stuff, North.
I just want them to show me in Heb 9-10 where there is anything about the race or land. Only from exact lines and concepts in Heb 9-10. not from other thoughts and theories from elsewhere.
I just want them to show me in Heb 9-10 where there is anything about the race or land. Only from exact lines and concepts in Heb 9-10. not from other thoughts and theories from elsewhere.
Jerry Shugart,
The New Covenant was the Covenant that Jesus instituted on the night before his death at the Last Supper, or the Memorial of Jesus' death, that all Christians are to honor every year, on the day of Jesus' death.
This New Covenant that Jeremiah wrote about, Superceded the old Mosaic Law Covenant, Hebrews 8:6-13. The old Law Covenant could not save anyone, it condemned to death all that is under it, they were under a Curse, which Jesus did away with by the redemption that was then available to all who would believe in Jesus and obey the commandments of God, Galatians 3:1-14, John 3:15,16 18, 1Timothy 2:1-6, John 15:10. The Mosaic Law Covenant could not make anyone perfect, or take away men's sins because it was based on the blood of goats and bulls, The New Covenant was based on Jesus blood, Hebrews 9:11-24, 10:1-17. No imperfect human could obey the Mosaic Law perfectly so they were condemned to death, Hebrews 6:22,23, but could be saved by the blood of Jesus, if they would take advantage of the free gift offered. Even Peter sId that none of the Jews could obey the Law covenant, Acts 15:7-10.
The New Covenant was a much better Covenant, because it was based on faith and not on works of the old Laws, 2Corinthians 3:1-18, Romans 9:30-33. Agape!!!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
The New Covenant was the Covenant that Jesus instituted on the night before his death at the Last Supper, or the Memorial of Jesus' death, that all Christians are to honor every year, on the day of Jesus' death.
This New Covenant that Jeremiah wrote about, Superceded the old Mosaic Law Covenant, Hebrews 8:6-13. The old Law Covenant could not save anyone, it condemned to death all that is under it, they were under a Curse, which Jesus did away with by the redemption that was then available to all who would believe in Jesus and obey the commandments of God, Galatians 3:1-14, John 3:15,16 18, 1Timothy 2:1-6, John 15:10. The Mosaic Law Covenant could not make anyone perfect, or take away men's sins because it was based on the blood of goats and bulls, The New Covenant was based on Jesus blood, Hebrews 9:11-24, 10:1-17. No imperfect human could obey the Mosaic Law perfectly so they were condemned to death, Hebrews 6:22,23, but could be saved by the blood of Jesus, if they would take advantage of the free gift offered. Even Peter sId that none of the Jews could obey the Law covenant, Acts 15:7-10.
The New Covenant was a much better Covenant, because it was based on faith and not on works of the old Laws, 2Corinthians 3:1-18, Romans 9:30-33. Agape!!!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Interplanner
Well-known member
good stuff, 12J,
just be prepared for the Dispensationalists on here. They are an unhappy, feisty bunch.
Hi why feisty bunch , whrn you really mean we ARE CORRECT and you have not answer !!
You conveniently , always report that Matt 28-29 is for Israel !!
Forget that verse 18 is the PASSOVER a Jewish Feast Day , how CONVENIENT is that !!
Will always forget the Jesus will be drinking again in His Father's Kingdom , so when does that happen ??
In verse 29 will be drink it new with the 12 apostles , and Jesus I know and the 12 apostles I know , BUT who are you TWO ?
dan p
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Show us the land cancellation.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
He has no answers, just ramblings, rationalizations, and humanistic rhetoric he's lifted from the thousands of commentaries scoured through the years.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Oh, the irony...
Interplanner
Well-known member
This is the only place I know of in the Christian world where "When Christ came as the high priest of the good things that are already here" is:
"rhetoric"
"humanist"
"scoured from commentaries"
If Hebrews 9:15 is Christian, then whatever STP is thinking is obviously anti-Christian, because he is smashing the purposes Christ accomplished in the new covenant.
"rhetoric"
"humanist"
"scoured from commentaries"
If Hebrews 9:15 is Christian, then whatever STP is thinking is obviously anti-Christian, because he is smashing the purposes Christ accomplished in the new covenant.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
When were you ever under the first covenant?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
You are destroying EVERY purpose of the new covenant, except the forgiveness of sins.
That is only one portion. You ignore the rest. What's wrong with you?
Interplanner
Well-known member
The new covenant as addressed in Heb 9:15 and nearby is obviously redemptive for all mankind, as found in the other passages as well.
Matthew 26:26
And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.
1 Corinthians 10:16-17
The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.