Has the Church Replaced Israel ?

[Clete]

Sorry, not buying this line of reasoning.

That isn't how sound reason works.

Had God wanted David brought to justice under the law it would have happened.

No, it would not have!

THERE IS NO PROVISION UNDER THE LAW TO PROSECUTE THE KING!

That's a pretty easy statement to falsify if it isn't true. Just explain to us how the king would have been brought to trial and duly convicted and punished. The entire criminal justice system in question is in the bible. Every jot and tittle of it is right there for the whole world to read in the most widely translated and published and owned and read book in the whole of history. Just look it up and prove us all wrong.

I believe God had other intentions for David and mercy from the law was warranted.

No one care what you believe Cabinet Maker! Your beliefs are not the basis of Christian doctrine and your personal opinions carry no weight whatsoever in determining the correctness of anyone's doctrine, including your own, by the way!

What this demonstrates, however, is that you aren't here to establish your doctrine, to sharpen your own steel, if you will. In fact, one is left to simply wonder what possible motive you could have for being here other than the satisfaction of some desire to bloviate about your personal opinions.

I, for one, don't get it. On a point as literally trivial as this, why wouldn't you simply concede that you'd not ever thought of it in those terms before and, at the very least, conceded the need for further study on the subject. Where is the profit, even for your own doctrine, to simply discard it out of hand with such a glibly mindless reaction such as "Sorry, not buying this line of reasoning." I mean, it's hardly even a line of reasoning. It more of a simply statement of fact that there isn't any provision in the Mosaic Law that allows for the prosecution of the king. All that would be required to falsify that claim is to find one single counter example. There were 42 kings and one queen in Israel and Judah. Just find the one who was ever even taken to court, never mind found guilty of a crime and you've proven our position false.

You won't even try to do that! Instead, you'll content yourself with "Sorry, not buying this line of reasoning." and make yourself believe that we're just making this stuff up!

Clete

 

[Gary K]

That isn't how sound reason works.


No, it would not have!

THERE IS NO PROVISION UNDER THE LAW TO PROSECUTE THE KING!

That's a pretty easy statement to falsify if it isn't true. Just explain to us how the king would have been brought to trial and duly convicted and punished. The entire criminal justice system in question is in the bible. Every jot and tittle of it is right there for the whole world to read in the most widely translated and published and owned and read book in the whole of history. Just look it up and prove us all wrong.


No one care what you believe Cabinet Maker! Your beliefs are not the basis of Christian doctrine and your personal opinions carry no weight whatsoever in determining the correctness of anyone's doctrine, including your own, by the way!

What this demonstrates, however, is that you aren't here to establish your doctrine, to sharpen your own steel, if you will. In fact, one is left to simply wonder what possible motive you could have for being here other than the satisfaction of some desire to bloviate about your personal opinions.

I, for one, don't get it. On a point as literally trivial as this, why wouldn't you simply concede that you'd not ever thought of it in those terms before and, at the very least, conceded the need for further study on the subject. Where is the profit, even for your own doctrine, to simply discard it out of hand with such a glibly mindless reaction such as "Sorry, not buying this line of reasoning." I mean, it's hardly even a line of reasoning. It more of a simply statement of fact that there isn't any provision in the Mosaic Law that allows for the prosecution of the king. All that would be required to falsify that claim is to find one single counter example. There were 42 kings and one queen in Israel and Judah. Just find the one who was ever even taken to court, never mind found guilty of a crime and you've proven our position false.

You won't even try to do that! Instead, you'll content yourself with "Sorry, not buying this line of reasoning." and make yourself believe that we're just making this stuff up!

Clete

Neither do your beliefs count as the basis for Christianity. They are your opinion on what scripture says and Cabinet Maker has his opinions on what scripture says. Just why is he to be condemned for his opinions and you are not?

 

[Clete]

Neither do your beliefs count as the basis for Christianity.

YEAH! No kidding, fool!

That's precisely the reason I keep saying it to everyone!

MAKE AN ARGUMENT!

They are your opinion on what scripture says and Cabinet Maker has his opinions on what scripture says.

The difference is that I don't present my position as a matter of personal opinion. I make arguments that I support with sound reason and with scripture. I do not ever blow off a substantive point by saying anything remotely like "Sorry, not buying this line of reasoning." without following it up with a substantive explanation as to why I don't buy it that goes well beyond my personal opinions.

Just why is he to be condemned for his opinions and you are not?

You are such a stupid fool that I can't even comprehend how you're not embarrassed to show yourself in public. You literally do not understand why personal opinions have little or no place in determining one's doctrine! You actually do believe that all doctrine just boils down to personal preference, don't you?! You don't reject dispensationalism, for example, because of an rationally considered analysis of the biblical evidence but because you simply don't like it as well as you like whatever nonsensical thing it is that you do believe in. And, if something comes along that you like better than your current beliefs then you'll drop your current beliefs for the same reason you reject dispensationalism.

Accepting or rejecting a doctrine based on personal opinion is the childish manner of thinking that leads to being blown about by every wind of doctrine. Correct doctrine is objectively true, which means not everyone is right! I believe and teach dispensationalism (for example) and you do not. ONE OF US IS WRONG, Gary! If one plods about like an idiot without engaging their rational faculties and setting aside personal opinions in favor of that which can be established with soundly rational argumentation and analysis of God's word then any doctrine at all is as good as any another. If it's all just personal preference then your pastor is no more correct than David Koresh or Jim Jones and we are all wasting our time even discussing it. We might as well just go and believe whatever it is we feel like believing!

Clete

 

[Right Divider]

YEAH! No kidding, fool!

That's precisely the reason I keep saying it to everyone!

MAKE AN ARGUMENT!


The difference is that I don't present my position as a matter of personal opinion. I make arguments that I support with sound reason and with scripture. I do not ever blow off a substantive point by saying anything remotely like "Sorry, not buying this line of reasoning." without following it up with a substantive explanation as to why I don't buy it that goes well beyond my personal opinions.


You are such a stupid fool that I can't even comprehend how you're not embarrassed to show yourself in public. You literally do not understand why personal opinions have little or no place in determining one's doctrine! You actually do believe that all doctrine just boils down to personal preference, don't you?! You don't reject dispensationalism, for example, because of an rationally considered analysis of the biblical evidence but because you simply don't like it as well as you like whatever nonsensical thing it is that you do believe in. And, if something comes along that you like better than your current beliefs then you'll drop your current beliefs for the same reason you reject dispensationalism.

Accepting or rejecting a doctrine based on personal opinion is the childish manner of thinking that leads to being blown about by every wind of doctrine. Correct doctrine is objectively true, which means not everyone is right! I believe and teach dispensationalism (for example) and you do not. ONE OF US IS WRONG, Gary! If one plods about like an idiot without engaging their rational faculties and setting aside personal opinions in favor of that which can be established with soundly rational argumentation and analysis of God's word then any doctrine at all is as good as any another. If it's all just personal preference then your pastor is no more correct than David Koresh or Jim Jones and we are all wasting our time even discussing it. We might as well just go and believe whatever it is we feel like believing!

Clete

Outstanding post Clete!

Make an ARGUMENT people! Use sound reason!

Otherwise, you're just full of hot air.

 

[Gary K]

Outstanding post Clete!

Make an ARGUMENT people! Use sound reason!

Otherwise, you're just full of hot air.

1Corinthians 2: 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Brains are of little use as spiritual things are spiritually discerned.

 

[JudgeRightly]

YEAH! No kidding, fool!

That's precisely the reason I keep saying it to everyone!

MAKE AN ARGUMENT!


The difference is that I don't present my position as a matter of personal opinion. I make arguments that I support with sound reason and with scripture. I do not ever blow off a substantive point by saying anything remotely like "Sorry, not buying this line of reasoning." without following it up with a substantive explanation as to why I don't buy it that goes well beyond my personal opinions.


You are such a stupid fool that I can't even comprehend how you're not embarrassed to show yourself in public. You literally do not understand why personal opinions have little or no place in determining one's doctrine! You actually do believe that all doctrine just boils down to personal preference, don't you?! You don't reject dispensationalism, for example, because of an rationally considered analysis of the biblical evidence but because you simply don't like it as well as you like whatever nonsensical thing it is that you do believe in. And, if something comes along that you like better than your current beliefs then you'll drop your current beliefs for the same reason you reject dispensationalism.

Accepting or rejecting a doctrine based on personal opinion is the childish manner of thinking that leads to being blown about by every wind of doctrine. Correct doctrine is objectively true, which means not everyone is right! I believe and teach dispensationalism (for example) and you do not. ONE OF US IS WRONG, Gary! If one plods about like an idiot without engaging their rational faculties and setting aside personal opinions in favor of that which can be established with soundly rational argumentation and analysis of God's word then any doctrine at all is as good as any another. If it's all just personal preference then your pastor is no more correct than David Koresh or Jim Jones and we are all wasting our time even discussing it. We might as well just go and believe whatever it is we feel like believing!

Clete

:think:

At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Who then is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 18:1-5 - New King James Version

Who Is the Greatest? - At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Who then is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by...

www.biblegateway.com

 

[Gary K]

:think:

At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Who then is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 18:1-5 - New King James Version

Who Is the Greatest? - At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Who then is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by...

www.biblegateway.com

So being like a child means not asking for forgiveness? That's more childish than child like.

 

[JudgeRightly]

So being like a child means not asking for forgiveness? That's more childish than child like.

Whoosh.

 

[JudgeRightly]

1Corinthians 2: 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

AMEN!

Brains are of little use as spiritual things are spiritually discerned.

You need a functional brain to understand spiritual things.

If your brain isn't functioning properly, you have no hope of understanding anything spiritual.

That's why Paul says "spiritually discerned."

 

[Clete]

1Corinthians 2: 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Brains are of little use as spiritual things are spiritually discerned.

No discernment can happen by anyone, spiritual or otherwise, without the use of sound reason. You cannot read I Corinthians 2:14 nor have any idea what its talking about without the use of sound reason. You cannot undermine the use of the mind without the use of the mind.

You are well and truly stupid. That is not me simply trying to insult you, Gary. I'm telling you that you mind is nearly useless. You should be embarrassed.

 

[Gary K]

No discernment can happen by anyone, spiritual or otherwise, without the use of sound reason. You cannot read I Corinthians 2:14 nor have any idea what its talking about without the use of sound reason. You cannot undermine the use of the mind without the use of the mind.

You are well and truly stupid. That is not me simply trying to insult you, Gary. I'm telling you that you mind is nearly useless. You should be embarrassed.

I'm not embarrassed. Tell me. was Paul stupid before his conversion but suddenly gained intelligence as an adult?

 

[Clete]

I'm not embarrassed. Tell me. was Paul stupid before his conversion but suddenly gained intelligence as an adult?

What on planet Earth could you possibly be talking about?

 

[Gary K]

What on planet Earth could you possibly be talking about?

You tell me I'm stupid and still can't understand my point?

Paul persecuted the Christian church and killed believers. What made him become a Christian? A massive increase in intellect as an adult?

 

[JudgeRightly]

You tell me I'm stupid and still can't understand my point?

Alternately, you're not using words very well.

Paul persecuted the Christian church and killed believers. What made him become a Christian? A massive increase in intellect as an adult?

Sound reason, from Reason Himself.

 

[CabinetMaker]

@Clete I have not been ignoring you, I have been considering what you have said and traveling for work. But I have been reading what you have posted and searching the Bible in text and prayer. I cannot walk the road you are walking. While I agree the judging the actions of others is something we should do, I do not agree that we should be condemning people with our judgments. I look at how Jesus forgave all those who came to Him regardless of their sins. I do not see anywhere in scripture where the Apostles condemned others for their sins an called for them to be punished under the law. Except for Paul, and even then that was focused on himself. Matthew 7:1 cautions us to not judge others or we will also me judged. God does not want us to condone sin either so when we talk to people about their sins, we should do so in such a way that they understand that God wants to forgive them and will if they choose to accept Christ as their savior. We should be striving to bring people the message of forgiveness under the New Covenant instead of the message of judgement under the Old Covenant.

Has the church replaced Israel? Yes. The New Covenant is between God and His Church. Is God done with Israel? In terms of Israel being able to bring salvation to the world, yes.

 

[Right Divider]

Has the church replaced Israel? Yes.

Wrong.

The New Covenant is between God and His Church.

Wrong.

Jer 31:31-33 (AKJV/PCE)​

(31:31) ¶ Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: (31:32) Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day [that] I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: (31:33) But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.​

​

Israel is not the body of Christ (i.e., the church) and the body of Christ is not Israel.

​

Is God done with Israel?

No.

In terms of Israel being able to bring salvation to the world, yes.

Only during the current dispensation.

 

[Derf]

Unresponsive.

The law, which David was king under, had (has) no provision for even bringing the king to court to convict him of a crime, never mind executing him for it. The king, under the Mosaic Law, answered to God, the Law Giver, not to any judge or court.

This worked because God was directly and actively working with the nation of Israel. A privilege that cannot be said of any nation today, by the way. As a result, a full adoption of Mosaic form of government could not be made to work today because the king would indeed be above the law. This, however, does not undo right and wrong or the principles of criminal justice. The death penalty is taught as just punishment by God in both the Old and New Testaments for several crimes, including murder, rape, child molestation, Sodomy, kidnapping, adultery and a few other crimes. The degree to which any criminal justice system does not enforce the death penalty for such crimes is the degree to which that system is unjust and the degree to which that society undermines itself.

Clete

Correct! The way God punished kings was to bring other nations to rule over them, which put the king under other law systems. But it wasn't part of the Mosaic law.

 

[Derf]

You tell me I'm stupid and still can't understand my point?

Paul persecuted the Christian church and killed believers. What made him become a Christian? A massive increase in intellect as an adult?

"Made him"? Do you mean "what forced him to become a Christian?"

 

[Clete]

You tell me I'm stupid and still can't understand my point?

Paul persecuted the Christian church and killed believers. What made him become a Christian? A massive increase in intellect as an adult?

This makes no sense whatsoever!

Do you think that he was converted against his will? Do you think that he was converted in spite of the verdict of his mind?

He saw the risen Lord that he had been persecuting and so repented. How is it that you think that was some how done in opposition to the function of his mind?

 

[Gary K]

"Made him"? Do you mean "what forced him to become a Christian?"

Clete and others on this forum seem to say the only thing necessary that it is intellect that enables us to understand spiritual concepts. My point is that it is the HS and spiritual discernment that He provides that enables us to understand them. Therefore Paul had a spiritual epiphany that converted him. That's what made him a Christian. Not made in the idea as forced him to become one.