Rather than call people who disagree with them bad names, why do not the followers of the supposed theology of "2P2P" explain how their theology is different from that of the founders of what was called dispensationalism? And use New Testament scripture in doing so. There is one prophecy in the Old Testament which is relevant to the statements in Hebrews 7: 22 and Hebrews 8: 6 that the New Covenant in Christ is a better covenant than the Old. This Old Testament prophecy is in Haggai 2: 9.
The "2P2P" statement that "Israel has been temporarily set aside" is not a statement found in the NT.
There are three verses in the NT which are most relevant to the issue of the Old Covenant, that is, Old Covenant Israel, being temporarily set side and later re-established.
"But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:" II Corinthians 3: 7
"How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?
9. For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory." II Corinthians 3: 8-9
"Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second." Hebrews 10: 9
Then, there are NT scriptures which support the doctrine that Christ did away with the Old Covenant without saying that it would be re-established later.
"But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
24. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
25. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all." Galatians 4: 23-26
Galatians 4: 23-26 especially supports Hebrews 8: 6 that the New Covenant in Christ is a better covenant than the Old.
Jerusalem which now exists is the Old Covenant in Galatians 4: 25, and it is said to be in bondage. But that Jerusalem which is above, is Spiritual Jerusalem, is free and is the mother of us all, meaning it is the mother of all the elect.
"Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision.
3. For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
4. Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5. Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6. Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7. But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8. Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ," Philippians 3: 2-8 Again, this text supports the doctrine that the Old Covenant was inferior to the New Covenant in Christ.
Why would God want to re-establish the Old Covenant which was inferior ,to the New Covenant?
Here is another NT text relevant to the issue of whether God is going to re-establish the Old Covenant in some way.
Remember, saying that God will in the future save All Israel, interpreted by 2P2P to mean all Israel of the Bloodline, is a re-establishment of one important part of the Old Covenant, the physical bloodline. What about the temple, animal sacrifice and circumcision? Maybe 2P2P only claims the physical bloodline is re-established as part of the Old Covenant, yet who knows what their doctrine is on the re-establishment of
the rituals of the Old Covenant? They have not said as far as I know.
"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17. Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ." Colossians 2" 16-17
The ceremonies of the Old Covenant were mere shadows of better things to come, and the Old Covenant itself was but a shadow of better things to come in Christ Jesus. "But the body is of Christ," where body of Christ is from σωμα του χριστου, soma tou Christou, is metaphoric in a way. It means that while the ceremonies of the Old Covenant were mere shadows, the substance is of Christ.
The Old Covenant was a shadow pointing to a Better Covenant which came later in Christ, and that New Covenant is the substance, the spiritual substance. Then, how could Christ bring back the shadows?
"The glory of this latter house shall be greater than of the former, saith the LORD of hosts: and in this place will I give peace, saith the LORD of hosts." Haggai 2: 9
