ECT Israel's New Covenant and the Body of Christ

I

Interplanner

Well-known member
STP,
I'm not interested in a person who has so little to say that there is less than a minute spent on his post. You especially need to read Heb 9-10 10x in between each post. Did you think this was a race where the last post showing wins?
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
STP,
I'm not interested in a person who has so little to say that there is less than a minute spent on his post. You especially need to read Heb 9-10 10x in between each post. Did you think this was a race where the last post showing wins?
Click to expand...

There is nothing in Heb 9-10 to suggest that this is for anyone other than Israel and Judah.
It's all in your commentary diluted imagination.
 
Jerry Shugart

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Did someone mention Hebrews 9?

Are they really so ignorant that they are not aware that the following passage is speaking about the Last Will and Testament of Christ and not the New Covenant?:

"For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth" (Heb.9:16-17).​

Dean Alford wrote that "It is quite vain to deny the testamentary sense of 'diatheke' in this verse....I believe it will be found that we must at all hazards accept the meaning of 'testament,' as being the only one which will in any way meet the plain requirement of the verse" [emphasis added] (Alford, The Greek Testament, IV:173, 174; cf. the renderings of ASV, RSV).

Elliott E. Johnson writes that "when the writer then begins to talk about the inauguration of the 'diatheke' (vv. 16,17), he describes it is functioning as a last will and testament. This is indicated because the arrangement begins to function at the death of the 'testator' (v. 16). His explanation means that a will and testament is in force when the author of the will dies. The inauguration of a will and covenant occurs on different bases. A covenant is inaugurated during the lifetime of both partners. Only a last will is inaugurated at the death of the author of the will" [emphasis added](Dispensational Understanding of the New Covenant, 172).
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
Yes, ALL founded on your FALSE premise.
Click to expand...




Which is what?

My premise is in the text: that the new covenant is the body of Christ (I have come to do Thy will, O Lord) of Ps 40) sacrificed for the sins of the world;
that the "Israel" of God not only benefits from that but proclaims it to the nation;
that those who are Jewish by race were meant to see/hear this Gospel and change from their wicked ways (in Judaism) and thus potentially stop the destruction of the country from happening;
that for that reason in that generation, there is nothing about the land of Israel being restored, nor needs to be, and
that the 'Israel' and 'Judah' reconciliation is meant a picture of even wider things.

So Mr RD, pontificator of all truth, I won't be changing from those premises, which are in the text, not orignated in my head. You are going to have to find something else to talk about because that is what I'm based on , operating from.

It sounds cool to blast out one liners, but they are ignored and don't deal with details.

There is no hint anywhere in the comments of chs 9 and 10 on 8 that the new covenant is just for Israel or involves the land or is a 2nd round or a 2nd chance for Israel under the old. It is false to think so.
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Interplanner said:
Which is what?

My premise is in the text: that the new covenant is the body of Christ (I have come to do Thy will, O Lord) of Ps 40) sacrificed for the sins of the world;
that the "Israel" of God not only benefits from that but proclaims it to the nation;
that those who are Jewish by race were meant to see/hear this Gospel and change from their wicked ways (in Judaism) and thus potentially stop the destruction of the country from happening;
that for that reason in that generation, there is nothing about the land of Israel being restored, nor needs to be, and
that the 'Israel' and 'Judah' reconciliation is meant a picture of even wider things.
Click to expand...
Based on nonsense like THAT, I can see why you're so CONFUSED.

The BIBLE makes it that God will make a NEW covenant WITH HOUSE OF ISRAEL and the HOUSE OF JUDAH.

Why can't you see those verses? Are you really that completely BLIND?

Interplanner said:
So Mr RD, pontificator of all truth, I won't be changing from those premises, which are in the text, not orignated in my head. You are going to have to find something else to talk about because that is what I'm based on , operating from.
Click to expand...
False premise -> False conclusion.

Interplanner said:
It sounds cool to blast out one liners, but they are ignored and don't deal with details.
Click to expand...
Oh the thick, juicy IRONY of that.

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. ​

​
Why do YOU ignore the DETAILS there? Because you are a hypocrite and real writer and grammar scholar.

Interplanner said:
There is no hint anywhere in the comments of chs 9 and 10 on 8 that the new covenant is just for Israel or involves the land or is a 2nd round or a 2nd chance for Israel under the old. It is false to think so.
Click to expand...
Your mind is SO TWISTED that you cannot see the truth even when we show it to you REPEATEDLY.

God promised Israel a KINGDOM with Christ as the KING. It will happen whether your commentaries like it or not.

P.S. You need to learn about the remnant.
Rom 9:27-28 (AKJV/PCE)​
(9:27) Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved: (9:28) For he will finish the work, and cut [it] short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.
​
 
Last edited:
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
Based on nonsense like THAT, I can see why you're so CONFUSED.

The BIBLE makes it that God will make a NEW covenant WITH HOUSE OF ISRAEL and the HOUSE OF JUDAH.

Why can't you see those verses? Are you really that completely BLIND?


False premise -> False conclusion.


Oh the thick, juicy IRONY of that.

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. ​

​
Why you YOU ignore the DETAILS there? Because you are a hypocrite and real writer and grammar scholar.


Your mind is SO TWISTED that you cannot see the truth even when we show it to you REPEATEDLY.

God promised Israel a KINGDOM with Christ as the KING. It will happen whether your commentaries like it or not.

P.S. You need to learn about the remnant.

Rom 9:27-28 (AKJV/PCE)​
(9:27) Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved: (9:28) For he will finish the work, and cut [it] short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.
​
Click to expand...





there is absolutely no going back to racial-based lines. It is nowhere in the NT; it is the celebration of the NT and the Gospel that they are gone.

The remnant is those who believed, not the race, and when it gets to how the NT/apostles use the term, it is both Jew and Gentile, because they have faith. Especially your Rom 9 quote, where v26 makes that totally clear.

I'm aware of the details of Jer 23-33 but even more aware of how the NT goes on to use it. Heb 9-10 are the commentary we are after and there is nothing about the land. No concern. This is in light of the fact that it is about to be decimated, so you would think, logically, that RIGHT THERE, RIGHT IN CH 9-10, IF ANYWHERE, IS WHERRE THE NT WOULD VALIDATE A FUTURE LAND OF ISRAEL ERA OR TIME PERIOD, and it does NOT.

D'ists do because of their veiled/Judaistic commentaries, but the NT does not.

You don't accept the NT as the final on these things, and I don't know if anything can be done about that, unless you change.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
there is absolutely no going back to racial-based lines. It is nowhere in the NT; it is the celebration of the NT and the Gospel that they are gone.

The remnant is those who believed, not the race, and when it gets to how the NT/apostles use the term, it is both Jew and Gentile, because they have faith. Especially your Rom 9 quote, where v26 makes that totally clear.

I'm aware of the details of Jer 23-33 but even more aware of how the NT goes on to use it. Heb 9-10 are the commentary we are after and there is nothing about the land. No concern. This is in light of the fact that it is about to be decimated, so you would think, logically, that RIGHT THERE, RIGHT IN CH 9-10, IF ANYWHERE, IS WHERRE THE NT WOULD VALIDATE A FUTURE LAND OF ISRAEL ERA OR TIME PERIOD, and it does NOT.

D'ists do because of their veiled/Judaistic commentaries, but the NT does not.

You don't accept the NT as the final on these things, and I don't know if anything can be done about that, unless you change.
Click to expand...

More made up commentary driven fantasy.
 
N

northwye

New member
"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:
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:
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." Jeremiah 31: 31-33

Jeremiah 31: 31-33 is talking about the remaking of Old Covenant Israel and referring to that remaking as being a New Covenant. II Kings 21: 13 says that God is to "turn Jerusalem upside down," Isaiah 29: 16 points to Jeremiah 18: 4-5, which is the parable of the lump of clay - which Paul refers to in Romans 9: 21 - and Jeremiah 18: 4-5 says God will remake Israel.

In Jeremiah 18: 1-6 Old Covenant Israel is seen to be a lump of clay on a potter's wheel. In Jeremiah 18: 4 the vessel God made out of the lump is marred in the hand of the potter, and "so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it." God then says in Jeremiah 18: "O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter?"

In the metaphor of the potter first making a pot that was marred and then remaking the same lump of clay as another pot, he, as God, saw as being good, a potter can actually do this. The potter takes the flawed pot off the potter's wheel, lays the wet lump of clay down on a table, mixes in dry clay, kneads it with his hands a while, and then puts the same lump of clay back on his potter's wheel and makes a better pot out of it.

Is the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31: 31-33 just a renewed form of the Mosaic Law? It may be that dispensationalists would want to think so, since they want to honor Old Covenant Israel and to become surrogates for those they see as being of Old Covenant Israel.

God promises in Isaiah 55: 3 that "Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David." 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, supported by Jeremiah 32: 40, Jeremiah 50: 5,Ezekiel 16: 60 and Ezekiel 37: 26.

Ezekiel 11: 19 promises to give the house of Israel one heart and a new spirit and take the stony heart out of Old Covenant Israel.

Ezekiel 18: 31 says for Israel to make for themselves new heart and a new spirit. "For why will ye die, O house of Israel?"

Hebrews 13: 20-21 talks about The "... blood of the everlasting covenant, make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight" The New Covenant is everlasting, not a temporary "dispensation," which is to give way to another dispensation of law for the people of the physical bloodline in some future time.

Hebrews 7: 22 says "By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament." And Hebrews 8: 6 says "But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises."

"And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." Hebrews 9: 15

Since Jesus Christ himself is the mediator of the New Covenant, the spiritual light which shines into the hearts of the believers in the New Covenant is greater than the light shining in the Old Covenant.

"And said unto me, Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified....... And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth." Isaiah 49: 3-7

"Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." John 8: 12

"Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.
15. Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. Matthew 5: 14-15

Israel, with Christ in it, is the light to the world. Without Christ, Israel is not the light to the world.

Old Covenant Israel was remade into the spiritual house in I Peter 2: 5, and so the New Covenant is not the renewal of the Old Covenant, but a remaking and transformation of the Old Covenant.

"If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious.
4.To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,
5.Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ." I Peter 2: 3-5

"Ye" in I Peter 2: 3-5 are those of the elect who are under the New Covenant. Who else could "ye" be?

Those of the New Covenant who are the elect are a spiritual house, implying that they are a spiritual house because they are in Christ and he in them, as a fulfillment of some Old Testament prophecies, which may not have said in an explicit way that in Christ, under the New Covenant, Christ was to create a spiritual house.

And under the New Covenant those not of the chosen people physical bloodline were brought into the people of God as equals. 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.

"Behold, I have given him for a witness to the people, a leader and commander to the people.
5.Behold, thou shalt call a nation that thou knowest not, and nations that knew not thee shall run unto thee because of the LORD thy God, and for the Holy One of Israel; for he hath glorified thee." Isaiah 55: 4-5

"And I will sow her unto me in the earth; and I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy; and I will say to them which were not my people, Thou art my people; and they shall say, Thou art my God." Hosea 2: 23
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
Ever the rationalizer. :juggle:


You are a hack and do not take the Word of God seriously.
Click to expand...





I see, the word of God is not in the NT. Got it.

I take the NT use of the passage over D'ism anyday. D'ism is by nature hack.

We are supposed to sound like Heb 10 when its all done, and apply like Heb 10B. I don't see any indication that you do.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
Isn't it stunning that these folks that try to tell us "what dispensationalists think" have NO idea what dispensationalists think?
Click to expand...





Is it possible that you don't think I know what you think because you are pretty repressed about it? Or are you repressed about it because it really doesn't stand and the less you say the better?

I grew up in it, spoke with Walvoord and Sauerwein and Needham myself, I had a Scofiled Bible for several years before I knew better. I see their material all the time. I have a pastor friend a DTS grad, who collaborated with me on some early Nazi philosophy analysis in our writing, but had a regrettable way of ending up in D'ism, so we are not close any longer.

Keep running your mouth; you have no idea what you are talking about.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
North wrote:
And under the New Covenant those not of the chosen people physical bloodline were brought into the people of God as equals. 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.




Hey D'ist guys, find even one problem with this.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
Is it possible that you don't think I know what you think because you are pretty repressed about it? Or are you repressed about it because it really doesn't stand and the less you say the better?

I grew up in it, spoke with Walvoord and Sauerwein and Needham myself, I had a Scofiled Bible for several years before I knew better. I see their material all the time. I have a pastor friend a DTS grad, who collaborated with me on some early Nazi philosophy analysis in our writing, but had a regrettable way of ending up in D'ism, so we are not close any longer.

Keep running your mouth; you have no idea what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

More opinions, thanks Dr Phil
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top