There is no land grant of Canaan in the Mosiac Covenant.That is your opinion. You can hang onto it and keep the one you have that I think is unbiblical.
Oh my gosh. While we are at it why don't we have an argument about what the meaning of the word is is.
They received the land through promise (covenant). Keeping it was a whole different deal when it came to the Sinai covenant which is the land grant covenant. Ma
The land grant was made in Ge 15:17-21.
Did you not say that covenant is the reason I can trust God?Do you think God does not bind Himself to keep His own promises? His very promise is an oath. It does not have to be formal.
Nope, dispensationalism was news to me after I had studied the Bible.Pretty sure you did not arrive there all on your own. No one does and those who say they do deceive themselves and/or others.
I had found nothing of the sort anywhere in it, and when I looked into this dispensational stuff, I found it was not only new to me but also new to the church, and not a historical doctrinre.
All you have to do is review the conversation, and you can decide for yourself.And now you back away from what you said by saying it was an example, not your view. Just like you did in another thread by saying what you were saying was speculating.
Scritpure doesn't call all of them covenants, that's an extra-Biblical idea of man.The only "problem"administrations solves is to not acknowledge all the covenants.
No, but does not Covenant theology have the Edenic Covenant going all the way to Christ, or something like that?Does a building require a frame work? The framework is not the building, but it is what the building is built around and what holds it together, and supports it, gives it its design. Covenant theology is not a series of overarching segments (as dispensationalism is) but the framework that upon which all of scripture is built, supports it. gives it its design.