• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

THE ERROR OF SUPERSESSIONISM

  • Thread starter Thread starter jeremiah1five
  • Start date Start date
That's not so. God gave a promise of salvation to the Israelite remnant that would return to their homeland in the post-exilic return.

Ezekiel 36:26-29 describes the conditions of this post-exilic return in terms of salvation. "A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statues, and ye shall keep my judgments, and so them. And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God. I will also save you from all your uncleannesses...Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good and shall loath yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations."

Paul in using this OT scripture promise of equating the Israelite remnant's return with salvation was spot on in describing the conditions of this post-exilic return as being "saved" in the spiritual sense as well as the physical - just as there was an Israelite remnant that was being spiritually saved at the present time in Paul's own days.
How can it be in the spiritual sense when all Israel knew was letter of the Law and the Holy Spirit had not yet come. You're over analyzing this and coming up with error.

Isaiah says a remnant shall RETURN. There is nothing salvic about returning to their homeland.
Saul changes the word to "saved" thus manipulating Scripture. That's being dishonest. Lies.
 
Perhaps the term 'Remnant' is in question...

According to Arnold Fruchtenbaum...

"The Remnant is that part of Israel that believes in the Messiah. A believing Remnant will exist in the Tribulation. The Remnant of Israel During the Tribulation. All individual Jewish believers during the seven years of the Tribulation will be part of the Remnant of Israel."

I believe those were the ones Saul/Paul was referring to when he mentions 'remnant', and I agree.
Saul changed the word from "return" to "saved."
When someone here does that, we call them out on it and a heretic.
And there's a great deal of heresy here, too.
Doctrines of devils is doctrines of lies.
 
Why blame Saul/Paul, why not Isaiah?
Your attack is not on Saul, but Scripture as a whole.
The Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets is good Scripture.
The writers of the New Covenant Scriptures are only discussing the effect of Israel's Messiah on their covenants, their promises, and their prophecies, on their whole religion. I can do the same thing and I do. But unlike Saul I don't change words to suit my belief-system. Lots do that here. You know that.
I hate a liar.
And those that lord it over the sheep.
What they do to the least of these my brethren they have done it unto me, Jesus said.
 
Saul changed the word from "return" to "saved."
When someone here does that, we call them out on it and a heretic.
And there's a great deal of heresy here, too.
Doctrines of devils is doctrines of lies.
But unlike Saul I don't change words to suit my belief-system. Lots do that here. You know that.
I hate a liar.
And those that lord it over the sheep.

So, please come clean.
Are you calling Paul a heretic or a devil? (you have already called him a liar)
Are you saying Scripture is not inspired by the Holy Ghost?
Or are you saying the letters of Paul are not Scripture?
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
 
Congrats, you are now on 'ignore'. I came here for 'Christian' fellowship, not to fellowship with one who denigrates Scripture or it's Apostles.
 
So, please come clean.
Are you calling Paul a heretic or a devil? (you have already called him a liar)
Are you saying Scripture is not inspired by the Holy Ghost?
Or are you saying the letters of Paul are not Scripture?
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
It's a shame you think you can judge me without hearing me out in answer to your questions, Solomon.
 
Congrats, you are now on 'ignore'. I came here for 'Christian' fellowship, not to fellowship with one who denigrates Scripture or it's Apostles.
Then you can ignore my response I just gave you.
I have deleted it.
 
How can it be in the spiritual sense when all Israel knew was letter of the Law and the Holy Spirit had not yet come. You're over analyzing this and coming up with error.

Isaiah says a remnant shall RETURN. There is nothing salvic about returning to their homeland.
Saul changes the word to "saved" thus manipulating Scripture. That's being dishonest. Lies.
On the contrary. Return from exile was equated with forgiveness of sins, i.e. salvation.
This is one of the major motifs of the crucifixion - through Jesus' death on the cross we have forgiveness of sins. We see in this a reversal of the Fall and a return from our exile from Eden. And the New Testament makes it clear that this is not just for believing Jews but for believing Gentiles as well. The scope of this salvation is for all the world, not just the Jews.
For God so loved the world that he gave His Only Son so that whoever believes in Him will have eternal life. John 3:16.
 
On the contrary. Return from exile was equated with forgiveness of sins, i.e. salvation.
This is one of the major motifs of the crucifixion - through Jesus' death on the cross we have forgiveness of sins. We see in this a reversal of the Fall and a return from our exile from Eden. And the New Testament makes it clear that this is not just for believing Jews but for believing Gentiles as well. The scope of this salvation is for all the world, not just the Jews.
For God so loved the world that he gave His Only Son so that whoever believes in Him will have eternal life. John 3:16.
Great. Now show me Scripture supporting that.

John 3:16 as with the other 3 gospels were written to the Jews to show them that this Jesus was their long-awaited Messiah.
Since there is no other word to show contextual inclusion as the word "kosmos" (translated "world"), the "world" meant the Jews.
Or does Jesus' very own words "I was not sent BUT to the lost sheep of the House of Israel" mean Gentiles?

The Covenant God made with the House of Israel in which their Messiah was a central component of this Hebraic Covenant has "Jew" written all over it no matter how much Gentiles want to force change of the Covenant God made with the House of Israel to include Gentiles.
God made no covenant with the House of Gentiles or the seed of Gentiles.
God is saving Gentiles WITHOUT covenant and the writings of Saul, Peter, James, and John, etc., are only their interpretations of their Messiah's effect on those covenants. This is why Saul for one tries to explain to other Jewish Christians their connection by being Christ-followers with the Abrahamic and Mosaic - and even the Davidic - Covenants and that Messiah is the fulfillment of the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets declarations of what we now know as the Seed.
If YOU JEWS are Christ's, then YOU JEWS are Abraham's children according to the Promise, a promise made to the House of Israel (Jer. 31:31-34; Genesis 17.)
There is nothing in the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets recording God making covenant with Gentiles or the seed of Gentiles.
None.
 
Great. Now show me Scripture supporting that.

John 3:16 as with the other 3 gospels were written to the Jews to show them that this Jesus was their long-awaited Messiah.
Since there is no other word to show contextual inclusion as the word "kosmos" (translated "world"), the "world" meant the Jews.
Or does Jesus' very own words "I was not sent BUT to the lost sheep of the House of Israel" mean Gentiles?

The Covenant God made with the House of Israel in which their Messiah was a central component of this Hebraic Covenant has "Jew" written all over it no matter how much Gentiles want to force change of the Covenant God made with the House of Israel to include Gentiles.
God made no covenant with the House of Gentiles or the seed of Gentiles.
God is saving Gentiles WITHOUT covenant and the writings of Saul, Peter, James, and John, etc., are only their interpretations of their Messiah's effect on those covenants. This is why Saul for one tries to explain to other Jewish Christians their connection by being Christ-followers with the Abrahamic and Mosaic - and even the Davidic - Covenants and that Messiah is the fulfillment of the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets declarations of what we now know as the Seed.
If YOU JEWS are Christ's, then YOU JEWS are Abraham's children according to the Promise, a promise made to the House of Israel (Jer. 31:31-34; Genesis 17.)
There is nothing in the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets recording God making covenant with Gentiles or the seed of Gentiles.
None.
If you want Scripture to support what I wrote, try reading from Genesis through to Revelation. The Bible afterall is all about God's rescue of humanity through Christ. You see the great thing is that we have a record in Acts of how God lead the Apostles to come to understand that the Gospel was not just for the Jews but the Gentiles as well - that the Gentiles were saved in exactly the same way as the Jews.

I also recommend reading some Hebrew and 2nd temple scholarship to better understand how the Jews in Biblical times and in the time leading to Jesus thought. It is really important when reading Scripture to read it in the cultural context of the time. Taking the words in the Bible and reading them with our modern day context leads to a lot of misunderstanding. I recommend scholars like Mackie and Heiser.
 
If you want Scripture to support what I wrote, try reading from Genesis through to Revelation. The Bible afterall is all about God's rescue of humanity through Christ. You see the great thing is that we have a record in Acts of how God lead the Apostles to come to understand that the Gospel was not just for the Jews but the Gentiles as well - that the Gentiles were saved in exactly the same way as the Jews.
Right. I agree. There is no mention of "forgiveness" to Israel as the motivation of God in the prophets by which He returned them back to their land.
Peter and James and John were apostles to the Jews and in their minds the New Covenant was Jewish in nature and purpose and Jesus Himself says, "I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the House of Israel," and when He sent His disciples on mission He said: "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand." Mt 10:5–7.

The reference of "kingdom of heaven" had only meaning to the lost sheep of the House of Israel. Gentiles and their dumb idols were oblivious to any "kingdom of heaven" God promised to Israel.

And before He ascended it was important to His Covenant with the House of Israel to let the twelve tribes scattered throughout the then-known Gentile lands - even Spain - to herald that Israel's Messiah had come and that God has kept His Promise to the House of Israel and the House of Judah as per the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets.
I also recommend reading some Hebrew and 2nd temple scholarship to better understand how the Jews in Biblical times and in the time leading to Jesus thought. It is really important when reading Scripture to read it in the cultural context of the time. Taking the words in the Bible and reading them with our modern day context leads to a lot of misunderstanding. I recommend scholars like Mackie and Heiser.
 
How can it be in the spiritual sense when all Israel knew was letter of the Law and the Holy Spirit had not yet come. You're over analyzing this and coming up with error.

Isaiah says a remnant shall RETURN. There is nothing salvic about returning to their homeland.
Saul changes the word to "saved" thus manipulating Scripture. That's being dishonest. Lies.
Paul did not lie. The text from Ezekiel 36:26-27 is most definitely describing a spiritual change in those who returned to Jerusalem after the exile. Haggai confirms this Spirit of the Lord remaining among the people as they worked to rebuild the temple. "According to the word that I covenanted with you when ye came out of Egypt, so my spirit remaineth among you: fear ye not." (Haggai 2:5). There was a revival of the spirit of the people who returned, as Ezra acknowledged in his prayer to God in Ezra 9:8-9. The people "wept very sore" (Ezra 10:1) for the sins they had committed against God, and essentially a national revival took place among that remnant. God had predicted this in the Ezekiel 26 text, and it came true.
 
Paul did not lie. The text from Ezekiel 36:26-27 is most definitely describing a spiritual change in those who returned to Jerusalem after the exile. Haggai confirms this Spirit of the Lord remaining among the people as they worked to rebuild the temple. "According to the word that I covenanted with you when ye came out of Egypt, so my spirit remaineth among you: fear ye not." (Haggai 2:5). There was a revival of the spirit of the people who returned, as Ezra acknowledged in his prayer to God in Ezra 9:8-9. The people "wept very sore" (Ezra 10:1) for the sins they had committed against God, and essentially a national revival took place among that remnant. God had predicted this in the Ezekiel 26 text, and it came true.
Ezekiel 36:26-27 is a prophesy having to do with the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-34 and is yet future and fulfilled with the advent of the Holy Spirit, who as per covenant was prophesied to dwell within the believe thus making Jesus' words that He, "the kingdom of God is within you."

And in Haggai is another prophecy yet future.

4 Yet now be strong, O Zerubbabel, saith the LORD;
And be strong, O Joshua, son of Josedech, the high priest;
And be strong, all ye people of the land, saith the LORD, and work:
For I am with you, saith the LORD of hosts:
5 According to the word that I covenanted with you when ye came out of Egypt,
So my spirit remaineth among you: fear ye not.
6 For thus saith the LORD of hosts; Yet once, it is a little while,
And I will shake the heavens, and the earth, and the sea, and the dry land;
7 And I will shake all nations, and the desire of all nations shall come:
And I will fill this house with glory, saith the LORD of hosts.
8 The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, saith the LORD of hosts.
9 The glory of this latter house shall be greater than of the former, saith the LORD of hosts:
Hag 2:4–9.

Haggai references the former house from the latter house, which is prophesied to come in Israel's future. And God has always been "among" His people but according to other prophecies He is said to be within His people, and this occurred beginning on the Feast of Harvest (Pentecost.)
Until atonement the Holy Spirit had never been within any of God's people because the blood did not "cover" them until Jesus' blood took away Israel's sins, and the good part is that God does this through covenant with the House of Israel and they don't have to "accept Jesus into their 'hearts."
God saves Israel through covenant and God saves Gentiles without covenant.
 
Haggai references the former house from the latter house, which is prophesied to come in Israel's future. And God has always been "among" His people but according to other prophecies He is said to be within His people, and this occurred beginning on the Feast of Harvest (Pentecost.)
Until atonement the Holy Spirit had never been within any of God's people because the blood did not "cover" them until Jesus' blood took away Israel's sins, and the good part is that God does this through covenant with the House of Israel and they don't have to "accept Jesus into their 'hearts."
God saves Israel through covenant and God saves Gentiles without covenant.
The "latter house" was Zerubbabel's temple - the second temple which was destroyed in AD 70. The glory of the "former house", the temple built under Solomon, would not surpass the glory of Zerubbabel's "latter house". That was because the incarnate Son of Man would appear in Zerubbabel's second temple, filling it with more glory than Solomon's "former house", the first temple, had ever had.

We can't say that the Spirit never indwelt anyone in the OT. Remember Numbers 27:18, in which God describes Joshus as "a man in whom is the Spirit". The Spirit remaining in us forever under the New Covenant represents a continual pledge of our future bodily resurrection. We are given that Holy Spirit as a seal of the future redemption of our bodies which will be made incorruptible and immortal.

God actually made no difference between Jew and Gentiles in salvation. With regard to the story regarding Cornelius the centurion in Acts 10, Peter told his fellow countrymen later that, God "put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith." We are saved in the same way "even as they" back under the Old Covenant - "through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ", as Peter affirmed in Acts 15:8-11 . The elect looked forward in faith to the coming Messiah, as far back as God's promise to Eve that her Seed would crush the serpent's head. We today as elect look back in faith on a Messiah who fulfilled all those prophesies regarding Himself.

The nation of Israel only served as a microcosm of how God would confirm the covenant with His elect, which even in OT days included Gentile strangers who sojourned among the Israelite tribes, sharing an inheritance of the land along with the tribes of Israel (Ezekiel 46:22-23, Isaiah 56:6-7). God always designed His house to be a "house of prayer for all nations".

You have missed the message of this "mystery" revealed to the Apostles in the first century. God concluded both Jew and Gentile in unbelief that He could have mercy upon all.
 
Last edited:
The "latter house" was Zerubbabel's temple - the second temple which was destroyed in AD 70. The glory of the "former house", the temple built under Solomon, would not surpass the glory of Zerubbabel's "latter house". That was because the incarnate Son of Man would appear in Zerubbabel's second temple, filling it with more glory than Solomon's "former house", the first temple, had ever had.
That would be at the end time. The reason why Zerubbabel's/Herod's Temple was left unto them desolate was because He was not in it.
We can't say that the Spirit never indwelt anyone in the OT. Remember Numbers 27:18, in which God describes Joshus as "a man in whom is the Spirit". The Spirit remaining in us forever under the New Covenant represents a continual pledge of our future bodily resurrection. We are given that Holy Spirit as a seal of the future redemption of our bodies which will be made incorruptible and immortal.
Joshua did not have the Spirit residing in him but as with prophets, priests and kings, and Mary, the Spirit overshadowed them but not indwelt. Atonement wasn't made yet and without the blood the Spirit could not dwell in a person as He does today post-Pentecost.
God actually made no difference between Jew and Gentiles in salvation.
If there was no difference or to be no difference, He would have made Covenant with Gentiles or at least mention in the Jeremian Covenant they were to be part of His Covenant with the House of Israel. But as we all know He didn't do that. They were not part of the Abrahamic and Mosaic Covenant to begin with nor received the sign of Covenant which is circumcision. Bunch of uncircumcised Philistines, David is famous in my eyes for saying!
With regard to the story regarding Cornelius the centurion in Acts 10, Peter told his fellow countrymen later that, God "put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith." We are saved in the same way "even as they" back under the Old Covenant -
That does not mean he was in the Covenant. As a matter of fact, Peter goes as far as Pentecost as "the beginning" and once the Holy Spirit came at the Feast of Harvests and 3000 Jews were saved and baptized into the Jewish Body of Christ the Mosaic Covenant was being replaced by the Jeremain Covenant, but only to those who were being saved. The Jews still served God under the Mosaic Covenant until these Jewish issues could be worked out. As a God Fearer, Cornelius was one step away from being a proselyte, which required circumcision. Being a proselyte, the Jews were allowed to be with them, eat with them, and otherwise treat them as a Jews for all intents and purposes since they were in effect Jews and no longer Gentile. Circumcision made quick work of that. But although Cornelius was devout and served God with almsgiving and fasting's his experience with the Holy Spirit did not bring him under the Mosaic Covenant because he wasn't circumcised, and circumcision is the sign of Covenant. Nor, as Gentile was, he part of the New Covenant because the New Covenant was between God and the House of Israel and not Gentiles.
"through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ", as Peter affirmed in Acts 15:8-11 . The elect looked forward in faith to the coming Messiah, as far back as God's promise to Eve that her Seed would crush the serpent's head. We today as elect look back in faith on a Messiah who fulfilled all those prophesies regarding Himself.
Agreed.
The nation of Israel only served as a microcosm of how God would confirm the covenant with His elect, which even in OT days included Gentile strangers who sojourned among the Israelite tribes, sharing an inheritance of the land along with the tribes of Israel (Ezekiel 46:22-23, Isaiah 56:6-7). God always designed His house to be a "house of prayer for all nations".

You have missed the message of this "mystery" revealed to the Apostles in the first century. God concluded both Jew and Gentile in unbelief that He could have mercy upon all.
22 In the four corners of the court there were courts joined of forty cubits long and thirty broad: these four corners were of one measure. 23 And there was a row of building round about in them, round about them four, and it was made with boiling places under the rows round about.
Eze 46:22–23.

Isaiah prophesied about the Kingdom established under Christ (King.)

6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD,
To serve him, and to love the name of the LORD,
To be his servants,
Every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it,
And taketh hold of my covenant;
7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain,
And make them joyful in my house of prayer:
Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar;
For mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.
Is 56:6–7.

Since God had commanded Israel to "not mingle with the nations (Goyim = Gentiles) nor learn their ways this prophecy has to do with the end when Christ sit on His throne. But it still does not say Gentiles are part of the Abrahamic, Mosaic, or the New Covenant.
And since the command was for Israel to maintain their separation from Gentiles the "stranger" here can mean the descendants of Ishmael and Esau, who were children of Abraham and strangers to the covenant since the covenant went through Isaac and then Jacob.

Understand this, that you will not find God making covenant in the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets. It doesn't exist. So, if there is no covenant in the Jewish Scriptures in their Law, in their Psalms, and in their Prophets then the only conclusion is God is saving Gentiles without a covenant.

When the New Covenant began in Jerusalem 3000 Jews were saved and Christ began to build His Church which is a continuation of the Church in the desert at the time of the Tabernacle. Only then, although Israel was "called out" ["ekklesia"] of Egypt the "ekklesia" had another name: The Great Congregation. And it was populated by Jews. Over 3 million strong. And further, the New Covenant writings of Saul, Peter, James, and John, etc., discussed Messiah's effect upon their covenants, for as a baby Church and experiencing a "new thing" God was doing in the earth, the Jewish Christians who became saved and born again and indwelt by the Holy Spirit searched their Scriptures of Law, Psalms, and Prophets for understanding of what was going on with them in Israel. We do the same to understand this "so-great salvation." But God made no covenant with Gentiles. The covenant that is presently in effect is with the House of Israel, and the Church began with Jews, and for 4 decades everything that occurred in Israel with regard to the New Covenant was seen through the lens of Judaism, and the Jewish covenants, and the Jewish prophets. Even the writings were from Jewish Christians who wrote to Jewish Christians in Jewish churches in Corinth, Ephesus, the area around Galatia, and Philippi, etc. While their Temple stood everything was Jewish in nature. And why not? It was a Jewish Covenant with the House of Israel.
Gentiles were excluded from the New Covenant. They were excluded from the Abrahamic Covenant and the Mosaic Covenant. And when the Times of the Gentiles end - and it will end - God will turn His full attention back to Israel, removed their blindness, send two Jewish prophets who will address Israel from out of the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets to show - as was done before - that this Jesus bar Joseph was truly Israel's Redeemer, Savior, Messiah, and King and then you'll see something never done before.
All Israel shall be saved.
Israel is the True Church, the True Bride betrothed to God and will be at the Marriage Supper through Covenant.
Gentiles will be there by invitation (Matt. 22.)
 
How can it be in the spiritual sense when all Israel knew was letter of the Law and the Holy Spirit had not yet come. You're over analyzing this and coming up with error.

Isaiah says a remnant shall RETURN. There is nothing salvic about returning to their homeland.
Saul changes the word to "saved" thus manipulating Scripture. That's being dishonest. Lies.
Revelation is incremental and progressive. The New Testament tells its readers the older revelation was 1) veiled, 2) hidden, and 3) a foreshadowing. It also tells us the original readers and interpreters of the older revelation were blind and blinded, deaf and deafened, hard-hearted, rebellious, unable to perceive and understand..... except where God explained it and did so for a select few. Furthermore, all of it is symbolic. It's a sort of "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" condition in which actual human history reflects the greater spiritual realities. There was a real physical promised land of dirt with rivers and mountains, but that reality also figured the promised land of sinlessness and immortality.

In the newer revelation words and concepts from the older, earlier, less specific but more concreate revelation were explained, and their true meaning revealed. God does not live in houses made from human hands was understandable in the older revelation even if most did not understand that. That God might inhabit people was thought impossible by most but the prophets themselves both new and talked about it; they also inhabited it. Most passed through life blind to the spiritual world around them but Elisha knew. He did not have to ask for a special momentary sight, need a vision, or dream. He saw it. It was his servant who needed the special request. Jacob sees the angles descending and ascending in a vision but if that vision was a glimpse into the normal world of the heavens that surround us then that is happening hear and now as I type these words. The psalmist tells us the angel of the LORD encamps around those who fear Him. The promise of a monarch and his throne that would endure for all time could not have been understood as a resurrection from death by those who believed life was a one-time occasion, but for those who suspected or believed in life on the other side of the grave the possibility was there all along.

So if Jesus, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Saul/Paul, Peter, James or whoever changes a word from old to new he does so at the behest, inspiration, empowerment, and obedience of the Holy Spirit. God told the truth in the past and He told a fuller truth later. There is no deceit. Of course, those who refuse to accept the newer revelation as an explanation of the old never understand either.
Isaiah says a remnant shall RETURN. There is nothing salvic about returning to their homeland.
There is the "homeland" is God and not a little postage-stamp sized parcel of earth on the east end of the Mediterranean.

1 Chronicles 28:2-4
Then King David rose to his feet and said, "Listen to me, my brethren and my people; I had intended to build a permanent home for the ark of the covenant of the LORD and for the footstool of our God. So I had made preparations to build it. But God said to me, 'You shall not build a house for My name because you are a man of war and have shed blood.' Yet, the LORD, the God of Israel, chose me from all the house of my father to be king over Israel forever. For He has chosen Judah to be a leader; and in the house of Judah, my father's house, and among the sons of my father He took pleasure in me to make me king over all Israel.

No, David got it wrong. Jesus got it right. Perhaps he later figured it out because he also wrote,

Psalm 110:1
The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet."

He understood there is a LORD and a Lord who was lord over lord and king David. He understood the eternal thrown wasn't on earth, and that the LORD would return but not until all his enemies were defeated. Despite the many occasions when glimpses into God's plan, purpose, mind, and work were revealed the leaders of Judaism still Got most of what was written wrong. Jesus repeatedly says, "You have heard it said, '________________,' but I say, '___________________,'" and he teaches the true original meaning corrects the perversion prominent during the days of his incarnation. Very little Jesus taught was new. It can all be found elsewhere in Tanakh............ in veiled, hidden, foreshadowed form to a hard-hearted pile of sinners whose only aspect of merit was their having been chosen by God.


And not a single one of them was ever asked if the wanted to be chosen. Despite that clear, consistent, repeated precedent, some readers of the newer revelation still think mind of sinful flesh is meritorious.


It is not.


The Church no more replaces Israel than Jesus replaces the human he regenerates and indwells. We are not our own, we've been bought at a price, but "we" do not cease to exist replaced by something or someone else.
 
Since God had commanded Israel to "not mingle with the nations (Goyim = Gentiles) nor learn their ways this prophecy has to do with the end when Christ sit on His throne. But it still does not say Gentiles are part of the Abrahamic, Mosaic, or the New Covenant.
It was one thing for Israel to be forbidden to mingle with the nations and not to learn their ways, but it was entirely admissible and a blessing for the nations to mingle with Israel and lay hold of the covenant, sharing an inheritance among the tribes as if one born among them (Ezekiel 47:22-23).

Even when Israel left Egyptian bondage, it is stated that a "mixed multitude" left Egypt along with the Israelites (Exodus 12:38), and were likewise included with the Israelite tribes as being "baptized in the cloud and in the sea" (1 Corinthians 10:2). When coming into the land of Canaan, the descendants of this "mixed multitude" also came, and the Mosaic laws applied to these "strangers" also as they entered the land of Canaan. They were likewise subject to the same laws of the covenant.

"And if a stranger sojourn with you, or whosoever be among you in your generations, and will offer an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord; as ye do, so he shall do. One ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation, and also for the stranger that sojourneth with you, an ordinance for ever in your generations: as ye are, so shall the stranger be before the Lord. One law and one manner shall be for you, and for the stranger that sojourneth with you." (Numbers 15:14-16).

Even back under the Mosaic law, God was already showing how there would be "one fold and one Shepherd" (John 10:16), without distinction as to ethnicity, gender, or social status (Galatians 3:28). The only circumcision that would really count in the long run would be "circumcision of the heart", as God described all the way back in Deuteronomy 30:6, so that His people would love Him with all their heart and soul.

You have written that the covenant was never made with Gentiles. That is not true. Read Deuteronomy 29:1-15. "These are the words of the covenant, which the Lord commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel in the land of Moab, beside the covenant which he made with them in Horeb." God then went on to speak to the children of Israel, saying, "Ye stand this day all of you before the Lord your God; your captains of your tribes, your elders, and your officers, with all the men of Israel, Your little ones, your wives, AND THY STRANGER that is in thy camp, from the hewer of thy wood unto the drawer of thy water: that thou shouldest enter into covenant with the Lord thy God, and into his oath, which the Lord thy God maketh with thee this day...Neither with you only do I make this covenant and this oath; BUT WITH HIM THAT STANDETH HERE WITH US THIS DAY BEFORE THE LORD OUR GOD, AND ALSO WITH HIM THAT IS NOT HERE WITH US THIS DAY:" The stranger standing among the ethnic Israelites that day, even of the humblest station, was included in this same covenant, as well as people who weren't even alive at that point.

God is not the racist that you make Him out to be.
 
It was one thing for Israel to be forbidden to mingle with the nations and not to learn their ways, but it was entirely admissible and a blessing for the nations to mingle with Israel and lay hold of the covenant, sharing an inheritance among the tribes as if one born among them (Ezekiel 47:22-23).
To have an inheritance one would have to be in covenant and God has made no covenant with Gentiles. Thus, Gentiles have no inheritance to speak of for they are in no covenant.
The New Covenant in which Israel is in right now was made between God and the House of Israel and the House of Judah - No Gentiles (Jer. 31:31-34.)

There is no change in the command to the Jews God gave them to "not mingle with the Gentiles nor learn their ways." The command is reiterated to Israel, specifically, Jewish Christians:

15 Love not the world (non-covenant), neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 1 Jn 2:15.

4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God. James 4:4.

And this ties in nicely with the original command to Israel of twelve tribes in the desert during the time of the Tabernacle in who they were commanded to love:

16 Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people: neither shalt thou stand against the blood of thy neighbour [member of another tribe living next to you]: I am the LORD.
17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother [member of the same tribe] in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour [member of another tribe living next to you], and not suffer sin upon him.
18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, [member of any tribe] but thou shalt love thy neighbour [member of another tribe living next to you] as thyself: I am the LORD. Lev. 19:16–18.

Jesus upheld this command to Israel:
Northern kingdom [ten tribes], and southern kingdom [two tribes]

43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour [member of another tribe], and hate thine enemy [member of the opposing kingdom].
44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies [the opposing kingdom], bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good [of both kingdoms], and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust [of both kingdoms].
46 For if ye love them which love you [allied tribes], what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
47 And if ye salute your brethren [of the same tribe] only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?
48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. Mt 5:43–48.

Be ye holy for I am holy.
Even when Israel left Egyptian bondage, it is stated that a "mixed multitude" left Egypt along with the Israelites (Exodus 12:38), and were likewise included with the Israelite tribes as being "baptized in the cloud and in the sea" (1 Corinthians 10:2). When coming into the land of Canaan, the descendants of this "mixed multitude" also came, and the Mosaic laws applied to these "strangers" also as they entered the land of Canaan. They were likewise subject to the same laws of the covenant.
The "mixed multitude" are the non-Jewish wives (and their children) of the twelve sons of Israel, such as a Canaanitish woman married to Simeon as an example. Multiply this situation by 400 years. A great people went to Egypt during the 7-year famine, lived there and had a life, and when the time was come to leave Egypt returned a "mixed multitude." But it was not anywhere a majority but enough to describe their significance. I doubt any Egyptians left with the children of Israel, and if there were any because their nation was destroyed by God it was most likely a small number (Gen. 46:8-27.)
"And if a stranger sojourn with you, or whosoever be among you in your generations, and will offer an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord; as ye do, so he shall do. One ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation, and also for the stranger that sojourneth with you, an ordinance for ever in your generations: as ye are, so shall the stranger be before the Lord. One law and one manner shall be for you, and for the stranger that sojourneth with you." (Numbers 15:14-16).
Jehovah was destroying Gentiles in Canaan and the surrounding area that they either went to war with Israel, was attacked by Israel, or stayed away from Israel. This left the descendants of Ishmael (twelve sons) and the descendants of Esau that interacted with the twelve tribes. Not being the promised seed, they were in effect "strangers" and "pilgrims," as were most of these nomad tribes.
Even back under the Mosaic law, God was already showing how there would be "one fold and one Shepherd" (John 10:16), without distinction as to ethnicity, gender, or social status (Galatians 3:28). The only circumcision that would really count in the long run would be "circumcision of the heart", as God described all the way back in Deuteronomy 30:6, so that His people would love Him with all their heart and soul.
The only circumcision that mattered was the circumcision of their present day and time. And this is what separated Abraham's descendants from the Gentiles not in covenant with God. Even Abraham was wise to not take anything from the Gentile king of Sodom thus maintaining separation and non-involvement. At this time the prophecy of "circumcision of the heart" was still over 2000 years away. Circumcision of the flesh was the in-thing for Abraham and his descendants.
You have written that the covenant was never made with Gentiles. That is not true. Read Deuteronomy 29:1-15. "These are the words of the covenant, which the Lord commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel in the land of Moab, beside the covenant which he made with them in Horeb." God then went on to speak to the children of Israel, saying, "Ye stand this day all of you before the Lord your God; your captains of your tribes, your elders, and your officers, with all the men of Israel, Your little ones, your wives, AND THY STRANGER that is in thy camp, from the hewer of thy wood unto the drawer of thy water: that thou shouldest enter into covenant with the Lord thy God, and into his oath, which the Lord thy God maketh with thee this day...Neither with you only do I make this covenant and this oath; BUT WITH HIM THAT STANDETH HERE WITH US THIS DAY BEFORE THE LORD OUR GOD, AND ALSO WITH HIM THAT IS NOT HERE WITH US THIS DAY:" The stranger standing among the ethnic Israelites that day, even of the humblest station, was included in this same covenant, as well as people who weren't even alive at that point.

God is not the racist that you make Him out to be.
The only people Israel would and could hang with were the descendants of Ishmael and Esau. Everyone else kept their distance fearing Jehovah. It is also possible they were slaves of the vanquished. Still, the covenant was with Abraham and his seed, not the stranger or foreigner, and with the children of Israel and their seed. God was continuing the Abrahamic Covenant with the Passover in Genesis 12.

11 And it shall be when the LORD shall bring thee into the land of the Canaanites, as he sware unto thee and to thy fathers, and shall give it thee, Ex 13:11.
 
The only people Israel would and could hang with were the descendants of Ishmael and Esau. Everyone else kept their distance fearing Jehovah. It is also possible they were slaves of the vanquished. Still, the covenant was with Abraham and his seed, not the stranger or foreigner, and with the children of Israel and their seed. God was continuing the Abrahamic Covenant with the Passover in Genesis 12.
You are completely ignoring God's statement that He was then including Gentiles in this covenant. Anyone who was not of a tribal lineage was considered a "stranger", and if they were standing there in that day, God was making the covenant with them also in Deuteronomy 29.
 
You are completely ignoring God's statement that He was then including Gentiles in this covenant. Anyone who was not of a tribal lineage was considered a "stranger", and if they were standing there in that day, God was making the covenant with them also in Deuteronomy 29.
Show me the covenant in which God is including Gentiles.
Circumcision is what separated Hebrew/Israel from Gentiles. They did not even live close to each other. But there were dozens of family descendants that came from the loins of Ishmael and Esau that lived near the children of Israel. Look at any map of the time. A stranger or foreigner would be people from these desert nomads. Now, let's put that grey matter to work.
When Jacob brought his family and their descendants to Egypt he did not bring Gentiles with him for they hated each other and would not interact with each other. Jacob took his descendants which when God delivered them from Egypt called them His people, His elect, His covenant people. Gentiles didn't go with Jacob to Egypt and live in Goshen and Gentiles did not leave with the children of Israel when God brought them out.
The Abrahamic Covenant was with Abraham and his descendants, those people that come from "out of him." THAT'S WHO God made covenant with, and you can read it in Genesis 17. Do I need to post the Scriptures? Yes, I do:

7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.
Gen. 17:6–7.

14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant. Gen. 17:14.

Since the sign of the covenant is circumcision, Gentiles are NOT circumcised, which means they are NOT included in covenant and if not circumcised it is impossible to "break the covenant" since circumcision is permanent and Gentiles are not circumcised. They were never in the covenant to begin with. So, your guess that Gentiles came out of Egypt with the children of Israel is impossible since the children would not keep company with Gentiles that are CUT OFF (ha ha) for not being in covenant to begin with and are not circumcised and NOT part of the covenant. The land of Goshen was set apart for the Hebrews and Gentiles are not Hebrew.

There is no mention of "strangers" or "foreigners," not only that but Gentiles do not come from the loins of Abraham, and the covenant is with his seed, NOT "strangers" or "foreigners." There's no mention of this in Genesis 17. The children of Israel were under the Abrahamic Covenant before Egypt, while they were there for 400 years, and when they left Egypt. They took no Gentiles with them to Egypt, and they took no Gentiles with them when they left Egypt for the land of Goshen was set apart specifically for Jacob's families. A people that became over 3 million strong when they left Egypt.
So, I put the same challenge to you as I put to others who cannot show me through the Abrahamic Covenant God making covenant with Gentiles. As it says above the Covenant God made with Abraham was also to his seed, his descendants, and Gentiles do not come from his loins.

But I'll give you a second chance: Look in the Hebrew/Jewish Scriptures of the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets for any verse of Scripture showing God making covenant with Gentiles. And another thing that just popped into my head: IF there were Gentiles they would be called "nations" not "strangers" or "foreigners." With this, it helps identify that these "strangers" and "foreigners" are not Gentile, and the only thing left is the descendants of Ishmael and Esau. They would be from the loins of Abraham but "strangers" and "foreigners" to the Isaac-ian covenant since the covenant went through his loins, and then Jacob's. In about 400-430 years the children of Abraham became over 3 million strong, even close to 4 million. And NONE of them Gentile. They were CUT OFF (ha ha) a long, long, time ago. Didn't even make the trip to Egypt with Abraham's kids.
There ya go. Learn something.
 
Back
Top