Why are they called Hebrews?

[EarlyActs]

I am not interested in working your 20 quotes.

If you want to present them, and tell me how they refute what I have said, go ahead. I promise I will respond.

You still haven't answered. Did God lie to Abram when He told him the land promise was forever, and everlasting?

Lees

He did not lie bc of the two citations of Joshua.

Yours is an old trick I’ve heard for decades.

If God did not totally disinherit those in Israel who did not follow the new Moses, as Acts 3 says, then he would be a liar. That event was its destruction in the 1st century. Like 23:28. I’m a historian first, then theologian. This was my research topic for my master’s degree.

No point in my telling you what the 20 quotes mean; you need to work it out yourself bc of the consequence of their profile: they are the official early result of what the apostles were taught during the 40 days by the enthroned King. And even though Paul was not there for that, it is amazing how many of them he uses the same way!

 

[EarlyActs]

I am not interested in working your 20 quotes.

If you want to present them, and tell me how they refute what I have said, go ahead. I promise I will respond.

You still haven't answered. Did God lie to Abram when He told him the land promise was forever, and everlasting?

Lees

Heb 2, 2Peter 3 and Rev 21 all show that nothing on earth will be forever/everlasting.

 

[Lees]

He did not lie bc of the two citations of Joshua.

Yours is an old trick I’ve heard for decades.

If God did not totally disinherit those in Israel who did not follow the new Moses, as Acts 3 says, then he would be a liar. That event was its destruction in the 1st century. Like 23:28. I’m a historian first, then theologian. This was my research topic for my master’s degree.

No point in my telling you what the 20 quotes mean; you need to work it out yourself bc of the consequence of their profile: they are the official early result of what the apostles were taught during the 40 days by the enthroned King. And even though Paul was not there for that, it is amazing how many of them he uses the same way!

What two citations?

If the land promise is not forever, and everlasting, then God did lie.

Nothing in (Acts 3) says God totally disinherited Israel.

No thanks.

Heb 2, 2Peter 3 and Rev 21 all show that nothing on earth will be forever/everlasting.

(Heb. 2) says no such thing.

(2 Peter 3) speaks of a new heaven and new earth. One which is renovated by fire. Still exists.

(Rev. 21:24) shows there shall be nations and kings upon the new earth. And the promise of the land to the nation of Israel will still exist.

Read again (Jer. 31:35-37). How could God be more plain?

Lees

 

[EarlyActs]

What two citations?

If the land promise is not forever, and everlasting, then God did lie.

Nothing in (Acts 3) says God totally disinherited Israel.

No thanks.



(Heb. 2) says no such thing.

(2 Peter 3) speaks of a new heaven and new earth. One which is renovated by fire. Still exists.

(Rev. 21:24) shows there shall be nations and kings upon the new earth. And the promise of the land to the nation of Israel will still exist.

Read again (Jer. 31:35-37). How could God be more plain?

Lees

God is more plain when interp'd by the NT, which is what Christ taught for 40 days after the Res! Find the NT quoting Jer 23-33 and you'll get it.

Heb 2 says our great salvation is not about this world but the next. How could you miss it?

2 P 3 says nothing about Israel in their land or a millenium, but that this world is replaced after the fire that consumes the universe.

The point of Rev 21 being that this earth is gone. How could you miss that? I wouldn't stake much on your NHNE having nations and Israel (the race-nation) when Christ is the temple and God is the light. It's not a world that is 'exactly like this one' at all.

The fundamental principle of Dispensationalism, wrote Ryrie in his DT, is that Israel and the church are not one and must be distinguished in all senses and ways. The chapter is called 'Two Peoples, Two Programs.' It has been known to cause some pastors to invent a 2nd atonement for Israel (in the future) out of Dan 9:24, to cause others to say Peter was totally mistaken when he spoke in Acts 2, and to cause many to fail to see that Rom 11's analogy of the olive-tree is faith-based, not race-nation based.

The term in Acts 3:23 is 'exolethreuthaesetai'. This is a superlative when it comes to stating devastation, because it includes disinheriting, besides the visible blight that the country was turned into. It dates, really, back to the correct reading of Dan 9, bc 24-27 are a 'miniature' of NT history. See my threads here.

Dispensationalism thrives on the blockage of actual NT history and events; it is far too consumed with figuring out that which we are not supposed to as Christians: 'a kingdom for Israel' (Acts 1).

It will help enormously if you do a thorough study of the first OT quotes by the apostles and see what is really going on.

 

[EarlyActs]

To restore a theocratic monarchy in Israel would indeed mean a revitalization of Judaism, to operate all the observances and customs. I may be wrong, but it seems that the letter to the Hebrews set all that aside.

Even if it was "Christ," would He set up Judaism all over again?

 

[Lees]

God is more plain when interp'd by the NT, which is what Christ taught for 40 days after the Res! Find the NT quoting Jer 23-33 and you'll get it.

Heb 2 says our great salvation is not about this world but the next. How could you miss it?

2 P 3 says nothing about Israel in their land or a millenium, but that this world is replaced after the fire that consumes the universe.

The point of Rev 21 being that this earth is gone. How could you miss that? I wouldn't stake much on your NHNE having nations and Israel (the race-nation) when Christ is the temple and God is the light. It's not a world that is 'exactly like this one' at all.

The fundamental principle of Dispensationalism, wrote Ryrie in his DT, is that Israel and the church are not one and must be distinguished in all senses and ways. The chapter is called 'Two Peoples, Two Programs.' It has been known to cause some pastors to invent a 2nd atonement for Israel (in the future) out of Dan 9:24, to cause others to say Peter was totally mistaken when he spoke in Acts 2, and to cause many to fail to see that Rom 11's analogy of the olive-tree is faith-based, not race-nation based.

The term in Acts 3:23 is 'exolethreuthaesetai'. This is a superlative when it comes to stating devastation, because it includes disinheriting, besides the visible blight that the country was turned into. It dates, really, back to the correct reading of Dan 9, bc 24-27 are a 'miniature' of NT history. See my threads here.

Dispensationalism thrives on the blockage of actual NT history and events; it is far too consumed with figuring out that which we are not supposed to as Christians: 'a kingdom for Israel' (Acts 1).

It will help enormously if you do a thorough study of the first OT quotes by the apostles and see what is really going on.

God was plain in the Old Testament also.

(Heb. 2) says nothing agianst the land promise to Abram and Israel.

(2 Peter 3) doens't remove the earth. It renovates and destroys all things on earth sinful man has perverted.

In (Rev. 21) the earth is not gone. It is new. And it has the nations of the saved and kings. (Rev. 21:24)

If you have some OT quotes by the apostles that prove your point, say on. I will respond. Again, I'm not going to do your homework for you.

Lees

 

[Lees]

To restore a theocratic monarchy in Israel would indeed mean a revitalization of Judaism, to operate all the observances and customs. I may be wrong, but it seems that the letter to the Hebrews set all that aside.

Even if it was "Christ," would He set up Judaism all over again?

Not Judaism as the unbelieving Jews created. But Judaism as promised to Abraham forever.

The letter to the (Hebrews) did set that aside. But, the New Covenant is for Israel. (Jer. 31:31-32) "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. 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, "

Also, (Ezekiel 20:35-37). "And I will bring you into the wilderness of the people, and there will I plead with you face to face. Like as I pleaded with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so will I plead with you, saith the Lord GOD. And I will cause you pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant:"

Yes, the theocratic monarchy will be restored to Israel.

It is the whole purpose of God to estabishing Israel as the leading nation over the world with Christ ruling from Jerusalem. "Thy Kingdom come, they will be done on earth as it is in Heaven." (Matt. 6:10)

My opinion.

Lees

 

[EarlyActs]

God was plain in the Old Testament also.

(Heb. 2) says nothing agianst the land promise to Abram and Israel.

(2 Peter 3) doens't remove the earth. It renovates and destroys all things on earth sinful man has perverted.

In (Rev. 21) the earth is not gone. It is new. And it has the nations of the saved and kings. (Rev. 21:24)

If you have some OT quotes by the apostles that prove your point, say on. I will respond. Again, I'm not going to do your homework for you.

Lees

So much for the elements being melted down in 2 P 3; and Rev says this earth was no more.

You need to do more homework. I already wrote a book on the 20 passages. But CCCF won’t let me mention it.

 

[EarlyActs]

Not Judaism as the unbelieving Jews created. But Judaism as promised to Abraham forever.

The letter to the (Hebrews) did set that aside. But, the New Covenant is for Israel. (Jer. 31:31-32) "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. 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, "

Also, (Ezekiel 20:35-37). "And I will bring you into the wilderness of the people, and there will I plead with you face to face. Like as I pleaded with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so will I plead with you, saith the Lord GOD. And I will cause you pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant:"

Yes, the theocratic monarchy will be restored to Israel.

It is the whole purpose of God to estabishing Israel as the leading nation over the world with Christ ruling from Jerusalem. "Thy Kingdom come, they will be done on earth as it is in Heaven." (Matt. 6:10)

My opinion.

Lees

That is not what he said his kingdom was, and is not the form he said it had. And he said it was here in like 10 ways.

 

[EarlyActs]

Not Judaism as the unbelieving Jews created. But Judaism as promised to Abraham forever.

The letter to the (Hebrews) did set that aside. But, the New Covenant is for Israel. (Jer. 31:31-32) "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. 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, "

Also, (Ezekiel 20:35-37). "And I will bring you into the wilderness of the people, and there will I plead with you face to face. Like as I pleaded with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so will I plead with you, saith the Lord GOD. And I will cause you pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant:"

Yes, the theocratic monarchy will be restored to Israel.

It is the whole purpose of God to estabishing Israel as the leading nation over the world with Christ ruling from Jerusalem. "Thy Kingdom come, they will be done on earth as it is in Heaven." (Matt. 6:10)

My opinion.

Lees

re Abraham's Judaism
Actually you have the right idea there, I hope! That's the Judaism found in Gal 3 which is to say it is the Gospel. "God preached the Gospel before hand to Abraham that he would save the Gentiles..."

In Jn 3, when Jesus says 'again' the term 'anothen' is just as easily understood as 'from the top' or '...the beginning,' meaning 'you Nic, need to go back to what Abraham believed, which was that his Seed was the Seed of Gen 3, which would save all who believe. That's the birth Nic needed, not the one of lineage recorded and monitored by Judaism. Of course, Jn 1 had already said that the children of God are not born of tracked lineage, or a husband's will.

This is why the mystery most often mentioned in the NT (Rom 1, 16, Col 1, 2, Eph 2-3, etc but not I Cor 15 or I Tim 3) is not that Gentiles would be saved through Christ. The mystery (to Judaism, to Paul as he was raised in it) was that that saving of the Gentiles would not be through the law. Instead, through the Gospel, all the promises to Israel are available to the Gentiles, Eph 3. All the technical terms for the inheritance of Israel are found in Eph 2-3 and a person gains it through Christ, whether Jew or Gentile.