What will the 1000 year kingdom on earth Jesus reigns over look like.

[Spiritual Israelite]

You are mixing salvation with the terms of the covenant as spelled out in Jer. 31 and Heb. 8. they are two different subjects.

Wrong. The new covenant is all about salvation because it relates directly to the forgiveness of sins, which is what salvation is all about.

Matthew 26:27 Then He took the cup, and after He gave thanks, He gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you. 28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Well you need to take that up with god and Paul.

Romans 9:4
Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;

Once again you err in thinking that receiving a benefit from a covenant God made with Israel equals being part of the covenant. It doesn't. It just means we benefit from it as was prophesied.

If you benefit from it that means you're part of it. You just don't get it.

Well seeing as I picked the most salient verses concerning the covenant, and as you accuse me of cherry picking- now prove it with facts instead of mere accusation.

I already have and you ignore what I say. You are too stubborn to learn anything.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Thousands of Jews die now and go to hell. So? Once again because you practice a form of replacement theology you gorget God made promises He called etewrnal to the nation of Israel. Matter of fact He called Israel the Apple of His eye! sounds like He is playing a little favorite to me also God said this:

26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father's sakes.

29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

And jsut because god has chosen to save the 1/3 of Israel that survives the tribulation, it makes HIm god and not a rqacist. If you can even go down that road, then the problem lies in your thinking and not with god nor His Word.

The Israel of which all is and shall be saved is spiritual Israel, not the nation of Israel. You need to learn to understand context. Paul wrote about two different Israels and your focus is on the wrong one.

Romans 9:6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 8 In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.

The Israel of which all are saved is the one that consists of the children of God which are the children of the promise and regarded as Abraham's offspring, which is not based on who or where someone is descended from. Instead, it is based entirely on being a spiritual child of God and of the promise and being part of the spiritual offspring of Abraham. That refers to all who belong to Christ.

Galatians 3:26 So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Being part of spiritual Israel is not dependent on being a natural descendant of Abraham or of the nation of Israel. Instead, it is dependent on being a child of God through faith in Jesus Christ which is true of all who belong to Christ and are the spiritual seed of Abraham and "heirs according to the promise".

 

[quietthinker]

The disciples had hurdles to overcome in their perception and understanding of Messiah. It never occurred to them that their premise and therefore expectations were out of line. Is it any wonder they scratched their heads to Jesus' words and behaviour? It just never followed the expected narrative.

Do you think it's possible that Christianity generally subscribes to expectations that are not in line with God's intentions?
Do you think it's possible that 'Christianity' is caught in the same net the disciple were prior to the resurrection? The net of their 'unquestionable' assumptions?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Wrong. The new covenant is all about salvation because it relates directly to the forgiveness of sins, which is what salvation is all about.

Matthew 26:27 Then He took the cup, and after He gave thanks, He gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you. 28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Then you tell me what teh New Covenant as declared in Jer. 31, Heb.; 8 and Romans 11 25-27 is about. I know it includes forgiveness of sins. but Why do you avoid telling us what Jer. 31 says.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Romans 9:6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 8 In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.

And keeping that in its proper context and not ripping it out of context. Isaac gave brth to Jacob (Israel) and Esau- who is the child of th eflesh. Spiritualizing a verse doesn't make the reinterpretation correct.

And yes An Israelite who gets saved is spiritual Israel. But that is not what Eza. 20, Jer.31, Zech 13 and Rom. 11 says and the time it is referring to. It is talking about teh last days of the 70th week of Daniel.

The Israel of which all is and shall be saved is spiritual Israel, not the nation of Israel. You need to learn to understand context. Paul wrote about two different Israels and your focus is on the wrong one.

My focus is on teh end times and the promises given to Israel in the end times. I cited the four times god made a promise to save all ethnic Israelis in teh end. 2/3 will be killed and the 1/3 that survive will be saved. If that were to happen now (which is not) that would mean 6,000,000 Jews will have the veil removed, say blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord and see Jesus physically return.

Galatians 3:26 So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

In Christ this is 100% correct. right now we all become one in the body of Christ. That does not make us Israel. And being seed of Abraham dos not make on Israeli. god said an Israeli is the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. So if you are not that you are not physical or spiritual Israel. You are a saved Gentile who is a member of the body with the saved Jews.

25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father's sakes.

29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

Paul shows the distinction between Jew and Gentile- why can't you?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

You ignored Bro. Arnold.

I'm waiting to hear why.

What's your excuse?

I didn't. But because you redefine words you cannot see that I agree with Him. Teh church has a connection to the New Covenant as He said, but we are not part of the New Covenant as He also said. Remember He said the New covenant is a Covenant between God and Israel. why do you ignore this?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

You ignored Bro. Arnold.

I'm waiting to hear why.

What's your excuse?

Isaiah 14:1 For the LORD will have mercy on Jacob, and will yet choose Israel, and set them in their own land: and the strangers shall be joined with them, and they shall cleave to the house of Jacob.

The Lord will have mercy on Jacob after the time of trouble, the tribulation ( Deuteronomy 4:30-31).

The Lord will set Israel in the land on earth (Deuteronomy 30:5 Jeremiah 24:6-7). This is the prophetic promise of a kingdom on earth promised the believing remnant of Israel.

The strangers, which are the Gentiles, will cleave to Israel and enter the kingdom along with the believing remnant of Israel (Isaiah 56:6-8 Isaiah 60:3-5).

The Gentiles were called strangers because they were not born Israelites.

[Exo 12:48 KJV] 48 And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof.

Gentile strangers could be considered born in the land of Israel; God always made provision for Gentiles to be blessed.

Paul said Gentiles were strangers from the covenants made to Israel (Ephesians 2:12).

[Eph 2:19 KJV] 19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

Paul called Gentiles foreigners just as Gentiles were called strangers because they were not of the land of Israel (Genesis 15:13).

[1Pe 1:1 KJV] 1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

Peter wrote to the strangers that were scattered into Gentile nations. These strangers could not be Gentile believers since they could not be strangers in Gentile nations. These strangers to whom Peter wrote were scattered believing Jews (Psalm 44:11 Matthew 26:31 Acts 8:1 8:4).

 

[covenantee]

I didn't. But because you redefine words you cannot see that I agree with Him. Teh church has a connection to the New Covenant as He said, but we are not part of the New Covenant as He also said. Remember He said the New covenant is a Covenant between God and Israel. why do you ignore this?

Ah, the squirming.

Bro. Arnold:
"The New Covenant itself is an unconditional covenant and therefore eternally in effect".

Previously you've said that the New Covenant is not in effect.

So you now agree with Bro. Arnold that the New Covenant is in effect?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Ah, the squirming.

Bro. Arnold:
"The New Covenant itself is an unconditional covenant and therefore eternally in effect".

Previously you've said that the New Covenant is not in effect.

Do you now agree with Bro. Arnold that the New Covenant is in effect?

From Page 35:

"It is an unconditional covenant involving god and both houses of Israel........It should be noted it is not made with the church."

"Third, it promises the national regeneration of Israel.(Jer.33:31, Is. 59:21) . The key aspect of this entire covenant is the blessing of salvation,which included Israels' national regeneration."

"Fourth , the regeneration of Israel is to be universal among all Jews."

REad Page 39 the last paragraph.

Reread Page 40, "The status of the covenant and see that the salvation part has gone in to effect in part- As He writes the blood of the covenant is the foundation for the Dispensation of Grace. but the Covenant itself in full is the basis for teh dispensation of the kingdom.

I agree with Dr. Fruchtenbaum, the church are partakers of teh Covenant God made with Israel alone- but not taker overs.

We gentiles are a foreign Olive branch grafter onto the vine of Israel as Paul explains in romans 11.

 

[covenantee]

From Page 35:

"It is an unconditional covenant involving god and both houses of Israel........It should be noted it is not made with the church."

"Third, it promises the national regeneration of Israel.(Jer.33:31, Is. 59:21) . The key aspect of this entire covenant is the blessing of salvation,which included Israels' national regeneration."

"Fourth , the regeneration of Israel is to be universal among all Jews."

REad Page 39 the last paragraph.

Reread Page 40, "The status of the covenant and see that the salvation part has gone in to effect in part- As He writes the blood of the covenant is the foundation for the Dispensation of Grace. but the Covenant itself in full is the basis for teh dispensation of the kingdom.

I agree with Dr. Fruchtenbaum, the church are partakers of teh Covenant God made with Israel alone- but not taker overs.

We gentiles are a foreign Olive branch grafter onto the vine of Israel as Paul explains in romans 11.

More squirming.

There is nothing in your post which claims that the New Covenant is not in effect.

Nothing.

Bro. Arnold's statement stands:
"The New Covenant itself is an unconditional covenant and therefore eternally in effect".

And no, you certainly don't agree with him. Your claim is in diametric opposition to his.

Yours is false.

His is true.

I'm sure he'd appreciate your attempt to contort his truth into your fallacy.

Let's also compare your claim against that of historical orthodox true Christianity.

There is not one recognized defender of the true faith in the entirety of orthodox Christianity to 1800 AD who claimed that the New Covenant was not in effect.

Not one.

What you're espousing is modernist revisionism which is nonexistent in the historical orthodox true Christian Church.

There's a four letter word for that.

CULT.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Then you tell me what teh New Covenant as declared in Jer. 31, Heb.; 8 and Romans 11 25-27 is about. I know it includes forgiveness of sins. but Why do you avoid telling us what Jer. 31 says.

I've been telling you what it means, which is what matters. And I'm using scripture to do it. But, you are not interested in the counsel of all scripture. You are not allowing scripture to interpret scripture for you. You try to say that the new covenant doesn't apply to Gentiles despite Paul telling Gentiles to observe the Lord's supper and to remember what Jesus did when He shed His blood to establish the new covenant. He wouldn't have told them to do that if the new covenant didn't apply to them. You just don't get it and nothing I'm saying will make you get it. You have to want to understand and you need to ask God for wisdom.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

And keeping that in its proper context and not ripping it out of context. Isaac gave brth to Jacob (Israel) and Esau- who is the child of th eflesh. Spiritualizing a verse doesn't make the reinterpretation correct.

You know nothing about context. You prove that over and over again. You don't use other scripture to aid your understanding. You have no understanding of the New Testament whatsoever. You may be aware that Paul wrote other letters. This is what it means in Romans 9:7 when it says "Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.".

Galatians 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. 27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. 28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

To be called in Isaac means that you are a child of the promise just like Isaac was. And scripture says that both Jew and Gentile believers are children of the promise.

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

And yes An Israelite who gets saved is spiritual Israel. But that is not what Eza. 20, Jer.31, Zech 13 and Rom. 11 says and the time it is referring to.

That is what the new covenant is all about. Salvation and the forgiveness of sins. This is getting tiresome at this point. I'm just repeating things I've already said which is a waste of time. You clearly just don't get it and you never will unless you ask God for wisdom about this (James 1:5-7).

 

[Ronald Nolette]

There is nothing in your post which claims that the New Covenant is not in effect.

Nothing.

Bro. Arnold's statement stands:
"The New Covenant itself is an unconditional covenant and therefore eternally in effect".

So show how all the provisions of the covenant as stated in Jer. 31 are iin effect.

I do not disagree that Gentiles are bveneficiaries of the covenant, but we are unnatural branches grafted on to the vine of Jewish blessing because of grace!

Yours is false.

His is true.

Then just show that the provisions as stated in Jer. 31, Heb. 8 and romans 11 are in effect and you win! I saw him teach this in person and it was an hour long class. there is a lot that is not posted here. but you refuse to touch the fact that the New covenant is between god and Israel alone as Scripture and Dr. Fruchtenbaum declare. we as gentiles are connected through salvation but are not members of the covenant.

There is not one recognized defender of the true faith in the entirety of orthodox Christianity to 1800 AD who claimed that the New Covenant was not in effect.

Not one.

prove this claim please with fact. Show me how you studies 1800 years of defenders of the faith in light of the New covenant please.

What you're espousing is modernist revisionism which is nonexistent in the historical orthodox true Christian Church.

And from 587AD to Oct. 31, 1517 what was considered the historical orthodox church?

Sorry for the late reply I was bedridden with the flu since Wednesday.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I've been telling you what it means, which is what matters. And I'm using scripture to do it. But, you are not interested in the counsel of all scripture. You are not allowing scripture to interpret scripture for you. You try to say that the new covenant doesn't apply to Gentiles despite Paul telling Gentiles to observe the Lord's supper and to remember what Jesus did when He shed His blood to establish the new covenant. He wouldn't have told them to do that if the new covenant didn't apply to them. You just don't get it and nothing I'm saying will make you get it. You have to want to understand and you need to ask God for wisdom.

Well in the most broadest definition ofapply, I would agree with you.

But teh new covenant was made between god and Israel. We gentiles were not in the desert nor did our fathers break the old covenant. this is also declared in Heb8 and rom. 11.

I do not allow one to take Scripture to reinterpret Scripture. Just because the church benefits via salvation because of the new Covenant, it does not make us member of the new Covenant.

Sorry I'm later in responding, I have been bedridden with the flu since Weds.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Paul also wrote that there is neither bond nor free, and yet spoke alot to servants to be subject to their masters. Is he a hypocrite?

He also said there is no difference between male and female and yest wrote about wives submitting to their husbands as their head just as Jesus is the head of the man! Is a hypocrite? or are your juvenile attacks against me because it is you who pulls out of context and do not rightly know how to divide the word.

God was not inspiring Paul to said there is no longer differences between men and women and that we were to consider all androgynous.

He was addressing how worship was in those days and how women had limited acces, but in chrisat they have equal access to spiritual worship and blessing.

Paul also wasn't writing to inspire a revolt of the millions of slaves throughout the empire, but as servants they were free in Christ and couls serve their masters from the heart!

You must remember that these writings were also dealing with immediate issues and encouraging people , not that no one needed to be s lave and men and women were to be the same.

 

[covenantee]

prove this claim please with fact. Show me how you studies 1800 years of defenders of the faith in light of the New covenant please.

Justin Martyr exposits the New Covenant:

"There will be no other God, O Trypho, nor was there from eternity any other existing" (I thus addressed him), "but He who made and disposed all this universe. Nor do we think that there is one God for us, another for you, but that He alone is God who led your fathers out from Egypt with a strong hand and a high arm. Nor have we trusted in any other (for there is no other), but in Him in whom you also have trusted, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob. But we do not trust through Moses or through the law; for then we would do the same as yourselves. But now[20]—(for I have read that there shall be a final law, and a covenant, the chiefest of all, which it is now incumbent on all men to observe, as many as are seeking after the inheritance of God. For the law promulgated on Horeb is now old, and belongs to yourselves alone; but this is for all universally. Now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law—namely, Christ—has been given to us, and the covenant is trustworthy, after which there shall be no law, no commandment, no ordinance. Have you not read this which Isaiah says: 'Hearken unto me, hearken unto me, my people; and, ye kings, give ear unto me: for a law shall go forth from me, and my judgment shall be for a light to the nations. My righteousness approaches swiftly, and my salvation shall go forth, and nations shall trust in mine arm?'[21] And by Jeremiah, concerning this same new covenant, He thus speaks: '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 which I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand, to bring them out of the land of Egypt'[22]). If, therefore, God proclaimed a new covenant which was to be instituted, and this for a light of the nations, we see and are persuaded that men approach God, leaving their idols and other unrighteousness, through the name of Him who was crucified, Jesus Christ, and abide by their confession even unto death, and maintain piety. Moreover, by the works and by the attendant miracles, it is possible for all to understand that He is the new law, and the new covenant, and the expectation of those who out of every people wait for the good things of God."

Your turn.

Please present a quote from any recognized defender of the historical True Faith, from 100 AD to 1800 AD, denying what Justin Martyr has described.

 

[covenantee]

And from 587AD to Oct. 31, 1517 what was considered the historical orthodox church?

Glad you're over the flu.

Are you denying that God has always preserved His remnant of "7000 who have not bowed to Baal"?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

And no, you certainly don't agree with him. Your claim is in diametric opposition to his.

And yes I do, I sat under the full teaching, not just a summation in the manuscript.

But I think your problem lies in the fact that some form of replacement theology have taken over your biblical thinking so it has caused for a faulty hermeneutic.

As you are willing to agree with Dr. Fruchtenbaum I ask you read another manuscript he wrote:

https://arielcontent.org/dcs/pdf/mbs007m.pdf

Once again let me reiterate. Just because the Chruch and gentiles are not part of the New covenant as spelled out in Jer. 31, Heb. 8, Rom 11,Is. 55:3, 59:21, 61:8-9, Jer. 32:40, Ez. 16:60,34:25:31,37:26-28.

Also just because a covenant is called eternal, does not mean it has gone into effect.

The Land covenant, the Davidic covenant, The Abrahamic Covenant are all eternal covenant as well as declared by God Himself. And these are not in effect as declared yet.

Once again we are blessed by the salvation promised in the new, but that does not mean the covenant belongs to eh church. REad the covenant again as well as the verses I cited.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Are you denying that God has always preserved His remnant of "7000 who have not bowed to Baal"?

meaning that exact number and bowing th eknee to the specific Baal? Yes it is not true. But God has always had a remnant of faith ful Israelites some times far more than 7000 and wouldn't surprise if there were fewer than 7000 at times and the false gods they did not bow to have gone by legions of names over the centuries.

 

[covenantee]

Then just show that the provisions as stated in Jer. 31, Heb. 8 and romans 11 are in effect and you win!

"The New Covenant itself is an unconditional covenant and therefore eternally in effect".

Via that declaration, Bro. Arnold unquestionably believes that Jer. 31, Heb. 8 and romans 11 are in effect.

Just show him renouncing that declaration, and you win!