Search results

"Jesus answered, 'My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.'” [John 18:36] "But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought...

Wait... Leviticus 6? Or Leviticus 26, which you specified before? Regardless, the civil and ceremonial law is in effect no longer, as the writer of Hebrews is very clear on in chapter 7 of that letter: "Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the...

The latter is outward; the former is inward. See Romans 2:28-29. Hmmm, okay, sure, The former is of men, and the latter is of God. It was always possible for anyone to see outward Israel, physical descendants ~ just as now it is possible for anyone to see the visible church, those who...

Oh, my. I know this was to Covenantee, but neither he nor I have ever insinuated such a thing... quite the opposite, actually. What you seem to refuse to see is the greater nature of His eternal promises. This lesser/greater concept is seen over and over and over and over again throughout...

Leviticus 26 is part of the ceremonial law that is no longer in effect. There is no "question." Yet again, the Israel of God was never a nation-state, and never will be. At any given time, it always is what God established it ~ and is even now continuing to build it, and will bring it to its...

There is no "replacement." Even we Gentiles, believers of every tongue, tribe, and nation, are the true descendants of Abraham, Isaac (the child of the promise), and Jacob. The perceived replacement is itself a false dichotomy. As the writer of Hebrews says: "Long ago, at many times and in...

Right, and this nation is called Israel, after Jacob, which I think you know. But Israel was not a nation-state then, and it is not now, even though there was a nation-state incorporated in 1948. The Israel of God and the Israel of men are two very different things. Some citizens of that...

You understand, Eternally Grateful, that God's nation of Israel, which includes all those whom He has called since the events of Genesis 3, regardless of ethnicity ~ the Israel He is still building today ~ is quite different than the physical nation-state of Israel as it exists today, right...

Are you really talking about when the Israelites were taken away into exile in Babylon? And postulating that's when Israel was cut off? My goodness... Okay, you know they returned just a few years later, 70, to be exact... But yet Paul, about eight centuries later, talks about them still...

Do you "understand" me to have made such a claim, Timtofly? Because I have not; such would be quite stupid... and neither has Covenantee... But Covenantee and I would both agree that in God's Israel, which is very different than the nation-state called Israel since 1948, and physical...

God's Israel was never and never will be a physical state in the way Egypt or any other nation-state was or is, even that physical nation-state that came to be in 1948 and of which Benjamin Netanyahu is now the Prime Minister. God's Israel always did and always will consist only of those He has...

Ad hominem literally means "to the person" in New Latin (Latin as first used in post-medieval texts). So, to your question, by definition, no, it's not any kind of ad hominem ~ on him or anyone else. Nope. None of what I have said reflects upon Timtofly as a person. See above. It can be...

I have no doubt... :) Actually, I do, too, if you're talking about Scriptural allusions, but they're just used in contradictory and, well, weird ways, so much so as to turn them on their respective ears, really. And the Day of the Lord refers to the time of Christ's return (he may actually...

Well, that kind of leaves no one. :) Well, as long as you define 'ethnicity' the way God does, which is neither Jew nor Gentile, but just those whom He elects and calls, then... okay. :) Agreed. Not even God can/will change His mind, plan, or will. :) This... is a jumble of contradictory...

Israel, Timtofly, was what God renamed Jacob, in Genesis 32. The "man" whom Jacob wrestled with "until the breaking of day" was God, and God, finally, in Genesis 32:28, said to Jacob, "Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel, for you have striven with God and with men, and have...

:) Okay... Yes, absolutely. But it's not "simple" ~ or wooden ~ as you would have it. Let me ask you, Marks, regarding Revelation 7, do you see John speaking of two different groups of people there (verses 1-8, as opposed to verses 9-17)? Because... no. :) To expound a bit: It is the...

Okay, but you are, so you don't realize it. Right, dispensational ones. :) If you'd like me to say, rather, "You're making the same arguments based on these passages that a dispensationalist would make," well, then fine, there you go. :) No, that's actually what you are saying. :) Yeah...

Ohhhh... you are. :) Maybe you don't realize it, but... you are. :) The only thing I'm "discounting" ~ discrediting, actually ~ are your (dispensational) arguments, Marks. Right, but you discount what the writer of Hebrews says about God having spoken to our fathers long ago, but through...

I'm preaching to the choir, here, I realize, but what Peter says in 1 Peter 2:9 is astonishing, and would have been absolutely shocking to his Jewish hearers. He was speaking to Gentiles using God's exact words through Moses in Exodus 19, just after He brought them out of Egypt and slavery...

No, his point is that some/many who did not descend from Israel are of Israel, even though those who are ethnic Jews will be jealous, which is finally what Paul says in Romans 11, that "...salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous... if their trespass means riches for the...