Hey, APAK. Thank you for the response.
About this statement right here, when do you think God abandoned that covenant, because as of the writing of Romans, Paul apparently believed it was still valid:
For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. 4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. 5 To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen. (Romans 9:3-5)
The word "belong" is used twice in this passage, and suggests the covenant was theirs as a possession. But anyway, when do you think God "divorced" them from it, as you say?
I think this confuses things a little, though. God's promise was to literal Israel in the flesh, it's just that it ultimately applied even more so spiritually. You see, I don't believe that the covenant God made with us spiritually annuls the covenant God made with them physically.
I think He planned for both, and for a large portion of physical Israel to become spiritual Israel in the end-times, when they finally realize that the New Testament prophecies regarding both Jesus Christ and the Antichrist were true, and are being fulfilled.
I know you think I am not listening, but after reading your post I nevertheless have to say I'm just not convinced. It doesn't seem to deal with the following passage of scripture well, where Paul said that God would be faithful even if the Israelites were not:
Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? 2 Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. 3 What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? 4 By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar, as it is written, “That you may be justified in your words, and prevail when you are judged.” (Romans 3:1-4).
HIH, great post and with understanding, except I never said the Covenant was ever abandoned - it was transformed over time. If I gave you that impression then that was my mistake in not making it abundantly clearer.
The Covenant was not purposely for the literal original people and to who it was initially conveyed to and announced. YHWH had to announce it a people, and it was the people of Abraham, he first chose.
In Romans 9:3-5 you translation says 'belong' twice; in others is does not at all. Nevertheless, I would not get caught up in the word 'belong(s)' though of your translation. We know what it means. Paul belonged and was loyal to his ancestry and heritage, and his brethren and felt deeply for their dire spiritual condition...that would be normal and well understand knowing Paul's predicament, now as a one for Christ.
Now God abandoned his people as his exclusive chosen ones, as the only Covenant people. There was of course a great reason for it. His original Covenant was now not for just obeying the Law on the outside, it was now for those that obeyed on the inside through faith and obedience. Some Hebrews/Israelites were all along practicing inward faith in the Mosaic Laws and many were credited with righteousness to salvation. God would not tolerate vain outward obedience to the Law without inward faith anymore. It led to idol worship and a false love to their YHWH Almighty. This drastic change, as we may see it, was necessary in the process and mechanics of the same Covenant to continue with the same purpose of the restoration of 'his' people - all people not just of the original Covenant people. It was the bridge to Christ in the age of Grace, where the Law would be etched in the hearts of both the Israelites and other nations, together forged as YHWH's people. It maintained the integrity and the purpose of the same original Covenant and the completion of the promise to Abraham, for a spiritual Israel.
Romans 9:31- 33 says: Israel (of old) did not attain a Law of Righteousness (as one people). They never
as a whole, searched for it with faith, as I just wrote above.
Paul, in Romans 9:3-5...
Paul was crying out to save his fellow Israelites, the seed of Jacob, and he was one of them. He knew they had been cut off permanently, and were still being cut off in his time, off from the Covenant and the tree of life. And he knew he was in Christ and still felt very strongly toward his native descendants and brethren, as if he wished to also be cut off from the natural tree of life, cut off from Christ who now fed him. He of course knew this was now impossible. He was saying goodbye to them in the most heartfelt way possible. The reality was just sinking in and caught him right between the eyes. His brethren, who rejected Christ, they could never be resurrected into the next life.
Another round...Now of course Paul was saying that his brethren and he, most definitely belong to the 'adoption' and kept in the same Covenant now under the new requirement of faith in Christ rather than the Law, as I coarsely outlined above. He was definitely adopted and belonged into the new phase of the original Covenant. And he definitely is still defined and identified with his key ancestors, those under the Law.
In Romans 10: 1-4 Paul restates more emphatically and openly what he said in Romans 9:3-6. He wants his fellow Israelites to be all saved. And he knows that will be impossible. They strived in the Law and Christ is beyond the Law, and many stumbled over this 'rock' and died.
Romans 2:28-29 Paul now redefines a real Jew....implication here is who is really an Israelite. He knows it cannot be just his ancestors.. He knows the Covenant was changes although kept and improved...I do understand him well.
"For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither
is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But
he is a Jew, which is one
inwardly; and circumcision
is that of the heart,
in the spirit,
and not in the letter; whose
praise is not of men, but
of God.
They are the true Israelites.. Amen
Now for your quote of Romans 3:1-4 ..Paul is trying to provide a useless thesis he knows will go nowhere, (all are truly liars and God alone is faithful) for the faithfulness of his brethren. Their faithfulness (in only the outward worship and adherent to the LAW) still must count for life, right? He knows though it does nothing of the sort without true faith UNDER THE LAW, ...read on further.. Paul says the faithfulness of God is true and not of men.....now if you are thinking somehow that if God is always faithful, and he (Paul) is then implying that those of the original physical Israel, who also as a whole (national level) rejected Christ will be saved in the future as new ethnic racial Jews, and separated from the rest in Christ, that is wishful thinking. Paul is not thinking or writing about that at all.
This is one of the primal errors that has morphed into a modern secular theory, that ALL blood-line Israelites of the last generation or so (called the Israelis today) will be saved, and separated SOMEHOW from non-Israeli Christians, before Christ returns. Misusing scripture this way will get no one to the truth.
and Romans 3:21-23...
21But now apart from the Law
the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
22even
the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for
there is no distinction;
23for
all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
24being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;
25whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith.
APAK
