There is neither Jew nor Greek...

a reply to: jmdewey60

There most certainly is a messianic covenant.

Gen 3:16 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel.”

Jesus is our Messiah and He came to fulfill this covenant.

The Nation of Israel split in Solomon's son Rehoboams reign in about 930 BCE.They became the Northern and Southern kingdoms.The Northern Kingdom of Israel sometimes called House of Ephraim (who was Josephs youngest son) because Ephraim was given Reubens( the 1st born son of Israel) birthright.The Southern Kingdom was the House of Judah which was the tribe of Judah, Benjamin (which Paul was from) and some Levites and other Israelites that joined them.

The Northern tribe was conquered by the Assyrians in 722 and were almost completely assimilated into other nations by the time of Yahoshua the main remnant as Samaria. There is no trace of them today at all regardless of the extreme speculation of nonsense such as the British Israelites.

The southern kingdom of Judah leaders were taken captive in 597 by the Babylonians (Nebuchadnezzar)) eventually returned about 70 years later to the general vicinity of what is now called Israel.There was no specific "place" of Israel because it was divided amongst 12 tribes.When Herods temple was destroyed in 70 CE eventually the Jews were also scattered and assimilated and no longer a nation.There is no basis for the modern nation of "Israel" today at best it is Judah.The nation of Israel has not existed for over 3,000 years and will never exist again.That means all the "prophetic" conjecture about the nation of "genetic"Israel(of any tribe) is just that...conjecture.

What is called the Abrahamic covenant is NOT just with the genetic nation of Israel,they are long since dispersed and untraceable.That isn't conjecture it is fact.The fact is Israel is an archetype of ALL mankind.The "many nations" that can't be "numbered".It is ludicrous to think the creator God "favors" a certain people of a certain"bloodline"..that is racism at it's zenith.

Dispensationalist, preterist etc,etc… and all of those theologies are just as false as the racism and only serve to separate. All of the theological theories are mere religious conjecture and meaningless.The creator God has "called" one people on the planet Earth as sons and daughters….ALL of mankind.There is no "Jew or Greek" distinction before the creator God.All of mankind are the many nations of Abraham ....to believe anything else is to believe and propagate a lie.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: jmdewey60There most certainly is a messianic covenant.
Jesus is our Messiah and He came to fulfill this covenant.

If so, then it is funny that the Bible never mentions it.
That is something that someone just dreamed up.

originally posted by: jmdewey60
a reply to: WarminIndy

jmDewey, unless the church is Israel or Judah, then who is God married to? And where is Israel and Judah to be reunited? Zion.

That's a metaphor.
It's comparing a relationship to marriage.
It isn't a literal marriage.

And where is Israel and Judah to be reunited? Zion.

There were things written in the Prophets about a united kingdom, but it is more like just a note of encouragement, oracles of things that might be, rather than an actual announcement of things that must happen.

So because you have no answer and can't accept anything, you fall back on the old "it's a metaphor". I see, so you have no rational answer.

Good to know that you feel the entire OT is nothing but metaphor. So then every prophecy about Jesus was also metaphor? What then do you really base your faith on?

originally posted by: jmdewey60
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

All believers are bound by the messianic covenant, . . . .

There isn't any such thing, and that is just a made up term.
There isn't a literal covenant.
That is a sort of analogy drawing on the understanding people already had of the basic concept.
There was no official confirmation ceremony of a binding agreement.
What we do have is a promise from Jesus that his upcoming death was going to be beneficial to mankind, and was a symbol of God's love for us.

but there also exists sub-covenants.

There is really just one covenant.

The Church is the body of Christ.

That was Paul speaking metaphorically. Jesus actually used the word church, which is the congregation.

Israel, on the other hand, belongs to the Abrahamic Covenant.

Israel came later, and became a national designation under Moses and what the covenant was there was an agreement to keep the Law.
Most of the mentions of the word covenant in the Bible is a reference to that, and becomes a sort of synonym for the Law.

God promised Abraham that his genetic seed would inherit the land eternally.

This was a promise of eternal life before there was really that concept to support it, so it reverts to a concrete description to put the point across.
Saying your seed will not die out on the land conveys that thought.
This was before the concept of a universal god, so there were regional gods, and the god that Abraham was on good terms with happened to be the supreme sovereign of that particular piece of real estate.
Once ideas developed to where you can have a single god over the entire world, and that a single person could live forever, then the terms are redefined for what the promise was really about.
That is spelled out in the New Testament which is just a re-visioning of the old.

God will not go back on His promise.

We understand who God is now through Jesus.

Oh yes there is a literal covenant.

What do you think the shedding of blood is all about? Simple forgiveness?

a reply to: WarminIndy

So because you have no answer and can't accept anything, you fall back on the old "it's a metaphor". I see, so you have no rational answer.

I don't think it is rational to take it as literally a marriage.

Good to know that you feel the entire OT is nothing but metaphor. So then every prophecy about Jesus was also metaphor? What then do you really base your faith on?

Concerning your reunion topic, I didn't say it was metaphor, I said it was an oracle. Look it up in a Bible commentary.

a reply to: WarminIndy

Oh yes there is a literal covenant.

It was used as a figure of speech.

What do you think the shedding of blood is all about? Simple forgiveness?

Symbolic for a violent death.
Forgiveness comes from repentance and living a life of righteousness.

originally posted by: jmdewey60
a reply to: WarminIndy

Oh yes there is a literal covenant.

It was used as a figure of speech.

What do you think the shedding of blood is all about? Simple forgiveness?

Symbolic for a violent death.
Forgiveness comes from repentance and living a life of righteousness.

Then you don't know much about blood covenants.

Marriage is a blood covenant. Why do you think they showed the bloody sheet the day after marriage was consummated? Marriage is a covenant and it is sealed by the shedding of blood.

Abraham and Moses both had blood covenants with God through the sacrifice of animals.

Jesus has a blood covenant with believers through His shed blood. I really don't think you know much about them.

a reply to: jmdewey60

Except the Church is Christ's bride. God is married to Israel and the Church is portrayed as Christ's bride. A marriage is a fast covenant meant to be unbreakable for us on earth in almost all circumstance. Why would such a promise made be any different for God?

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: jmdewey60

Except the Church is Christ's bride. God is married to Israel and the Church is portrayed as Christ's bride. A marriage is a fast covenant meant to be unbreakable for us on earth in almost all circumstance. Why would such a promise made be any different for God?

Exactly and it is sealed by the shedding of blood.

a reply to: Rex282

Im afraid the book of Revelation disagrees with you. I agree that the modern Zionist state of Israel is illegitimate, but Revelation specifically indicates that all 12 tribes are preserved in the 144,000 witnesses.

originally posted by: jmdewey60

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: jmdewey60There most certainly is a messianic covenant.
Jesus is our Messiah and He came to fulfill this covenant.

If so, then it is funny that the Bible never mentions it.
That is something that someone just dreamed up.

I just cited Genesis 3 where the messianic covenant was first revealed. It is mentioned again Genesis 5 through the line of Noah.

Lamech lived one hundred and eighty-two years, and became the father of a son. 29 Now he called his name Noah, saying, “This one will give us rest from our work and from the toil of our hands arising from the ground which the LORD has cursed.”

The Messianic Covenant belongs to ALL believers, whether they belonged to the Age of Gentile Patriarchs, the Age of Israel, or the Church Age

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Rex282

Im afraid the book of Revelation disagrees with you. I agree that the modern Zionist state of Israel is illegitimate, but Revelation specifically indicates that all 12 tribes are preserved in the 144,000 witnesses.

The book of Revelation is written in signs (symbols and metaphors) nothing in it is predictive or prophetic of past, present or future historical events.All the theories of dispensationalism are false because they are built on a faulty premise of a future dispensation.

It should be obvious this number 144 thousand is not a literal numbering of a group of people that are genetic Israelites.First because All of Revelation is written in signs(and it clearly states so in the 1st verse) and lastly because it makes no sense in the context which your theology believes.

Your statement is false.Revelation 7 or 14 don't say ANYTHING of the 144 thousand being the "witnesses".That is manipulative extrapolation to fit a false religious doctrine.It is a historical fact the nation of Israel does not exist anymore and hasn't existed for 3,000 years and will NEVER exist again.There are NO genetic Israelites and all traces of them is gone and they have been absorbed into all of the nations.

The Revelation 7 list is not the Sons of Israel on the breastplate of judgement worn by Aaron.It excludes Dan and Ephraim(who had the birthright) which are replaced by Levi and Joseph and is in a different order.There is no "replacement" theory supported in the scriptures at all it is all extrapolation and manipulation of the scriptures.

Any "theology" built from your false statement is an extrapolation and manipulation of the scriptures.It is not what I wrote that contradict the scriptures it is your belief that does.

originally posted by: Rex282

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Rex282

Im afraid the book of Revelation disagrees with you. I agree that the modern Zionist state of Israel is illegitimate, but Revelation specifically indicates that all 12 tribes are preserved in the 144,000 witnesses.

The book of Revelation is written in signs (symbols and metaphors) nothing in it is predictive or prophetic of past, present or future historical events.All the theories of dispensationalism are false because they are built on a faulty premise of a future dispensation.

It should be obvious this number 144 thousand is not a literal numbering of a group of people that are genetic Israelites.First because All of Revelation is written in signs(and it clearly states so in the 1st verse) and lastly because it makes no sense in the context which your theology believes.

Your statement is false.Revelation 7 or 14 don't say ANYTHING of the 144 thousand being the "witnesses".That is manipulative extrapolation to fit a false religious doctrine.It is a historical fact the nation of Israel does not exist anymore and hasn't existed for 3,000 years and will NEVER exist again.There are NO genetic Israelites and all traces of them is gone and they have been absorbed into all of the nations.

The Revelation 7 list is not the Sons of Israel on the breastplate of judgement worn by Aaron.It excludes Dan and Ephraim(who had the birthright) which are replaced by Levi and Joseph and is in a different order.There is no "replacement" theory supported in the scriptures at all it is all extrapolation and manipulation of the scriptures.

Any "theology" built from your false statement is an extrapolation and manipulation of the scriptures.It is not what I wrote that contradict the scriptures it is your belief that does.

That is your opinion based on another man's theological opinion. If you would get around to proving it, I would be more inclined to take you seriously.

Why would John go through the trouble of naming 12 separate tribes if they were symbolic? Where symbolism exists in the Bible, the symbol is directly revealed in the context of the surrounding passages. What gives you authority to take the 144k as a symbol when the bible offers no other explanation than a literal one?

If you would base your interpretation on scripture rather than opinion (like I asked in the OP) you would make a lot more sense.

You cant just take the bible as allegory when it suites your needs. It simply doesnt work that way. At least Dispensationalism can be backed up by scripture.

a reply to: WarminIndy

Then you don't know much about blood covenants.

That's one of those cult things, apparently.

Marriage is a blood covenant. Why do you think they showed the bloody sheet the day after marriage was consummated? Marriage is a covenant and it is sealed by the shedding of blood.

Ha Ha.

Abraham and Moses both had blood covenants with God through the sacrifice of animals.

OK, according to your little made up, cult terminology.

Jesus has a blood covenant with believers through His shed blood.

OK, so you like to put your own little labels on things to categorize them, so what?

I really don't think you know much about them.

I don't belong to your cult.

a reply to: jmdewey60

You like to throw the word "cult" around a lot. Perhaps you should take a good look at yourself.

You're not even addressing the issues, just calling people names like a brat. Its really sad.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

I just cited Genesis 3 where the messianic covenant was first revealed. It is mentioned again Genesis 5 through the line of Noah.

You seem to be making things up in order to prove your earlier point that somehow everyone is functioning under different covenants.

Lamech lived one hundred and eighty-two years, and became the father of a son. 29 Now he called his name Noah, saying, “This one will give us rest from our work and from the toil of our hands arising from the ground which the LORD has cursed.”

Nothing here about serpents.

The Messianic Covenant belongs to ALL believers, whether they belonged to the Age of Gentile Patriarchs, the Age of Israel, or the Church Age

It exists in your own mind, not in the Bible.

a reply to: jmdewey60

What else can I say to you, JMDewey? You have hardened your heart to the truth. You seek your own image in the word of God rather than the Light of the world. You reject the blood of Christ, therefore for you, there is no other sacrifice. I only wish you could percieve your own inconsistencies.

Believe that Jesus died for your sins and be saved or hold your peace, but dont project your flaws on to us. If we are cult-minded (as you so arrogantly claim), then you are as well, even sevenfold.

Stop your childishness. If you have anything intellegent to say, say it or leave.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

You like to throw the word "cult" around a lot. Perhaps you should take a good look at yourself.

OK, then what am I supposed to find?
I am familiar with cults, belonging to a few, and why I try to seek normalcy, a normative form of Christianity that takes a straightforward interpretation of the Bible rather than just using it for proof texts to support cooked up doctrines.

You're not even addressing the issues, just calling people names like a brat. Its really sad.

I am, that you are using terms not used in normal Christian theology.
You are forcing the Bible to fit a doctrinal system.

originally posted by: jmdewey60
a reply to: WarminIndy

Then you don't know much about blood covenants.

That's one of those cult things, apparently.

Marriage is a blood covenant. Why do you think they showed the bloody sheet the day after marriage was consummated? Marriage is a covenant and it is sealed by the shedding of blood.

Ha Ha.

Abraham and Moses both had blood covenants with God through the sacrifice of animals.

OK, according to your little made up, cult terminology.

Jesus has a blood covenant with believers through His shed blood.

OK, so you like to put your own little labels on things to categorize them, so what?

I really don't think you know much about them.

I don't belong to your cult.

That's exactly right, you do not belong to my "cult' you belong to a strange one.

And the fact that you have no idea about the historical context of the OT in customs and practices, just shows me you know very little also about the time in which the early church started. So you've made a metaphor out of everything without knowing the context of anything. Good to know how "well educated" you really are.

Do you know how I know you follow Dionysus....from Augustine's City of God

City of God by Augustine and I would think you would have been more careful in your investigations. Here's who Augustine says prophesied Christ

Augustine traces the parallel courses of the earthly and heavenly cities from the time of Abraham to the end of the world; and alludes to the oracles regarding Christ, both those uttered by the Sibyls, and those of the sacred prophets who wrote after the foundation of Rome, Hosea, Amos, Isaiah, Micah, and their successors.

Where do you find these prophetic utterances of Christ? Here you go...Sibyls

And now that you have rejected the Jewish messiah and grabbed a Greek one, what is left? Not Jesus of the Bible and certainly no Old or New Testament figure. All you have done is ignorantly grabbed a Greek god and transposed him into "Christian" theology. That's all you have done.