KINGDOM OF MESSIAH

[lekh l'kha]

Hebrews 5:11 - "About this we have much to say that is hard to explain, since you have become dull in understanding."

Hebrews 7:11,12 - "Now if perfection had been attainable through the levitical priesthood

[lekh l'kha]

Okay, let's start with Bible Study 101 - Paul didn't write Genesis or Psalms and Zecheriah wrote Zecheriah....

Oh, Ok. So you're saying that each prophet and each apostle had his own program and his own message that had nothing to do with the messages of any of the others?

[lekh l'kha]

Hebrews 5:11 - "About this we have much to say that is hard to explain, since you have become dull in understanding."

(Citations from Hebrews and Galatians deleted for brevity. See above for full text)

Tell me, Rufus, since you seem determined to show that you can't understand things that are hard to explain. What has the law of Moses which you consistently quote as above to do with God's promises to Abraham and Christ's inheritance in the earth?

Bible Study 101-A: The citations which you so blithely dismiss as being from the law of Moses were from the book of Hebrews and the book of Galatians, both in the New Testament...and you want to launch an ad hominum attack. Your polemic has no merit.

Rufus, hang on. You're starting to make me laugh. I'll leave it here.

Lekh

[lekh l'kha]

Hebrews 5:11 - "About this we have much to say that is hard to explain, since you have become dull in understanding."

(Citations from Hebrews and Galatians deleted for brevity. See above for full text)

Tell me, Rufus, since you seem determined to show that you can't understand things that are hard to explain. What has the law of Moses which you consistently quote as above to do with God's promises to Abraham and Christ's inheritance in the earth?

Bible Study 101-A: The citations which you so blithely dismiss as being from the law of Moses were from the book of Hebrews and the book of Galatians, both in the New Testament...and you want to launch an ad hominum attack. Your polemic has no merit.

Rufus, hang on. You're starting to make me laugh. I'll leave it here.

Lekh

Wise choice. Better to retreat than go down in ignominious defeat.

The truth is you made me realize for the first time in my life what the Toronto blessing is all about. I could hardly type.

So the seed of Abraham have been replaced by the seed of Abraham because the Mosaic Covenant God made with the seed of Abraham has been replaced by the New Covenant God made with the seed of Abraham, and the passages in Hebrews, Galatians etc which contrast the Mosaic Covenant with the New Covenant are not referring to the Mosaic Covenant.

Made sense to me

God bless brother - and thank you - you made my day!

[Shiloh62]

Please don't just glance over the verses below, just because you've read them before. Read them carefully, because something's changed (apparently):

"And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your seed after you in their generations for a temporary covenant which will last only until the establishment of a new covenant which I will yet make with your seed after you, to be a God to you and to your seed after you...

... And I will give the land to you in which you are a stranger, and to your seed after you, all the land of Canaan, for a temporary possession, only until the establishment of the new covenant. And I will be their God." (Gen.17: 7-8).

O.k - that's not what God said - but that's apparently what He meant, according to many Christians.

In truth, what God actually said was:

"And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your seed after you in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God to you and to your seed after you. And I will give the land to you in which you are a stranger, and to your seed after you, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession. And I will be their God." (Gen 17:7-8).

The Hebrew word for "everasting" in the above verses is "olam" and it's the same word used in the verses below:

"Behold! I, even I, establish My covenant with you, and with your seed after you; and with every living creature that is with you, of the birds, of the cattle, and of every animal of the earth with you; from all that go out from the ark, to every animal of the earth.

And I will establish My covenant with you. Neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood. Neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.

And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between Me and you and every living creature with you, for everlasting generations: I set my rainbow in the cloud. And it shall be a token of a covenant between Me and the earth." (Gen 9:9-13).

1. This is the Noahic Covenant, and it shows that God makes covenants WITH FLESH.

2. It also shows that if God keeps His promises with the flesh-seed of His Covenants, this does not mean that the fulfillment of the promises is a carnal thing and produced by the flesh .

3. The fulfillment of the promise contained in the covenant is not based upon the faith of the beneficiaries of the promise, who are flesh - it is based ALONE upon the Word (promise) of God and His faithfulness to His Word.

4. An everlasting token was given by God as the sign both of the covenant and of the everlasting nature of the covenant.

5. The word "everlasting" in the Nohaic Covenant quoted above, is the same Hebrew word (olam) that is used in the next promise that God made with flesh - the seed of Abraham; and God sealed this promise by making an oath (covenant) with Abraham guaranteeing the fulfillment of the promise. This oath is written about in Gen.15: 5-21 and mentioned in Heb.6: 13-18.

The promise was not solicited by Abraham or his physical descendants, and Paul tells us that the inheritance of this promise belongs ultimately to Christ, and that the Mosaic Covenant (which was ratified with blood and not sealed by God's oath) cannot annul the promise:

"And to Abraham and to his Seed the promises were spoken. It does not say, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, "And to your Seed," which is Christ. And I say this, A covenant having been ratified by God in Christ, the Law (coming into being four hundred and thirty years after) does not annul the promise, so as to abolish it. For if the inheritance is of Law, it is no more of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by way of promise." (Gal 3:16-18).

So the promise belongs ultimately to Christ, and the prophet Zechariah and others tell us that He will take His inheritance:

"And Jehovah shall possess Judah, His portion in the holy land, and shall choose Jerusalem again. Be silent, all flesh, before Jehovah; for He has risen out of His holy dwelling place." (Zec 2:12-13).

But again, that's not what God meant, according to many Christians. They claim that God actually meant a spiritual kingdom which has nothing to do with God's original promises to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and the prophets - and they say this not even realizing that this theological separation of the spiritual and the physical is derived from the Greek gnostic philosophy of Dualism, which maintains that the spiritual and the physical cannot be united, since (according to Dualism) the physical is corrupt and can never be sanctified.

But can they give valid reasons for saying that God never meant what He said?

Nope, they can't. They will quote verses like the following, ignoring the meaning of the Greek word "nun" (pronounced noon), which means "of present time" and has been translated into English as "now":

"Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would fight so that I might not be delivered to the Jews. But now (Greek: nun, "of present time") My kingdom is not from here." (Joh 18:36).

Forgetting that the Revelation says that at the sounding of the seventh trumpet "... the kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ.." (Rev.11: 15), they will go along with the Greek gnostic influence and maintain an everlasting Dualistic separation between

the spiritual and the physical, and continue to claim that God never actually meant what He promised by oath to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and the prophets, and they will continue to ignore the fact that the same Greek word "nun" used in John 18: 36, is used in the following verse also:

"For Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and answers to Jerusalem which now (Greek: nun, "of present time") is, and is in slavery with her children." (Gal 4:25).

And so they will deny that God actually meant the things He said through the prophets, such as:

"And Jehovah shall possess Judah, His portion in the holy land, and shall choose Jerusalem again. Be silent, all flesh, before Jehovah; for He has risen out of His holy dwelling place." (Zec 2:12-13).

"I will declare the decree of Jehovah. He has said to Me, You are My Son; today I have begotten You. Ask of Me, and I shall give the nations for Your inheritance; and the uttermost parts of the earth for Your possession. You shall break them with a rod of iron; You shall dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel." (Psa 2:7-9).

The prophets prophesied of a Messiah who would:

1. Be the antitype of David who would save the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob from their enemies ("the nations") by judging their enemies who would gather against Jerusalem in a day during which the Jews are being regathered to the land of their fathers (which God promised them would be their eternal inheritance).

2. Be the antitype of Joseph who would be betrayed by his brothers, and suffer and die for his people.

The Jews who refuse to believe in this Messiah have been blinded to the second part of the full counsel of God regarding Him, because they do not want such a Messiah.

Yet there are many Gentiles who believe in the second part of the full counsel of God regarding the Messiah, yet they remain blinded to the first part, because they do not want such a Messiah - they do not want a Messiah who will take possession of Judah as His inheritance and will choose Jerusalem again, ruling all the world from His throne in Jerusalem, just as God promised.

These Gentiles will ignore the fact that just as God's promise to Abraham was sealed by oath, so God's promise to king David was likewise sealed by oath:

"My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before me." (Psa 89:34-36, see also 2Samuel 7: 16).

These oaths (covenants) of God are unlike the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant, in that the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant were ratified by blood (not sealed by an oath), and have to do with obedience to Law and obedience to God, and salvation from the consequences of transgression/disobedience.

And yet Stephen said to the Jews who would not believe in the second part of the full counsel of God regarding the Messiah and His Kingdom:

"Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye." (Acts 7:51).

So the question is: Why is that so many Gentiles will only believe in a gnostic-inspired theology of "the kingdom of Christ", and do not want a Messiah who will take possession of Judah as His inheritance in the Holy land, and choose Jerusalem again, reigning the whole world from His throne in Jerusalem? Why is it that so many Gentiles choose a theology which teaches that God did not actually mean what He promised in His oaths to Abraham and king David, and in His promises to the prophets and to the Jews through the prophets? Why is it that so many Gentiles, like all unbelieving Jews, refuse to believe the full counsel of God regarding the Messiah and His Kingdom?

Can anyobody explain this to me?

Lekh

Maybe they are close minded and have not interpreted scripture correctly.

[lekh l'kha]

So the question is: Why is that so many Gentiles will only believe in a gnostic-inspired theology of "the kingdom of Christ", and do not want a Messiah who will take possession of Judah as His inheritance in the Holy land, and choose Jerusalem again, reigning the whole world from His throne in Jerusalem? Why is it that so many Gentiles choose a theology which teaches that God did not actually mean what He promised in His oaths to Abraham and king David, and in His promises to the prophets and to the Jews through the prophets? Why is it that so many Gentiles, like all unbelieving Jews, refuse to believe the full counsel of God regarding the Messiah and His Kingdom?

Can anyobody explain this to me?

Lekh

Maybe they are close minded and have not interpreted scripture correctly.

Do you really think so? It's difficult for me to believe that most Christians who believe only on one part of the full counsel of God regarding the Messiah are consciously or deliberately closed-minded to the truth of the Biblical message - I think it has a lot to do with the theology passed onto them by their teachers, who in turn are taught it in their theological seminaries, Bible Colleges etc. The reason why I asked those questions was to hopefully get those who are locked in this mindset of "Old Testament/New Testament Israel" to think a little deeper about the implications of this teaching they have received and believed. But it seems to be to no avail. Others have tried, and not succeeded.

Maybe most Christians just take it for granted that their teachers know better than they do "because they have the theological training", and so they don't search the scriptures enough to find out for themselves if everything they hear is true.

[Shiloh62]

So the question is: Why is that so many Gentiles will only believe in a gnostic-inspired theology of "the kingdom of Christ", and do not want a Messiah who will take possession of Judah as His inheritance in the Holy land, and choose Jerusalem again, reigning the whole world from His throne in Jerusalem? Why is it that so many Gentiles choose a theology which teaches that God did not actually mean what He promised in His oaths to Abraham and king David, and in His promises to the prophets and to the Jews through the prophets? Why is it that so many Gentiles, like all unbelieving Jews, refuse to believe the full counsel of God regarding the Messiah and His Kingdom?

Can anyobody explain this to me?

Lekh

Maybe they are close minded and have not interpreted scripture correctly.

Do you really think so? It's difficult for me to believe that most Christians who believe only on one part of the full counsel of God regarding the Messiah are consciously or deliberately closed-minded to the truth of the Biblical message - I think it has a lot to do with the theology passed onto them by their teachers, who in turn are taught it in their theological seminaries, Bible Colleges etc. The reason why I asked those questions was to hopefully get those who are locked in this mindset of "Old Testament/New Testament Israel" to think a little deeper about the implications of this teaching they have received and believed. But it seems to be to no avail. Others have tried, and not succeeded.

Maybe most Christians just take it for granted that their teachers know better than they do "because they have the theological training", and so they don't search the scriptures enough to find out for themselves if everything they hear is true.

Good point. We should always seek God in understanding and interpreting Scripture, and not take what others teach us as the final word. When we dicover new truths, we can even enlighten those that taught us, and may have erred.

[lekh l'kha]

Good point. We should always seek God in understanding and interpreting Scripture, and not take what others teach us as the final word. When we dicover new truths, we can even enlighten those that taught us, and may have erred.

Whooa - that all depends on who it is whose taught us I've been told once if I don't like the teaching in the church I can always find another church - and I wasn't being arrogant, I just wanted to discuss what had been taught from the pulpit. I got outta that church

[Guest shiloh357]

QUOTE (horizoneast @ Nov 19 2009, 02:39 AM)

The Hebrew nation (with the exception of the believing

[lekh l'kha]

Do you really think so? It's difficult for me to believe that most Christians who believe only on one part of the full counsel of God regarding the Messiah are consciously or deliberately closed-minded to the truth of the Biblical message - I think it has a lot to do with the theology passed onto them by their teachers, who in turn are taught it in their theological seminaries, Bible Colleges etc. The reason why I asked those questions was to hopefully get those who are locked in this mindset of "Old Testament/New Testament Israel" to think a little deeper about the implications of this teaching they have received and believed. But it seems to be to no avail. Others have tried, and not succeeded.

Maybe most Christians just take it for granted that their teachers know better than they do "because they have the theological training", and so they don't search the scriptures enough to find out for themselves if everything they hear is true.

lekh, I have to hand it to you. You are patient and caring, but you are beating your head against a couple of brick walls here. Some people are simply blinded by their doctrine and simply don't get what scripture plainly says. They twist it around, explain it away, say it doesn't mean what it says literally. They have multiple ways of attempting to make an end run around what scripture says or smear someone elses character instead of dealing with facts.

You have to throw away, ignore or completely mis-interpet every book of prophecy to say that Israel is finished. You have to make words like 'everlasting,' 'eternal,' and 'irrevocable' mean something else. What they never get is that when they subscribe to their brand of doctrine, they make God a liar.

As Desi Arnaz would say, when they stand before the Lord, they will have some "'splainin' to do. . ."

It never makes sense to me though. These are folks who seem to believe in Jesus as much as I do and who seem to love Him, and yet they can't see. Not only do all the prophets say the same thing (except Jonah, Nahum and Obadiah, who prophesied to Gentiles about Gentiles only), but the apostles said the same thing (Acts 3: 17-25. for example).

They also can't see all the Biblical types, such as the fact that Jesus is a Jew who is fully the antitype of Joseph, who yearned for his Israelite brethren who had rejected him and betrayed him even though he took a Gentile bride - and that he yearned for them in all those years of estrangement from them to such an extent, that when that day of reconciliation finally came, the whole house of Pharoah (a Biblical type of"the kings of the world") heard his loud sobs as he fell on their necks and embraced them, forgiving them. Then he went and lived with his Gentile bride and Israelite brethren in the idyllic land of goshen - a Bibical type of the millennium.

With the exception of the parts of the Bible dealing specifically with salvation through Jesus, most of the Bible is a closed book to those who are blinded by this unbiblical conviction of theirs. It's really sad, and difficult to understand why.

Lekh