Everlasting Covenant

[PGA]

Hi Steve,

I don't believe God ever broke His covenant that He made with Abraham. God did give this land to Abraham's offspring, but the people God made into a great nation, I believe can also be seen as those in Christ under the New Covenant. I believe that the NT demonstrates that there is always a greater fulfillment than just the mere physical reality, the greater reality being in Christ Jesus. I believe that God's promises achieve fulfillment, just as the Mosaic covenant, in Christ Jesus.

Hebrews 11:8-16 conveys this, IMO.

Hebrews 11:8-16

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)

⁸ By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going. ⁹ By faith he made his home in the promised land like a stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. ¹⁰ For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God.

¹¹ By faith Abraham, even though he was past age—and Sarah herself was barren—was enabled to become a father because he^[a] considered him faithful who had made the promise. ¹² And so from this one man, and he as good as dead, came descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as countless as the sand on the seashore.

¹³ All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth. ¹⁴ People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. ¹⁵ If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. ¹⁶ Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.

Footnotes:

1. Hebrews 11:11 Or By faith even Sarah, who was past age, was enabled to bear children because she
   

The OT has always pointed forward to the NT as far as I'm concerned and the greater reality that is Christ Jesus and fulfillment of all God's promises of blessing that are met in Christ. Abraham was looking ahead to Christ.

Peter

I don't deny that there is a measure of looking towards the new testament with regards to the promises given to Abraham. I believe that this is specifically borne out in Genesis 22:15-18 after God stops Abraham from sacrificing Isaac:

Gen 22:15 Then the Angel of the LORD called to Abraham a second time out of heaven,

Gen 22:16 and said: "By Myself I have sworn, says the LORD, because you have done this thing, and have not withheld your son, your only son—

Gen 22:17 blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your descendants shall possess the gate of their enemies.

Gen 22:18 In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice."

There are all sorts of beautiful parallels here that obviously point to Jesus. But, for the purposes of this conversation, I'm going to stick with my Genesis 12:7 line of reasoning. The Hebrews scripture quoted above is not mutually exclusive to the Abrahamic land promise. Why does the physical realm matter at all if everything can be looked at through a strictly spiritual prism and, furthermore, if that's the case, why were physical land promises ever made? Here's an example:

Gen 13:14 And the LORD said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: "Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward, and westward;

Gen 13:15 for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever.

This is a reiteration of the land promise made in 12:7. Why were these promises made exclusive of the promises made to Abraham after his obedience to God with reference to Isaac?

Also, let's look back at Gen 22:15-18. Abraham is told - "In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice." This implies to me that Abraham's obedience with regard to Isaac earned him a greater reward than the land promise (God says "by Myself I have sworn" with regards to this particular group of promises. God swore by himself to give Abraham this particular set of rewards and it's pretty awesome to think about that in and of itself. For me, it is indicative of the willingness of Abraham to obey no matter what). If 12:7 and further 13:14-15 were the same promises as 22:15-18 (which I believe is the argument you are making), then that certainly takes away a lot from Abraham's act of obedience because he already had these promises.

In your response you said that those in Christ under the new covenant are those of the great nation. God promises that "In your seed all the nations of the earth will be blessed." This is CLEARLY, to me, the promise of a messiah coming from Abraham's bloodline. This was made long after the land promise and is obviously also a physical promise, because Jesus DID come from Abraham's seed (physically). It's quite confusing for you to claim that the land promise extends to the new covenant spirtually, when clearly the seed promise was fulfilled PHYSICALLY (not to mention the fact that the land covenant has also been physically fulfilled!).

And that brings me to my greatest issue. We have physical evidence right now that descendants of Abraham are, against virtually all odds, in control of the land (or most of it) promised Abraham. All of the prophecies given to Abraham have been physically fulfilled. Clearly there are spiritual components to them and clearly the greatest reward is in heaven, but God keeps his promises and he promised Abraham physical land to his descendants forever ("Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward, and westward;").

Hi Steve,

Since it is getting late I'm going to think more about you post over the next couple of days, since I'm working this weekend. But I want to make a few comments now.

Gen 13:14 And the LORD said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: "Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward, and westward;

Gen 13:15 for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever. -Steve

If forever always means forever then you can't take 2 Peter 3:10 as literal then, can you? Or is God going to 'recreate' this land? Something has to give, surely, either the way you look at Genesis 13:15 or the way you look at 2 Peter - right or wrong?

And that brings me to my greatest issue. We have physical evidence right now that descendants of Abraham are, against virtually all odds, in control of the land (or most of it) promised Abraham. All of the prophecies given to Abraham have been physically fulfilled. Clearly there are spiritual components to them and clearly the greatest reward is in heaven, but God keeps his promises and he promised Abraham physical land to his descendants forever ("Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward, and westward;"). -Steve

Actually, I've never looked at it from this angle before. I always looked at the land promises that are so often quoted as 'not being fulfilled', in order to fulfill the Israel of today prophecies, as being those of Deuteronomy 1:7 and 11:25-27 and these applying to OT Israel under the Mosaic covenant, not the Abrahamic covenant, which I think is a true understanding of those two Scriptures. It is clear, to my mind at least, that in regard to the Mosaic covenant that God brought the curses upon this people, both in the Babylonian captivity and also in A.D. 70. So I can't see how this people today in our times relates to OT Israel, the people whom God made the Mosaic covenant with, since I believe that covenant is no longer in existence. These are the people who I believe that God is concerned with in sending His one and only Son to earth from heaven. It was this covenant of blessings and curses that fits the bill of returning to the land - blessing for obedience and curses and removal from the land for disobedience.

One final point, as per Hebrews, the shadow and copies are the physical, earthly things. The reality is the heavenly things. Would you agree? I've listed a number of these contrasts that can be seen throughout the Bible in NT Scriptures in previous posts, but that list can be greatly expanded on. In the NT the spiritual aspects of the physical OT quotes and illustrations can be seen.

For instance, here are just a few examples that you can refer to - Romans 5:12-18; 1 Cor. 10:1-11; 2 Cor. 3:7-18; Gal. 4:21-31; Eph. 5:22-33; Phil. 3:1-9; Col. 2:11-17, of which I'll leave you with verse 17:

Colossians 2:17

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)

¹⁷ These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.

Peter

[PGA]

Hi again Steve,

I do have a question with regards to this.

2Th 2:3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition,

2Th 2:4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

Who fulfilled that particular prophecy from your personal viewpoint? -Steve

I would be speculating to say who it was, although I think there are clues from the writings of Josephus, but let's take the witness of Thessalonians itself.

2 Thessalonians 2:7

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)

⁷ For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.

Paul says that the power of lawlessness is already at work and THEY knew what was holding him back. Paul was writing to a church that existed in the 1st century.

The second point is that some of the believers thought the Day had already come. This means that they, at least, were not looking for a physical coming in which the heavens and earth would be destroyed, because they thought it HAD already happened.

This man of sin would sit in the temple of God. That means that a temple would have to exist and since Paul was writing to 1st century believers, this must have been the OT temple that existed, because the NT temple is the called out body, being made into a spiritual house, is it not?

Lastly, the 'Abomination that causes Desolation' is a Mosaic concept in violation of that covenant that, in other Scripture, brings in the destruction of the Mosaic city and temple, as made a note of in Daniel 9:27 and also in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy 28-32. If this is the case then the man of desolation can also be seen as possibly being a Jew. Josephus records the different factions involved within the city during the Roman siege, as well as the different divisions of the Roman armies outside the city walls. We also know from Josephus that Titus was involved in bringing down the city and temple and as a Roman emperor also seen as a god to some.

Peter

[PGA]

I ask simple short questions and you do not answer with a on point short answers,

Simple point ..when someone tries to proclaim that the 1000 year millennium has already began or is in the past then it is a simple matter of taking note of the things that the scriptures declare will happen during the millennium and determine if they have happened , such things like satan unable to deceive people , lions eating straw and not meat , wolves and lions and bears living peaceably with lambs and other animals they normally eat . no wars among men, and many other things , none of which have happened yet ,,,which is proof the millennium has not not begun.

The reason you always avoid these statements is because you will not admit that these and other things are LITERAL

It is sad that you refuse such truth solely to avoid dealing with the errors of preterism

Scriptures have been given to you many many times and you either avoid them altogether or take them apart and remove the part that you do not want to accept and deal with ,,you make a 24 inch long post that still does not answer directly and concisely .

My answers are not satisfactory to you because you look at Scripture from a different standpoint. You view Scripture from that standpoint, and I used to as well.

I explained in the last thread, before it was shut down, my take on Isaiah 11 and Zechariah 12-14, of which you never responded to my questions. In fact I gave you Scripture on Zechariah 12:10; 13:7 and Isaiah 11 as already being fulfilled from quotes in the NT.

I have also been through my position on the thousand years, of which you also dismiss because I don't a) necessarily see it as literal, or b) see it as already fulfilled.

I gave you a list of my thoughts, and Scriptures on why I saw Christ as victor over Satan, as already having received power and glory and might from the Father when He came into His heavenly kingdom and how He was waiting in heaven at His Father's side until His enemies were made His footstool, which I believe happened in A.D. 70, bvecause OT Israel was His enemy that He said He would judge in 'this generation' of 1st century A.D.

He conquered death, sin and Satan and in A.D. 70, I believe, He came in judgment (as well as to bring salvation to those who were waiting, for throughout the NT there is always this near expectancy of these realities) to make these victories reality.

By first fulfilling the Old Covenant, and then destroying the Old Covenant God, through Christ, brought in the greater/better everlasting covenant.

Peter

[Guest BEAST MODE]

i tend to agree that this is an issue of confusion from within. not from in the Word. sometimes we get hung up on the configuration of a set of words, or we over think a verse, or we try to connect two concepts where there should be no connection. but i think also that its worth hammering that out to better understand the Word and to sharpen our studying skills. also to provoke the being led by the Holy Spirit. anyway good stuff from everyone

[Steve_S]

Hi again Steve,

I do have a question with regards to this.

2Th 2:3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition,

2Th 2:4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

Who fulfilled that particular prophecy from your personal viewpoint? -Steve

I would be speculating to say who it was, although I think there are clues from the writings of Josephus, but let's take the witness of Thessalonians itself.

2 Thessalonians 2:7

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)

⁷ For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.

Paul says that the power of lawlessness is already at work and THEY knew what was holding him back. Paul was writing to a church that existed in the 1st century.

The second point is that some of the believers thought the Day had already come. This means that they, at least, were not looking for a physical coming in which the heavens and earth would be destroyed, because they thought it HAD already happened.

This man of sin would sit in the temple of God. That means that a temple would have to exist and since Paul was writing to 1st century believers, this must have been the OT temple that existed, because the NT temple is the called out body, being made into a spiritual house, is it not?

Lastly, the 'Abomination that causes Desolation' is a Mosaic concept in violation of that covenant that, in other Scripture, brings in the destruction of the Mosaic city and temple, as made a note of in Daniel 9:27 and also in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy 28-32. If this is the case then the man of desolation can also be seen as possibly being a Jew. Josephus records the different factions involved within the city during the Roman siege, as well as the different divisions of the Roman armies outside the city walls. We also know from Josephus that Titus was involved in bringing down the city and temple and as a Roman emperor also seen as a god to some.

Peter

It's quite important that the man of sin be identified with historical veracity to even tacitly attempt to objectively argue a preterist viewpoint, in my opinion. I find preterists tend to shy away from this because there are simply no good candidates that fit the entire narrative, which in and of itself calls preterism into question, especially in light of some of the descriptive terms used with regards to some of these events. Titus wasn't a roman emperor yet at this time, so that's simply out as an argument. The traditional preterist argument has seemed to be Nero as far as I can tell, but these must be people who haven't studied any sort of history at all and so, without giving the laundry list of reasons why, he must be ruled out as well. Your last line of reasoning basically says that, while under a full seige from a vastly superior enemy and in the height of a crisis, someone from jewish sect INSIDE jerusalem was somehow able to accomplish this? Not to mention the fact that in Daniel 11 and 12 it very much so seems like a foreign conqueror. The possibility of it being a jew aside, you have no real candidate for the man of sin and we have an extensive historical record of the events. If there is no man of sin there is no great tribulation and if that's the case the preterism is defunct.

[PGA]

Hi again Steve,

I do have a question with regards to this.

2Th 2:3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition,

2Th 2:4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

Who fulfilled that particular prophecy from your personal viewpoint? -Steve

I would be speculating to say who it was, although I think there are clues from the writings of Josephus, but let's take the witness of Thessalonians itself.

2 Thessalonians 2:7

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)

⁷ For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.

Paul says that the power of lawlessness is already at work and THEY knew what was holding him back. Paul was writing to a church that existed in the 1st century.

The second point is that some of the believers thought the Day had already come. This means that they, at least, were not looking for a physical coming in which the heavens and earth would be destroyed, because they thought it HAD already happened.

This man of sin would sit in the temple of God. That means that a temple would have to exist and since Paul was writing to 1st century believers, this must have been the OT temple that existed, because the NT temple is the called out body, being made into a spiritual house, is it not?

Lastly, the 'Abomination that causes Desolation' is a Mosaic concept in violation of that covenant that, in other Scripture, brings in the destruction of the Mosaic city and temple, as made a note of in Daniel 9:27 and also in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy 28-32. If this is the case then the man of desolation can also be seen as possibly being a Jew. Josephus records the different factions involved within the city during the Roman siege, as well as the different divisions of the Roman armies outside the city walls. We also know from Josephus that Titus was involved in bringing down the city and temple and as a Roman emperor also seen as a god to some.

Peter

It's quite important that the man of sin be identified with historical veracity to even tacitly attempt to objectively argue a preterist viewpoint, in my opinion. I find preterists tend to shy away from this because there are simply no good candidates that fit the entire narrative, which in and of itself calls preterism into question, especially in light of some of the descriptive terms used with regards to some of these events. Titus wasn't a roman emperor yet at this time, so that's simply out as an argument. The traditional preterist argument has seemed to be Nero as far as I can tell, but these must be people who haven't studied any sort of history at all and so, without giving the laundry list of reasons why, he must be ruled out as well. Your last line of reasoning basically says that, while under a full seige from a vastly superior enemy and in the height of a crisis, someone from jewish sect INSIDE jerusalem was somehow able to accomplish this? Not to mention the fact that in 11 and 12 it very much so seems like a foreign conqueror. The possibility of it being a jew aside, you have no real candidate for the man of sin and we have an extensive historical record of the events. If there is no man of sin there is no great tribulation and if that's the case the preterism is defunct.

Hi Steve,

Although it is not so easy to identify who this man may be because history does not give us enough records of this event to deal with it in certainty, I feel that Scripture is specific enough to reveal to us the time frame in which these events took place. Who was there to witness them, other than Josephus, the Romans in the city and the Jews in the city. Of those who do you think would best be able to preserve such record? I can dig up some references from Josephus on this destruction of the temple and city. Other than that who is going to record such events? The Jew in captivity?

It is my contention that the whole of the Scriptures were already written before A.D. 70, so Scripture would also be silent on who this was, other than to say that the Holy Spirit was keeping this person at bay at the present time of it being written.

My point earlier was that I believe 2 Thessalonians was written to 1st century believers who were expecting Christ to come shortly. This is evident in just about every epistle/letter. If you notice the verb tenses, it is in the present, near future and past tense that the author is speaking much of the time. By the pronouns and context it is to this body of believers. I actually listed some of my reasons in my previous post to you as to why the context talked directly and primarily to that church of the 1st century. How about addressing those points?

It's quite important that the man of sin be identified with historical veracity to even tacitly attempt to objectively argue a preterist viewpoint, in my opinion. -Steve

Preterism does not rest on one Scripture or 'the man of sin.' It rests on the whole body of God's word and what it says in context and in the larger context of Scripture itself, for just like you, I'm sure, I believe that Scripture is its own best interpreter, when correctly handled. There are so many avenues of questions that I feel cannot be adequately defended by a futurist position, of which I have tried in the past to engage others with limited luck. If I felt that a futurist position was correct I would not be asking how such questions are to be answered because I would already have an adequate answer. But this is the problem I have, that is, I have not seen adequate answers.

For instance, if Jesus said that not one letter of the Law or Prophets would be abolished until all is accomplished (Matthew 5:17-18), what does that tell you about the Law and Prophets (1 Peter 1:10 onwards)? Where is the temple? Where is the priesthood? Where are the animal sacrifices that the Law requires for sin? Where are these Mosaic covenant people? Why does Scripture teach that circumcision of the flesh is no longer valid, that the people of promise are a circumcision of the heart?

Foe instance, how can the Great city spoken of in Revelation be anything but OT Jerusalem?

We can get more specific than this by actually examining each epistle or gospel as to what it literally or plainly says to the topics of whom primarily it is addressing and when. The question becomes when you do this, 'Can God tell time' or 'Does God mean what He says' when you look at the passages, because they speak of things that must shortly come to pass. When Jesus is speaking to His disciples in Matthew 24 and they have asked Him questions as to when the stones of the Jerusalem temple will be thrown down, or what will be the sign of His coming or the end of the age He addresses them. 'Watch out that no one deceives YOU...' If you are going to take the passage literally then who would 'you' refer to? We know of course that the answer of both the time and meaning is yes to both. God can tell time and make His meaning clear. But I feel we also have to understand that God speaks to us in spiritual language that conveys spiritual truths. Physical Israel and physical history in the OT can and do take on spiritual meaning in the NT.

Peter

[Guest]

Dem Bones Dem Bones All Dem Traveling Bones

Then he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts. Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. Ezekiel 37:11-12

Hear The Word Of The LORD

And ye shall know that I am the LORD, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves, And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the LORD have spoken it, and performed it, saith the LORD. Ezekiel 37:13-14

~

For instance, how can the Great city spoken of in Revelation be anything but OT Jerusalem?

Beloved

And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. Revelation 21:3-4

There Ain't Nothing Old

And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. Revelation 21:5

About New Jerusalem Or New Earth Or The New Heavens

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. Revelation 21:1-2

And As For The Actuality Of The Revelation Of Jesus Christ

The Revelation of Jesus Christ Revelation 1:1(a)

It's The Real Deal To Believers

And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, Revelation 1:5

You See?

~

Believe

Behold, I will send for many fishers, saith the LORD, and they shall fish them; and after will I send for many hunters, and they shall hunt them from every mountain, and from every hill, and out of the holes of the rocks. Jeremiah 16:16

And Be Blessed Beloved

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: they shall prosper that love thee. Psalms 122:6

Love, Your Brother Joe

~

Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever. 1 John 2:15-17

[PGA]

When it comes to the preterist point of view , among the many things that are in error such as accuracy and so much assumption ,,the biggest thing that I find to be so troublesome is that in the preterist point of view is that 100% of everything that God could ever do is already done and over thousands of years ago ,, that there is no possibility that anything can be ever done in the present(which is yesteryear's future) or the future in the coming years ..

That has absolutely no logic whatsoever .

To make assumptions that because the scriptures are no longer being written therefore the LORD and Creator of everything is no longer doing anything but sitting on a throne

Simple that if the things that God said would happen , such as a time when satan cannot deceive people ,,is a literal matter , not something to make assumptions about , saying the lion will eat straw and be friends with animals they once eat for dinner is telling us the exact specifics of what the Creator has plans to do ,

but solely for the explicit purpose to bend twist , massage and cause the Word of God to be conformed to fit some mens desire to be right they choose to disregard what God means and insists that they know better what God means than God himself

in the pereterist view everything that LORD GOD ALMIGHTY says will be done is already done and is no longer doing anything that can bee seen ..now in 2013 we can readily and easily see many events happening right now that perfectly match what scripture says will happen , and there is no indication that it will happen more than once , so the preterist totally disregard everything that is happening now to be a fulfillment of what the Almighty God says will happen , God tells us point blank in simple terms what will happen in the end

and that is simply that Jesus returns to earth and rules on earth ,, but simply because that does not fit the preterist view they will insist through 100% assumption that either it has already happened or it is not a literal happening all to avoid any inaccuracies in the preterist view

The book of the Revelation of Jesus the Christ is about Jesus coming back to earth and walking with people on earth again ,,,,

Hi Danielzk,

The Preterist position does not discount God working in the lives of people today. He does that all the time in His revelation of Himself to others by bringing them to faith.

I believe that God is not a god of confusion, therefore logical, and the Preterist view I see as also logical. I see taking a term like 'this generation' of Matthew 24 and applying it to a far distant generation is not logical, or in fact God's intent when we read such Scripture. If you take note of ever other occurrence of this phrase it seems to apply to the 1st century. Can you deny this? If not then why take the Matthew 24 passage as other than applying to 1st century Jews.

I believe that one of the major themes of Revelation is the vindication of God's people, the avenging of the blood of all the saints shed on the earth, both OT and NT. I believe this vindication revolves around old covenant Israel. The book transitions between heaven and earth and I believe there is good evidence that the whole book was written before A.D. 70. The mention of the measurements of the temple and the Great City where the Lord was slain (Rev. 11) are indicators that it is OT Jerusalem before its fall. It is a difficult book to interpret because of all the imagery and symbolism, thus, I believe a good knowledge of the OT is required, since much of its imagery is taken from OT books. But one thing again that strikes me is the theme of near expectancy by the language used.

Even though I favor a full Preterist approach to Scripture I'm also open to the partial-Preterist position, I just do not find the Scriptures as supportive of this view. The partial Preterist believes in a final coming of the Lord Jesus Christ whereas the Preterist sees His coming as happening in the first century. The Preterist also sees this coming to earth by Jesus as spiritual in nature, not physical.

Peter

[hippias]

Hi Hippias,

And what do you mean by that God has fulfilled the Abrahamic covenant? God has promised land which was robbed by the Romans then, with respect to fruitfulness we can be sure to assume that today there are more Jews than around Jesus's times. Only the promise that God will be the Jews's god forever EXPIRED then because of John 14:6. -Hippias

The 'Seed' is the fulfillment. God has indeed blessed us through the 'Seed' of Abraham. I'm not following what you are referring to by your second statement concerning land robbed by the Romans. Are you talking about the Jews of today, the people of Israel today?

The Jews of today, in my opinion again, are different than the Jews of the OT times. You see, as far as I can understand, when God made the covenant with the twelve tribes of Israel, this old covenant people, the covenant contained both blessings and curses. The condition of staying in the land He was giving was upon whether they obeyed His laws of the Mosaic covenant. How can the Israel of today obey a covenant that no longer is in place - Matthew 5:17-18 (unless of course you believe it is, in which case where is the priesthood, the temple sacrifice and atonement for the people). It is not needed because God has met it fully in Christ Jesus!

Another point, return to the land was also conditional upon obedience to the covenant. How can this be today? Some, possibly the majority of the nation of Israel today are secular or atheistic/agnostic. How can that be obedient? How can you obey a covenant in which so much of it can no longer be obeyed because the sufficient means of the priesthood, sacrifices, building, etc are no longer in existence?

Another point, has not God fulfilled every land promise He made to OT Israel? I believe He has (Joshua 21:43-45)

Joshua 21:43-45

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)

⁴³ So the Lord gave Israel all the land he had sworn to give their forefathers, and they took possession of it and settled there. ⁴⁴ The Lord gave them rest on every side, just as he had sworn to their forefathers. Not one of their enemies withstood them; the Lord handed all their enemies over to them. ⁴⁵ Not one of all the Lord’s good promises to the house of Israel failed; every one was fulfilled.

How do you trace the lineage of the current Israel back to the OT? Were not the genealogies lost in the destruction of the city and temple? If not where are these records? These 1st century peoples were scattered across the whole Roman world of their day. How do we know which today are descendents of OT Israel?

Peter

I was talking about the land that was referred to in the Gen 17: the land of Canaan that was promised to Abraham and his seed as an everlasting possession. Since the land of the Jews was taken by the Romans when Jesus was on earth this part of the covenent can hardly be regarded as fulfilled, since the possession wasn't everlasting.

I know about the interpretation of the word "seed" as Jesus but in my opinion it makes no sense - for a start in what sense should Jesus have the land as an everlasting possession?! And you see that God refers very obviously to Abrahams descendants in Gen. 17:7-14. Every male (in their generations!) had to be circumcised not only Jesus, e.g. Just look at the uses of the word in

the Bible:

8 And God spoke unto Noah and to his sons with him, saying, 9 “And I, behold, I establish My covenant with you and with your seed after you, 10 and with every living creature that is with you — of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the earth with you, from all that go out of the ark to every beast of the earth. (Gen. 9:8-10)

15 for all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it and to thy seed for ever. 16 And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth, so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered. 17 Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it, for I will give it unto thee.” (Gen. 13:15-7)

Would it make sense to say "And I will make thy Jesus as the dust of the earth, so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy Jesus also be numbered."?

“But thou, Israel, art My servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham My friend. (Is. 41:8) Jacob= Jesus?

Ye that fear the LORD, praise Him! All ye the seed of Jacob, glorify Him; and fear Him, all ye the seed of Israel. (Psalm 22:23)

16 And the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, 17 “Speak unto Aaron, saying, ‘Whosoever he be of thy seed in their generations who hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. (Lev. 21:16-7) "Jesus" who hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer etc.?

In all these instances it would hardly make sense if "seed" means "Jesus", though the word being not doubt in singular. So why should this replacement be valid in other instances? Finally: You say the covenant is no longer in place, hence it can't be called "everlasting". That is all I am wondering about. The question you araised I can not answer but the more it is doubtful that the covenant can be called everlasting.

[Guest]

I was talking about the land that was referred to in the Gen 17: the land of Canaan that was promised to Abraham and his seed as an everlasting possession. Since the land of the Jews was taken by the Romans when Jesus was on earth this part of the covenent can hardly be regarded as fulfilled, since the possession wasn't everlasting.

~

It Ain't Over Til It's Over

But I had pity for mine holy name, which the house of Israel had profaned among the heathen, whither they went.

Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went. And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, saith the Lord GOD, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes.

For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land. Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God.

I will also save you from all your uncleannesses: and I will call for the corn, and will increase it, and lay no famine upon you. And I will multiply the fruit of the tree, and the increase of the field, that ye shall receive no more reproach of famine among the heathen. Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall lothe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations.

Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel.

Thus saith the Lord GOD; In the day that I shall have cleansed you from all your iniquities I will also cause you to dwell in the cities, and the wastes shall be builded.

And the desolate land shall be tilled, whereas it lay desolate in the sight of all that passed by. And they shall say, This land that was desolate is become like the garden of Eden; and the waste and desolate and ruined cities are become fenced, and are inhabited.

Then the heathen that are left round about you shall know that I the LORD build the ruined places, and plant that that was desolate: I the LORD have spoken it, and I will do it. Thus saith the Lord GOD; I will yet for this be inquired of by the house of Israel, to do it for them; I will increase them with men like a flock. Ezekiel 36:21-37