SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Articles and Sermons : "Why I’m Sure Israel Will Be Saved"-Dr Michael Brown

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 Next Page )
PosterThread
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5529
NC, USA

 Re:

I guess it depends on whether you think the promises were conditional. There are an awful lot of "ifs" attached to an awful lot of the promises.


_________________
Todd

 2016/5/12 9:30Profile









 Re:

TMK,
Let's look at the covenant in question here which is The Abrahmic Covenant. Not the Mosaic or Davidic, but focus on the Abrahamic covenant. It's also referenced in the NT, is always referred to as "the EVERLASTING covenant", etc. And is the covenant received by faith & the one we are in a sense (by type) grafted into as Gentiles as we believe God (the Gospel) by faith also, as is clear throughout the NT. As you read the initial call of Abraham in Genesis 12 & the through to the first covenant in Genesis 15 where GOD Himself Puts Abraham asleep and GOD ALONE "walks" between the cut in two bleeding animals on the "table of covenant" to say in a sense "if I don't keep my end of this covenant, may I be cut in two like these dead animals". And not only that, but God put Abraham asleep & God Alone walked through the covenantal table for both ends of the covenant. Abraham never even did. God was (in type) saying, I will keep my end, & by the power of my righteous right hand, I'll keep your end too (can anyone keep any promise or covenant without the Lord's Power? Of course not). There is never one single "if" in all of the text there. God keeps His everlasting covenant. You won't find an "If" anywhere there. I just looked again. God was saying He would keep it Himslef for His own Name's sake no matter what. He is able & He is faithful.
Then, in Genesis 17, God appears to Abraham again & speaks another covenant before Abraham. He never puts Abraham asleep, & the common understanding of the text & the common covenantal understanding of the era was that Abraham would have made the covenantal table, spread out the table of covenant of dead animals split in two, walked through the blood in the middle, splashing up on the hemn of his robe, as to say, "if I don't keep my end of this covenant, may I die & bleed out like these animals". God starts out discussing HIS END of the "Everlasting Covenant" (the land as "and EVERLASTING possession", etc.) & then God details Abrahams part: circumcision. Now in the NT we see that circumcision of the flesh was no longer required (our part) but circumcision of the heart by faith (symbolic of justification followed by sanctification), but I don't see any text anywhere in the NT where God's promises of this "EVERLASTING COVENANT" are repealed. Ever. Anywhere. Also, it is worth noting that there also NO "IF"s found anywhere there in Genesis 17. God's promises & provisions in the Abrahamic Covenant are received by faith, irrevocable, unconditional (once entered upon TRULY by faith & through Blood, now namely the Blood of Jesus), etc. Of course we still have things to do on our part, but "He remains faithful, even when we are faithless". Thank God! It's for His name's sake, His reputation as a covenant keeping God, & the things so amazing in His Gospe plan for a rebellious mankind, that "even the Angels long to look into these things".
So, when you speak of "IF"s, as in "conditions" of covenant, you are not referring in context to the Abrahamic Covenant, but most likely the Mosaic covenant. The Law. And yes, it was conditional, no one could keep it perfectly, & it was the schoolmaster to bring us to see our need for Christ the perfect Lamb of God which was the covenant by faith in which God always keeps His promises, even when we fail, fall, stumble, etc.
I'm sure others can offer even better/more to the discussion, but I know understanding covenant in the ancient Way it was spoken, carried out & understood by its original audience is important. It's more than just a "contract" as we would see it. And God always keeps HIS covenant promises He gave to Abraham & His descendants after him. Always. He always referred to His end of keeping the covenants to Abraham as "EVERLASTING" (literally forever, non-ending), but never makes such specific statements to anything on our end, nor to Moses concerning the Law (the conditional Mosaic covenant). Not that I see when reading the text. Again, I don't understand everything, but I don't see a single "IF" in al of the Abrahamic Covenant in scripture in Genesis 12-19. I only see unconditional language on God's part, see the Hebraic picture of it in God putting Abraham to sleep & coming down & walking through the covenant HIMSELF alone, & see the word "EVERLASTING" repeatedly when God is referring to His part of keeping the covenant.
God Bless,
Jeff

 2016/5/12 10:28









 Re:

And all that aside, Romans 11:26 (the quintessential NT text that's the crux heart nature of the OP, even if you "allegorize" away all the OT covenantal promises & prophecies of the Day of The Lord, etc.) has no "IF"s in it whatsoever. Romans 11:26 is pretty plainly spoken, with no IF's & lines up with the OT prophetic texts, Abrahamic Covenantal language, etc.

 2016/5/12 10:47
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5529
NC, USA

 Re:

How do you explain God's willingness to wipe out the Israelites in Ex. 32? It was only through the mediation of Moses that He did not do so.


_________________
Todd

 2016/5/12 11:11Profile









 Re:

I think it was actually a rhetorical question for Moses to test his heart & show intercession standing in the gap. God in the OT & Jesus in the NT often asked such rhetorical questions to test the hearts of men & make a point.

 2016/5/12 11:36
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5529
NC, USA

 Re:

Possibly so.


_________________
Todd

 2016/5/12 12:11Profile
savannah
Member



Joined: 2008/10/30
Posts: 2057


 Re: rhetoric



ZEPHANIA CHAPTER 1

 2016/5/12 12:15Profile
docs
Member



Joined: 2006/9/16
Posts: 2154


 Re: Imposing the Mosaic Covenant on the Abrahamic Covenant

/I guess it depends on whether you think the promises were conditional. There are an awful lot of "ifs" attached to an awful lot of the promises./

You're making a classic mistake that others make in trying to assess the promises in Psalm 105:8-11 and elsewhere. You're laying and imposing the ifs and conditions of the Sinatic/Mosaic covenant onto the Abrahamic covenant. The possession of the land promised to Abrahamn was part of entirely different covenant than the covenant of "ifs" a and "conditionms" imposed at Sinai. The Lord knew before hand the people would never be able to keep the law so He set up a divine dilemma by requiring something of them He knew they would never be able to keep. The law served as a schoolmaster to show them they neeeded a righteousness they could never possess within themselves. So the grace of the Abrahamic covenant, realized only in Christ, was and is the only alternative. God putting Abraham to sleep as He cut covenant with him is enormously siginificant. If the nation one day comes to faith then the ineer righteousness of Christ within will give them the moral ability to keepo and abiode by what God will require. Abiding possession of the land was always intended to be possible only through GRACE realized only in Christ who is the epitome of the grace of the Abrahamic covenant.

"It is not uncommon for amillennialists to associate the temporal nature of the conditional Mosaic covenant with the abiding nature of the UNCONDITIONAL Abrahamic covenant, the results being that elements of the former are imposed on the latter. The promise of land to Abraham in Gen 12:13 thus becomes absorbed into a conditional, typological frame of reference. As a result, this same land, having been forfeited through disobedience, is merely regarded as a micro-earthly representation of future macro-heavenly glory that the Church inherits on a universal scale."

(From "Future Israel" - Barry Horner - ch 9 - "Israel and the Inheritance of the Land through Abraham" - p238)

If you think the pre-mill view is that the land will be inherited under the Sinatic/Mosaic covenant because the people will find within themselves the ability to keep the ifs and conditions of the Mosaic Covenant then this is wrong. The law which came 430 years after the Abrahamic covenant cannot disannul the former Abrahamic covenant (Gal. 3:17). Abiding possession of the land was not promised or possible under the Mosaic covenant and never will be. Abiding possession of the land was promised under the Abrahamic covenant of unconditional grace.


_________________
David Winter

 2016/5/12 14:29Profile
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5529
NC, USA

 Re:

David-

1) Who were the promisees of the Abrahamic covenant?

2) Who were the promisees of the Mosaic (Sinaitic) covenant?


_________________
Todd

 2016/5/12 14:54Profile









 Re:

Quote:
by TMK on 2016/5/12 14:54:19

David-

1) Who were the promisees of the Abrahamic covenant?



Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

 2016/5/12 15:46





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy