Replacement theology? Yes or No.

[Beekeeper]

I understand if you're using this type of teaching technique to help walk Beekeeper through this. It appears to be helping him.

I am glad you think I am making progress, and yes, I quite like @OMC approach at times.
If all you and I had to agree about is that the second temple prophesies were fulfilled and that future restorations were predicted, we could reach a sort of vague and undefined agreement too.
We could of course dig a bit deeper than that, but there would be risk that we depart from our vague and agreeable ways.

 

[cv5]

That's fair. If your point is that another restoration is coming, I don't think I've actually disagreed with that.

What I've been pushing back on is the claim that the second-temple restoration was so inadequate that it effectively doesn't count as a fulfillment of the restoration promises.

Scripture says God brought them back, rebuilt Jerusalem, rebuilt the temple, and dwelt among them. That was a real restoration.

If your point is that the prophets also looked beyond that restoration to something greater, then I agree.
Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, the New Covenant promises, the Messiah, the resurrection, and the Day of the Lord all point forward.

So I don't think the disagreement is whether another restoration is written in Scripture. It plainly is.

The disagreement is whether the post-exilic restoration was a genuine fulfillment that also pointed beyond itself, or whether it was so deficient that the major restoration prophecies must be postponed almost entirely to the future.

I think the prophets present the former: a real restoration, followed by greater fulfillments still to come.

Only the insane do not understand that the 2nd regathering of the Nation Israel is also the time when they enter into the New Covenant. Which did NOT happen in the time of Ezra and Nehimiah @Beekeeper, rendering your preposterous theory as specious and bizarre.

All of the prophets testify to this 2nd regathering in faith and this entering into the New Covenant. To say otherwise is madness.

Frankly I am continually shocked at the stupifying biblical illiteratcy and outright stupidity I am watching around here.

 

[cv5]

I am glad you think I am making progress, and yes, I quite like @OMC approach at times.
If all you and I had to agree about is that the second temple prophesies were fulfilled and that future restorations were predicted, we could reach a sort of vague and undefined agreement too.
We could of course dig a bit deeper than that, but there would be risk that we depart from our vague and agreeable ways.

Indeed, vague and undefined is your objective and why you are here. Its also your defining characteristic stamped on every post.

But it certainly is not mine. And thank God for that.

 

[Revelation1v8]

I am glad you think I am making progress, and yes, I quite like @OMC approach at times.
If all you and I had to agree about is that the second temple prophesies were fulfilled and that future restorations were predicted, we could reach a sort of vague and undefined agreement too.
We could of course dig a bit deeper than that, but there would be risk that we depart from our vague and agreeable ways.

Like I told OMC, I never said past events didn't happen. My narrative showed you in large letters that the second temple restoration period was only partially fulfilled. I was just trying to show you that certain language within the text just did not fit that particular period. ALL the prophetic books have past and future events listed in them.

 

[Beekeeper]

Indeed, vague and undefined is your objective and why you are here. Its also your defining characteristic stamped on every post.

But it certainly is not mine. And thank God for that.

Self praise is no great honor you know.
Luke 18:9-14.

 

[Beekeeper]

Indeed, vague and undefined is your objective and why you are here. Its also your defining characteristic stamped on every post.

But it certainly is not mine. And thank God for that.

In that case could you please define the New Covenant for us in a way that is not vague?

 

[Beekeeper]

Only the insane do not understand that the 2nd regathering of the Nation Israel is also the time when they enter into the New Covenant. Which did NOT happen in the time of Ezra and Nehimiah @Beekeeper, rendering your preposterous theory as specious and bizarre.

People who believe in Jesus understand that as the new covenant itself.

 

[Revelation1v8]

People who believe in Jesus understand that as the new covenant itself.

We all believe in Jesus as the New Covenant, but we also believe what He said in Luke 24:44 and Jeremiah 31 (and all the other prophetic books) about bringing the House of Israel back together (the northern and southern kingdoms) again in order to establish His "Covenant of Peace" between them and everyone else in the future. They will be grafted back into the Olive Tree like Paul suggested in Romans 11:25-27.

Ezekiel 34:25 states, "I will make a covenant of peace with them; and I will cause evil beasts to cease out of the land: and they shall dwell safely in the wilderness, and sleep in the woods." This promise is reiterated and expanded in Ezekiel 37:26, which declares, "Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in their midst for evermore."

Additionally, Isaiah 54:10 reinforces the permanence of this covenant, noting, "Though the mountains depart, and the hills be removed, yet my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed, saith the Lord that hath mercy on thee."

Jeremiah 31:31-34 outlines the New Covenant, which is intrinsically linked to this peace. It promises that God will put His law in their minds and write it on their hearts, serving as the foundation for the restored relationship and peace with Israel and Judah.

 

[Revelation1v8]

People who believe in Jesus understand that as the new covenant itself.

In addition, it helps to remember that Jesus is both the God of the Old & New Testaments and Covenants. He authored them all AND He fulfilled them in the flesh. We can't separate the Old & New Testaments any more than we can separate Jesus from God.

--

 

[Beekeeper]

In addition, it helps to remember that Jesus is both the God of the Old & New Testaments and Covenants. He authored them all AND He fulfilled them in the flesh. We can't separate the Old & New Testaments any more than we can separate Jesus from God.

--

Hebrews 8:7
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

God has ABOLISHED the old covenant.

Hebrews 8:6
But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

God has REPLACED it with a better covenant.

 

[OMC]

Only the insane do not understand that the 2nd regathering of the Nation Israel is also the time when they enter into the New Covenant. Which did NOT happen in the time of Ezra and Nehimiah @Beekeeper, rendering your preposterous theory as specious and bizarre.

All of the prophets testify to this 2nd regathering in faith and this entering into the New Covenant. To say otherwise is madness.

Frankly I am continually shocked at the stupifying biblical illiteratcy and outright stupidity I am watching around here.

Your confidence in your interpretation does not give you license to insult those who disagree with you.
Calling fellow believers "insane," "mad," "stupid," and "biblically illiterate" is not the conduct Scripture commands.
"The servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient" (2 Tim. 2:24), and we are told to speak the truth in love, not contempt.

You may believe your view of Israel's restoration and the New Covenant is correct, but asserting that only an insane person could disagree is arrogance, not exegesis.
Serious students of Scripture have debated these passages for centuries.
The issue should be settled from the text, not by ridicule.

Frankly, if this is the manner in which you intend to engage people, I would encourage you to step away from the discussion until you can address others with the humility and graciousness Scripture requires.
A person who cannot discuss doctrine without insulting others is not helping the conversation, regardless of how strongly he believes he is right.

 

[Revelation1v8]

Hebrews 8:7
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

God has ABOLISHED the old covenant.

Hebrews 8:6
But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

God has REPLACED it with a better covenant.

You just posted verse 8 showing that God/Jesus will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. What Covenant do you think that is??!!

We need to remember too that God/Jesus has made 7 Covenants.

--

 

[Beekeeper]

We all believe in Jesus as the New Covenant, but

I am not convinced that we all believe in the PREEMINENCE of the New covenant.
By that I mean I am not persuaded that it is your primary focus.
When you mention the NC in passing, your focus is still on earthly Israel and on prophesies that could potentially be interpreted to it's earthly advantage.
The new covenant is of far greater value than all of that, because it has power to save.

Hebrews
8:1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

Jesus is the king, high priest and builder of the tabernacle under the new covenant, and this is the covenant that was promised in Ezekiel 37 and in Jeremiah 31.
This is the promised restoration of Israel, so you can forget all that garbage about completing the second temple restoration.
Those eternal promises in the OT were talking about something far better.

 

[Revelation1v8]

I am not convinced that we all believe in the PREEMINENCE of the New covenant.
By that I mean I am not persuaded that it is your primary focus.
When you mention the NC in passing, your focus is still on earthly Israel and on prophesies that could potentially be interpreted to it's earthly advantage.
The new covenant is of far greater value than all of that, because it has power to save.

Hebrews
8:1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

Jesus is the king, high priest and builder of the tabernacle under the new covenant, and this is the covenant that was promised in Ezekiel 37 and in Jeremiah 31.
This is the promised restoration of Israel, so you can forget all that garbage about completing the second temple restoration.
Those eternal promises in the OT were talking about something far better.

In my personal opinion, I'm not sure you understand that God/Jesus has made 7 different covenants.

--

 

[Beekeeper]

You just posted verse 8 showing that God/Jesus will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. What Covenant do you think that is??!!

We need to remember too that God/Jesus has made 7 Covenants.

--

That is the same covenant that is discussed in Hebrews 8.
It is not about anything earthly, it is about Jesus.
That is also the same covernant that is discussed in Jeremiah 31 with the famous reference to the sun, moon and stars.
I am sorry, but you have been understanding all of this very wrongly, and missing out on much.

 

[Beekeeper]

In my personal opinion, I'm not sure you understand that God/Jesus has made 7 different covenants.

--

You may also not comprehend that the covenant to which I refer is peppermint and everlasting.

 

[Revelation1v8]

That is the same covenant that is discussed in Hebrews 8.
It is not about anything earthly, it is about Jesus.
That is also the same covernant that is discussed in Jeremiah 31 with the famous reference to the sun, moon and stars.
I am sorry, but you have been understanding all of this very wrongly, and missing out on much.

I believe you are missing out on much as well. Let's break it down and come to the my final conclusion in my last statement:

The New Covenant for Israelites​

The New Covenant was originally spoken to Israel and Judah (Jeremiah 31:31; Ezekiel 36:26–28). For them it means:

• Unconditional forgiveness — "I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more" (Jer. 31:34). This is no longer dependent on animal sacrifice or Israel's own obedience.
• Internal transformation — God's law is written on the heart rather than on stone tablets (Jer. 31:33; Ezek. 36:27). Israel will be circumcised inwardly, not just outwardly.
• Direct knowledge of God — "All of them, both small and great, will know me" (Jer. 31:34), removing the need for intercessory priests.
• Regathering and restoration — Israel will be gathered back to the land, united as one nation under one king, and will dwell there forever (Ezek. 37:21–28).
• A covenant of peace — an everlasting, unbreakable relationship that will not be broken as the Mosaic covenant was (Jer. 31:32).

The New Covenant for Gentiles

Gentiles were originally "strangers to the covenants of promise" (Ephesians 2:12), excluded from the commonwealth of Israel. The New Covenant changes that:

• Grafted into Abraham's family — Through faith in Christ, Gentiles become "fellow heirs, fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 3:6). Paul calls this a mystery previously hidden (Eph. 3:3–6; Col. 1:26–27).
• The blessing of Abraham extended — "That the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Jesus Christ" (Gal. 3:14). The Abrahamic covenant's promise to "all nations" is realized.
• Freedom from the Mosaic Law — The Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) confirmed that Gentile believers are not obligated to keep the Law of Moses. The wall of separation is broken (Eph. 2:14–16).
• Equality in Christ — "There is no longer Jew or Gentile… for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:28). Both groups share the same forgiveness, the same indwelling Spirit, and the same access to God.
• Union with Christ — Because Christ was Himself a Jew, Gentiles who are united to Him by faith participate in His covenant relationship with the God of Israel.

This is why Paul tells you in Romans 11:25-27 that God/Jesus has temporarily blinded the Jews until THE FULNESS OF THE GENTILES COMES IN. Once it does, God/Jesus will make Himself known to them so they can join into the New Covenant that WE WILL ALL SHARE, but it doesn't all happen at the same time.

 

[OMC]

I believe you are missing out on much as well. Let's break it down and come to the my final conclusion in my last statement:

The New Covenant for Israelites​

The New Covenant was originally spoken to Israel and Judah (Jeremiah 31:31; Ezekiel 36:26–28). For them it means:

• Unconditional forgiveness — "I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more" (Jer. 31:34). This is no longer dependent on animal sacrifice or Israel's own obedience.
• Internal transformation — God's law is written on the heart rather than on stone tablets (Jer. 31:33; Ezek. 36:27). Israel will be circumcised inwardly, not just outwardly.
• Direct knowledge of God — "All of them, both small and great, will know me" (Jer. 31:34), removing the need for intercessory priests.
• Regathering and restoration — Israel will be gathered back to the land, united as one nation under one king, and will dwell there forever (Ezek. 37:21–28).
• A covenant of peace — an everlasting, unbreakable relationship that will not be broken as the Mosaic covenant was (Jer. 31:32).

The New Covenant for Gentiles

Gentiles were originally "strangers to the covenants of promise" (Ephesians 2:12), excluded from the commonwealth of Israel. The New Covenant changes that:

• Grafted into Abraham's family — Through faith in Christ, Gentiles become "fellow heirs, fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 3:6). Paul calls this a mystery previously hidden (Eph. 3:3–6; Col. 1:26–27).
• The blessing of Abraham extended — "That the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Jesus Christ" (Gal. 3:14). The Abrahamic covenant's promise to "all nations" is realized.
• Freedom from the Mosaic Law — The Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) confirmed that Gentile believers are not obligated to keep the Law of Moses. The wall of separation is broken (Eph. 2:14–16).
• Equality in Christ — "There is no longer Jew or Gentile… for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:28). Both groups share the same forgiveness, the same indwelling Spirit, and the same access to God.
• Union with Christ — Because Christ was Himself a Jew, Gentiles who are united to Him by faith participate in His covenant relationship with the God of Israel.

This is why Paul tells you in Romans 11:25-27 that God/Jesus has temporarily blinded the Jews until THE FULNESS OF THE GENTILES COMES IN. Once it does, God/Jesus will make Himself known to them so they can join into the New Covenant that WE WILL ALL SHARE, but it doesn't all happen at the same time.

I simply do not see where Romans 11 explicitly states that the New Covenant itself is postponed for Israel until after the fulness of the Gentiles comes in.
That seems to be an inference rather than a statement of the text.
The burden is to show from Romans 11:25-27 itself that participation in the New Covenant by Israel is entirely future, rather than that a future turning of Israel results in many more Jews entering blessings that have already been inaugurated through Christ.

 

[Revelation1v8]

I simply do not see where Romans 11 explicitly states that the New Covenant itself is postponed for Israel until after the fulness of the Gentiles comes in.
That seems to be an inference rather than a statement of the text.
The burden is to show from Romans 11:25-27 itself that participation in the New Covenant by Israel is entirely future, rather than that a future turning of Israel results in many more Jews entering blessings that have already been inaugurated through Christ.

Isn't that what we've been doing for the last several pages? Showing how the prophetic books all show that God/Jesus reveals Himself to the House of Israel after a final repeat of history, when He comes in and cleans out the land and the people himself and pours out His Spirit on them one last time before His earthly kingdom is set up?

The Bible isn't written in a way that you can or have to prove anything from a couple of verses. You have to look at the whole big picture and use the entire Bible together to see how it unfolds. What's clear is that God/Jesus doesn't totally reveal himself to His original people until He returns and they look upon Him as the one whom they pierced and mourn over it.

 

[OMC]

Isn't that what we've been doing for the last several pages? Showing how the prophetic books all show that God/Jesus reveals Himself to the House of Israel after a final repeat of history, when He comes in and cleans out the land and the people himself and pours out His Spirit on them one last time before His earthly kingdom is set up?

The Bible isn't written in a way that you can or have to prove anything from a couple of verses. You have to look at the whole big picture and use the entire Bible together to see how it unfolds. What's clear is that God/Jesus doesn't totally reveal himself to His original people until He returns and they look upon Him as the one whom they pierced and mourn over it.

You are appealing to a larger prophetic narrative to argue that Israel's covenant participation must therefore be entirely future.
But that is the very point under debate.
Simply citing future restoration passages does not establish that no Israelite has entered New Covenant blessings prior to that future event.
In fact, Paul himself was an Israelite.
The apostles were Israelites.
The remnant according to grace in Romans 11:5 were Israelites.
If salvation, forgiveness of sins, the indwelling Spirit, and union with Christ are New Covenant blessings, then Israelites were already participating in those blessings in Paul's day.
So I agree that the prophets describe a future moment when Israel will look upon the One they pierced and mourn.
I agree there is a future salvation of "all Israel" in Romans 11.
What I do not see is the step where that future national turning proves the New Covenant was completely unavailable to Israel beforehand.
The issue is not whether a future restoration exists.
The issue is whether a future restoration requires a future-only New Covenant.
Romans 11 explicitly teaches the former. I do not see where it explicitly teaches the latter.