Theology—beneficial or source of endless debating?

The thread Robo started on Catholicism being heresy has not been posted in for almost five years

This is an excellent video. Definitely worth watching and sharing.

The "clout" is in the argument itself! You either can recognize a good argument or not?

You completely lack credibility. There is no bad or heretical translation in this matter. You clearly are not yourself a scholar. I'm not a scholar either, but my brother is pretty learned on the manuscripts of the Bible.

Nothing you say sounds remotely scholarly. Please give me a recognized opinion that declares the NIV I read as a "bad translation?" Or any scholarly position that admits any modern version of Gal 3.16 to be a bad translation? Or are you declaring this by your own authority?

To Paul, the literal descendants of Abraham by faith constituted "Christ's Body." So in promising something to Abraham's Seed was not only promising a progeny, but also promising a Christian progeny. That is, Paul was limiting the promise to descendants of Abraham who would have faith in Christ. Paul argues this same truth elsewhere...

Rom 9.7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.”

Yes, that's who the Jews are, both those who have already received Christ and those who have yet to put their faith in Christ, and will.

I never said Christian faith replaces Abraham's faith! I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here? Faith under the Law was bound up under the curse of sin and death. But it was released by the redemption of Christ. In any case, those before and after Christ among the Jews are to be part of "Christ's Body." They are the "Seed" to whom the inheritance of Abraham is to be given.

You're bringing up several different issues, and discussing them all at once can confuse the issues. If I remember correctly the context of your questions I would say that Israel today is not "nation-less." Israel has been reborn as a State in the Middle East. It is a "nation."

But Israel's promise is to be a Christian nation--a nation of faith. That has not happened yet. Unbelievers still dominate in Israel and among the Jewish People. God has put off judging them until Christianity is born in every nation to some degree. The goal is not just to have Christians in every nation, but more, to have Christian nations. But as I'm saying, Christian nations fail in the present era, and can only be completely fulfilled in the Kingdom of God.

I do believe that conversion can take place in the afterlife for those who had never received a complete testimony to who Christ is. They are either found to be "innocent" by God, or not. Naivete is not justification for sinning, but it can explain behavior that would ultimately lead to conversion with the right information.

But I'm talking about God wanting to make Christian societies--not just Christian individuals. So God wished to build nations, beginning with Israel, knowing that they can't last in the present era of the dominance of sin. But in the next age, these Christians nations will be built again. And yes, Israel will adopt a Christian Constitution of sorts.

Right. Not all nations would become Christ, but some, like Israel, would. The spiritual inheritance was also given to European Civilization. "

Matt 21.43 “Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.

I believe European Civilization was this "people." At the same time, God wanted the Gospel to reach out and produce Christians in all nations, even though those nations will not all become Christian nations.

“Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.

I do understand and disagree with your problem with the translation. I think the real issue here is *interpretation.*

I do agree on a natural/spiritual dichotomy in history, between those who are "of faith" and those who are "not of faith." Those of faith have God internally and see spiritual things. Those who do not let God reside in them are spiritually blind, and cannot see God's truth clearly. They come and go. They are good and evil both.

But I wouldn't apply this natural/spiritual dichotomy too carelessly. Some use it to remove the spiritual hope of "Natural Israel." I think the carnal in Israel will be removed, while others will be converted to become true, spiritual Israel.

By "Natural Israel" we refer to a specific nationality and ethnicity. Those are not removed simply because we have now put our faith in Christ. We have *redeemed* what we are--not removed what and who we are!

The doctrine of Peter as the first in a long succession of "popes" is ridiculous on its face, but lets just look at it a little more closely.

This idea is based on Matthew 16:18-19: "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

There it is, these are the two verses upon which all of Catholicism was built.

Now, let's say for the sake of argument that Peter is the "rock" to which Jesus refers. I think a good argument can be made for that. However, there's no suggestion whatsoever that Peter was to become the "vicar of Christ" on earth or a "pope." This is made up out of whole cloth.

So what do we know about Peter? We know there's nothing at all in the New Testament that even hints he was a "pope"; this all comes from the traditions of men.

Acts 10:24-26 says: "And the following day they entered Caesarea. Now Cornelius was waiting for them, and had called together his relatives and close friends. As Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped him. But Peter lifted him up, saying, 'Stand up; I myself am also a man.' " Notice what Peter doesn't say. He doesn't say: "Kiss my hand while you're at it. Then build a big idol of me so you can kiss my foot. That's right, I'm the pope, the vicar of Christ!" No, he says "Get up; I myself am also a man."

Peter would be appalled to see what's going on in his name.

Yes, of course.

Earthbound Israel is in bondage with her children to sin and are not under the NEW Covenant except for a remnant.
Galatians 4:21-31, Romans ch11

Out of each and every nation on earth only a Remnant is saved from each as the LORD elects thru the Father and Holy Spirit.

Earthbound/bondage Israel will only be restored back into the ISRAEL of God when the LORD Returns/His Second Coming = Matthew 23:37-39 and Zechariah ch14

The HOPE of the Nations is the PROMISE God made to Abraham = "In you shall all nations be blessed" = Gal 3:8

When you were Bor-Again by the Spirit, what were you Born-Again into?

I not only believe we maintain our nationality and our ethnicity when we were saved, but I believe that is part of God's promise to Abraham, to make of him many nations. He isn't just interested in the individual, but also in the society. He cares not just about gratifying the individual--He cares about social relationships.

So God is interested in redeeming all of the elements of society, and not just getting people into a relationship with Himself. He's also interested in our relationship with others.

What was I born into? I've always been a Christian, but I made a more certain commitment to Christ when I was 16. I had already spent a life-time in church, but the church was largely dead. So I suppose I was "born into" a better fellowship of Christians, and into a greater sense of what following Christ is supposed to be about.

I thought following Christ was just about staying clean and following the 10 Commandments, about praying before meals and at bedtimes, about going to church and confessing the creeds. But when I fully committed to Christ without reservation I found a deeper spirituality--one that is promised to those who obey God.

God does have Christian nations and nations consecrated to Himself like Israel for a time. But in the present age, nations of God do not generally last very long. The Byzantine Empire lasted a 1000 years, but I'm not sure it was entirely spiritual during that entire period of time? Likely not!

But it proves that God is not just after individuals committed to Him, but also to entire societies committed to His Law. And I think that will more fully be revealed when Christ comes back.

God says He is the Rock of salvation and there is no other.

‘Do not tremble and do not be afraid;
Have I not long since announced it to you and declared it?
And you are My witnesses.
Is there any God besides Me,
Or is there any other Rock?
I know of none.’” Isaiah 44:8

There are many many corroborating verses. I'll go get them

Jesus is the Rock of our salvation. God is the only Rock of our salvation.

Psalm 78:35
And they remembered that God was their rock, And the Most High God their Redeemer.

Genesis 49:24
But his bow remained firm, And his arms were agile, From the hands of the
Mighty One of Jacob (From there is the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel),

Deuteronomy 32:15
"But Jeshurun grew fat and kicked-- You are grown fat, thick, and sleek--
Then he forsook God who made him, And scorned the Rock of his salvation.

2 Samuel 23:3
"The God of Israel said, The Rock of Israel spoke to me, 'He
who rules over men righteously, Who rules in the fear of God,

Psalm 42:9
I will say to God my rock, "Why have You forgotten me? Why do
I go mourning because of the oppression of the enemy?"

Isaiah 30:29
You will have songs as in the night when you keep the festival, And gladness of heart as when
one marches to the sound of the flute, To go to the mountain of the LORD, to the Rock of Israel.

Habakkuk 1:12
Are You not from everlasting, O LORD, my God, my Holy One? We will not die You, O LORD,
have appointed them to judge; And You, O Rock, have established them to correct.

2 Samuel 22:32
"For who is God, besides the LORD? And who is a rock, besides our God?

Psalm 18:31
For who is God, but the LORD? And who is a rock, except our God,

1 Samuel 2:2
"There is no one holy like the LORD, Indeed, there is no
one besides You, Nor is there any rock like our God.

Isaiah 44:8
'Do not tremble and do not be afraid; Have I not long since announced it to you and declared it?
And you are My witnesses Is there any God besides Me, Or is there any other Rock? I know of none.'"

Deuteronomy 32:31
"Indeed their rock is not like our Rock, Even our enemies themselves judge this.

Deuteronomy 32:37
"And He will say, 'Where are their gods, The rock in which they sought refuge?

Psalm 144:1
Blessed be the LORD, my rock, Who trains my hands for war, And my fingers for battle;

Deuteronomy 32:4
"The Rock! His work is perfect, For all His ways are just; A God of
faithfulness and without injustice, Righteous and upright is He.

Psalm 92:15
To declare that the LORD is upright; He is my rock, and there is no unrighteousness in Him.

Psalm 62:7
On God my salvation and my glory rest; The rock of my strength, my refuge is in God.

Psalm 28:1
To You, O LORD, I call; My rock, do not be deaf to me, For if You are
silent to me, I will become like those who go down to the pit.

Psalm 31:1-3
In You, O LORD, I have taken refuge; Let me never be ashamed; In Your righteousness deliver me. Incline Your ear to me, rescue me quickly; Be to me a rock of strength, A stronghold to save me. For You are my rock and my fortress; For Your name's sake You will lead me and guide me.

Psalm 61:2
From the end of the earth I call to You when my heart is faint; Lead me to the rock that is higher than I.

Psalm 71:3
Be to me a rock of habitation to which I may continually come; You have
given commandment to save me, For You are my rock and my fortress.

Isaiah 26:4
"Trust in the LORD forever, For in GOD the LORD, we have an everlasting Rock.

Psalm 94:22
But the LORD has been my stronghold, And my God the rock of my refuge.

2 Samuel 22:3
My God, my rock, in whom I take refuge, My shield and the horn of my salvation,
my stronghold and my refuge; My savior, You save me from violence.

Psalm 18:2
The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer, My God, my rock, in
whom I take refuge; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.

Psalm 95:1
O come, let us sing for joy to the LORD, Let us shout joyfully to the rock of our salvation.

2 Samuel 22:47
"The LORD lives, and blessed be my rock; And exalted be God, the rock of my salvation,

Psalm 18:46
The LORD lives, and blessed be my rock; And exalted be the God of my salvation,

Psalm 19:14
Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart
Be acceptable in Your sight, O LORD, my rock and my Redeemer.

Psalm 62:2
He only is my rock and my salvation, My stronghold; I shall not be greatly shaken.

Psalm 89:26
"He will cry to Me, 'You are my Father, My God, and the rock of my salvation.'

Isaiah 17:10
For you have forgotten the God of your salvation And have not remembered the rock of your
refuge. Therefore you plant delightful plants And set them with vine slips of a strange god.

Isaiah 8:14
"Then He shall become a sanctuary; But to both the houses of Israel, a stone to strike
and a rock to stumble over, And a snare and a trap for the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

Isaiah 28:16
Therefore thus says the Lord GOD, "Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a tested stone, A costly
cornerstone for the foundation, firmly placed. He who believes in it will not be disturbed.

Psalm 118:22
The stone which the builders rejected Has become the chief corner stone.

Matthew 21:42
Jesus said to them, "Did you never read in the Scriptures, 'THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED, THIS
BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone; THIS CAME ABOUT FROM THE LORD, AND IT IS MARVELOUS IN OUR EYES'?

Mark 12:10
"Have you not even read this Scripture: 'THE STONE WHICH THE
BUILDERS REJECTED, THIS BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone;

Luke 20:17
But Jesus looked at them and said, "What then is this that is written: 'THE STONE
WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED, THIS BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone'?

Acts 4:11
"He is the STONE WHICH WAS REJECTED by you, THE BUILDERS, but WHICH BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone.

1 Peter 2:6-7
For this is contained in Scripture: "BEHOLD, I LAY IN ZION A CHOICE STONE, A PRECIOUS CORNER stone, AND HE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED." This precious value, then, is for you who believe; but for those who disbelieve, "THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED, THIS BECAME THE VERY CORNER stone,"

Matthew 21:44
"And he who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust."

Luke 20:18
"Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces;
but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust."

Romans 9:32-33
Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone, just as it is written, "BEHOLD, I LAY IN ZION A STONE OF STUMBLING AND A ROCK OF OFFENSE, AND HE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED."

1 Peter 2:4-8
And coming to Him as to a living stone which has been rejected by men, but is choice and precious in the sight of God, you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For this is contained in Scripture: "BEHOLD, I LAY IN ZION A CHOICE STONE, A PRECIOUS CORNER stone, AND HE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED."

Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name
under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.

I know of no other............Amen

"And the Rock that followed them was Christ" = Hebrews

I took a moment to look back at what was going on here. In post 102, you listed Gen 12:1, Gen 12:2, and then jumped to Gen 17:3-7. At the time I thought you were drawing from some version of the Bible that lists "seeds" in Gen 12:7. It turns out coincidentally that the same criticism applies to Gen 17:7.

The Strong's concordance (Strong's 2233) shows that these instances of "descendants" seen in some translations of Gen 17:7 are functionally the same as the "seed"/"offspring"/"descendant" in Gen 12:7. Both are second person masculine singular.

With this in mind, yes, I would go so far to say that NIV is a corrupted text if not observed with the correct context. Each of these instances of "seed" are preserved correctly in the KJV and these seed promises are what Gal 3:16 discusses.

There is a subtly between promises made directly to descendants of Abraham vs. promises made to Christ and therefore indirectly to some descendants of Abraham for those descendants in Christ.

Literal spiritual descendants regardless of physical origin: Christians. (cf. Gal 3:29)

If we wind this back for a moment, do you believe that Gal 3:16 does not apply to Gen 17:7 but does apply to Gen 12:7? Both functionally use the same term for "seed" in a singular way.

Can you contemplate the concept that NIV might not be a good translation if that is the case?

As I explained: pluralization is not heretical from the perspective of Talmudic Judaism. That is because Talmudic Judaism does not consider the New Testament to be the inerrant word of God. pluralization IS heretical from the perspective of Christianity because Gal 3:16 specifically references the "seed" in Gen 12:7 and states in no unclear terms that it is "seed" singular, not "seeds" plural via Gal 3:16. In the same way that English words like "sheep" and "fish" can be understood to be singular or plural depending on the context, so too that Hebrew can be numerically ambiguous unless a different verse gives context.

Authority is given to scripture and to logical process. A single bad translation can sometimes lead us to an incorrect understanding.

From Gen 12:7
"לְזַ֨רְעֲךָ֔ (lə·zar·‘ă·ḵā)
Preposition-l | Noun - masculine singular construct | second person masculine singular
Strong's 2233: Seed, fruit, plant, sowing-time, posterity"

From Gen 17:7
זַרְעֲךָ֧ (zar·‘ă·ḵā)
Noun - masculine singular construct | second person masculine singular
Strong's 2233: Seed, fruit, plant, sowing-time, posterity

From Gen 17:7
וּֽלְזַרְעֲךָ֖ (ū·lə·zar·‘ă·ḵā)
Conjunctive waw, Preposition-l | Noun - masculine singular construct | second person masculine singular
Strong's 2233: Seed, fruit, plant, sowing-time, posterity

If you look at KJV, you will see that each of these instances of "seed" retains the singular form that is evidence in the Hebrew and explained in Gal 3:16.

Non-sequitur.

You proposed that the modern geopolitical state that called itself Israel was the fulfilment of the promise to Abraham for a nation. I asked the simple question of why you were excluding the possibility that the promised nation is or will be a Christian nation? You didn't answer the question. And you still clearly do not have an answer.

Your position so far seems to be "I feel that way, so that must be how it is."

A big part of your position is surely going to come from the incorrectly rendered "descendants" and the possible implication that is sometimes drawn for that to mean "all descendants" which is clearly incorrect. And the moment we address that misconception, what then? What does your interpretation use to substantiate its position? Nothing as far as I can tell, but I would gladly be proven wrong.

Let's take the sentence you wrote and replace "Abraham's seed" with "Christ" as Gal 3:16 shows us to do.

"So in promising something to [Christ] was not only promising [that Christ would come], but also promising [Christianity]:"

The promise was very specifically directly to the singular "seed" that is Jesus Christ. If someone is in Christ, then they are indirectly part of the Spiritual seed of Abraham and heirs to the promise. If you change your wording to "spiritual descendants of Abraham" I agree with that. It is important not to confuse this with fleshly descendants of Abraham.

You could argue that every nonChristian has not received the "complete" testimony of Christ. It might be simpler just to talk about it in terms of spiritual blindness being lifted such as Saul's transformation into Paul by revelation in Jesus Christ. I'm all for the perspective that there are potentially millions of Sauls destined to become Pauls. And who knows, maybe those type of transformations can occur after death.

The faith of Abraham is Christianity. Israel does not replace the faith of Abraham.

Those in Christ, yes. But not all that call themselves Jews are Jews. Not all of Israel are Israel. Only a remnant of Israel will be saved. Only a remnant of Israel will turn to Christ. And when in Christ, everyone is together without distinction. No Jew or Gentile, for all are one in Christ.

Spiritual Israel would be amalgamated into Christianity, just as Saul became Paul. No differently than a Moslem finding Christ as God the Son, or a Hindu finding Christ, etc. Traditions in many ways are preserved and celebrated together.

So you agree that the promised nation is Christian? That would mean that the current nonChristian society that you are referring to isn't the promised nation.

And again, why assume the geopolitical state that calls itself Israel would have anything to do with it?

"All Israel shall be saved" is not a reference to the modern geopolitical state that calls itself Israel, it is a reference to the Spiritual Israel that turns to Christ and of which Saul/Paul was part of. Paul wasn't a nation unto himself, but formed part of the Christian nation that started with the first church in Antioch. The descendants of people like Timothy would not be counted as Israel by the modern geopolitical state that calls itself Israel despite the fact that they can make the same claims that Paul did.

Sure, and Asian ones, African ones, etc.

I mean, until you actually address the points about the Hebrew source scripts, Strong's concordance, and the fact that Gal 3:16 explicitly states that the seed promises are all to Christ.... I don't believe that you actually understand because you can't seem to address the arguments in a direct and effective manner.

Good reply.

Love casts out fear.

1 John 4:18
There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love.

No, I wasn't doing that. I was focusing on the promises of nation-singular and nations-plural to point out that God promises Abraham not just individuals, but nations quite literally.

In order to achieve the single nation of Israel, Abraham had to have a posterity of many descendants, it is clear. So God's promise was to Abraham and to his biological posterity, which would become a singular nation.

The fact that it was a single nation, set apart from other nations, indicates its singular nation and explains why the word "seed" is used instead of "seeds." It is a composite whole, explained by the theology of separation. Paul is explaining that Christ is the basis for this separation, indicating that the composite whole of those belonging to him form a singular "seed."

The NIV is the same as the KJV, and both make sense to me, indicating that Christ is synonymous with Abraham's separated descendants, who form a single, composite group. They are not many composite groups, but one.

The same could be said of Abraham's spiritual inheritance among the nations, but they must also be distinguished in the plural, as distinct nations. Nevertheless, they enjoy the same separation from the world through Christ, who forms the basis for Abraham's natural children, the Jewish People.

You draw a lot of false conclusions. I have an answer, and have had an answer. The problem is, you begin with a false premise, and with that nothing else follows nor needs any answers. You have to begin with the right premise, that Paul is speaking of nations--plural of promise, separated as a composite seed--singular distinguished by Christ. As Christ made Israel one, so he makes all nations individual composite units in Christ.

I have not said that the modern state of Israel is an *undistinguished* entity fulfilling God's promise to Abraham. Rather, I'm saying that Israel is one of the criteria for this fulfillment, the other being identity in Christ.

I have addressed this--you just refuse to accept it. Christ is the single entity, indicating the composite nature of the descendants being described. They are not all included, but rather, distinguished by their being *in Christ.* That's what indicates the promise to the singular "seed" means, to apply to only those descendants that are belonging to that seed.

In the same way God numbered all of Israel's descendants not through Ishmael, but through Isaac. There was a narrowing process to determine the natural heirs. But it was also a narrowing process using a spiritual determiner--are they chosen in Christ or not?

Isaac was chosen in Christ to be the criteria for who would be Israel. But without any descendants of Isaac being chosen in Christ, they were not "true Israel" either. Two criteria were required--descendance through Isaac and being chosen in Christ.

What you're not recognizing is that God made *natural* criteria based on Christ. Being a "natural criteria" did not mean therefore that the choice was not spiritual.

I would argue that spiritual and natural are not opposites in this case, but rather, complementary. And I think that's the problem you're having.

Good Morning,

You said: "Nevertheless, they(natural Israel) enjoy the same separation from the world through Christ, who forms the basis for Abraham's natural children, the Jewish People."

Please explain from Scripture how you see this to be true.

Yes, I can do that, though reading through this you can see the language is somewhat difficult to make clear.

1) Natural Israel is defined by spiritual choices in Christ. In choosing Isaac, instead of Ishmael, God is showing that He uses a spiritual criteria to determine who the true Natural Israel is. That is, true Israelites must both be descended through Isaac, and be chosen spiritually in Christ.

2) Ethnicities and nations are determined to be true peoples of God on the same basis, on their genetic disposition as descended from a particular people and nationality, and are chosen by spiritual means in Christ. They must be, to be a true Christian German, for example, born of Germans and chosen spiritually in Christ.

So we are not just determining ethnicities and nationalities, but more, people from these people groups who are true peoples of God. The Chinese could never be viewed as a *nation* of God, because they have never adopted a Christian Constitution as a nation. However, they could be viewed as a *people* of God among that smaller group within the nation who adopt Christ as their own.

On the other hand, a nation like Britain could claim legitimately to be a nation and people of God because they as a nation actually adopted a Christian Constitution. Nevertheless, the true "nation of God" is counted only from among those who are genuine Christians.

The basis for separation between those who are "true people of God" and those who are not, and between those who are "true nations of God," and those who are not, is Christ and the spiritual determination God makes, spiritually, in choosing who belongs to Him. This is how God determined who "true Israel was" in the OT period under the Law. And it is still the same criteria for determining today who true nations of God are or not. Only those chosen in Christ can form a true Christian individual or a true Chinese man of God or a true English man of God, or who comprise the true Christian nation in England.

I had to ensure you understood what I was saying 1st before giving you my Scripture references. So let me know if you understand that I'm saying other nations are given the same status as Israel was given under the Law--only now they have Christ as their basis for being "nations of God?"

The 1st Scripture I would point you to is here.

Matt 21.43 Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.

This proves, at least to me, that God has a "people of God," and not just Christian individuals. He temporarily took Israel's status in the Kingdom away and gave it to the Roman People, who then were determined to be "God's People" after the Romans were Christianized. Only, they were determined to truly be God's People if they were determined to be true Christians.

The rest of the Scriptures are as I've already pointed out, that Paul argues Natural Israel was determine by spiritual criteria to be numbered through Isaac.

Rom 9.7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.”

Finally, all of this rests upon the Abraham promise that Abraham would have a specified nation as a biological posterity, Israel, and that he would also have a company of nations specified by their faith in the same God.

It is therefore essential to the promises of God to have specified ethnicities, nationalities, and the faith of Abraham, which we now call "Christ." He is the seed of all of God's people, which must come from every nation and must include many nations. Christ is the word of God determining who a true person of God is and who true nations of God are and who true peoples of God are.

You said: "I had to ensure you understood what I was saying 1st before giving you my Scripture references."
You said: "Nevertheless, they(natural Israel) enjoy the same separation from the world through Christ, who forms the basis for Abraham's natural children, the Jewish People."

I understand things very well, thank you for asking - 2 Peter 1:16-21

For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For He received from God the Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the Excellent Glory: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” And we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.
And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.


Since the Scripture is of not relegated to private interpretation, please respond with the Scripture that agrees with your assessment of earthbound Israel which you said: "Nevertheless, they(natural Israel) enjoy the same separation from the world through Christ."

It's not an insult to your IQ to say I don't think you understand what I'm saying. Perhaps you do, but it doesn't sound like it.

Israel was separated from pagan nations around them by the Law of Moses. Adhering to that they were exhorted and warned not to follow the sinful ways of the pagan nations around them, not to intermarry with them, and not to do business with them. They were not to condone what pagans did, nor were they to corrupt their own people by adopting any of their sinful ways.

This is the principle of "separation." The same can be said of the Church consisting of many nations. All Christians are to separate themselves from paganism in the world. None of this is controversial nor difficult to understand.

So I have to wonder: what is your concern here? What is your agenda? It is perfectly reasonable to say that earth-bound Israel, a "natural people," were separated from other peoples and nations by the Law of God.

It may be that I'm introducing the idea of "Christ" into the OT. And of course, Christ was preexistent Deity, and administered the Law to Israel. He was the basis of separation for that "Natural People." Christ was also the word of God who determined that Israel's descendants should be counted only through Isaac. That is, the word of God determines who in a religious entity is a genuine product of the promise.

All this i understand fully = this is Bible 101 truth.

So let's get back to your statement: You said: "Nevertheless, they(natural Israel) enjoy the same separation from the world through Christ, who forms the basis for Abraham's natural children, the Jewish People."

Please provide the Scripture that speaks directly to your statement - Thank You

If you think they are the same, let's stick with the KJV.

It would be helpful if you would cite the verses that you are making these claims from. I assume you are referencing Gen 18:18.

"Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?" - Gen 18:18 KJV

Which seems to also pair well with Mat 21:43

"Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof." - Mat 21:43 KJV

Why are you making the leap between Abraham as a nation and Israel as a nation? You appear to be advocating for the belief that Israel replaces Abraham. If that is your position, on what scriptural grounds are you making this claim?

Are you forgetting Gal 3:29?

"And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." - Gal 3:29 KJV

Abraham was promised to be the father of many nations. The promise was not that each of those fathered nations would be heirs to the promise. Not everyone in each of those fathered nations would be a recipient of the promise. In fact, out of all of the nations and all of the people, only Christ Himself was the natural heir to the promise.

Abraham was promised to be made into a great nation. This says nothing of biological progeny. Even rocks could be raised into children of Abraham.

Using the KJV, demonstrate your case with scripture. Lines like Gen 17:7 don't actually say "descendants" they say "seed" singular.

Wrong.

"For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God." - Rom 2:28-29 KJV

Where? Cite the verse.

Where is your composite seed concept coming from? Cite the verses.

You appear to be advocating for the concept of theosis.

Gal 3 shows us that this "narrowing process" is so specific that only Christ is the natural heir.

If you agree that the body of Christ is synonymous with Abraham's seed, then you agree that Israel does not replace Abraham.

If you trying to claim that "Christ" means something else, please explain. Are you suggesting that only Abraham's physical descendants are "Christ" via theosis?

Lines like this make me think that you are talking about Christians with Israelite ancestry such as Paul. If someone had an ancestor from ~2000 years ago that was an Israelite that found Christ, is that modern day person still counted as Spiritual Israel because of that ancestor? Whether your answer is yes or no, on what basis are you making this determination?

"To apply to those descendants"

No. I don't think you are drawing this from scripture. Bloodlines don't matter, social status doesn't matter, gender doesn't matter, for if they have put on Christ they are one in Christ. And if they are Christ's, they are heirs to the promise.

Maybe. There are going to be many groups that claim to be "true Israel". Who is right? And by what scripture do we make that determination?

How would you know which descendants of Isaac are chosen in Christ?

Why should we care about human bloodlines/ ancestry if the covenant of Christ is open to all? Why should we care about bloodlines when it is by faith that we find righteousness?

Read the promises again, they don't say what you seem to think they say.