Hi again Beekeeper,
You misunderstood the context, when I said, "not every physical descendant of Abraham automatically receives the covenant promises". You originally said that not all of Abrahams descendants are chosen. I agree in that Ishmael and Esau Abrahams descendants, and that they were not chosen by God, the context is that God chooses who He pleases, not based on merit when it comes to the Abrahamic covenant. So, God chose Isaac, Jacob, and all of Jacob's descendants.
I am glad you see Genesis 17:14 as part of the same Abrahamic covenant as the earlier promises as a minority of people see it as a separate covenant. However, across Jewish, Christian, and ANE scholarship, you’ll see a consistent model of Genesis 15 = Covenant ratification (unconditional) and Genesis 17 = covenant sign. Therefore, the unconditional covenant = God guarantees the promises and the conditional sign = humans must adopt the marker of belonging. So, the covenant continues even if individuals fail. But individuals who reject the sign are cut off from the covenant people, not the covenant itself. Paul confirms this in Galatians 3:17.
Therefore, the promise of the land remains intact even if an individual does not get circumcised and it is still in effect today. Thanks again for your response.
The first part sounds a bit like the old debate about man's free will vs. God's free will.
In the times of Ishmael and of Esau the Abrahamic covenant was in place, yet it seems that you are telling me that God was free to NOT choose those two children?
Well I can see that too, but did God bound Himself in a different way to the children of Jacob than He did to the children of Abraham before Jacob?
There is of course the covenant of Sinai, but like circumcision it seems that man has power to break that too, if he chooses to do so.
As long as man is still a party to the covenant, it is possible for God to be 100% faithful and intend to be so for eternity, yet man like an adulterous wife can break the marriage.
I can see the unbreakable part of the Abrahamic covenant, especially in light of Galatians 3:16 where we learn that the covenant was made with Jesus, but I can not find the part where citizenship in the holy land was ever unconditional.
You make a point that for those who obey in the matter of circumcision, their citizenship remains despite the unbelief of the individual who disobeys and is cut off, but do you also consider that it is possible for a man under the law to be circumcised in vain?
"For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision."
So if a man's status is now "uncircumcision" that means he is like a Gentile, regardless of what is done to his flesh.
He is not a rightful citizen of the holy land.
So what happens if it is not just one man who loses his citizenship in this way, but every single man other than Jesus?
Romans 3:10 "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:" ?
Well, adultery is Biblical grounds for divorce, and God has divorced the earthly nation of Israel (Isaiah 50).
Just as Jesus was sentenced to death with a capital letter sign on the cross; "JESUS Of NAZERETH THE KING OF THE JEWS",
the earthly nation was also sentenced to death in the presence of two witnesses.
"MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH".
So what now of the covenant with Jesus that cannot be broken?
Well that part continues for all!
Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
