Replacement theology? Yes or No.

[cv5]

Are there any heirs not according to promise?

Here's a hint:

"But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called.” That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed."

So tell us: how does that in any way alter the prophetic certainty of the Restoration of the Kingdom to Israel?

 

[Revelation1v8]

Yup. His typical gameplay:
-he shows up after being soundly refuted at an earlier point in the thread
-trots out the same worn-out panoply of insipid banal vacuous vague one-liners one after another
-is soundly refuted one after another
-trots out insipid banal vacuous one-liner denials
-is called out as a fraud having denied everything and proven nothing
-takes a vacation for a while
-wash rinse and repeat

FYI, as you well know, the early Church was plagued by those who were trotting out vague and woefully erroneous notions of the Person and nature of Christ salvation and eschatology.

And then they demanded that their vague and woefully erroneous notions should be considered on par with the sound doctrine established by the legitimate scholars and wise men and scribes.

And then they became heretics and started their own "religion" to suit their error.

Some of these people don't even care that they are making fools of themselves. It just goes to show what a sad state some Christians are truly in.

--

 

[Revelation1v8]

@cv5, have fun! (cough, cough)

My husband is out of town for the next day or so and I'm going to go shopping and pamper myself for awhile.

Keeping you in my prayers while I'm gone!

 

[cv5]

What is the relationship between Romans 9 and Romans 11?​

The two chapters should be read together.

Romans 9 explains that God's promises have not failed, even though not every physical descendant of Abraham belongs to the particular line of promise or responds to God in faith.

Romans 10 addresses Israel's unbelief and emphasizes the need for faith and salvation through the Lord Jesus Christ.

Romans 11 then addresses the question of whether God has rejected Israel and answers emphatically that He has not.

Paul's argument develops as follows:

1. Romans 9:6: God's word has not failed.
2. Romans 9:7–13: God's covenant purposes have always involved His sovereign choice, illustrated through Isaac and Jacob.
3. Romans 10:1–4: Paul expresses his desire for Israel's salvation and explains the relationship between Israel, righteousness, and Christ.
4. Romans 11:1: God has not cast away His people.
5. Romans 11:11: Israel's trespass is not presented as an irrevocable end to God's dealings with them.
6. Romans 11:25–29: Paul describes Israel's partial hardening, the salvation of all Israel, and God's irrevocable gifts and calling.

This progression matters. If we interpret Romans 9 in a way that contradicts Paul's explicit statement in Romans 11:1, we should reconsider our interpretation.

The bottom line

Romans 9:6–8 is about the faithfulness of God's word and His sovereign fulfillment of His promises. It is not, by itself, a declaration that national Israel has been replaced by the Church.

The immediate example is Isaac, who was chosen to carry the covenant promise despite Abraham having other physical descendants. Paul then develops his argument across Romans 9–11, ultimately declaring that God has not cast away His people and that His gifts and calling are irrevocable.

The most important interpretive principle is this: Do not use Romans 9 to cancel what Paul explicitly teaches in Romans 11. Read both chapters together, preserve the distinctions Paul makes, and let Scripture interpret Scripture.

We must interpret Romans 9 alongside Romans 11, where Paul explicitly asks, "Hath God cast away his people?" and answers, "God forbid" (Romans 11:1). He then explains that Israel has experienced a partial hardening and declares that God's gifts and calling are irrevocable (Romans 11:25–29). Therefore, Romans 9 teaches us that God fulfills His promises according to His sovereign purpose; it does not give us grounds to conclude that God has permanently abandoned Israel or nullified His promises concerning the nation. We must allow Paul's entire argument, especially his explicit statements in Romans 11, to inform our interpretation of Romans 9.
--

Thank you and well spoken.

Compare and contrast your superbly comprehensive, reasoned, fully featured EXEGETICAL TREATMENT that is commendably grounded upon the whole counsel of God with the surfacic, trivial, tawdry, insipid, banal, vacuous and vague one-liners proffered by those whose pretensions to exegetical erudition are exceeded only by the breathtaking poverty of their actual contributions

Worse still, their exegetical impoverishment is matched only by their incorrigible arrogance: they disdain correction, repudiate sound instruction, and heap contempt upon those whose understanding exposes the bankruptcy of their own pretensions.

 

[Beekeeper]

Circumcision was THE SIGN of the covenant provided in Genesis 15.

And you thought that it was a "work"?
Pity......

Indeed, it is highly probable that your failure to rightly comprehend this principle stems from your repudiation of all things Jewish.

Fortunately, I do not suffer from the same crippling prejudice.

If you are trying to persuade me of the unconditionality of God's promises to Abraham it might not be too late to correct me.

God sealed all these promises Himself when Abraham was asleep, and in light of this when God says "Every man child among you shall be circumcised" we could justifiably understand this also to be one of those promises.
The fact that Abraham was required to obey does not conflict with the unconditionality of God's prediction, because through God given faith, Abraham DID obey.

The conditional national covenant of Moses is an entirely different covenant to that one however, and is not a continuation of it.
It is the foundation of national Israel, and it has been violated.

The covenant of Abraham does not offer any safety net for the temporal nation to fall on, but those who inherit the faith of Abraham and are obedient to the "condition" of the new covenant (of believing in Jesus) it offers citizenship in the everlasting spiritual nation.
This faith is likewise a gift of God to all who are children of the promise.

 

[Churchgoer]

If you are trying to persuade me of the unconditionality of God's promises to Abraham it might not be too late to correct me.

God sealed all these promises Himself when Abraham was asleep, and in light of this when God says "Every man child among you shall be circumcised" we could justifiably understand this also to be one of those promises.
The fact that Abraham was required to obey does not conflict with the unconditionality of God's prediction, because through God given faith, Abraham DID obey.

The conditional national covenant of Moses is an entirely different covenant to that one however, and is not a continuation of it.
It is the foundation of national Israel, and it has been violated.

The covenant of Abraham does not offer any safety net for the temporal nation to fall on, but those who inherit the faith of Abraham and are obedient to the "condition" of the new covenant (of believing in Jesus) it offers citizenship in the everlasting spiritual nation.
This faith is likewise a gift of God to all who are children of the promise.

"This faith is likewise a gift of God to all who are children of the promise." Amen, including u, me, ethnic jews, Arabs,...... we are all brothers sisters in Jesus Christ .
We serve an awesome God ! That is true love!!! And only true love we pursue.

 

[Beekeeper]

Bottom line is the temple was not destroyed out of judgment against Israel. It was to start the scattering of his people as God said.
The temple was corrupted by the pharisees among many other reasons. Jesus directly answered the pharisees that their house would be destroyed and given to another. The priests duties were to serve God and the people. Not to rule over them.
Judgment begins in the house of the Lord. As Jesus said his house is a house of prayer, but they made it a den of thieves.

I would not put the unbelief of the Pharisees into a different category from the unbelief of others.
Their abuse of authority may have gotten them a more severe judgement, but all who reject Christ are children of the devil just like them.
Children of the devil can of course repent and be born again as children of God, but nobody can claim to have inherited anything from Abraham if they have not also inherited his faith.
So the temple and the establishment of Jerusalem really were judged together with the unbelieving people for a long history of rejecting God and His prophets, and the covenant of Moses on which the earthly nation based it's right to exist was made void.
For the faithful among the people blessings and mercy are given in the new covenant of Jesus.

 

[Beekeeper]

Brother, that is a stronger argument than simply appealing to Deuteronomy 28, and I appreciate the distinction you're making.

I agree that Deuteronomy 30 contains conditions of repentance and obedience, and I agree that the New Covenant is superior to the Mosaic Covenant (Heb. 8:6).
Where I think the debate remains open is whether the New Testament reinterprets all land promises exclusively in spiritual terms.

You argue that any future restoration must be found in New Covenant promises. Fair enough.
But many would point to passages like Romans 11 and argue that God's future purposes for Israel are discussed there, not merely in the Old Testament.

My main question would be this: does the New Testament ever explicitly say that the land promises have been transformed into purely spiritual realities and can no longer have any geographical or national aspect?

I agree that physical descent from Abraham is not sufficient.
Jesus dismantles that assumption in John 8, and Paul repeatedly emphasizes faith.

However, it seems to me that you're asking dispensationalists to prove a future land restoration from the New Covenant while assuming that the New Covenant excludes such a restoration unless explicitly restated.
That's the point I would challenge.

To be clear, I am not taking sides here.
The real issue is not whether the New Covenant brings a deeper spiritual fulfillment. It clearly does.
The question is whether that spiritual fulfillment exhausts every aspect of God's promises to Israel, or whether some promises still await a future fulfillment.

That is where I think the discussion actually needs to focus.

The new covenant does not offer a renewed land promise to Israel.
R.11 has an offer to the Israelites that if they abide not still in unbelief, they shall be grafted in, and consequently saved.
Not exactly a warrant to occupy land.

The Mosaic covenant is the entire foundation of National Israel's right to exist in the promised land before God.
It did not only contain curses for disobedience, but also blessings for obedience through which Israel was blessed in better times.
As this covenant has been disannulled (Hebrews 7:18) and consequently the land promise with it (Deut, 28:63).
It follows that national restoration to the land would need to be explicitly restated in the new covenant for it to be sanctioned by God.

In search for a Biblical warrant for modern Israel to possess the land of Palestine many turn to the Abrahamic promises, but they do not promise anything that God has not yet done.
Abraham's seed were to possess the land, and they possessed it (Josh 21:43).
God said He would make them a great nation, and He did.
They became a nation under a completely different covenant however.

God had not permitted Abraham to conquer the Holy land, Abraham just dwelt there.
So even if modern Israelis were able to inherit the promises to Abraham through their flesh (contrary to scripture), that would not give them authority drive families away from their homes on the threat of death, as they did to my father and grandparents.
Without the moral support of the Mosaic covenant, they have no God given right to conquer possess the land, or Biblical right to establish a nation there.

 

[Beekeeper]

@Beekeeper and @OMC,

Remember what I spoke about earlier on how sometimes we need to take a single verse and pick it apart?

Here's another one worth considering...

Jeremiah 12:15 - And it shall come to pass, after that I have plucked them out I will return, and have compassion on them, and will bring them again, every man to his heritage, and every man to his land.
We know that the ones who have been "plucked" are the seed of Isaac & Jacob, however, since we see "every man" returning to his own heritage and every man returning to his own land, I don't think we can just assume that every man that is living on earth from a Gentile nation or returns to earth with Jesus are forced to go up to the temple during the Millennial Kingdom period.

I am sorry, but I could not read your sermon past the first paragraph.
How can you expect us to take you seriously when you are teleporting Jeremiah 12 into your future earthly kingdom?
This is the same book that Daniel studied (Daniel 9:2) to understand the time when the return from Babylon would happen.
On what grounds would a man have an heritage in the land?
That is his blessing under the covenant of Moses for turning back to God (Deut. 30:1-3), just as the captivity was a Mosaic curse in the first place.
With the Mosaic covenant terminated none of this would translate into your future post rapture land even if it was to exist.

 

[Revelation1v8]

The new covenant does not offer a renewed land promise to Israel.
R.11 has an offer to the Israelites that if they abide not still in unbelief, they shall be grafted in, and consequently saved.
Not exactly a warrant to occupy land.

The Mosaic covenant is the entire foundation of National Israel's right to exist in the promised land before God.
It did not only contain curses for disobedience, but also blessings for obedience through which Israel was blessed in better times.
As this covenant has been disannulled (Hebrews 7:18) and consequently the land promise with it (Deut, 28:63).
It follows that national restoration to the land would need to be explicitly restated in the new covenant for it to be sanctioned by God.

In search for a Biblical warrant for modern Israel to possess the land of Palestine many turn to the Abrahamic promises, but they do not promise anything that God has not yet done.
Abraham's seed were to possess the land, and they possessed it (Josh 21:43).
God said He would make them a great nation, and He did.
They became a nation under a completely different covenant however.

God had not permitted Abraham to conquer the Holy land, Abraham just dwelt there.
So even if modern Israelis were able to inherit the promises to Abraham through their flesh (contrary to scripture), that would not give them authority drive families away from their homes on the threat of death, as they did to my father and grandparents.
Without the moral support of the Mosaic covenant, they have no God given right to conquer possess the land, or Biblical right to establish a nation there.

Your posts drip with bitterness, and because of that, you'll never be able to read the scriptures for what they say.

Good luck to you.

---

 

[Revelation1v8]

In search for a Biblical warrant for modern Israel to possess the land of Palestine many turn to the Abrahamic promises, but they do not promise anything that God has not yet done.
Abraham's seed were to possess the land, and they possessed it (Josh 21:43).
God said He would make them a great nation, and He did.
They became a nation under a completely different covenant however.

They haven't actually possessed all of the land promised to them yet and the book of Joshua recognizes that here:

Joshua 13:1–7 explicitly lists what was not yet taken:

• The entire Philistine territory (Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Gittaim, Ekron)
• The Avites
• All Canaanite territory from the south to Aphek
• The Gebalites and all of Lebanon, up to Baal-gad and Lebo-hamath

--

 

[OMC]

The new covenant does not offer a renewed land promise to Israel.
R.11 has an offer to the Israelites that if they abide not still in unbelief, they shall be grafted in, and consequently saved.
Not exactly a warrant to occupy land.

The Mosaic covenant is the entire foundation of National Israel's right to exist in the promised land before God.
It did not only contain curses for disobedience, but also blessings for obedience through which Israel was blessed in better times.
As this covenant has been disannulled (Hebrews 7:18) and consequently the land promise with it (Deut, 28:63).
It follows that national restoration to the land would need to be explicitly restated in the new covenant for it to be sanctioned by God.

In search for a Biblical warrant for modern Israel to possess the land of Palestine many turn to the Abrahamic promises, but they do not promise anything that God has not yet done.
Abraham's seed were to possess the land, and they possessed it (Josh 21:43).
God said He would make them a great nation, and He did.
They became a nation under a completely different covenant however.

God had not permitted Abraham to conquer the Holy land, Abraham just dwelt there.
So even if modern Israelis were able to inherit the promises to Abraham through their flesh (contrary to scripture), that would not give them authority drive families away from their homes on the threat of death, as they did to my father and grandparents.
Without the moral support of the Mosaic covenant, they have no God given right to conquer possess the land, or Biblical right to establish a nation there.

Deuteronomy 28:63 unquestionably teaches that Israel's disobedience would result in expulsion from the land.
No one should minimize that.
The text says they would be "plucked from off the land."

However, the difficulty is that Deuteronomy does not end at chapter 28.
In the very next section, Moses speaks of a future regathering:
"The LORD thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the nations" (Deut. 30:3).
Therefore, Deuteronomy itself contains both exile and restoration.
The curse does not automatically prove the land promises were permanently canceled.

 

[Beekeeper]

They haven't actually possessed all of the land promised to them yet and the book of Joshua recognizes that here:

Joshua 13:1–7 explicitly lists what was not yet taken:

• The entire Philistine territory (Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Gittaim, Ekron)
• The Avites
• All Canaanite territory from the south to Aphek
• The Gebalites and all of Lebanon, up to Baal-gad and Lebo-hamath

--

Not yet at that stage.
There was still more war to follow.

Joshua 21:43 And the Lord gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein.
44 And the Lord gave them rest round about, according to all that he sware unto their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their enemies before them; the Lord delivered all their enemies into their hand.
45 There failed not ought of any good thing which the Lord had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass.

 

[Revelation1v8]

Not yet at that stage.
There was still more war to follow.

Joshua 21:43 And the Lord gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein.
44 And the Lord gave them rest round about, according to all that he sware unto their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their enemies before them; the Lord delivered all their enemies into their hand.
45 There failed not ought of any good thing which the Lord had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass.

AGAIN, you missed what God himself said in Joshua 13:6:

Joshua 13:6 - All the inhabitants of the hill country from Lebanon unto Misrephothmaim, and all the Sidonians, them will I drive out from before the children of Israel: only divide thou it by lot unto the Israelites for an inheritance, as I have commanded thee.

1. The explicit promise in Joshua 13:6 itself. God uses the emphatic first person: "I will drive them out from before the children of Israel." The "I" is not a vague reference to eventual human success — it is God staking His own name on the act.

2. The standing covenant from Deuteronomy. Moses had already told Israel years earlier:

• "The LORD your God will drive out those nations before you, LITTLE BY LITTLE" (Deut 7:22)
• "The LORD your God will deliver them over to you, throwing them into great confusion until they are destroyed" (Deut 7:23)
• "It is not because of your righteousness... but because of the wickedness of these nations that the LORD your God drives them out from before you, and to keep the oath the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" (Deut 9:6)

When God/Jesus returns, he will fulfill the promise of the REMAINING LAND HIMSELF.

--

 

[Beekeeper]

Deuteronomy 28:63 unquestionably teaches that Israel's disobedience would result in expulsion from the land.
No one should minimize that.
The text says they would be "plucked from off the land."

However, the difficulty is that Deuteronomy does not end at chapter 28.
In the very next section, Moses speaks of a future regathering:
"The LORD thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the nations" (Deut. 30:3).
Therefore, Deuteronomy itself contains both exile and restoration.
The curse does not automatically prove the land promises were permanently canceled.

I do not see the difficulty there, because Deuteronomy 29 and 30 are still talking about the blessing and curse under the law of Moses.
In 29 there is a scenario like the Babylonian captivity, and in 30 like the return from Babylon.
These can be read as warnings or as direct prophesy, but they apply to a time when the Mosaic covenant was in full force, i.e. in Moses' future, not in ours.
So the land restoration is provided for under the blessings of that covenant, like Deut 28:1.
Moses has already prophesied the Babylonian captivity (Deut. 4:25-28) before we get to that part of the book.

 

[Revelation1v8]

I do not see the difficulty there, because Deuteronomy 29 and 30 are still talking about the blessing and curse under the law of Moses.
In 29 there is a scenario like the Babylonian captivity, and in 30 like the return from Babylon.
These can be read as warnings or as direct prophesy, but they apply to a time when the Mosaic covenant was in full force, i.e. in Moses' future, not in ours.
So the land restoration is provided for under the blessings of that covenant, like Deut 28:1.
Moses has already prophesied the Babylonian captivity (Deut. 4:25-28) before we get to that part of the book.

Do, you see Israel living CURRENTLY in all the land promised to them by God? The answer is NO, because they are currently living in disobedience. Once Jesus returns and pours out His Spirit on the House of David, Israel, and Jacob for the LAST TIME, then you'll see them possess the land in FULL as a final inheritance for 1,000 years on earth before the Kingdom of Heaven is brought down.

---

 

[OMC]

I do not see the difficulty there, because Deuteronomy 29 and 30 are still talking about the blessing and curse under the law of Moses.
In 29 there is a scenario like the Babylonian captivity, and in 30 like the return from Babylon.
These can be read as warnings or as direct prophesy, but they apply to a time when the Mosaic covenant was in full force, i.e. in Moses' future, not in ours.
So the land restoration is provided for under the blessings of that covenant, like Deut 28:1.
Moses has already prophesied the Babylonian captivity (Deut. 4:25-28) before we get to that part of the book.

That's a fair point, and I agree that Deuteronomy 29-30 is spoken within the context of the Mosaic Covenant.
The question I would still raise is whether Deuteronomy 30 is exhausted by the return from Babylon.

Moses says: "If any of thine be driven out unto the outmost parts of heaven, from thence will the LORD thy God gather thee" (Deut. 30:4),
and: "The LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart" (Deut. 30:6).
That heart-circumcision language is later picked up by the prophets and the New Covenant (Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek. 36:26-27; Rom. 2:29).

So while I agree the immediate context is Mosaic, I am not convinced the restoration language is limited to the return from Babylon alone.
The prophets repeatedly return to these themes after the exile and still speak of future restoration.

My point is not that this proves a future national land restoration.
My point is that Deuteronomy 30 appears to reach beyond mere return from exile and into the larger work God promises to accomplish in His people.
Therefore I don't think Deuteronomy 28 settles the question by itself.
The relationship between the land promises, the New Covenant, and Israel's future still has to be demonstrated from the whole of Scripture.

 

[Revelation1v8]

herefore I don't think Deuteronomy 28 settles the question by itself.
The relationship between the land promises, the New Covenant, and Israel's future still has to be demonstrated from the whole of Scripture.

And here's what the WHOLE of Scripture says:

The New Covenant is explicitly promised to the House of Israel and House of Judah in Jeremiah 31:31–34, establishing a future era where God’s law is written on their hearts and their sins are forgiven. This covenant is distinct from the Mosaic Covenant because it is unconditional and ensures Israel’s permanent restoration to their land, as detailed in Jeremiah 32:37–41 and Ezekiel 36:24–28.

The fulfillment of these promises is tied to the Millennial Kingdom, where Jesus Christ reigns as King, Israel is regathered, and the land boundaries are restored to their full extent from the Nile to the Euphrates. Key verses demonstrating this include:

• Jeremiah 31:31–34: God promises a new covenant with the house of Israel and Judah, writing His law on their hearts.
• Jeremiah 32:37–41: God promises to gather Israel from all nations, bring them back to the land, and make an everlasting covenant with them.
• Ezekiel 36:24–28: God promises to gather Israel from the nations, cleanse them, give them a new heart and spirit, and settle them in their own land.
• Jeremiah 33:14–26: The new covenant is linked to the Davidic throne, promising an everlasting kingdom and descendants for David.
• Zechariah 14:9: The Lord will reign over all the earth, with Jerusalem as His capital, during the Messianic Kingdom.
• Genesis 15:18: God establishes the boundary of the land promise to Abraham’s descendants from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates.
• Romans 11:26: The Apostle Paul states that “all Israel shall be saved,” fulfilling the covenant promises.
• Hebrews 8:6–13: Quotes Jeremiah 31, confirming the New Covenant is established with the house of Israel and Judah.
• Isaiah 11:11–12: Prophesies the Lord’s second hand to recover the remnant of His people from the nations.
• Ezekiel 37:21–22: God promises to take the Israelites from the nations and bring them back to their own land, uniting them as one nation.

--

 

[Revelation1v8]

And here's what the WHOLE of Scripture says:

The New Covenant is explicitly promised to the House of Israel and House of Judah in Jeremiah 31:31–34, establishing a future era where God’s law is written on their hearts and their sins are forgiven. This covenant is distinct from the Mosaic Covenant because it is unconditional and ensures Israel’s permanent restoration to their land, as detailed in Jeremiah 32:37–41 and Ezekiel 36:24–28.

The fulfillment of these promises is tied to the Millennial Kingdom, where Jesus Christ reigns as King, Israel is regathered, and the land boundaries are restored to their full extent from the Nile to the Euphrates. Key verses demonstrating this include:

• Jeremiah 31:31–34: God promises a new covenant with the house of Israel and Judah, writing His law on their hearts.
• Jeremiah 32:37–41: God promises to gather Israel from all nations, bring them back to the land, and make an everlasting covenant with them.
• Ezekiel 36:24–28: God promises to gather Israel from the nations, cleanse them, give them a new heart and spirit, and settle them in their own land.
• Jeremiah 33:14–26: The new covenant is linked to the Davidic throne, promising an everlasting kingdom and descendants for David.
• Zechariah 14:9: The Lord will reign over all the earth, with Jerusalem as His capital, during the Messianic Kingdom.
• Genesis 15:18: God establishes the boundary of the land promise to Abraham’s descendants from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates.
• Romans 11:26: The Apostle Paul states that “all Israel shall be saved,” fulfilling the covenant promises.
• Hebrews 8:6–13: Quotes Jeremiah 31, confirming the New Covenant is established with the house of Israel and Judah.
• Isaiah 11:11–12: Prophesies the Lord’s second hand to recover the remnant of His people from the nations.
• Ezekiel 37:21–22: God promises to take the Israelites from the nations and bring them back to their own land, uniting them as one nation.

--

@Beekeeper and @OMC,

Here are MORE scriptures to back up the above:

Regathering to the Land​

• Amos 9:14–15 — "I will also plant them on their land, and they will not again be rooted out from their land which I have given them."
• Jeremiah 16:14–17 — A regathering surpassing the Exodus: "I will bring them back from the land of the north and from all the countries where I banished them."
• Jeremiah 23:3–8 — God gathers the remnant from all exile lands, appoints shepherds, and raises the righteous Branch from David: "Judah will be saved and Israel will live in safety."
• Jeremiah 24:6–7 — "I will bring them back to this land… I will give them a heart to know Me, that I am the Lord."
• Ezekiel 11:17 — "I will gather you from the peoples, assemble you from the countries where you have been scattered, and I will give you the land of Israel."
• Ezekiel 20:33–38 — God brings Israel out of exile and into the land.
• Ezekiel 39:27–29 — "Then they will know that I am the LORD their God… I will leave none of them there any longer."
• Isaiah 27:12–13 — God threshes Israel from the Euphrates to Egypt, gathering with a great trumpet blast.
• Zephaniah 2:1–2 — A worldwide regathering before the day of the Lord.

The New Covenant and the Land Together​

• Ezekiel 11:14–20 — God promises to give them "one heart, and put a new spirit within them," removing their "heart of stone," and bringing them back to the land.
• Ezekiel 36:8–15 — The land itself is restored: it becomes fruitful, the cities are rebuilt, and the desolate places are tilled.

--

 

[God-fearing]

I would not put the unbelief of the Pharisees into a different category from the unbelief of others.
Their abuse of authority may have gotten them a more severe judgement, but all who reject Christ are children of the devil just like them.
Children of the devil can of course repent and be born again as children of God, but nobody can claim to have inherited anything from Abraham if they have not also inherited his faith.
So the temple and the establishment of Jerusalem really were judged together with the unbelieving people for a long history of rejecting God and His prophets, and the covenant of Moses on which the earthly nation based it's right to exist was made void.
For the faithful among the people blessings and mercy are given in the new covenant of Jesus.

And this is what I consider secular reasoning.....what you think.
So according to your reasoning God failed to redeem his people....I'll leave that to you to tell him. He siad he would do it for his name sake. Guess his name remains marred forever.
The prayers of Jesus and his words of forgiveness and having power over life and death were null and void.
Scripture clearly says in the old as well as the gospels that Christ would be rejected no surprise to God.
Jesus prophesied that temple would be destroyed....their house not his. He came to set the captives free, priest were to serve not rule.