The following proves you are correct. Who is now the King of Israel in John 1:49? Is the King of Israel now the Head of the Church, and are we His Body? Why did God allow the Romans to destroy the Old Covenant temple and the Old Covenant city, about 40 years after His Son fulfilled the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34 in blood at Calvary? Who is really teaching “Replacement Theology” ? (Did God fulfill His promises to the Jewish people at Calvary? Matthew 26:28, John 19:30) The advocates of modern Dispensational Theology often accuse others of promoting “Replacement Theology”, or some may even say “Antisemitism”. What does the Bible say about their accusations? 1. Who is replacing Christ as the seed of Abraham through which all the families of the Earth would be blessed in Genesis 12:3, with Abraham’s modern descendants? (See Paul’s interpretation in Galatians 3:8, 3:16.) 2. Who is replacing the one people of God in John 10:16, with two peoples of God ? 3. Who is replacing the one seed (Christ) in Galatians 3:16, with the many seeds? 4. Who is replacing the children of the promise in Romans 9:8, with the children of the flesh? 5. Who is replacing the faithful “remnant” of Israelites in Romans 11:1-5, with the Baal worshipers? 6. Who is replacing the word "so" in Romans 11:26, with the word "then"? 7. Who is attempting to replace the Church made up of all races of people, with one made up only of Gentiles? Why did Peter address the crowd as “all the house of Israel” in Acts 2:36, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted Christ on the Day of Pentecost? 8. Based on Hebrews 9:15, the New Covenant cannot be separated from the Messiah’s death. Is the covenant in Daniel 9:27 connected to the Messiah’s death in Daniel 9:26. Is the covenant with the “many” in Daniel 9:27 the same covenant with the “many” in Matthew 26:28? If it is, some have replaced the New Covenant in Daniel 9:27 with a future covenant made by an antichrist not found in Daniel chapter 9. (See the 1599 Geneva Bible used by the Pilgrims.) 9. Those promoting the Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology often accuse others of teaching “Replacement Theology”, but are they the masters of it? Are they promoting a form of Dual Covenant Theology based on race? (See “genealogies” in Titus 3:9) Is the most important genealogy in the Bible found in Matthew 1:1? Is God's Son the ultimate fulfillment of Israel? Why has the modern Church done a pitiful job of sharing the Gospel with modern Orthodox Jews? Why would someone tell them they are God's chosen people and then fail to share the Gospel with them? Who is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15? Who is the "son" in Psalm 2? Who is the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53? Who would fulfill the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34? Who would fulfill the timeline of Daniel chapter 9 before the second temple was destroyed? Why have we not heard this simple Old Testament Gospel preached on Christian television in the United States on a regular basis? 10. Watch the KZfaq video “Genesis of Dispensational Theology” to see the origin of this man-made doctrine, which is less than 200 years old. It was brought to the United States about the time of the Civil War by John Nelson Darby. The doctrine was later incorporated into the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible, and then spread through much of the modern Church. Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas Texas was created in part to promote John Darby’s Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology. Lewis Sperry Chafer, the first president of Dallas Theological, had the following to say about the difference between Israel and the Church: “The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.” Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas, Seminary Press, 1936), p. 107. Chafer states that, ‘Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on which David rules from an eternal throne,’ that is, on earth and distinct from the church who will be in heaven.” Lewis Sperry Chafer. Systematic Theology. 1975. Vol. IV. pp. 315-323. John Walvoord, another prominent voice of Dallas Theological stated… "...it is an article of normative dispensational belief that the boundaries of the land promised to Abraham and his descendants from the Nile to the Euphrates will be literally instituted and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. In such a scheme the Church on earth is relegated to the status of a parenthesis.” John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question.1979, p. 25 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Are there two peoples of God in John 10:16? (See also 1 John 2:22-23, 2 John 1:7-11.) What is the land promise to the Old Testament Saints in Hebrews 11:15-16? (See what Joshua said about the Old Covenant land promise in Josh. 21:43.) Based on 2 Peter 3:10-13, is this earth “eternal”? Will it be replaced by a new earth? Based on Acts 2:36, and Romans 9:6-8, and Romans 11:1-5, and Hebrews 12:22-24, and James 1:1-3, can faithful Israel and the Church be separated into two different groups? Who is the New Covenant promised to in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and is it fulfilled by the blood of Christ at Calvary in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 12:18-24? Will modern Orthodox Jews ever be saved outside of the New Covenant Church, if the New Covenant is “everlasting” in Hebrews 13:20? (See also 2 Thess. 1:7-10) If the New Covenant has made the Old Covenant “obsolete” in Hebrews 8:6-13, why would God go back to the Old Covenant system during a future time period? Read the recent book "The Rise and Fall of Dispensationalism", by Daniel G. Hummel.

@@SpotterVideo yep still replacement theology lol

@@mlp1211That's a typical response from a dispensationalist... utterly lacking any reference to scripture or thought. The other typical response is yanking one isolated verse out of context. And the worst type of response of all is making a false claim that anyone other that a dispensationalist is not a brother or sister in Christ Jesus. Thank you for at least not doing that.

@@davekpghpa still replacement theology.. American thelogy is destroying the church and polluting the world. A grafted branch does not become the plant its drafted to. Take a trip to a garden or simply look up a video on plant grafting. Its as simple as that

It is also about the merger of Israel and all gentile converts into one tree that feeds from the same roots (i.e. the O.T. promises to Israel are the roots shared by the church)

Yeah Galatians 3:29 explains that ONE in Christ. There is no more jew or Greek male or female we are one in Christ.

What kind of prayers … may I ask?

So many labels. No wonder the confusion. If any man be in Christ he is a new creature

Romans Chapter 11: In its New Covenant context... There is no Plan B of salvation outside of the New Covenant Church in this passage. Plan A is found in verses 23 and 24. In Romans 1:16 Paul said the Gospel was taken "first" to the Jews. This time period can be found in Matt. 10:5-7, and Acts 10:36-38, and Gal. 1:14-18. Many try to claim God never gave the Jews a chance to accept Christ, so there must be some Plan B of salvation before or during the Second Coming of Christ. Romans 1:16 proves they are wrong, since Paul said the Gospel went "first" to the Jews. Many ignore the fact that Peter addressed the crowd as "men of Judea", and as "men of Israel", and as "all the house of Israel" on the Day of Pentecost, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted the New Covenant fulfilled in blood at Calvary. The Gentiles were not grafted in until several years later. This passage proves Paul was right about the Gospel being taken "first" to the Jews. Were all of the Israelites "partially" hardened in Romans 11, or were part hardened and another part were not hardened? The answer is found in the "remnant" of Romans 11:5. Paul reveals two different groups of Israelites in Romans 9:6-8. There is an Israel of the promise, and an Israel of the flesh. This is part of the context of Romans 11. Paul speaks about the "remnant" of Israel in Romans 9:27. This is also part of the context of Romans 11. Paul starts Romans 11 with two different groups of Israelites. In verse one Paul reveals he is still an Israelite, even after his conversion. Then Paul refers to two different groups of Israelites during the time of Elijah. There were the Baal worshippers, and there was the faithful "remnant". In verse five Paul says there is also a faithful "remnant" of Israelites during his time. This must be the Israelites who have accepted Christ, as on the Day of Pentecost. Paul uses the two olive trees as a symbol of the New Covenant Church made up of believing Israelites, and believing Gentiles grafted together into the same tree. The unbelieving Israelites have been broken off but can be grafted back in through faith in Christ in verses 23-24. Verse 26 is the problem for many modern Christians. What does the verse actually say, and how is it changed by many in the modern Church. I have heard two of our nations famous preachers say the following. "And then all Israel will be saved..." I have heard another say the following. "And all Israel will be saved..." What does God's Word, recorded by the Apostle Paul actually say? Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: The English word "so" is translated from the Greek word "houto", which is an adverb of manner, instead of an adverb of timing. Some have changed the word from "so" to "then", in order to change the meaning of the verse. How will all of the "remnant" of Israel from Romans 9:27 be saved? The answer is found in the verses that precede verse 26 and are found below. Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again. Rom 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? Paul quoted from the OT in referring to the Deliverer coming out of Sion to pay for sin. Did this happen at Calvary, or will Jesus die again for His people in the future? Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. Verse 28 can only be understood by looking at how Paul started the passage. He started with two different groups of Israelites and he ends the passage in the same way. There are two different groups of "they" in verse 28. One group of "they" reject Christ and are the enemies of God, and another group of "they" are the election which accept Christ through hearing the Gospel and faith. Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes. Based on Luke 21:24b-28, the times of the Gentiles comes to fullness at the Second Coming of Christ. This agrees with what Paul said in Romans 1:16 about the Gospel going “first” to the Jews.

amen . also" history & destiny of Israel & the church." & while you have time" Appointment in Jerusalem " is wonderful, Derek Prince was cewrtainly used of God to teach the church , the relavence of Scripture & where we are at... 20 yaers ago... some have taken notice & are praying .

He is a true man of God. Derek Prince. Perfect timing they're playing his videos.

New Covenant Whole Gospel: Can you honestly answer the first three questions below without ridicule or condemnation? Who is now the King of Israel in John 1:49? Is the King of Israel now the Head of the Church, and are we His Body? Why did God allow the Romans to destroy the Old Covenant temple and the Old Covenant city, about 40 years after His Son fulfilled the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34 in blood at Calvary? Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, man-made Bible doctrines fall apart. Let us now learn to preach the whole Gospel until He comes back. The King of Israel is risen from the dead! (John 1:49, Acts 2:36) We are not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18. We are come instead to the New Covenant church of Mount Zion and the blood in Hebrews 12:22-24. Who is really teaching “Replacement Theology” ? (Did God fulfill His promises to the Jewish people at Calvary? Matthew 26:28, John 19:30, Heb. 13:20. Is there a Plan B of salvation outside of the New Covenant Church? Does God want a return to the Old Covenant system during a future time, or is the New Covenant "everlasting"? ) The advocates of modern Dispensational Theology often accuse others of promoting “Replacement Theology”, or some may even say “Antisemitism”. What does the Bible say about their accusations? 1. Who is replacing Christ as the seed of Abraham through which all the families of the Earth would be blessed in Genesis 12:3, with Abraham’s modern descendants? (See Paul’s interpretation in Galatians 3:8, 3:16.) 2. Who is replacing the one people of God in John 10:16, with two peoples of God ? 3. Who is replacing the one seed (Christ) in Galatians 3:16, with the many seeds? 4. Who is replacing the children of the promise in Romans 9:8, with the children of the flesh? 5. Who is replacing the faithful “remnant” of Israelites in Romans 11:1-5, with the Baal worshipers? 6. Who is replacing the word "so" in Romans 11:26, with the word "then"? 7. Who is attempting to replace the Church made up of all races of people, with one made up only of Gentiles? Why did Peter address the crowd as “all the house of Israel” in Acts 2:36, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted Christ on the Day of Pentecost? 8. Based on Hebrews 12:18-24, the New Covenant cannot be separated from the Messiah’s death. Is the covenant in Daniel 9:27 connected to the Messiah’s death in Daniel 9:26. Is the covenant with the “many” in Daniel 9:27 the same covenant with the “many” in Matthew 26:28? If it is, some have replaced the New Covenant in Daniel 9:27 with a future covenant made by an antichrist not found in Daniel chapter 9. (See the 1599 Geneva Bible used by the Pilgrims.) 9. Those promoting the Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology often accuse others of teaching “Replacement Theology”, but are they the masters of it? Are they promoting a form of Dual Covenant Theology based on race? (See “genealogies” in Titus 3:9) Is the most important genealogy in the Bible found in Matthew 1:1? Is God's Son the ultimate fulfillment of Israel? Why has the modern Church done a pitiful job of sharing the Gospel with modern Orthodox Jews? Why would someone tell them they are God's chosen people and then fail to share the Gospel with them? Who is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15? Who is the "son" in Psalm 2? Who is the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53? Who would fulfill the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34? Who would fulfill the timeline of Daniel chapter 9 before the second temple was destroyed? Why have we not heard this simple Old Testament Gospel preached on Christian television in the United States on a regular basis? 10. Watch the KZfaq video “Genesis of Dispensational Theology” to see the origin of this man-made doctrine, which is less than 200 years old. It was brought to the United States about the time of the Civil War by John Nelson Darby. The doctrine was later incorporated into the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible, and then spread through much of the modern Church. Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas Texas was created in part to promote John Darby’s Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology. Lewis Sperry Chafer, the first president of Dallas Theological, had the following to say about the difference between Israel and the Church: “The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.” Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas, Seminary Press, 1936), p. 107. Chafer states that, ‘Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on which David rules from an eternal throne,’ that is, on earth and distinct from the church who will be in heaven.” Lewis Sperry Chafer. Systematic Theology. 1975. Vol. IV. pp. 315-323. John Walvoord, another prominent voice of Dallas Theological stated… "...it is an article of normative dispensational belief that the boundaries of the land promised to Abraham and his descendants from the Nile to the Euphrates will be literally instituted and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. In such a scheme the Church on earth is relegated to the status of a parenthesis.” John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question.1979, p. 25 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Are there two peoples of God in John 10:16? What is the land promise to the Old Testament Saints in Hebrews 11:15-16? (See what Joshua said about the Old Covenant land promise in Josh. 21:43.) Based on 2 Peter 3:10-13, is this earth “eternal”? Will it be replaced by a new earth? Based on Acts 2:36, and Romans 9:6-8, and Romans 11:1-5, and Hebrews 12:22-24, and Hebrews 13:20, and James 1:1-3, can faithful Israel and the Church be separated into two different groups? Who is the New Covenant promised to in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and is it fulfilled by the blood of Christ at Calvary in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 12:18-24? Will modern Orthodox Jews ever be saved outside of the New Covenant Church, if the New Covenant is “everlasting” in Hebrews 13:20? If the New Covenant has made the Old Covenant “obsolete” in Hebrews 8:6-13, why would God go back to the Old Covenant system during a future time period? Based on John 19:37 and Acts chapter 2, was Zechariah 12:10 fulfilled at Calvary and on the Day of Pentecost? What did Paul say about Christ returning "in flaming fire" taking vengeance on those who do not obey the Gospel in 2 Thess. 1:7-10? Based on these passages from the New Testament, is there a Plan B of salvation based on race at the Second Coming of Jesus? If not, start sharing the New Covenant Gospel with all races of people now before it is too late for them. Read the recent book "The Rise and Fall of Dispensationalism", by Daniel G. Hummel.

I’m not sure why you seem convinced that I will ridicule or condemn you? You don’t know me at all…

@@ks5499 It is a question, instead of an accusation. Can you answer the three questions?

Well you started with an assumption that that’s where I would go…and no…I won’t answer your questions…I’m not obligated…and I have neither the time nor the inclination to engage you

@@ks5499 Romans Chapter 11: In its New Covenant context... There is no Plan B of salvation outside of the New Covenant Church in this passage. Plan A is found in verses 23 and 24. In Romans 1:16 Paul said the Gospel was taken "first" to the Jews. This time period can be found in Matt. 10:5-7, and Acts 10:36-38, and Gal. 1:14-18. Many try to claim God never gave the Jews a chance to accept Christ, so there must be some Plan B of salvation before or during the Second Coming of Christ. Romans 1:16 proves they are wrong, since Paul said the Gospel went "first" to the Jews. Many ignore the fact that Peter addressed the crowd as "men of Judea", and as "men of Israel", and as "all the house of Israel" on the Day of Pentecost, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted the New Covenant fulfilled in blood at Calvary. The Gentiles were not grafted in until several years later. This passage proves Paul was right about the Gospel being taken "first" to the Jews. Were all of the Israelites "partially" hardened in Romans 11, or were part hardened and another part were not hardened? The answer is found in the "remnant" of Romans 11:5. Paul reveals two different groups of Israelites in Romans 9:6-8. There is an Israel of the promise, and an Israel of the flesh. This is part of the context of Romans 11. Paul speaks about the "remnant" of Israel in Romans 9:27. This is also part of the context of Romans 11. Paul starts Romans 11 with two different groups of Israelites. In verse one Paul reveals he is still an Israelite, even after his conversion. Then Paul refers to two different groups of Israelites during the time of Elijah. There were the Baal worshippers, and there was the faithful "remnant". In verse five Paul says there is also a faithful "remnant" of Israelites during his time. This must be the Israelites who have accepted Christ, as on the Day of Pentecost. Paul uses the two olive trees as a symbol of the New Covenant Church made up of believing Israelites, and believing Gentiles grafted together into the same tree. The unbelieving Israelites have been broken off but can be grafted back in through faith in Christ in verses 23-24. Verse 26 is the problem for many modern Christians. What does the verse actually say, and how is it changed by many in the modern Church. I have heard two of our nations famous preachers say the following. "And then all Israel will be saved..." I have heard another say the following. "And all Israel will be saved..." What does God's Word, recorded by the Apostle Paul actually say? Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: The English word "so" is translated from the Greek word "houto", which is an adverb of manner, instead of an adverb of timing. Some have changed the word from "so" to "then", in order to change the meaning of the verse. How will all of the "remnant" of Israel from Romans 9:27 be saved? The answer is found in the verses that precede verse 26 and are found below. Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again. Rom 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? Paul quoted from the OT in referring to the Deliverer coming out of Sion to pay for sin. Did this happen at Calvary, or will Jesus die again for His people in the future? Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. Verse 28 can only be understood by looking at how Paul started the passage. He started with two different groups of Israelites and he ends the passage in the same way. There are two different groups of "they" in verse 28. One group of "they" reject Christ and are the enemies of God, and another group of "they" are the election which accept Christ through hearing the Gospel and faith. Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes. Based on Luke 21:24b-28, the times of the Gentiles comes to fullness at the Second Coming of Christ. This agrees with what Paul said in Romans 1:16 about the Gospel going “first” to the Jews.

If God gave up on HIS promises and everlasting covenant with HIS chosen remnant of Israel --- He would give up on believers today. He keeps HIS promises

​@@Over-for-now God didn't give up his chosen people, but the chosen people always have been those who are connected to God. It was never based solely on genetics.

@@asmrjeweler9237 God is the chooser because NONE seek after HIM. "All we like sheep have gone astray". The Bible is very clear about our depravity and our hatred of God and HIS claims on our lives

There is only one thing God is asking us today and that is do you believe that my Son offered his own blood in payment for your sins and accepted my gift of eternal life in Ephesians 2:8&9 KJV made possible by that sacrifice? There is no other gospel but that one today and until the appearing of Jesus Christ (Colossians 3:4 KJV)!

@@dfkuz Faithful words. Thanks The FINISHED work Jesus accomplished for salvation

Both Moses and Jeremiah also recognized that physical circumcision was of no value but it was the circumcision of the heart that mattered. (Dt 10:16 & Jer 4:4) And Paul calls the Gentile believers “the real circumcision” in Phil 3:3.

"What advantage hath then the Jew? And what profit is there in circumcision? Much in every way: chiefly, because unto them were committed the oracles of God. For, what if some did not believe? Shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid, let God be true, but every man a liar..." Romans 3:1-4.

​@@kvzacomics so?

Replacement theology is Satan's doctrine.

Incorrect it the same definition with different words. If Isreal is no longer the chosen people of God than God is a liar and he can change. Red flag theology if I saw one.

@@cameronspach220 The Bible says Christ Jesus is Israel though. As He fulfilled everything Israel was suppose to do, as the true Israel.

@@paulpowell6418show me the verse that Jesus goes “I am the new Israel” (not Paul or anyone else, but Jesus him self says it)

@@cameronspach220 Jesus does not say those exact words. But in Matthew 2 we see that Jesus fulfilling the prophecy of Israel from Hosea.

I love Steve Gregg!!

@@alanweinstein8625 indeed. I've know him for many years and he's a dear friend.

​@@alanweinstein8625Steve Gregg is confused 😢

They always give it a derogatory term and then label us anti-semites. I believe we’re all grafted into one body.

Thanks!

Agreed.. Its all about a God who keeps His Words and His promises!

Both have elements that fit Scripture and parts that are problematic. The best thing is to take the good parts and discard the problematic parts

We need to remember though. They do not worship the same God as we Christians. 1 John 2:23. Secondly we the believers in Christ Jesus as the heirs of Abraham Galatians 3:16 and Galatians 3:26-29. Thirdly we must remember Christ Himself said the Kindgom of Heaven has been taken away from them and given to a poeple producing the fruit of it Matthew 21:43. The Kingdom belongs the those who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ I pray every Jew and Muslim recognizes this and comes back to the Father and believes on the Lord Jesus Christ. Please don't be like the Pharisees how old. Recoginize Christ is the Messiah and believe in Him please don't die in your sins. As a Christian, I can think of no great act of love for the Jewish and Muslim poeple than to tell them of the Love of Christ and plead that they would believe.

​@@kinorynn You actually believe those who believe in Covenant Theology are NOT Christians?

@paulpowell6418 I'm not sure where you came to that conclusion. Can you elaborate more please?

@paulpowell6418 I would say believing in Jesus as your savior makes you a Christian. I believe that those who are believers in Christ are Isreal, Believer in Christ make up the Body of Christ ie the Christian Church. The church is the bride of Christ. Christ made one church, men divide it, but it is still one church in God's eyes. Whether they be Lutheran(myself), Catholic, Orthodox, Baptist etc. Just as it was in Moses day. Being born a certain race never got any into heaven.

@@kinorynn My apologies, I thought I read something that clearly was not there. Forgive me.

1) no the New Testament explains the old and does not replace it. 2) yes the nation of Israel is restored and saved when they look upon the one whom they pierced.

@@bradwhitt6768 Hi Brad... Thank you for your reply. I'm in agreement, the Scriptures overflow with passages describing the restoration of Israel in the Messianic kingdom. Regarding point 1), can you identify distinctions between the old testament ekklesia and the new testament ekklesia?

@@BrotherInChrist There are not two distinctions between the Old and New Testaments. Really the new explains the old. That's why we are Christians and not Jews. If the New Testament didn't explain the old we would hold the same old beliefs the Jews had of the Messiah. The New Testament doesn't abolish the Old Testament either. As Christ says I have not come to destroy the law but to fulfill it. As far as covenants go just because the Abrahamic covenant to bless the nations through his seed (Jesus) was fulfilled does not make the covenant God made with Jacob null and void. Which Paul explains in Galatians and Romans. It's why Paul was thrown out of synagogues. Because Paul is telling the religious leaders and the Jews of the time that their prophecy of the messiah coming to destroy their enemies and to reign on earth isn't what is going to take place. That their sacrifices of animals aren't necessary that their messiah came and died on the cross for their sins to reconcile them to the Father. The cross is a stumbling block because in Jewish law hanging by a tree was for murders, thieves, and rapists. You have to understand that their messiah going from a conqueror to dying and being like a criminal is a problem for them. The Abrahamic covenant where the nations would be blessed through Abraham's seed offspring is in reference to what is to come. Notice seed and offspring are singular. That offspring is Christ. God hasn't changed his plan from the end to the beginning. So by saying the Old Testament and the new Testament have different and distinct ekklesia you are saying God had a different plan and that is heretical.

@@bradwhitt6768 Thank you for following up, Brad. The word for church, ekklesia, is used 60 times in 56 verses of the old testament (LXX) to describe the Israelites. The old testament ekklesia was the nation of the twelve tribes of Israel (including sojourners and proselytes), called out of Egypt to be God’s possession; a people in covenant with God. Many in the old testament ekklesia were not saved because they were not united by faith with those who listened to the good news (Hebrews 4:2). The Object of faith for the old testament saints was the Coming One; the coming Christ who is to bruise the head of the serpent (Genesis 3:15). In Hebrews 11, we learn that Moses regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt, because he was looking ahead to his reward (Hebrews 11:26). The new testament ekklesia is comprised of Jew and Gentile, called out of the world to be God’s possession; a people in covenant with God. Many in the new testament ekklesia are not saved because they do not understand the word of the kingdom, some fall away because of tribulation or persecution, and others are unfruitful because the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word (Matthew 9:18-22). The righteous shall live by faith, and those who have faith preserve their souls (Hebrews 10:38-39). The Object of faith for the new testament saints is the crucified, buried, and resurrected Christ, Jesus of Nazareth; our coming King (Matthew 25:31-46). Within the old testament and new testament ekklesia are the saints of God, counted righteous by faith; the sons of Abraham (Galatians 3:7, 29). Together we are made perfect (Hebrews 11:40)-resurrected and raptured (caught up to God; Greek, harpazo) at the parousia, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ; our blessed hope. Blessings

@@BrotherInChristIt's pretty amazing that greek was used in the Old Testament considering Jews didn't know the Greeks in the Old Testament.

The following proves you are correct. Romans Chapter 11: In its New Covenant context... There is no Plan B of salvation outside of the New Covenant Church in this passage. Plan A is found in verses 23 and 24. In Romans 1:16 Paul said the Gospel was taken "first" to the Jews. This time period can be found in Matt. 10:5-7, and Acts 10:36-38, and Gal. 1:14-18. Many try to claim God never gave the Jews a chance to accept Christ, so there must be some Plan B of salvation before or during the Second Coming of Christ. Romans 1:16 proves they are wrong, since Paul said the Gospel went "first" to the Jews. Many ignore the fact that Peter addressed the crowd as "men of Judea", and as "men of Israel", and as "all the house of Israel" on the Day of Pentecost, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted the New Covenant fulfilled in blood at Calvary. The Gentiles were not grafted in until several years later. This passage proves Paul was right about the Gospel being taken "first" to the Jews. Were all of the Israelites "partially" hardened in Romans 11, or were part hardened and another part were not hardened? The answer is found in the "remnant" of Romans 11:5. Paul reveals two different groups of Israelites in Romans 9:6-8. There is an Israel of the promise, and an Israel of the flesh. This is part of the context of Romans 11. Paul speaks about the "remnant" of Israel in Romans 9:27. This is also part of the context of Romans 11. Paul starts Romans 11 with two different groups of Israelites. In verse one Paul reveals he is still an Israelite, even after his conversion. Then Paul refers to two different groups of Israelites during the time of Elijah. There were the Baal worshippers, and there was the faithful "remnant". In verse five Paul says there is also a faithful "remnant" of Israelites during his time. This must be the Israelites who have accepted Christ, as on the Day of Pentecost. Paul uses the two olive trees as a symbol of the New Covenant Church made up of believing Israelites, and believing Gentiles grafted together into the same tree. The unbelieving Israelites have been broken off but can be grafted back in through faith in Christ in verses 23-24. Verse 26 is the problem for many modern Christians. What does the verse actually say, and how is it changed by many in the modern Church. I have heard two of our nations famous preachers say the following. "And then all Israel will be saved..." I have heard another say the following. "And all Israel will be saved..." What does God's Word, recorded by the Apostle Paul actually say? Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: The English word "so" is translated from the Greek word "houto", which is an adverb of manner, instead of an adverb of timing. Some have changed the word from "so" to "then", in order to change the meaning of the verse. How will all of the "remnant" of Israel from Romans 9:27 be saved? The answer is found in the verses that precede verse 26 and are found below. Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again. Rom 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? Paul quoted from the OT in referring to the Deliverer coming out of Sion to pay for sin. Did this happen at Calvary, or will Jesus die again for His people in the future? Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. Verse 28 can only be understood by looking at how Paul started the passage. He started with two different groups of Israelites and he ends the passage in the same way. There are two different groups of "they" in verse 28. One group of "they" reject Christ and are the enemies of God, and another group of "they" are the election which accept Christ through hearing the Gospel and faith. Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes. Based on Luke 21:24b-28, the times of the Gentiles comes to fullness at the Second Coming of Christ. This agrees with what Paul said in Romans 1:16 about the Gospel going “first” to the Jews.

No it's been Catholic and Orthodox doctrine for the past 2000 years. Justin Martyr was not a heretic.

The following proves you are correct. Who is really teaching “Replacement Theology” ? (Did God fulfill His promises to the Jewish people at Calvary? Matthew 26:28, John 19:30) The advocates of modern Dispensational Theology often accuse others of promoting “Replacement Theology”, or some may even say “Antisemitism”. What does the Bible say about their accusations? 1. Who is replacing Christ as the seed of Abraham through which all the families of the Earth would be blessed in Genesis 12:3, with Abraham’s modern descendants? (See Paul’s interpretation in Galatians 3:8.) 2. Who is replacing the one people of God in John 10:16, with two peoples of God ? 3. Who is replacing the one seed (Christ) in Galatians 3:16, with the many seeds? 4. Who is replacing the children of the promise in Romans 9:8, with the children of the flesh? 5. Who is replacing the faithful “remnant” of Israelites in Romans 11:1-5, with the Baal worshipers? 6. Who is replacing the word "so" in Romans 11:26, with the word "then"? 7. Who is attempting to replace the Church made up of all races of people, with one made up only of Gentiles? Why did Peter address the crowd as “all the house of Israel” in Acts 2:36, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted Christ on the Day of Pentecost? 8. Based on Hebrews 9:15, the New Covenant cannot be separated from the Messiah’s death. Is the covenant in Daniel 9:27 connected to the Messiah’s death in Daniel 9:26. Is the covenant with the “many” in Daniel 9:27 the same covenant with the “many” in Matthew 26:28? If it is, some have replaced the New Covenant in Daniel 9:27 with a future covenant made by an antichrist not found in Daniel chapter 9. (See the 1599 Geneva Bible used by the Pilgrims.) 9. Those promoting the Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology often accuse others of teaching “Replacement Theology”, but are they the masters of it? Are they promoting a form of Dual Covenant Theology based on race? (See “genealogies” in Titus 3:9) Is the most important genealogy in the Bible found in Matthew 1:1? Is God's Son the ultimate fulfillment of Israel? Why has the modern Church done a pitiful job of sharing the Gospel with modern Orthodox Jews? Why would someone tell them they are God's chosen people and then fail to share the Gospel with them? Who is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15? Who is the "son" in Psalm 2? Who is the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53? Who would fulfill the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34? Who would fulfill the timeline of Daniel chapter 9 before the second temple was destroyed? Why have we not heard this simple Old Testament Gospel preached on Christian television in the United States on a regular basis? 10. Watch the KZfaq video “Genesis of Dispensational Theology” to see the origin of this man-made doctrine, which is less than 200 years old. It was brought to the United States about the time of the Civil War by John Nelson Darby. The doctrine was later incorporated into the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible, and then spread through much of the modern Church. Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas Texas was created in part to promote John Darby’s Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology. Lewis Sperry Chafer, the first president of Dallas Theological, had the following to say about the difference between Israel and the Church: “The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.” Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas, Seminary Press, 1936), p. 107. Chafer states that, ‘Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on which David rules from an eternal throne,’ that is, on earth and distinct from the church who will be in heaven.” Lewis Sperry Chafer. Systematic Theology. 1975. Vol. IV. pp. 315-323. John Walvoord, another prominent voice of Dallas Theological stated… "...it is an article of normative dispensational belief that the boundaries of the land promised to Abraham and his descendants from the Nile to the Euphrates will be literally instituted and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. In such a scheme the Church on earth is relegated to the status of a parenthesis.” John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question.1979, p. 25 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Are there two peoples of God in John 10:16? (See also 1 John 2:22-23, 2 John 1:7-11.) What is the land promise to the Old Testament Saints in Hebrews 11:15-16? (See what Joshua said about the Old Covenant land promise in Josh. 21:43.) Based on 2 Peter 3:10-13, is this earth “eternal”? Will it be replaced by a new earth? Based on Acts 2:36, and Romans 9:6-8, and Romans 11:1-5, and Hebrews 12:22-24, and James 1:1-3, can faithful Israel and the Church be separated into two different groups? Who is the New Covenant promised to in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and is it fulfilled by the blood of Christ at Calvary in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 12:18-24? Will modern Orthodox Jews ever be saved outside of the New Covenant Church, if the New Covenant is “everlasting” in Hebrews 13:20? (See also 2 Thess. 1:7-10) If the New Covenant has made the Old Covenant “obsolete” in Hebrews 8:6-13, why would God go back to the Old Covenant system during a future time period? Read the recent book "The Rise and Fall of Dispensationalism", by Daniel G. Hummel.

Focus on the next generation who already reject this dispensational racist heresy. Too many GenZ are disgusted with dispensational christians and converting to Islam 😮

Use scripture to back your point

Ruling an earthly kingdom on earth was the mistake that Israel/Jewish people made when Jesus came because Jesus said that his kingdom is not of this world. -The kingdom is Jesus who is our king and the Jews are not going to have an earthly kingdom according to Jesus.

That just means Jews can be grafted back in if they believe.

From Hamas! Yes, Free Palestine from hamas!