Gal 3:29 And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise.
Rev 12:17 And the dragon was enraged over the woman, and went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
The recipe is both faith and obedience, belief in Jesus demonstrated by obedience to the Father. Of course the promise went first to the Hebrews and second to the Gentiles. We Gentiles are joining the Hebrew faith when we get Baptized. The Bible is one coherent Book from Genesis to Revelation, IMO. If you interpret "replacement" to exclude Jews who accept Jesus, I believe you are in error. If you interpret "replacement" to mean that the Law died with Christ, I believe you are in error, too.
I suspect that you and I are in essential agreement on the majors, even if we dicker around a bit on the minors.
Yes, indeed, but you would be much more eloquent than I.
In layman's terms, I do not think the battle of Armaggeddeon is going to take place in the middle east as a physical battle.
Rev 16:16 And he gathered them into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon (Har-Meggidon).
I have read that Mount Carmel borders the valley of Har Meggidon. That was where Elija told the people 1Ki 18:21 And Elijah came to all the people and said, How long are you limping over two opinions? If Jehovah is God, follow Him. But if Baal is God, then follow him. And the people did not answer him a word.
I believe the battle for the end is a battle over hearts and minds and all the fuss over the middle east is a ruse perpetuated by Satan to fool as many as possible into believing in him instead of God.
I will officially change my address to "1 lunatic fringe way" now.
In layman's terms, I do not think the battle of Armaggeddeon is going to take place in the middle east as a physical battle. . . I believe the battle for the end is a battle over hearts and minds and all the fuss over the middle east is a ruse perpetuated by Satan to fool as many as possible into believing in him instead of God.
I think it's both--one of the things I've learned is that the existence of a spiritual meaning does not necessarily aborogate the existence of the physical aspect.