Replies

>>>You go to Joshua to show the land promise was literally fulfilled. Then when you are confronted by the reality of the unfulfilled promises in the OT text concerning Abraham himself ... you run to the NT and read back into the Old to claim that the fulfillment of that promise is spiritual through Christ and the church.<<<

Certainly you have not been brainwashed by Fruchtenbaum into believing his ridiculous interpretation of Genesis 13, or have you? Don't you realize how silly that sounds? You are claiming that Abraham must be raised from the dead, and physically take possession of the land of Canaan, before the covenant is fulfilled? Where can we find a hint of that anywhere, even in Genesis 13---the passage you referenced? You gotta be pulling my leg . . .

BTW, both Joshua and Nehemiah have multiple scriptures citing fulfillment of the land promise. You are the one who dismisses their plain words. And you have yet to show any scripture that even hints that the land promise to Abraham has not been fulfilled, either in the old or new testament. Something does not add up. Why are you making such a ridiculous claim?

In any case, I previously posted the three Joshua references. Maybe the readers would appreciate the two Nehemiah references, as well:

"Thou art the Lord the God, who didst choose Abram, and broughtest him forth out of Ur of the Chaldees, and gavest him the name of Abraham; And foundest his heart faithful before thee, and madest a covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Jebusites, and the Girgashites, to give it, I say, to his seed, and hast performed thy words; for thou art righteous:" (Neh 9:7-8 KJV)

"Moreover thou gavest them kingdoms and nations, and didst divide them into corners: so they possessed the land of Sihon, and the land of the king of Heshbon, and the land of Og king of Bashan. Their children also multipliedst thou as the stars of heaven, and broughtest them into the land, concerning which thou hadst promised to their fathers, that they should go in to possess it. So the children went in and possessed the land, and thou subduedst before them the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, and gavest them into their hands, with their kings, and the people of the land, that they might do with them as they would." (Neh 9:22-24 KJV)

Take note that in verses 9:7-8, Nehemiah claims the covenant with Abraham regarding the land was to Abraham's seed, not directly to him, which we all know to be the case.

There are other references that are equally devastating to the false doctrine of dispensationalism on the matter of the land covenant. This is the Lord speaking to Isaac, after Abraham's death:

"And the Lord appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt; dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of: Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries, and I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father; And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed " (Gen 26:2-3 KJV)

Fair enough. God gave the Land to Isaac's seed, Jacob. But wait a minute? How could the Lord give it to Isaac's seed, when, as you claim, he had already given it to Abraham? If what you claim is true, there is only one way this could have occurred: the Lord must have taken the land away from Abraham. Otherwise, he could not have given it to Jacob.

But we all know that what you have claimed is little more than a can of worms. All the references, even the one you cited, Genesis 13, point to fulfillment in Abraham's seed.

Almost forgot: there are also these related words spoken by Saint Stephen, shortly before he was martyred:

"So Jacob went down into Egypt, and died, he, and our fathers, And were carried over into Sychem, and laid in the sepulchre that Abraham bought for a sum of money of the sons of Emmor the father of Sychem. But when the time of the promise drew nigh, which God had sworn to Abraham, the people grew and multiplied in Egypt, Till another king arose, which knew not Joseph." (Acts 7:15-18 KJV)

So Stephen stated the time of the promise was still future, even in the days after Jacob! How could Abraham have been promised possession of the land when the promise itself was still hundreds of years in the future?

>>>I could not have asked for a better illustration of the theological method fallacies of replacementism ...<<<

Nor could I ask for a better example of the weakness of dispensational doctrine. You have posted exactly one old-testament passage during this land debate; and even then you were forced to squeeze a false meaning out of the passage with the rigor of a communist attempting to squeeze redistribution out of the plain words of the Constitution.

Funny, but also sad . . .

Philip