Replies

The great apostle to the Gentiles gives the reason for the withdrawal of covenant privileges from the people of Israel, or the Jews, and their bestowal on the Gentiles:

“It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles” (Acts 13:46).

Balaam keeps trying.

The covenant was never withdrawn. Even the "new covenant" is with Judah and Israel.
Jer 31:31
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah

The adversary roams the earth seeking to turn every soul against the house of Israel and the house of Judah, to cast a stumbling block to prevent their return to the LORD.

The Apostle to the Gentiles did not in any wise mean what you allege.
He is the Apostle to the Gentiles.
He was commanded to go to the Gentiles, but he knows his orders, "To the Jew first and also to the Greek." So he does this always, and everywhere.
He doesn't stop.

Thus after he leaves Antioch of Pisidia and journeys to Iconium, what does he do ?

You hold the covenant was broken in Antioch of Pisidia by an apostle who was not even authorized to break a covenant, much less a covenant with Israel. However, what does he do in the very next city ?

Acts 14:1
And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed.

Here is the next proof.

Acts.17:1-4

Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews:
And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,
Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ.
And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few.

And the Jewish Apostle to the Gentiles wrote to the Church of Rome

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

So, AF Vet 1981 (and Elsie), what is the new covenant and who was it made with? Initially made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah. Then, REJECTED by them and given to SPIRITUAL Israel, those in Christ, CHRISTIANS, as ministers of the new covenant. Pretty clear from this article and 2 Cor 3.

https://www.atsjats.org/moskala-new-covenant.pdf

What Was the First Covenant? One needs to ask what Paul means when he speaks about the “first covenant” (the full phrase is used only in Heb 9:15; but see also 8:7, 13; 9:1, 18). To what covenant is he referring? It is interesting that Paul in Hebrews never once uses the term “old covenant” to describe the first covenant. Paul uses the phrase “old covenant” only in 2 Cor 3:14 in reference to the reading and understanding of Old Testament revelation without acknowledging Christ as the key to interpret it. He stresses that Christians are “ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (2 Cor 3:6 ESV).

2 Corinthians 3: (I’m quoting the full chapter)

Christ’s Epistle
1Do we begin again to commend ourselves? Or do we need, as some others, epistles of commendation to you or letters of commendation from you? 2You are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read by all men; 3clearly you are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart.

The Spirit, Not the Letter

4And we have such trust through Christ toward God. 5Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, 6who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the [a]Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

Glory of the New Covenant

7But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, 8how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious? 9For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory. 10For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. 11For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.

12Therefore, since we have such hope, we use great boldness of speech— 13unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. 14But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. 15But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. 16Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 18But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as [b]by the Spirit of the Lord.

“The movement of thought from Jeremiah 31:32 to 31:33 reveals that the covenant relationship between God and his people, whether under the Sinai covenant or the new covenant to come, is maintained by keeping the law in response to God’s prior act of redemption. It must be emphasized that this is no truer of the new covenant than it was of the Sinai covenant before it (cf. Deut. 6:20-25). Rather than suggesting that the law is somehow negated or replaced in the new covenant, Jeremiah 31:31-33 emphasizes that it is the ability to keep the law as a result of having a transformed nature, not its removal, that distinguishes the new covenant from the covenant at Sinai. The contrast between the two covenants remains a contrast between two different conditions of the people and their correspondingly different responses to the same law” (Hafemann, 2 Corinthians, 135).

Another good insight into the internalization of God’s law in the new covenant. Most on this FR site (not mentioning names) say that God’s commandments don’t apply to Christians, because they were first found in the “OLD” covenant. This also shows that the new covenant blessings are conditional. There is no “salvation” without obedience. That is where judgment comes in. Rebellion against God’s law (take the Sabbath for example) is rebellion against the Holy Spirit.

https://www.atsjats.org/moskala-new-covenant.pdf

See perceptive insights by Scott J. Hafemann about the experiential deficiency and efficacy of “the law” in the Sinai covenant and the new covenant: “Paul is careful in [2 Cor] 3:6 not to establish a contrast between the law itself and the Spirit. Nor is the Spirit to be read as a code-word for the gospel, so that the letter/Spirit contrast is transformed into a law/gospel contrast. The problem with the Sinai covenant was not with the law itself, but, as Ezekiel and Jeremiah testify, with the people whose hearts remained hardened under it. The law remains for Paul, as it did for the Jewish traditions of his day, the holy, just, and good expression of God’s covenantal will (Rom. 7:12). Indeed, Paul characterizes the law itself as ‘spiritual’ (7:14). As the expression of God’s abiding will, it is not the law per se that kills, or any aspect or perversion of it, but the law without the Spirit, that is, the law as ‘letter.’ Devoid of God’s Spirit, the law remains to those who encounter it merely a rejected declaration of God’s saving purposes and promises, including its corresponding calls for repentance and the obedience of faith. Although the law declares God’s will, it is powerless to enable people to keep it. Only the Spirit ‘gives life’ by changing the human heart. In this regard, Paul can say that the gospel too kills when it encounters those who are perishing (cf. 2:16)!” (2 Corinthians, The NIV Application Commentary: From Biblical Text . . . to Contemporary Life [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2000], 132)

Would you say that this is generally the understanding of dispensationalism?

Here is the title of the paper: Israel as the People of the Covenant and Dispensationalism: A Biblical Evaluation

https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1577&context=jats

Dispensationalism: Its Basic Tenets

1: Definition and Introduction:

Dispensationalism is a system of biblical hermeneutics that has had considerable influence within conservative Christian circles37 and has infiltrated almost every branch of Protestantism.38 Its origins can be traced back to John Nelson Darby of Britain (1800-1882). It spread in the United States largely through the work of Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921), and the famous Scofield Reference Bible, as well as conferences on biblical prophecy led by ministers from Dispensationalist Bible Institutes and books written by Dispensationalist proponents such as John Walvoord, Hal Lindsey, Dwight Pentecost and Tim LaHaye among others.39

Dispensationalism is a system of theology that divides history into dispensations,40 periods of time during which man is tested in respect to his obedience to some specific revelation of God.41 Each dispensation begins a new and distinct method of testing mankind and each ends in man’s failure and judgment.42 There is no consensus on the exact number of dispensations,43 but a common number is seven: (1) Innocence (2) Conscience (3) Human Government (4) Promise (5) Law (6) Grace (or Church) (7) Kingdom.44

Dispensationalism emphasizes the consistent literal interpretation of Scripture, known as consistent literalism.45 If the plain meaning makes sense, one must not look further.46 This is also applied to all prophecy often in considerable detail.47 Dispensationalists claim that they are probably the only ones who use this consistent literal method in Biblical interpretation in opposition to non-Dispensationalists who tend to allegorize or spiritualize the plain meaning of Scripture especially in the area of prophecy.48 For example, they maintain that the name” Israel” in prophecy always refers to the nation of Israel and to nothing else.49

2: Dispensationalism: A Theology and Eschatology of Israel/Church Dichotomy

At the heart of Dispensationalist theology is an Israel/Church dichotomy.50 God has two distinct people: Israel as His earthly people and the Church as His heavenly people.51 They are two separate entities and will remain so unto eternity.52 God’s covenant promises to Israel were unconditional and not dependant on their faithfulness and obedience to His requirements.53 These covenant promises and prophecies of restoration are not to be fulfilled in the church54 since the church is supposedly not mentioned in the OT.55

For Jews, God planned to set up an earthly kingdom, the “kingdom of heaven,” the Davidic messianic kingdom,56 through the first coming of Jesus Christ. But they rejected Him.57 Therefore, this earthly kingdom was conversion and gathering of the Jews to the Messiah will begin during the tribulation for seven years, after which God will establish the millennial kingdom on earth and literally fulfill all the covenant promises made to Israel.59 Because the Jews will have finally accepted the Messiah, Jerusalem and the Jews will be central in this millennial reign with Christ on David’s throne and the temple in the center.60

As for the Church, God brought it into existence because of the rejection of Christ by the Jews.61 It is just an episode or parenthesis between the rejection and reinstitution of the earthly kingdom of the Jews62–a mystery, possibly unforeseen by God.63 The church began at Pentecost.64 Since the church is God’s heavenly people65 (“the kingdom of God,” angels and the saints of all ages),66 they will be swept to heaven in the pre tribulation rapture so as to give Israel the spotlight on earth again.67 The rapture will be the end of the church.68

From the paper:

Conclusion
This study has given an overview of Israel as a people of the covenant especially on the identity of the people and its implications for Gentiles both in the Old and New Testaments. It has also presented the basic tenets of Dispensationalism on the Israel-Church dichotomy of the people of the covenant. The major arguments were evaluated based on biblical texts and principles to determine their consistency and validity within the biblical context of salvation history.
The covenant theme can be traced throughout the Bible and it emphasizes God’s relationship with His people. However, the Dispensationalist system of theology states that God has two distinct people who remain separate through time and eternity: Israel and the Church. A careful study of the Biblical theme of the people of God’s covenant shows that there has always been only one people of God through all of Scripture: those who accept and obey God, and, ultimately, His Son Jesus.
Dispensationalism does not seem to fit well with the biblical evidence presented in this article. It imposes divisions on the flow of salvation history. Consequently it wrongly divides the people of God and in essence, “puts asunder what God has joined together (in the OT and NT Church).”177 This leads to inconsistency and a partitioning of the one whole united truth of God’s work for humankind in the redemptive history of the Bible as it is in Jesus. Its hermeneutics stand as an obstacle to the main aim of the Covenant which God states clearly at the end of the Great Controversy: “I will be their God and they will be My people” (Rev 21:3)–One people of God not two.