Did God restore Israel in 1948?

[dad1]

Israel must be back in the land in the end time according to the bible. Some people suggest that God brought them back, and that they are now fulfilling prophesy such as the desert blooming like a rose etc. Can anyone support that idea? Several denominations do make such claims.

In the end, after the remnant repents and Jesus returns, is when God restores believing Israel to the land. Not, as far as I can tell, in 1948. So, there are good bible teaching preachers that seem to think otherwise (Jack Hibbs, Behold Israel, Jan Markell, James Kaddis, Bret meador, etc etc). The thread is for someone to support their claims. In other threads I have not seen this done yet.

[JehovahsWitness]

Can you explain why Paul refered to "the Law" in a discussion about the requirements to make animal sacrifices, if his references to "the law" only included the ten commandements ?

HEBREWS 10:1

For since the Law has a shadow of the good things to come, but not the very substance of the things, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered year after year, make those who approach perfect

- what is the pronoun "it" (in red above) ?

[1213]

Who were to be selected for this kingdom of Priests?

The people to whom the EXODUS 19:5, 6 was said.

Since the Mosaic law did not allow for kingship and Priesthood to be combined in the same office, would the above mean the law would have to be modified? Is there and alliance for the Mosaic law to be changed / modified?

Please show the scripture that says kingship and priesthood can't be combined in the same office?

[JehovahsWitness]

[JehovahsWitness]

Please show the scripture that says kingship and priesthood can't be combined in the same office?

I didnt say "it cannot be" ... I said " the Mosaic law [covenant] did not allow for kingship and Priesthood to be combined". It can be combined if the Mosaic law a be changed or modified but I think we've agreed that modification of the law is not possible. The only alternaive then is that the law be annulled or the covenant be broken. God cannot break his covenant and the Israelites had no right to unilaterally override it. Which leaves us with the law being brought to its natural end.

- By what i know, Bible doesn't give time limit to the covenant.

Indeed so it could end at an unforseen (unstipulated) time.


JW

[JehovahsWitness]

Did you see the question in post #161 HERE-->> viewtopic.php?p=1149571#p1149571

Would you care to answer it?

[JehovahsWitness]

[1213]

Can you explain how if the PRIESTOOD, under the Mosaic law covenant , was restricted to the tribe of LEVI and God promised kingship to the descendants of David (of the tribe of Judah) ,there could be a kingdom* of royal (king)/Priests without amending (changing) or replacing the Mosaic law covenant ?

For example they can be kings and priests for other nations. Or it is about the future, when heaven and earth has passed away.

Truly I say to you, Until the heaven and the earth pass away, in no way shall one iota or one tittle pass away from the law until all comes to pass.
Mattt. 5:18

[JehovahsWitness]

Can you explain how if the PRIESTOOD, under the Mosaic law covenant , was restricted to the tribe of LEVI and God promised kingship to the descendants of David (of the tribe of Judah) ,there could be a kingdom* of royal (king)/Priests without amending (changing) or replacing the Mosaic law covenant ?

For example they can be kings and priests for other nations.

The covenant makes no provision for Priesthood for other nations, it was strictly for the nation of Israel only. Can you explain how the there can be a Priesthood (and a kingship) " for other nations" without amending (changing: adding something and removing other things) or replacing the Mosaic law covenant?

ROMANS 7

If, then, perfection was attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for it was a feature of the Law* that was given to the people), what further need would there be for another priest to arise who is said to be in the manner of Melchizedek

Paul's entire argument was that the Mosaic Law was not enough. Since the original cojld not be changed it had To be replaced.


* This scripture also addresses the erroneous idea that when Paul refered to --> "The Law" < --- he was ONLY speaking about the Ten Commandements.

....There are also several other rules, but they are separate from the 10, which is why they are not necessary the same as the God's law...

I think I must have misunderstood you, when Paul, referred to "the law" ( in the context of Jewish worship) was he ONLY speakng of the ten commandements ?

[JehovahsWitness]

[1213]

The covenant makes no provision for Priesthood for other nations, it was strictly for the nation of Israel only. Can you explain how the there can be a Priesthood (and a kingship) " for other nations" without amending (changing: adding something and removing other things) or replacing the Mosaic law covenant?

I don't say the law is the only thing. Also other deals are possible at the same time.