Olivia
Online
Jas
@jazturingan
Genesis 1 | Ephesians 2:8-9 | 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 | Romans 5:8 | 2 Corinthians 5:18-21 | 1 Thessalonians 4:14-18 |
North Texas
Joined February 2018
246 Following
184 Followers
512 Posts
A good read!
Dispensationalism vs Covenant Theology https://t.co/q7MWZvuFi6
@MrMrsTrumpet @PeachesPilled @MrMrsTrumpet for clarity. I have to correct myself, I do not agree with the “One Covenant” insofar as how Covenant theology defines it. I dont adhere to Fulfillment theology. I hold to a (Pre-trib) Dispensationalist Premill view.
@MrMrsTrumpet @PeachesPilled While I agree w/ your 2nd&3rd statements, jargons & terms are important bec these are used to lay out the presuppositions by which the rest of the argument will be hinged on. So in this case, “what/who is Israel?” shouldve been defined. Obviously he’s referring to the “nation” ,
@PeachesPilled Same to you, have a wonderful day!
@MrMrsTrumpet @PeachesPilled “nation” of Israel, and not the spiritual Israel that Covenant theology presupposes.
See an example below of what a good argument would look like
(a lesson here is the loudest voices arent always the most reliable sources)
DOES GALATIANS REDEFINE ISRAEL?
A central verse where Fulfillment Theology often “hangs its hat” is Galatians 3:16:
“The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say 'and to seeds,’ meaning many people, but ‘and to your seed,’ meaning one person, who is Messiah.” (Gal. )
N. T. Wright, a leading voice in Fulfillment Theology, writes: “Jesus is the single seed through whom the promises to Abraham would come to fruition, and it is those who are in Him who now inherit those promises.” [1] Similarly, Peter Leithart says that the identity of Israel is “reshaped around Jesus.”[2]
In other words, this perspective argues that Paul is introducing a radically new understanding of Israel—a redefinition that alters how we read Old Testament promises. But is this what Paul is really saying?
There are several problems with this view.
1. It assumes that equating Jesus with Israel is a new development. But Scripture shows that this association is ancient. Isaiah uses the name “Israel” to describe both the people and the Servant (Messiah). For example, in Isaiah 49:3–6, the Servant is called “Israel” in verse 3, yet his task is to restore Israel in verse 5. Isaiah expert John Oswalt writes, “The servant is called 'Israel' in 49:3, but his task is to restore Israel (49:5). Thus, he is an individual who represents the nation but is also distinct from it.”[3] Alec Motyer similarly observes, “The servant bears the name of Israel not simply because he is from Israel, but because he embodies its calling and vocation.”[4]
2. Paul’s statement about the seed in Galatians 3:16 is a literary and rhetorical device, not a literal lexical argument, meaning he is being creative with the text to make a point, not being dogmatic. In both Hebrew (zerah) and English, the word “seed” functions as a collective noun. It can be singular or plural depending on context—just like “fish” or “deer.” Paul, a trained Pharisee and Hebrew speaker, would certainly understand this. He is using a midrashic technique—a common Jewish interpretive method that seeks to bring out hidden or layered meaning in Scripture.
3. If Paul meant that only Jesus was the seed, and all other references to Abraham’s descendants were annulled, that would contradict countless passages. Genesis speaks of Abraham’s seed being as numerous as the stars in the sky or the sand on the seashore. That clearly cannot refer to a single individual.
Moreover, Paul later writes in Galatians 3:29: “If you belong to Messiah, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
That verse uses the same term—“seed”—but clearly refers to a plural group. If we read verse 16 as excluding all others besides Jesus, verse 29 becomes incoherent. Paul is not unaware of the collective sense of “seed”; rather, he uses it masterfully to highlight Yeshua as the supreme fulfillment of God’s promise, without excluding the broader application.
In other words, Paul’s point in Galatians is not to redefine Israel, but to elevate the Messiah as the central figure through whom God’s promises come to fruition. This interpretation is deeply consistent with Jewish interpretive traditions and with Paul’s other teachings.
Stay tuned for Part 2, where we’ll explore how this reading fits with Paul's larger theology—especially in Romans 11—and what it means for the ongoing role of Israel in God's redemptive plan.
Dr. Ron Cantor
Subscribe to Ron's newsletter from Israel at https://t.co/AePiXJTR1x
[1] N. T. Wright, Paul and the Faithfulness of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2013), 787.
[2] Peter Leithart, Delivered from the Elements of the World: Atonement, Justification, Mission (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2016), 212.
[3] John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 291.
[4] J. Alec Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1993), 387.
![RonSCantor's tweet photo. DOES GALATIANS REDEFINE ISRAEL?
A central verse where Fulfillment Theology often “hangs its hat” is Galatians 3:16:
“The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say 'and to seeds,’ meaning many people, but ‘and to your seed,’ meaning one person, who is Messiah.” (Gal. )
N. T. Wright, a leading voice in Fulfillment Theology, writes: “Jesus is the single seed through whom the promises to Abraham would come to fruition, and it is those who are in Him who now inherit those promises.” [1] Similarly, Peter Leithart says that the identity of Israel is “reshaped around Jesus.”[2]
In other words, this perspective argues that Paul is introducing a radically new understanding of Israel—a redefinition that alters how we read Old Testament promises. But is this what Paul is really saying?
There are several problems with this view.
1. It assumes that equating Jesus with Israel is a new development. But Scripture shows that this association is ancient. Isaiah uses the name “Israel” to describe both the people and the Servant (Messiah). For example, in Isaiah 49:3–6, the Servant is called “Israel” in verse 3, yet his task is to restore Israel in verse 5. Isaiah expert John Oswalt writes, “The servant is called 'Israel' in 49:3, but his task is to restore Israel (49:5). Thus, he is an individual who represents the nation but is also distinct from it.”[3] Alec Motyer similarly observes, “The servant bears the name of Israel not simply because he is from Israel, but because he embodies its calling and vocation.”[4]
2. Paul’s statement about the seed in Galatians 3:16 is a literary and rhetorical device, not a literal lexical argument, meaning he is being creative with the text to make a point, not being dogmatic. In both Hebrew (zerah) and English, the word “seed” functions as a collective noun. It can be singular or plural depending on context—just like “fish” or “deer.” Paul, a trained Pharisee and Hebrew speaker, would certainly understand this. He is using a midrashic technique—a common Jewish interpretive method that seeks to bring out hidden or layered meaning in Scripture.
3. If Paul meant that only Jesus was the seed, and all other references to Abraham’s descendants were annulled, that would contradict countless passages. Genesis speaks of Abraham’s seed being as numerous as the stars in the sky or the sand on the seashore. That clearly cannot refer to a single individual.
Moreover, Paul later writes in Galatians 3:29: “If you belong to Messiah, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
That verse uses the same term—“seed”—but clearly refers to a plural group. If we read verse 16 as excluding all others besides Jesus, verse 29 becomes incoherent. Paul is not unaware of the collective sense of “seed”; rather, he uses it masterfully to highlight Yeshua as the supreme fulfillment of God’s promise, without excluding the broader application.
In other words, Paul’s point in Galatians is not to redefine Israel, but to elevate the Messiah as the central figure through whom God’s promises come to fruition. This interpretation is deeply consistent with Jewish interpretive traditions and with Paul’s other teachings.
Stay tuned for Part 2, where we’ll explore how this reading fits with Paul's larger theology—especially in Romans 11—and what it means for the ongoing role of Israel in God's redemptive plan.
Dr. Ron Cantor
Subscribe to Ron's newsletter from Israel at https://t.co/AePiXJTR1x
[1] N. T. Wright, Paul and the Faithfulness of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2013), 787.
[2] Peter Leithart, Delivered from the Elements of the World: Atonement, Justification, Mission (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2016), 212.
[3] John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 291.
[4] J. Alec Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1993), 387.](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GuV5Mf4WMAAy8dz.jpg)
@JennLeonard4now Appreciate you Jenn. God bless
An ineffective presentation of an argument does not de-legitimize the merits of that argument.
He’s right, replacement theology is bad theology. But he could’ve articulated it better.
This is Jack. Jack has awful eschatology. Don't be like Jack.
@MaeOfFable Fortunately, the ‘Christian’ men who promoted that talking point are now being exposed as wolves.
@iownmyownmind Imo, he checked both boxes.
@iownmyownmind Sorry for jumping in on your post that I so agree with, so if i may add:
Imo, he wanted Schaffer to say the things that he(Webbon) as a pastor, couldn’t say himself. In a ideal world, he shouldve lost his ministry for co-opting with and using a degenerate as his mouthpiece.
@MarbledWell7 Ok. I respect your view.
I just can’t agree. Be blessed
@PeachesPilled reconstructionists postmills whereby in addition to evangelising,discipleship,etc, they also seek to unite Church & govt to form a theocratic form of govt
@MarbledWell7 1 John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.
@GraceIsMyAnchor Maranatha!
@alexxelizabeth2 wowzer. Hitting 2 birds with one schedule
Ultimate hack to healthy Jesus-centered life
@autocorrect2_0 Beautiful testimony, AC. Your reference to the Parable of the 2 Debtors is such a powerful reminder for all of us
Luke 7:47 For this reason I say to you, her sins, which are many, have been forgiven, for she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little."
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk 
@elonmusk
241.5M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
118.8M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
114.6M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.8M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107.1M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
98.7M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.3M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
91.8M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
90.1M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
84M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
75.5M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
73.5M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
70.9M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.8M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
66.5M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
65.3M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
63.1M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.2M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.7M followers
X
@x
60.7M followers