Jesus acknowledged that the Jews were the descendants of Abraham, but that they weren’t the “children of Abraham” or the “children of God” anymore, but the “children of the devil”. Since Abraham is not their father, but the devil is, the promises that God gave to Abraham of those blessing Abrahams children being blessed does not apply to the Jews. They rejected Christ and are the children of the devil and not Abraham.
In John 8:37 Jesus said “I know you are Abraham’s descendants”.
in vs. 38, “If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would[c] do what Abraham did.”
In vs 42, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God.
In vs 44, “You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires.“
You're conflating two different realms. Salvation is in the Spiritual realm, while land covenant pertains only to the physical.
When you say things like "there are no two senses," you deny this basic reality; do you have no body? Do you have no soul? Of course you have both. The Bible addresses both.
Don't pretend they're the same.
When looking into Salvation, land covenant is irrelevant.
You could only be a “child of Abraham” by being a biological descendant in the Old Testament. Jesus told the Jews that descent didn’t matter anymore and that they could only be a “child of Abraham” by believing in him. He specifically told him that they were a “child of the devil” and not of God by rejecting him. You are literally arguing with Jesus here over this.
The promised land covenant doesn’t apply to the biological jews anymore, but to the “children of Abraham”. The people who accept Christ regardless of their genealogy.
See, there you fall into a natural consequence of your refusal to allow any other definitions but your own. If this were true, why don't the Christians run the Levant? The standard answer is, oh, we must also spiritualize away the meaning of "promised land". When Abraham's family was told over and over that the land was promised to them without condition, you'd believe that there was really a time condition and the real and only permanent meaning is that believers are promised a spiritual kingdom. The fact that the spiritual kingdom is true doesn't negate that the land promises referring to particular geography are unconditional. Reading literally, they will be fulfilled again, and, since belief is a necessary part of remaining in the land (even though Ezekiel prophesies, as happened in the 20th century, that Israel will return to the land in unbelief), evangelists to Jews have great hope. But cutting Jews out of their own beliefs when they need not be cut out (because they don't contradict the gospel) is not seriously giving good news to them and thereby belies the great commission to the Jew first.
Jesus said the Jews aren’t “children of Abraham” anymore. Therefore the promises given to the “children of Abraham” don’t apply to them. The Jews don't have a god given right to take the land for themselves then.
It’s so simple, stop arguing. Jesus himself said “Why is my language not clear to you?”. Stop twisting Jesus’ words and take what Jesus said is clear at face value.
As for those who can inhabit Canaan? It will be Christian’s for all of eternity, reigning with Christ in new Jerusalem and mt. Zion.
You keep saying this, but it's you that are adding to the text and twisting the words. When he says they are children of the devil, you're using Grecian logic to assume they can't be children of anyone else, but that is not the intent. He didn't say you're not children, in fact he said you are seed and Abraham is your father.
Of course Christians will inhabit Canaan for all eternity, but that's because most Jews will become Christians as Romans 11 says. That's part of how the land promise comes about and is explicitly indicated in Ezek. 36:24-26. This promise is not for Christians, who already have the new heart and later receive the spiritual kingdom: it's for Jews who receive the land first (1948) and then receive the new heart.
But if you don't see these things and continue the illogic of denying the quotes that Jesus said and inserting quotes he didn't say, that's on you. I can only show you.
Did Jesus say "Ye are Abraham's seed"? Yes.
Did Jesus say "Your father Abraham rejoiced"? Yes.
Did Jesus say "Ye are not children of Abraham"? No. He left it to the mixed crowd to determine if they would live out the destiny of children of Abraham.
And His very clear context is Salvation. Entrance to the Kingdom. Eternal Salvation, and also more abundant life now. I'm not arguing for any land covenants bestowed by God as valid now, but you should recognize that's a completely different realm.
In terms of Israel the Country? It existed before I was born, I don't see a reason I should try to change that.
I'm not "arguing over that" at all. Maybe you should learn how to read.
Land covenant is distinct from Eternal Salvation yet there you go conflating the two again 🙄
Jesus never Promised physical Israel to the Gentiles. It's not why He came down from heaven. It's not what He gave His body to be broken for. You should have no difficulty comprehending this.
I already explained this in the most simplest terms. Let me be even more simpler.
The children of Abraham before Jesus were just biological descendants.
Now Jesus came and said the children of Abraham were not biological descendants but instead those who believed on him.
Now, the promises to the “children of Abraham” don’t apply to the biological descendants anymore. In other words, the biological descendants of Abraham don’t have the land as a god given right anymore.
Not at all. "Children of Abraham" always had the dual meaning. If it hadn't, then Ishmaelites and Midianites would be children of Abraham in every sense, but they were not accounted as his children because they didn't have the faith of Abraham. If you don't do what your father does, everyone knew your father dismisses you as a child.
You have this wrong division to the word "anymore" like something changed. The spiritual covenant was always the same: believe on the Seed of the Woman to be revealed. Tribal and national covenants arose at many points in history and are easily separable. Because we're so far from the origin we made up other paradigms where we blur the two types of covenant, and that requires us to invent presto-changeo work on Jesus's behalf, but Jesus did not change one serif of the covenant.
You need to figure out what it is that's driving you so illogically. It appears to be some unstated objection that, if this is true, you'd have to do something crazy that may sound Jewish. I'm not proposing anything crazy or Jewish; I am proposing equal self-determination for all. Maybe you should come straight out and say what you think my position logically entails that you cannot accept, and then I can explain why the position doesn't logically entail it as you might mistakenly believe. (Or perhaps we can get to the real binary proposition separating us.)