Let me see, you said you agreed that:
1) The new covenant replaced the old.
2) The Church is forever.
I did not realize that you believe in Replacement Theology. In fact, I am astonished, considering the tone of your previous posts when debating Replacement Theology.
You do realize that those, like me, who believe that the new covenant has replaced the old covenant, also believe that Joshua 11:23, 21:43-45 and 23:14 meant exactly what it says: that God fulfilled his land promises to Israel long ago. Dual-covenant theologists, like Fruchtenbaum, must spiritualize those verses so they mean something else; that is, they must be "reinterpreted" to pretend that God did not fulfil those promises, in order to claim (demand) thus God must fulfil them in the future. I know it seems bizarre, but that is what dual-covenant theologists believe.
These are the three verses from Joshua that plainly indicate fulfillment
"So Joshua took the whole land, according to all that the Lord said unto Moses; and Joshua gave it for an inheritance unto Israel according to their divisions by their tribes. And the land rested from war." (Jos 11:23 KJV)
"And the Lord gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein. And the Lord gave them rest round about, according to all that he sware unto their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their enemies before them; the Lord delivered all their enemies into their hand. There failed not ought of any good thing which the Lord had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass." (Jos 21:43-45 KJV)
"And, behold, this day I am going the way of all the earth: and ye know in all your hearts and in all your souls, that not one thing hath failed of all the good things which the Lord your God spake concerning you; all are come to pass unto you, and not one thing hath failed thereof." (Jos 23:14 KJV)
Are you sure you do not want to clarify that position? If not, then welcome to the light.
Philip
Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.Is this the covenant the has been replaced?
I have clarified it ...
The flaw in your analysis is that Abraham HIMSELF has not possessed the land. Go read the promise ... It will take some courage to believe what the text actually says ... but I know you have it in you.