There are two Israels...

[DeafPosttrib]

Allan,

Then, please define what "Church" means?

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[Me4Him]

Allan,

Then, please define what "Church" means?

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

"Church" is ..."Any assemble of God's people".

Christians= "Christ like". (conform to his image)

There are no "divisions" of Nationality in the "body of Christ",

the "CHURCH".

Jew/Greek or Gentile.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Then, please define what "Church" means?

The church is the total number of Spirit-Baptized believers from Pentecost to the Rapture. In the gospels the church is still future, so that proves that there was no church in the OT. A church is not just an assembly of God's people.

 

[webdog]

The church is the total number of Spirit-Baptized believers from Pentecost to the Rapture. In the gospels the church is still future, so that proves that there was no church in the OT. A church is not just an assembly of God's people.

That's probably the best definition for church I have seen.

 

[DeafPosttrib]

Larry,

The church is the total number of Spirit-Baptized believers from Pentecost to the Rapture

I strong DISAGREE.

Church is make up pf ALL members from beginning to end, from Adam to the very last person at Christ's coming.

In the gospels that church is still future, so that proves that there was no church in the O.T.

I disagree. That is your opinion.

Of course I am aware that you would use Matt. 16:18 to support, "I WILL built my church" speaks of Church will begin on Pentacost Day.

My understanding of Matt. 16:18 means that Christ told disciples that he is going to built his people when He will give power(keys)to disciples to witness gospel to the world.

The Bible doesn't rule out that Adam, Abraham, Moses, David, etc. are not part of the Church.

Because Christ already made reconcile all Jews and Gentiles unity together became one by Calvary (Ephesians chapter 2), clearly that means it includes all O.T. saints join with the together.

Romans 11:25-26 teaching us clearly that Olive Tree was ALREADY right there in O.T. period. That tree is picture as Church-Jesus Christ. Also, tree is picture of Cross too. Jews were already in Olive Tree long time before Gentiles.

Jews were already commonwealth of Israel in O.T. whilst Gentiles were separated and strangers. In other word, Jews were already belong to Christ's church in O.T.

NOW, Gentiles are grafted in tree join with believing Jews, therefore, Gentiles are now part of commonwealth of Israel. Israel is same as Church. Church never replace Israel. Israel is just now expanding, same as Church is expanding.

Also, I BELIEVE that, before Christ comes to earth, O.T. saints already heard the word 'Church' in their own language Hebrew or Greek, it easily mean congregation. So, therefore, Church was already right there in O.T. but church was limited within physical nation -Israel, because the gospel was not yet spreading out over world to Gentiles till Christ brought his keys(power) to Disciples. Now, church is no more limited, it is expanding over the world because of gospel.

Church is make up of ALL saints from Adam to the very last person at Christ's coming, by through their FAITH on Jesus Christ only, no other else.

Look at example of Revelation chapter 21 of New Jerusalem is the perfect picture of the Church/Israel, what the Bible is all talking about salvation.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[Pastor Larry]

I strong DISAGREE.

Church is make up pf ALL members from beginning to end, from Adam to the very last person at Christ's coming.

Show this in the Bible. Never is anyone in the OT said to be in the church.

First, the church is the body of Christ. That can't exist until Christ has died and risen again.
Second, the church is formed by Spirit baptism (1 Cor 12:13). In the gospels that was still future (Matt 3:11; Mar 1:8; Luk 3:16). Therefore, the church can't exist until Spirit baptism which was not until Acts 2.

Of course I am aware that you would use Matt. 16:18 to support, "I WILL built my church" speaks of Church will begin on Pentacost Day.

Wouldn't be my first argument, but it is a good one.

My understanding of Matt. 16:18 means that Christ told disciples that he is going to built his people when He will give power(keys)to disciples to witness gospel to the world.

Yes.

The Bible doesn't rule out that Adam, Abraham, Moses, David, etc. are not part of the Church.

Yes it does. You have not one place in the Scriptures that put these people in the church. Paul says the church was a mystery.

Because Christ already made reconcile all Jews and Gentiles unity together became one by Calvary (Ephesians chapter 2), clearly that means it includes all O.T. saints join with the together.

Not at all. Not only is that not "clear." It is not even realistic. Paul was talking about unity in the body between Jew and Gentile. He was saying nothing about the OT saints.

Church is make up of ALL saints from Adam to the very last person at Christ's coming, by through their FAITH on Jesus Christ only, no other else.

But again, notice that you have no Scripture that says this. Not one place does the Scripture describe anyone prior to Pentecost as being in the church. That is significant. This is a place where you have to abandon your presuppositions and look at the text.

 

[J.D.]

J.D., the following is something I put together that, "I think", is the answer to your question.

The small text is necessary to post all of it.

What happen to the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel who became the "Northern Kingdom" and where do they fit into the overall plans of God?


For that answer, we have to go back to Genesis.

Ge 48:17 And when Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, it displeased him: and he held up his father's hand, to remove it from Ephraim's head unto Manasseh's head.


18 And Joseph said unto his father, Not so, my father: for this is the firstborn; put thy right hand upon his head.


19 And his father refused, and said, I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations.

20 And he blessed them that day, saying, In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh: and he set Ephraim before Manasseh.

Ephraim, the second born of Joseph, who was a "prefigure" of Jesus, was prophesied by Jacob to be the "Father of a mulitude of nations", this of course is the "Gentile race".

The house of Joseph was a member of the Northern tribes and was given the land we know as "Samaria", residents of this land was later known as "Samaritans".

Ephriam made a pact with Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, to attack Jerusalem, the "Southern Tribes" of Benjamin/Judah.

Isa 7:1 And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it.

2 And it was told the house of David, saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim.

However God said this:
Isa 7:7 Thus saith the Lord GOD, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass.


8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people.


9 And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliah's son. If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.

"that it be not a people" is found in other prophecies of scripture, which we'll get to later.

The "Assyria King" conquered the Northern Tribes about 135 years before Nebuchadnezzar conquered the "Southern Tribes", which he kept in captivity 70 years,

By this time the Northern Tribes had been in captivity 135+70=205 years, and had married into the "Gentiles Race".

However, when the Southern tribes returned to Jerusalem, a remnant of the Northern tribes returned as well, and settled back in the land of Samaria,

These were coming to be know as "Israelites" while the Southern Tribes were coming to be known as "Jews" (Judah)

This marriage of the Northern tribes into the Gentile race caused another disagreement between the Northern/Southern Tribes.

Ezr 9:1 Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites.


2 For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass.

Judah, decided they would divorce all non Jews, however the "Israelites" of Samaritan remained married.

Ezr 10:10 And Ezra the priest stood up, and said unto them, Ye have transgressed, and have taken strange wives, to increase the trespass of Israel.


11 Now therefore make confession unto the LORD God of your fathers, and do his pleasure: and separate yourselves from the people of the land, and from the strange wives.


12 Then all the congregation answered and said with a loud voice, As thou hast said, so must we do.

This had the effect of continuing the "riff" between the Jews and Samaritans.

Joh 4:9 Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.

When the "Jew" reject Jesus, he turned to the "Israelite/Samaritans", which accepted him as "Messiah".

Joh 4:39 And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him


Joh 4:40 So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them:

Remember what Jacob said about Ephriam becoming the Father of a mulitude of nations, and then God saying he make Ephraim a people that are not a people and then use those people who are not a people to "Provoke them to angry"??

De 32:21 They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.


Isa 7:8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people.


1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

10 Which in time past "were not a people", but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.


Ro 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they (Jews) should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

It's quite easy to see how the "Ten Lost Tribes" merged into and became the "Samaritan/Gentile"..... "Bride of Christ", ...... through Jacob's prophecy about "Ephraim", and became the people God used to make "JEWS" jealous.

Joseph, being a "prefigure of Jesus" and "Ephraim" being the prefigure of the "Samaritan/Multitude of Nations/Gentile Church".

These two sticks, House of Joseph/Ephraim, House of Judah will become one stick during the MK.

Eze 37:16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:

Eze 37:19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.

The "TEN LOST TRIBES" are not as "lost" as many believe, and it give new meaning to:


Ro 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved:

M4Him, long time no see. I think I used to call you the BB resident heretick. I'm a nicer guy now, but not by much. After you disappeared from the scene, Skypair came along to take your place. It's some coincidence isn't it that now he's been banned and here you are again. But welcome back and I mean that (for now).

Are you saying that the ten tribes of the Israel and the two tribes of Judah are the "twain" that become "one man" in Eph 3?

 

[J.D.]

The church is the total number of Spirit-Baptized believers from Pentecost to the Rapture. In the gospels the church is still future, so that proves that there was no church in the OT. A church is not just an assembly of God's people.

Could you support that from a Bible in original languages?

 

[J.D.]

Anyway, to steer back toward the OP, has anyone disproven my assertion that there undeniably is two Israel's in scripture:

#1: "after the flesh"
#2: "not after the flesh"

(if you missed the reference, see 1 Cor 10:18)

 

[Allan]

Could you support that from a Bible in original languages?

You bet.

1Cr 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether [we be] Jews or Gentiles, whether [we be] bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Now, before you go wrenching this out of context you must first remember that this is a passage that is dealing with the Church.

Secondly, that it is speaking of the body whom the Spirit has both baptized and is indwelling.

Thirdly, this passage is part of context refering to spiritual gifts which are and have only been given to those of the Church (Spirit baptized and indwelt believers). The Spirit distributes His gifts to believers as He chooses.

Spirit baptism is defined in 1 Corinthians 12:13 as that work of God whereby believers are baptized (immersed, placed) into Christ’s body, the church.

How then does a believer become a member of the body of Christ? It is by the Spirit's baptism. If we can determine when Spirit baptism first began, then we will know when the church began. When did God first baptize believers into His body? When were believers first placed into the body of Christ? To answer this is to determine the day on which the church began.

Another thing to consider is the Acts passages 1:5 and 11:15-16:

"For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence" (Acts 1:5).

According to our Christ's prediction the Spirit baptism had not taken place yet though it would soon take place. No one yet had been immersed into the body of Christ. Thus, the church could not have begun prior to Acts 1:5. When Jesus spoke the words of Acts 1:5 His death and His resurrection had already taken place but the Spirit baptism had not taken place as of yet, and so the church had not yet been formed. However the announcement of Acts1:5 is very significant because Jesus said that Spirit baptism would take place "not many days hence". And we know that this event happened just 10 days later on the day of Pentecost.

Pentecost and the unique events that took place on that day are described in Acts chapter 2. Though in this chapter Spirit baptism is not specifically mentioned. It is not until Acts 11 that we are specifically told that Spirit baptism took place on the day of Pentecost:

And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that He said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost" (Acts 11:15-16).

Based on the clear statement of this passage we know that Spirit baptism first took place on the the Day of Pentecost. It was then that believers were first placed into the body of Christ. Without question it was then we find the church beginning and not in the OT.

Add to that This statement by CHrist also:

"He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)" (John 7:38-39).

And just to make sure you know I anskwered you question about if the original language show such. Look them up the passages I gave for yourself. The church is distinct from Israel. We are not Israel nor are we spiritual Israel - We are the Church both the body and bride of Christ Jesus.


However, just for fun, one could take this to show an illistration that just as there are many members which make up the same body, so to is Israel and the Church different members of the same body. The members aspect of the illistration does not mean they are two seperate unrelated bodies but to different members of the same body with different purposes or functions to fulfill. We are all of the body of faith which is Christ Jesus but we have different functions and purposes. We are distinct from each other not as entities of different bodies but in relation to means and function. (much like the hand, foot, eye). But that is just having some fun with scripture and I am not stating that is the context of this passage.

 

[Allan]

Anyway, to steer back toward the OP, has anyone disproven my assertion that there undeniably is two Israel's in scripture:

#1: "after the flesh"
#2: "not after the flesh"

(if you missed the reference, see 1 Cor 10:18)

Yes, it has been disproven. Next question :thumbs:

 

[Me4Him]

M4Him, long time no see. I think I used to call you the BB resident heretick. I'm a nicer guy now, but not by much. After you disappeared from the scene, Skypair came along to take your place. It's some coincidence isn't it that now he's been banned and here you are again. But welcome back and I mean that (for now).

Thanks for the Welcome, being banned is common in this falling away season, especially if the Mod is a know it all or doesn't have any spiritual discernment, just kick the dust off and go on down the road.

Are you saying that the ten tribes of the Israel and the two tribes of Judah are the "twain" that become "one man" in Eph 3?

The House of Judah was invited to the "lambs marriage supper", but Judah refused. (Jews) (Matt 22)

The House of Joseph/Ephraim accepted the invitation. (Gentile Church)

The house of Joseph/Ephraim are raptured to the lamb's marraige supper,

The house of Judah (Jews) enter/suffer the trib as chastisment for refusing.

The "CANA" marriage is the "Two sticks/Houses" becoming one, during the MK.

You ask if there was a Spiritual/literal Israel, the answer is "YES",

Circumcision in the heart makes one a Jew, that's the "Spiritual Israel" that consist of the "gentile Church.

But God made a promise to "Abraham" that "HIS SEED", Natural descendants, would as the "stars of heaven",

And even if they are "enemies of the gospel" they are still chosen "FOR THE FATHER'S SAKE" of keeping his promise.

Ro 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

That's not to say they don't have to be "born again", they do, but that is what the tribulation period is all about.

Judah (Jews) would be the "literal Israel" while Joseph/Ephraim (church) would represent the "Spiritual Israel", because we can "SEE" the Kingdom of God,

Judah is still looking for the "literal" Kingdom, and it's coming "VERY SOON".

 

[DeafPosttrib]

Me4Him,

That's your own theory.

"The Lost Tribes" is a completely theory. I do not agree with it. This is men making teaching in their own theory.

Nowhere in the New Testament mention 'lost tribes.'

Some use Jeremiah chapter 31 about "House of Judah" & "House of Israel" that they saying the 'new covenant' for both tribes are not yet fulfilled. They say it will be fulfill at Second Coming for Millennial Kingdom.

But, Jeremiah chapter 31 of 'new covenant' already fulfilled by through Calvary by through the blood of Christ, that he already made new covenant with Israel. I suggest that everyone should read and study book of Hebrews, it mentioned lot about covenant, blood, and sacrifice. Book of Hebrews teaching us that the blood of Christ already set new covenant. Now we are no longer under the old coveant.

Dispensationalists still believe that 'Church' and 'Israel' are still distinction in God's program of present time.

For example, this present gospel age is FOR Church only while God holds 'Israel' leaves on the shelf wait till Rapture occurs, when the Church gones, then, God takes 'Israel' off the shelf and to focus on Israel(physical Jewish nation) again for seven year of Tribulation Period. Also, when Christ comes again, They saying that God will re-etablish Israel as Jewish nation again and to set modern Jerusalem to be world's capitol during Millennial Kingdom. In their teasching that God have a very "special" plan for Jews during Millennial kingdom.

Dispensationalism doctrine is no make sense, and it is men-making doctrine.

God only have one family of all nations whosoever believing in Christ, they are now belong to God's children. God don't care what race, religion, nation, a person is. God interests in person who put faith and trust IN Jesus Christ only-salvation.

In Hebrews 11:9-10 telling us, Abraham's faith that he was looking for heavenly city which God is the maker that built the city. Clearly speak of New Jerusalem.

Bible doesn't saying that Abraham was looking for future earthly city -modern Jerusalem for coming Millennial Kingdom.

Because this present modern Jerusalem is filled of sins and that city will be destroy at Christ's coming. We do not need that old earthly Jerusalem. We are eager look for New Jerusalem will be descend out of heaven, put it on new earth, and we shall dwell in it for eternality follow at Christ's coming in Revelation chapter 21.

Right now, we are spiritual Israel, because we as Gentiles are already graft in Olive Tree join with believing Jews that why we are part of Israel -Romans 11:26. God only have one family, and also, He only have ONE WIFE, not two wives.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[Pastor Larry]

Could you support that from a Bible in original languages?

Yes, I already did, and Allan repeated it.

 

[DeafPosttrib]

Larry,

J.D. asked you, to find the support or proof from the BIBLE in original language according as what you mentioned on 'Church' definition that you saying the 'Church; was not yet exist in the O.T. period, and it was born during Pentacost Day till Rapture. So, you seem not yet use verse to prove your comment on Church. Your comment is obivious theory as opinion to me. I am not interest in your theory or opinion, I am interest truth with verses that you have to prove it about the Church.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[Pastor Larry]

J.D. asked you, to find the support or proof from the BIBLE in original language according as what you mentioned on 'Church' definition that you saying the 'Church; was not yet exist in the O.T. period, and it was born during Pentacost Day till Rapture. So, you seem not yet use verse to prove your comment on Church. Your comment is obivious theory as opinion to me. I am not interest in your theory or opinion, I am interest truth with verses that you have to prove it about the Church.

I gave it to you. I don't know how much original language you want or can understand (since I don't know what your level of knowledge of Greek is). If you would like me to say it all in Greek and Hebrew, I can do that, but that will take some time to translate my thoughts. I gave verses and showed the argumentation already. There is nothing hidden in the original languages. The versions all agree on this.

Take some time and review it and then get back to me.

 

[J.D.]

Yes, it has been disproven. Next question :thumbs:

I know it was denied, but I didn't see it disproven. Can you direct me to that post - I must have missed it?

 

[J.D.]

I gave it to you. I don't know how much original language you want or can understand (since I don't know what your level of knowledge of Greek is). If you would like me to say it all in Greek and Hebrew, I can do that, but that will take some time to translate my thoughts. I gave verses and showed the argumentation already. There is nothing hidden in the original languages. The versions all agree on this.

Take some time and review it and then get back to me.

DeafPostTrib may speak Greek but not me. My point is that if we take the original words and translate them as "assembly" instead of "church", as some have suggested, then what do we get? We get an "assembly" in the OT and an "assembly" in the NT. No problem. But the assembly in the wilderness (KJV "church", Acts 7?) was not a pagan assembly - it was the assembling of God's Covenant people, was it not? So it was a "church" in that sense, hence the KJV translator's use of that word has been defended by many.

And if Jesus says that he will build his "assembly", then how does that exclude the possibility that an "assembly" already exists? The assembly of Christ is distinguished from the OT assembly in the sense that it is expanded to include believing gentiles.

When a dispy says that there is a distinction between Israel and the Church, I actually agree. But what is the nature of that distinction, and in what way do we find continuity between the covenants? It's the failure of disp'sm to recognize the continuity and similarity of the OT assembly and the NT assembly that is the error.

There is only one olive tree, one vine, one new man, one people of God, throughout all ages, world without end. This body is a continuous work of God from Adam to Noah, to Abraham, to the Apostles, to Cornelius, to the Getiles, to the end. But unbelievers, Jew and Gentile alike, are distinguished from the one body. Therefore, the unbelieving Jew is distinct, that is, separate from the people of God, and does not inherit the covenant blessings.

Only believing Israel receives the Kingdom, as compare to unbelieving Israel, which does not receive the Kingdom, and believing Israel includes those Jews indeed who are the sons of faithful Abraham but not of genetic descent - in other words, gentile believers.

So, you see, there are two Israels, and the Kingdom, which was "lost" (removed actually) after the exile (some say after Solomon), is to be (if not already) restored to that Israel who abides in Christ.

 

[J.D.]

Thanks for the Welcome, being banned is common in this falling away season, especially if the Mod is a know it all or doesn't have any spiritual discernment, just kick the dust off and go on down the road.




The House of Judah was invited to the "lambs marriage supper", but Judah refused. (Jews) (Matt 22)

The House of Joseph/Ephraim accepted the invitation. (Gentile Church)

The house of Joseph/Ephraim are raptured to the lamb's marraige supper,

The house of Judah (Jews) enter/suffer the trib as chastisment for refusing.

The "CANA" marriage is the "Two sticks/Houses" becoming one, during the MK.

You ask if there was a Spiritual/literal Israel, the answer is "YES",

Circumcision in the heart makes one a Jew, that's the "Spiritual Israel" that consist of the "gentile Church.

But God made a promise to "Abraham" that "HIS SEED", Natural descendants, would as the "stars of heaven",

And even if they are "enemies of the gospel" they are still chosen "FOR THE FATHER'S SAKE" of keeping his promise.

Ro 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

That's not to say they don't have to be "born again", they do, but that is what the tribulation period is all about.

Judah (Jews) would be the "literal Israel" while Joseph/Ephraim (church) would represent the "Spiritual Israel", because we can "SEE" the Kingdom of God,

Judah is still looking for the "literal" Kingdom, and it's coming "VERY SOON".

so basically you are agreeing with me that there are two Israels? "Literal" and "Spiritual"?

 

[Pastor Larry]

My point is that if we take the original words and translate them as "assembly" instead of "church", as some have suggested, then what do we get? We get an "assembly" in the OT and an "assembly" in the NT. No problem. But the assembly in the wilderness (KJV "church", Acts 7?) was not a pagan assembly - it was the assembling of God's Covenant people, was it not? So it was a "church" in that sense, hence the KJV translator's use of that word has been defended by many.

But simply comparing words won't work. What is behind the particular use of a word? that is what is important. The NT defines the church (ekklesia) as the body of Christ and the way into the body is Spirit baptism (1 Cor 12:13). There was no such Spirit baptism in the OT, and therefore, whatever the "ekklesia" was, it wasn't the church.

And if Jesus says that he will build his "assembly", then how does that exclude the possibility that an "assembly" already exists?

It doesn't. There were many assemblies in the OT. But the fact that there are two assemblies doesn't mean that they are the same assembly.

The assembly of Christ is distinguished from the OT assembly in the sense that it is expanded to include believing gentiles.

But it is distinguished in more ways. First, the OT assembly did include believing Gentiles (such as Rahab). But then you the issues of the body of Christ, the mystery, Spirit baptism, etc, all of which distinguish the NT church from OT Israel.

it's the failure of disp'sm to recognize the continuity and similarity of the OT assembly and the NT assembly that is the error.

It think it's the opposite. It is the failure of covenantalists to recognize discontinuity.

Only believing Israel receives the Kingdom, as compare to unbelieving Israel, which does not receive the Kingdom, and believing Israel includes those Jews indeed who are the sons of faithful Abraham but not of genetic descent - in other words, gentile believers.

I agree with all of this.

So, you see, there are two Israels, and the Kingdom, which was "lost" (removed actually) after the exile (some say after Solomon), is to be (if not already) restored to that Israel who abides in Christ.

Those are not two Israels. They are the same Israel. For all your talk of continuity, you are creating a discontinuity. The OT/NT treats Israel whether from the Exodus or the Exile or the restored kingdom as one entity. And that is the point of dispensationalism.