While it’s easy to find scripture passages that appear to support ANY given theology, logically, all it takes is one contradictory passage to falsify an interpretation. Dispensationalism fails badly here, but this is also where the strict versions of Covenant theology will run into difficulty — ultimately the Bible does affirm ethnic Israel as well as the gentiles grafted on, and a prophetic mass conversion of the ethnic Israel at the end times.

There’s also Christ making the old covenant obsolete (Hebrews 8:13), and not just fulfilled— which can be a challenge to both dispensationalism and strict versions of covenant theology, especially the subdivisions of legalistic covenants (Noahide, Abrahamic, etc)

All told, dispensationalism should be in the trash bin, especially as its fruit has become known. And strict legalistic versions of covenant theology will run its own risks. The old covenant points to Christ, not just partially but completely.

the goal is always Christ (the way, the truth, and the life), where we often find a “both-and” solution to these kind of dilemmas, which is reflected in early church fathers on this topic.

That said, the early church fathers did not mince words about the Jews, who lost the authority granted to them by God (the binding/loosing that Christ gave to the apostles), and that Jews had partially hardened hearts (God giving them over to their own sins).

See Chrysostom’s “Against the Jews” to get a sense of how Christians traditionally approached this subject — ethnic Jews are to be loved and the patriarchs and prophets honored, but Jews were seen as obstinate, blind to truth, and their synagogues filled with demons. And it is this group they believed will be saved in a mass conversion event at the end times.