Interplanner
Well-known member
In John 13-17 there are three places where you could swoop in, grab a sound-byte and be off in to a fantasy world of prosperity gospel or something. One is 14:14. 'you may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.' By swooping in, most people will miss the 'in my name' part and tell their neighbors and friends about how God does anything you ask.
Just yesterday I ran into two of these by D'ists. D'ism is fraught with sound-byte thinking.
1, 'God is going to bring Israel back to the land (again)' because of Rom 9:4,5. So no matter what Paul says next, nor how little the land is mentioned by the apostles, it is pounding in these readers minds that those two verses mean God will put Israel back in its land in our future, and 'in the land' is not with faith in the Gospel (which is portable, global, and transcultural) but so that the Levitical worship system can operate once again. And this is not a delusion of Judaism to be wary of, it is really 1100 BC all over again, with a temple.
What Paul says next is that even though Israel has that advantage list, God's word has not failed. He had said the same thing, for a different reason, in 3:3. There 'not failed' meant that the soon coming judgement on Israel (the DofJ) was the resolution. Here, it is because not all of the natural children of Israel are those of faith, who are the ones who receive the promises. He shows this several times, and then he comes back to the same judgement theme that is in 3:3+--that some people respond to God and are blessed objects of glory, while others keeping fighting (Israel = to wrestle God) and are objects of wrath. The divide is not RACIAL it is FAITH or obedience. The faith group is therefore both Jew and Gentile 9:24 because it is not RACIAL, it is FAITH-determined).
Then 4 quotes from the OT support this.
Also, backing up a step: the glory of the renewed world--the NHNE-- of ch 8, when the earth itself will burst into joy because the children of God alone are its inhabitants, is no small blessing. Paul anguishes that they (his hard-hearted people) will not see this--without faith.
A restoration to the land is not in sight, not mentioned.
2, the same kind of thing happens in the 2nd half of Rom 9-11, about which D'ism is a total failure in interpretation. I'm referring of course to 'all Israel saved.' In Romans, it never has anything to do with a restored land and worship system for Judaism. Saved is the package of justification, transformation and future glorification of those who believe, whether Jew or Gentile, because it is not based on RACE but on FAITH.
'Saved' is also not RACIALLY divided, in 10:12. The division is FAITH. The idea that God will deal with people in the future on a basis other than Christ is totally foreign to the NT.
From v14 on, the mission of Israel (ideally theirs to complete) is the subject. It is why that string of questions is there. Paul wants all of them to be missionaries for it, but regrets that so few join him. Israel the race consists of the elect vs the hardened. Actually, all races are that way. But he would love it if they all believed and worked in the mission, 11:12.
None of this is about 'a restored land and worship system.'
That's why 'all Israel saved' is not about a restored land and worship system, and why the Isaiah quote at the end of 11 is historic--past tense. The elect are in Christ and there are Gentiles. The hardened are not in Christ and there are Gentiles there too. The true Israel will be saved. The "in this way" (in this manner) has been developed that way since 9:6 by Paul.
Only if you are pounded by popular D'ist eschatology books and look for sound-bytes and don't read at least 3 chapters at a time, would you think that at one future moment 'all Israel would be restored to their land and worship system.' And then there's the word 'all'... All the ones who died in the desert? All the ones who died when the city was captured by Babylon? All who died in the DofJ? What is all?
Sound-bytes often mean the complete opposite of context. Which is why the Bible has none.
Just yesterday I ran into two of these by D'ists. D'ism is fraught with sound-byte thinking.
1, 'God is going to bring Israel back to the land (again)' because of Rom 9:4,5. So no matter what Paul says next, nor how little the land is mentioned by the apostles, it is pounding in these readers minds that those two verses mean God will put Israel back in its land in our future, and 'in the land' is not with faith in the Gospel (which is portable, global, and transcultural) but so that the Levitical worship system can operate once again. And this is not a delusion of Judaism to be wary of, it is really 1100 BC all over again, with a temple.
What Paul says next is that even though Israel has that advantage list, God's word has not failed. He had said the same thing, for a different reason, in 3:3. There 'not failed' meant that the soon coming judgement on Israel (the DofJ) was the resolution. Here, it is because not all of the natural children of Israel are those of faith, who are the ones who receive the promises. He shows this several times, and then he comes back to the same judgement theme that is in 3:3+--that some people respond to God and are blessed objects of glory, while others keeping fighting (Israel = to wrestle God) and are objects of wrath. The divide is not RACIAL it is FAITH or obedience. The faith group is therefore both Jew and Gentile 9:24 because it is not RACIAL, it is FAITH-determined).
Then 4 quotes from the OT support this.
Also, backing up a step: the glory of the renewed world--the NHNE-- of ch 8, when the earth itself will burst into joy because the children of God alone are its inhabitants, is no small blessing. Paul anguishes that they (his hard-hearted people) will not see this--without faith.
A restoration to the land is not in sight, not mentioned.
2, the same kind of thing happens in the 2nd half of Rom 9-11, about which D'ism is a total failure in interpretation. I'm referring of course to 'all Israel saved.' In Romans, it never has anything to do with a restored land and worship system for Judaism. Saved is the package of justification, transformation and future glorification of those who believe, whether Jew or Gentile, because it is not based on RACE but on FAITH.
'Saved' is also not RACIALLY divided, in 10:12. The division is FAITH. The idea that God will deal with people in the future on a basis other than Christ is totally foreign to the NT.
From v14 on, the mission of Israel (ideally theirs to complete) is the subject. It is why that string of questions is there. Paul wants all of them to be missionaries for it, but regrets that so few join him. Israel the race consists of the elect vs the hardened. Actually, all races are that way. But he would love it if they all believed and worked in the mission, 11:12.
None of this is about 'a restored land and worship system.'
That's why 'all Israel saved' is not about a restored land and worship system, and why the Isaiah quote at the end of 11 is historic--past tense. The elect are in Christ and there are Gentiles. The hardened are not in Christ and there are Gentiles there too. The true Israel will be saved. The "in this way" (in this manner) has been developed that way since 9:6 by Paul.
Only if you are pounded by popular D'ist eschatology books and look for sound-bytes and don't read at least 3 chapters at a time, would you think that at one future moment 'all Israel would be restored to their land and worship system.' And then there's the word 'all'... All the ones who died in the desert? All the ones who died when the city was captured by Babylon? All who died in the DofJ? What is all?
Sound-bytes often mean the complete opposite of context. Which is why the Bible has none.