ECT The failure of the Bible or God is not resolved by a future Israel

[HisServant]

It is a unique and glorious insight and it is as plain as the nose on your face.

When Paul speaks about those who were rejected being reconciled and those who failed being fully included, those being graffed in who were graffed out being graffed in he cannot be speaking about those Jews who did accept Christ, they were not rejected, they did not fail, nor were they graffed out.

So it is disobedient Israel who are to be reconciled and accepted.

Hope.. that is not what he is plainly speaking of.

He is saying that the Israel of the promise was never the physical seed, the Israel of the promise was ALWAYS those that exhibited the same faith as Abraham. He was distraught that the Rabbi's that had taught him all those years were wrong.

 

[Totton Linnet]

Hope.. that is not what he is plainly speaking of.

He is saying that the Israel of the promise was never the physical seed, the Israel of the promise was ALWAYS those that exhibited the same faith as Abraham. He was distraught that the Rabbi's that had taught him all those years were wrong.

No he isn't listen again

The Jewish disciples of Christ were those who exhibited the same faith as Abe, they were not rejected or graffed out.

It is those who failed who are to be fully included, those who were disobedient who are to be reconciled and accepted.

Ro.11.12 now if their trespass means riches for the world and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles how much more will their full inclusion mean......
15b
....for if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead.

Peter James and John etc were not rejected, they did not fail nor were they graffed out.

So Paul is speaking about a future reconciliation of disobedient Israel.

 

[HisServant]

No he isn't listen again

The Jewish disciples of Christ were those who exhibited the same faith as Abe, they were not rejected or graffed out.

It is those who failed who are to be fully included, those who were disobedient who are to be reconciled and accepted.

Ro.11.12 now if their trespass means riches for the world and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles how much more will their full inclusion mean......
15b
....for if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead.

Peter James and John etc were not rejected, they did not fail nor were they graffed out.

So Paul is speaking about a future reconciliation of disobedient Israel.

No he isn't... read the entire chapter... there is no future.

 

[Totton Linnet]

Ya know doctrines make people blind as bats

If you read further in 11 Paul says

Lest you be wise in your own conceits I want YOU to understand this mystery brethren

A hardening has come upon part of Israel until the full number of the Gentiles come in and so all Israel will be saved as it is written

The Deliverer will come from Zion He will banish ungodliness from Jacob
and this will be My covenant with them when I take away their sins

That is SO clear...but there is more

As regards the gospel they are enemies for your sake but as regards election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers

For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.....

 

[Danoh]

Ya know doctrines make people blind as bats

If you read further in 11 Paul says

Lest you be wise in your own conceits I want YOU to understand this mystery brethren

A hardening has come upon part of Israel until the full number of the Gentiles come in and so all Israel will be saved as it is written

The Deliverer will come from Zion He will banish ungodliness from Jacob
and this will be My covenant with them when I take away their sins

That is SO clear...but there is more

As regards the gospel they are enemies for your sake but as regards election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers

For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.....

Exactly!

Good post.

 

[Interplanner]

No,
the gifts and calling verse is a 50/50 verse. I see it as much in favor of the new Israel as you do a future Israel.

the weight falls on how Isaiah is quoted, and on the fact that "until" does not come packaged with YOUR future plan. It is just an end of time statement. It does not guarantee anything after. The hardness goes on until the end of time (the age of the nations was to follow Messiah's coming in post-exile Judaism).

There is no theological reason why God needs to do anything else with Israel as an ethnos, which is why it is never clear in the NT. Not when 2 Cor 3-5, Gal 3 Eph 3, and Acts 13's sermon and the hearing in 26 are consulted. If you can't find it there, better stop.

The word "saved" from Isaiah's quote does not mean 'restored theocracy in a land.' It means justification and has meant that since the middle of ch 10, or earlier, but he was specifically on Israel being saved there.

 

[Interplanner]

btw, a third choice on "and so" is that the incoming nations fill out the Israel he is talking about and that is the end of the age of the nations. Not the ethnos; that would be an oxymoron. Actually, I have half of that already in how I render it. ('kai houtos' is usually attached to the partial hardening...the partial hardening will go on to the end; but at the same time Gentiles are added).

notice that it is partial hardening. that is why you can NOT do things in wholesale of different ethnos groups. Everything is now partial because it is individuals in Christ, as v30 says.

 

[whitestone]

If someone can show where the truth of the Bible or God, according to the apostles, finally rests on a view of a future Israel, please do! In Romans, that is never the thing that resolves this problem, or question. The question is resolved in the belief that Christ fulfilled what was promised to Israel/the fathers so that the nations would be able to believe and share in the promises too.

this is curious,,remember now we once discussed the ending in Revelation how the head wounded unto death cannot ascend out of the bottomless pit unless it had at that time not already existed and was at that time in the pit.

You said then that you offered no position on that final eschatology and so then if this little piece of the same puzzle cannot be resolved,how then can you be certain that there is no future necessity of Israel?

Again not being certain of the last few chapters of Revelation is there any evidence that each and every prophecy even needs to fit into this dispensation? That is, is it completely necessary for us to take every scripture and have it fulfilled before the end of this dispensation? ,,,

,,,,,,,,,,how do we determine that some of these prophecies will not be fulfilled by Israel,after this dispensation comes to the evening of it's day,,do you really know for sure that even this world,disp.,stewardship ect. will not come to it's end and then another will follow where Israel will fulfill the remainder of promises made by God?

 

[Danoh]

btw, a third choice on "and so" is that the incoming nations fill out the Israel he is talking about and that is the end of the age of the nations. Not the ethnos; that would be an oxymoron. Actually, I have half of that already in how I render it. ('kai houtos' is usually attached to the partial hardening...the partial hardening will go on to the end; but at the same time Gentiles are added).

notice that it is partial hardening. that is why you can do things in wholesale of different ethnos groups. Everything is now partial because it is individuals in Christ, as v30 says.

"A third choice" hunh?

A bit ever revealing of your often approach - "what if I look at it from this angle? Nope. That doesn't work... Hmmm... How about if I...Nope. That still doesnt fit my "theology..." Hmmm... A third choice is..."

Our wordings reveal our recurrent patterns. As yours do yours. As theirs two thousand years ago reveal theirs.

You think your "perhaps this, what about if maybe that" only reveals your approach is based on a source other than the whole of the Scripture.

There is just too you have come to hold to that what you study from there forward must somehow be made to fit as your criterion.

Try being willing to start over from scratch each time out. Allowing what continues to remain, to continue to, until this approach yields otherwise as to the parts and or the sum.

Its why I say that although I hold to A9D aka Mid-Acts, I do not hold to it.

I don't allow myself to until I am done examining what I am examining the recurrent patterns of for what they point back to.

Like I said; we differ in approach.

 

[Interplanner]

It's is a legitimate sub-doctrine to what I already thought.

I'm not the least interested in your commentary on my head. Do you have some grammatical reason to rule out either one?

WARNING: if the word "you" shows in your next post, I will not read it. Stick to the text, to grammar, or to commentary.

 

[Interplanner]

this is curious,,remember now we once discussed the ending in Revelation how the head wounded unto death cannot ascend out of the bottomless pit unless it had at that time not already existed and was at that time in the pit.

You said then that you offered no position on that final eschatology and so then if this little piece of the same puzzle cannot be resolved,how then can you be certain that there is no future necessity of Israel?

Again not being certain of the last few chapters of Revelation is there any evidence that each and every prophecy even needs to fit into this dispensation? That is, is it completely necessary for us to take every scripture and have it fulfilled before the end of this dispensation? ,,,

,,,,,,,,,,how do we determine that some of these prophecies will not be fulfilled by Israel,after this dispensation comes to the evening of it's day,,do you really know for sure that even this world,disp.,stewardship ect. will not come to it's end and then another will follow where Israel will fulfill the remainder of promises made by God?

1, I don't generate doctrine out of the Rev unless it is totally clear elsewhere.
2, there is no theological reason after the DofJ and the coming of the Gospel, to go back to a theocratic state and promises for Israel. The NT is magnificently climactic in the Gospel; even the angels wish they could see it better. Your going back to Judaism in a way.

 

[Totton Linnet]

1, I don't generate doctrine out of the Rev unless it is totally clear elsewhere.
2, there is no theological reason after the DofJ and the coming of the Gospel, to go back to a theocratic state and promises for Israel. The NT is magnificently climactic in the Gospel; even the angels wish they could see it better. Your going back to Judaism in a way.

The NT is only climatic IF...

you bleeve in the millennial reign

The climax of this age is full told by Christ and all the apostles [no need to go to Revs]

There will be wars and rumours of wars, famines and natural disasters, tsunami these are only the beginnings of the birth pans for then nation will rise up against nation and kingdom against kingdom...you know it

They will, the apostles say, be parlous times.

This is completely opposite to the latter days predicted by Isaiah and the other prophets....when nations will no longer rise against nation, it will be a time of righteousness, peace and prosperity for everyone.

Israel WILL be the highest hill and the nations WILL flock to Jerusalem.

You cain't just brush these prophecies out.

 

[Totton Linnet]

btw, a third choice on "and so" is that the incoming nations fill out the Israel he is talking about and that is the end of the age of the nations. Not the ethnos; that would be an oxymoron. Actually, I have half of that already in how I render it. ('kai houtos' is usually attached to the partial hardening...the partial hardening will go on to the end; but at the same time Gentiles are added).

notice that it is partial hardening. that is why you can NOT do things in wholesale of different ethnos groups. Everything is now partial because it is individuals in Christ, as v30 says.

You missed it again, a partial hardening, but it is those who failed who will be accepted, those who disobeyed will be reconciled, those who were graffed out will be graffed back in...not the new Israel for they did not fail, they did not disobey, they were not graffed out.

Your doctrines act as blinkers, blocking out God's word.

 

[Interplanner]

Sorry but he has a new Israel in mind, ch 9:6, 24, Gal 6, etc. All the force of his declarations go that way.

How, anyway, can people who rejected in 200 AD somehow accept him in some future time? Reincarnation? It's not what the passage is about. There is no 'snapshot' of Israel believing in the future that 'makes up' for failure in the past.

He is talking about a new Israel as in Eph 3. By faith in the Gospel.

 

[Interplanner]

You missed it again, a partial hardening, but it is those who failed who will be accepted, those who disobeyed will be reconciled, those who were graffed out will be graffed back in...not the new Israel for they did not fail, they did not disobey, they were not graffed out.

Your doctrines act as blinkers, blocking out God's word.

"Those who did not seek me have found me" is who is grafted in, because people only stand by faith. He has no concern or respect for tree types.

 

[Totton Linnet]

"Those who did not seek me have found me" is who is grafted in, because people only stand by faith. He has no concern or respect for tree types.

That makes TERRIBLE reading, how can we have been grafted out when we were not grafted in? it is those who were rejected...we have not been rejected, who will be accepted and those who failed we did not fail, who will be reconciled.

I say honour scripture more than your doctrine...don't change scripture to make it fit your doctrine.

 

[Totton Linnet]

Sorry but he has a new Israel in mind, ch 9:6, 24, Gal 6, etc. All the force of his declarations go that way.

How, anyway, can people who rejected in 200 AD somehow accept him in some future time? Reincarnation? It's not what the passage is about. There is no 'snapshot' of Israel believing in the future that 'makes up' for failure in the past.

He is talking about a new Israel as in Eph 3. By faith in the Gospel.

God deals with Israel as a nation...how can the grafting out apply to the new Israel? we were never grafted in

I just SHOWED you when you said this NT age would be climactic...Jesus own mouth said otherwise. Wars, famines and tribulation. Right up to Christ's return.

The NEW age, the Millennium, IS the climax. We reign with Christ in heaven and the Jews reign with Christ on earth,

It is what we have been praying for "Thy will be done ON EARTH as it is in Heaven."

 

[Interplanner]

that ending is 2P2P, which is not in the Bible.

'How can we be grafted in'? Easy! Don't you realize the whole picture is about faith vs unbelief? People stand by faith, v20. You have ethnos conphused with faith! The very opposite of what he is trying to say. this is why those in Israel who believe are grafted back in v23. (I'm putting are instead of will be, because you think he is predicting when he is not; he is talking about current circumstances).

It is indeed a mystery that more Jews don't believe (talked about since 3:3). That is what he means in v25. He doesn't mean there is a mysterious snapshot of total belief coming in Israel. Because all of that surrounding the quote of Isaiah 55 is already happening--the Redeemer, the removal of sins and the new covenant.

I don't see anything in the Rev or ordinary letters about 1 rule in heaven and 1 on earth. The next event is the worldwide judgement of all individuals through Christ and either the NHNE or the gloom of hell after that.

I don't generate doctrine from the Rev if it is not clear in the letters, although I don't see where it matters in this case anyway.

All Israel gets saved, but its the one by faith like in the paragraph about the grafting. It is not the ethnos. No ethnos as such will be saved.

 

[Totton Linnet]

that ending is 2P2P, which is not in the Bible.

'How can we be grafted in'? Easy! Don't you realize the whole picture is about faith vs unbelief? People stand by faith, v20. You have ethnos conphused with faith! The very opposite of what he is trying to say. this is why those in Israel who believe are grafted back in v23. (I'm putting are instead of will be, because you think he is predicting when he is not; he is talking about current circumstances).

It is indeed a mystery that more Jews don't believe (talked about since 3:3). That is what he means in v25. He doesn't mean there is a mysterious snapshot of total belief coming in Israel. Because all of that surrounding the quote of Isaiah 55 is already happening--the Redeemer, the removal of sins and the new covenant.

I don't see anything in the Rev or ordinary letters about 1 rule in heaven and 1 on earth. The next event is the worldwide judgement of all individuals through Christ and either the NHNE or the gloom of hell after that.

I don't generate doctrine from the Rev if it is not clear in the letters, although I don't see where it matters in this case anyway.

All Israel gets saved, but its the one by faith like in the paragraph about the grafting. It is not the ethnos. No ethnos as such will be saved.

You don't see because your doctrine acts like blinkers for example Paul says

For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God for the creation was subjected to futility not of it's own will but by the will of Him who subjected it in hope.

because the creation itself will be SET FREE from it's bondage to decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the children of God.

We know that the creation has been groaning in travail together until now, and not only creation but we ourselves who have the first fruits of the Spirit.

Your eyes just skate over scriptures like that...the creation is to be set free, the curse will be lifted. No loud bangs, no melting away of the elements etc....not at that point of time at least, those things happen after the thousand years.

Peter full of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost said

Heaven must hold [Christ] until the time for establishing all that God spoke by the holy prophets of old.

That is that nations will beat the swords into plowshares etc

Those prophecies must come to pass, you can't just take them out of the bible.

You say that it is happening now..where is it happening? which nation is it that does not study war any more? you say the church, but the church is not the nations....we never had any swords to beat into plowshares.

You don't see the prophecies concerning the nations which will flock to the mountain of the Lord to learn the ways of the God of Jacob? really? It is because you read with the view to making the bible agree with your doctrine.

The latter days that Isaiah prophesied are the opposite to the end of the age that Christ foretold, neither has fully happened yet, we see only the birth pangs of the tribulations Jesus predicted.

But Isaiah prophesied peace and abundance.

They are both true prophecies but to be fulfilled at different times

And Jesus said His signs were for the end of the age, not the end of the world.

 

[Totton Linnet]

We can be grafted in, but Paul is speaking about those who had been grafted out being grafted back in...that is too plain to have to explain, and it has not happened yet

Those who were rejected have not yet been accepted.

And the hardening on part of Israel was for a time "until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in" so when that happens the hardening will be lifted.