That's cool. Just email me your explanation of Romans 11 in context. And why YOU think Jesus didn't correct the disciples in Acts 1, but further deceived them. And FYI - I'm not loaded with cash or anything, but if you don't have the $ to buy the book, "When a Jew Rules the World" & would read it, I would send it to you. I think some of the info in there is so unknown to most of the church (was to me - I just always mentally rolled everything over on the Roman Catholic Church, but that's not the whole story/truth/history) & so shocking (historical facts, not opinions or vague scriptures where it's 50/50 on the interp) that I believe this needs to be read. In Christ, Jeff
Jeff- I know this is your and Julius' discussion but I was hoping you could answer a quick question. In regard to Rom 11:26 which says "**and in this way** (some versions say "and so all) Israel will be saved" what do think this phrase is referring to in reference to v 25? To me, at least, it seems to be saying that all "Israel" will be saved when the full complement of Jews and Gentiles make up the completed olive tree. Of course this would mean that "Israel" would mean the same thing it does in Rom 9. In other words, Paul seems to be saying (to me at least) that the fact that Gentiles are saved is part of the equation of all Israel being saved. If I was to write the equation it would look like this:All saved Gentiles + All saved Jews = all saved IsraelAnd, since all saved Gentiles + all saved Jews= The Church, then: The Church = all saved Israel (at least the Israel Paul is talking about)I know you will disagree with this equation so you just need to show me how you see it differently.
TMK, you are most welcome to participate in the conversation. Any loving contributions (from anyone) are appreciated even if they are divergent views.
I don't disagree that natural believing Israel + grafted in gentile believers = Eternal Israel above! 😊 But that wouldn't explain away the final in gathering of Natural Israel who are hardened for a time & get regrafted in by sovereign election at the end. We can't pull verse 25 out from the context of verses 1, 11-24, 28-32, etc.And also, why do you TMK think that Jesus didn't correct the disciples in Acts 1:6-7 if there was to be no restoration of the kingdom to Israel ever at all? Was Jesus just too busy to answer/correct them? Did he want them to intentionally stay confused? Had he changed His normal course of action of always previously correcting them so they would remember & understand later what He meant? And why did He actually solidify such ignorance by saying the times and seasons are not for them to know, but only by His Father? Intentional misleading disingenuousness? And of course TMK you are welcome to discuss brother! 😉
good qestions.and Jeff how do you make these versus work in your eschatology since you have thrown out the pretrib rapture myth."...that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in"Do yo believe that this is referring to a time in which every Gentile that can be saved will be saved and than after the door has been shut to the Gentiles than : "all Israel shall be saved"I see how they make it work with the pretrib rapture myth.as well as explaining those versus that speak of being prepared for the imminent return of christ. but when we throw out the pretrib rapture myth, I do not see how we can still interput those scriptures the same way "as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:"Also notice that it says he will come out of sion It did not say that he will come from heaven or from the clouds. "...The deliverer shall come - Yea, the deliverer is come; but not the full fruit of his coming..." - Wesely
I remember Jesus being similarly obtuse in John 21(I remember because I wrote a post called "breakfast on the beach" based on John 21 last week):John 21:21-23 When Peter saw him, he said to Jesus, “Lord, what about this man?” Jesus said to him, “If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow me!” So the saying spread abroad among the brothers that this disciple was not to die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he was not to die, but, “If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you?” Jesus did not always clarify his disciples' misunderstandings. I think he was rather dismayed about how often they "missed" it. So it possible, although I agree not certain, that in Acts 1 he decides not to clarify. It seems that the question must have been answered on Pentecost because the disciples thereafter did not talk about re-establishment of an earthly kingdom. Jesus himself told Pilate that his kingdom was not of this world. At the time of his ascension the disciples still did not understand this.
by jeffmar1130 on 2016/4/4 12:25:43I don't disagree that natural believing Israel + grafted in gentile believers = Eternal Israel above! 😊 But that wouldn't explain away the final in gathering of Natural Israel who are hardened for a time & get regrafted in by sovereign election at the end. We can't pull verse 25 out from the context of verses 1, 11-24, 28-32, etc.
[by TMK on 2016/4/4 12:48:16It seems that the question must have been answered on Pentecost because the disciples thereafter did not talk about re-establishment of an earthly kingdom. Jesus himself told Pilate that his kingdom was not of this world. At the time is his ascension the disciples still did not understand this.
TMK, that is different. That text cin John cearly says that Jesus says "if..." & then says "they thought this meant Jesus was saying He would not die....but Jesus never said this." Not the case in Acts 1 AT ALL (nor did Luke say, "they thought this meant that Israel would have restoration but Jesus didn't say this..."). In other words in John, God made sure the whole of the passage was clear. In Acts 1, not the case at all. Apples and oranges.Wait, Jesus didn't answer them, but it was clear on Pentacost that the clear teaching concerning natural Israel coming to Him after a partial hardening in Romans 11? Say what? This is scriptural Twister gymnastics. When was Romans written? Around 60 AD. So Paul was speaking about the "partial hardening" of Israel for just the next 10 years & the fullness of the Gentile's came in already at that point? No way. In fact, very little of natural Israel came into the kingdom between 60-70AD (they stayed hard as a rock overall), but many Gentile's came in. BUT, they (Natural Israel) are starting to come in mass NOW before Christ's REAL second Coming, the day of the Lord. And Gentile's are still coming in to at this point. It's actually not that difficult & doesn't require Phillip Mauro or Don Preston to understand & follow it.
Not true Julius.Paul preached that Christ WAS THEIR MESAIAH & was coming again, and that they crucified him, which is why he received such persecution. And He preached that He was coming again & that they should repent, as do I.