ECT Romans 11:25-36 can't be erased (Israel's Vision will be restored)

[tetelestai]

Is there any point where you will start addressing the discussed OP points and actually quote pertinent scripture to the topic that honors scriptural context?

Rom 2:15 proves that the Roman Gentiles were descendants of the House of Israel.

Rom 11:25 states that the "fulness of the Gentiles" pertains to the Gentiles from the House of Israel.

Again, your Dispensationalism is a mess. You need to give up the false teachings of John Nelson Darby, and start believing what the Bible actually says.

You're OP is a joke.

 

[7Spirits]

Rom 2:15 proves that the Roman Gentiles were descendants of the House of Israel.

Rom 11:25 states that the "fulness of the Gentiles" pertains to the Gentiles from the House of Israel.

Again, your Dispensationalism is a mess. You need to give up the false teachings of John Nelson Darby, and start believing what the Bible actually says.

You're OP is a joke.

You keep denying full scriptural context and you haven't addressed all of the Scripture in the OP yet. Is there a chance you might contribute with scholarship or continuity that respects context?

 

[tetelestai]

You keep denying full scriptural context and you haven't addressed all of the Scripture in the OP yet. Is there a chance you might contribute with scholarship or continuity that respects context?

Your Zionism, and Dispensational Plan B theory is a joke. This rubbish didn't exist before Darby invented it in the year 1830.

(Rom 11:1) ..Hath God cast away his people? God forbid...

Yet, you Darby Followers claim God cast away His people, inserted a secret parenthetical dispensation of "church age" believers, and is then going to pick back up again with the Jews after the secret church age believers are raptured away.

No one taught this rubbish before Darby.

 

[7Spirits]

Your Zionism, and Dispensational Plan B theory is a joke. This rubbish didn't exist before Darby invented it in the year 1830.

(Rom 11:1) ..Hath God cast away his people? God forbid...

Yet, you Darby Followers claim God cast away His people, inserted a secret parenthetical dispensation of "church age" believers, and is then going to pick back up again with the Jews after the secret church age believers are raptured away.

No one taught this rubbish before Darby.

Romans 11:25-36 brings full context to this quote. Thank you for supporting OP point with scripture.

Cast off is your claim.

 

[tetelestai]

Cast off is your claim.

Nope, that's your claim.

You Darby Followers claim God put the Jews on "hold", inserted a secret parenthetical dispensation, and then is going to pick back up with the Jews after the people from the secret parenthetical dispensation are raptured away.

That's not what happened.

 

[7Spirits]

Nope, that's your claim.

You Darby Followers claim God put the Jews on "hold", inserted a secret parenthetical dispensation, and then is going to pick back up with the Jews after the people from the secret parenthetical dispensation are raptured away.

That's not what happened.

Not OP topic. Please contribute with contextual scripture and focused commentary that is honest.

 

[7Spirits]

Is there such a thing as hidden posts? They're showing on my quote tab as hidden.

 

[7Spirits]

We get it. You don't.

Ez. 36:21-34 KJV

But I had pity for mine holy name, which the house of Israel had profaned among the heathen, whither they went. Therefore say unto the house of Israel, thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went. And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, saith the Lord GOD, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes. For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land. Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them. And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God.
I will also save you from all your uncleannesses: and I will call for the corn, and will increase it, and lay no famine upon you. And I will multiply the fruit of the tree, and the increase of the field, that ye shall receive no more reproach of famine among the heathen. Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall lothe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations. Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel. Thus saith the Lord GOD; In the day that I shall have cleansed you from all your iniquities I will also cause you to dwell in the cities, and the wastes shall be builded. And the desolate land shall be tilled, whereas it lay desolate in the sight of all that passed by.





Ez. 37:21-22 KJV
And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all.



Ez. 39:25-29 KJV
Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Now will I bring again the captivity of Jacob, and have mercy upon the whole house of Israel, and will be jealous for my holy name; After that they have borne their shame, and all their trespasses whereby they have trespassed against me, when they dwelt safely in their land, and none made them afraid. When I have brought them again from the people, and gathered them out of their enemies' lands, and am sanctified in them in the sight of many nations; Then shall they know that I am the LORD their God, which caused them to be led into captivity among the heathen: but I have gathered them unto their own land, and have left none of them any more there. Neither will I hide my face any more from them: for I have poured out my spirit upon the house of Israel, saith the Lord GOD.

 

[Lon]

There is no fell swoop that I've ever seen that ends the difference between Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism. As people read their bibles, one or the other starts making sense and they end up with a view that sees patterns all the same, or the differences marked in scripture. Following either the differences, or those patterns that are the same and developing further, will have someone either embracing a Dispensational view (different) or a Covenant Position (same). No one scripture is the end of either view 'because' it is an overall picture that best fits one's understanding of their reading of the Bible. Imho, the best approach is reading the Bible all the way through, multiple times. -Lon

 

[Danoh]

No, it only appears that way to you because you're a Darby Follower.

(Rom 2:15) They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)

Paul says that some of the Roman Gentiles had the law written on their hearts when they did good things BY NATURE.

The passage also says that their "CONSCIENCE" was bearing witness of this fact.

Now, let's look at Jeremiah 31:33:

(Jer 31:33) “This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel
after that time,” declares the Lord.
“I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.

The statement "I will be their God, and they will be my people" only applies to the House of Israel, NOT the Jews.

Paul said the Roman Gentiles had the law written on their hearts and that their conscience bared witness.

That's a fulfillment of Jer 31:33.

Nope you incompetent - Romans 1:18-3:20 is about lost people and the wrath they deserve because they all come short of the glory of God.

Paul first lays that out in contrast to God's glory in His grace in His Son that he will then go into, in Romans 3:21-5:21.

You are...an incompetent.

Rom. 5:8
Acts 17:11,12

 

[steko]

Idolatry is putting up Jewish people who hate Jesus.

Futility is dialoging with the likes of you.

 

[glorydaz]

Futility is dialoging with the likes of you.

:first:

 

[beloved57]

The physical descendants of abraham israel, they have no relationship to God anymore than the egyptians have, because like the egyptians they are not the children of God Rom 9:8

[FONT=&quot]That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

And since they are not the children of God they are not Heirs, because the only the children of God are Heirs Rom 8:17

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]And if children, then [/FONT]heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

Abraham was an Heir Heb 11:8-9

[FONT=&quot] By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:[/FONT]

 

[7Spirits]

The physical descendants of abraham israel, they have no relationship to God anymore than the egyptians have, because like the egyptians they are not the children of God Rom 9:8

[FONT="]That is, [B]They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God:[/B] but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

And since they are not the children of God they are not Heirs, because the only the children of God are Heirs Rom 8:17

[/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#000000][FONT="]And if children, then [/FONT]heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

Abraham was an Heir Heb 11:8-9

[FONT="][FONT=Arial][B] [/B][/FONT]By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#000000][FONT="]9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:[/FONT]

Again,

Dispensationally, the verses are supporting the OP. Israel isn't re-appropriated in any of those verses. Your commentary is riddled with context that isn't there.

You need to utilize entire passages and context, instead of key verses with false doctrinal contexts written in your mind.

 

[beloved57]

Again,

Dispensationally, the verses are supporting the OP. Israel isn't re-appropriated in any of those verses. Your commentary is riddled with context that isn't there.

You need to utilize entire passages and context, instead of key verses with false doctrinal contexts written in your mind.

You are ignoring the new testament revelation. Israel, Abrahams Physical descendants according to the flesh are not the children of God Rom 9:8 so not Heirs of the promises of God. Sorry!

Sent from my 5054N using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[7Spirits]

Quickening

Quickening

There is no fell swoop that I've ever seen that ends the difference between Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism. As people read their bibles, one or the other starts making sense and they end up with a view that sees patterns all the same, or the differences marked in scripture. Following either the differences, or those patterns that are the same and developing further, will have someone either embracing a Dispensational view (different) or a Covenant Position (same). No one scripture is the end of either view 'because' it is an overall picture that best fits one's understanding of their reading of the Bible. Imho, the best approach is reading the Bible all the way through, multiple times. -Lon

I can totally appreciate your words. For salvation, Jesus is the only requirement and He is the Deepest of all Truth. In Christ, the Preterist, Convenient Theologian and the Dispensationalist are unified. In respect of God's promises and the scriptural intent of the Sole Covenant Maker, the words of a fictional character ring true.

"There can be only one"

 

[7Spirits]

You are ignoring the new testament revelation. Israel, Abrahams Physical descendants according to the flesh are not the children of God Rom 9:8 so not Heirs of the promises of God. Sorry!

Sent from my 5054N using TheologyOnline mobile app

Only extra biblical writings force the view you are interjecting into scripture. Israel is never redesignated in scripture. You can't provide scripture that cites Israel's replacement and redesignation because it doesn't exist.

Paul acknowledged his tribal aphiliation and connects Israel to Jacob in all of his writings. You can't quote all of Romans 11:25-36, because it plainly backs the OP.

 

[beloved57]

Only extra biblical writings force the view you are interjecting into scripture. Israel is never redesignated in scripture. You can't provide scripture that cites Israel's replacement and redesignation because it doesn't exist.

Paul acknowledged his tribal aphiliation and connects Israel to Jacob in all of his writings. You can't quote all of Romans 11:25-36, because it plainly backs the OP.

You continue to ignore the Nt light of revelation. Israel according to the flesh, Abrahams Physical descendants are not Gods Children, therefore not Heirs. They're no more Heirs as Japan is!

Sent from my 5054N using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[northwye]

"That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. Romans 9: 8

And since they are not the children of God they are not Heirs, because the only the children of God are Heirs Rom 8:17"

Comment on this: "You need to utilize entire passages and context, instead of key verses with false doctrinal contexts written in your mind."

It is true that sometimes context does determine the meaning of any particular verse within that context. But rarely does context make a verse within that context pulled out as an independent statement have the opposite meaning it has within the context.

Romans 9: 8 is within this context: "That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.
3. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
4. Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
5. Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
6. Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7. Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed."

Why does Paul have great sorrow in his heart for his kinsmen? It is because he knows that not all of his kinsmen - those of the physical bloodline - are of that remnant he writes about in Romans 11: 1-5. The multitude of his kinsmen are going to be cut off for rejecting Christ. Yet there was a remnant of Old Covenant Israel who accepted Christ, so the dispensationalist statement that the Jews rejected Christ is not trure,

The context, which is Romans 9: 3-8, does not cause Romans 9: 8 to have one meaning when understood within that context and another meaning when pulled out of context as an isolated statement.

To say as an argument that it does have a significantly different meaning when stated as an isolated doctrine is an appearance of an argument, not a substantive argument. Such an appearance of an argument is used as a tactic within the dialectic to bring an anti-thesis, or opposition, against the absolute truth of scripture, which is the thesis in the dialectic. Romans 9: 8 is an absolute truth from Christ, as stated by Paul. The dialectic has been made into a game, a game which can become addicting. And when that which is presented as an argument is only one in appearance and is not substantive, the fact that a game is being played becomes clear to some.

 

[Danoh]

"That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. Romans 9: 8

And since they are not the children of God they are not Heirs, because the only the children of God are Heirs Rom 8:17"

Comment on this: "You need to utilize entire passages and context, instead of key verses with false doctrinal contexts written in your mind."

It is true that sometimes context does determine the meaning of any particular verse within that context. But rarely does context make a verse within that context pulled out as an independent statement have the opposite meaning it has within the context.

Romans 9: 8 is within this context: "That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.
3. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
4. Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
5. Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
6. Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7. Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed."

Why does Paul have great sorrow in his heart for his kinsmen? It is because he knows that not all of his kinsmen - those of the physical bloodline - are of that remnant he writes about in Romans 11: 1-5. The multitude of his kinsmen are going to be cut off for rejecting Christ. Yet there was a remnant of Old Covenant Israel who accepted Christ, so the dispensationalist statement that the Jews rejected Christ is not trure,

The context, which is Romans 9: 3-8, does not cause Romans 9: 8 to have one meaning when understood within that context and another meaning when pulled out of context as an isolated statement.

To say as an argument that it does have a significantly different meaning when stated as an isolated doctrine is an appearance of an argument, not a substantive argument. Such an appearance of an argument is used as a tactic within the dialectic to bring an anti-thesis, or opposition, against the absolute truth of scripture, which is the thesis in the dialectic. Romans 9: 8 is an absolute truth from Christ, as stated by Paul. The dialectic has been made into a game, a game which can become addicting. And when that which is presented as an argument is only one in appearance and is not substantive, the fact that a game is being played becomes clear to some.

Problem is, you violate your own stated principle, or rule of thumb, there.

In the very last part of the following, by you - "The multitude of his kinsmen are going to be cut off for rejecting Christ. Yet there was a remnant of Old Covenant Israel who accepted Christ, so the dispensationalist statement that the Jews rejected Christ is not trure,"

That last part there is not what "the dispensationalist statement" is.

That is more what some take it to mean.

Rom. 5:8
Acts 17:11,12.