ECT They can't be the same

[Right Divider]

Blindness didn't happen to the Jews in the first century.

Blindness "in part" happened to the northern nation of Israel when the kingdom of Israel split into two nations in 930BC. That's what Pau is talking about.

So then why did you try to HIDE the remainder of that verse that CONTAINED the EXPLANATION of what the "this mystery" was DESCRIBING? And who is Pau?

The "blindness" that Paul speaks about in Romans 11 has absolutely nothing to do with the Jews in the first century.

And YET .... God concluded them all in unbelief that He might have mercy on all.

There was a remnant of Jews in the first century who believed in Christ Jesus. Together, this believing remnant became one new man in Christ Jesus, one body.

And not a single member of the norther ten tribes believed?

The unbelieving Jews had their temple and city destroyed for good in 70AD. That marked the end of the old covenant, the law and prophets, etc.

So the Law of Moses was still in effect until 70 AD? So they were still sacrificing animals in the Temple?

You are so far out in left field on what Paul is talking about in Romans 11 because you have been brainwashed with Dispensationalism.

I was willing to look at ALL of it, instead of trying to HIDE some of it like you did.

 

[john w]

The unbelieving Jews had their temple and city destroyed for good in 70AD. That marked the end of the old covenant, the law and prophets, etc.

Caught again, in a lie, that I continue to catch this mutt making...

Vs.,

"The law was nailed to the cross...The law was abolished at the cross...."-habitual liar Craigie

You are so far out in left field on what Paul is talking about in Romans 11 because you have been brainwashed with Dispensationalism.

=his spam, when he is getting picked apart, along with "Because you are a Darby follower, you don't understand..."

Yes, we do-we understand that you are so obsessed with allegedly disproving dispensationalism, you resort to habitual, satanic lying, hypocrisy, and sophistry debating tactics, you wicked wimp.

 

[Cross Reference]

Yes. Please move on to another forum.

I didn't believe for a minute you would agree with that truth.

Since you aren't a Christian I have ask what you are, besides being an empty cracked pot?

 

[tetelestai]

So then why did you try to HIDE the remainder of that verse that CONTAINED the EXPLANATION of what the "this mystery" was DESCRIBING? And who is Pau?

I didn't try to hide anything.

I was pointing out that there is a mystery in what Paul is explaining.

And YET .... God concluded them all in unbelief that He might have mercy on all.

What does that have to do with Romans 11?

And not a single member of the norther ten tribes believed?

If you read Romans 11, Paul quotes Elijah. There were 7,000 who did.

However, the millions and millions who did not were scattered amongst the pagan Gentiles, divorced from God, received no mercy from God, and were told they were not a people by God.

Part of the mystery is that these Israelites were promised a new covenant.

By the time the first century came, there were millions of these people who could not be distinguished from a pagan Gentile. (just like Ben Masada said)

When the New Covenant was made, this is how all of Israel was saved, and this is how the fulness of the nations was fulfilled as described in Gen 48:19

Romans 11 has nothing to do with Jews, it's about Israelites who were never Jews.

So the Law of Moses was still in effect until 70 AD? So they were still sacrificing animals in the Temple?

Yep.

Just like when God dwelled in the Ark of the Covenant for 40 years in David's tent, the Israelite priests still performed sacrifices at Moses' tabernacle.

Read Hebrews 8:13

 

[Right Divider]

I didn't try to hide anything.

I was pointing out that there is a mystery in what Paul is explaining.

Liars just keep on lying.... it's what they/you do.

Yes, and you conveniently left OFF what Paul meant by "this mystery" with your .....

What does that have to do with Romans 11?

Well gee, I guess since it's a quote of Romans 11:32 KJV it might have something to do with Roman 11. And you call MADists Biblically illiterate.

If you read Romans 11, Paul quotes Elijah. There were 7,000 who did.

However, the millions and millions who did not were scattered amongst the pagan Gentiles, divorced from God, received no mercy from God, and were told they were not a people by God.

Part of the mystery is that these Israelites were promised a new covenant.

That was NOT a "mystery". It's in Jeremiah and Ezekiel just as clear as day.

By the time the first century came, there were millions of these people who could not be distinguished from a pagan Gentile. (just like Ben Masada said)

Yes, your unbelieving friend. You and Ben cannot be distinguished from pagan Gentiles. I guess that it's beyond your comprehension that just because YOU cannot distinguish, God does not lose track of who is who.

When the New Covenant was made, this is how all of Israel was saved, and this is how the fulness of the nations was fulfilled as described in Gen 48:19

Romans 11 has nothing to do with Jews, it's about Israelites who were never Jews.

It's extremely clear that Paul is NOT talking ONLY about the 10 tribes when he uses Israel here since in the VERY first verse of Romans 11 he INCLUDES himself as an Israelite.

Rom 11:1 KJV I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.​

And yet, just a few verses later, YOU think that he is NOW talking about only the 10 tribes. Don't let these pesky facts get in your way. You've got a myth to prove!

Yep.

Just like when God dwelled in the Ark of the Covenant for 40 years in David's tent, the Israelite priests still performed sacrifices at Moses' tabernacle.

Read Hebrews 8:13

The fact that you think that the OC and NC can run concurrently is a testament to the fact that you are insane. Please seek medical attention immediately.

 

[heir]

The fact that you think that the OC and NC can run concurrently is a testament to the fact that you are insane. Please seek medical attention immediately.

:rotfl:

 

[tetelestai]

The fact that you think that the OC and NC can run concurrently is a testament to the fact that you are insane. Please seek medical attention immediately.

Heb 8:13 proves me right.

If you disagree, then just explain what Heb 8:13 means.

 

[tetelestai]

:rotfl:

It's New Years Eve.

You still have time to make a New Year's Resolution.

Try giving up Darby and Bullinger for just one month, and see what happens.

 

[john w]

It's New Years Eve.

You still have time to make a New Year's Resolution.

Try giving up Darby and Bullinger for just one month, and see what happens.

That(AD 70-his reference) marked the end of the old covenant, the law and prophets, etc.

Caught again, in a lie, that I continue to catch this mutt making...

Vs.

"The law was nailed to the cross...The law was abolished at the cross...."-habitual liar Craigie


Get a job, put down your J Stuart Russelll/Ken Gentry/Dennis Tod/RC Sproul/Gary DeMar...books, your Hank Hanegraaf tapes/books, from which you plagiarize, join a new "church," since you were booted from your last "man made" church, and perhaps you will lose your MAD obsession, and grow a spine, you wimp, and will not habitually lie, you demon.


So there, Craigie-the habitual liar of TOL.

 

[Interplanner]

So then why did you try to HIDE the remainder of that verse that CONTAINED the EXPLANATION of what the "this mystery" was DESCRIBING? And who is Pau?


And YET .... God concluded them all in unbelief that He might have mercy on all.


And not a single member of the norther ten tribes believed?


So the Law of Moses was still in effect until 70 AD? So they were still sacrificing animals in the Temple?


I was willing to look at ALL of it, instead of trying to HIDE some of it like you did.

I really doubt that Paul had a reference that far back when he spoke of the partial hardness. Everything else in the chapter is in reference to response to Christ. Also, the NT does not deal in the two parts of the ancient kingdom. I don't know any discussion in 1st century Judaism where that division matters any more. The Pharisee vs Sadducee vs zealot divisions were much more prominent.

Don't forget: it's hardness, not blindness.

 

[Lazy afternoon]

Caught again, in a lie, that I continue to catch this mutt making...

Vs.

"The law was nailed to the cross...The law was abolished at the cross...."-habitual liar Craigie


Get a job, put down your J Stuart Russelll/Ken Gentry/Dennis Tod/RC Sproul/Gary DeMar...books, your Hank Hanegraaf tapes/books, from which you plagiarize, join a new "church," since you were booted from your last "man made" church, and perhaps you will lose your MAD obsession, and grow a spine, you wimp, and will not habitually lie, you demon.


So there, Craigie-the habitual liar of TOL.

It is not good for Christians to take your words into their mind, as there is enough evil around as it is.

LA

 

[Cross Reference]

Caught again, in a lie, that I continue to catch this mutt making...

Vs.

"The law was nailed to the cross...The law was abolished at the cross...."-habitual liar Craigie

The law was NOT nailed to any cross! Hence, the law was NOT abolished. By the nailing to the cross Jesus Christ was the law FULFILLED IN HIM and by His death and resurrection was it made so as a proof that it was accomplished! The Law became a PERSON! That Person is now the Glorified Word of God! If you understood what you say you do, you would know that. Now you have at least heard it from me. So go ahead and mock away to your own perdition!

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

there is enough evil around as it is.

LA

Such as yourself.

 

[tetelestai]

I don't know any discussion in 1st century Judaism where that division matters any more.

(John 7:35) Then said the Jews among themselves, Whither will he go, that we shall not find him? will he go unto the dispersed among the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles?

"There are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans, while the ten tribes are beyond Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers" - Josephus, Ant.11:5:2)

 

[Interplanner]

(John 7:35) Then said the Jews among themselves, Whither will he go, that we shall not find him? will he go unto the dispersed among the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles?

"There are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans, while the ten tribes are beyond Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers" - Josephus, Ant.11:5:2)

Granted, but that is no where close to the heat of the debates about whether to be Pharisee, Sadducee, zealot, Samaritan. It is not in Rom 9-11 at all. I don't know anywhere that it matters in the NT.

 

[tetelestai]

It is not in Rom 9-11 at all.

Paul begins Romans 11 by telling about Elijah and the remnant of 7,000.

Elijah was not a Jew, nor were any of the 7,000 that were part of that remnant.

Elijah and the 7,000 men were all Israelites from the 10 tribes of the Northern Nation of Israel.

I don't know anywhere that it matters in the NT.

Do you believe the New Covenant was made?

 

[Interplanner]

The law was NOT nailed to any cross! Hence, the law was NOT abolished. By the nailing to the cross Jesus Christ was the law FULFILLED IN HIM and by His death and resurrection was it made so as a proof that it was accomplished! The Law became a PERSON! That Person is now the Glorified Word of God! If you understood what you say you do, you would know that. Now you have at least heard it from me. So go ahead and mock away to your own perdition!

"he took it away, nailing it to the cross." Col 2. He's referring to the condemnation in it 'that was against us.' At the same time, he did what you're saying but accomplishing righteousness himself.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

It's New Years Eve.

You still have time to make a New Year's Resolution.

Try giving up Darby and Bullinger for just one month, and see what happens.

Try giving up your false doctrine for the rest of your life phony?

 

[Interplanner]

Paul begins Romans 11 by telling about Elijah and the remnant of 7,000.

Elijah was not a Jew, nor were any of the 7,000 that were part of that remnant.

Elijah and the 7,000 men were all Israelites from the 10 tribes of the Northern Nation of Israel.



Do you believe the New Covenant was made?

But nothing about the example Paul is using about Elijah is north vs south. It is about faith vs unbelief, apart from ethne. 'you stand by faith' Rom 11.

Of course the New Covenant has been made, once again having nothing to do with the pointless distinction of north vs south. Otherwise Rom 9-11 would be riddled with the distinction everytime Paul uses the title "Israel." He would keep saying 'Israel-but-not-Judah' or 'Judah-but-not-Israel.' This is too elementary to spend any more time upon. His favored group is the elect/remnant/"us" of 9:24 which is both Jew and Gentile (where 'Jew' means Israel north and south).

 

[tetelestai]

But nothing about the example Paul is using about Elijah is north vs south.

It's not north vs. south. Paul isn't speaking about the south (the Jews). Paul is only speaking about the north (Israel)

Of course the New Covenant has been made, once again having nothing to do with the pointless distinction of north vs south.

If we read Ezekiel, we are told that when the stick of the north (Joseph) is joined with the stick of the south (Judah) there will be one king over all of them.

Jeremiah said the same thing about the New Covenant, and described it as the House of Judah being joined with the House of Israel.

You said the New Covenant was made. That means the two sticks (houses) were joined together. We know who Judah (house of Judah) was. Who was Joseph (House of Israel)?

Otherwise Rom 9-11 would be riddled with the distinction everytime Paul uses the title "Israel." He would keep saying 'Israel-but-not-Judah' or 'Judah-but-not-Israel.'

Paul doesn't have to. You won't find the words "Jew", "Jews", or "Judah" anywhere in Romans 11 in the KJV

(where 'Jew' means Israel north and south).

If that were the case, then that would mean the stick of Judah and the stick of Joseph was joined together hundreds of years before Christ. Is that your claim?

HINT:

(Gen 48:19 YLT)And his father refuseth, and saith, `I have known, my son, I have known; he also becometh a people, and he also is great, and yet, his young brother is greater than he, and his seed is the fulness of the nations;'

(Rom 11:25 YLT) For I do not wish you to be ignorant, brethren, of this secret -- that ye may not be wise in your own conceits -- that hardness in part to Israel hath happened till the fulness of the nations may come in;