Israel’s Final Restoration

[eternally-gratefull]

PROVE IT!

Already have, Paul was speaking of the manner in which "all Israel would be saved" A future event.

it may not have struck you but a group is made up of individuals and each ONE has to be converted.

It is still a group. You can't take the context from a group. to individual people. Well I guess you could, People have,, but it does not make it correct.

the falling away and grafting in is of many INDIVIDUALS. Not all Israel was cut off. not all Gentiles were saved

I never said they were, The falling away was natural branch unbelieving jews, The grafting in was the unnatural branch gentiles (believing) ANd the warning is for us unnatural branch gentiles to get to proud, because just as they fell away, God can graft them back in.

The context is unbelieving and believing jews vs believing gentile.

In order for you to be correct. Gentile and jew (believing) alike would have to be called natural branches. it is not so.

still missing the point of ISRAEL? yawn,

Unresponsive, and I am sick of responding to these childish remarks. so expect from now on to have these remarks ignored.

it is dealing with large numbers of individuals. or do you think their leader only will be converted?

It is dealing with national isreal (believing and non believing natural branches) vs Gentile unnatural branches.

Nothing more, nothing less. PERIOD

 

[eternally-gratefull]

So if all Israel being saved means Physical Israel and not saved individuals does that mean a Jewish criminal say a Murderer will be saved because He or She is Jewish?

No one has ever said anyone will be saved just because they are jewish.

No one, jew or Gentile will be saved until the repent and receive the true messiah.

David was a murderer, and yes He will be in heaven.. But not because he was a jew..

 

[DP]

So if all Israel being saved means Physical Israel and not saved individuals does that mean a Jewish criminal say a Murderer will be saved because He or She is Jewish?

Well, Jesus did say all manner of sin may be forgiven man... didn't He? Per Revelation 22:14-15 is revealed murderers among the wicked outside the gates of the beloved city during Christ's millennial reign. Since they are still there in that time, who are we to judge? Christ only is Judge unto condemnation.

 

[DP]

Why do so many here skip Paul's point in Romans 11 about God Himself having blinded those away from The Gospel?

Rom 11:7
7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear unto this day.
9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling block, and a recompence unto them:
10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
KJV



If God puts blinders over your spiritual eyes and ears, then how can you be accountable? In Christ's future millennial reign, every soul will be accountable to Him, all deceptions and blinders removed.

In Romans 11, Paul tells us God blinded Israel in part so The Gospel could also go to the Gentiles. So their blindness is because of His Plan of Salvation even for the Gentiles. Thus their 'unbelief' is not being pointed as their own fault, though we all sin and are guilty. So how can God judge them in that state of blindness which He put them in?

God won't judge them in that state; He will remove that state of blindness He put them in, which is what Paul was talking about here:

Rom 11:25-29
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.
29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
KJV

 

[trofimus]

ok, I know it is hard for some people.

1. Paul is speaking of a future even, When the ungodliness of Jacob will be removed. Not the salvation of induviduals.
2. Paul is not speaking of the salvation of induviduals. But talking about how one groups (isreal) falling away led to another groups (gentile) being grafted in. And how great this is, But we gentiles better not be foolish, but be wise, Because just as fast as they were cast away, We too can be cast away. In fact that is what will happen. When their blindness is remeoved, and all isreal is saved.

trying to force rom 11 into individual salvation of one person is to totally ignore what is said in the text.

.

ok, I know it is hard for some people.

I will try to make it easy for you.

Paul is not speaking of the salvation of induviduals.

In fact, he is.

Paul starts the whole chapter with his own salvation and even in the verse 14 is he talking about individuals:
"...in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them..."

From verse 23 again individuals:
"And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree! "

Branch = individual. Branches = individuals. If you think branch is whole nation of Israel, what nations are other natural branches? Also notice Paul is speaking to one individual reader "you" as a branch.

That he sometimes speaks generally (they), does not mean its not about the salvation of individuals.

Paul is speaking of a future even

Thats your intepretation, not an evidence. And I think your interpretation is wrong:

You miss the simple thing, that Paul is QUOTING OT prophecy. The OT prophecy was written in the future tense, because it was written before the Christ. For us it is a past tense.

"Because just as fast as they were cast away, We too can be cast away. In fact that is what will happen.

No. Gentiles will never be taken out of salvation, out of the olive tree.

When their blindness is remeoved, and all isreal is saved."

There is no evidence that the blindness of the majority of Jews will be removed. "Until" means to the end. Because when the fullness of Gentiles will come in into the kingdom, the end will come.

----

What do you think was the main goal of God from the beginning? The nation of Israel or the Church?
Is the New Testament the main goal of all history or is it just an insertion into the plan with Israel?
I think this view determines your interpretation of Romans.

 

[trofimus]

WHat do you think the church of rome was?

Well, in that case church will always be pagan, because christians of non-jewish origin will always be majority. And so this argument means nothing.

I mean your argument used against me is no more usefull in the argument then me saying your belief came from antisemetism of the early roman church.

What antisemitism of the early roman church do you have in mind, exactly?
My argument was different. If your view is the right one, church (no matter how will you call that church) was in darkness about this topic for almost 2000 years.
And what you call "early pagan church" I call "the apostolic church". And apostles knew better than we do.

Lets stick to facts and not use these strawmen arguments, which do nothing to support our case. [/B][/COLOR]

Please.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I will try to make it easy for you.



In fact, he is.

lol, Ok, I will give you an ear.

Paul starts the whole chapter with his own salvation and even in the verse 14 is he talking about individuals:
"...in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them..."

Notice paul spoke in plural her not singular. He is talking about a group of his own people.

From verse 23 again individuals:
"And if they (Israel) do not persist in unbelief, they (Isreal) will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. After all, if you (Gentiles) were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, (Israel) the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree! "

Please note.

1. you in vs 24 is speaking about gentile believers, the readers of the text he is writting to,, ie the gentile believers in rome.

2. He is contrasting the natural branches (Isreal) with the unnatural branches (Gentiles)

3. He is not talking about individual believers period.

Branch = individual. Branches = individuals. If you think branch is whole nation of Israel, what nations are other natural branches? Also notice Paul is speaking to one individual reader "you" as a branch.

If you are in a group of people, and I am speaking of you all, I commonly will use the term "you singular when addressing you, Because I am not speaking of any one individual, but a whole group of people.

thus context determines how we must interpret the words. And context does not allow it to be speaking of individual people. because he is differntiating believing Jews (Israel) from believing gentiles. not individual people

That he sometimes speaks generally (they), does not mean its not about the salvation of individuals.

it is not, because it is about two seperate groups of people. Believing gentiles and believing Israelite's. Not induvidual people

Thats your intepretation, not an evidence. And I think your interpretation is wrong:

No, it is not wrong, it is what the passage says,

Literally,

in this manner shall all isreal be saved (a future event, which will happen this way) The redeemer will come out of zion and turn the ungodliness away from jacob.

sorry, but there is no way possible to get a past tense meaning from this passage, If it is past tense, then all Israel was already saved the moment paul wrote this.

You miss the simple thing, that Paul is QUOTING OT prophecy. The OT prophecy was written in the future tense, because it was written before the Christ. For us it is a past tense.

for us? What does "us" have anything to do with it? Paul at the time he wrote this quoted an OT prophesy, TO HIM it was a future event. It does not matter if it is past or present to us, what matters is what was it to him.

Since it was future to him, and since All Israel has not yet been saved, it is still a future event.

I am sorry, I can not see it your way, it makes no sense.

No. Gentiles will never be taken out of salvation, out of the olive tree.

I never said they would please stop trying to speak for me.

and try to listen to what I am saying.

salvation was never taken away from Isreal. And it was always offered even in the OT to the gentile.

Salvation is not the context of the passage.. You just proved it by what you just said.

There is no evidence that the blindness of the majority of Jews will be removed. "Until" means to the end. Because when the fullness of Gentiles will come in into the kingdom, the end will come.

Thats your opinion. And I do not need any evidence, Thats like a person in king davids day saying their is no evidence that gentiles will take over the oracles of God in an organization called the church.. You do not need evidence to prove future events, You only need evidence to prove past events do not fulfill the prophesy, which we have ample evidence that is true.

What do you think was the main goal of God from the beginning? The nation of Israel or the Church?
Is the New Testament the main goal of all history or is it just an insertion into the plan with Israel?
I think this view determines your interpretation of Romans.

What was the main goal of God?

have you ever read the OT?

What was Gods origional plan with Isreal (which by the way, nbever came to fruition because of Israels continued unbelief)?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Well, in that case church will always be pagan, because christians of non-jewish origin will always be majority. And so this argument means nothing.


What antisemitism of the early roman church do you have in mind, exactly?

If you do not know, there is no need to go forward. although if you know anything of history and how the roman church treated the jews You would understand.

My argument was different. If your view is the right one, church (no matter how will you call that church) was in darkness about this topic for almost 2000 years.

It was in darkness about most of the gospel truth, You will find no written documents to prove otherwise Because anything the church considered heresy (and this is one that they would have to consider heresy) would be sniffed out by death if need be.

Again, by your reasoning, half of the protestant doctrines would be considered new. Which I am sure you understand is not the case.

thus, your line of reasoning is no more applicable then my antisemetism argument, it is a non secular, straw man argument which proves nothing.

My point was, Lets stick with the fact. Jesus was crucified on arguments such as these..

And what you call "early pagan church" I call "the apostolic church". And apostles knew better than we do.

The only reliable source you have is scripture. Lets stick with that, Nothing else can be trusted.

Yes the did no better,, So liets stick with them, and not history past the last letter written in the cannon.

Please.

Yes, Please

 

[garee]

Branch = individual. Branches = individuals. If you think branch is whole nation of Israel, what nations are other natural branches? Also notice Paul is speaking to one individual reader "you" as a branch.

Branch does not represent born again believers. That comes from the dry root, Christ the seed . Branch just represents the outward flesh of men as a general term .

Like the word Christian, all who say they are Christian, are not of Christ.The same applies to a Jew

Christian is a word when defined clearly means “residents of the City of Christ” the new heavenly Jerusalem... prepared as His eternal bride.

It’s the new name he, not men named His people who were previously called as inward born again of the Spirit of Christ, Israel or a Jew.This is in respect to the spiritual seed (one) of Christ. What is applied to a inward born again Gentile the same applies to any nation to include the Jewish nation.

God our heavenly father in respect to the name Abram, he renamed Abraham is used to typify the father of many nation........ never in respect to one, as if God was a respecter of persons .

The word Christian can be used as a Jew below.It does not exchange it or replace it. But rather it simply adds to it to describe the bride of Christ. .

Revelation 2:9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

There is no need to try and separate an Jew from a Gentile in that way. It simply causes confusion, as to how many brides, how many gospels?

Christ, the anointing Holy Spirit of God works by faith(His) in the heart of all men without respect of flesh (.No difference)

And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;And put no difference between “us and them”, purifying their hearts by faith. Act 15:8

Romans 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

Romans 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

 

[trofimus]

Literally,[/B][/COLOR]

in this manner shall all isreal be saved (a future event, which will happen this way) The redeemer will come out of zion and turn the ungodliness away from jacob.

sorry, but there is no way possible to get a past tense meaning from this passage, If it is past tense, then all Israel was already saved the moment paul wrote this.

I meant the prophecy about redeemer, its the past tense for us, living today. Because Christ has already come. All Israel (i.e. all the church) will be saved in its time, just before the end of the world.

for us? What does "us" have anything to do with it? Paul at the time he wrote this quoted an OT prophesy, TO HIM it was a future event. It does not matter if it is past or present to us, what matters is what was it to him.

He quoted prophecy, thats why there is a future tense in that prophecy. But the redeemer has already come. Matthew also quotes many prophecies from the OT in his gospel (in the original future tense), but it is obviously about Christ, i.e. about the past for Matthew.

And I do not need any evidence

Sure you dont need any, you can believe whatever you want. But if you want to discuss some topic, you need the evidence to prove your point to us. Evidence is for us, not for you.

What was the main goal of God?

have you ever read the OT?

What was Gods origional plan with Isreal (which by the way, nbever came to fruition because of Israels continued unbelief)?

Thank you for your responses to my questions. ;-)

 

[trofimus]

If you do not know, there is no need to go forward. although if you know anything of history and how the roman church treated the jews You would understand.

Thank you again for your responses to my questions, you are very kind ;-)

It was in darkness about most of the gospel truth, You will find no written documents to prove otherwise Because anything the church considered heresy (and this is one that they would have to consider heresy) would be sniffed out by death if need be.

Again, by your reasoning, half of the protestant doctrines would be considered new. Which I am sure you understand is not the case.

But according to you, even the first church was in darkness, with apostles, prophets and many living witnesses about Christ around.
Thats a very different situation from the reformation after the middle ages.

The only reliable source you have is scripture. Lets stick with that, Nothing else can be trusted.

And which translation is the most reliable? Are not translations made by men with their views and biases? You cant separate yourself from the ideas of men totally, there will always be some, let us admit that.

 

[garee]

What was the main goal of God?

have you ever read the OT?

What was Gods origional plan with Isreal (which by the way, nbever came to fruition because of Israels continued unbelief)?

Yes the ones that did continual in unbelief (no faith) continued all the way to the end. The froward generation the generation of Adam.

Christ is is watching for their end.

Deuteronomy 32:20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is "no faith".

The ones that Christ began the work of faith in as our salvation continued to trust Christ, our confidence, to the end. If he begins the good work he will finish it


Philippians 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform "it" until the day of Jesus Christ:

 

[garee]

But according to you, even the first church was in darkness, with apostles, prophets and many living witnesses about Christ around.
Thats a very different situation from the reformation after the middle ages.

Hi Trofimus
If I could add my two cents

Judaism had become completely apostate, it was very dark. Judaism had become completely apostate, it was very dark until Christ, the light of the word came.. as the kind of glory that cannot be hid under a Bushel Basket

Speaking of reformation and restoring the church to another time period. The first century reformation is a pattern of the later. Same problems, same kind of false authority that apposed, as it is written (sola scriptura) They during the first century reformation tried to prove believing all things written in the law and the prophets (sola scriptura)was a heresy just a Rome did. The first century reformation restored the bride of Christ back to where they was no outward form as a pagan form of government (Kings and fathers) to place the faith of God in, it was restored to the period of Judges.

 

[trofimus]

Hi Trofimus
If I could add my two cents

Judaism had become completely apostate, it was very dark. Judaism had become completely apostate, it was very dark until Christ, the light of the word came.. as the kind of glory that cannot be hid under a Bushel Basket

Speaking of reformation and restoring the church to another time period. The first century reformation is a pattern of the later. Same problems, same kind of false authority that apposed, as it is written (sola scriptura) They during the first century reformation tried to prove believing all things written in the law and the prophets (sola scriptura)was a heresy just a Rome did. The first century reformation restored the bride of Christ back to where they was no outward form as a pagan form of government (Kings and fathers) to place the faith of God in, it was restored to the period of Judges.

Hi,
I agree, that the first century was some kind of reformation of the OT belief, like the reformation of the 16th century was the reformation of the NT belief.

But I see 2 differences there:

a) There was God present in body, in the first century, with his final authority and with his appointed apostles with the similar authority by the Holy Spirit. Its different a little from the work of "men" like Luther or John Hus, if you understand me.

b) It was not only a reformation, but also a new view, new discoveries, in the first century, that Christ has revealed. It was hidden from the previous generations. The reformation of the 16th century re-discover what was revealed before.

BTW, judaism is very dark and apostate till today, not only until Christ

 

[valiant]

Already have, Paul was speaking of the manner in which "all Israel would be saved" A future event.

a future event to Paul. 'Israel' being saved was continually taking place. It still is.

It is still a group. You can't take the context from a group. to individual people. Well I guess you could, People have,, but it does not make it correct.

you have to also consider the group as individual as Paul clearly is. If SOME do not believe they will be cut off.

I never said they were, The falling away was natural branch unbelieving jews, The grafting in was the unnatural branch gentiles (believing) ANd the warning is for us unnatural branch gentiles to get to proud, because just as they fell away, God can graft them back in.

yes each of them individually one by one.

The context is unbelieving and believing jews vs believing gentile.

each one making his choice,

In order for you to be correct. Gentile and jew (believing) alike would have to be called natural branches.

not at all. the original branches left in place are believing Jews,

Unresponsive, and I am sick of responding to these childish remarks. so expect from now on to have these remarks ignored.

LOL look back at your childish remarks.

It is dealing with national isreal (believing and non believing natural branches) vs Gentile unnatural branches.

Nothing more, nothing less. PERIOD

but as being cut off or grafted in one by one, Not all Gentiles would be cut off due to unbelief

 

[valiant]

Why do so many here skip Paul's point in Romans 11 about God Himself having blinded those away from The Gospel?

Rom 11:7
7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear unto this day.
9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling block, and a recompence unto them:
10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
KJV



If God puts blinders over your spiritual eyes and ears, then how can you be accountable? In Christ's future millennial reign, every soul will be accountable to Him, all deceptions and blinders removed.

In Romans 11, Paul tells us God blinded Israel in part so The Gospel could also go to the Gentiles. So their blindness is because of His Plan of Salvation even for the Gentiles. Thus their 'unbelief' is not being pointed as their own fault, though we all sin and are guilty. So how can God judge them in that state of blindness which He put them in?

God won't judge them in that state; He will remove that state of blindness He put them in, which is what Paul was talking about here:

Rom 11:25-29
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.
29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
KJV

when God blinds people He does it because they have already blinded themselves first. so your stricture does not hold. They ARE accountable

note how He hardened Pharaoh's heart because Pharaoh had already hardened is own heart,

 

[psalm6819]

Good job,EG I've learned by reading your posts. Thank you.

 

[NetChaplain]

Good job,EG I've learned by reading your posts. Thank you.

Hi Psa - Thank you Sis for letting me know! God's blessings to your Family!

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I meant the prophecy about redeemer, its the past tense for us, living today. Because Christ has already come. All Israel (i.e. all the church) will be saved in its time, just before the end of the world.

1. All Isreal is not the church, It is Israel. If the Isreal was everyone who is saved, Paul would not have differentiated Israel (natural branches) from Gentiles (unatural branches) being attacked to the vince (Christ) they would have been united as one unit, not divided

2. It is not a past event, because Jacob (Israel) is still in sin, The redeemer has not "turned them" from their ungodliness (they have not yet repented.) OT states clearly, when Israels redeemer comes, They will repent turn from their sin, and never commit those sins (spiritual adultery) again (see Ez 37 and many other prophesies concerning this event)

He quoted prophecy, thats why there is a future tense in that prophecy. But the redeemer has already come. Matthew also quotes many prophecies from the OT in his gospel (in the original future tense), but it is obviously about Christ, i.e. about the past for Matthew.

It does not matter, He spoke of a future occurrence, which would happen when the redeemer came. (context)

Christ is the redeemer, always has been, always will be, It does not matter if he came only once, or comes another hundred times, he will always be called the redeemer.

So again, Context must be used to interpret the passage, He is speaking of a future event (All Isreal will be saved) and by what means that even will occur (the redeemer (Christ) coming from Zion to turn away the ungodliness from Jacob (Israel)

Sure you dont need any, you can believe whatever you want. But if you want to discuss some topic, you need the evidence to prove your point to us. Evidence is for us, not for you.

No, I do not need any evidence, because if this is a future event, the evidence has not occurred yet. Using this straw man argument used by many in the old church to prove their points will not help you here. Sorry.

If you can not take that into account that it is a possibility, we have nothing further to discuss. Because you will never be able to grasp where I am coming from, period.

Thank you for your responses to my questions. ;-)

Your welcome, and thank you for your continued discussion,

 

[eternally-gratefull]

But according to you, even the first church was in darkness, with apostles, prophets and many living witnesses about Christ around.

Even paul called it a mystery, and told the gentile church in rome not to be fooled by it, thinking they are wise. So Paul would agree that many of them were in the dark still.

rom 11: [SUP]25 [/SUP]For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion

Thats a very different situation from the reformation after the middle ages.

I am talking about before the reformation. when rome ruled with an iron fist.. and no one could go against her,

And which translation is the most reliable? Are not translations made by men with their views and biases? You cant separate yourself from the ideas of men totally, there will always be some, let us admit that.

Any of them would be more reliable than books written long after the cannon was completed. When men and their biases, and even the iron fist of rome controlled what was written and what was not, and what was not alloud to be written (and destroyed if it was written)

The jews used that excuse to crucify Christ (extra biblical writings) lets not make the same mistake, but learn from the mistakes of the past..