In your view, how does Isaiah 49 fit into the total scheme of things and the timeline?
Revelation 19- A major Key to understanding Revelations
- Thread starter tttallison
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
In your view, how does Isaiah 49 fit into the total scheme of things and the timeline?
Then you need to point me back to what you're talking about. In the meanwhile, I don't think you took what I said in context with the rest of what I was saying. While existing believers are considered ALL IN CHRIST, not everyone becomes believers at the same time. Until they become a believer, we are not all in Christ together.
You’re treating “we are all one in Christ” as if Paul meant “all humans become one only after they all eventually believe,” but Paul isn’t describing the timing of individual conversions — he’s describing the nature of the body into which every believer is incorporated the moment they believe; unity is not postponed until the last convert arrives, it is the present identity of the redeemed.
Yes, unbelievers are not “in Christ” until they believe — obviously — but that doesn’t change Paul’s point: the moment anyone is united to Christ, they are united to the same body, the same Spirit, the same household, the same citizenship, and the same promises (Eph 2:14–19), which means the unity is already real, not waiting for eschatological completion.
Your argument tries to turn Paul’s present‑tense unity into a future‑tense event so your system can preserve a temporary Jew‑Gentile hierarchy, but Paul explicitly says the dividing wall is already broken down, the two peoples are already one new man, and the inheritance is already shared. The fact that people believe at different times doesn’t postpone the unity Paul describes; it simply means they enter the same unity whenever they believe.
I call B.S. on your worthless response. Just because believers consider the unity already real, doesn't mean unbelieving Jews consider the wall broken down and until they become a believer.
If I didn't know better, I'd think you're just trying to deflect from giving a meaningful response to the more meaningful questions being pondered here.
I'm not making a category mistake. Paul told you that the Jews are temporarily blinded until the FULLNESS OF THE GENTILES comes in. That won't happen until the Word has been preached throughout the entire rest of the world. Once it has, Jesus will reveal Himself to the Jews and graft a remnant of them back into the Olive Tree.
You’re not quoting Paul — you’re quoting your system and then stapling Romans 11 onto it; Paul never says “Jews are temporarily blinded until the Word is preached throughout the entire world,” never ties their hardening to global evangelization, never links it to Matthew 24:14, and never says Jesus will “reveal Himself to the Jews” in a future ethnic event — he says their hardening lifts when they turn to Christ (2 Cor 3:16), not when a Gentile age expires. “Fullness of the Gentiles” in Romans 11:25 is not a countdown to the last Gentile convert; it’s Paul’s way of describing the ingathering that is already happening through the gospel, and the “mystery” is not that God will restart an ethnic program later, but that Jew and Gentile are saved the same way, by the same mercy, into the same olive tree.
LOL! The blindness doesn't lift until God/Jesus lifts it at His return, which is why they all mourn when He returns. You need to reconsider what the "fullness of the Gentiles" means. It's not a description for ingathering when the Gentiles are the only ones mentioned. Here's how the Bible describes it:
- Jesus comes to earth and says He only came for the lost sheep of Israel.
- The Jews reject Him, so He turns His attention to the rest of the world (the Gentile nations).
- Jesus waits until every last Gentile is saved (fullness of the Gentiles) because the Jews have rejected Him.
- Jesus returns to the Mt. of Olives where He originally ascended from to focus back on the Jews and He lifts their blindness, and yes, it's to complete and fulfill the promises He made to their fathers, just like the Bible tells us.
Your entire timeline is fan‑fiction with a few verses taped to the outside, and the fact you’re so confident about it doesn’t make it any less detached from what Paul actually says; Romans 11 never gives you “Jesus waits until every last Gentile is saved,” never gives you “Jesus turns away from Israel to focus on Gentiles,” never gives you “Jesus returns to lift Jewish blindness,” and never gives you a future ethnic program reboot — Paul says their blindness lifts when they turn to Christ (2 Cor 3:16), not when Jesus descends on the Mount of Olives with a prophetic optometrist kit.
Your “they mourn when He returns, therefore blindness lifts at His return” is a category error:
Zechariah’s mourning is repentance, not a cosmic eye‑exam, and Paul explicitly says the remnant exists now (Rom 11:5), the grafting happens whenever they believe (Rom 11:23), and the olive tree is already the one people of God in Christ — not a future ethnic orchard waiting for a Gentile countdown to hit zero.
And your “fullness of the Gentiles = every last Gentile saved” is the theological equivalent of reading a grocery list as apocalyptic code; Paul uses “fullness” the same way he uses it everywhere else — the ingathering of the nations — not a cosmic stopwatch.
The NT never teaches “Jesus returns to focus back on the Jews,” never teaches “He lifts their blindness at His return,” and never teaches “He fulfills promises to their fathers by restarting an ethnic program”; it teaches that all promises are yes and amen in Christ (2 Cor 1:20), that Jew and Gentile are one new man now (Eph 2:14–16), and that the true children of Abraham are those who are in Christ (Gal 3:7).
What does "B.S." stand for?
Does the Holy Spirit lead people to use foul language?
The "remnant" in Romans 11:5 is referring to the people mentioned immediately before it! Let's read it together.
Romans 11:4-5
4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.
5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
So, when Paul is talking about the "remnant" there he is pointing out that God has RESERVED TO HIMSELF seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal during their day.
They don't make up the entire "remnant" of the saved Jews. The Bible mentions several instances of Israel going through judgement and God preserving a "remnant" of them throughout all of history, but there is still yet ANOTHER REMNANT that He will save at His Second Coming in order to restore them AGAIN. I know you can't stand hearing that, but the Bible talks about it over and over and over again. You choose not to listen to it. I'm not convinced you're even familiar with the Old Testament even though you claim you are.
haha, nice cover lolB.S. means "Bogus Stuff". It's not foul language.
This is God bringing dead Israel back to life after the millennium. How can it be anything else? The second death will have power here, but how it all plays out I do not know. In the first resurrection prior to the millennium the second death has no power, and the implication is that the second death will have power over the second resurrection, meaning, IMO, that some will be saved and some will not.
Your entire argument about “another remnant at the Second Coming” is built on the theological equivalent of duct tape and optimism, because Romans 11:4–5 doesn’t give you a future ethnic remnant waiting for Jesus to return — Paul uses Elijah’s seven thousand as an analogy for the present‑tense remnant (“even so at this present time”), not as a preview of a future national resurrection; the remnant is now, not “later when Jesus comes back to restore Israel again.”
Your claim that “the Bible mentions several instances of Israel going through judgment and God preserving a remnant” is true — but irrelevant — because Paul explicitly says the remnant he’s talking about is the one that exists during his ministry, not a prophetic placeholder for a future ethnic revival.
And your insistence that “there is still yet ANOTHER REMNANT He will save at His Second Coming” is exactly the kind of OT‑first hermeneutic Paul spends Romans 9–11 dismantling: he says not all Israel is Israel (Rom 9:6), he defines the children of Abraham as those of promise, not ethnicity (Rom 9:8), he says the remnant is present, not postponed (Rom 11:5), and he says grafting happens whenever they believe (Rom 11:23), not at a future mass conversion triggered by Jesus landing on the Mount of Olives like a prophetic optometrist.
Your “you must not know the Old Testament” jab is cute, but the apostles already told you how to read the OT — in Christ, not in a future ethnic reboot — which is why your system keeps collapsing under the weight of Romans 11 and Ephesians 2 one new man.