Israel's PROMISED Fulness

[Danoh]

In my particular Mid-Acts Perspective, Romans 11:26, is actually a continuation, not of 11:25, but of 11:23's conditional promise.

As Romans 11:4 is an example of a reminder of that to Isaiah, verse 25 is also, actually a reminder of that.

BUT Paul doesn't stop there - not by a longshot, thus, his rejoicing at the end of the chapter.

For, in Paul's God given eschatology as to God's OTHER agency: Israel, verse 23's condition was promised to be met BY GOD!

His "covenant unto them," verse 27, promises to one day enable "all Israel" to meet verse 23's condition!

Again, verse 25 is not the means of that, rather, it is a reminder on God's part through Paul, lest we, being ignorant of the above dynamic, end up wise in our own conceits contrary to the Spirit's fact: that God is not through with Israel, "for this is my covenant unto them, when I SHALL take away their sins."

For a "good book about this," in fact, two good books, see Deuteronomy and Ezekiel. For a preview, try Deut. 4 and Ezek. 36

 

[Biblewriter]

In my particular Mid-Acts Perspective, Romans 11:26, is actually a continuation, not of 11:25, but of 11:23's conditional promise.

As Romans 11:4 is an example of a reminder of that to Isaiah, verse 25 is also, actually a reminder of that.

BUT Paul doesn't stop there - not by a longshot, thus, his rejoicing at the end of the chapter.

For, in Paul's God given eschatology as to God's OTHER agency: Israel, verse 23's condition was promised to be met BY GOD!

His "covenant unto them," verse 27, promises to one day enable "all Israel" to meet verse 23's condition!

Again, verse 25 is not the means of that, rather, it is a reminder on God's part through Paul, lest we, being ignorant of the above dynamic, end up wise in our own conceits contrary to the Spirit's fact: that God is not through with Israel, "for this is my covenant unto them, when I SHALL take away their sins."

For a "good book about this," in fact, two good books, see Deuteronomy and Ezekiel. For a preview, try Deut. 4 and Ezek. 36

You keep posting "from" your "mid-Acts perspective." But someone's perspective is wholly immaterial. If the scriptures say it, it is true. If they do not say it, it may or may not be true. And if they contradict it, it is false.

 

[Danoh]

BW, all you have done is state your perspective about all that.

A Pentecostal friend of mine who believes eternal security is a false doctrine is fond of noting "the Bible is right."

And yet, he not only accomplishes nothing by that, but does not because he hasn't any true sense of what actually constitutes actual objectivity.

It is actual objectivity that results in the needed perspective - Scripture's Perspective.

Romans 11:25, is, for example, a contrast between two perspectives; one of them off base, or unobjective.

I assert "my Mid-Acts Perspective" both out of my perspective from objectivity applied that the Apostle Paul was Mid-Acts, but also, from my awareness that not only might not all Mid-Acts people hold to a view I might hold, but also, from my awareness that many, due to a lack of true objectivity on their part, when reading my posts, my right off deduce that whatever particular view I might be endorsing is held by all Mid-Acts people.

If there is one consistency on many of these threads its the consistency with which most right off generalize other's words.

The above on Israel's Fullness is MY perspective via the passages. I merely sought to distance it from other's generalizing it as held by all Mid-Acts people.

You generalized something else from it altogether.

Its that kind of a thing that is behind why you are, correct me if I am off here: Acts 2 Dispensational, while I am Mid-Acts - our generalizations and distinctions.

As I am sure you are aware; there are some differences in "perspective" between Acts 2 and Mid-Acts Dispensationalism.

By the same token, as well as for the same reason, I differ in some key areas from some who hold to the Mid-Acts Perspective. I merely sought to spare them from any backlash from what is my view as to the sense of Romans 11 as to Israel's promised, foreknown fulness.

Try to be objective, brother... no, a bit more...

 

[random person]

In my particular Mid-Acts Perspective, Romans 11:26, is actually a continuation, not of 11:25, but of 11:23's conditional promise.

As Romans 11:4 is an example of a reminder of that to Isaiah, verse 25 is also, actually a reminder of that.

BUT Paul doesn't stop there - not by a longshot, thus, his rejoicing at the end of the chapter.

For, in Paul's God given eschatology as to God's OTHER agency: Israel, verse 23's condition was promised to be met BY GOD!

His "covenant unto them," verse 27, promises to one day enable "all Israel" to meet verse 23's condition!

Again, verse 25 is not the means of that, rather, it is a reminder on God's part through Paul, lest we, being ignorant of the above dynamic, end up wise in our own conceits contrary to the Spirit's fact: that God is not through with Israel, "for this is my covenant unto them, when I SHALL take away their sins."

For a "good book about this," in fact, two good books, see Deuteronomy and Ezekiel. For a preview, try Deut. 4 and Ezek. 36

Pure rubbish. The remnant obtained the Hope Of Israel (the Resurrection & Spiritual Kingdom of Christ), verses 4-5, 7, 11-12. The Rest were blinded.

Jesus and Paul were singing the wrong tune to expectations of the Jews in the 1st century, they persecuted our Lord and his apostle for not spreading the good news of Israel's natural and national carnal restoration. Instead Jesus and Pauls preached a Resurrection and a spiritual kingdom.

 

[Danoh]

An update as to Romans 11's:

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.

For, "as it is written... all Israel shall be saved" when "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins."

The "And so" of verse 26 being the "For... when" of verse 27.

Which, per Paul, awaits some point in time after "the fulness of the Gentiles be come in."

Acts 15:

14. Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
15. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
16. After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
17. That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
18. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.

To what "agree the words of the prophets, as it is written" - that after a prophesied delay on God's part He would return to build again the tabernacle, or house of David.

Thus, James agreement that if God has chosen to do a Mystery work of some sort among the Gentiles during Israel's prophesied delay, well, "Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world."

 

[random person]

You Dispensationalists?!


Acts 15:

14. Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
15. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
16. After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
17. That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
18. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.

The tabernacle of David, which is basically a place of worship and an assembly of believers outside of the Temple in Jerusalem and can have a temporary or permanent function, is the church.

Look, if the tabernacle of David has not already been built, so neither has verse 17 been fulfilled either. It is the reason, the only reason the tabernacle is built IN THE FIRST PLACE. That the Gentiles will seek after the Lord upon whom my name is called (Christians).

 

[ThatTrueLight]

Greetings everyone,

I've been learning much from the conversations here even though many seem to be highly argumentative rather than edifying. Nothing wrong with a little heat in the kitchen though from my experience.

I see a distinction between Israel under the law as compared to ththe church under grace. Does that make me dispensational?

 

[ThatTrueLight]

Romans is amazing to me and seems like everything a believer needs to know in one compacted book.

The portion in Romans 11 being vital to knowing of "All Israel being saved" when He does come from Sion..

To me that is clearly a pointer to Christ coming a second time, is it not?

I can't imagine reading that in any past context.. and hence the warning of being ignorant of these things.

One poster called that pure rubbish? Reading Romans 11 in its future context is pure rubbish?

 

[Biblewriter]

Greetings everyone,

I've been learning much from the conversations here even though many seem to be highly argumentative rather than edifying. Nothing wrong with a little heat in the kitchen though from my experience.

I see a distinction between Israel under the law as compared to ththe church under grace. Does that make me dispensational?

Sort of. But no more so that Irenaeus, Hyppolytus, and other second century Chriatians.

 

[Biblewriter]

Jesus and Paul were singing the wrong tune to expectations of the Jews in the 1st century, they persecuted our Lord and his apostle for not spreading the good news of Israel's natural and national carnal restoration. Instead Jesus and Pauls preached a Resurrection and a spiritual kingdom.

There is not an atom of scriptural or historical evidence to back up this claim. They were persecuted for two things:

First and foremost, for saying that Jesus was the Messiah.

See this in Juhn 9:22 "His parents said these things because they feared the Jews, for the Jews had agreed already that if anyone confessed that He was Christ, he would be put out of the synagogue.

John 12:42 "Nevertheless even among the rulers many believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they did not confess Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue;"

Acts 4:17-18 "But that it spread no further among the people, let us straitly threaten them, that they speak henceforth to no man in this name. And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus."

Second, and clearly, for spreading the gospel to the gentiles.

We see this in Acts 22:21-23:
"And he said unto me, Depart: for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles.
And they gave him audience unto this word, and then lifted up their voices, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live. And as they cried out, and cast off their clothes, and threw dust into the air,"

 

[ThatTrueLight]

Sort of. But no more so that Irenaeus, Hyppolytus, and other second century Chriatians.

I guess I'm not sure what it is exactly that makes one dispensational, is it based on seeing a difference between Israel under the Law as compared to the church under grace?

If that's all, then I'd imagine most would be able to see that.

 

[Danoh]

See the second post in this link:

http://letsrollforums.com/until-fulness-gentiles-come-t31376.html?p=262967

 

[ThatTrueLight]

See the second post in this link:

I have no problem with All Israel being saved and who Paul means by Israelites. If that's all it takes to be dispensational then I would imagine most Christians would be dispensational.

What are the alternatives?

Amil? Postmillennialism?

 

[Danoh]

I guess I'm not sure what it is exactly that makes one dispensational, is it based on seeing a difference between Israel under the Law as compared to the church under grace?

If that's all, then I'd imagine most would be able to see that.

It really depends on who you allow to define that.

And most who do, on either side of the fence, miss the actual distinction.

For, if it is the distinction between Law and Grace, then where was Dispensationalism before said Grace?

If the distinction is between Israel and "the Church" then where is Dispensationalism before there was this "Church"?

Those distinctions as to what Dispensationalism actually is, resulted from a too soon attempt to define Dispensationalism.

Thousands of years before Christ, for example, Genesis 11, 12, and say Leviticus 11, all laid out a Distinction In Identity Before God between Israel and the Gentiles that governed how God dealt with either of those two, Ephesians 2.

That is what Dispensationalism really boils down to as an overall operating principle - a Distinction in Identities.

To that another was added by God - you see this in Romans 1-3, and it looks like this - 1 Corinthians 10:

32. Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:

And it began like this, here, which, if you'll read Romans 1 and 2, is in contrast to this here - in Acts 17:

22. Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.
23. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
24. God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;
25. Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
26. And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
27. That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
28. For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
29. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
30. And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
31. Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

It goes from a Distinction in Identities Between Jew and Gentile, to a Further Distinction of Jew, Gentile, Church of God as Paul defined that.

 

[random person]

Romans is amazing to me and seems like everything a believer needs to know in one compacted book.

The portion in Romans 11 being vital to knowing of "All Israel being saved" when He does come from Sion..

To me that is clearly a pointer to Christ coming a second time, is it not?

I can't imagine reading that in any past context.. and hence the warning of being ignorant of these things.

One poster called that pure rubbish? Reading Romans 11 in its future context is pure rubbish?

But how is Israel defined under the New Covenant?

Read Galatians 6:15-16:

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision (Jewish ethnicity) availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision(Gentile ethnicity), but a new creature.

And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.


The New Creature is Israel, and the citizens of this Israel of God consists of both born again Jews and born again Gentiles. Not solely natural Jews, the circumcision made with human hands.

 

[random person]

I guess I'm not sure what it is exactly that makes one dispensational, is it based on seeing a difference between Israel under the Law as compared to the church under grace?

If that's all, then I'd imagine most would be able to see that.

There are no distinctions between the Jew and Gentile under the New Covenant.

To say Jews have higher privileges than the Gentiles under the New Covenant renders God a respecter of persons.

The Plan God has for the Jews is the very same Plan God has for the Gentiles.

Remember what Jesus taught about thieves and robbers in John chapter 10.

Jesus was speaking of Jews (such as Pharisees and lawyers) who think they can bypass (by reason of their "chosen-ness" or their religiousity) the Messiah ontowards to God. These are the thieves and robbers. Jesus is the only shepherd and the gates of Heaven only open to his sheep who hear his voice.

 

[Danoh]

But how is Israel defined under the New Covenant?

Read Galatians 6:15-16:

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision (Jewish ethnicity) availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision(Gentile ethnicity), but a new creature.

And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.

The New Creature is Israel, and the citizens of this Israel of God consists of both born again Jews and born again Gentiles. Not solely natural Jews, the circumcision made with human hands.

Random, I'll answer for the sake of those with ears to hear, as I have given up on you as one who uses the literal and the figurative where it makes his case.

You mean under what you assert is "the New Covenant."

And Paul's point is that whether or not one is circumcised, what matters is are they in Christ.

Lol, circumcision/uncircumcision is not an ethnicity issue!

And the "born again" issue is not the New Creature issue. Israel was born as a nation when they first came out Israel.

In John 3, Jesus tells one of their rulers "ye" [plural - the nation] "must be born again."

That speaks of Israel being born again as nation one day.

Isaiah 66:

5. Hear the word of the LORD, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name's sake, said, Let the LORD be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed.
6. A voice of noise from the city, a voice from the temple, a voice of the LORD that rendereth recompence to his enemies.
7. Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child.
8. Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.
9. Shall I bring to the birth, and not cause to bring forth? saith the LORD: shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the womb? saith thy God.
10. Rejoice ye with Jerusalem, and be glad with her, all ye that love her: rejoice for joy with her, all ye that mourn for her:
11. That ye may suck, and be satisfied with the breasts of her consolations; that ye may milk out, and be delighted with the abundance of her glory.

John 16:

20. Verily, verily, I say unto you, That ye shall weep and lament, but the world shall rejoice: and ye shall be sorrowful, but your sorrow shall be turned into joy.
21. A woman when she is in travail hath sorrow, because her hour is come: but as soon as she is delivered of the child, she remembereth no more the anguish, for joy that a man is born into the world.
22. And ye now therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you.

And when will that be - seeing as its intended end result - verse 22 - has never been the case?

Revelation 12 per 1 Thessalonians 5 - that's when:

1. But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.
2. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.
3. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
4. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.

Gentiles are not born "again" in that sense - of an entire nation, rather, the spirit is "quickened" or made alive, Eph 2.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

It really depends on who you allow to define that.

And most who do, on either side of the fence, miss the actual distinction.

For, if it is the distinction between Law and Grace, then where was Dispensationalism before said Grace?

If the distinction is between Israel and "the Church" then where is Dispensationalism before there was this "Church"?

Those distinctions as to what Dispensationalism actually resulted from a too soon attempt to define Dispensationalism.

Thousands of years before Christ, for example, Genesis 11, 12, and say Leviticus 11, all laid out a Distinction In Identity Before God between Israel and the Gentiles that governed how God dealt with either of those two, Ephesians 2.

That is what Dispensationalism really boils down to as an overall operating principle - a Distinction in Identities.

To that another was added by God - you see this in Romans 1-3, and it looks like this - 1 Corinthians 10:

32. Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:

And it began like this, here, which, if you'll read Romans 1 and 2, is in contrast to this here - in Acts 17:

22. Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.
23. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
24. God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;
25. Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
26. And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
27. That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
28. For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
29. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
30. And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
31. Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

It goes from a Distinction in Identities Between Jew and Gentile, to a Further Distinction of Jew, Gentile, Church of God as Paul defined that.

Danoh, thank you very much for this description in identities, I like that.

Jew, Gentile, and the church of God - they're all clearly defined terms in the scriptures if you ask me.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

But how is Israel defined under the New Covenant?

Read Galatians 6:15-16:

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision (Jewish ethnicity) availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision(Gentile ethnicity), but a new creature.

And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.


The New Creature is Israel, and the citizens of this Israel of God consists of both born again Jews and born again Gentiles. Not solely natural Jews, the circumcision made with human hands.

Paul writes that in Christ there is neither Jew or Gentile, and these are the differences Danoh just described. What you're describing here is the Church. That is the new identity, not Israel.

To me it's like Israel is the old identity, and the Church is the new creation in Christ. To say that Israel is the new is not new at all, it was the old.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

There are no distinctions between the Jew and Gentile under the New Covenant.

To say Jews have higher privileges than the Gentiles under the New Covenant renders God a respecter of persons.

The Plan God has for the Jews is the very same Plan God has for the Gentiles.

Remember what Jesus taught about thieves and robbers in John chapter 10.

Jesus was speaking of Jews (such as Pharisees and lawyers) who think they can bypass (by reason of their "chosen-ness" or their religiousity) the Messiah ontowards to God. These are the thieves and robbers. Jesus is the only shepherd and the gates of Heaven only open to his sheep who hear his voice.

Just because there is no difference between Jews and Gentiles in the new doesn't mean that there isn't (or was not) a difference then and even now.

Paul says so - Jews, Gentiles, Church