As I stated, your interpretation is anachronistic, anthropologically as well as scripturally.
How so?
The preponderance of the context of
Romans 9 concerns who is the true Israel God amongst the descendants of Jacob and Abraham
I agree. I would go even farther, and add who is true Israel among Israel.
Romans 9:6 It is not as though God’s word has failed.
For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.
Your comment that Paul does not mention Ephraim especially shows a lack of erudition, anthropologically as well as scripturally
If saying I have a lack of erudition makes you feel better, I'm glad I could help.
But this still doesn't address how Paul applies Hosea in romans 9:25-26 to the Jews and Gentiles in Romans 9:24.
Every time Paul used the term “Israel” he is referring principally to Ephraim and Manasseh according to scripture.
"Every time"? You might want to double check on that....
which maintains the principal interpretation of
Romans 9:25-26 pertains to Ephraim,
And yet Paul applies it to the Jews and gentiles in romans 9:24.
Isaiah 11:13,
Ezekiel 37:19 and
Hosea 1:10 substantiate the grammatical-historical interpretation that the 10 northern tribes are perceived by God as a nation and people, Ephraim, at the second advent.
Isaiah 11:13: Paul has Isaiah 11:10 fulfilled with the gentiles glorifying God.
Romans 15:12: And once more, Isaiah says: “The root of Jesse will appear, One who will arise to rule over the Gentiles; in Him the Gentiles will put their hope.”
Hosea 1:10: Paul has Hosea 1:10 fulfilled with Jews and Gentiles becoming vessels of mercy
Romans 9:26 and,
“It will happen that in the very place where it was said to them, ‘You are not My people,’ they will be called ‘sons of the living God.’”
See, your backpedaling. You conceded that Ephraim was gathered in Christ at the first advent to proclaim the great commission. There is the enmity between Judah and Ephraim that was prophesied in
Zechariah 11:14, by your own concession. Throughout our controversy, you had conceded that Ephraim is contrasted from Judah in that Ephraim accepted the gospel and Judah did not, the remnant of Judah through the apostles notwithstanding. As I stated, this is clear backpedaling.
You argument doesn't even make any sense, nor does your use of the word backpedaling. Misunderstanding on your part does not amount to backpedaling on mine. I believe Ephraim and gentiles are synonymous, in that Ephraim was divorced by God and became as gentiles in regards to the old covenant.
There is enmity between the Jews and the body of Christ.
Zechariah 11:14 Then I cut in pieces my second staff called Union, breaking the brotherhood between Judah and Israel.
Galatians 4:25-28 Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present-day Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother. For it is written: “Rejoice, O barren woman, who bears no children; break forth and cry aloud,
you who have never travailed; because more are the children of the desolate woman,
than of her who has a husband.” Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. At that time, however,
the son born by the flesh persecuted the son born by the Spirit. It is the same now.
There is peace between Jews and gentiles in the body of Christ.
Hosea 1:11 Then the people of Judah and of Israel will be gathered together, and they will appoint for themselves one head, and will go up out of the land.
Isaiah 11:13 Then the jealousy of Ephraim will depart, and the adversaries
d of Judah will be cut off.
Ephraim will no longer envy Judah, nor will Judah harass Ephraim.
Ephesians 2:14-16 For He Himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has torn down the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees.
He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace and reconciling both of them to God in one body through the cross, by which He extinguished their hostility.
Supersessionism has difficulty discerning fulfillment from consummation.
It appears THT does as well, when they ignore the NT applications of OT scripture by the apostles.
The process of reconciling Ephraim and Judah commences with the first advent, it begins to be fulfilled
We agree.
but it is exclusively consummated upon the second, then all Israel will be saved, according to
Romans 11:26
No arguments with that.
Isaiah 11:13,
Ezekiel 37:19 and
Hosea 1:10 concern the consummation, not the commencement at the first advent.
Considering Paul has Isaiah 11:10 and Hosea 1:10 being fulfilled at the first advent through the death of Christ, I would disagree with your interpretation.
The kingdom of Christ is consummated, established, at his return and not the first advent,
I would partially agree and partially disagree.
Revelation states the kingdom comes when Jesus ascends to heaven and Satan is cast out.
revelation 12:9-10 And the great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him. And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying: “
Now have come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of His Christ.
Which is consistent with Jesus telling they disciples they wouldn't die until they see the kingdom of God arrive with power.
Mark 9:1 Then Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God arrive with power
The consummation occurs at the 2nd advent.
Revelation 11:15 Then the seventh angel sounded his trumpet, and loud voices called out in heaven:
“The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ, and He will reign forever and ever.”
Until the consummation, he waits until his enemies are made his footstool (
Psalms 110).
He also reigns until his enemies are made his footstool
1 Corinthians 15:26
He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet
Revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead,
and the ruler of the kings of the earth.
Your conceding Ephraim is amongst the gentiles; I agree.
Does this mean you concede Ephraim became as the gentiles, as they were separated from God and became "not my people"?
As I confirmed, Christ can retain the authority that he had laid aside to become a man (
Philippians 2:6-10), and yet not consummate the Davidic kingdom.
But he rose again to be exalted to the highest place, above all names in order to fulfill the oath made to David.
Philippians 2:9-11 Therefore God exalted Him to the highest place and gave Him the name above all names, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Acts 2:30-31 But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that He would place one of his descendants on his throne. Foreseeing this, David spoke about the resurrection of the Christ
Again, supersessionism has difficulty discerning fulfillment from consummation; the "kingdom of God" is obviously not the promised Davidic kingdom when the grammatical-historical interpretation is upheld.
Are you saying the kingdom of God is different than you proposed future Davidic kingdom?
You’re failing to take into account Satan is cast to the earth in
Revelation 12 and makes war with the saints, which is recapped in the next chapter. In the next chapter Satan, the dragon, gives the sea-beast his throne and great authority over “all the world” to war with the saints and overcome them, for the same amount of time the woman is in the wilderness. In
Revelation 20:3 the dragon, Satan, is stripped of this ability to deceive the nations and is cast in a pit for 1000 years and then released to fulfill the prophecy of
Ezekiel 38. In
Ezekiel 38 God has Gog come against the “
land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.” Gog says, “
I will go up to the land of unwalled villages; I will go to them that are at rest, that dwell safely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates, To take a spoil, and to take a prey; to turn thine hand upon the desolate places that are now inhabited, and upon the people that are gathered out of the nations, which have gotten cattle and goods, that dwell in the midst of the land” (
Ezekiel 38:8-12). Ezekiel’s description of the land of unwalled villages is precisely the security that
Jeremiah 23:1-6 prophecies about the Davidic kingdom. There is no doubt in the minds of those who maintain the grammatical-historical interpretation, as well as progressive revelation, that the Revelation upholds premillennialism as opposed to the amillennialism or postmillennialism that you're asserting. BTW, which is it that you are asserting?
how does this address satan having two little seasons?
Supersessionism’s perception that the phenomenon of
Hebrews 9:24-25 conveys the day of atonement is based on the nuances of the “presence” of God and “every year” to force their perception into the context that Christ “put away sin” at the first advent.
So the high priest entering the presence of God every year as mentioned in Hebrews 9 has nothing to with the day of atonement? Even a modest Bible expositor could see that you’re wrong.
Hebrews 9:24-25 For Christ did not enter a man-made copy of the true sanctuary, but He entered heaven itself, now to appear on our behalf in
the presence of God. Nor did He enter heaven to offer Himself again and again, as the
high priest enters the holy places every year with blood that is not his own.