PING: JEFF (1st Century)

[Pastor Dave]

Jeff,

I have not seen a response form you regarding the following
message. Could you please address this...


****************************************************

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 18:23:40 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

message

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!
1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

But the 'fullness of the Gentiles' has not yet come in,

Are you saying that you now recognize that Romans 11:25-26a
was not about God going back and saving all of national Israel,
after the fullness of the Gentiles came in?

Has your argument changed to one in which you acknowledge
that and now say that it still has yet to be fulfilled, because,
"the fullness of the Gentiles" has not finished coming in?

That's fine if you are, since it would mean that you now see
that Paul was *not* saying that all of national Israel was
going to be saved and you are submitting to the word of God,
as we *all* should be doing. :) My views on various things
have changed over time, as has everyone about this or that.
It is perfectly normal and a sign of integrity, when one throws
out a piece of ones doctrine, because they now see that it is
not supported by the word of God, as they thought it was.
We should all be so humble and willing. :)

I am asking, just trying to ascertain where you stand on this
now and not to criticize you, if you have changed your position.

So do I have this right? If so, then please tell me and we can
then move on to what you stated above, about whether or not
the fullness of the Gentiles has come in yet.

And if not, then we are still back where we started and you
have not answered to the point I made yet, about the fact
that it says, "and so" and should not be changed to, "and then",
as the Dispensationalists have been doing. And so, I'm not
going to allow anyone to divert the subject to something else.

I will wait for your answer. I do not wish to continue,
until I know where you now stand on this issue.
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

"The real mark of someone who wants to know the Truth
is not that they expect others to prove it to them,
but that they seek after it themselves." - Chayil

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

Post by Pastor Dave
Jeff,
I have not seen a response form you regarding the following
message. Could you please address this...
****************************************************
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 18:23:40 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by Pastor Dave
message

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!
1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

But the 'fullness of the Gentiles' has not yet come in,

Are you saying that you now recognize that Romans 11:25-26a
was not about God going back and saving all of national Israel,
after the fullness of the Gentiles came in?

I am saying God will save the nation of Israel when all those whom God is
still calling [even today] have been accepted, and Christ Returns to rescue
Jerusalem from their enemies the final time.
Zech. 14.

Post by Pastor Dave
Has your argument changed to one in which you acknowledge
that and now say that it still has yet to be fulfilled, because,
"the fullness of the Gentiles" has not finished coming in?

It remains the same...that Israel will be saved once all God's children have
been called and baptised.

Post by Pastor Dave
That's fine if you are, since it would mean that you now see
that Paul was *not* saying that all of national Israel was
going to be saved and you are submitting to the word of God,
as we *all* should be doing. :) My views on various things
have changed over time, as has everyone about this or that.
It is perfectly normal and a sign of integrity, when one throws
out a piece of ones doctrine, because they now see that it is
not supported by the word of God, as they thought it was.
We should all be so humble and willing. :)

Dave....I cannot think of any Apostolic doctrine or any of Christ's commands
that I have changed my views about in over 30 years after baptism, because I
found it was not supported by the Word of God.
As if it was not supported, I would not believe it in the first place.

Post by Pastor Dave
I am asking, just trying to ascertain where you stand on this
now and not to criticize you, if you have changed your position.

I have not changed my position from Scripture despite all your normal clever
use of semantics and outwardly persuasive lines of argument. {;o;}

Post by Pastor Dave
So do I have this right? If so, then please tell me and we can
then move on to what you stated above, about whether or not
the fullness of the Gentiles has come in yet.

See above!

Jeff...

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:00:53 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
Jeff,
I have not seen a response form you regarding the following
message. Could you please address this...
****************************************************
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 18:23:40 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by Pastor Dave
message

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!
1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

But the 'fullness of the Gentiles' has not yet come in,

Are you saying that you now recognize that Romans 11:25-26a
was not about God going back and saving all of national Israel,
after the fullness of the Gentiles came in?

I am saying God will save the nation of Israel when all those whom God is
still calling [even today] have been accepted, and Christ Returns to rescue
Jerusalem from their enemies the final time.
Zech. 14.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.

I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.

So to repeat what you snipped...

As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".

And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
to be contradicting himself. (:

You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".

Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

"Now faith is the substance of evolution, The evidence
of fossils not seen!" - Evofaith 11:1

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

"Pastor Dave" <_-ananias917-***@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message

<Snipped : Build-up semantics, for brevity and sanity's sake>

Post by Pastor Dave
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

Dave......Use whatever words suits you, it still signifies the same thing.
"Blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles
be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved:"

Jeff...

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:02:58 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
<Snipped : Build-up semantics, for brevity and sanity's sake>

Post by Pastor Dave
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

Dave......Use whatever words suits you, it still signifies the same thing.

As I thought. You don't care what the Bible says.
You want to believe what you want to believe,
God's word be damned! (:
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

Prevent truth decay. Brush up on your Bible.

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

Post by Pastor Dave
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:02:58 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
<Snipped : Build-up semantics, for brevity and sanity's sake>

Post by Pastor Dave
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

Dave......Use whatever words suits you, it still signifies the same thing.

As I thought. You don't care what the Bible says.
You want to believe what you want to believe,

Dave....I gave you God's Word.....but you decided to snip it out.
"Blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles
be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved"
Period.

And as we know, the 'fullness of the Gentiles' has not yet come in.

Jeff...

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:20:54 GMT,

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Dave....I gave you God's Word.....but you decided to snip it out.
"Blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles
be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved"
Period.
And as we know, the 'fullness of the Gentiles' has not yet come in.

Correct. And when it does come in, it won't constitute the "Israel"
which is an enemy of the gospel during the time of the fullness of the
Gentiles, and which is partly blinded until the fullness of the
Gentiles come in, and with which God make the irrevocable covenants
and promises. This Israel is, well...ISRAEL:


That the Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is not the church seems evident from the following
considerations:

1) Because "Israel", throughout the entirety of chapter 11, refers to
national Israel, and is everywhere in stark contrast to the "fullness
of the Gentiles".

2) The "Israel" which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is the one that is an enemy of the gospel (11:28). This
is not referring to a group of people who are getting saved during the
time of the fullness of the Gentiles, but who are "enemies" concerning
the gospel. When you're an enemy of the gospel, you're not getting
saved, and this is the condition of this "Israel", during the time of
the fullness of the Gentiles.

3) It is for "your sakes" (Gentiles), that this "Israel", is an enemy
of the gospel (11:28b). If "Israel", here, were a reference to all
the church of both Jews and Gentiles who were getting saved, not only
would they not be the "enemies" of the gospel, but they would not
continue to be contrasted with the "your sakes" who are being saved,
in the very explanation of why they are enemies of the gospel.

4) There is nothing in the context of this chapter (or anywhere in the
Bible, for that matter), which indicates "Israel" is a spiritual
reference to the "church", or the time of the "fullness of the
Gentiles" with which it is constantly contrasted throughout the
chapter. Galatians 6:16 shows that, although Paul condemned Jewish
legalizers, he wished peace on those of national Israel ("Israel of
God") who were truly believers (cf. Rom. 9:6) as well as (kai = "and")
on those who walk according to the principle that circumcision avails
nothing.

5) The Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is the elect Israel which God made irrevocable covenants,
gifts and promises to, and this is national Israel (Isa. 11:11-16;
45:17; 54:6-10; Jer 3:17-23; 30:17-22' 31:31-37; Jer
32:37-41; 33:24-26; Eze. 34:22-31; 37:21-28; 39:25-29; Eze.
40:1-48:35; Ho. 3:5; Joel 3:16-21; Am. 9:14,15; Mic. 7:15-20; Zep.
3:12-20; Zec. 10:6-12; Rom. 11:26; Rev. 7:4). This salvation will be
fulfilled, when the deliverer comes out of Zion (Rom. 11:26; Ps. 14:7;
Isa. 59:20).

6) The contention there can't still be Jews, Gentiles, or a national
Israel, since Christ made the church, ignores the plain, obvious
statement of Scripture: "Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor
to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God". --1 Corinthians 10:32.

7) There are 24 elders (not 12), and two sets of inscriptions in New
Jerusalem, one for the tribes of Israel (Israel), and one for the
apostles (representative of the church):

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".

Re 21:12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at
the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the
names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
Re 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them
the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

That both national Israel and the church are part of the same vine of
faith (Romans 11), doesn't do away with the fact there remain two
branches on the one vine.

Neither "And so", nor "in this manner" presents a problem to the
interpretation this is "Israel", not the church.
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org


Funny Usenet Quotes:

I just love the way you Futurists keep claiming that there's
all of this "Biblical evidence" for your claims and yet, can't
provide anything to refute one single thing that I post.
-- Pastor Dave (***@4ax.com)

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:43:11 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:20:54 GMT,

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Dave....I gave you God's Word.....but you decided to snip it out.
"Blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles
be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved"
Period.
And as we know, the 'fullness of the Gentiles' has not yet come in.

Correct.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.

I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.

So to repeat what you snipped...

As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".

And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
to be contradicting himself. (:

You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".

Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

Healing after abortion:

http://www.rachelsvineyard.org/

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:56:24 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org

Funny Usenet Quotes:

What do you think fog is? Fog is essentially a dense cloud
of water droplets, or cloud, that is close to the ground, so
don't tell me, "clouds are in the sky"...--Pastor Dave
(***@4ax.com)

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:58:48 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:56:24 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove

The subject here is whether or not God was going to go back
and save all of national Israel after the fullness of the
Gentiles had come in. That was your claim.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.

I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.

So to repeat what you snipped...

As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".

And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
to be contradicting himself. (:

You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".

Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

"Many fossils have been collected since 1859, tons of
them, yet the impact they have had on our understanding
of the relationships between living organisms is barely
perceptible. ...In fact, I do not think it unfair to
say that fossils, or at least the traditional
interpretation of fossils, have clouded rather than
clarified our attempts to reconstruct phylogeny."
(Fortey, P. L., "Neontological Analysis Versus
Palaeontological Stores," 1982, p. 120-121)

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:16:42 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org


Funny Usenet Quotes:

Now...How high was the highest mountain, DUMB ASS?...The
highest "mountain" was no more than 15 cubits high. --Pastor
Dave (***@4ax.com)

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:18:03 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:16:42 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove

The subject here is whether or not God was going to go back
and save all of national Israel after the fullness of the
Gentiles had come in. That was your claim.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.

I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.

So to repeat what you snipped...

As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".

And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
to be contradicting himself. (:

You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".

Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

"If then, these teachings [of a false prophet]
contradict the chief doctrine and article of Christ,
we should accord them neither with attention nor
acceptance though it were to snow miracles daily."
- Martin Luther

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:19:31 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:20:54 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:02:58 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
<Snipped : Build-up semantics, for brevity and sanity's sake>

Post by Pastor Dave
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

Dave......Use whatever words suits you, it still signifies the same thing.

As I thought. You don't care what the Bible says.
You want to believe what you want to believe,

Dave....I gave you God's Word.....

You ignored it.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
but you decided to snip it out.

You cannot be stupid enough to think that you can point
an accusing finger at me, after you snipped almost my
entire post, which contained those very same Scriptures!

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Now we both know that the fulness of the Gentiles
has not come in.

That is your attempt to change the subject, because I have
shaken you up, by pointing out how you are changing
the wording of the Scripture.

Now here, once again, is what we both know you are avoiding,
as you always do, snipping and then attacking me and lying
about what you're doing....


*************************************************

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
I am saying God will save the nation of Israel when all those whom God is
still calling [even today] have been accepted, and Christ Returns to rescue
Jerusalem from their enemies the final time.
Zech. 14.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.

I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.

So to repeat what you snipped...

As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".

And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
to be contradicting himself. (:

You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".

Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

"I don't mind scientists trying to find naturalistic
explanations, but I wouldn't say it's the mission
of physics to explain everything naturalistically.
The mission of physics is to pursue a naturalistic
explanation as far as we can; but since physics can
only explain one set of laws by invoking a more
fundamental set of laws, it can never itself explain
the most fundamental laws. Explaining these laws
is where one moves from physics to metaphysics.
Though invoking God may not be strictly part of
science, it is in the spirit of science to follow
the evidence and its implications wherever they
lead us. We shouldn't shrink back from the God
hypothesis if that's what the facts fit."
- Robin Collins, PHD

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

Post by Pastor Dave
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:20:54 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:02:58 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
<Snipped : Build-up semantics, for brevity and sanity's sake>

Post by Pastor Dave
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

Dave......Use whatever words suits you, it still signifies the same thing.

As I thought. You don't care what the Bible says.
You want to believe what you want to believe,

Dave....I gave you God's Word.....

You ignored it.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
but you decided to snip it out.

You cannot be stupid enough to think that you can point
an accusing finger at me, after you snipped almost my
entire post, which contained those very same Scriptures!

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Now we both know that the fulness of the Gentiles
has not come in.

That is your attempt to change the subject, because I have
shaken you up, by pointing out how you are changing
the wording of the Scripture.
Now here, once again, is what we both know you are avoiding,
as you always do, snipping and then attacking me and lying
about what you're doing....
*************************************************

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
I am saying God will save the nation of Israel when all those whom God is
still calling [even today] have been accepted, and Christ Returns to rescue
Jerusalem from their enemies the final time.
Zech. 14.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".
You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.
I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.
So to repeat what you snipped...
As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".
And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".
Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?
Romans 11:25-26a
25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...
Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!
1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.
It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".
Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

I don't...either translation signifies the same thing....you just can't seem
to see it.

Post by Pastor Dave
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

Right! but the "Fullness of the Gentiles" has not yet come in as we both
know.

Jeff...

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 06:41:41 GMT,

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
I don't...either translation signifies the same thing....you just can't seem
to see it.

Correct.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

Right! but the "Fullness of the Gentiles" has not yet come in as we both
know.

I agree with your position, but this argument here doesn't disprove
his view, because he is contending that the fullness of the Gentiles
(whenever that finally finishes coming in), IS "Israel". It doesn't
matter, to his position, whether or not the fullness of the Gentiles
has finished coming in. He thinks once it does come in, that will
constitute the "Israel" of Romans 11:25ff.

That the Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is not the church seems evident from the following
considerations:

1) Because "Israel", throughout the entirety of chapter 11, refers to
national Israel, and is everywhere in stark contrast to the "fullness
of the Gentiles".

2) The "Israel" which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is the one that is an enemy of the gospel (11:28). This
is not referring to a group of people who are getting saved during the
time of the fullness of the Gentiles, but who are "enemies" concerning
the gospel. When you're an enemy of the gospel, you're not getting
saved, and this is the condition of this "Israel", during the time of
the fullness of the Gentiles.

3) It is for "your sakes" (Gentiles), that this "Israel", is an enemy
of the gospel (11:28b). If "Israel", here, were a reference to all
the church of both Jews and Gentiles who were getting saved, not only
would they not be the "enemies" of the gospel, but they would not
continue to be contrasted with the "your sakes" who are being saved,
in the very explanation of why they are enemies of the gospel.

4) There is nothing in the context of this chapter (or anywhere in the
Bible, for that matter), which indicates "Israel" is a spiritual
reference to the "church", or the time of the "fullness of the
Gentiles" with which it is constantly contrasted throughout the
chapter. Galatians 6:16 shows that, although Paul condemned Jewish
legalizers, he wished peace on those of national Israel ("Israel of
God") who were truly believers (cf. Rom. 9:6) as well as (kai = "and")
on those who walk according to the principle that circumcision avails
nothing.

5) The Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is the elect Israel which God made irrevocable covenants,
gifts and promises to, and this is national Israel (Isa. 11:11-16;
45:17; 54:6-10; Jer 3:17-23; 30:17-22' 31:31-37; Jer
32:37-41; 33:24-26; Eze. 34:22-31; 37:21-28; 39:25-29; Eze.
40:1-48:35; Ho. 3:5; Joel 3:16-21; Am. 9:14,15; Mic. 7:15-20; Zep.
3:12-20; Zec. 10:6-12; Rom. 11:26; Rev. 7:4). This salvation will be
fulfilled, when the deliverer comes out of Zion (Rom. 11:26; Ps. 14:7;
Isa. 59:20).

6) The contention there can't still be Jews, Gentiles, or a national
Israel, since Christ made the church, ignores the plain, obvious
statement of Scripture: "Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor
to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God". --1 Corinthians 10:32.

7) There are 24 elders (not 12), and two sets of inscriptions in New
Jerusalem, one for the tribes of Israel (Israel), and one for the
apostles (representative of the church):

Re 21:12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at
the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the
names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
Re 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them
the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

That both national Israel and the church are part of the same vine of
faith (Romans 11), doesn't do away with the fact there remain two
branches on the one vine.

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 06:41:41 GMT,

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
I don't...either translation signifies the same thing....you just can't seem
to see it.

Correct.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

Right! but the "Fullness of the Gentiles" has not yet come in as we both
know.

I agree with your position, but this argument here doesn't disprove
his view, because he is contending that the fullness of the Gentiles
(whenever that finally finishes coming in), IS "Israel". It doesn't
matter, to his position, whether or not the fullness of the Gentiles
has finished coming in. He thinks once it does come in, that will
constitute the "Israel" of Romans 11:25ff.

Thus his muddled and confounded thinking is causing his eventual downfall as
he refuses to take the sacraments as commanded by Christ.
John 6: 53 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the
Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I
will raise him up at the last day."

Sad for Dave....very sad indeed!

Jeff...

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 07:03:04 GMT,

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Thus his muddled and confounded thinking is causing his eventual downfall as
he refuses to take the sacraments as commanded by Christ.
John 6: 53 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the
Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I
will raise him up at the last day."

I agree with your understanding of Romans 11. However, regarding
eating Christ's flesh and drinking His blood, as it is set forth in
John 6, Jesus clarifies:

40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which
seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I
will raise him up at the last day.
47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath
everlasting life.
48 I am that bread of life.

And when the disciples were perplexed about Jesus' statement on eating
His flesh and drinking His blood, He clarified to them:

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth
nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they
are life.

When Jesus spoke about eating his flesh and drinking his blood, in
this chapter, He referred to believing that his bodily death (flesh)
and shedding of blood on the cross pays for our sins, and that we
should rely on this finished work alone for salvation.

A person neither gets or looses their salvation based on taking the
Lord's supper, as whoever "believeth" in Him "has" everlasting life.
We take the Lord's supper as a "communion" with and "memorial" of His
work on the cross (1 Cor. 10 - 11).

1 Corinthians 11
23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto
you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took
bread:
24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat:
this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of
me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped,
saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft
as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew
the Lord’s death till he come.

The part about eating or drinking damnation to yourself (11:29-34),
refers to the chastening of the Lord (11:32), not the loss of
salvation. Hebrews says every son God receives gets chastened (12:6).
God was chastening some of the Corinthian believers, because they were
partaking of the Lord's table in an unworthy manner, in that some were
eating all the food while others went hungry. God's chastening, here,
is a sign you are saved, not that you are not saved.

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 07:03:04 GMT,

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Thus his muddled and confounded thinking is causing his eventual downfall as
he refuses to take the sacraments as commanded by Christ.
John 6: 53 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the
Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I
will raise him up at the last day."

I agree with your understanding of Romans 11. However, regarding
eating Christ's flesh and drinking His blood, as it is set forth in
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which
seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I
will raise him up at the last day.
47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath
everlasting life.
48 I am that bread of life.

Even so we must break bread which is ...sybolically eating Christ's
flesh......and drink wine.....sybolically drinking Christ's blood.

" Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man,
and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I
will raise him up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in
him.
57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that
eateth me, even he shall live by me."

Otherwise Christ will not be in fellowship with one who refuses the
sacraments.
To eat Christ's flesh and to drink his blood means partaking of the
sacrament of the Lord's supper. Otherwise "there is no life in you"

"Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no
life in you."
It does not say merely beleive in him, it states to eat his flesh [the
bread] and to drink his blood [drink the wine] .

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
When Jesus spoke about eating his flesh and drinking his blood, in
this chapter, He referred to believing that his bodily death (flesh)
and shedding of blood on the cross pays for our sins, and that we
should rely on this finished work alone for salvation.

It also refers to eating the bread signifying his body, and drinking the
wine which signifies his blood. This has to be done, if one whats to remain
in fellowship with Christ and his Father.

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
A person neither gets or looses their salvation based on taking the
Lord's supper, as whoever "believeth" in Him "has" everlasting life.

Sorry.... but Christ states even our "idle words" that we speak will
determine whether we are saved or not.
Matt. 12:36 "But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak,
they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be
condemned. "

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
We take the Lord's supper as a "communion" with and "memorial" of His
work on the cross (1 Cor. 10 - 11).

And to remain in fellowship with him...
"He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in
him."
Thus Dave puts himself out of fellowship with Christ by refusing to obey his
command to partake of the Lord's supper.

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
1 Corinthians 11
23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto
you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took
this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of
me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped,
saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft
as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew
the Lord's death till he come.
The part about eating or drinking damnation to yourself (11:29-34),
refers to the chastening of the Lord (11:32), not the loss of
salvation. Hebrews says every son God receives gets chastened (12:6).
God was chastening some of the Corinthian believers, because they were
partaking of the Lord's table in an unworthy manner, in that some were
eating all the food while others went hungry. God's chastening, here,
is a sign you are saved, not that you are not saved.

Only if one is really chastened.....if they still refuse to obey or continue
to "Drink unworthily" they will still be "damned." or "condemned".

1 Cor. 11:27 "Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup
of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and
drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation
to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep."

Jeff...

[Pastor Dave]

On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 19:16:08 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Sorry.... but Christ states even our "idle words" that we speak
will determine whether we are saved or not.

And yet, you people have no problem attacking me.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Thus Dave puts himself out of fellowship with Christ by refusing to obey his
command to partake of the Lord's supper.

Let us note that this thread turned into a personal attack on me,

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
1 Cor. 11:27 "Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup
of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and
drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation
to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep."

You should have read the verse just prior to these.

"For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup,
ye do show the Lord's death till he come." 1 Cor 11:26

Thus, if He has returned, as I believe He has, then it
would wrong for me to partake of the Lord's Supper.

But of course, that verse didn't suit your attack.

And of course, what I posted didn't suit you, which is why
you kept trying to change the subject. You didn't want to
answer, because your doctrine is more important to you
than God's word. That is why this thread has become
about you and Randy personally attacking me.

But hey, don't worry about that "idle word" thing, right?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

Life has many choices. Eternity has two. What's yours?

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 13:43:24 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
Let us note that this thread turned into a personal attack on me,

Just curious, Dave, why you put the smiley face after claiming you've
been personally attacked? Are you happy about being attacked?
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org


Funny Usenet Quotes:

Now...How high was the highest mountain, DUMB ASS?...The
highest "mountain" was no more than 15 cubits high. --Pastor
Dave (***@4ax.com)

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

Post by Pastor Dave
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 19:16:08 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Sorry.... but Christ states even our "idle words" that we speak
will determine whether we are saved or not.

And yet, you people have no problem attacking me.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Thus Dave puts himself out of fellowship with Christ by refusing to obey his
command to partake of the Lord's supper.

Let us note that this thread turned into a personal attack on me,

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
1 Cor. 11:27 "Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup
of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and
drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation
to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep."

You should have read the verse just prior to these.
"For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup,
ye do show the Lord's death till he come." 1 Cor 11:26
Thus, if He has returned, as I believe He has, then it
would wrong for me to partake of the Lord's Supper.
But of course, that verse didn't suit your attack.
And of course, what I posted didn't suit you, which is why
you kept trying to change the subject. You didn't want to
answer, because your doctrine is more important to you
than God's word. That is why this thread has become
about you and Randy personally attacking me.
But hey, don't worry about that "idle word" thing, right?

I worry..... that is why I most careful with my wording Dave. {;o;}

[Pastor Dave]

On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 17:18:51 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 19:16:08 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Sorry.... but Christ states even our "idle words" that we speak
will determine whether we are saved or not.

And yet, you people have no problem attacking me.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Thus Dave puts himself out of fellowship with Christ by refusing to obey his
command to partake of the Lord's supper.

Let us note that this thread turned into a personal attack on me,

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
1 Cor. 11:27 "Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup
of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and
drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation
to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep."

You should have read the verse just prior to these.
"For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup,
ye do show the Lord's death till he come." 1 Cor 11:26
Thus, if He has returned, as I believe He has, then it
would wrong for me to partake of the Lord's Supper.
But of course, that verse didn't suit your attack.
And of course, what I posted didn't suit you, which is why
you kept trying to change the subject. You didn't want to
answer, because your doctrine is more important to you
than God's word. That is why this thread has become
about you and Randy personally attacking me.
But hey, don't worry about that "idle word" thing, right?

I worry..... that is why I most careful with my wording Dave. {;o;}

Right. That's why you ignored v26. And that's why you turned
a discussion about Romans 11:25-26a into an attack on me.

Sure! (:
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

"The mark of a society that's on its last leg, is when
there is no fear of God." - Adrian Rogers

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 14:04:08 GMT,

you turned a discussion about Romans 11:25-26a into an attack on me.

Genesis 4:14 "...whoever finds me will kill me." -- Cain after he slew
Able
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org

Genius Usenet Quotes:

Now...How high was the highest mountain, DUMB ASS?...The
highest "mountain" was no more than 15 cubits high. --Pastor
Dave (***@4ax.com)

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

Post by Pastor Dave
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 17:18:51 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 19:16:08 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Sorry.... but Christ states even our "idle words" that we speak
will determine whether we are saved or not.

And yet, you people have no problem attacking me.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Thus Dave puts himself out of fellowship with Christ by refusing to obey his
command to partake of the Lord's supper.

Let us note that this thread turned into a personal attack on me,

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
1 Cor. 11:27 "Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup
of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and
drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation
to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep."

You should have read the verse just prior to these.
"For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup,
ye do show the Lord's death till he come." 1 Cor 11:26
Thus, if He has returned, as I believe He has, then it
would wrong for me to partake of the Lord's Supper.
But of course, that verse didn't suit your attack.
And of course, what I posted didn't suit you, which is why
you kept trying to change the subject. You didn't want to
answer, because your doctrine is more important to you
than God's word. That is why this thread has become
about you and Randy personally attacking me.
But hey, don't worry about that "idle word" thing, right?

I worry..... that is why I most careful with my wording Dave. {;o;}

Right. That's why you ignored v26. And that's why you turned
a discussion about Romans 11:25-26a into an attack on me.

Dave...your getting to be rather neurotic just lately.

Jeff...
1 Cor. 11: 23 "For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered
unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took
bread:
24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is
my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying,
This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink
it, in remembrance of me."

[Pastor Dave]

On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 18:13:16 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
Right. That's why you ignored v26. And that's why you turned
a discussion about Romans 11:25-26a into an attack on me.

Dave...your getting to be rather neurotic just lately.

Insulting me will not make the fact that you insulted me
and ignored v26 go away.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Jeff...
1 Cor. 11: 23 "For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered
unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took
24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is
my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying,
This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink
it, in remembrance of me."

And once again, you ignored v26. That's because you are
a lying God hater, who cannot stand that the Scripture
does not support his attempt to claim that I am not a
Christian. If Jesus returned, then I am not supposed to
celebrate the Lord's Supper and I would be a hypocrite
for doing so, AS THE SCRIPTURE SAYS. THE SCRIPTURE
THAT YOU IGNORED, which was the very next passage,
as you were made aware of and repeatedly ignored, as
you have just done again!!!

"For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you
proclaim the Lord’s death *_TILL HE COMES_*."
- 1 Corinthians 11:26

You can't win with Scripture, so you invent stories and you are
stupid enough to think that deleting my words means that
no one saw them. (:

Goodbye Jeff. I won't waste any more of my time on
a cowardly, lying jack ass like you!
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

http://www.unlimitedglory.org/evcha3.htm

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

Post by Pastor Dave
On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 18:13:16 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
Right. That's why you ignored v26. And that's why you turned
a discussion about Romans 11:25-26a into an attack on me.

Dave...your getting to be rather neurotic just lately.

Insulting me will not make the fact that you insulted me
and ignored v26 go away.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Jeff...
1 Cor. 11: 23 "For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered
unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took
24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is
my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying,
This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink
it, in remembrance of me."

And once again, you ignored v26. That's because you are
a lying God hater, who cannot stand that the Scripture
does not support his attempt to claim that I am not a
Christian.

Authentic Christans obey Christ, and he has commanded his brethren to break
bread and drink wine in his rememberence....till he returns....and he hasn't
returned yet as we can see, the state of the wicked world world and the lack
of iron rule over the nations by the saints proves beyond doubt...

Rev 2:26 "And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him
will I give power over the nations:
27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter
shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
28 And I will give him the morning star.
29 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the
churches."

Thus whether you accept it or not, you have put yourself out of fellowship
with Christ by refusing this sacrament.....and thus Christ warns.....
John 6:53 "Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except
ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in
you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I
will raise him up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in
him."

Post by Pastor Dave
If Jesus returned, then I am not supposed to
celebrate the Lord's Supper and I would be a hypocrite
for doing so,

If.....but he hasn't returned..... the World populations still walk in
darkness....
But they won't.....in the 'last days'.

Isaiah 2: 2 "In the last days Jerusalem and the Temple of the Lord will
become the world's greatest attraction and people from many lands will flow
there to worship the Lord.
3 "Come," everyone will say, "let us go up the mountain of the Lord,
to the Temple of the God of Israel; there he will teach us his laws, and we
will obey them." For in those days the world will be ruled from Jerusalem.

4 The Lord will settle international disputes; all the nations will convert
their weapons of war into implements of peace.[3][will convert their weapons
of war into implements of peace, literally, "beat their swords into
plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks."] Then at the last all wars
will stop and all military training will end."
Amen!

Jeff...

[Pastor Dave]

On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 06:41:41 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:20:54 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:02:58 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
<Snipped : Build-up semantics, for brevity and sanity's sake>

Post by Pastor Dave
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

Dave......Use whatever words suits you, it still signifies the same thing.

As I thought. You don't care what the Bible says.
You want to believe what you want to believe,

Dave....I gave you God's Word.....

You ignored it.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
but you decided to snip it out.

You cannot be stupid enough to think that you can point
an accusing finger at me, after you snipped almost my
entire post, which contained those very same Scriptures!

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Now we both know that the fulness of the Gentiles
has not come in.

That is your attempt to change the subject, because I have
shaken you up, by pointing out how you are changing
the wording of the Scripture.
Now here, once again, is what we both know you are avoiding,
as you always do, snipping and then attacking me and lying
about what you're doing....
*************************************************

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
I am saying God will save the nation of Israel when all those whom God is
still calling [even today] have been accepted, and Christ Returns to rescue
Jerusalem from their enemies the final time.
Zech. 14.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".
You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.
I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.
So to repeat what you snipped...
As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".
And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".
Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?
Romans 11:25-26a
25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...
Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!
1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.
It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".
Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

I don't...either translation signifies the same thing....you just can't seem
to see it.

They aren't "translations". THE translation is, "and so".
YOU are trying to CHANGE IT to "and then". You know
it and I know it!

No Bible says, "and then". Almost all say, "and so"
and the rest say, "in this way", or "in this manner".

Thus, there is no reason to believe what you claimed.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

Right! but the "Fullness of the Gentiles" has not yet come in as we both
know.

Once again, you try to change the subject. The subject is
whether or not after the fullness of the Gentiles had come
in, God was going to go back and save national Israel.
It does not say that He would. You change the wording
to read "and then" and that is where you come up with
that idea. (:

Now as usual Jeff, when you are shown a truth, instead
of owning up to it and praising God for now understanding
it, you try to dodge admitting it, snip the text and run away.

The truth is, you now know better. You know it doesn't say
what you originally claimed and you are refusing to admit
that. And that is why when shown this, you kept ignoring it
and had no way (and still don't) to refute what I said, because
you know it is true.
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

The Last Days were in the first century:

Matthew 3:7,10,12

7) But when He saw many of the Pharisees and
Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto
THEM, O GENERATION of vipers, who hath warned
YOU to flee from the wrath to come?
10) And NOW also the axe is laid unto the root
of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth
not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into
the fire.
12) Whose fan is in his hand, and he will
throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat
into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff
with unquenchable fire.

[Timothy]

Post by Pastor Dave
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 06:41:41 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:20:54 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:02:58 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
<Snipped : Build-up semantics, for brevity and sanity's sake>

Post by Pastor Dave
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

Dave......Use whatever words suits you, it still signifies the same thing.

As I thought. You don't care what the Bible says.
You want to believe what you want to believe,

Dave....I gave you God's Word.....

You ignored it.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
but you decided to snip it out.

You cannot be stupid enough to think that you can point
an accusing finger at me, after you snipped almost my
entire post, which contained those very same Scriptures!

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Now we both know that the fulness of the Gentiles
has not come in.

That is your attempt to change the subject, because I have
shaken you up, by pointing out how you are changing
the wording of the Scripture.
Now here, once again, is what we both know you are avoiding,
as you always do, snipping and then attacking me and lying
about what you're doing....
*************************************************

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
I am saying God will save the nation of Israel when all those whom God is
still calling [even today] have been accepted, and Christ Returns to rescue
Jerusalem from their enemies the final time.
Zech. 14.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".
You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.
I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.
So to repeat what you snipped...
As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".
And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".
Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?
Romans 11:25-26a
25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...
Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!
1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.
It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".
Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

I don't...either translation signifies the same thing....you just can't seem
to see it.

They aren't "translations". THE translation is, "and so".
YOU are trying to CHANGE IT to "and then". You know
it and I know it!
No Bible says, "and then". Almost all say, "and so"
and the rest say, "in this way", or "in this manner".

KJV: 'And so'
New Jerusalem: 'And this is how'
New English Bible: 'when that has happened'
NIV: 'And so'
RSV: 'And so'

Oh dear, Jeff, NONE of them say 'and then'. LYING again Jeff? Oh dear oh
dear. Twisting the words of Scripture? Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
Two-faced Jeff likes to point at others for lying, when he does so himself!
Oh dear....

Tim.

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

Post by Pastor Dave
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 06:41:41 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:20:54 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:02:58 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
<Snipped : Build-up semantics, for brevity and sanity's sake>

Post by Pastor Dave
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

Dave......Use whatever words suits you, it still signifies the same thing.

As I thought. You don't care what the Bible says.
You want to believe what you want to believe,

Dave....I gave you God's Word.....

You ignored it.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
but you decided to snip it out.

You cannot be stupid enough to think that you can point
an accusing finger at me, after you snipped almost my
entire post, which contained those very same Scriptures!

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
Now we both know that the fulness of the Gentiles
has not come in.

That is your attempt to change the subject, because I have
shaken you up, by pointing out how you are changing
the wording of the Scripture.
Now here, once again, is what we both know you are avoiding,
as you always do, snipping and then attacking me and lying
about what you're doing....
*************************************************

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
I am saying God will save the nation of Israel when all those whom God is
still calling [even today] have been accepted, and Christ Returns to rescue
Jerusalem from their enemies the final time.
Zech. 14.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".
You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.
I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.
So to repeat what you snipped...
As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".
And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".
Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?
Romans 11:25-26a
25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...
Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!
1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.
It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".
Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

I don't...either translation signifies the same thing....you just can't seem
to see it.

They aren't "translations". THE translation is, "and so".
YOU are trying to CHANGE IT to "and then". You know
it and I know it!
No Bible says, "and then".

The Living Bible does, which is the one I used.
"Yes, it is true that some of the Jews have set themselves against the
Gospel now, but this will last only until all of you Gentiles have come to
Christ--those of you who will.
26 And then all Israel will be saved."

Post by Pastor Dave
Almost all say, "and so"
and the rest say, "in this way", or "in this manner".

Well they all mean a similar thing why keep harping on about it.
But if it makes you happeir chose which ever Bible you wish to read the
passage from it does not detract from it's meaning.

Once the "fullness of the Gentiles" are come in.....Israel will be saved.

Post by Pastor Dave
Thus, there is no reason to believe what you claimed.

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

Right! but the "Fullness of the Gentiles" has not yet come in as we both
know.

Once again, you try to change the subject.

I am progressing onward.....

Post by Pastor Dave
The subject is
whether or not after the fullness of the Gentiles had come
in, God was going to go back and save national Israel.
It does not say that He would.

What do you mean 'go back' you talk in riddles as usual.

Post by Pastor Dave
You change the wording
to read "and then" and that is where you come up with

I didn't 'change' anything it was the word in the Bible I quoted.

Post by Pastor Dave
Now as usual Jeff, when you are shown a truth, instead
of owning up to it and praising God for now understanding
it, you try to dodge admitting it, snip the text and run away.

I haven't run away...I'm still here Dave. {;o;}
And I'm still at a lose as to why you create so much fuss over such a simple
thing!

Jeff...

[Pastor Dave]

On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 20:41:56 GMT, "1st Century Apostolic

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
No Bible says, "and then".

The Living Bible does, which is the one I used.

No wonder, it's a paraphrase. They change a lot of the wording.
They take what they think it is saying and that's what they put
there. That is not a literal translation.

The fact is, you know better. And btw, I looked up the
"New Living" translation and it says, "and so".

Post by 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist

Post by Pastor Dave
Almost all say, "and so"
and the rest say, "in this way", or "in this manner".

Well they all mean a similar thing why keep harping on about it.

No, they do NOT "all mean a similar thing" AND YOU KNOW THAT!

The word "so" would mean, "in this way". That is NOWHERE NEAR
saying, "and then such and such will happen".

It is saying, "And in this way, all Israel will be saved.".

That is totally different than, "And then, all Israel will be
saved.".

Now if you want to try to claim that they are both saying
the same thing, then it would fall on my side, since "so"
cannot speak of another coming event, but "then" can
speak of the "manner" of the preceding statements.

You have a belief that you WANT to keep and so, you don't care
what the word of God actually says. And frankly, how you could
use such a piece of trash like the Living Bible and claim to be a
serious Bible student, I don't know. (: Everyone knows that is
not a Bible for the serious student and that what is in there
can't be trusted as "the word of God". That's not meant as an
attack on you. It's simply a fact of life.

And we both know that you know better, since you immediately
tried to change the subject to whether or not the fullness of the
Gentiles had come in yet, because you were seeking to change
the subject to one in which you could attack me personally and
get others to focus on that.

This is *NOT* about whether or not the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in yet.

This *IS* about the order of things that would make, "all Israel"
saved.

The Scripture says...

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in (whatever number).

"AND *SO*" (and in this manner), all Israel is saved.

That is what it says. You can try to wiggle out of that all you
want to, but you already know I'm right. So you can choose
to hang on to your doctrine, or to submit to the word of God.

You do what you want. I know you and I know how you
operate and thus, I know that you will never confess to
being corrected, at least not by me. You will continue to
insist that you are right and you will continue to try to
change the subject and you will continue to attack me.
You ran away from the last debate we had and you have
run away from this one also. Posting "I'm right here"
does not mean that you haven't run away from it.
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

"Faith is not an intellectual belief. Faith is a belief
with legs on it." - Adrian Rogers

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:11:39 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
As I thought. You don't care what the Bible says.
You want to believe what you want to believe,

You copped out, making excuses not to even attempt to refute what I
responded with:

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".

That the Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is not the church seems evident from the following
considerations:

1) Because "Israel", throughout the entirety of chapter 11, refers to
national Israel, and is everywhere in stark contrast to the "fullness
of the Gentiles".

2) The "Israel" which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is the one that is an enemy of the gospel (11:28). This
is not referring to a group of people who are getting saved during the
time of the fullness of the Gentiles, but who are "enemies" concerning
the gospel. When you're an enemy of the gospel, you're not getting
saved, and this is the condition of this "Israel", during the time of
the fullness of the Gentiles.

3) It is for "your sakes" (Gentiles), that this "Israel", is an enemy
of the gospel (11:28b). If "Israel", here, were a reference to all
the church of both Jews and Gentiles who were getting saved, not only
would they not be the "enemies" of the gospel, but they would not
continue to be contrasted with the "your sakes" who are being saved,
in the very explanation of why they are enemies of the gospel.

4) There is nothing in the context of this chapter (or anywhere in the
Bible, for that matter), which indicates "Israel" is a spiritual
reference to the "church", or the time of the "fullness of the
Gentiles" with which it is constantly contrasted throughout the
chapter. Galatians 6:16 shows that, although Paul condemned Jewish
legalizers, he wished peace on those of national Israel ("Israel of
God") who were truly believers (cf. Rom. 9:6) as well as (kai = "and")
on those who walk according to the principle that circumcision avails
nothing.

5) The Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is the elect Israel which God made irrevocable covenants,
gifts and promises to, and this is national Israel (Isa. 11:11-16;
45:17; 54:6-10; Jer 3:17-23; 30:17-22' 31:31-37; Jer
32:37-41; 33:24-26; Eze. 34:22-31; 37:21-28; 39:25-29; Eze.
40:1-48:35; Ho. 3:5; Joel 3:16-21; Am. 9:14,15; Mic. 7:15-20; Zep.
3:12-20; Zec. 10:6-12; Rom. 11:26; Rev. 7:4). This salvation will be
fulfilled, when the deliverer comes out of Zion (Rom. 11:26; Ps. 14:7;
Isa. 59:20).

6) The contention there can't still be Jews, Gentiles, or a national
Israel, since Christ made the church, ignores the plain, obvious
statement of Scripture: "Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor
to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God". --1 Corinthians 10:32.

7) There are 24 elders (not 12), and two sets of inscriptions in New
Jerusalem, one for the tribes of Israel (Israel), and one for the
apostles (representative of the church):

Re 21:12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at
the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the
names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
Re 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them
the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

That both national Israel and the church are part of the same vine of
faith (Romans 11), doesn't do away with the fact there remain two
branches on the one vine.

Neither "And so", nor "in this manner" presents a problem to the
interpretation this is "Israel", not the church:
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org

Funny Usenet Quotes:

What do you think fog is? Fog is essentially a dense cloud
of water droplets, or cloud, that is close to the ground, so
don't tell me, "clouds are in the sky"...--Pastor Dave
(***@4ax.com)

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:40:03 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:11:39 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
As I thought. You don't care what the Bible says.
You want to believe what you want to believe,

You copped out, making excuses not to even attempt to refute what I

You can lie all you want to. You did not respond on point.

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove

The subject here is whether or not God was going to go back
and save all of national Israel after the fullness of the
Gentiles had come in. That was your claim.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.

I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.

So to repeat what you snipped...

As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".

And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
to be contradicting himself. (:

You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".

Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

When Christianity becomes religion it leaves the heart hungry.

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:59:33 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:13:40 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:59:33 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove

The subject here is whether or not God was going to go back
and save all of national Israel after the fullness of the
Gentiles had come in. That was your claim.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.

I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.

So to repeat what you snipped...

As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".

And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
to be contradicting himself. (:

You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".

Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

"Many fossils have been collected since 1859, tons of
them, yet the impact they have had on our understanding
of the relationships between living organisms is barely
perceptible. ...In fact, I do not think it unfair to
say that fossils, or at least the traditional
interpretation of fossils, have clouded rather than
clarified our attempts to reconstruct phylogeny."
(Fortey, P. L., "Neontological Analysis Versus
Palaeontological Stores," 1982, p. 120-121)

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:16:27 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

That the Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is not the church seems evident from the following
considerations:

1) Because "Israel", throughout the entirety of chapter 11, refers to
national Israel, and is everywhere in stark contrast to the "fullness
of the Gentiles".

2) The "Israel" which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is the one that is an enemy of the gospel (11:28). This
is not referring to a group of people who are getting saved during the
time of the fullness of the Gentiles, but who are "enemies" concerning
the gospel. When you're an enemy of the gospel, you're not getting
saved, and this is the condition of this "Israel", during the time of
the fullness of the Gentiles.

3) It is for "your sakes" (Gentiles), that this "Israel", is an enemy
of the gospel (11:28b). If "Israel", here, were a reference to all
the church of both Jews and Gentiles who were getting saved, not only
would they not be the "enemies" of the gospel, but they would not
continue to be contrasted with the "your sakes" who are being saved,
in the very explanation of why they are enemies of the gospel.

4) There is nothing in the context of this chapter (or anywhere in the
Bible, for that matter), which indicates "Israel" is a spiritual
reference to the "church", or the time of the "fullness of the
Gentiles" with which it is constantly contrasted throughout the
chapter. Galatians 6:16 shows that, although Paul condemned Jewish
legalizers, he wished peace on those of national Israel ("Israel of
God") who were truly believers (cf. Rom. 9:6) as well as (kai = "and")
on those who walk according to the principle that circumcision avails
nothing.

5) The Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is the elect Israel which God made irrevocable covenants,
gifts and promises to, and this is national Israel (Isa. 11:11-16;
45:17; 54:6-10; Jer 3:17-23; 30:17-22' 31:31-37; Jer
32:37-41; 33:24-26; Eze. 34:22-31; 37:21-28; 39:25-29; Eze.
40:1-48:35; Ho. 3:5; Joel 3:16-21; Am. 9:14,15; Mic. 7:15-20; Zep.
3:12-20; Zec. 10:6-12; Rom. 11:26; Rev. 7:4). This salvation will be
fulfilled, when the deliverer comes out of Zion (Rom. 11:26; Ps. 14:7;
Isa. 59:20).

6) The contention there can't still be Jews, Gentiles, or a national
Israel, since Christ made the church, ignores the plain, obvious
statement of Scripture: "Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor
to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God". --1 Corinthians 10:32.

7) There are 24 elders (not 12), and two sets of inscriptions in New
Jerusalem, one for the tribes of Israel (Israel), and one for the
apostles (representative of the church):

Re 21:12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at
the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the
names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
Re 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them
the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

That both national Israel and the church are part of the same vine of
faith (Romans 11), doesn't do away with the fact there remain two
branches on the one vine.

Neither "And so", nor "in this manner" presents a problem to the
interpretation this is "Israel", not the church:

This is just an extra paragraph that I'm adding to see if Dave is
reading what has been written, or if he is just blind spamming his
answers. If you see this Dave, indicate such in your next response.
If you don't, it will be evident to everyone that you haven't read
what you are blind spamming to.
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org


Funny Usenet Quotes:

Now...How high was the highest mountain, DUMB ASS?...The
highest "mountain" was no more than 15 cubits high. --Pastor
Dave (***@4ax.com)

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:19:45 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:16:27 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

That the Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is not the church seems evident from the following

The subject here is whether or not God was going to go back
and save all of national Israel after the fullness of the
Gentiles had come in. That was your claim.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.

I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.

So to repeat what you snipped...

As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".

And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
to be contradicting himself. (:

You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".

Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

"The real mark of someone who wants to know the Truth
is not that they expect others to prove it to them,
but that they seek after it themselves." - Chayil

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:20:31 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:19:45 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:16:27 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

That the Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is not the church seems evident from the following

The subject here is whether or not God was going to go back
and save all of national Israel after the fullness of the
Gentiles had come in. That was your claim.
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".
You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.
I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.
So to repeat what you snipped...
As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".
And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".
Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?
Romans 11:25-26a
25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...
Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!
1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.
It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".
Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

Well, it's evident, if anyone scrolls back up to the post right before
Dave responded, here, that Dave is blind spamming, since he didn't
read the extra paragraph I responded with at the end of the post.
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org


Funny Usenet Quotes:

Now...How high was the highest mountain, DUMB ASS?...The
highest "mountain" was no more than 15 cubits high. --Pastor
Dave (***@4ax.com)

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:33:02 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:20:31 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:19:45 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:16:27 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

That the Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is not the church seems evident from the following

The subject here is whether or not God was going to go back
and save all of national Israel after the fullness of the
Gentiles had come in. That was your claim.
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".
You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.
I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.
So to repeat what you snipped...
As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".
And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".
Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?
Romans 11:25-26a
25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...
Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!
1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.
It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".
Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.
1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!
So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?

Well, it's evident, if anyone scrolls back up to the post right before
Dave responded, here, that Dave is blind spamming, since he didn't
read the extra paragraph I responded with at the end of the post.

You can claim whatever you want to. You did not deal with
the subject at hand, which is you wanting to change it from
saying, "and so", to "and then".

Your attacks on my beliefs, which you pretend are a response
to the subject being addressed, do not negate your obligation
to support your claim about Romans 11:25-26a and pretending
that I'm snipping your so called "proof", when all you did was
snip my words and then respond by trying to divert attention
away from the subject at hand, only shows how dishonest
you are and how little you care for the truth. (:

It is obvious you are not interested in truth, but rather, in
promoting your own doctrinal biases. Back into the kill file
you go for a while. Maybe then you will be able to be honest.
It is certain that you have not been thus far.
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

http://members.aol.com/trwstrong/straight.html

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:20:31 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

Dave, if you are reading this, please indicate that you see this
paragraph, and I'll let you have the last word in this thread. If you
don't indicate you read this, you will be indicating that you are
blind spamming.

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:34:30 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:20:31 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove

Thank you for proving my point.
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

http://wayoflife.org/fbns/aremodern.htm

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:42:13 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".

That the Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is not the church seems evident from the following
considerations:

1) Because "Israel", throughout the entirety of chapter 11, refers to
national Israel, and is everywhere in stark contrast to the "fullness
of the Gentiles".

2) The "Israel" which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is the one that is an enemy of the gospel (11:28). This
is not referring to a group of people who are getting saved during the
time of the fullness of the Gentiles, but who are "enemies" concerning
the gospel. When you're an enemy of the gospel, you're not getting
saved, and this is the condition of this "Israel", during the time of
the fullness of the Gentiles.

3) It is for "your sakes" (Gentiles), that this "Israel", is an enemy
of the gospel (11:28b). If "Israel", here, were a reference to all
the church of both Jews and Gentiles who were getting saved, not only
would they not be the "enemies" of the gospel, but they would not
continue to be contrasted with the "your sakes" who are being saved,
in the very explanation of why they are enemies of the gospel.

4) There is nothing in the context of this chapter (or anywhere in the
Bible, for that matter), which indicates "Israel" is a spiritual
reference to the "church", or the time of the "fullness of the
Gentiles" with which it is constantly contrasted throughout the
chapter. Galatians 6:16 shows that, although Paul condemned Jewish
legalizers, he wished peace on those of national Israel ("Israel of
God") who were truly believers (cf. Rom. 9:6) as well as (kai = "and")
on those who walk according to the principle that circumcision avails
nothing.

5) The Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is the elect Israel which God made irrevocable covenants,
gifts and promises to, and this is national Israel (Isa. 11:11-16;
45:17; 54:6-10; Jer 3:17-23; 30:17-22' 31:31-37; Jer
32:37-41; 33:24-26; Eze. 34:22-31; 37:21-28; 39:25-29; Eze.
40:1-48:35; Ho. 3:5; Joel 3:16-21; Am. 9:14,15; Mic. 7:15-20; Zep.
3:12-20; Zec. 10:6-12; Rom. 11:26; Rev. 7:4). This salvation will be
fulfilled, when the deliverer comes out of Zion (Rom. 11:26; Ps. 14:7;
Isa. 59:20).

6) The contention there can't still be Jews, Gentiles, or a national
Israel, since Christ made the church, ignores the plain, obvious
statement of Scripture: "Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor
to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God". --1 Corinthians 10:32.

7) There are 24 elders (not 12), and two sets of inscriptions in New
Jerusalem, one for the tribes of Israel (Israel), and one for the
apostles (representative of the church):

Re 21:12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at
the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the
names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
Re 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them
the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

That both national Israel and the church are part of the same vine of
faith (Romans 11), doesn't do away with the fact there remain two
branches on the one vine.

Neither "And so", nor "in this manner" presents a problem to the
interpretation this is "Israel", not the church:
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org

Funny Usenet Quotes:

We should think ourselves lucky, the pressure on the server
when an email announcement is sent will be pretty hairy.
-- Jeff Gaines (***@news.individual.net)

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:37:26 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:42:13 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove

The subject is whether or not it says that God would go back
and save all of national Israel, as you claimed.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.

I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.

So to repeat what you snipped...

As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".

And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
to be contradicting himself. (:

You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".

Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:57:15 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org


Funny Usenet Quotes:

I just love the way you Futurists keep claiming that there's
all of this "Biblical evidence" for your claims and yet, can't
provide anything to refute one single thing that I post.
-- Pastor Dave (***@4ax.com)

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:14:24 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:57:15 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove

The subject here is whether or not God was going to go back
and save all of national Israel after the fullness of the
Gentiles had come in. That was your claim.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.

I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.

So to repeat what you snipped...

As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".

And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
to be contradicting himself. (:

You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".

Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

"Few paleontologists have, I think ever supposed that
fossils, by themselves, provide grounds for the
conclusion that evolution has occurred. An examination
of the work of those paleontologists who have been
particularly concerned with the relationship between
paleontology and evolutionary theory, for example that
of G. G. Simpson and S. J. Gould, reveals a mindfulness
of the fact that the record of evolution, like any
other historical record, must be construed within a
complex of particular and general preconceptions not
the least of which is the hypothesis that evolution has
occurred. ...The fossil record doesn't even provide any
evidence in support of Darwinian theory except in the
weak sense that the fossil record is compatible with
it, just as it is compatible with other evolutionary
theories, and revolutionary theories and special
creationist theories and even historical theories."
(Kitts, David B., "Search for the Holy Transformation,"
review of Evolution of Living Organisms, by Pierre-P.
Grassé, Paleobiology, vol. 5, 1979, pp. 353-354)

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:16:59 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org

Funny Usenet Quotes:

What do you think fog is? Fog is essentially a dense cloud
of water droplets, or cloud, that is close to the ground, so
don't tell me, "clouds are in the sky"...--Pastor Dave
(***@4ax.com)

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:20:29 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:16:59 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove

The subject here is whether or not God was going to go back
and save all of national Israel after the fullness of the
Gentiles had come in. That was your claim.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.

I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.

So to repeat what you snipped...

As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".

And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
to be contradicting himself. (:

You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".

Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

Don't put a question mark where God put a period.

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:20:58 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org

Funny Usenet Quotes:

We should think ourselves lucky, the pressure on the server
when an email announcement is sent will be pretty hairy.
-- Jeff Gaines (***@news.individual.net)

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:42:13 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".

That the Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is not the church seems evident from the following
considerations:

1) Because "Israel", throughout the entirety of chapter 11, refers to
national Israel, and is everywhere in stark contrast to the "fullness
of the Gentiles".

2) The "Israel" which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is the one that is an enemy of the gospel (11:28). This
is not referring to a group of people who are getting saved during the
time of the fullness of the Gentiles, but who are "enemies" concerning
the gospel. When you're an enemy of the gospel, you're not getting
saved, and this is the condition of this "Israel", during the time of
the fullness of the Gentiles.

3) It is for "your sakes" (Gentiles), that this "Israel", is an enemy
of the gospel (11:28b). If "Israel", here, were a reference to all
the church of both Jews and Gentiles who were getting saved, not only
would they not be the "enemies" of the gospel, but they would not
continue to be contrasted with the "your sakes" who are being saved,
in the very explanation of why they are enemies of the gospel.

4) There is nothing in the context of this chapter (or anywhere in the
Bible, for that matter), which indicates "Israel" is a spiritual
reference to the "church", or the time of the "fullness of the
Gentiles" with which it is constantly contrasted throughout the
chapter. Galatians 6:16 shows that, although Paul condemned Jewish
legalizers, he wished peace on those of national Israel ("Israel of
God") who were truly believers (cf. Rom. 9:6) as well as (kai = "and")
on those who walk according to the principle that circumcision avails
nothing.

5) The Israel which will be saved when the fullness of the Gentiles
has come in, is the elect Israel which God made irrevocable covenants,
gifts and promises to, and this is national Israel (Isa. 11:11-16;
45:17; 54:6-10; Jer 3:17-23; 30:17-22' 31:31-37; Jer
32:37-41; 33:24-26; Eze. 34:22-31; 37:21-28; 39:25-29; Eze.
40:1-48:35; Ho. 3:5; Joel 3:16-21; Am. 9:14,15; Mic. 7:15-20; Zep.
3:12-20; Zec. 10:6-12; Rom. 11:26; Rev. 7:4). This salvation will be
fulfilled, when the deliverer comes out of Zion (Rom. 11:26; Ps. 14:7;
Isa. 59:20).

6) The contention there can't still be Jews, Gentiles, or a national
Israel, since Christ made the church, ignores the plain, obvious
statement of Scripture: "Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor
to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God". --1 Corinthians 10:32.

7) There are 24 elders (not 12), and two sets of inscriptions in New
Jerusalem, one for the tribes of Israel (Israel), and one for the
apostles (representative of the church):

Re 21:12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at
the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the
names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
Re 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them
the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

That both national Israel and the church are part of the same vine of
faith (Romans 11), doesn't do away with the fact there remain two
branches on the one vine.

Neither "And so", nor "in this manner" presents a problem to the
interpretation this is "Israel", not the church:

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:46:31 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove

The subject here is whether or not God was going to go back
and save all of national Israel after the fullness of the
Gentiles had come in. That was your claim.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.

I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.

So to repeat what you snipped...

As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".

And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
to be contradicting himself. (:

You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".

Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

"Atheism is folly, and atheists are the greatest fools
in nature; for they see there is a world that could not
make itself, and yet they will not own there is a God
that made it." - Matthew Henry

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:00:32 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org


Funny Usenet Quotes:

Now...How high was the highest mountain, DUMB ASS?...The
highest "mountain" was no more than 15 cubits high. --Pastor
Dave (***@4ax.com)

[Pastor Dave]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:14:43 -0500, www.pulpitfire.org

Post by www.pulpitfire.org
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:00:32 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove

The subject here is whether or not God was going to go back
and save all of national Israel after the fullness of the
Gentiles had come in. That was your claim.

You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

You snipped and completely ignored the points I made and so,
I see no reason to think that a discussion can be had with you.
Nor do I entertain someone attempting to refute one Scripture,
by posting another, thereby pitting Scripture against itself and
you have clearly proved that you know that you are attempting
to change the wording of Romans 11:25-26a.

I will repeat what I already posted and until you can respond to
it, specifically and directly, I will not discuss this with you.

So to repeat what you snipped...

As to Romans 11:25-26, you are changing the wording from,
"AND SO", to "AND THEN".

And you are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be saved"?
How is it that he could be saying that all of national Israel
would be saved, if he just finished saying that "they are not
all Israel", referring to those born into national Israel?
That doesn't make any sense and Paul would be blatantly
contradicting himself. (: He also said that the bondwoman
shall not be heir with the free. So can you explain how it is
that what you believe could be true, given what else Paul
had to say? For your belief to be true, Paul would have
to be contradicting himself. (:

You are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and you are changing
the wording of the passage. (: In reality, it says, "and SO".

Now what does that word "so" mean? It simply means,
"in this manner". What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (in this manner), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

So now the question remains, why do you seek to change
the wording of the passage from "and so", to "and then"?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

"Theology and ethics are inextricably bound together.
Yet under the supposed banner of unity, we have
harbored enemy ships - as long as they flew our flag.
That policy must change. Tolerating enemies of the
historic Christian faith as though they were our
brethren is not love, but adultery. The substance
of the faith is the only basis for unity."
- The Agony of Deceit, p23

[www.pulpitfire.org]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:19:16 GMT,

Post by Pastor Dave
You are intentionally ignoring the fact that you are attempting
to change the phrase "and so", to "and then".

Whether it's "and so", "in this manner", or "then", doesn't disprove
that this "Israel" is Israel, not the church:

Romans 11
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 fullness of the Gentiles be
come in.
26 And so [in this manner] all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn
away ungodliness from Jacob:

In what manner?

1) In the manner of Israel (not the church or a "spiritual Israel")
being partly blinded until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
(past).

2) In the manner "it is written" of Israel. How was it written? It
was written that "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". Neither the church, nor
Israel was spiritually or physically delivered from anything in your
A.D. 70 "return of Christ", Dave. "In this manner" is the manner in
which it was written, that is, that Christ will come and turn
ungodliness away from "Jacob", which is "Israel", which is neither the
"church", nor the "fullness of the Gentiles".
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this finished work alone for salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-3;
Eph. 2:8-10).

• Daily devotionals • Community forum
• Bible questions and answers • Live chatting
• Free at www.pulpitfire.org

Funny Usenet Quotes:

We should think ourselves lucky, the pressure on the server
when an email announcement is sent will be pretty hairy.
-- Jeff Gaines (***@news.individual.net)