Featured Irresistible Grace

Trying to reach you brother . I pray you remember what I'm saying and the Lord brings you out . God bless . Start researching the P . that was my way out of the maze of Calvinism and Lordship salvation . God bless .

 

The issue is that on Election and predestination ( they both don't mean the same) can't have several meanings and they are all correct obviously. Just like tongues. But if it is the case that God has really hand picked people before they were born to be saved when they exist later then this is radically wrong ,if it is wrong. Its not like ' head coverings ' or do we use grape juice or wine . Then if we look at all 5 points being wrong. Well what is going on if that's the case ? that's impressively wrong .

 

Depends, some say unless you are , your not saved ,which is dangerous.

 

I look at "when the fullness of Gentiles come in" as the completion of an intended plan whereas you see it as the beginning of their failure - wouldn't your interpretation have been better captured with a "when the Gentiles no longer come in, then Israel will be saved"?

And I guess that stems from our very different understanding of what causes one to be born of God - whether it is God Himself birthing His children of promise or if man causes himself to be born by his faith. That in itself is a larger discussion.

But let's trace God's plan here where God determines to conclude all in unbelief so that He can have mercy on all. The gentiles first did not believe God but now are receiving mercy and are reconciled. Likewise, Israel is now not believing God but will receive mercy too in the future. And their reconciliation is the end of the world. That's all I see it for.

But you add more to this - you're saying that the Gentiles that are already reconciled now and who are already receiving mercy will again fall into unbelief and these gentile branches will be cut off and then Israel will receive mercy. So the end of the world cannot yet come because now the cut off Gentiles will again have to be shown mercy for their unbelief and will need to be grafted in again and be reconciled all over again. Where do you find evidence for this additional loop of reconciliation when no such thing is mentioned in Rom 11?

This is a principle being stated - with both the IF and the ELSE. It does not explicitly say what will transpire here, does it? That's something you're interpreting from elsewhere (and which I've argued against above), but to say this is the verse which concludes that the Gentiles will no longer believe and be cut off is at best ignorant of interpretative principles. Do you likewise read say Rom 2:26 and conclude that the gentiles have indeed kept the righteousness of the law - or do you read it merely as a hypothetical to make an argument for a principle?

 

I do not wish to digress, but am curious to know why you find the resurrection illogical?

Let's get this out of the way too. 1) What according to you have I not believed in Rom 11:25-32? and 2) what have I said that led you to perceiving this? Specific statements would help - for eg: "you don't seem to believe all Israel will be saved because you said ..." or "you don't seem to believe all of God's promises to the fathers will be fulfilled because you said ..."

Thanks. That's all I needed to know.

 

This is a very interesting nuance - I was wondering why you'd added the phrase "that breathes air".
So just to make sure I follow rightly, are you saying that of ALL Israel, many rebels in heart will be killed and the remaining Israel that haven't been killed and who are still "breathing air" will be saved? So basically All does not really mean ALL but a subset that qualifies as not being rebellious? How is it different from the present scenario where the rebellious are still perishing and the remaining are being saved in Christ?