ECT MADs Are Weird...

[Danoh]

Like I said, if you understood Gen 48:19, you wouldn't be so confused about Romans 11, and claim Israel had a prophetic clock that stopped.

(Gen 48:19 YLT) And his father refuseth, and saith, `I have known, my son, I have known; he also becometh a people, and he also is great, and yet, his young brother is greater than he, and his seed is the fulness of the nations;'

(Rom 11:25 YLT) For I do not wish you to be ignorant, brethren, of this secret -- that ye may not be wise in your own conceits -- that hardness in part to Israel hath happened till the fulness of the nations may come in;

First off, books based know it all, neither fulness has to do with people as a number, rather, with the volume (fulness) of God's blessing upon and through the respective people each passage is addressing .

Paul has been describing that since the latter half of Romans 3.

While, in the beginning of Romans 3 and in 9-11, he relates how that Israel's promised fullness was now yet future.

Neither of those two have to do with Gen. 48:19.

That passage is the issue of how that the fulness of God's blessing in and through a multitude would be upon both boys; that Joseph had no cause to fuss about who was first and who was not.

This was why that young Israelite that I mentioned put no difference between himself and that North American Jew; why he said what he did to him.

Regretabbly, it took that bastard from hell: Hitler and his death camps, to bring together as one people the Lord had desired of them in Him, some two thousand years ago, in Early Acts.

It's interesting - that Palestinian did not see that in his "cousin;" just as God told Abraham would be the case.

Of course, now you'll distort all this too.

 

[Nick M]

Romans 11

11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles.

Paul meant through their joining together that salvation has come to the gentiles. The Holy Spirit slipped up in his wording. lain:

 

[Lon]

I mean, regardless of just about any Scriptural topic you might throw at them; you sit down to discuss it with them and not only do they right away want to go by the Scripture, but know where all the verses are without having to break much of a sweat.

What's the matter with these people - don't they know the Bible is not actually for that kind of level of familiarity with Genesis thru Revelation?

Someone ought to point these weird people to a nearby bookstore...all kinds of books "about" the Bible out there.

No need to know the passages, let alone, that readily at hand.

That's embarrassing to others...

I am not MAD, but good challenge to all of us. I had a professor, Dr. John Mitchell, that could literally (literally) quote the bible chapter and verse. One time, in class, I decided to find an obscure passage from Leviticus to stump the old guy. I'll be dog-gonned if he didn't tell me the exact chapter and verse when I quoted it :noway:

"Don't you folks ever read your Bibles?" -John G. Mitchell

 

[Danoh]

Good challenge to all of us. I had a professor, Dr. John Mitchell, that could literally (literally) quote the bible chapter and verse. One time, in class, I decided to find an obscure passage from Leviticus to stump the old guy. I'll be dog-gonned if he didn't tell me the exact chapter and verse when I quoted it :noway:

"Don't you folks ever read your Bibles?" -John G. Mitchell

J. C. O'Hair of old North Shore Church, was like that.

As is C.R. Jordan of Grace School of the Bible, Shorewood Bible Church, Grace Impact. There is simply no stumping the man.

I once met someone who actually spoke in KJV English. He was another person who could cite entire chapters no matter what was thrown at him.

I have friends whose kids are like that with the entire Koran.

Read it once myself. Didn't care to memorize it though. Just wanted to know what was in it. Same with the book of Mormon.

I just love books of all kinds. Lol, I'm rambling again...

 

[tetelestai]

First off, books based know it all, neither fulness has to do with people as a number, rather, with the volume (fulness) of God's blessing upon and through the respective people each passage is addressing .

Has nothing to do with blessings

(Luke 21:24) They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Luke 21:24 was fulfilled in 70AD

Israel's promised fullness was now yet future.

Again, you fail to understand the difference between Israel and Judah.

Neither of those two have to do with Gen. 48:19.

Romans 11 specifically deals with Gen 48:19

You have yet to give a valid explanation of Gen 48:19

That passage is the issue of how that the fulness of God's blessing in and through a multitude would be upon both boys; that Joseph had no cause to fuss about who was first and who was not.

Jacob said Ephraim's descendants would become a multitude of nations, even greater than Manasseh, who's descendants would also be a great people.

Regretabbly, it took that bastard from hell: Hitler and his death camps, to bring together as one people the Lord had desired of them in Him, some two thousand years ago, in Early Acts.

If these Jews you speak of reject Christ Jesus, then neither of them are "in Him".

 

[Danoh]

One, I did not define what I meant by in him.

Two, who said anything about Christ rejectors being in Him?

You, Tet, are amazingly unable to get at another's intended sense.

 

[tetelestai]

Romans 11

11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles.

You just don't get it.

(Deut 32:21 KJV) They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.

In all of the Bible, there is only one group of people who were called "not a people". They were the Israelites from the 10 tribes who were NOT Jews.

(Hosea 1:9) Then the LORD said, "Call him Lo-Ammi (which means "not my people"), for you are not my people, and I am not your God.

(Isaiah 7:8) 8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people.

Which is why you are so confused with 1 Peter 2:10

(1 Peter 2:10) Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.

 

[Lon]

I have friends whose kids are like that with the entire Koran.

Read it once myself. Didn't care to memorize it though. Just wanted to know what was in it. Same with the book of Mormon.

I just love books of all kinds. Lol, I'm rambling again...

Have read the same, though I can't remember if I skipped quite a bit at points (think I did).

 

[tetelestai]

Romans 11

11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles.

(Rom 11:12 KJV) Now if the fall of them (Jews) be the riches of the world (pagan Gentiles), and the diminishing of them (Jews) the riches of the Gentiles (Israelites from 10 tribes, "the nations"); how much more their (Jews) fulness?


There are 3 groups of people in verse 12

1) Jews
2) Pagan Gentiles
3) Israelites from the 10 tribes

Young's makes the distinction even clearer:

(Rom 11:12 YLT) and if the fall of them [is] the riches of a world, and the diminution of them the riches of nations, how much more the fulness of them?

1) "them" = Jews
2) "world" = pagan Gentiles
3) "nations" = Israelites from 10 tribes.

If Jews represent all 12 tribes, and Gentiles represent all non-Israelites, there is no one left to represent the world.

 

[patrick jane]

(Rom 11:12 KJV) Now if the fall of them (Jews) be the riches of the world (pagan Gentiles), and the diminishing of them (Jews) the riches of the Gentiles (Israelites from 10 tribes, "the nations"); how much more their (Jews) fulness?


There are 3 groups of people in verse 12

1) Jews
2) Pagan Gentiles
3) Israelites from the 10 tribes

Young's makes the distinction even clearer:

(Rom 11:12 YLT) and if the fall of them [is] the riches of a world, and the diminution of them the riches of nations, how much more the fulness of them?

1) "them" = Jews
2) "world" = pagan Gentiles
3) "nations" = Israelites from 10 tribes.

If Jews represent all 12 tribes, and Gentiles represent all non-Israelites, there is no one left to represent the world.

You make no sense at all

 

[tetelestai]

You make no sense at all

That's because you're a Dispensationalist, and have been taught that all Israelites are Jews.

 

[Nick M]

You make no sense at all

Much like a lying politician who is caught in double talk. Don't you think? Glad to know you can see right through the Chewbacca defense.

 

[Danoh]

You make no sense at all

Well, that is how one separates a passage from all the rest that it make sense :rotfl:

Then again, some of "our own" do something similar with other passages Romans, so I guess it balances out, lol

 

[tetelestai]

Much like a lying politician who is caught in double talk.

Nope.

Just exposing your ignorance regarding who "not a people" were.

 

[Danoh]

Nope.

Just exposing your ignorance regarding who "not a people" were.

More like exposing your own ignorance of how to properly study a thing out.

 

[tetelestai]

Then again, some of "our own" do something similar with other passages Romans, so I guess it balances out, lol

(Deut 32:21 KJV) They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.


Please tell us who "those which are not a people" are, and who "a foolish nation" were?

 

[tetelestai]

More like exposing your own ignorance of how to properly study a thing out.

I have studied it out.

I know who "not a people" were.

Darby Followers are clueless. They claim "not a people" in 1 Peter 2:10 were Jews.

 

[Danoh]

(Deut 32:21 KJV) They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.


Please tell us who "those which are not a people" are, and who "a foolish nation" were?

The Little Flock.

Would you like an anecdote, lol

 

[tetelestai]

The Little Flock.

How in the world were the Little Flock "not a people", and a "foolish nation"?

 

[Danoh]

How in the world were the Little Flock "not a people", and a "foolish nation"?

There you go - that's it - "were."

Now study it out in Scripture from both sides of the fence. Then come back and post your findings.