[Dr. Eckleburg]

"all Israel will be saved."

"For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel...

That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed." -- Romans 9:6,8

That's the last comment I'm making on this thread regarding Israel. Somehow the thread has been conveniently side-tracked off the pope's foolish and destructive agenda and onto another topic entirely.

Obviously the criticisms of this socialistic document out of Rome were hitting too close to the uncomfortable truth.

[Buggman]

A text without a context is a pretext for a prooftext. Romans 9 makes it clear that by "Israel," Paul is talking about the blood descendents of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who at the present time have not accepted their King. He goes on to point out that God has always made a point of pruning His tree. In chapter 10, he explains that the current blindness was not a surprise, but was pre-ordained.

In chapter 11,

1) Paul starts by pointing out that God has always kept a remnant of the faithful even when the vast majority were in open idolatry.

2) He goes on to point out that the Gentiles partake of Israel's (family) tree by a miracle of God. He warns that the Gentile branches can be broken off just as swiftly as the natural branches.

3)

3) And it is in the light of the above that he said, "all Israel will be saved, as it is written . . . Concerning the Gospel, they are enemies for your (the Gentiles') sakes, but in regards to election, they are beloved for the Patriarch's sakes."

The only way you can get around that plain interpretation is to either deny the "remnant of Israel now/all of Israel in the future" dichotomy that Paul is clearly setting up or to claim that the Church is the enemy of the Gospel because of the Gentiles that were grafted in. Frankly, I know Jews who might agree with that second interpretation, given how the visible church has treated the Lord's people in the name of a distorted "gospel"--but I wouldn't think that you'd prefer that interpretation to a straightforward reading that the Father will be reconciled with His firstborn son.

Shalom.

[editor-surveyor]

"Obviously the criticisms of this socialistic document out of Rome were hitting too close to the uncomfortable truth."

The word 'obviously' should be in bright fluorescent red! Troubling that they cannot see just how transparent they are.