Romans 11:26a.... And so all Israel will be saved.

[EarlyActs]

Think Jesus statement referred to the Jewish Peoples at that time of His first coming would on the hole reject Him as promised messiah, but at His second coming, the living Jews indeed shall cry out to Him 'grieving .mourning over Him, and saying Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord"

No it’s an ethical reality right then. It is not a prediction.

The mourning over him has taken place as noted in John, a fulfilled event.

 

[EarlyActs]

The power of the Bible is not predicting our future. Even though we know the end.

It is asserting that Christ was enthroned in the resurrection and all people , high or low, must honor him. Ps 2 and 110, and Acts 2:30,31.

 

[EarlyActs]

Jn 19:37 is one of many places where the fulfillment is clearly in the Gospel event, not future judgement, and where the repeat quote in the Rev shows that it has a present (that generation) meaning. Another major one is the Lk 23:24 where the line about the dread of the judgement that is to take place in that generation, which is also mentioned in the Rev.

The synoptics 'future' is mostly about the end of that generation (Mt 24 up to 29), with the allowance that the world might not end by then. If you know the Rev, you know the first page says it is about that time also, but when you get to the end of the document, yes, this world is gone and a new has come, after Christ has reigned a long time. Very similar outlooks.

 

[Josheb]

Think Jesus statement referred to the Jewish Peoples at that time of His first coming would on the hole reject Him as promised messiah, but at His second coming, the living Jews indeed shall cry out to Him 'grieving .mourning over Him, and saying Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord"

...or cry out in despair for the mountains to fall on them to spare them from divine judgment.

 

[EarlyActs]

Corr: Mt 24 up to v29. The original understanding of the apostles was that the world would end after the destruction of Israel.

 

[JesusFan]

Corr: Mt 24 up to v29. The original understanding of the apostles was that the world would end after the destruction of Israel.

Full preterism is heretical view

 

[JesusFan]

...or cry out in despair for the mountains to fall on them to spare them from divine judgment.

Not would be before His second coming event itself

 

[Josheb]

Not would be before His second coming event itself

Meaningless assembly of words

Do you think there will absolutely no people at all considering self-destruction to avoid God's wrath (regardless of the timing of Rev. 6:16)?

 

[EarlyActs]

Full preterism is heretical view

So? I'm not. As my post says, the expectation of the apostles (not the history) was that the world would end right after the DoJ. That's clear from Mt 24 or even unrelated passages like I Cor 7 about marriage, and from the fact that 2 Peter 3 has to explain a delay. If you are explaining a delay, you are not "full" because the coming in judgement has not yet happened. Which is exactly what 2P3 says.

 

[Josheb]

So? I'm not.

I'm just covering the base. Full-preterism is wrong. If you're not full-pret then that's good. No need for further commentary or explanation.

As my post says, the expectation of the apostles (not the history) was that the world would end right after the DoJ.

That is incorrect. They did not expect the world to end. They expected the world to be changed. The changes they were expecting were sometimes worded in extremely violent terms, apocalyptic imagery, and fundamentally alterations at the foundation of existence but the world was not going to cease to exist.

That's clear from..

No, it's not. It might be clear from your interpretation of those various passages, but those interpretations are inconsistent with the whole of scripture. The very first verse of the Bible is God creating both the heavens and the earth, and the very last verse of the Bible is about Jesus...... coming to earth. He cannot come to earth if there is no earth. At the foundation of the "world's-gonna-end" position is false presupposition God wants to, and will, destroy His own creation. God created creation for a purpose, and He always and everywhere succeeds. The purpose of creating creation is not creation's destruction.


That's just dumb.


And, just saying, any full-pret who thinks the apostles expected the world would literally end has contradicted himself because the full-pret version of that would be the world has already ended and you and I aren't really here .
.

 

[JesusFan]

Meaningless assembly of words

Do you think there will absolutely no people at all considering self-destruction to avoid God's wrath (regardless of the timing of Rev. 6:16)?

Yes per the Bible there will be, but those would not be the jews alive when the See Jesus, as they will cry out to Him now "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord"

 

[Josheb]

Yes per the Bible there will be...

That's all that needs to be said. The point is made and there's no "but..." to it. Whatever else might occur the fact is some will seek to avoid judgement with their own destruction.

 

[EarlyActs]

Yes per the Bible there will be, but those would not be the jews alive when the See Jesus, as they will cry out to Him now "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord"

I think you have a few bit piece verses that you are trying to string together into a system. It doesn’t work.

 

[JesusFan]

I think you have a few bit piece verses that you are trying to string together into a system. It doesn’t work.

Could be that, but also think that while right now the Lord deals with Spiritual Israel of saved jews and saved Gentiles, He still has plans in mind for national Israel to be reborn as a nation unto Yahweh and His King the Lord Jesus

 

[EarlyActs]

Could be that, but also think that while right now the Lord deals with Spiritual Israel of saved jews and saved Gentiles, He still has plans in mind for national Israel to be reborn as a nation unto Yahweh and His King the Lord Jesus

Were they ever? Would there be a temple or is John 2&4 true? Is it possible after all the qualifications of Rom 1-11 that 'all Israel' in v26 is just another way of saying 'all the seed of Abraham' (which has been explained as those who believe)?

 

[Josheb]

Were they ever? Would there be a temple or is John 2&4 true? Is it possible after all the qualifications of Rom 1-11 that 'all Israel' in v26 is just another way of saying 'all the seed of Abraham' (which has been explained as those who believe)?

Or "all those in whom God perseveres" (because that is what the name "Israel" literally means)? All those in whom God perseveres will be saved. Not all Israel are those in whom God perseveres, but the ones in whom God perseveres will be saved.

 

[brightfame52]

Scripture reveals Two Israel's Rom 9:6

6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel #1, which are of Israel #2:

Scripture reveals Two Jerusalems Gal 4:25-26

25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem #1 which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

26 But Jerusalem #2 which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. 8

 

[brightfame52]

The Church is the New Israel composed of both saved jews and gentiles. That both saved jews and gentiles are the new manifestion of Israel is understood by these inspiried words Eph 2:12

That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

Now Christ has made them One Commonwealth Israel Eph 2:14

14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one[commonwealth/citizenship], and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

Saved Gentiles now have citizenship with Israel

19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens[in the commonwealth of Israel] with the saints, and of the household of God;

This is also pictured in Rom 11 with the Olive Tree, with saved Gentiles being Grafted into the citizenship with saved Israel the household of God 9

 

[Hobie]

It has been on my heart to have a better understanding of Israel according to the Bible.

I have started researching this and will do so in depth, time permitting.

Without getting into dispensationalism or eschatology, (perhaps that is needed?) I am seeking to find answers in my research to Romans 11:26a.

Not looking to debate this subject. There are many on this forum that are educated on this and I would like feedback for my research.

The following is an excerpt on the 3 views of this verse, it will continue in a second post.


26a. And so all Israel will be saved.

Three Interpretations

A. The Most Popular Theory​

“All Israel” indicates the mass of Jews living on earth in the end-time. The full number of elect Gentiles will be gathered in. After that the mass of the Jews—Israel on a large scale—will be saved. This will happen just previous to, or at the very moment of, Christ’s Return.

For the names of some of the advocates of this theory see p. 307.

Evaluation​

a. The Greek word οὕτως does not mean then or after that. The rendering “Then all Israel will be saved” is wrong. In none of the other occurrences of this word in Romans, or anywhere else in the New Testament, does this word have that meaning. It means so, in this manner, thus.

b. This theory also fails to do justice to the word all in “all Israel.” Does not “all Israel” sound very strange as a description of the (comparatively) tiny fraction of Jews who will still be living on earth just before, or at the moment of, Christ’s Return?

c. The context clearly indicates that in writing about the salvation of Israelites and Gentiles Paul is not limiting his thoughts to what will take place in the future. He very definitely includes what is happening now. See especially verses 30, 31.

d. Would it not be strange for God to single out for a very special favor—nothing less than salvation full and free—exactly that generation of Jews which will have hardened its heart against the testimony of the longest train of Christian witnesses, a train extending all the way from the days of Christ’s sojourn on earth—in fact, in a sense, all the way from Abraham—to the close of the new dispensation?

e. The reader has not been prepared for the idea of a mass conversion of Israelites. All along Paul stresses the very opposite, namely, the salvation, in any age (past, present, future) of a remnant. See the passages listed under 11:5, p. 363. If Rom. 11:26 actually teaches a mass conversion of Jews, would it not seem as if Paul is saying, “Forget what I told you previously”?

f. If Paul is here predicting such a future mass conversion of Jews, is he not, contradicting, if not the letter, at least the spirit, of his earlier statement found in 1 Thess. 2:14b–16:

“… the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, and do not please God, and are hostile to all men, in that they try to prevent us from speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved, so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But upon them the wrath [of God] has come to the uttermost”32<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title="">2</a>?

g. The immediately following context (11:26b, 27) refers to a coming of “the Deliverer” who will turn away godlessness and remove sin from Jacob. Was not that the purpose of Christ’s first coming? But the popular interpretation of Rom. 11:26 predicts a mass conversion of Jews in connection with Christ’s second coming. That theory is, accordingly, not in harmony with the context.

For these several reasons Interpretation A. should be rejected.

B. John Calvin’s Theory​

“All Israel” refers to the total number of the elect throughout history, all those who are ultimately saved both Jews and Gentiles. In his Commentary on his passage Calvin expresses himself as follows:

“I extend the word Israel to all the people of God, according to this meaning: when the Gentiles shall come in, the Jews also will return from their defection to the obedience of faith, and thus will be completed the salvation of the whole Israel of God, which must be gathered from both …”

The same view is defended by J. A. C. Van Leeuwen and D. Jacobs, op. cit., p. 227; and, in a sense, by Karl Barth, Der Römerbrief, Zürich, 1954, p. 401; English tr., p. 416.

Evaluation​

Inasfar as Calvin interprets the term Israel spiritually—“Israel” refers to the elect—his theory must be considered correct. Cf. Rom. 9:6. Also his claim that the section, verses 25–32 (considered as a unit), describes the one people of God cannot be successfully refuted. On the other hand, Calvin’s application of the term “Israel,” in verse 26, to all the people of God, both Jews and Gentiles, is wrong. In the preceding context the words Israel, Israelites(s) occur no less than eleven times: 9:4; 9:6 (twice); 9:27; 9:31; 10:19; 10:21; 11:1; 11:2; 11:7; and 11:25. In each case the reference is clearly to Jews, never to Gentiles. What compelling reason can there be, therefore, to adopt a different meaning for the term Israel as used here in 11:26? To be sure, at the close of verse 25 the apostle makes mention of the Gentiles, but only in order to indicate that the partial hardening of the Jews will not cease until every elect Gentile will have been brought into the kingdom. Accordingly, Paul is still talking about the Jews. He does so also in verse 26b. Even verse 28 contains a clear reference to Jews. Not until verses 30–32 are reached does the apostle cause the entire body of the elect, both Jews and Gentiles, to pass in review together.

Therefore, while appreciating the good elements in Calvin’s explanation, we cannot agree with him in interpreting the term “all Israel” in 11:26 as referring to all the elect, both Jews and Gentiles. A passage should be interpreted in light of its context. In the present case the context points to Jews, not to Gentiles, nor in verses 26–29 to a combination of Jews and Gentiles.

C. A Third Theory​

The term “All Israel” means the total number of elect Jews, the sum of all Israel’s “remnants.” “All Israel” parallels “the fullness of the Gentiles.” Verses 25. 26 make it very clear that God is dealing with both groups, has been saving them, is saving them, and is going to save them. And if “All Israel” indicates, as it does, that not a single elect Israelite will be lacking “when the roll is called up yonder,” then “the fulness of the Gentiles” similarly shows that when the attendance is checked every elect Gentile will answer “Present.”

For the meaning of “will be saved” see on 1:16, p. 60. For Jew and Gentile the way of salvation is the same. In fact, their paths run side by side. Opportunity to be saved will have ended for both when Christ returns. As indicated previously, the two—“the fullness of the Gentiles” and “All Israel”—constitute one organism, symbolized by a single olive tree. It should be clear that if, in the present connection, fullness must be interpreted in its unlimited sense, the same holds for all in “All Israel.”

The words “And so” are explained by Paul himself. They indicate, “In such a marvelous manner,” a manner no one could have guessed. If God had not revealed this “mystery” to Paul, he would not have known it. It was, in fact, astonishing. The very rejection of the majority of Israelites, throughout history recurring again and again, was, is, and will be, a link in the effectuation of Israel’s salvation. For details, see above, p. 366, 367, 377, 378 (Rom. 11:11, 12, 25).

Although, to be sure, this interpretation is not nearly as popular as is theory A, among its defenders are men of recognized scholarship (as holds also, of course, for theories A and B). Let me mention but a few.

One of the propositions successfully defended by S. Volbeda, when he received his summa cum laude doctor of theology degree from the Free University of Amsterdam was: “The term ‘all Israel’ in Rom. 11:26a must be understood as indicating the collective elect out of Israel.”32<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" title="">3</a>

H. Bavinck, author of the four-volume work Gereformeerde Dogmatiek [Reformed Dogmatics], states, “ ‘All Israel’ in 11:26, is not the people of Israel, destined to be converted collectively, neither is it the church consisting of united Jews and Gentiles; but it is the full number which during the course of the centuries is gathered out of Israel.”32<a href="#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3" title="">4</a> Cf. H. Hoeksema, God’s Eternal Good Pleasure, Grand Rapids, 1950, p. 465.

And L. Berkhof states, “ ‘All Israel’ is to be understood as a designation not of the whole nation but of the whole number of the elect out of the ancient covenant people … and the adverb οὕτως cannot mean ‘after that,’ but only ‘in this manner.’ ”32<a href="#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4" title="">5</a>

For a similar interpretation see H. Ridderbos, op. cit., p. 263.

Not only scholars of Reformed persuasion and Dutch nationality or lineage have adopted this interpretation, but so have many others, as is clear from a glance at Lenski’s commentary on Romans, pp. 714, 726, 727. See also O. Palmer Robertson, “Is There a Distinctive Future for Ethnic Israel in Romans II?,” in Perspectives on Evangelical Theology, Grand Rapids, 1979, pp. 81–94. These interpreters are convinced that this is the only interpretation that suits the text and context.

​

384.​

​

Continued.....

Find who is the true 'seed of Abraham' and you will have your answer...

 

[brightfame52]

Find who is the true 'seed of Abraham' and you will have your answer...

Them who belong to Christ Gal 3:29

29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.