Romans 11 Olive Tree Allegory

[Sonbeam]

In the Replacement thread, Jericho and I had started to discuss Paul’s olive tree allegory found in Rom Chap 11.

Rather than continue this in that thread, I thought it better to do it in a new one, and study that allegory keeping in mind what Jesus said in the parable of the Vine and the Branches in John 15, and what He said in the other gospels.

While the Holy Spirit through Paul gave us a detailed revelation of the true Gospel of Jesus Christ in the chapters preceding Chap 11 in Romans, I believe that Paul in his olive tree allegory gave a biased view that elevated Israel to a place it does not have/hold in the salvation process.

Why do I say this?

Take a look at the phrases I highlighted in Rom 11:11-12

11  Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 

12  But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring!

The above statements are not true on several counts.

Israel’s transgression of rejecting Jesus Christ to the point of having Him crucified, did not bring reconciliation and salvation to anyone.

The Father through His Son did:

First by sending His Son to pay the penalty for all sin (including Israel’s transgression),
and through His blood to obtain forgiveness for all sin (including Israel’s transgression).

This is what brought reconciliation between God and man -- “riches for the world" – not Israel’s transgression.

Salvation for the Gentiles was hardly an afterthought that came about “because of Israel’s rejection of Christ.”

God offered salvation to”Gentiles” (simply men – non-Jews) through the first 2500 plus years before the Mosaic covenant was even instituted and even before the final Word for the way of salvation came through His Son.

God could have left the Mosaic Covenant completely out of the salvation process, like He did for the first 2500 plus years of man’s history, and He would still have sent His Son as mediator to continue to save men.

More on the rest of Chap 11, if we (I) can get through this first portion.

I usually start threads against my better judgment because I do not write my posts quickly, as most of you seem to do, and with good answers too.

If I “shoot from the hip” on my answers, I usually regret it.


sonbeam

[Jericho]

While the Holy Spirit through Paul gave us a detailed revelation of the true Gospel of Jesus Christ in the chapters preceding Chap 11 in Romans, I believe that Paul in his olive tree allegory gave a biased view that elevated Israel to a place it does not have/hold in the salvation process.

Sonbeam, are you saying that Paul was wrong? If so, that's a pretty bold statement. If an apostle who wrote 28% of the New Testament can be wrong about something then how could any of the bible be trusted?

I don't necessarily see this as a salvation issue. God could have given His word any way he liked, but He chose Israel. If the Jews had accepted Jesus as their Messiah then Christianity would have remained an insular religion like Judaism. This is why they were blinded in part, so the rest of us could be grafted into the new covenant.

First by sending His Son to pay the penalty for all sin (including Israel’s transgression),
and through His blood to obtain forgiveness for all sin (including Israel’s transgression).

Forgiveness, like salvation, is a two way street. It has to be accepted. Jesus died for everyone's sins, but not everyone will be saved because not everyone will accept salvation. Likewise, God will forgive but it has to be asked for. It does not come automatically. Jewish people as a whole have never accepted Jesus as their messiah and they have never repented. So how can their corporate offense be forgiven?

God offered salvation to”Gentiles” (simply men – non-Jews) through the first 2500 plus years before the Mosaic covenant was even instituted and even before the final Word for the way of salvation came through His Son.

There wasn't really a path forward for salvation until Jesus' resurrection. Those that died in faith were kept apart from the the unsaved in Abraham's Bosom. But they could not ascend to heaven until Jesus rose from the grave. But that is another subject altogether.

[Sonbeam]

Jericho said:

Sonbeam, are you saying that Paul was wrong? If so, that's a pretty bold statement. If an apostle who wrote 28% of the New Testament can be wrong about something then how could any of the bible be trusted?

Yes, that is what I’m saying. As I said before, I believe that Paul wrote the most complete and detailed definition of the Gospel. But this was given to him by the Holy Spirit. As Paul told the Corinthians, “what do you have that you have not received.”

Is it possible that Paul wrote something that was not given to him by the Holy Spirit?

I say Yes, if it departed from the Gospel given to us by our Lord in John Chaps 3 and 4, and later by the Word of the Holy Spirit given to Paul himself.

And I believe his allegory does this. Paul didn’t give a pass to Peter when he strayed from the truth.

And as far as I’m concerned, this would apply to any other passage in the bible that does not adhere to the Truth of the Gospel.

James’ Chap 2 version of how to be saved comes to mind. But that would be for another thread.

So how could anything in the bible be trusted? Who is going to confirm the Truth to us then?

The Holy Spirit will. Christ said in John 14:26 that the Holy Spirit would guide us into all Truth. John 14:26


I’m going to try to keep my posts short, so that we can address each other comments more fully.


So I’ll address the rest of your post next.


sonbeam

[Jericho]

Yes, that is what I’m saying. As I said before, I believe that Paul wrote the most complete and detailed definition of the Gospel. But this was given to him by the Holy Spirit. As Paul told the Corinthians, “what do you have that you have not received.”

Is it possible that Paul wrote something that was not given to him by the Holy Spirit?

If you go down that rabbit hole then it presents the problem I've stated, the bible can't be trusted if it can be second guessed. Your cherry picking what you want to be true to fit your interpretation.

So how could anything in the bible be trusted? Who is going to confirm the Truth to us then?

The Holy Spirit will. Christ said in John 14:26 that the Holy Spirit would guide us into all Truth. John 14:26

Paul had that same Holy Spirit too. Have you considered that it's not Paul that was in error, but your own interpretation?

[Mr Baldy]

And as far as I’m concerned, this would apply to any other passage in the bible that does not adhere to the Truth of the Gospel.

Hate to but in here....but I'm a bit confused here Sonbeam - care to elaborate?

Here is what 2 Timothy 3:16 says:

2 Timothy 3:16 - New American Standard Bible

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness

I think I'm comprehending what you're trying to say, and not that I disagree, but I'm just curious to see how you apply what you've said to the aforementioned passage of Scripture.

Thanks

[keithareilly]

Sonbeam,

When Paul addressed things, if he was going to express his opinion, then he informed the readers what was from him and what was from God. It is pretty clear Paul knew exactly when what he was speaking was from the Lord and when what he was speaking was from himself. And when he mixed what he had to say with what the Lord led him to say, he made certain the readers understood which was from the Lord and which was from him. Because he indicated when what he was saying was from himself, I would agree sometimes he expressed his own opinion and was not speaking from the Holy Spirit. Also, therefore, because he indicated when he was providing his opinion, I disagree with the conclusion: Occasionally, Paul did not inform us that what he was writing was his opinion; but, was, nevertheless, his opinion only. Paul knew when what he said was from God, and when what he said was from himself. And he told us when it was from himself.

1 Corinthians 7:10-12
10 But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband 11 (but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife. 12 But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her.

So, are there verses in the bible that are not from God? Yes, Paul says they are not from God; but, from himself.
The bible tells us when what is written is not from God. Such exceptions are rare, put forth with clarity, and supports the credence that verses not reported as, not from God, are, therefore, from God.


Keith
Edited for Clarification 6.20.20.

[Mark F]

[Sonbeam]

Jericho said:

Paul had that same Holy Spirit too. Have you considered that it's not Paul that was in error, but your own interpretation?

Of course! None of us can claim that what we write here is always in line with God's Truth.

But has anyone ever considered that Paul and the other writers of the bible might not have been used by the Holy Spirit 24/7 to utter His Word?

Are we honest with ourselves and when we have doubts/questions about something they wrote, just fall back on the prevailing doctrine: if it’s in the bible it must/has to be true even if it challenges the truth of the Gospel?

I’m being honest about what I see in Paul’s olive tree allegory. Did he mean something other than what he wrote? If he did, we’ll never know.

I think that having been born and lived under the Mosaic cov and his love for his race, gave Paul a biased disproportionate view of Israel’s part in the process of salvation.

And that would be fine, if his allegory didn’t place Israel as co-savior with Christ.

Why do I say this? Because there is only One mediator between God and man, and that is Jesus Christ.

We do not get “grafted” into Israel first and then are born of the Spirit. That is not the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Sonbeam

[Sonbeam]

And as far as I’m concerned, this would apply to any other passage in the bible that does not adhere to the Truth of the Gospel.

Hate to but in here....but I'm a bit confused here Sonbeam - care to elaborate?

Hey Mr Baldy,

Glad you joined us.

My primary concern when reading the bible, and I think it should be every believer’s too, is that everything I read there points to Christ as our 'Savior, especially in the NT, and stays true to His Gospel of grace that we are to proclaim.

For instance, I think the James Chap 2 passage on faith and deeds does not do this.

Here is what 2 Timothy 3:16 says:

2 Timothy 3:16 - New American Standard Bible

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness

I think I'm comprehending what you're trying to say, and not that I disagree, but I'm just curious to see how you apply what you've said to the aforementioned passage of Scripture.

Thanks

As far as what the above passage says: Yes, the bible does all that.

I believe that the bible, in as many versions as we have today, is indeed what the Lord has absolutely intended for us to have. So yes, that makes it God given.

However, I don’t believe that that necessarily makes it inerrant, infallible, etc., etc.

Why not if I believe it is God given?

I believe that just like a professor gives a test to his students that has true and false statements, and they are to discern which are true and which are not, God has placed in our hands a collection of books that are not necessarily totally error free.

Why would He do this?

As I see it, His purpose would not be to test us, but to draw us into a closer relationship with Him.

One that sends us to Him often to seek His wisdom and counsel and so that He will open up the scriptures for us as He did for the believers on the walk to Emmaus.


Sonbeam

[keithareilly]

Sonbeam wrote ...

For instance, I think the James Chap 2 passage on faith and deeds does not do this.

It aligns with salvation through grace from my perspective.

Why do you think it does not align?

Keith

[Jericho]

I think that having been born and lived under the Mosaic cov and his love for his race, gave Paul a biased disproportionate view of Israel’s part in the process of salvation.

That's pure speculation on your part. You could make that same accusation about anyone in the Bible. Moses also loved his race. Does that also mean he was biased and gave disproportionate view of Israel? Do you see the problem with that line of thinking? Either you believe the bible or you don't. We can't pick and choose what we "think" is an opinion.

Paul said that "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. (Gal 3:28)" He is the one who reprimanded Peter because he wouldn't eat with gentiles (Gal 2:11-21). Does that sound like a man who loved his race so much that he was biased?

[Ready1]

And as far as I’m concerned, this would apply to any other passage in the bible that does not adhere to the Truth of the Gospel.

Hate to but in here....but I'm a bit confused here Sonbeam - care to elaborate?

Hey Mr Baldy,

Glad you joined us.

My primary concern when reading the bible, and I think it should be every believer’s too, is that everything I read there points to Christ as our 'Savior, especially in the NT, and stays true to His Gospel of grace that we are to proclaim.

For instance, I think the James Chap 2 passage on faith and deeds does not do this.

Here is what 2 Timothy 3:16 says:

2 Timothy 3:16 - New American Standard Bible

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness

I think I'm comprehending what you're trying to say, and not that I disagree, but I'm just curious to see how you apply what you've said to the aforementioned passage of Scripture.

Thanks

As far as what the above passage says: Yes, the bible does all that.

I believe that the bible, in as many versions as we have today, is indeed what the Lord has absolutely intended for us to have. So yes, that makes it God given.

However, I don’t believe that that necessarily makes it inerrant, infallible, etc., etc.

Why not if I believe it is God given?

I believe that just like a professor gives a test to his students that has true and false statements, and they are to discern which are true and which are not, God has placed in our hands a collection of books that are not necessarily totally error free.

Why would He do this?

As I see it, His purpose would not be to test us, but to draw us into a closer relationship with Him.

One that sends us to Him often to seek His wisdom and counsel and so that He will open up the scriptures for us as He did for the believers on the walk to Emmaus.


Sonbeam

Seems to me that you are saying that the Bible "contains" truth but is not 100% true. Mormons would believe that. Many cults would believe that.

If God can/t get it right the first time, what would cause you to believe that the Holy Spirit could get it right the second (or third or fourth, etc.) time? If you cannot accept 2 Tim 3:16 in it's entirety, why bother to read the Bible since it is flawed? As such, I reject what you are proposing as unscriptural.

[Sonbeam]

Sonbeam wrote ...

For instance, I think the James Chap 2 passage on faith and deeds does not do this.

It aligns with salvation through grace from my perspective.

Why do you think it does not align?

Keith

Hi Keith,

James 2
24 You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

The above verse alone tells where the author is coming from: the Law

Salvation by faith alone is not good enough for him. He himself has got to see deeds.

There is so much more that could be said about the whole faith and deeds passage Keith, but this would take us away from the discussion on the olive tree allegory.

Maybe we can do a thread on James 2 . . . . someday. Others could start that one though.

Because there are other topics that would be very beneficial to study first IMO, like the specific purpose of
the Mosaic Cov in the process of salvation.






sonbeam

[Sonbeam]

I think that having been born and lived under the Mosaic cov and his love for his race, gave Paul a biased disproportionate view of Israel’s part in the process of salvation.

That's pure speculation on your part. You could make that same accusation about anyone in the Bible. Moses also loved his race. Does that also mean he was biased and gave disproportionate view of Israel? Do you see the problem with that line of thinking? Either you believe the bible or you don't. We can't pick and choose what we "think" is an opinion.

Paul said that "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. (Gal 3:28)" He is the one who reprimanded Peter because he wouldn't eat with gentiles (Gal 2:11-21). Does that sound like a man who loved his race so much that he was biased?

HI Jericho,

Take a look at this, especially verses 3 and 4:

Romans 9

Paul’s Anguish Over Israel

9 I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spirit— 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, 4 the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. 5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah, who is God over all, forever praised![a] Amen.

Is the above "my speculation"?

While we may consider verse 3 as hyperbole used by Paul to let others know how much he cared for those of his own race, it's a bit over the top, don"t you think?

We cannot love anyone, not anyone, more than Christ.

Matthew 10:37

Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

What about friends and those of our own race? Forget it! Don't even ask.


sonbeam

[Jay Ross]

Hello,

I think that Sonbeam issue is the manner in which the scriptures are being interpreted by the scholars in making the source texts understandable to us in a language that we can understand.

The issue that I have been faced with is that when I begin to point out some of the errors in the understanding/interpretation of the source texts for our translated bibles that people have defended the wrongly expressed understanding/interpretations that have become accepted within the translated bibles as being infallible and so it is very difficult to bring about change, which is difficult to do in all circumstances, within or outside of the church, and so I have been sidelined by the responders to my posts because I have wanted to change the understandings that we have to a better understanding as a step along the way to getting our collective understandings right.

Sonbeam, from her personal perspective of the scriptures, derived from the "English Translations" of the original source texts for the translations, believes that her understanding is right, just like everybody else sees that their understanding is right.

Just like the Parable of the separation of the the people who called Jesus Lord, Lord, where the "saints" will be separated into flocks of sheep and goats, many people do not see this parable this way but only see it as the separation of the righteous people from the unrighteous people, i.e. the people who have rejected God.

The allegory of the olive tree as presented by Paul needs to be understood with respect to the growing of olive trees.

I found this comment on the net with respect to producing fruit in an Olive Tree grove: -

That is a function of cultivar. 'Arbequina' and 'Koroneiki' begin fruiting at an early age (about 3 years). Other cultivars do not make fruit until they are five to twelve years old. Most olive cultivars will not produce fruit without a pollinator tree of a different cultivar.

Perhaps this is what Paul was referring to. The Gentiles need the Jewish Olive tree to be able to produce fruit. Also that the Israelites need the Gentile Christian's Olive tree so that they two can produce fruit.

At this present time, God has turned his back on Israel until the completion of their visitation of their iniquities upon them for a period of two ages, a little longer that 2,000 years has been completed. Only when the Time of the Gentiles trampling the Sanctuary of God and His earthly hosts has run its full course of 2,300 years will God redeem Israel and enter once more into a relationship with them.

The miracle is that even with no contact between God and Israel, Israel has not lost its desire to be in relationship with God.

In the Parable of the Minas, Jesus tell us that they have not lost their desire to be one with God such that Israel will begin to seek after God once again. In this parable, Jesus clearly tells us that when "Satan, i.e. the noble man," goes away into a large place like a chasm, i.e. the bottomless pit, that his servants, i.e. Israel, will send a delegation after him stating that they no longer want to be ruled by him. In the Parable, Jesus goes on to tell us that when the nobleman returns that he then wants all of the servants who rebelled against him when he had left to be brought to him so that they can be killed in front of him.

The manner in which the NKJV is written, does not reflect the above in that it has been written as though all of the Gentiles will be brought into the Kingdom of God first, before any of the Israelites will be saved. A form of replacement theology that the scholars held to when the translations were worked on.

But much meditation is required to determine whether or not his is at all a possible understanding that can be drawn from the scriptures, say with respect to Zech 4 and Rev 11:4.

Shalom

[Jericho]

While we may consider verse 3 as hyperbole used by Paul to let others know how much he cared for those of his own race, it's a bit over the top, don"t you think?

We cannot love anyone, not anyone, more than Christ.

I'm sure he did love his own people, nothing wrong with that. It doesn't mean he was biased because of it or loved them more than Christ. Anything to the contrary is conjecture. There's nothing left but to agree to disagree.

[Sonbeam]

While we may consider verse 3 as hyperbole used by Paul to let others know how much he cared for those of his own race, it's a bit over the top, don"t you think?

We cannot love anyone, not anyone, more than Christ.

I'm sure he did love his own people, nothing wrong with that. It doesn't mean he was biased because of it or loved them more than Christ. Anything to the contrary is conjecture. There's nothing left but to agree to disagree.

Yes, we can do that Jericho.

Thank you for joining in this discussion. Though I wished you had directly addressed the
comments I made on Paul’s specific remarks on his allegory.

I’ve always enjoyed reading your well written posts, and most often than not agreed with
what you had to say.






sonbeam

[Sonbeam]

Hi Ready1

you said:

Seems to me that you are saying that the Bible "contains" truth but is not 100% true.

That is what I’m saying. And here is one reason why, among a couple of others:

A well known denomination, and a couple of other denominations teach faith plus works to be saved.

Do you believe this is true?

Guess where they got that idea? From a certain book in the bible.

And who can blame them? That’s what it says in that book.

The other denominations do cartwheel and pretzel arguments to deny what it plainly says there because they must/have to uphold the inerrancy doctrine.

If God can/t get it right the first time, what would cause you to believe that the Holy Spirit could get it right the second (or third or fourth, etc.) time?

Oh but I believe that God has gotten the scriptures right the first time. I’ve already said that the bible in all its versions is God given.

And not only that, but since God has shown us since the beginning of man's history, that He has progressively been giving us more and more revelations about Himself, I believe He's continuing to do that. And He'll get that right too.

If you cannot accept 2 Tim 3:16 in it's entirety,

Oh but I did. Read what I said about that in my answer to Mr. B.

why bother to read the Bible since it is flawed?

Because God has left with us a Counselor, the Holy Spirit, Who will confirm to us those things that are true and those that are not. Can we trust Him to do that? I'm sure we can.

sonbeam

[Jericho]

I’ve always enjoyed reading your well written posts, and most often than not agreed with
what you had to say.

It's all good.

[Sonbeam]

sonbeam said: Rather than continue this in that thread, I thought it better to do it in a new one, and study that allegory keeping in mind what Jesus said in the parable of the Vine and the Branches in John 15, and what He said in the other gospels.

In my first post in this thread, I said to keep in mind what Jesus said in His parable
of the Vine and the Branches in John 15, and for good reason.

In Jesus’ parable the “branches” (men) only get broken off once. There is no “grafting” back into the vine –- Jesus Christ. There is no second chance.

In Paul’s allegory, there is “grafting” back and forth.



sonbeam

[slick]

PSALM 119:160

The sum of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous ordinances is everlasting.

1 peter 1:20-21
knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,
for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke [as they were] moved by the Holy Spirit.

Paul was an Apostle and had a special relationship with JESUS/HOLY SPIRIT who communicated to him directly that which HE (H.S) desired to say , Pauls reference to HIS and Not By Way of...is no less GOD BREATHED than any other verse in scripture...what Paul is referring to is this was not something he had previously learned from direct teaching of Christ nor revealed anywhere else in Scripture (i.e the many O.T ref..) but his OWN new direct revelation from God.....Pauls Position as APOSTLE to the GENTILES did not come easily for Paul...as you see in his early missionary outreach was to the JEWS but later he would renounce that mission and begin to convert GENTILES...Paul was Taught in Classic PHARISEE SCHOOL the JEWS were privileged and could not be removed from GODS CHOSEN status . What Paul is Teaching in the illustration is his coming to understanding of the JEWS being removed from the PRIVILEGED status that they believed (as did Paul) was true.
His words as A called PROPHET and APOSTLE as RECORDED in SCRIPTURE ARE all INERRANT AND DIRECTLY INSPIRED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT...PROFITABLE FOR TEACHING!!!

In His Grace,
Clarence (slick)

[keithareilly]

How did God design trees? Every Fall leaves fall. New leaves replace the old leaves; but, it is the same tree.

Did the Law pass away? No.
Did not Jesus come to heal the sinners so that our actions became righteous instead of remaining unrighteous?

Was not the Jewish nation established to reveal sin to the world, was not that the point of the Law?

Have you considered that when a seed is planted, the tree that comes forth does not resemble the seed?
Did the tree replace the seed? No, the tree came forth from the seed.

If a branch is removed and another grafted in its place, is not the purpose of the grafting to add to the types of fruit being produced by the tree; therefore, expanding the original tree's fruitfulness?

It is not about the branches. It is about the fruitfulness of the tree.
Unfruitful trees are cut down and replaced, fruitful trees are pruned and refined to yield the most fruit.

The TREE OF LIFE has been around since the Garden of Eden; Pruned and grafted to be twelve (12) times fruitful.

Revelation 22:2
2 in the middle of its street. On either side of the river was the tree of life, bearing twelve [a]kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit every month; and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

Keith

[extravagantchristian]

Sonbeam,

Are you saying that you have recieved more revelation than Paul? Should we add a "book of sonbeam" to the Bible to correct the false prophet Paul?

All scripture is inspired by God. Obviously that wouldn't be the case if what he taught was wrong.

If Satan can get you to question one verse in the Bible, he can cause you to question anything and potentially dismantle your faith, or cause you to fall into sin.

That's how he caused eve to sin in the garden, by questioning what God said and sowing doubt.

Jesus warned against changing his word. We don't have the right to do that.

Revelation 22:18-19
18 For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book;

and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

[Sonbeam]

Keith, Clarence, and Extravagant Christian,

Glad you are joining this discussion'. I can understand where all of you are coming from.

Questioning the bible’s inerrancy is not very acceptable at any time. For it leaves one with having to rely on the Holy Spirit for confirmation of His truth as to what it says there.

This is scary and downright threatening for all of us believers, me included at times.

What verses can we now cite for our convictions? What is absolutely true in the bible and what isn’t? For me especially about Christ’s gospel.

In regards to the inerrancy of the bible, in Job’s Chap 42 it is recorded explicitly that God said this:

Job 42
7 After the Lord had said these things to Job, he said to Eliphaz the Temanite, “I am angry with you and your two friends, because you have not spoken the truth about me, as my servant Job has. 8 So now take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job and sacrifice a burnt offering for yourselves. My servant Job will pray for you, and I will accept his prayer and not deal with you according to your folly. You have not spoken the truth about me, as my servant Job has.”

Therefore, as I see it believers in the absolute inerrancy of the bible have got three choices on this:

a) to acknowledge that there are errors in the bible about God’s character, or

b) to ignore what God said as recorded in the book of Job, or

c) take Paul at his word when he includes himself as knowing in part and prophesying in part in 1 Cor 13. And then not feel threatened when someone like me questions his olive tree allegory.

Then just relax and move on trusting that the Holy Spirit will confirm to our spirits His Truth.

1 Cor 13
8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears.

Could you then specifically address my following questions:

Do we have to be ingrafted into Israel to get to Christ?

Is Israel then co-savior with Christ?

Do we have two mediators between us and God?


Bless you,


Sonbeam

[keithareilly]

Sonbeam wrote …

Take a look at the phrases I highlighted in Rom 11:11-12
11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious.
12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring!
The above statements are not true on several counts.
Israel’s transgression of rejecting Jesus Christ to the point of having Him crucified, did not bring reconciliation and salvation to anyone.

Mostly I disagree with you on this. Why? Because Jesus stated salvation is of the Jews.

John 4: 21-24
21 Jesus *said to her, “Woman, believe Me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. 22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. 24 God is [e]spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”

The Jews crucified Christ. Without them having done so, we would have to pay for our sins. Therefore, there actions saved all mankind.

But not just their actions alone ...
Another issue with your interpretation is responsibility. Who is responsible for Jesus death? The Jewish Chiefs. And Pontious Pilate, who chose to allow the execution. God, who set Him aside since the foundation of the world to do this, and Jesus who chose to do it himself.

It is about multiple responsibility: Jesus points out that the Jewish Elders had a greater responsibility than Pilate with regards to his death.

John 19:10-11
10 Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?
11 Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.

In that above verse, Jesus does not limit the responsibility to the chiefs, he says Pilate shares a portion as well. Because Jesus does this, I think it is better to acknowledge, as Jesus and John acknowledged, that salvation is indeed of the Jews and it is of the Jews through their crucifixion of Christ.

Keith

[Sonbeam]

Hi Keith,

Thank you for your answer.

Here's part of how I see the phrase I highlighted in the following passage:

John 4:
21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews.   23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.
25 The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”
26 Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he.”

What did Jesus mean when He said to the woman at the well, “for salvation is from the Jews”?

Was He saying that the Jews came up with the plan of salvation? Or that men had to go to the Jews for salvation?

I think we know, or we should know that this is not what He meant.

But just in case any of us thinks that is what Jesus was saying to the woman, let’s follow through on that.

Shouldn’t Jesus then have given her the following instructions right after He said that salvation was of the Jews?

“Woman go to Jerusalem and talk to the High Priest. Tell him you want to be saved, and he will tell you what you need to do.”

Instead Jesus revealed to her that He was the Christ. And then, by revealing to her the kind of worshippers the Father was seeking, Christ also gave her a glimpse into His Father’s heart.



To be continued...



sonbeam


-------------------------------------

[Sonbeam]

John 4

10.Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.”


20 Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”
21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 
22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 
23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in trut
25 
The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”
26 Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he.”

I really think that most of us understand what Jesus meant when He said, “salvation is from the Jews.”

That the the Word of God for salvation came through Jewish prophets and also through God’s feasts (that shadowed God’s salvation process) given to the Jews within the Mosaic covenant.

And not that Israel/the Jews themselves instituted/initiated the plan of salvation.

And this really becomes clear when reading verse 22 in the context of Jesus’ whole conversation with the woman, especially vss 10 and 25, 26.

10. Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.”

25 The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”

26 Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he.”

Salvation is the gift of God through the Messiah, Jesus Christ. It is not a gift “from the Jews.”



sonbeam

[keithareilly]

Sonbeam,

Christ was Jewish. Pontius Pilate was Jewish. The chief priests were Jewish.

You are free to argue against the facts all you want.

I accept facts.
And when the facts align with what Paul said, then what he said was true, not false.

Romans 11:11
11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious.

Salvation came because the Jews killed Christ. Those are the facts.

Was it part of God's plan? Sure it was. Prophesy is evidence it was part of Gods plan.
Just because it was planned before the foundation of the world does not change the facts that salvation is from the Jews through their transgressions which includes killing Christ.

Facts are Facts. Paul wrote the facts. I accept the facts.


Keith

[Jay Ross]

Hello Sonbeam,

What I am perceiving is a hatred of the Jewish people coming out of your posts.

In the OT, It is Israel that is spoken about as becoming the Priests of God's Everlasting Kingdom and that they will be planted in a fertile field to draw their nourishment from so that the heads of the wheat crop will bring forth many into the Kingdom of God. Jer 31:31ff speaks of God renewing the Kingdom of Priests, A holy Nation and His Possession among the Nations covenant with the Remanent of Israel in our near future after the time of the Judgement of the nations at Armageddon. If we, as Christians, are righteous, will we not also be included in this covenant with the remanent of Israel?

Peter suggests this for us in that we will become a Royal Priesthood.

God's plan for the salvation of the people of the earth during the time of His Everlasting Kingdom, is His to determine, and it is something that we should not be critical of, as to how God is going to achieve that end, with His plan.

Will we be raptured soon to avoid the pain of the tribulation? If we believe that we will be part of the Pre-trib rapture, then why are we so critical of How God intends to bring about the salvation of the masses after we are raptured, because when we are raptured, we will then know of God's plan, from the horse's mouth, so to speak, and will be set straight as to How God's Plan will work out.

Paul in Rom 11:25-26 plainly tells us that after the fullness in time of the Heathen Gentiles trampling the Sanctuary of God and His earthly Hosts, when the Heathen Gentiles will be judged at Armageddon, that all of Israel will be saved.

The replacement theology that has crept into our translations is foremost in these verses where the translators have completely changed the actual context of what Paul had written in these verses.

We all need to go back to the intent of the writers and consider actual context of their words and not accept the flawed translations on which we rely to paint a picture for us of God and Who He is and His prophetic words.

This requires much mediation on God's truths found in the source language from which our "scared translations" have come.

Shalom

[Mr Baldy]

Could you then specifically address my following questions:
Do we have to be ingrafted into Israel to get to Christ?
Is Israel then co-savior with Christ?
Do we have two mediators between us and God?

Hi Sonbeam -

I've been tracking what you're saying in this thread - Great Questions, and Great Job!

I know the aforementioned questions are rhetorical; and from what I'm reading in your comments, your responses are scriptural. I think it's a matter of interpretation where others may not be seeing your points.

Keep up the Good Work - you're spot on!

[shorttribber]

John 4

10.Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.”


20 Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”
21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 
22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 
23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in trut
25 
The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”
26 Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he.”

I really think that most of us understand what Jesus meant when He said, “salvation is from the Jews.”

That the the Word of God for salvation came through Jewish prophets and also through God’s feasts (that shadowed God’s salvation process) given to the Jews within the Mosaic covenant.

And not that Israel/the Jews themselves instituted/initiated the plan of salvation.

And this really becomes clear when reading verse 22 in the context of Jesus’ whole conversation with the woman, especially vss 10 and 25, 26.

10. Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.”

25 The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”

26 Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he.”

Salvation is the gift of God through the Messiah, Jesus Christ. It is not a gift “from the Jews.”



sonbeam

[Sonbeam]

Mr B and ST,

Thank you for letting me know you see/understand the points I've presented here on my
interpretation of Paul's allegory.




sonbeam

[Sonbeam]

Jay said:
What I am perceiving is a hatred of the Jewish people coming out of your posts.

Your opinion is baseless Jay. There is nothing in my posts to support it.

Insert any other ethnic group’s name instead of “Jews” in the allegory, and I would still make the same comments
I’ve been making on this thread.

It wouldn’t change my view that Paul’s allegory does harm to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Proof?

The heretical, Hebrew Roots movement teaches that since Christians have been “grafted” into Israel, they must keep the Torah, God’s feasts, etc.

Guess where they got their basis for that idea?

Now there is the possibility that this passage in Rom 11:11-24 is what some Christian scholars call a scribal “interpolation, ” that is a text that has been added by a scribe/scribes in the process of copying a biblical manuscript.

Taking that into consideration for a moment, if the above verses are set aside, verse 11:25 flows more naturally after verse 11:10.

In any case, we have the passage in the bible as it is so we need to deal with it honestly.

I suggest you go over what I’ve said in this thread Jay, and if you address directly some of the points I’ve made I’d certainly would discuss them with you.


sonbeam

[keithareilly]

Hi Sonbeam,


I don't see any hatred in your posts.

I am absolute about Paul expressing the truth about salvation coming from the Jews through their unrighteous actions.
While we do not agree on this, I appreciate you sharing your perspective and, No, I don't see your perspective as biased against the Jews. I do see it as a biased similar to the bias of Job's friends who refused to acknowledge God was responsible for the things God authorized Satan to do to Job and his family.

With all the posts on this thread about many things. I am not clear about what this topic is about.

Any chance you can put forth what you want to discuss in this topic with regards to replacement theology?
Are you saying it is true or not true? What is your perspective?

Keith



Keith

[Sonbeam]

Hi Sonbeam,


I don't see any hatred in your posts.

I am absolute about Paul expressing the truth about salvation coming from the Jews through their unrighteous actions.
While we do not agree on this, I appreciate you sharing your perspective and, No, I don't see your perspective as biased against the Jews. I do see it as a biased similar to the bias of Job's friends who refused to acknowledge God was responsible for the things God authorized Satan to do to Job and his family.

Thank you for your kind words Keith,

I can understand the confusion. I started this thread on Paul’s allegory of the Rom 11 Olive Tree, but as it usually happens, the discussions here almost always lead us to other topics which may or may not be related to the original one.

Regarding your comments above, yes, Israel was the means to God’s end: the crucifixion of Christ that would bring reconciliation for all men with God.

The means (Israel) was just an instrument in the User’s (God) Hand. Israel could not do anything other than what God had decreed for her to do to further His plans.

Therefore, we must give God the responsibility/full credit for the end result: reconciliation of all men to God through the Cross.

We do not credit Israel for what God planned and accomplished. Just like we would not give Pharaoh the credit for God bringing the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt.

Isa. 10:15
15 Does the ax raise itself above the person who swings it,
    or the saw boast against the one who uses it?
As if a rod were to wield the person who lifts it up,
    or a club brandish the one who is not wood!

More on the rest of your post next.



sonbeam

[keithareilly]

Hi Sonbeam,

If you want to start another topic about who is responsible for what, God, Satan, Man, I think it would be interesting.
But definitely another thread.

Keith

[Sonbeam]

Hi Sonbeam,

If you want to start another topic about who is responsible for what, God, Satan, Man, I think it would be interesting.
But definitely another thread.

Keith

Yeah that would be interesting, but I can barely keep up with answering posts on this thread Keith.


About replacement theology and how it relates to Paul’s allegory, I don’t think there’s a connection there Keith.

To begin with, the term replacement theology is totally pointless.

There has only ever been one chosen people (the elect) of God that will spend eternity with Him.

They will be those who, since man left the garden, have been chosen by God through faith in His Word.

Hebrews Chapt 11 speaks of those saints.



sonbeam.

[Mr Baldy]

To begin with, the term replacement theology is totally pointless.There has only ever been one chosen people (the elect) of God that will spend eternity with Him.They will be those who, since man left the garden, have been chosen by God through faith in His Word.

Couldn't agree with you more Sonbeam!

Scripture is very clear about this - and I wish more people understood this message.

[shorttribber]

To begin with, the term replacement theology is totally pointless.There has only ever been one chosen people (the elect) of God that will spend eternity with Him.They will be those who, since man left the garden, have been chosen by God through faith in His Word.

Couldn't agree with you more Sonbeam!

Scripture is very clear about this - and I wish more people understood this message.

Absolutely!