The Contextual Israel in Romans 11:26

I don't know why I even waste my time responding to your utter nonsense. You have no SPIRITUAL CAPABILITY to even deal HONESTLY with God's Word. You pervert, twist, and deny God's Word just like the spirit that is working in you perverted, twisted and denied God's word in Genesis 3:1-5.


You cannot deal with Paul's words here so you rewrite them to suit your heresy! You dare not respond to my posts as they expose your utter ignorance of God's Word.

 

I said I was no prophet but I predicted exactly how SBG would respond and that is precisely how he did respond.

He did not deal with a single word of Romans 11:11.

He did not deal with the grammar of Romans 11:11

Instead, he attempts to make "Israel" in Romans 11:11 mean GENTILES and NONE GENTILES.

This is the common cultic eisgetical response to every text of scripture that explicitly denies their HALF TRUTH heresies - they make one word mean two opposite definitions at once. That is, they make black mean white and yet mean black or cold mean hot but yet mean cold.

Will SBG deal with the objections that I have placed before him? Will he deal with the questions I have presented him with in regard to Romans 11:11?

The answer is NO! Why? Because HE CANNOT! So he will not!

The WHOLE TRUTH is that the same Ethnic Israel that has been and now is rejecting Christ and is rejected by God - that same Israel will in the future accept Christ and will be received by God -not merely a "remnant" of that same Israel but "ALL ISRAEL" will IN THE FUTURE accept Christ at the specific time when Christ returns from heaven (Rom. 11:25-28; Rev. 1:7; Acts 13:19-20; Zech 12:14-13:1; etc.).

SBG has HALF of this truth and uses his HALF truth to repudiate the rest of God's Word on this subject.

 

SBG, this is supposed to be a discussion board not a prograndist outlet. Thus far you have not entered into any discussion, all you have done is ignored every objection placed before you and continued as you were the only one writing.

If you can't defend your positions, if you can't answer the objections then why are you on this forum? Are you here just to proselyte? Either enter into discussion or find something else to do other than to waste my time and the time of others.

 

Exactly! You are not here to discuss or debate but to proselyte. Do you understand the term "discussion" or "debate"? You are not discussing or debating when you do not respond to objections placed in front of your face. You are not discussing or debating when you just ignore evidence presented that completely exposes what you are saying as complete error!

You have got to be kidding me or you must be on drugs to even suggest I have not proved your position wrong???? Can you read English?????

 

So, now you have gone from TWO definitions of "Israel" to THREE definitions of the term "Israel" thus THREE different meanings.

(1) "Israel" = Ethnic Israel elect remnant and ethnic non-elect.

(2) "Israel" = Spiritual Israel = Gentile and Jews elect;

(3) "Israel" = eternally reprobate ethnic Israel - non-elect;

So you just pick and choose what definition you want to use whenever a text won't fit your "spiritual" definition.

However, your interpretation of verses 7-11 is IMPOSSIBLE for several reasons no matter how many different contradictive definitions you give the term "Israel."

FIRST PROBLEM: The "Israel" in verses 7-11 is set in contrast to the "remnant" in verses 5-6. The "Israel" in verses 7-11 is PRESENTLY being rejected by God and is in a fallen state and no recovery is expected PRESENTLY while the "remnant" in verses 5-6 are being saved PRESENTLY.

Note that verse 5 demands that the "remnant" is NOW PRESENTLY being saved not being blinded and rejected as the "Israel" in verses 7-11

5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

Let the reader clearly see that the "remnant" in verses 5-6 hath obtained it by election but the "Israel" in verses 7-11 has not obtained it but is defined as "the rest" that is blinded and rejected. Hence, the term "Israel" and its pronouns (their, them, they) cannot mean both REMNANT ELECT and NON-ELECT ethinic Israel but rather are placed in CONTRAST to teach other. However, SBG's interpretation must make the term "Israel" and its pronouns (their, they, them) in verses 7-11 inclusive of BOTH in the same word! To show the utter nonsense of his interpretation let us read it that way:

7 What then? ELECT REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL hath not obtained that which ELECT REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL seeketh for; but the election hath obtained ELECT REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL, and the rest OF ELECT REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL were blinded 8 (According as it is written, God hath given ELECT REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL the spirit of slumber, eyes that REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL should not see, and ears that they should not hear unto this day.
9 And David saith, Let REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL :
10 Let REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL eyes be darkened, that REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL may not see, and bow down their back alway.
11 I say then, Have REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL stumbled that REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL should fall? God forbid: but rather through REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke REMNANT AND NONE ELECT ETHNIC ISRAEL to jealousy.

See the utter nonsense SBG's second definition of "Israel" in this context makes????


SECOND PROBLEM:The "Israel" in verses 7-11 is set in contrast to ELECT GENTILES and therefore cannot possibly mean your "spiritual" definition of Israel. For example, let's place your spiritual definition in the text and see what sense it makes:

7 What then? THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT hath not obtained that which THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT seeketh for; but the election hath obtained THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT, and the rest OF THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT were blinded
8 (According as it is written, God hath given THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT the spirit of slumber, eyes that THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT should not see, and ears that THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT should not hear unto this day. 9 And David saith, Let THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT:
10 Let THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT eyes be darkened, that THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT may not see, and bow down THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT back alway.
11 I say then, Have THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT stumbled that THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT should fall? God forbid: but rather through THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke THE GENTILE AND JEWISH ELECT to jealousy.

Let the reader see that SBG's GENTILE/JEW ELECT Israel makes absolutely no sense in this passage.


THIRD PROBLEM: Not only do SBG's first two definitions make NO SENSE when the passage is read that way but his third definition makes NO SENSE either. All one has to do is use his third definition for the term "Israel" in verses 10-11 to see the utter nonsense of that definition:

10 Let THE ETERNALLY REPROBATE ETHNIC ISRAEL eyes be darkened, that THE ETERNALLY REPROBATE ETHNIC ISRAEL may not see, and bow down THE ETERNALLY REPROBATE ETHNIC ISRAEL back alway.
11 I say then, Have THE ETERNALLY REPROBATE ETHNIC ISRAEL stumbled that THE ETERNALLY REPROBATE ETHNIC ISRAEL should fall? God forbid: but rather through THE ETERNALLY REPROBATE ETHNIC ISRAEL fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke THE ETERNALLY REPROBATE ETHNIC ISRAEL to jealousy.

This would mean that God utterly denies that THE ETERNALLY REPROBATE ETHNIC ISRAEL will utterly fall. Do you believe that SBG?????

None of SBG's definitions of "Israel" make any sense when read into this passage.


However, if you take my definition "Israel as an Elect ethnic Nation" and put it in the place of "Israel" and the pronouns "their" "they" and "them" it makes PERFECT SENSE with the context and the FULL truth that they are PRESENTLY being rejected because their time of salvation has not come and will not come until in the yet distant FUTURE when "the fullness of the Gentile" elect be "come in" and then God turns his attention back to Israel and saves "all Israel" as a nation and not until. SBG has a HALF truth and attempts to use his HALF truth to distort, pervert and deny other scriptures that teach the other HALF of this same truth.

Notice, I have given an explicit and detailed response with SUBSTANCE to why SBG's GENERAL interpretation of Romans 11:7-10 is wrong but he will not be able to respond with an equally explicit and detailed denial of my explanation because ERROR cannot respond to details! He will simply give another GENERAL whitewash explanation or IGNORE it all together because he is not on this forum to discuss anything but to proselyte.

 

In other words, you are asserting that verses 7-10 demand that Israel as an ethnic nation has completely and irreversably fallen into utter and eternal reprobation but Paul is denying that their utter irreversable reprobation makes God a failure because that is not even the Israel God promised the father's he would save because the Israel God promised to save is the GENTILE and JEWISH Israel! Right?

Absolutely IMPOSSIBLE interpretation! Why? Because, Paul is speaking about the same Israel that David says was given a "stumbling block" in verse 9 that "stumbled" over it in verse 11. Paul is denying the Nation that is stumbling will be permitted by God to stumble completely and utterly! Read the English!


9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:......
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

David is not speaking about ELECT GENTILES AND JEWS in verses 9-10! Your own interpetation of these texts denies David is speaking about ELECT GENTILES AND JEWS in verses 9-10. Your own interpretation emphatically asserts that verses 9-10 speaks about ETHNIC NATIONAL ISRAEL.

Paul in verse 10 is responding to what David said in verse 9 where the "stumblingblock" was placed before ETHNIC NATIONAL ISRAEL. Paul is denying vehemently the very interpretation you are asserting! Paul is denying that the Israel which stumbled over the "stumbling block" in verse 9 will be permitted by God to fall COMPLETELY and IRREVERSABLY.

READ THE ENGLISH! Your interpretation is not only IMPOSSIBLE but YOUR INTERPETATION CONTRADICTS the very thing Paul is emphatically and utterly denying by the words "God forbid"!

Your interpretation has a Israel in verse 11 that stumbled without a stumbling block in verse 9 as you deny the Israel with the stumblingblock in verse 9 is the Israel that stumbled in verse 11!!!!

 

Nobody denies there is a "remnant" within the nation BUT Paul is not arguing that the "remnant" has stumbled over the stumbling block in verse 9 or has fallen in verse 11 is he???????????????? It is what has stumbled and fallen that Paul denies SHALL utterly fall but will be saved in the yet FUTURE.

Still you are not dealing with the textual evidence I placed before you. I gave you irrefutable Bible evidence and you come back with unproven PERSONAL OPINION.

However, it is NOT the "remnant" that David says stumbled over the stumbling block is it? What you will not accept is Paul's words! Paul is referring to what David says stumbled and the "remnant" is not what stumbled.

25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

Blindness in part has not happened to the remnant! Paul is speaking of those words in verses 7-10. Paul is not promising that when "the fullness of the Gentiles be come in" that the "remnant" will be saved but rather that "Israel" which has been BLINDED and STUMBLING shall be saved.

However, try, just try to deal honestly with the text and the questions I placed before you about Romans 11:9-11 - just try. You haven't even tried to! Why? Because you cannot do it honestly or truthfully and still hold to your HALF truth.

 

Paul is refuting YOUR DOCTRINE of Israel in Romans 11. He is refuting the idea that GENERATIONAL "remnant" Israel is the completion of God's redemptive plan for Israel and/or that GENTILES complete the Israel of promise.

Paul freely admits that God has PRESENTLY rejected Israel AS AN ETHNIC NATION and PRESENTLY is saving only a "remnant" of Israel AS AN ETHNIC NATION.

However, Paul in the strongest terms "God forbid" is utterly denying that God is finished with Israel AS AN ETHNIC NATION but is only PRESENTLY rejecting them while GENERATIONALLY calling in His GENTILE elect and Jewish "remnant." elect.

The Israel that David says Christ became a STUMBLINGBLOCK unto in verse 9 is the SAME ISRAEL that Paul says STUMBLED over that stumbling block in verse 11.

YOU on the other hand have David talking about one kind of Israel in verses 9-10 and Paul about another kind of Israel in verse 11. THAT IS THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN MAKE THE TEXT FIT YOUR FALSE THEORY!

 

Here is a little exercise for you and all those who hold your HALF truth theory on this forum:

9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:
10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

QUESTION: Who is being quoted as speaking in verse 9?
ANSWER: "And David saith"

QUESTION: Who is speaking in verse 11?
ANSWER: "I say"


9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:
10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

QUESTION: What is the Stumblingblock that David refers to? What does it mean to "stumble" over it? Isn't that what David is describing in verse 10 - the stumbling?

ANSWER: "As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed." Isn't to "stumble" at the "stumblingblock" is TO REJECT CHRIST!!!!!


9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:
10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

QUESTION: Who is David describing as "their" and "them" and "they" in verses 9-10 that stumbled over this stumblingblock - REJECTED CHRIST? Is it the Gentiles? Is it the "remnant" of Israel or is it Israel as an ETHNIC NATION?

QUESTION: Who is Paul describing that has "stumbled" (REJECTED CHRIST) in verse 11 so that salvation goes to the Gentiles? Is it the Gentiles that have REJECTED CHRIST so that salvation can come to the Gentiles? Is it the "remnant" that has REJECTED CHRIST so that salvation can go to the Gentiles OR is it Israel as an ETHNIC NATION that has rejected Christ so that salvation can go to the Gentiles?


11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

QUESTION: Is not Paul in the strongest language possible denying that the Israel who has "stumbled" REJECTED CHRIST will utterly fall - "GOD FORBID"

ANSWER: The only definition of Israel that can possibly fit this verse is ISRAEL AS AN ETHNIC NATION,

1. because the generational "remnant" of Israel do not reject Christ. The Gentiles who shall "come in" (v. 25) will not reject Christ.

2. Because it is not the "fall" (rejection of Christ) of the "remnant" that brings salvation to the Gentiles!

3. Because it is not the "fall" (rejection of Christ) of Gentiles that bring salvation to the Gentiles!


THE FULL TRUTH is that God is now rejecting ISRAEL AS A NATION because ISRAEL AS A NATION is rejecting Jesus Christ. However, ISRAEL AS A NATION shall not continue in unbelief but will come to faith AS A NATION when the "fullness of the Gentile" elect be come in, when Christ returns from heaven (Rom 11;25-28; Rev. 1:7; Zech. 12:14-13:1; Acts 3:19-20; Mt. 23:39).

 

You need to stop reading your A-millennial commentators and Jew haters and look at what God says in the Bible!! Your theory is a HALF truth and Romans 11:9-11 thoroughly refutes it!

 

In your above response, you present to us THREE different interpretations of the term "Israel." I have already applied each of your interpretations to Romans 11:9-10 and proved that TWO of your interpretations are IMPOSSIBLE to fit that text - IMPOSSIBLE. However do you respond to the evidence??? No! You just simply repeat it thinking if you repeat it enough the IMPOSSIBLE will become possible.

You imagine that your SPIRITUAL definition of Israel consisting of elect GENTILES and JEWS is taught by Peter in 1 Peter when in fact Peter is specifically writing to JEWISH CHRISTIANS ONLY. Indeed, Galatians 3:9 states clearly that Peter believed he was an apostle to JEWISH CHRISTIANS while Paul and Barnabas were sent to the GENTILES. Peter is addressing JEWS ONLYas the present and real SPIRITUAL NATION of Israel - the "remnant" of His day. He addresses them as the "twelve tribes" scattered abroad or the Jewish dispersion.

However, the "remnant" Israel of his day cannot be what Paul is talking about in Romans 11:9-10 as the remnant Israel DID NOT REJECT CHRIST but the Israel in Romans 11:9-10 REJECTED CHRIST.

The "remnant" Israel cannot be what Paul is speaking about in Romans 11:9-11 because it is not because of the REJECTION OF CHRIST by remnant Israel that God forsook "remnant" Israel and went to the Gentiles. So your response is absurd, rediculous and IMPOSSIBLE.

I don't think it is in you to simply be HONEST WITH THE TEXT and deal with THE EVIDENCE. You will continue to JUMP out of the context and PIT scriptures against scriptures because your intepretation of Romans 11:9-11 is BANKRUPT of truth.

 

SBG cannot harmonize his interpretation of Israel with Romans 11:9-11 for the following obvious reasons.

1. The Israel in Romans 11:9-11 are CHRIST REJECTORS not "spiritual" Israel.

2. The CHRIST REJECTING Israel in Romans 11:9-11 is the stated reason why God forsook THIS KIND OF ISRAEL and brought salvation to the Gentiles (v. 11) but that cannot be said about "spiritual" or "remnant" Israel as God has not forsook them to go to the Gentiles as they are presently being saved in every generation (v. 5).

3. The CHRIST REJECTING Israel in Romans 11:11 is the SAME ISRAEL that David describes in Romans 11:9-10. It is the SAME ISRAEL that Elijah described in his day as well in Romans 11:2-3. Neither Elijah or David or Paul is speaking about "remnant" Israel but about the SAME ISRAEL that has historically rejected Christ and rebelled against God so that God turned away from THIS KIND OF ISRAEL unto the Gentiles.

4. The CHRIST REJECTING Israel in Romans 11:2-3 and 11:9-11 or the SAME ISRAEL in Elijah's day, in David's day and now in Paul's day that has continued from Elijah to Paul's day in REBELLION against God and in REJECTION of Christ are continuing in their stumbling, continuing in their fall, but this is not true of the "remnant" Israel but remnant Israel in Elijah's day was saved, in David's day was saved and in Paul's day is being saved (v. 5).

5. The CHRIST REJECTING Israel in Romans 11:11 will not continue in their "fall" so as to be irreversably fallen as Paul in the strongest words deny they will continue in that fallen condition "God forbid." However, that fallen condition had contined in Elijah's day, in David's day and in Paul's day so that God turned to the Gentiles UNTIL that SAME CHRIST REJECTING ISRAEL is made jealous (v. 11) and "UNTIL the fullness of the Gentiles be come in" and then that same CHRIST REJECTING Israel that continued in their stumbling in Elijah's day and in David's day and in Paul's day becomes a CHRIST RECIEVING Israel WHEN Christ's Second Advent occurs (Rom. 11:25-28) and "all Israel" MEANING "all" rather than "remnant" MEANING "all" Israel as a NATION will be saved. MEANING in contrast to their previous history AS A NATION in Elijah's day, and in David's day and in Paul's day - the SAME Israel AS A NATION that had continued in CHRIST REJECTION. This is not true of "remnant" Israel in Elijah's day (v. 3) or in David's day or in Paul's day or in our day.

Will SBG deal with the above evidence in any kind of contextual and substance response? No! He will continue to JUMP out of the context and/or PIT scriptures against scriptures because HE CANNOT DO ANY KIND OF SOUND WORD BY WORD EXEGESIS OF ROMANS 11:9-11 because if he attempts to do so it will expose his interpretation as only a HALF truth.

 

Just as I predicted, you want to JUMP and you want to PIT scripture against scripture but your are INCAPABLE of dealing with the contextual evidence I placed before you below.

You are teaching lies and the proof is that you cannot HONESTLY deal with Romans 11:9-11 exegetically or expositorily. If you could, you could disprove the evidence I placed before you below.

 

Did you forget Galatians 2:9?

Gal. 2:9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

There are two sets of Peculiar people. Even you have made a distinction between "remnant" Israel - ALL JEWS in distinction to GENTILE Christians and thus you have TWO sets of Christians or are you now defining "remnant" Israel to be GENTILES?????????

The fact that "in Christ" there is neither JEW or GENTILE denies your whole idea of a "spiritual" ISRAEL or "spiritual" JEWS since there are NO "Jews" or "Gentiles' in Christ.

So yes, Remnant Israel is SPIRITUAL ISRAEL today or the "holy nation" of ETHNIC twice born Jews while Israel as a ETHNIC NATION is still in rebellion.

HOWEVER, ALL THIS JUMPING OUTSIDE THE ROMANS 11:7-11 TEXT AND PITTING ONE CONTEXT AGAINST ANOTHER CONTEXT DOES NOT HELP YOU AT ALL. I HAVE PROVIDED EVIDENCE FROM ROMANS 11:7-11 THAT PROVES YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THAT TEXT IS IMPOSSIBLE - IMPOSSIBLE - IMPOSSIBLE - AND FURTHER PROOF IT IS IMPOSSIBLE IS THAT YOU HAVE NOT ATTEMPTED TVERTHROW ONE SINGLE STATEMENT IN THE FOLLOWING POST:


SBG cannot harmonize his interpretation of Israel with Romans 11:9-11 for the following obvious reasons.

1. The Israel in Romans 11:9-11 are CHRIST REJECTORS not "spiritual" Israel.

2. The CHRIST REJECTING Israel in Romans 11:9-11 is the stated reason why God forsook THIS KIND OF ISRAEL and brought salvation to the Gentiles (v. 11) but that cannot be said about "spiritual" or "remnant" Israel as God has not forsook them to go to the Gentiles as they are presently being saved in every generation (v. 5).

3. The CHRIST REJECTING Israel in Romans 11:11 is the SAME ISRAEL that David describes in Romans 11:9-10. It is the SAME ISRAEL that Elijah described in his day as well in Romans 11:2-3. Neither Elijah or David or Paul is speaking about "remnant" Israel but about the SAME ISRAEL that has historically rejected Christ and rebelled against God so that God turned away from THIS KIND OF ISRAEL unto the Gentiles.

4. The CHRIST REJECTING Israel in Romans 11:2-3 and 11:9-11 or the SAME ISRAEL in Elijah's day, in David's day and now in Paul's day that has continued from Elijah to Paul's day in REBELLION against God and in REJECTION of Christ are continuing in their stumbling, continuing in their fall, but this is not true of the "remnant" Israel but remnant Israel in Elijah's day was saved, in David's day was saved and in Paul's day is being saved (v. 5).

5. The CHRIST REJECTING Israel in Romans 11:11 will not continue in their "fall" so as to be irreversably fallen as Paul in the strongest words deny they will continue in that fallen condition "God forbid." However, that fallen condition had contined in Elijah's day, in David's day and in Paul's day so that God turned to the Gentiles UNTIL that SAME CHRIST REJECTING ISRAEL is made jealous (v. 11) and "UNTIL the fullness of the Gentiles be come in" and then that same CHRIST REJECTING Israel that continued in their stumbling in Elijah's day and in David's day and in Paul's day becomes a CHRIST RECIEVING Israel WHEN Christ's Second Advent occurs (Rom. 11:25-28) and "all Israel" MEANING "all" rather than "remnant" MEANING "all" Israel as a NATION will be saved. MEANING in contrast to their previous history AS A NATION in Elijah's day, and in David's day and in Paul's day - the SAME Israel AS A NATION that had continued in CHRIST REJECTION. This is not true of "remnant" Israel in Elijah's day (v. 3) or in David's day or in Paul's day or in our day.

Will SBG deal with the above evidence in any kind of contextual and substance response? No! He will continue to JUMP out of the context and/or PIT scriptures against scriptures because HE CANNOT DO ANY KIND OF SOUND WORD BY WORD EXEGESIS OF ROMANS 11:9-11 because if he attempts to do so it will expose his interpretation as only a HALF truth.