Featured Is "Fullness" an inadequate translation?

Fullness does not mean "full inclusion" of all the Gentiles, which is a "futurist" interpretation.

Fullness is inadequate because it is too vague, as your interpretation demonstrates. Intended affect better presents the message.

But thank you for your thoughtful response, especially the "leaving us with the context to know what it means."

 

Lets take a look at these two "complementary" verses, Romans 11:12 and 25.

Verse 12 (NASB) Now if their transgression is riches for the world and their failure is riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their fulfillment [or fullness] be!

Verse 25 (NASB) 25 For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will not be wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in;

Shoostie is correct that is is probable that Paul intended the same meaning for the word translated fullness is both verses.

However, his position (as I understand it) means in verse 25 the inclusion of Gentiles as equal members, rather than wild branches. I do not think that idea (perhaps misconstrued by me) has merit.

OTOH, my view is that the fullness of the Jews and fullness of the Gentiles refers to the "intended affect" of God's completed action. In verse 12, the intended affect of the temporary hardening will be the end of their diminishment and restoration to the natural olive tree of those becoming believing Jews. In verse 25, the "intended affect" of the gospel message being taken to the Gentiles due to the Jews at that time being temporarily hardened, will have been completed.