-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
the previous poster's concern was the graphic nature of the photos.
your assertion that followed was "yes antisemitic propaganda" - which is ludicrous.
the kids were shot by the IDF.
if someone posts woodcuts of the Spanish Inquisition would you say "anti-catholic propaganda"?
what about a 7-11 clerk gunned down in a robbery? "anti-criminal propaganda"?
your assertion that followed was "yes antisemitic propaganda" - which is ludicrous.
the kids were shot by the IDF.
if someone posts woodcuts of the Spanish Inquisition would you say "anti-catholic propaganda"?
what about a 7-11 clerk gunned down in a robbery? "anti-criminal propaganda"?
C
were they?
there have been previous false claims against the IDF
the most famous being that 12 year old boy they(the IDF) were accused of killing but were eventually exonerated; ie it was an exercise in palestinian propogands
Israeli panel: Palestinian boy 'killed' by IDF at start of intifada did not actually die - Diplomacy & Defense Israel News | Haaretz
there have been previous false claims against the IDF
the most famous being that 12 year old boy they(the IDF) were accused of killing but were eventually exonerated; ie it was an exercise in palestinian propogands
Israeli panel: Palestinian boy 'killed' by IDF at start of intifada did not actually die - Diplomacy & Defense Israel News | Haaretz
take it up with these Israelis who hate what they did. and testify about it.
tell them how antisemitic they are.
BREAKING THE SILENCE
Israeli soldiers talk about the occupied territories
www. breakingthesilence. org
Featured categories
› Abuse
› Assassinations
› Bribery
› Checkpoints
› Confirmation of killing
› Curfews/closures
› Deaths
› Destruction of property
› Human shields
› Humiliation
› Looting
› Loss of livelihood
› Routine
› Rules of engagement
› Settlements
› Settler violence
tell them how antisemitic they are.
BREAKING THE SILENCE
Israeli soldiers talk about the occupied territories
www. breakingthesilence. org
Featured categories
› Abuse
› Assassinations
› Bribery
› Checkpoints
› Confirmation of killing
› Curfews/closures
› Deaths
› Destruction of property
› Human shields
› Humiliation
› Looting
› Loss of livelihood
› Routine
› Rules of engagement
› Settlements
› Settler violence
Last edited:
The question remains, which part of my thinking or lifestyle is antisemitic?
You're defending your theology and denial is a poor way to go about it.
Which part of my thinking do I need to change in order to not be "antisemitic"?
I'm sure that the Holy Spirit will tell you if you just pray. Then the rest of us can marvel at the genius of dispensationalism.
James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all [men] liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
You're defending your theology and denial is a poor way to go about it.
Which part of my thinking do I need to change in order to not be "antisemitic"?
I'm sure that the Holy Spirit will tell you if you just pray. Then the rest of us can marvel at the genius of dispensationalism.
James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all [men] liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
It's starting to appear as if all of us off-white people look the same to you. If Oskar Schindler had operated the way that dispensationalists do, then everyone would have died already...
The boy named at the link you posted is Mohammed al-Dura.
The children at the link I posted were not anyone named al-Dura.
This is confirmed by "officials at Ash-Shifa hospital".
http://www.uruknet.de/?p=50434
If Oskar Schindler had operated the way that dispensationalists do, then everyone would have died already...The boy named at the link you posted is Mohammed al-Dura.
The children at the link I posted were not anyone named al-Dura.
This is confirmed by "officials at Ash-Shifa hospital".
http://www.uruknet.de/?p=50434
C
The question remains, which part of my thinking or lifestyle is antisemitic?
You're defending your theology and denial is a poor way to go about it.
Which part of my thinking do I need to change in order to not be "antisemitic"?
I'm sure that the Holy Spirit will tell you if you just pray. Then the rest of us can marvel at the genius of dispensationalism.
James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all [men] liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
You're defending your theology and denial is a poor way to go about it.
Which part of my thinking do I need to change in order to not be "antisemitic"?
I'm sure that the Holy Spirit will tell you if you just pray. Then the rest of us can marvel at the genius of dispensationalism.
James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all [men] liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
as you know i was referring to images and your attempt to provoke an emotional reaction against israel and the IDF
It is not smart to attack or libel israel
for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye
I don't know any evangelical who believes that.
That's a real confounding of the gospel.
They can't be forgiven by the blood of Christ because it applies only to those who have faith in the blood
of Christ (Ro 3:25).
Forgiveness is only by faith in the Christ Jesus.
Another confounding of Scripture, which gives this appellation "stiff-necked" to Christ-rejecting Jews
(Ac 7:51; Ex 32:9, 33:3, 5, 34:9; Dt 9:6, 9:13).
Do you have a Christian understanding regarding those who have been hardened and blinded by God (Ro 11:7-8) and reject Christ Jesus?
And to be sure there is no confusion, I cannot know who are the remnant elected to salvation,
and who are not.
Therefore, I am to treat all Jews as any other unbeliever and call them to the gospel.
And the ones who do not respond are no worse than the Gentiles who do not respond.
God has put all, Jew and Gentile, on the same footing in the NT.
Salvation from God's wrath on sin (Ro 5:9) is by faith in Jesus Christ, and in no other way (Jn 3:18, 36),
for both Gentile and Jew.
That's a real confounding of the gospel.
They can't be forgiven by the blood of Christ because it applies only to those who have faith in the blood
of Christ (Ro 3:25).
Forgiveness is only by faith in the Christ Jesus.
Another confounding of Scripture, which gives this appellation "stiff-necked" to Christ-rejecting Jews
(Ac 7:51; Ex 32:9, 33:3, 5, 34:9; Dt 9:6, 9:13).
Do you have a Christian understanding regarding those who have been hardened and blinded by God (Ro 11:7-8) and reject Christ Jesus?
And to be sure there is no confusion, I cannot know who are the remnant elected to salvation,
and who are not.
Therefore, I am to treat all Jews as any other unbeliever and call them to the gospel.
And the ones who do not respond are no worse than the Gentiles who do not respond.
God has put all, Jew and Gentile, on the same footing in the NT.
Salvation from God's wrath on sin (Ro 5:9) is by faith in Jesus Christ, and in no other way (Jn 3:18, 36),
for both Gentile and Jew.
And to top it all off, this is 2013 and word "Jew" is generally considered a slur.
Acceptable: Jewish person, Jewish people, Hebrew person, Hebrew people
Not acceptable: Jew
So...the title of this thread: chutzpah
Today's Yiddish word of the day: chutzpah
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/chutzpah
chutzpah (uncountable) Noun
(slang) Nearly arrogant courage; utter audacity, effrontery or impudence; supreme self-confidence; exaggerated self-opinion;
Originated 1890–95 from Yiddish חוצפּה (khutspe), from Mishnaic Hebrew חֻצְפָּה (khutspá), from חָצַף (khátsaf, “to be insolent”).
Acceptable: Jewish person, Jewish people, Hebrew person, Hebrew people
Not acceptable: Jew
So...the title of this thread: chutzpah
Today's Yiddish word of the day: chutzpah
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/chutzpah
chutzpah (uncountable) Noun
(slang) Nearly arrogant courage; utter audacity, effrontery or impudence; supreme self-confidence; exaggerated self-opinion;
Originated 1890–95 from Yiddish חוצפּה (khutspe), from Mishnaic Hebrew חֻצְפָּה (khutspá), from חָצַף (khátsaf, “to be insolent”).
And to top it all off, this is 2013 and word "Jew" is generally considered a slur.
Acceptable: Jewish person, Jewish people, Hebrew person, Hebrew people
Not acceptable: Jew
So...the title of this thread: chutzpah
Today's Yiddish word of the day: chutzpah
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/chutzpah
chutzpah (uncountable) Noun
(slang) Nearly arrogant courage; utter audacity, effrontery or impudence; supreme self-confidence; exaggerated self-opinion;
Originated 1890–95 from Yiddish חוצפּה (khutspe), from Mishnaic Hebrew חֻצְפָּה (khutspá), from חָצַף (khátsaf, “to be insolent”).
Acceptable: Jewish person, Jewish people, Hebrew person, Hebrew people
Not acceptable: Jew
So...the title of this thread: chutzpah
Today's Yiddish word of the day: chutzpah
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/chutzpah
chutzpah (uncountable) Noun
(slang) Nearly arrogant courage; utter audacity, effrontery or impudence; supreme self-confidence; exaggerated self-opinion;
Originated 1890–95 from Yiddish חוצפּה (khutspe), from Mishnaic Hebrew חֻצְפָּה (khutspá), from חָצַף (khátsaf, “to be insolent”).
it gets updated too often.
but, given some of the recent posts, is this the Jesus you know?
"It is not smart to attack or libel israel"; for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye
their jesus is for 35cal shells in certain kids, who are not the apple of his eye.
eh....going to read.
this stuff is too much sometimes.
what i did find interesting last time i went through the "BREAKING THE SILENCE - Israeli soldiers talk about the occupied territories" (and other Israeli testimonies) was the very same reasoning the Dispies use...or rather, the very same vulgar conditioning....the "other" isn't quite human.
i can almost understand it in unregenerate people...but those who say they know Jesus?
nah.
these former IDF have more conscience about what goes on than some others....i'm thinking:
[video=youtube;hDh1Vr7qajA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDh1Vr7qajA[/video]
ciao
Last edited:
So? I'm the United States citizen and taxpayer. US foreign aid and our veto power in the UN is what allows Israel to exist in the first place. I'll post photos of dead Iraqi babies if that's the topic of the thread--not much difference--I paid for that also.
-> U.S. aid to Israel totals $233.7b over six decades - Business Israel News | Haaretz
It's Israel, not israel [sic].
Attack or libel? Israel stands guard. The United States stands guard. That doesn't mean I'm going to allow atrocities against civilians to pass without, you know, saying something...
You just stay at home and bang two rocks together (proof: Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome) and pretend that Jewish people actually care what you think. That's why I feel compelled to label it a dispensationalist fantasy.
--
Today's Yiddish word of the day: schmoe
schmoe - Wiktionary
schmoe (plural schmoes) Noun
A stupid or obnoxious person
From Yiddish.
--
Yiddish
YIDDISH LANGUAGE
Yiddish is an endangered heritage language. It is the 1,000-year-old language of Ashkenazi Jews (i.e. European Jews). Ashkenazic Jewish Civilization represented one of the highest peaks in the history of Judaism: Yidn (Jews) spoke Yiddish (the language of the Jews).
Yiddish is a highly plastic and assimilative language, rich in idioms, and possessing remarkable freshness, pithiness, and pungency. There were an estimated 11 million speakers of Yiddish before Holocaust (two out of three Jews in the world spoke Yiddish ), and on the eve of WW II, there were 60 Yiddish daily newspapers and 300-400 daily periodicals in 30 different countries. Truly international in scope, Yiddish works were published on all five continents. It is estimated that a quarter of a million works of Yiddish literature were published in the mere 80 years that represent the height of modern Yiddish culture (approximately 1860-1940). Today there are an estimated one million speakers world-wide. It remains on the UN list of endangered languages.
Yiddish is a “fusion” language, its development a rapid process of growth and dissolution. It is based originally on a mixture of Middle High German dialects and coalescing into a language around the Rhine region of Mainz and Spires around 1100. Written in Hebrew characters, it initially served as an auxiliary to Hebrew, which was the language of prayer, ritual, and scholarly and legal commentaries. But it soon acquired an international scope (reflecting the travail of wandering, exile, dispersion), borrowing freely from almost every Indo-European language. With an estimated vocabulary of 180,000 words, it is one of the richest languages in the world. Approximately 80 percent of its vocabulary is derived from the Germanic; 15 percent is Hebraic; and five percent is from Slavic, Latin and Romance languages.
It is also categorized as a Germanic “folk” language. Since it was spoken by ordinary people rather than by scholars, its vocabulary is weak in abstractions, and has few items descriptive of nature (with which the Jews of Eastern Europe had relatively little contact). Yet it has a wealth of words descriptive of character and of relations among people. It also makes liberal use of diminutives and terms of endearment and has a variety of expletives. Use of proverbs is considerable. These qualities and usages give Yiddish a uniquely warm and personal flavor.
Yiddish is a language rich in irony, as exemplified by the following proverb on economic theory: “Rich and poor both lie IN the ground together, but ON the ground the rich lie more comfortably.”
-> U.S. aid to Israel totals $233.7b over six decades - Business Israel News | Haaretz
It's Israel, not israel [sic].
Attack or libel? Israel stands guard. The United States stands guard. That doesn't mean I'm going to allow atrocities against civilians to pass without, you know, saying something...
You just stay at home and bang two rocks together (proof: Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome) and pretend that Jewish people actually care what you think. That's why I feel compelled to label it a dispensationalist fantasy.
--
Today's Yiddish word of the day: schmoe
schmoe - Wiktionary
schmoe (plural schmoes) Noun
A stupid or obnoxious person
From Yiddish.
--
Yiddish
YIDDISH LANGUAGE
Yiddish is an endangered heritage language. It is the 1,000-year-old language of Ashkenazi Jews (i.e. European Jews). Ashkenazic Jewish Civilization represented one of the highest peaks in the history of Judaism: Yidn (Jews) spoke Yiddish (the language of the Jews).
Yiddish is a highly plastic and assimilative language, rich in idioms, and possessing remarkable freshness, pithiness, and pungency. There were an estimated 11 million speakers of Yiddish before Holocaust (two out of three Jews in the world spoke Yiddish ), and on the eve of WW II, there were 60 Yiddish daily newspapers and 300-400 daily periodicals in 30 different countries. Truly international in scope, Yiddish works were published on all five continents. It is estimated that a quarter of a million works of Yiddish literature were published in the mere 80 years that represent the height of modern Yiddish culture (approximately 1860-1940). Today there are an estimated one million speakers world-wide. It remains on the UN list of endangered languages.
Yiddish is a “fusion” language, its development a rapid process of growth and dissolution. It is based originally on a mixture of Middle High German dialects and coalescing into a language around the Rhine region of Mainz and Spires around 1100. Written in Hebrew characters, it initially served as an auxiliary to Hebrew, which was the language of prayer, ritual, and scholarly and legal commentaries. But it soon acquired an international scope (reflecting the travail of wandering, exile, dispersion), borrowing freely from almost every Indo-European language. With an estimated vocabulary of 180,000 words, it is one of the richest languages in the world. Approximately 80 percent of its vocabulary is derived from the Germanic; 15 percent is Hebraic; and five percent is from Slavic, Latin and Romance languages.
It is also categorized as a Germanic “folk” language. Since it was spoken by ordinary people rather than by scholars, its vocabulary is weak in abstractions, and has few items descriptive of nature (with which the Jews of Eastern Europe had relatively little contact). Yet it has a wealth of words descriptive of character
and of relations among people. It also makes liberal use of diminutives and terms of endearment and has a variety of expletives. Use of proverbs is considerable. These qualities and usages give Yiddish a uniquely warm and personal flavor.Yiddish is a language rich in irony, as exemplified by the following proverb on economic theory: “Rich and poor both lie IN the ground together, but ON the ground the rich lie more comfortably.”
Yes. . .your point?
That's also what the NT thinks. . .and BTW, that's "the fullness of their reinstatement" as in
"the fullness of the Gentiles."
Pour yourself a cup, and put on your thinkin' cap, 'cause we're headin' into barracuda waters.
A text without a context is a pretext.
The explanation in chp 11 of God's sovereign choice in rejecting unbelieving Israel was written to
Roman Christians in the context of the whole letter to the Romans on the righteousness of God,
where Paul vindicates God's righteousness in rejecting unbelieving Israel.
So you can't jump in at the middle of the letter in chp 11 and expect to understand it correctly.
In chp 8 of his defense of God's righteousness, Paul presents the inability to be separated from
the love of God that is in Christ Jesus, which then sets off a series of rhetorical questions.
If nothing "can separate us from the love of God" that is in Christ Jesus our Lord (Ro 8:34-39),
then what about Israel? They are cut off, separated from the love of God in Christ Jesus.
Why does Israel not believe and receive sonship (see Jn 5:3-47).
Paul's response to the question is that God's cutting off Israel because of unbelief is not inconsistent
with his clearly stated purpose in his word (9:6).
Moving to chp 9, Paul first expresses his grief that Israel has been cut off, after being chosen
as God's people (see Zec 11:4-11, where the reason for the judgment on Israel is given
in vv. 1-3; viz, rejection of the Messianic Shepherd-King.
He points out that, although Israel was given many advantages by God, his promise of sonship
was not to all the descendants of Abraham, just as it was not to Ishmael and Esau.
God sovereignly chose Jacob to inherit the promise instead of Esau, before they were even born
or had done anything good or bad--in order that his purpose in election might stand;
i.e., not by works but by him who calls.
So having introduced God's sovereignty into his presentation, Paul addresses the obvious
question it raises: Is God unjust (to Ishmael and Esau)? His answer: Not at all, God has the right
to dispense his mercy and compassion as he chooses, for it is not owed to anyone, it is a gift, which has
nothing to do with the recipient, but with God's soverign choice of to whom he will grant them.
To demonstrate God's right to dispense, or not to dispense, mercy based solely in his sovereign
choice, Paul uses the account of Pharoah, and concludes that God has mercy on whom he wants
(chooses) to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants (chooses) to harden.
Which then raises the next obvious question:
Then why does he blame us for hardening our hearts? Who can resist his will that they be hardened?
Paul's answer. . .the sovereignty of God. "Who are you, O man, to talk back to God?" God is the
sovereign potter who has the right to make from his clay some vessels for noble purposes (salvation)
and some for common use (human waste vessels, for wrath).
Which raises the next issue: So why would he choose to make some vessels the objects of his wrath,
who prepared themselves for destruction, rather than make all vessels for mercy? His answer: what if
God did this to make his wrath and power known, as a foil for making known to the objects of his mercy
the riches of his glory (goodness). However, while no one can call God to account for what he does,
Paul does point out God's great patience toward the objects of his wrath, for the purpose of bringing
about repentance.
Continuing on with his presentation of the sovereignty of God in election to mercy, Paul uses the
prophecies of Hosea 2:23, 1:10 to show that the forgiving, saving, restoring God takes the Gentiles
who are "not my people" and makes them "my people" by sovereignly grafting them into the covenant.
Then he uses the prophecies of Isa 10:22-23, 1:9 to show that only a small remnant of Israel
would ever be saved (see Ro 11:5-6), that it's not a new plan, and that God's calling includes both
Gentiles and Jews, the great majority being Gentiles.
Having introduced Gentiles into his presentation, he addresses the reason for Israel's rejection and
the Gentiles' calling: unbelief and belief, respectively. The Gentiles pursued righteousness by faith and
obtained it, while Israel pursued it by works and did not attain it. They stumbled over the Messiah,
the "stumbling stone" (1Pe 2:8), and fell into rejection.
God's promise has not been altered.
God is now saving a remnant of Israel, just as he is saving a remnant of all mankind.
In the NT, both Israel and the Gentiles are on the same footing.
Conversion of unbelievers is not about God having the power or not, it's about his choice or not.
God stated, 750 years before the NT, in Isa 10:21, that only a remnant would return to him.
It is repeated again in Ro 9:27.
That is your fancy, with no Biblical basis, and totally contrary to the NT.
It also has nothing to do with the revelation spoken by the Son in these last days (Heb 1:1-2), given
through the writers of the NT, in which light all Scripture is to be understood.
And there any promise from God to forgive sin after Christ Jesus returns.
Peter states that Christ Jesus must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore
everything (Ac 3:21, for which the whole creation has been groaning, and for which we have been e
agerly awaiting, the redemption of our bodies at the resurrection (Ro 8:22-23), followed by
the Final Judgment and the new heavens and new earth (2Pe 3:13).
The Christ comes once to atone and once to judge, and not in between (Heb 9:27-28).
If you have not made your peace with God through Christ Jesus before he returns,
it will be too late when he returns.
That's also what the NT thinks. . .and BTW, that's "the fullness of their reinstatement" as in
"the fullness of the Gentiles."
Pour yourself a cup, and put on your thinkin' cap, 'cause we're headin' into barracuda waters.
A text without a context is a pretext.
The explanation in chp 11 of God's sovereign choice in rejecting unbelieving Israel was written to
Roman Christians in the context of the whole letter to the Romans on the righteousness of God,
where Paul vindicates God's righteousness in rejecting unbelieving Israel.
So you can't jump in at the middle of the letter in chp 11 and expect to understand it correctly.
In chp 8 of his defense of God's righteousness, Paul presents the inability to be separated from
the love of God that is in Christ Jesus, which then sets off a series of rhetorical questions.
If nothing "can separate us from the love of God" that is in Christ Jesus our Lord (Ro 8:34-39),
then what about Israel? They are cut off, separated from the love of God in Christ Jesus.
Why does Israel not believe and receive sonship (see Jn 5:3-47).
Paul's response to the question is that God's cutting off Israel because of unbelief is not inconsistent
with his clearly stated purpose in his word (9:6).
Moving to chp 9, Paul first expresses his grief that Israel has been cut off, after being chosen
as God's people (see Zec 11:4-11, where the reason for the judgment on Israel is given
in vv. 1-3; viz, rejection of the Messianic Shepherd-King.
He points out that, although Israel was given many advantages by God, his promise of sonship
was not to all the descendants of Abraham, just as it was not to Ishmael and Esau.
God sovereignly chose Jacob to inherit the promise instead of Esau, before they were even born
or had done anything good or bad--in order that his purpose in election might stand;
i.e., not by works but by him who calls.
So having introduced God's sovereignty into his presentation, Paul addresses the obvious
question it raises: Is God unjust (to Ishmael and Esau)? His answer: Not at all, God has the right
to dispense his mercy and compassion as he chooses, for it is not owed to anyone, it is a gift, which has
nothing to do with the recipient, but with God's soverign choice of to whom he will grant them.
To demonstrate God's right to dispense, or not to dispense, mercy based solely in his sovereign
choice, Paul uses the account of Pharoah, and concludes that God has mercy on whom he wants
(chooses) to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants (chooses) to harden.
Which then raises the next obvious question:
Then why does he blame us for hardening our hearts? Who can resist his will that they be hardened?
Paul's answer. . .the sovereignty of God. "Who are you, O man, to talk back to God?" God is the
sovereign potter who has the right to make from his clay some vessels for noble purposes (salvation)
and some for common use (human waste vessels, for wrath).
Which raises the next issue: So why would he choose to make some vessels the objects of his wrath,
who prepared themselves for destruction, rather than make all vessels for mercy? His answer: what if
God did this to make his wrath and power known, as a foil for making known to the objects of his mercy
the riches of his glory (goodness). However, while no one can call God to account for what he does,
Paul does point out God's great patience toward the objects of his wrath, for the purpose of bringing
about repentance.
Continuing on with his presentation of the sovereignty of God in election to mercy, Paul uses the
prophecies of Hosea 2:23, 1:10 to show that the forgiving, saving, restoring God takes the Gentiles
who are "not my people" and makes them "my people" by sovereignly grafting them into the covenant.
Then he uses the prophecies of Isa 10:22-23, 1:9 to show that only a small remnant of Israel
would ever be saved (see Ro 11:5-6), that it's not a new plan, and that God's calling includes both
Gentiles and Jews, the great majority being Gentiles.
Having introduced Gentiles into his presentation, he addresses the reason for Israel's rejection and
the Gentiles' calling: unbelief and belief, respectively. The Gentiles pursued righteousness by faith and
obtained it, while Israel pursued it by works and did not attain it. They stumbled over the Messiah,
the "stumbling stone" (1Pe 2:8), and fell into rejection.
God's promise has not been altered.
God is now saving a remnant of Israel, just as he is saving a remnant of all mankind.
In the NT, both Israel and the Gentiles are on the same footing.
Conversion of unbelievers is not about God having the power or not, it's about his choice or not.
God stated, 750 years before the NT, in Isa 10:21, that only a remnant would return to him.
It is repeated again in Ro 9:27.
That is your fancy, with no Biblical basis, and totally contrary to the NT.
It also has nothing to do with the revelation spoken by the Son in these last days (Heb 1:1-2), given
through the writers of the NT, in which light all Scripture is to be understood.
And there any promise from God to forgive sin after Christ Jesus returns.
Peter states that Christ Jesus must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore
everything (Ac 3:21, for which the whole creation has been groaning, and for which we have been e
agerly awaiting, the redemption of our bodies at the resurrection (Ro 8:22-23), followed by
the Final Judgment and the new heavens and new earth (2Pe 3:13).
The Christ comes once to atone and once to judge, and not in between (Heb 9:27-28).
If you have not made your peace with God through Christ Jesus before he returns,
it will be too late when he returns.
Last edited: