Romans 11 - the olive tree - slow and easy

[BibleStudent]

Shiloh,

You need to quit making assumptions. You said:

I find it interesting how the goofy theology of preterism works.

I

[Guest shiloh357]

Shiloh,

You need to quit making assumptions. You said:

QUOTE

I find it interesting how the goofy theology of preterism works.

I

[Guest Zayit]

It sounds to me as if some grafted in branches are of the parasitic variety.

[BibleStudent]

I'm amazed. I go away for several days, and when I come back, no one has even offered a single comment on the substance of my discussion of verse 25. There were two key areas where I expected at least some comments.

1. The "partial hardening in Israel."

2. "Until the fulness of Gentiles has come in."

Both of these ought to have some comments from Dispensationalists. Yet I have seen none. I will wait a bit for comments on those before proceeding.

Ted

[JesusisGod2]

I'm amazed. I go away for several days, and when I come back, no one has even offered a single comment on the substance of my discussion of verse 25. There were two key areas where I expected at least some comments.

1. The "partial hardening in Israel."

2. "Until the fulness of Gentiles has come in."

Both of these ought to have some comments from Dispensationalists. Yet I have seen none. I will wait a bit for comments on those before proceeding.

Ted

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ted, there has been a lot of comments made on a lot of things, but you arent listening.

[BibleStudent]

JesusIsGod,

There are scurrilous comments about me, but there has been no comment whatever about the merits of what I said about "until" and "hardness in Israel." Until those are addressed, there has been no substantive response.

It is sad to see that some people find it necessary to demean someone who doesn't agree with them as one discussant does repeatedly. I have kept my comments very close to what has been said. When I said that the writer ignored something, that is exactly what he did. He denied it, but that doesn't change the facts. In no place did I call him "incompetent" or "blasphemous" as he did me.

When one substitutes inflammatory comments for serious discussion of the merits of a point, it raises serious questions about the author of those comments.

Let us return to Romans 11.

Ted

[JesusisGod2]

It is sad to see that some people find it necessary to demean someone who doesn't agree with them as one discussant does repeatedly. I have kept my comments very close to what has been said. When I said that the writer ignored something, that is exactly what he did. He denied it, but that doesn't change the facts. In no place did I call him "incompetent" or "blasphemous" as he did me.

Hi Biblestudent,

Brother, I cant speak for anyone else, but I have been the recipient of the same thing that you accuse another of by none other than yourself. However, I realize we can all get "sharp tongued" at times.

Remember that when you point a finger at someone, 4 are pointing back at you.

And then again, some of us may not intend to be "sharp tongued" but when reading in the limitations of print as opposed to face to face confrontaions, these can be taken wrong and were never intended by the writter.

There has been many points brought out on this and other threads about the hardining of Israel better known as "the time of the gentiles" and how God will again turn to the Nation of Israel and redeem her, but you have not acknowledged any of it. Yet you insist that people acknowledge you when you bring up something, and that not being scriptural truth but your belief or at best a denominational belief.

I realize that you have written a book and this is where I think that your problem lies. If you wre to acknowledge the truth, you would have to admit your book is wrong, which to me there would be no shame in that.

So again I will say, the responses to your question have have already been given, but you refuse to acknowledge them.

[Guest shiloh357]

This partial hardening continues

[BibleStudent]

Shiloh,

It

[BibleStudent]

After nearly two weeks, Shiloh has not seen fit to explain to us which of his contradictory views should be accepted. Unless he is away on vacation, I must suppose that this means that he is either unable or unwilling to do so. It may be that he is unwilling, since to do so would require that he do the hard biblical study to pick one position and show how the other is incorrect. Of course, that would be admitting that one of his positions is incorrect, and that is hard for anyone to do.

On the other hand, it is possible that he is unable. That is, he is unable to recognize the obvious fact that he has adopted an internally inconsistent hermeneutic. This is called a cognitive disconnect, and until it is remedied, Shiloh will be unable to properly exegete scripture.

For the benefit of all the onlookers, I am a professor of biblical exegesis. My next course, Practical Hermeneutics, is a lab course. The final exam will be for the student to exegete the olive tree. Four weeks will be allowed, and the paper will be graded on use of scripture and clarity of thought and presentation. Agreement with the professor will not be a grading point. I expect that my students will do a better job than Shiloh has done.

**

Now, since Shiloh has abandoned the field, I will conclude the exegesis of the olive tree. I will begin with a brief summary of the material so far explored. Obviously, if someone else chooses to make a reasoned dissent, more discussion may follow.

Concluded so far:

1. The root of the olive tree is Abraham. (If we want to get technical, it could be Jacob, since he was the first one with the name