Timeline for In Romans 11:26, how is “all” understood by those who believe Israel refers to physical Israel?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 18, 2023 at 16:06 | answer | added | Levan Gigineishvili | timeline score: 0 | |
| Nov 18, 2023 at 14:59 | answer | added | Bob Akers | timeline score: 0 | |
| Sep 13, 2020 at 19:22 | answer | added | user35953 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Sep 13, 2020 at 18:29 | answer | added | Steve Miller | timeline score: 1 | |
| Oct 7, 2019 at 15:29 | vote | accept | למה זה תשאל לשמי | ||
| Sep 18, 2019 at 5:54 | comment | added | למה זה תשאל לשמי | This article by Jason Staples is the most persuasive understanding of Romans 9-11 that I've read to date, and some similarities to the answer given by Nihil Sine Deo jasonstaples.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/… | |
| Sep 17, 2019 at 19:25 | comment | added | Nihil Sine Deo | @Constantthin the wild branches are either, depending on the interpretation, those with partial bloodline or no bloodline at all of the 12 tribes. And yes they are able to be grafted in by faith. | |
| Sep 16, 2019 at 22:55 | comment | added | Constantthin | I also agree, but it is noteworthy that the scripture also says that wild branches can be used as substitutes, to make up the full number. | |
| Sep 16, 2019 at 22:16 | answer | added | ScottS | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jun 28, 2019 at 21:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackBibleHerm/status/1144712190714404865 | ||
| Jun 28, 2019 at 12:15 | comment | added | Lowther | @autodidact I agree with the 'America- Israel' comparison... | |
| Jun 27, 2019 at 16:04 | comment | added | Nihil Sine Deo | It says all of Israel not every Israelite. That’s an important distinction. Imagine saying all of the United States of America was at the Olympics, maybe all 50 states were present but not all Americans were present. All Israel, all twelve tribes but not every Israelite | |
| Jun 27, 2019 at 14:45 | answer | added | Nihil Sine Deo | timeline score: 6 | |
| Jun 27, 2019 at 11:36 | comment | added | Lowther | I am starting to see a consistent theme on this stack, that is that if a question or answer is not concerning original or alternative language and grammar other than English, that contextually exegetical questions or answers are not considered applicable... I don't agree. The fact is that in this question and many others the correct hermeneutic to apply is a simple contextual evaluation of what is said, in and by the text it self, with the consultation of language or grammar to amend, critic or obsolete the answer or question | |
| Jun 27, 2019 at 11:25 | comment | added | Lowther | The question could have been better framed perhaps, but this is a hermeneutical question. To show what the text says in and of it self is exegesis, and that is exactly what I had applied to the question asked, thus it is hermeneutics' question | |
| Jun 27, 2019 at 9:52 | comment | added | Gina | Is this question appropriate for hermeneutics? Asking for an opinion or belief system may exclude true exegesis of the scripture. | |
| Jun 27, 2019 at 8:46 | comment | added | Nigel J | As the answer below emphasises (Romans 9:6) scripture clearly states that 'not all are (true) Israel who are (naturally) of Israel'. Therefore there is no real exegetical value in asking the hypothetical question. I think this would have better been asked on the Christianity site as it a question about relative opinions, not absolute scriptural text. | |
| Jun 27, 2019 at 4:05 | answer | added | Lowther | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jun 27, 2019 at 0:12 | history | asked | למה זה תשאל לשמי | CC BY-SA 4.0 |