@reformed said:

show previous quotes

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@Mitchell said:
Dave, could you please list the titles of (or quote) at three resources (Commentaries/Articles) that specifically comment on Romans 11:28 and illustrate clearly for a layman the interpretation that you hold to concerning Romans 11:28.

I quoted few the resources I have in my library concerning Romans 11:28 on October the 20th See: link

And, you dismissed missed them with the following:

@Dave_L said:
These are interesting but the Reformed, and Dispensationalists depend on a skewed interpretation of the law and institutional religion. They shoot their own feet out from under them if they fully take Paul at his word.

So, now please inform me of the better commentaries, articles, and exegesis on Romans 11:28 in your opinion. I ask only for the titles or quotes from of them that you accept and that clearly explain your position on Romans 11:28.

If, you do not have any that is okay, but please say so.
If, you do not want to share that is also okay but please say so.
If, your point of view is original to you that is also okay, but please say so.

The Reformed Creeds teach that the Church is Israel. And those who reject Christ are not. So if you understand this, Romans 11 supports this.

He asked for a SPECIFIC title or a SPECIFIC quote. Why is it so hard for you to produce that?

$20 per hour?

Dave let me ask you this. What is your purpose for being a participant on this site? What are your goals? What do you want to get out of this?

I share what God has blessed me with. Nothing more. I also learn from those who develop articles.

Then why the $20 per hour comment? If your goal is to truly share what God has blessed you with then share it. Don't keep dodging and deflecting or completely changing the topic. People are wanting to learn from you but you need to actually give them what they ask for so that they can.

I provided the source and the topic for personal study. The Reformed view of the Church and Israel supports all that I say as the OP of this thread.

See, that contradicts what you said about wanting to share. You don't really because you don't share. THey have asked you for a specific resource and a specific quote. You just keep giving generalities. This site is not for pointing people to personal study. That will be a result, but this site is for discussion, that means you bring the study here. You give the resources, you give the quotes, you make your case.

I think you will gain more if you look into the Reformed Creeds and read them for yourself. I can give you more of my blessings this way than if I do your work for you.

That is your opinion and we have requested otherwise. If you are always just going to say go look for yourself, this probably isn't a good community for you.

It is more important for you to know what the Reformed Creeds say. It will straighten out many kinks in your world view.

@reformed said:

show previous quotes

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@Mitchell said:
Dave, could you please list the titles of (or quote) at three resources (Commentaries/Articles) that specifically comment on Romans 11:28 and illustrate clearly for a layman the interpretation that you hold to concerning Romans 11:28.

I quoted few the resources I have in my library concerning Romans 11:28 on October the 20th See: link

And, you dismissed missed them with the following:

@Dave_L said:
These are interesting but the Reformed, and Dispensationalists depend on a skewed interpretation of the law and institutional religion. They shoot their own feet out from under them if they fully take Paul at his word.

So, now please inform me of the better commentaries, articles, and exegesis on Romans 11:28 in your opinion. I ask only for the titles or quotes from of them that you accept and that clearly explain your position on Romans 11:28.

If, you do not have any that is okay, but please say so.
If, you do not want to share that is also okay but please say so.
If, your point of view is original to you that is also okay, but please say so.

The Reformed Creeds teach that the Church is Israel. And those who reject Christ are not. So if you understand this, Romans 11 supports this.

He asked for a SPECIFIC title or a SPECIFIC quote. Why is it so hard for you to produce that?

$20 per hour?

Dave let me ask you this. What is your purpose for being a participant on this site? What are your goals? What do you want to get out of this?

I share what God has blessed me with. Nothing more. I also learn from those who develop articles.

Then why the $20 per hour comment? If your goal is to truly share what God has blessed you with then share it. Don't keep dodging and deflecting or completely changing the topic. People are wanting to learn from you but you need to actually give them what they ask for so that they can.

I provided the source and the topic for personal study. The Reformed view of the Church and Israel supports all that I say as the OP of this thread.

See, that contradicts what you said about wanting to share. You don't really because you don't share. THey have asked you for a specific resource and a specific quote. You just keep giving generalities. This site is not for pointing people to personal study. That will be a result, but this site is for discussion, that means you bring the study here. You give the resources, you give the quotes, you make your case.

I think you will gain more if you look into the Reformed Creeds and read them for yourself. I can give you more of my blessings this way than if I do your work for you.

That is your opinion and we have requested otherwise. If you are always just going to say go look for yourself, this probably isn't a good community for you.

It is more important for you to know what the Reformed Creeds say. It will straighten out many kinks in your world view.

This is your main problem. You assume that I DON'T know what they say. And by the way, creeds are subject to error. They are not Scripture.

If you know what they say, we would't be having this discussion.

@Wolfgang said:

show previous quotes

@Dave_L said:
Sometimes the way we want people to answer is not the best way to answer. We should always give them credit for answering in the way they think best.

So you think that a question about fruit would best be answered by explanations about bicycles ... and for such you should be given credit?

Of course not. But what is better, hearing it straight from the horses mouth? Or from someone acting like a horse?

@C_M_ said:

Let's Settle It!

The passage is about the salvation of the human race. Does it really matter how the Reformed Creeds/Confession view this text (Rom. 11:28) The key word in verse 28 is "election". Who are they?

The unbelieving Jews, like unbelieving Gentiles, are enemies of God because they have rejected the gospel. However, the Lord made specific promises to the Israelite forefathers. Israel as a nation was chosen to teach the world God's will and way. They failed, but the Lord is still able to keep His covenant promises with Abraham and with the Old Testament
prophets. Those Jews who accept Christ by faith (the elect) are part of spiritual Israel. Because spiritual Israel, all who believe in Christ, will be saved, God's promises will be fulfilled. Thus "the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable" (Rom. 11:29, RSV). This should satisfy all when it comes to this text. CM

But all the promises are yes in Christ, not the Talmud.

@reformed said:

show previous quotes

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

@reformed said:

@C_M_ said:

@reformed said:

@Dave_L said:

How about the three forms of unity for starters.
I said name one
Any Reformed folk know about these.

??? unpack. CM

There's nothing to unpack, he doesn't know what he is talking about.

The Smoking Gun! Is this what Dave was talking about? CM See pdf below:

That's one of the things Dave is talking about. But when I asked him for one creed he said three forms of unity which is not even a creed but a reference to three separate creeds. Then he said I didn't know that and had to Google it, which I didn't, as if that is even relevant.

Thanks CM for posting these. They straighten out many popular false beliefs today.

It's like talking to a brick....

You should familiarize yourself with these creeds. Especially consider their Amillennial stance.

I have and I don't find them plausible. Just like I don't find Infant Baptism as a replacement for circumcision plausible.

Then you're not Reformed?

Again, those aren't the definition of Reformed Theology. You, again, show that you do not know or understand terms.

These are the creeds of the Reformed Churches.

Again, you are combining terms. And technically those are not creeds they are confessions.

Confessions then

Which are also not equivalent to Scripture. And here is what reformed theology means:

https://www.gotquestions.org/reformed-theology.html

Notice what is not discussed, baptism, end times theology, etc.

Hint, Got Questions is Jerry Falwell's Dispensationalist anti Reformed Arminian clones. OK for history, not for biblical truth.

https://www.ligonier.org/learn/series/what_is_reformed_theology/

Here is the leading organization in Reformed Theology and notice what they cover in "What is Reformed Theology?" and what they do not cover. It's the same as the other site! Good grief.

But none of the confessions are Dispensational and solidly refute it in their Amillennialism. You are not Reformed unless you are Amillennial or Postmillennial.