Search results

In Romans 9:27 Paul quotes Isaiah, not Zechariah. Why didn't you notice that?

Are you allergic to chapter and verse specifications? :laughing: What is "the same place in Romans" and what does it reaffirm?

You've been shown multiple times that Israel was always comprised of both Jews and Gentiles. Romans 9 27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved: A remnant nation? :laughing:

Excellent. So what does a literal reading of the following Scriptures tell you about Jews and Gentiles? “For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him.” – Romans 10:12 “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor...

Prove me wrong. :laughing:

Unsurprisingly, you haven't cited a single Scripture disproving what I've cited. You can't understand it. So just leave it for those who can. :laughing:

False. Israel was comprised of both Jews and Gentiles from its birth and throughout its existence. Genesis 17:12; Exodus 12:48-49; Leviticus 19:34; Leviticus 24:22. Furthermore, Jacob's mother Rebekah was not a descendant of Abraham, therefore she was a Gentile, and thus Jacob and all of his...

Two Israels. Romans 9 6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: 7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. 8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh...

There are no enemies of the Gospel in the Scriptures I cited. There are no others also in the Scriptures I cited.

The gifts and the calling are terms associated exclusively with those who have put their faith in Christ. Upon whom does God bestow His gifts? Romans 12:6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of...

So true. Beyond absurd, but deplorably, so predictable.

Your references describe Jesus' throne at His Second Coming. Acts 2:29-35 describes David's throne at Jesus' resurrection. See the difference? Nah. :laughing:

Just leave it for those who can understand it. You can't. :laughing:

Evidently you can't understand plain English. Acts 2 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of...

Why not address Acts 2:29-35, which is Scripture's NT final word about David's throne? Acts 2 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. Does that refer to the first coming of Christ, or to the second...

Solomon sat on one throne, not two. It was identified as both the throne of David and the throne of the Lord. Yes, David's physical throne was on earth, but it was physically destroyed more than two thousand years ago. It cannot fulfill prophecy, because it does not exist. There is only one...

David's throne was on earth until Christ was resurrected and ascended to David's throne, in heaven ever since. The resurrection of Christ was not the second coming of Christ. David spoke of the resurrection of Christ. He did not speak of the second coming of Christ. Acts 2 29 Men and...

See post #27.

Then Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord (1Chronicles 29:23). Solomon was on earth. The Lord was in heaven.

Then sat Solomon upon the throne of David his father (1Kings 2:12). Then Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord (1Chronicles 29:23). The throne of David is the throne of the Lord. They are one and the same.