Think I'll have to disagree. If it were just the verse itself you might have an argument. But the surrounding context is of "all Israel being saved," and for Futurists this phrase is referring to the nation of Israel being delivered from utter destruction, i.e. before they are completely annihilated by the Antichrist and his armies (Matthew 24:22).
The term "Redeemer" however would carry a different connotation, and suggest Isaiah was referring back to Christ's sacrifice on man's behalf, to redeem them from sin and the kingdom of darkness. But I admit the Isaiah 59 verse could be taken in a couple of different ways.
I'd like to see it. I would like to lean in the direction of Israel and his children, as it presents some interesting implications. But atm I would have to lean to the root being Christ.
Well disagreements there will be of course. And again, I am the revisionist doing all the work and explaining the truth of the matter as I know it to be.
I just do not seriously think your theory as a 'Futurist' as with others that hold your same view can arbitrary pick and choose scripture or parts of it as verses or expressions within them and attempt to redefine their meaning to suit and force fit them into a fanciful future event theory stretched out beyond our time. It just does not work that way. You have to show your work in a very methodical way that is very convincing. And this passing grade has never been achieved IMO. They just cannot explain it, only to state their theory ad nauseum, by pointing out specific scripture they theorize supports it. It never get past that point.
And you said,
"But the surrounding context is of "all Israel being saved," and for Futurists this phrase is referring to the nation of Israel..."
What is the surrounding context that supports your meaning here? Point it out to me because you have not explained it yet. And a satisfactory explanation cannot be said in one or two sentences, believe me.
The expression that Paul used in Romans 11:26 "...all Israel will be saved." means just that, 'all' (limited in scope of course) true believers as Paul was one, part of the remnant of his ancestry, and from the many other nations that believed. As I restate from before, Paul was part of the 'all' as he spoke to his audience. Others of his ethnic origin were also coming to Christ, after he 'came from Zion' to deliver/redeem them FIRST. And now other nations were also coming to Christ as Paul pointed out very clearly. And, until 'all' when all the nations have experienced Christ.
Both ethnic Israelites and other nations that do come to Christ as ONE Israel in spirit are the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham. There is where I also get the root of the tree, sourced from it.
There is no NEW theorized nation of ethic Israel in Pauls' words. He would think this would be strange, insane and incredible thinking. He knew his descendants would be few and are far between in the future. He knew what the olive tree meant when Jesus cursed it. He knew what the prediction by Christ of the physical destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem meant. He knew it meant his blood-line people were meant to vanish as an extinct species, although not in spirit, of Christ. He tearfully and regrettably, and he knew was justified, resigned himself to knowing the fate of his people going forward. That was the punch line he was giving to his audience.
Physical Israel is dead, Spiritual Israel, of both the nations and the remnant of his people is alive and well....Amen!!
He knew that all Israel meant All believers in Christ, period. Not some mythical resurrected physical nation of Israel in the future. That theory or as fact is definitely not in the Bible.
A little history of your theory is required...it was a deviously spawned idea from the start
This theory that you hold as with others was first influenced and then conceived about 500 years ago by religious writers and scholars of the Khazarian Jew extraction, not true ethnic Israel, as these, the latter, became nearly extinct many centuries ago as I already eluded to. They were either assimilated in the other nations, or killed off many centuries ago. There were easily over 1 million that were either killed or became slaves by Rome in 70 AD. It was done by design per scripture as you may read.
And this theory of yours and others also helped support and develop the Zionist theory and political movement we know today. It has been a real burden to say the least.
Anyway, back to this Futurist theory of yours. It was quickly then absorbed and heavily supported by the new 'Christian' Zionists of the writers of the Bible and political forces in the 1600s and on, of the dream of a future separate reconverted (some kind of Israel people, because they are not of the ethnic extract for sure) of Israel. These new Christian sympathizers were duped into really serving the fake self-styles Jews that originated from around the North and Eastern parts of the Black Sea. These are the ones that mostly inhabit the political State of Israel today and other places around the globe.
And since especially the late 18th century this Futurist theory has gained notable traction with no sight of abatement.
As another note: These same Khazarian scholars and writers and their 'Christian' sympathizers of the Bible who heavily influenced the translations of the Bible also deliberately altered the meaning of the Hebrew word Goy or Goyim and the Greek word Ethno(s) in many places.
They found a useful name (symbol) to deliberately separate and divide themselves from all the 'other nations' as they always thought of themselves, since their en-masse Jewish conversion around 700-800 AD, and origin as a tribe of Phalanx worshippers, as being superior to any other nation, as the Pharisees saw themselves as the same.
By providing a new and useful name for 'the nations' or 'people' or 'tribes' they substituted in the Latinized English word 'gentiles' or even worse 'gentile' singular, in many places. This word should never be in English Bible.
They hijacked the original intent of the Latin would gens to gentile for one of non-Roman citizenry to force it to mean a non-ethnic Jew or a no-ethnic Israelite. And the Hebrew Goy or Goyim or Greek Ethnos never means a single person. They not only added in the words gentile or gentiles to discredit the other nations, they also changed other words to mean gentile or gentiles...eg. 'Hellen' means a Greek person...they redefined it as a gentile in many places. They even used the word heathen for a person of another nation....I hope you see my point here...
These self-styles Jews of no ethnic Israel ancestry, hijacked the original intent and meaning of the Latinized word gentile(s) for a non-Roman citizen, to a new deceitful meaning - as the word 'gay' was similarly hijacked by militant homosexuals some 50 years ago.....
Have a great week...APAK
PS here's some scripture that speaks to Christ the redeemer and deliver in context of how it is used in Isaiah 59:25 and what Paul also meant.
Psalms 14:7, 50:2, 53:6; 2 Kings 19:30-31; Isaiah 37:32.
A 'band of survivors' indeed, as Paul was also saying
