Romans (Finally) Makes Sense! A Review of 'Paul and Resurrection of Israel' by Jason Staples

[@rayhanakram9912]

As it turns out Paul is in no way in conflict in his actions or his words with Christ as many may try to fool you into believing.

[@nancycorbin7317]

Profound statement. Very true!

[@johnirish989]

Paul's entire teaching is that of the risen Christ.

[@anaximander66]

Yep, exactly! As attested to by Luke as well.

[@AaronGardner98]

What then would you make of those like Ehrman who state that Jesus did not preach justification by faith, while Paul does?

[@rayhanakram9912]

@@AaronGardner98 point em to this book lol, Bart has objections to Christianity and we have objections to Bart.

[@jessebbedwell]

That's one thing my father-in-law was really able to drive home in weekly bible study (he's a Messianic rabbi), that it makes absolutely no sense when you have a Jewish book such as the New Testament constantly referring to "the Jews" -- It's like reminding everyone that George Washing or Harriet Tubman were humans. It makes no sense. What it actually refers to is the Judean ruling class, and therefore he would always refer to those sections of reference as "the Judeans".

[@rainking50]

Interesting. Thanks for sharing. In David Bentley Hart's translation of the New Testament, which I adore, he honors your point and uses "Judeans".

[@thinking7667]

From what I understand, "Judean" is the accurate translation. It's been a while since I read up on this, but the word "Jew" comes from the word "Judean" or "Judah" and that the term "Jew" did not exist when the bible was written. That what they were saying was, in fact, "Judean". I think that is the gist of what I remember on this subject.

[@kellyjohna]

Messianic Jews are almost all Dispensational. In order to counter the claim that The Gospel of John is anti-Semitic the idea was floated around that Jews always means Judeans in New Testament or whenever it is convenient for Dispensationalists. This is based on a faulty hermeneutic you cannot just exegete particular text and then cobble together other related texts to prove your point. You have to start with a sound hermeneutic first and then exegete. New Testament supercedes and Interprets Old Testament and you cannot ignore the Christcentric focus of all Holy scripture. Scripture interpret Scripture.

[@PaulVanderKlay]

Tom Holland does a similar thing.

[@3BALL4]

This book is a triumph. I don't know if you mentioned the author's first book that lays out the Jew-Israel distinction in more detail? The Idea of Israel in Second Temple Judaism. Worth checking out too.

[@Wren_Farthing]

At my level of study, I suspect the footnotes would be a challenge , but I'm convinced it would be worth the slog. Romans is at the center of so much disparate theology, all of which boggles my mind. In particular, I have some of the same discomfort you described around supersessionism. I think you've sold me on this book! Thanks for the review!

[@frankfebus7565]

I wrote a book entitled "Confess with your mouth" Amazon. The verses you cited in the first chapter of Roman's vs. 17-32 is exactly what I came up with. Every book I researched on Roman's echoes the same misconception that it's content deals exclusively with those without covenant. It is good to know that one does not need letters behind their name to harvest truth . I think that the problem with modern scholars is that they do not want to be branded as anti Semitic. You know " God's Chosen people.

[@atonementandreconciliation3749]

Paul's use of justification and faith are used in their FUNCTIONAL. When you justify something that is crooked, you set it right. Only then do you declare it right. Faith that affects the heart and is not merely academic will affect how a person thinks and lives. That is why functional faith causes a functional justification. We are justified (set right) by our functional faith.

[@whitemagiktiger]

Faith without works is dead.

[@gmac6503]

He is an excellent scholar and he will also be on the Ehrman Conference on NINT24 next month with 9 other scholars. Hope you are there. Jason A Staples also has another (2021) _The Idea of Israel in Second Temple Judaism: A New Theory of People, Exile, and Israelite Identity_

[@AaronGardner98]

I’m doing NINT!

[@gmac6503]

@@AaronGardner98 Me too! Last year's was great. Hard to top, but this one's gonna be right up there also. Can't wait!

[@AaronGardner98]

@@gmac6503 I am probably most excited about Staples’ presentation. Fascinating topic.

[@tedroybal5231]

Thank you so much Joel. I subscribed after your review. Also, I purchased the book. This is great timing for me. I will start teaching Romans this week. I last covered Romans five years ago and, of course, NT Wright was quoted often. This book sounds so interesting.

[@detcovello3648]

Much of what you have mentioned I found comfortable with and was going to pass on purchasing this work but you cites two point that captured my interest. Thanks for the review.

[@davidstout6051]

Sounds like it might be worth a look. Thanks for the review.

[@jackshadow325]

There were Judaean Israelites and Hellenized Israelites in the first century. Those who were near, and those who were far off. The older brother and the prodigal son. Paul going out to the nations (Gentiles) was to seek out the prodigal son. Non-Israelite Gentiles got saved too but the New Testament gospel mission was primarily to gather the scattered sheep of Israel, which God promised to do in the prophets when the Messiah came. Check out Bruce Malina’s and John Pilch’s commentary on the letters of Paul.

[@jonathanyeong324]

Partially correct. You are wrong about non Israelites being saved. The New Covenant was not made with them. See Hebrews 8.8

[@jackshadow325]

@ Yes, but non-Israelites in the 1st century could proselytize and become Israelites.

[@jonathanyeong324]

@@jackshadow325 Incorrect. Christians like to say...."Remember, under the Mosaic Covenant a pure Gentile could become joined to Israel through conversion. " There were non-Israelites who were allowed to live among Israelites as slaves or sojourners, or people captured in war...but that didn't make them Israelites. An old covenant Isrealite was identified by his / her records of blood lineage. There was absolutely no intention within old covenant Israel to evangelize or convert pagan nations. Their god simply wasn't interested. 'God' never commanded his people to proselytize in the Old Testament. God was not interested in gathering foreigners to himself. God never commanded or commissioned his chosen ones to seek converts. Ancient Israel was a closed tribal culture. In fact, Israel's god didn't love any other nation..only Israel (Deut 7:6-7). God even commanded his people not to marry foreign women from the surrounding nations. He also commanded his people not to make covenants with foreign nations. God was so serious on this subject that he made every Israelite divorce their foreign wives and send away their children after they returned from Babylonian captivity (Ezra 10:3). Think of the thousands of women and children crying on the long trek back to Babylon. God didn’t give these women an opportunity to convert to Him. Evidently, he just wasn’t interested. Jesus was not interested in foreigners either. Jesus viewed them as DOGS (Matt 15:26). According to Rev 22:15, dogs didn’t make it into the New Jerusalem. Oops! He was sent only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matt 15:24). Jesus also upbraided the Pharisees for proselytizing. He said that they made their proselytes twice the sons of hell as themselves (Matt 23:15). If proselytizing was acceptable to Jews then why did Peter say it was unlawful for a Jew to keep company or go to one of another nation? Wouldn’t that make proselytizing impossible if it was against the law to keep company with a foreigner or go to their nation? Acts 10:28 “Then he said to them, "You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation.” Later in the New Testament proselytizing was acceptable because the mission was to gather search for and gather the elect into Christ before the end of the age. According to Isaiah 45:4, the elect were Israelites. Neither Jesus or the apostle’s were searching for foreigners, but for descendants of the tribes of Israel who were among populations of foreigners. The idea of foreigners who joined Israel actually becoming Israelites is incorrect. For example.... Exodus 12:48 (NKJV) "And when a stranger dwells with you [and wants] to keep the Passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as a native of the land. For no uncircumcised person shall eat it. That means they were allowed to participate in the Passover if they chose to get circumcised. It has nothing to do with being in covenant with God. Did you notice that they didn’t lose their status as “strangers”. They were allowed to eat the Passover.....nothing more.....nothing less. Some people claim that “strangers and foreigners who chose to sojourn with Israel, became ISRAELITES if they obeyed the Torah”. Is there a scripture that states these strangers became ISRAELITES? You won’t find one. Foreigners/strangers that lived alongside Israelites had to abide by the Mosaic law. That’s akin to a resident alien living within the US. Resident aliens and are not citizens but they have to abide by the laws of the US. Those strangers /foreigners were never assimilated into the tribes of Israel. They kept their status as strangers and foreigners and they were deemed third class citizens by God and the tribes of Israel. Here’s the evidence. Leviticus 25:45 'Moreover you may buy the children of the strangers who dwell among you, and their families who are with you, which they beget in your land; and they shall become your property. 46 'And you may take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them as a possession; they shall be your permanent slaves. But regarding your brethren, the children of Israel, you shall not rule over one another with rigor. The children of Israel could buy the STRANGERS that lived among them and they would become the property of the Israelites. It gets better, those same STRANGERS would be their PERMANENT SLAVES and an inheritance for their children after them. Here’s the kicker... “but regarding your brethren, the children of Israel, you shall not rule over one another with vigor.” There is a Grand Canyon size difference between the strangers/foreigners and Israelites. Deuteronomy 23:20 (NKJV) "To a foreigner you may charge interest, but to your brother you shall not charge interest, that the LORD your God may bless you in all to which you set your hand in the land which you are entering to possess. They lived alongside Israelites but the distinction of being an foreigner remained. There’s this hope that some people today have, that they can “join Israel” through faith. It’s absolutely silly and based on a very poor understanding of the text and of ancient Israelite culture. For one, there is no old covenant Israel to join. All things considered, this means gentiles who were saved were descendants of the tribes of Israel. Proselytes were descendants of the tribes of Israel. Jews were descendants of the tribes in the southern kingdom.

[@jackshadow325]

@@jonathanyeong324 I don't have a problem with anything you say... But, as per Exodus 12.48-49, strangers who were circumcised became "as a native of the land." AFTER circumcision, they were no longer considered strangers but rather considered "native-born."

[@BillyBoy66]

Joel, what do you think NT Wright will think about Staple's points in this book?

[@mikealdridge5424]

It’ll blow wrights mind. He’s such a humble man that he might celebrate this book and I’d guess revise some of his work.

[@PostSupAnglican]

No criticism of Wright's character but he has been exposed to post supersessionism in the past kzbin.info/www/bejne/p3qlpWlqopKDr5Ysi=b6APU5kP_UmTFC_z

[@glennshrom5801]

Since becoming familiar with Heiser's work on what happened at Babel, I see the first couple chapters of Romans as the Gentile nations origin story, followed later with the Israel origin story where Abraham comes into play. Still, I am intrigued by what you have presented in this video, and would like to get the details. I'd like to buy the book. I think I make sense of Romans now, even though it might not be the same way this book covers everything. I have long been scratching my head why I don't see more about the restoration of Israel in the NT, it being such a repeated promise in the OT regarding what the Messiah would do when he comes. (In this case, when he comes again.) I don't have a problem with the potter and the clay sections. Pharaoh was a son of god who was fashioned on the potter's wheel of his god, and all humans are made out of clay by our god or gods. God showed mercy on Pharaoh and raised him up, when God could have wiped him out, but did so in order to display to the world his glory through Pharaoh once Pharaoh's heart was hardened. By analogy, God can show mercy on Israel and raise up Israel, only to harden Israel later, and do so in order to reach the Gentiles with his glory once Israel's heart had been hardened. In the case of Pharaoh, Pharaoh was a done deal. In the case of Israel, God will come back around to Israel once the Gospel is propelled out to the Gentiles and the world is reached. I realize that this book is taking "Israel" in a different direction, but I see compatibility between raising up faithful Israelites once Israel heeds the Gospel, and restoring the tribes/kingdoms of Israel back together again. But it is so clear over and over again that after God scatters Israel, he will have a time of gathering them together again, and that the Messiah is the key to that restoration.

[@TommyStahr]

Jesus said in Luke 21:24 that Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the TIMES of the Gentiles are fulfilled. Where are the Jews today? I believe most all Christians are lost today to bigotry & Idolatry, all the false prophets & thieves are coming through the "Image of the Beast". I'm a born-again Jew. Jesus has shown me, l believe, where we are. 2Thess2:11 is here. The church is fallen. They believe THE LIE! Rev 18:4 is calling. GOP LIES USA DIES! Trump LOST & the religious right is wrong. Anti-LGBT & anti-women, & anti-immigrant are ANTI-CHRIST LIES! Matt 7? Romans 2? People use Romans 1 to condemn gays but don't read to chapter 2 which says if you judge you'll be judged. The right-wing break Jesus' one command to love, breaking the Golden Rule. No different or better than Islamic sharia law. The Little Horn of Daniel 7 is false Abrahamic religions of Catholicism, Islam & Fascists for Jesus. America is the Resurrection of the head of the Beast. Rev 13:11-16 & Rev 18 are America. Two horns like a lamb are right-wing Christians and Catholics who are about to burn down America for the big lie. Compare Exodus & Rev 13:16 & Matt 5:29. The Mark of the Beast is SIN. We must be born again. John 3. What we fill our minds (foreheads) & give our time, money & strength (right hand) proves who our God is. It's Jesus or the Beast. The world is the Beast. The Mark is symbolic and spiritual. The Image is real. Turn off the world and turn on Jesus.

[@TommyStahr]

Check out these scriptures to understand that the 2nd half of Daniel's 70th week is almost over. Dan 7:25 & 12:7 & Rev12:14. The 70th week began when Jesus was baptized in the Jordan. Messiah was cut off for the HOLY SPIRIT to begin His ministry. For 3.5 years He did the works to prove Jesus is the Christ. Then, in the middle of the 70th week He, God, put an end to sacrifice & offering ON THE CROSS. The 2nd 3.5 years is TIME, TIMES & and half a Time. The Spirit has been building the 3rd Temple and it's almost over. It's not a literal number of time. Look at Luke 21:24, Rev 11:1-2, Rev 12:6 & 13:5. Time = Catholicism; Times = Islam; Half a Time = American right-wing (Dan 7:4-5, wings of an eagle). Can you see? America is going to burn because the church lifted evil in Jesus name.

[@mikealdridge5424]

I’m so glad you’ve read this book. It’s a masterpiece! And it changes everything in the best possible way.

[@Dennis144000]

I disagree with the major premise of this book . We know the northern tribes of Israel are not lost nor have they assimilated into the nations because… 1)The Biblical accounts of Ten Tribes in Judea after the Assyrian capture of the north in 722 2) The archeological evidence of a surge of 80,000 people in Judea population at the time of the Assyrian deportation circa 720 BC. Population of Judea goes from 40,000 to 120,000. This is from 10 Tribes migrating to Judea. 3) The biblical account of Ten Tribes mentioned to be in Judea circa 530 BC after the Babylonian captivity and Ezra's and Nehemiah's repatriation 4) The strict Jewish laws prohibiting inter-racial/religion marriage 5) Paul, who was of the tribe of Benjamin, calls those who were alive and in the land of Judea and the greater Roman Empire " Israel" when speaking to Agrippa. 6) Paul mentions Israel (and he means literal Israel, distinct from Gentile) 12 times in Romans Ch 9-11 7) James addresses all 12 Tribes in James 1:1 8) Anna (Luke 2:36) was from the tribe of Asher (one of the ten supposedly lost tribes) 9) Zechariah and Elisabeth-and therefore John the Baptist-are from the tribe of Levi (Luke 1:5) 10) Jesus chose twelve apostles as a typological representation of the 12 tribes 11) King of the Jews equals King of Israel Mark 15:32 12) The massive aliyah of Israelites from Iran, Turkey and Iraq (formerly Assyria) prophesied and being fulfilled! 13) The Revelation lists 12 tribes to be restored before Christ’s second coming. 14) Peter addresses all Israel in Acts 2:22, 36 etc 15) Josephus did not understand the northern tribes to have assimilated into the nations. He saw them as still a distinct and identifiable people group.

[@Tofuwabofu]

Respectfully, these objections are all addressed convincingly. This book is a sequel to Staples' The Idea of Israel in Second Temple Judaism, and while the distinction between Israel and Jews is handled relatively briefly in Paul and the Resurrection of Israel, it is dealt with exhaustively in the first book. If that is the sticking point for you, I implore you to read The Idea of Israel (and then Paul and the Resurrection if you haven't yet). I went in to both with a good deal of skepticism and pessimism, and I now consider them among the most important and persuasive books on biblical scholarship in recent history.

[@MainPointMinistries]

Good resource. Thanks for sharing

[@e.m.8094]

I really need to get this book, as well as his other one.

[@ds61821]

I just now ordered it. Thanks.

[@kellyjohna]

The term "Israel" must be examined in context of the particular audience Paul was writing to. Although there are similarities between Galatians and Romans the context is vastly different. In Romans 9:3 Paul is identifying himself with Israel not based on being a Judean but based on religious and racial aspects. In Romans "Israel" and "Jew" are used interchangeably.

[@PostSupAnglican]

Would love to hear what you think of Gerald McDermott's New History of Redemption. McDermott is a few degrees more radical on the post-supersessionist axis than Staples, I think. Looking forward to reading his latest.

[@TommyStahr]

I'm a Jew born anew since 1982! God always saves a remnant. I grew up atheist, didn't know my mom was fully Jewish until I was about 50 y.o.! So...After 42 years of walking with Jesus, I just realized about 8 years ago how close His return actually is. 2Thess2:11 is here. The lawless one is lifted up in the holy place (the church). The church is fallen to bigotry & Idolatry. They BELIEVE THE LIE! Jesus is coming soon for this born-again gay stoner Jew while most Christians are left behind because of the bigotry & Idolatry. Idolatry OF THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST! Compare Exodus & Rev 13:16 & Matt 5:29. The Mark of the Beast is SIN, we must be BORN AGAIN! John 3:3. What we fill our minds and give our time proves who our God is. It's Jesus or the Beast. The world is the Beast. Most all the church is lost. 😢Turn off the world and turn on Jesus!

[@a.t.ministries5376]

Could this book function as a Roman’s commentary?

[@mikealdridge5424]

It’s not an exhaustive commentary on Romans however it is basically a commentary on Romans 1,2, and 9-11. It’s amazing!

[@barrymiller3044]

The down stream consequences of this book are going to be huge! Thanks for the review!

[@mikealdridge5424]

💯

[@BillyBoy66]

Bought this book last week. The pages were falling out. Sent it back and received a replacement. Same thing. The book is not bound well. Anyone else have this problem???

[@Tofuwabofu]

I saw a review on Amazon which mentions the same issue. It's a big disappointment for such a great book, and it's making me reconsider purchasing a copy for a friend as a gift.

[@cynthiacassel]

I’ll put it on my list.

[@josephbrown6906]

I'm a first time watcher here. I am currently reading this book. I love it and the review. Are you familiar with David Mitchell's Messiah ben Joseph? It's great and some of the ideas in it complement Dr. Staples' work.

[@integrationalpolytheism]

I mean, whole dissertations could be written on the discrepancies between Paul's theology and that of the character of Jesus in the various gospels. Dr James Tabor wrote and published a good one, in fact, which I would commit to anyone viewing this video. You'll learn a lot more from Taborsbook than from this video clip!

[@e.m.8094]

Disciple Dojo did an interview with him on one episode.

[@KingoftheJuice18]

Was it about this book (or the same themes of the book)?

[@e.m.8094]

​@@KingoftheJuice18As I recall, yes.

[@KingoftheJuice18]

@@e.m.8094 Thank you

[@Wren_Farthing]

@@e.m.8094 I love Disciple Dojo. I’ll be looking this up!

[@e.m.8094]

@@Wren_Farthing He's got one of the best channels around for the serious student of the Bible. A true blessing for sure. 🙌

[@PostSupAnglican]

Does Staples interact at all with the Paul Within Judaism camp?

[@JoelWentz]

Yes, he especially interacts with Matt Thiessen. Some substantial agreement, but a lot of challenge, particularly on the difference between the meaning of "Israel" and "Jew" in the literature

[@nco_gets_it]

Growing up in the Restoration Movement, and attending one of their colleges/seminaries, this understanding of Paul was always a backdrop for me. The thematic concept that the Church was intended to fulfill the Covenant with Israel is a powerful statement. The Church is not a "plan B", "second covenant", or even response to an "oh my" moment. It also implies that the nation state of Israel being some form of prophetic fulfillment held in many US evangelical circles is not the point of Scripture at all. The modern state of Israel is in no way part of Paul's concept here. The Church is Israel, restored to the Covenant through Jesus, not through political machinations. But make no mistake, Paul is communicating something far more than just this premise. He builds upon it to provide the Church some guidelines for its own governance--rules of the road, so to say--to prevent a return to exile. We ignore his exhortations to holiness, community, and faith at our own peril.

[@nco_gets_it]

Important to note: the Church does not "replace" Israel. It restores Israel to Covenant. So, is modern Judaism part of Israel? No. It is part of Jewishness, not Israel. This in no way limits God to methods, but Paul is clear that the only way back to the Covenant is not through Judaism, but Jesus. Alone. Without caveat.

[@j7489]

Except of course that Scripture clearly states Jesus Himself will restore the Jews to their homeland and will sit on the throne of David ruling over the cosmos. Where was David’s throne located?

[@TheRomans9Guy]

Well, the overarching argument of Romans is able to be comprehended, and it is significantly different than what scholars have said for centuries. But the argument that we’ve missed that Paul’s argument that Israel is being restored, is wrong. I write the correct view in my book.

[@BiteSizeBible1]

Loved this book too!

[@SpaceCadet4Jesus]

God creating one new person out of Jews and Gentiles is found in Ephesians 2:14-16. - Ephesians 2:14-16: - "For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups ONE and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself ONE NEW HUMANITY out of the two, thus making peace, and in ONE BODY to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility". AND - Romans 9:6-8: - "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed" I'll listen to the rest of your review but I don't think God is making a restoration of the missing 10 ethnic tribes of Israel, any more than ethnic Israel already exists.

[@StorminNorman-p2b]

Amen!

[@BibleTales123]

Awesome review ! 🧸⭐️⛱️ we want to read this

[@spoofoid]

I would really appreciate some more comments on how this book 'solves' supercessionism. Since people are dying right now because of what you are saying is incorrect theology over Judah and Israel, this is much more than an academic debate.

[@Ditchdiggerpewsitter]

Intrigues me as a full preterist. See where this goes. Thanks.

[@Scrupulouslyhonest]

It seems that some from all the tribes returned to land and eventually became one nation from from the times of Ezra and Nehemiah to Messiah's first advent. In other words, it seems that the two sticks prophesy was fulfilled before Messiah came. All Israel heard the Good News from Him. I'm carefully reviewing the prophetic facts to be sure for myself.

[@37south47]

Totally lost on what is being said in the video and the comments!

[@cynthiacassel]

And you gobbled that up? I personally enjoy reading textbooks when I want to gain a new understanding of scripture.

[@GatheringJacob]

Thank you for your review. This is a theme I have understood by reading scripture. Wondering if the author makes the natural conclusion. That if the “gentiles” are Israel returned, than the prerequisites of the first covenant made with Israel originally, the prerequisites they broke, to make them scattered gentiles, must be the natural necessary outworking of there return to covenant and restoration! I.e. the circumcision of the heart, being a heart of obedience to the terms of the covenant. This obvious outworking is the key to understanding the New Covenant and ultimate result of being a part of that covenant is the Torah being written on your heart which ultimately is practiced by the community of redeemed Israel, here and now, but ultimately into eternity. Which manifests as scripture makes clear, in Jerusalem, with our Messianic king, and a fully functioning temple with priesthood and sacrifices restored! That’s a big pill for Protestants and anti Torah teaching “Christians” to swallow, but the sooner this truth is embraced, the sooner the truth will set you free! We are not free from death until we are free from sin. Sin is the transgression of Torah and until our hearts are converted from law breaking to law abiding we will NOT be free. The penalty of the Torah/law does not apply to the lawful, it only applies to the lawless! I could go on but hopefully you get my drift and hopefully this author realizes the true results of the truth he has expressed in this book.

[@mikeschaller9233]

So we are not free from the law and must become part of Israel, circumcision and all, to be a part of Israel? Isn’t that what the circumcision group, as Paul called them, said was necessary. The same group Paul was fighting? The same group that the first council in Jerusalem sided against by saying gentiles we’re not required to keep the law of Moses?

[@mattaikay925]

My Messianic Rabbi is bringing us Romans chapter by chapter weekly.

[@Ditchdiggerpewsitter]

The IO camp might like this book.

[@zgennaro]

The Israel/Jew distinction was pretty jarring, not sure how everyone brushes by that. Romans 1, nothing new there, Romans 2 his argument for Augustines read over the natural law view was interesting. Already subscribed to Calvin’s view of Chapter 11 so no shock there. Excellent book though.

[@-kepha8828]

A Jew was not "one of the 12 tribes". The slang word Jew represented the southern kingdom of Judah, which was made up of 3 tribes: 1. Judah 2. Levi 3. Benjamin As opposed to the dispersed 10 northern tribes of Israel.

[@lukewagner8871]

The ninth chapter of Romans is about the election of God. Romans 9:11 KJVS (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) Romans 9:21-24 KJVS Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? [22] What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: [23] And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, [24] Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? The election of God is those that are in the promise seed, Jesus Christ. Galatians 3:16,29 KJVS Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. [29] And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. Romans 8:9 KJVS But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. That also includes those in the old testament who had the spirit of Christ. 1 Peter 1:10-11 KJVS Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: [11] Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

[@cynthiacassel]

Looks like a deep read.

[@kylewhitten3961]

John 11 and the Lazarus pericope is about the same thing. It’s all 1 story.

[@samsauce94]

This whole argument is kind of blowing my mind lol

[@5675492]

Virtually everyone else in the early church , including and maybe especially James the brother of Jesus , weren't initially buying what Paul was saying . It took some considerable arm twisting and scripture re-interpretation by Paul to get his point across . Even then I think the deciding factor was seeing the bags of cash Paul was bringing back from wealthy gentiles and the promise of swelling congregations that tipped the tide in Paul's favor . And , not that this means anything really , Islam considers Paul to be a deceiver ( false teacher ) who corrupted the Jewish religion .

[@harryabrahams2770]

Just as there is a first and second Adam, first and second covenant, there is also a first and second Israel.. There is no scriptural Israel until the first resurrection ( the first fruits )…All of Israel shall be saved is referring to the second Israel…as the scriptures state that just as He chose Jacob He will CHOOSE Israel again… Got Torah Got Truth

[@-kepha8828]

Scripture never mentions a "2nd covenant". The word used in English translation is "new covenant", yet the Hebrew word means "to re-new". Similar to how there is no such thing as a new moon day, only a re-newed moon day. You wouldn't say their are 2 moons, simply because there is a renewed moon. There are not 2 covenants. Only a renewed covenant based on better promises. And that would be the priesthood. Yehushua is the high priest now. That was the better promise.

[@harryabrahams2770]

@@-kepha8828 there was obviously a 1st covenant, so numerically the next covenant would be the 2nd covenant so yes , there are two covenants…if you can’t think logically you should keep your comments to yourself….Got Torah Got Truth

[@-kepha8828]

@@harryabrahams2770 there was never a 2nd covenant. Scripture never mentions a 2nd covenant. But you know this lol, which is why you cannot provide scriptural verses claiming a 2nd covenant. Again, Hebrews 8 says there is a "new covenant". But the word actually means "to re-new". This is why Jesus said "I bring you NO NEW commands, but only that which already were. Just as their are new moon days. But this doesn't mean there is a NEW moon every month. It's the same moon each month, just it's cycle is being RE-NEWED. SEEMS YOU DISAGREE WITH SCRIPTURE LOL

[@kwpctek9190]

Nice to see someone batting for Paul again. Guys like Rabbi Tovia Singer are saying Paul alone invented Christianity, was anti-nomian and could conceivably influence the world council of Churches to reduce a globally acceptable Bible by 13 books. Of course he says Paul hated women too 🙄

[@nancycorbin7317]

Singer , is a heavy weight contender for Jews for Judaism isn't he . Believe it not, they refused to see Yeshua as , Yehovahs prophesied Messiah when he was walking around. Would be something if , they did huh?

[@andreaurelius45]

Tovia wants a pie.

[@johnirish989]

​@Sherlock_nohtrealThe most correct cutting of His word is that between the gospel of Jesus and the gospel of the risen Christ, the latter given only and directly to Paul by a revelation of the risen Christ. And the two radically different gospels are NOT to be mixed because doing so just causes chaos and confusion and brings great joy to Satan. The basics: Jews circumcisionists /Gentiles uncircumcisionists, law works/grace, forgiven if you do this this and this/justified thus no need for forgiveness, must go through the tribulation/snatched away before the tribulation, not appointed to indignation, terrestrial destination/celestial destination. They hated Paul (the risen Christ) just like many hated Jesus. All of Paul's teachings except where he explicitly says they are his are from the risen Christ, none are from Saul. I personally don't think the Israel Jew distinction is that important. When Paul teaches that in the body of Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile, he's not referring to members of the tribe of Judah. Perhaps the Circumcisionists. More relevant points of Paul: the meaning of the cross of Christ, the blood of the cross, the agony of the cross instead of a mere slitting of the throat type sacrifice. The Circumcisionists writers (Peter, John, James, Jude) never mention the word cross. For them His crucifixion was bad news the Jews needed to repent for. For Paul's gospel, His crucifixion was good news and the foundation of his gospel.

[@toddstevens9667]

Just pointing out that the epistle to the Romans made sense to countless people for a couple millennia before this book you’re reviewing was written. Just saying … lol

[@TheRomans9Guy]

Just starting this video, and haven’t read the book, but wow, you are way off base. People have NOT understood Romans for thousands of years. People have MISunderstood Romans, beginning with Augustine.

[@theyouthexodus8077]

Thank you, sir. I love your channel. Can you review this book Title: Nobody's Mother: Artemis of the Ephesians in Antiquity and the New Testament by Sandra L. Glahn

[@hoerimchoi4461]

Not so fast! The ten tribes of the northern Kingdom of Israel were not completely wiped out, but their fate was complex and multifaceted following the Assyrian conquest in 722 BCE. ### 1. **Exile and Dispersion:** - **Assyrian Conquest**: The Assyrian Empire conquered the northern Kingdom of Israel, and a large portion of the population was indeed exiled. The Assyrians had a policy of deporting conquered peoples to different regions within their empire to prevent rebellion and to break down local identities. As a result, many Israelites from the northern tribes were dispersed throughout the Assyrian Empire, losing their distinct identity over time. These exiles are often referred to as the "Lost Tribes of Israel" because they effectively disappeared from historical records. ### 2. **Remnants and Escape:** - **Fleeing to Judah**: Not all members of the ten northern tribes were exiled. Some Israelites managed to escape the Assyrian invasion and fled south to the Kingdom of Judah. The Kingdom of Judah, consisting mainly of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, also included people from the other tribes who had moved there either before or after the fall of Israel. This included those who sought refuge during the Assyrian campaigns or those who had moved to Judah in earlier times for religious reasons (like those who wanted to remain faithful to the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem). ### 3. **Integration and Assimilation:** - **Integration into Judah**: The Israelites who fled to Judah were gradually integrated into the society there. Over time, they assimilated into the population of Judah, contributing to the formation of what would later become known as the Jewish people. This means that the bloodlines and heritage of the ten tribes continued, albeit merged with the tribe of Judah and Benjamin. ### 4. **Religious and Cultural Impact:** - **Religious Significance**: The presence of remnants from the ten tribes in Judah had religious significance, as it meant that the spiritual and cultural heritage of these tribes was preserved to some extent. Some biblical prophecies and later Jewish traditions hold that members of all twelve tribes were present in Judah during the Babylonian exile and subsequent return, though they were primarily identified as "Jews" from Judah. ### 5. **Later Jewish Traditions:** - **Legends of the Lost Tribes**: Throughout history, there have been various legends and speculations about the whereabouts of the "Lost Tribes." Some believe they assimilated with other cultures, while others suggest they migrated to distant lands. However, these theories are often more mythological than historical. In conclusion, while many members of the ten northern tribes were exiled and dispersed, others survived by fleeing to Judah, where they eventually integrated into the broader Jewish population. The tribes weren't entirely wiped out, but their distinct identities largely vanished over time.

[@hoerimchoi4461]

In other words, contrary to the author of this book, Israel is well preserved through Judah. Whoever is lost in northern Israel is lost in history through obvious judgment of God. Yet, remnant is remnant and northern remnants survive to fulfill the whole Israelites as it meant to be until Jesus Christ. Please do not come up with fancy way to twist the obvious truth. Israel is Israel, and Judah (hence Jews) represented the whole when Paul meant it. It goes way back to Abraham and Jacob! Don’t overthink it.

[@IsraeliteJewels]

The so-called black Israelites have been talking about the true understanding of Paul's letters for years way before this book came out. Maybe the writer has been listening, discerning, and verifying the twisted half truth doctrines of the Romans Catholic from the real Israelites about the Church understanding of the Gentiles. I read the whole book, and the writer is trying not to offend a fake people but recognize the real people of the book still scattered throughout the four corners of the earth. I know who are the lost 10 tribes are today. Paul's teachings and guidance was towards the lost Israelites only acting as Gentiles following Greek Japhites (Gentiles Gen 10:1-5) pagan gods.

[@3BadBostons]

For the Jew first and also fir the Greek, does anyone realize Paul is soeaking of , the people of God and the not people of God, Israel is a forshadow of the church.

[@lukewagner8871]

Romans 9:6-8 KJVS 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, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. Apostle Paul in the fourth chapter of Galatians writes about the two covenants. Law and promise. Galatians 4:21-26,28-31 KJVS Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? [22] For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. [23] But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. [24] Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. [25] For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. [26] But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. [28] Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. [29] But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. [30] Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. [31] So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

[@ClaimClam]

was pol polytheist？

[@firstamendment2887]

That's weird. With asking the Holy Spirit for discernment, I understand it just fine. Are you supposing that we need another book, to understand the Bible? Sounds very, JW/Mormon/Catholic. Nah. I will stick with what God says.

[@TheRomans9Guy]

Jew is a general term to describe Israelites.

[@johncordbooks593]

Dear Joel, I watched this video thru the YT App on my TV & appreciate your presentation. I was not raised in religion but had reason to begin studying the Bible & the history of "We love God" empires, nations & leaders. I remain nonreligious. 50 years Bible Study & 24 years of appeals to the most famous, powerful voices on Earth to speak the nonviolent solution to "holy" fascism, racism, misogyny, homophobia, Anti-Jews & wars that builds no further hate. I can find no pope, no leader, no famous Atheist, no law school, no elementary school that will speak the promised "reconciliation between Jew & Greek ('Gentile'; non-Jew). The Old Testament reveals that the 1 Circumcision is not of a male's foreskin but is of the foreskin of the heart of every human (Romans 2:25-29). Those that honor this 1 Circumcision live to circumcise or cut-away or "abort" rising desires to do harm and instead use their brilliant minds to determine the problem source & find the solution that does no harm at the point of the seed of discontent. "The people of the Circumcision" refer to all humans, regardless of one's ancestry or religious sect or culture, that live to maintain the safety first & peace. "The people of the uncircumcision" are humans that have no problem "birthing" or giving life to desires to do harm for their gain, all of whom can change. I appreciate your video because it proves, again, that this entire world is built upon the silencing of the solution that is further clarified by Jesus and by Paul (in Romans). Not only is the true meaning of the 1 Circumcision globally silenced but so is the One Law of God ('The All of the Law') that substantively means the same thing... that no matter how we define ourselves, we are to make this Unseen All-Good Mind & Spirit seen, not doing things to others we'd never want done to ourselves, meaning that when issues or problems arise we find the solution that does no harm, just as we'd want other people we don't even know to resolve their rising troubles without doing harm to us or anyone else for that matter. To date, since 15 (I am now 65), I have never heard one human ever explain Romans 2:25-29. It is as if it has been deleted from Scripture though it is there is black & white. To date, I have never heard anyone of power teach the 1 true circumcision that correctly defines "the people of the circumcision" (later called, 'The Jews') from "the people of the uncircumcision" (later called, 'The Gentiles'). There will never be that promised reconciliation between Jew & Gentile until mankind understands what "Jew" & "Gentile" actually means. These are character issues. No one is born a "Gentile" in character. Please consider taking the time to hear the historically silenced, relatively simple solution that initiates the restoration of peace on earth. I am no savior. I could care less if there is a literal heaven but wholly care that "heaven on earth" is before us if we want. Humans that do not believe this world can be run by people who know how to resolve troubles without fomenting hate, oppressions & committing crimes against humanity have already lost. Do you live to fix rising troubles before you without hurting others or not? I will not put the link to this video here. I plan to record the final part tomorrow. I am not monetizing or seeking fame. Stay well. I have subscribed & look forward to watching more of your videos. Here's the video title presenting the solution. PT 3A: BRICE TAYLOR, ROGAN, KULINSKI, SERF TIMES, MO’NIQUE, KATT: THE SOLUTION & FAKE OPPOSITION

[@Dizerner]

None of this makes any sense. Right up there with "two part Romans."

[@sillysil2006]

The Hebrew Israelite have been saying this forever...the gentiles are the lost sheep of the house of Israel

[@wqnc]

This is why anybody who teaches the replacement of Israel with the church will never understand this theology . We should always remember that Jesus made it very clear that he was only sent to the lost sheep o the House of Israel.

[@HrvojeSL]

The Church doesn't replace Israel. The Church*is* Israel

[@user-zb4wh3ks2e]

If you think Romans is about the resurrection of Isrsel, what you mean when you say it makes sense is that you have invented a lie that makes sense. These delusions are given to you false believers by God Himself because of your UNBELIEF.

[@frankfebus7565]

U must b drinking alot of coffee