Coming back to here because we hit maximum thread depth.

Argument 1) The passage says Jesus will save the Jews when he returns. If there's no connection between Jews then and Jews now, it makes nonsense of that prophecy.

Argument 2) The context of Romans was a time when Jews were actively persecuting the church and murdering Christians. Paul was severely mistreated by them and nearly killed.

You appear to be arguing that subsequent developments make the book of Romans moot, but that's silly, because if it applied at a time when they were seriously assaulting the church, then it applies now.

Argument 3) I don't like the Talmud, and think it's pretty bad. (It's not as bad as the online antisemites say though; many of the viral quotes are made up - you have noticed that, right?). But once again, it's no worse than the stuff the Pharisees and Saducees pushed, as far as we know, so it's a weak argument to say the NT ceases to apply given that it's just a written version of the same rabbinic stuff that existed when the NT was written.

Argument 4) Jews still have the Torah, and it ranks higher than the Talmud, as the NT outranks the OT for us.