Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 11:1
I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, [of] the tribe of Benjamin.
Ch. Rom 11:1-10. Meanwhile the rejection of Israel never was, nor is, total: a remnant believes, and so abides in covenant
1. I say then ] I say therefore. Thus far St Paul has stated the adverse side of the case of Israel. He has shewn (1) that the Divine Promise never pledged eternal light and life to all Abraham’s descendants; (2) that God is sovereign in His grants of mercy; (3) that the true work of the elder Dispensation was to prepare for the later; (4) that both Gentile faith and Jewish unbelief were distinctly foretold in the Law and the Prophets. And now, true to his main purpose throughout this argument, he turns to state the happier side; and this in two main aspects. First he reiterates the truth of the Divine Election, but now in its positive aspect the existence always of a believing Israel within the unbelieving mass. Secondly, he predicts a time when even in the mass Israel should turn to the true Messiah, be restored to the Church, and become thus an influence of vast good for the world. “ Therefore: ” i.e. as the practical result from my previous account of sin and judgment in the case of Israel. Q. d., “I have given that account in order the better to give an account of present and coming mercy; which therefore I now do.’
Hath God cast away ] Lit. and better, Did God thrust away? i.e. when He welcomed the Gentiles into His covenant. (So too Rom 11:2) For the expression cp. 2Sa 12:22; where LXX. uses the same verb and noun.
his people ] Here, obviously, the bodily descendants of Jacob. St Paul asks whether all these as such were now excluded from the covenant. So immense was the apparent revolution of the admission of Gentiles as such to full covenant, that this fact (along with the fact of the unbelief of millions of Jews) might prompt the thought that the Gentiles were now the privileged and the Jews the aliens.
God forbid ] See on Rom 3:4. The phrase rejects with indignation the suggested thought. In this intense feeling are combined deep love for his kinsmen, jealousy for his own place in the covenant, and jealousy too for the great principle of the irreversibility of “gifts and calling.” See Rom 11:29.
For I also, &c.] Q. d., “I am a living proof to the contrary; an Israelite in the strongest and strictest sense of bodily descent; yet a Christian, a child of God, a messenger of His word.”
an Israelite ] See on Rom 9:4.
Benjamin ] Cp. Php 3:5, where St Paul, for a different purpose, dwells on his pedigree. See Bp. Lightfoot’s interesting note on Php 3:5, for the historic dignity and pride of the tribe of Benjamin. (Here, however, such ideas are less clearly in question than there.)
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The Olive Tree; the Root, Branches, and Graftings
1. The Olive Tree is the true Israel (cp. Jer 11:16,) as the Church, the People of God. Its Root is Abraham and the Patriarchs. Its Stem is the Church of the Old Testament, when in a certain sense (that of external privilege) the Church coincided with the Nation of Israel, and when at least the vast majority of true believers were also physically children of Abraham. Its branches (by a slight modification of metaphor) are potential believers, whether Jewish or Gentile. If Jewish, their faith in Jesus as Messiah is viewed as retaining them in the Church; if Gentile, their faith “ grafts ” them into the stem of the covenant-congregation. If, being Jews, they reject the offers of the Gospel, they are thereby “ cut off ” from the stem. If they repent and believe, their faith “ grafts ” them into it again; and this process, says St Paul, is, by the nature of the case, a more likely and natural one than the “grafting” of the alien branches which yet is graciously effected.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
I say then – This expression is to be regarded as conveying the sense of an objection. Paul, in the previous chapters, had declared the doctrine that all the Jews were to be rejected. To this a Jew might naturally reply, Is it to be believed, that God would cast off his people whom he had once chosen; to whom pertained the adoption, and the promises, and the covenant, and the numerous blessings conferred on a favorite people? It was natural for a Jew to make such objections. And it was important for the apostle to show that his doctrine was consistent with all the promises which God had made to his people. The objection, as will be seen by the answer which Paul makes, is formed on the supposition that God had rejected all his people, or cast them off entirely. This objection he answers by showing,
- That God had saved him, a Jew, and therefore that he could not mean that God had east off all Jews Rom 11:1;
- That now, as in former times of great declension, God had reserved a remnant Rom 11:2-5;
- That it accorded with the Scriptures that a part should be hardened Rom 11:6-10;
- That the design of the rejection was not final, but was to admit the Gentiles to the privileges of Christianity Rom 11:11-24;
- That the Jews should yet return to God, and be reinstated in his favor: so that it could not be objected that God had finally and totally cast off his people, or that he had violated his promises.
At the same time, however, the doctrine which Paul had maintained was true, that God had taken away their exclusive and special privileges, and had rejected a large part of the nation.
Cast away – Rejected, or put off. Has God so renounced them that they cannot be any longer his people.
His people – Those who have been long in the covenant relation to him: that is, the Jews.
God forbid – Literally, it may not or cannot be. This is an expression strongly denying that this could take place; and means that Paul did not intend to advance such a doctrine; Luk 20:16; Rom 3:4, Rom 3:6,Rom 3:31; Rom 6:2, Rom 6:15; Rom 7:7, Rom 7:13.
For I am also an Israelite – To show them that he did not mean to affirm that all Jews must of necessity be cast off, he adduces his own case. He was a Jew; and yet he looked for the favor of God, and for eternal life. That favor he hoped now to obtain by being a Christian; and if he might obtain it, others might also. If I should say that all Jews must be excluded from the favor of God, then I also must be without hope of salvation, for I am a Jew.
Of the seed of Abraham – Descended from Abraham. The apostle mentions this to show that he was a Jew in every respect; that he had a title to all the privileges of a Jew, and must be exposed to all their liabilities and dangers. If the seed of Abraham must of necessity be cut off, he must be himself rejected. The Jews valued themselves much on having been descended from so illustrious an ancestor as Abraham Mat 3:9; and Paul shows them that he was entitled to all the privileges of such a descent; compare Phi 3:4-5.
Of the tribe of Benjamin – This tribe was one that was originally located near Jerusalem. The temple was built on the line that divided the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. It is not improbable that it was regarded as a special honor to have belonged to one of those tribes. Paul mentions it here in accordance with their custom; for they regarded it as of great importance to preserve their genealogy, and to be able to state not only that they were Jews, but to designate the tribe and family to which they belonged.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Rom 11:1-10
God hath not cast away His people.
God hath not cast off His people
This is proved by–
I. The known facts of their history–Paul and his companions in the faith.
II. The secret operations of the Spirit of God–as exemplified in the case of Elias.
III. The results to be achieved in the national rejection of Israel.
1. The conversion of the Gentiles.
2. The consequent conversion of the Jews.
3. The completion of the redeeming purpose on earth.
IV. The ultimate purpose of Gods judgments–the demonstration of His own glory. (J. Lyth, D.D.)
The remnant, the admonition, and the hope
1. Distressed though the apostle was that anything should have caused the exclusion of his kinsmen from the benefits of Messiahs kingdom, yet the fact was patent that it was because of their unbelief, and that it had been predicted. Henceforth they should no longer be, as a people, the people of God. Even when admitted into the kingdom of God, which they still might be by the obedience of faith, they should have no pre-eminence over their believing Gentile brethren (Joh 10:16).
2. Now all this might well fill the heart of the patriotic Jew with thoughtful sadness. For he had been accustomed to give to the glowing predictions of Israels prospective glory an altogether national and literal interpretation. How sadly disappointing, then, to be now assured that the Israel there spoken of was, not Israel after the flesh, but after the spirit! He would ask, How am I to understand the matter? Hath God cast away His people? God forbid! exclaims the apostle. As a nation, and because that they have rejected the Lords Christ, He has rejected them, but this only so far, and so long, as they reject Him. Therefore–
I. He has not cast them away indiscriminately; they have not all been rejected; there is still a foreknown remnant.
1. Such a total rejection the apostle had never affirmed. Should any one assert that so he had taught, let him reflect that he also was an Israelite, etc. But he was not therefore excluded from the benefit of Christs salvation. No; not even though he had once been a blasphemer, etc. (1Ti 1:16).
2. Nor had the apostle alone from amongst the Jews obtained mercy (Act 21:20). Nor could he have anything like an adequate conception of the number of Jewish believers. These whom God had foreknown He had by no means cast away. Though perhaps unknown of men, they were known of God (Rev 7:1-8). Such secret ones the Lord has always had (Rom 11:2-5; cf. 1Ki 19:9-18; Isa 1:9; Isa 10:22).
3. This remnant had obtained that salvation (Rom 9:27), which the rest refused to accept on the stipulated terms; while that rest, because of their self-righteous and obstinate unbelief, had been judicially blinded and hardened (Deu 29:4; Psa 69:22-23). Thus it is that God always deals with incorrigible sinners. They persist in loving darkness, and hating light, and He blinds them. They reject the sure foundation, and it becomes a stone of stumbling. Thus He dealt with Pharaoh and his hosts, with the unbelieving Israelites in the times of Moses, David, Solomon, and Isaiah. And thus He deals with them still (Act 13:40-41; Hab 1:5). These unbelieving Jews are the cast away; but the believing Jews (a foreknown remnant) are elected and saved. But now–
II. With respect to those who have been cast away; have they stumbled to a hopeless fall? Had God ordained that it should be so? God forbid! is the vigorous reply.
1. God did not purpose less mercy for them, but He did intend more for the Gentiles. Indeed, it was this very opening the door of faith to the Gentiles that chiefly caused the offence of the Jews. But by this, which occasioned their fall, salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
2. And now the apostle turns to the Gentile Christians to admonish them against a spirit of exultation over the fallen and rejected Jews. The admonition was probably needed, the persecuting spirit of the Jews being calculated to provoke retaliation. It was still more needed in after times, when Christian rulers and Churches then acted towards that scattered people as though they had been deprived of all the rights of common humanity. But the God of Israel had given no right to any to add one stripe to their chastisement. His severity was intended not for destruction, but salvation; and how much more desirable the latter than the former result! (verses 12-15).
3. And that their salvation is even yet possible is further evident (verse 16). The firstling of the dough and the root of the tree–figures to designate the great progenitors of the whole Jewish nation–having believed in God, had obtained salvation, and had become holy to the Lord. Nay, Jehovah had so presented them to Himself that their descendants also were to be accounted a holy nation. True, this did not insure their unconditional salvation. It had not prevented great numbers from forsaking the God of Israel (Isa 1:4); but for their fathers sakes He would spare no pains to renew them again unto repentance, and to give them hearty welcome on their return (Isa 54:6-8). Many individual Jews had already believed and been saved. These, therefore, might be regarded as, in a secondary sense, the first-fruits unto God, and served to prove that, on like terms, all Israel might be saved.
4. Nay, further, the apostle maintains that the Jews occupied a position more favourable to their salvation. If the Church be symbolised by the olive-tree the Jews were the natural branches as related to Abraham, the father of the faithful, and, as by solemn covenant, separated to fire service of Jehovah. Compared with them, the heathen are indeed but branches of the wild and uncultured tree (Eph 2:11-12). And be it that some of the branches were broken off, and that many from the wild olive have been grafted into the true olive, let them remember that this has been effected contrary to nature, and therefore not exult over the off-broken branches: forasmuch as the state of neither the off-broken nor engrafted branches is irreversible. If the believing Gentile suffers the spirit of pride to displace that of humble trust in the Saviour, he, too, shall not be spared. And if the now reprobated Jew shall receive Him, then shall he also be re-engrafted into the ancient stock. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God (verses 22-24).
5. And not only so, but however improbable it might seem, the time would arrive when all Israel should acknowledge Christ as Lord, and be thereupon welcomed back into His fold (verses 25-27). In the meantime, and as far as concerns the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes. And that which has brought them into this position is the free grace of God, which resolved to include you also. But as touching the election the believing remnant, which continues from age to age (verses 5, 6), are beloved for the fathers sakes. For God Himself has given a sure word of promise that, whithersoever they may be dispersed, when they shall make confession of their iniquity, then will He remember His covenant (Lev 26:40-45). For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. All alike are by nature unbelieving and disobedient. To the consciousness of this fact it is that God shuts them up, and that in order that they may be induced to seek and to secure salvation. (W. Tyson.)
The rejection of Israel
I. Not absolute.
1. A remnant saved.
2. Exemplified in Paul and many known Jewish converts.
3. Confirmed by the history of Elijah.
4. This remnant is of grace (verse 6).
II. Not arbitrary.
1. The rest were blinded.
2. Because of their disobedience.
3. By the just visitation of God.
4. As announced beforehand by their own prophets. (J. Lyth, D.D.)
Gods people
I. Cannot fail on earth.
1. Individuals are still converted (verse 1).
2. The purpose of God is unchangeable (verse 2).
II. Is still small.
1. But not so small that we should be discouraged.
2. Great enough to occasion joy and gratitude.
III. Consists of all true believers who–
1. Repudiate all human merit.
2. Receive Gods mercy as a free gift.
3. Do not harden themselves against the truth. (J. Lyth, D.D.)
Gods Church wider than mans
I. The conspicuously good are the few–not the many. The many are the called; the few are the chosen who accept the call. God had not wholly cast away His people (verse 1). It was then as it had been in the time of Elijah (verse 4). And how is it now? Let us beware of uncharitable judgments. Nothing is easier than sweeping censures. God is tender in His judgments of men, often justifying many whom we in our severity should condemn. Still, would Christ acknowledge the majority in the churches, or would He have to turn to the minority? Certainly to only a small minority, whose faith is proved by their character and works. For, strip away from the profession of Christianity its accidental accompaniments, and what do you find? Nothing that is perfect, even in the loftiest; and nothing of unmixed evil in the meanest. But you will find in the few, in spite of great faults, a faith in Christ so genuine as to give a sure pledge that the goodness of the man will assuredly conquer the badness in the end. The man in whom the love of truth is a passion, in whom justice is a matter of greater concern than the falling of the heavens, and who burns with shame at the thought of an impure deed, and who has courage enough to suffer in the righteous cause like his Great Master;–why, that man forms part of Gods elect remnant, who put to shame the majority of those who cry aloud the name of Christ, but who do not His deeds.
II. Some of these few are not found within the boundaries of the recognised Church. They are in Christs Church, but not in mans. And that is a cause of jealousy and anger to many of us. When Paul told the Jews that God was founding a Church outside their own nation, he knew that he was wounding their prejudices to the quick. So strongly did he feel this that he had to fortify himself by an appeal to Moses (Rom 10:19). But though fact and prophecy supported his statement, they would not admit that God was working upon lines outside their own. And yet the apostle insists upon it as the great revealed mystery which was to crush their pride and to precipitate their fall (verse 25). And so now God is wider in His plans than our pride and prejudice think. We find it almost as hard to believe as the Jew did, that God has a Church outside the Church. And yet, are we not confronted by facts? I believe the Church is our right and natural place, and that it is its natural work to be foremost in doing whatever contributes to the highest welfare of men. But has it not been, and is it not so still, that God has other sheep which are not of this fold? Some of these have maintained an outward connection with the Church, though the Church has not identified itself with them. They have worked alongside the Church rather than with it. Wilberforce and Clarkson did not get the sympathy and support of the Church till their cause was triumphant. Who are the true prophets of this generation? For the most part men upon whom the Church looks askance. When we get to heaven we shall find men there whom we never expected to see, and miss others perhaps whom we expected to find in the foremost places.
III. This outer Church of the Gentiles was to provoke the Jews to jealousy and emulation. The Jews fell that the Gentiles might rise, and the Gentiles had risen that they might stimulate the Jews to rise too. The Church is evermore in need of this constant renewal and reconstruction. At the time of the Reformation Christian truth had to be rediscovered, and a new Church formed outside the lines of the old Church. But the fundamental principle of the Reformation did not long preserve its supremacy–the right of every man to exercise his own judgment–for the Protestants soon began to persecute men like the Catholics. There is a great cry in our day that religion is in danger, and that the churches are failing; such a cry as must have gone forth among the Jews when Paul first preached, but has the cry any greater warrant now than it had then? Was not religion then really rooting itself in a richer soil, and preparing to bring forth better fruit? The devout Catholic thought that the Reformers were devils, and prophesied the overthrow of all religion. But was it not rather a fresh ploughing and sowing of the human soul, and a new opening of the heavens? And as to the cry in our day, if the Christianity depended on the Roman Syllabus, the Thirty-Nine Articles, the Westminster Confession, then we might tremble, but God forbid that we should be overcome by such an ignoble fear. We believe in the religion of Christ, and we can see before it a nobler future. As the Jews had to learn from the Gentiles in order to their recovery, so we have some things to learn from the outer boundaries of Gods Church. (C. Short, M.A.)
God hath not cast away His people.
The glory which will redound to God from the conversion of the Jews
I. Their national preservation through so long a tract of time will furnish a wonderful illustration of the Divine power.
1. They can look back along a line of ancestry compared with which that of the Norman and the Saxon are but of yesterday. Nations which did not exist till long after the Jew had acquired a history, have long ago run their course; but he is unchanged.
2. Nor will any of the ordinary means of national preservation account for their continuance.
(1) They have not, like the Chinese, been stationary, and built in from the rest of the human family. From about B.C. 740, till the destruction of Jerusalem, they suffered as many dispersions, partial or entire, as there were centuries.
(2) Foreign alliances will not explain it. For, besides the fiercest commotions within, they have sustained a quick succession of the most sanguinary invasions from without.
(3) Arms, climate, genius, politics, equally fail to explain it. For they have been crumbled and scattered over the face of the earth; and yet they exist. Old empires which oppressed them have fallen; but the Jew has lived on amidst their ruins. Young nations have started into being, and he has been present to mingle with their elements, but never uniting. And, as if to complete the wonder, their number at this moment is very nearly the same as it was on their leaving Egypt.
3. Now, the only way to account for their preservation is the scriptural one, viz., to ascribe it to Divine power. I am God, I change not; therefore, ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. When, then, they shall be turned to the Lord, with what new emphasis and enlarged meaning will they have to sing Psa 124:1-8.
II. God shall be glorified when it shall be seen that this preservation has not been effected by mere power, but that, from first to last, that power was under the guidance of wisdom, or was exercised according to a plan. A new light is dawning on the mind of men respecting this plan.
1. Formerly the historian only recorded facts. But now it has occurred to him that all the facts of history are connected; that could the principles of this connection be traced history would form one organic whole; and hence, to trace and to expound these principles is now the highest office of the historian–the philosophy of history.
2. Every lover of the Bible, however, should remember that its histories were never written in any other way. It both states the facts, and the principles which unite them. True, after sketching the early history of the race, it confines its history to the Jews. But in that you have, in effect, a type of the whole. And more; in that, you frequently catch glimpses of the others at the most eventful moments of their existence. And more still; the Bible is prophetic as well as historic. Before Herodotus had begun to amass his materials, Isaiah had sung the glory of the latter day; and Daniel had foretold the kingdoms which would arise to the end of time.
3. The Bible never speaks of the course of human events but as conducted on a great plan. And with this peculiarity, that from the time of the promise to Abraham, the entire plan was regulated in relation to his posterity. Nay, ages earlier than that the plan began to evolve (Deu 32:7-8). The great principle on which the habitable part of the globe was mapped out was a principle of relation to the chosen people. And, as the great drama of Providence unfolded, the civilised world invariably found itself involved with that people. Read Psa 78:1-72 th, 105th, and 106th, and do you not hear Jehovah, as He leads them through the nations, saying, Touch not Mine anointed, and do My prophets no harm? Are they invaded and oppressed? Who delivered up Jacob to be a spoil, and Israel to the plunderers? Was it not Jehovah? Does the Assyrian afflict Israel? The Assyrian, saith God, is the rod of My hand. Does the Persian deliver Israel? God calls Cyrus by name. Did nations change hands in consequence of the Persian movement? I have given Egypt for thy ransom; Cush and Sheba for thee. Have the ancient persecutors of Israel perished? Their destruction was foretold! And when, at length, the time shall have come, yea, the set time to favour Zion, what ground will there be for saying, Ye know that not one thing has failed of all that the Lord your God spake concerning you!
III. Gods glory shall be enhanced when it shall appear that the entire plan of His conduct towards israel has directly tended to promote their highest welfare by illustrating the great principles of His moral government.
1. The principle of mediation–of making the conduct or relationship of one a reason for blessing others. God hath not cast away His people. They are still beloved for the fathers sakes, and their conversion will, at length, establish this fact. It will show them that they have never been absolutely renounced, and why Abraham himself was beloved, and that there never was but one Mediator between God and man, the day of whose coming Abraham saw and was glad.
2. Justice (verse 22). Looking back on their history they will behold it covered with the memorials of the Divine displeasure against sin, and learn that every stroke of His fatherly chastisement was intended to bring them in penitence to His feet.
3. The bringing of good out of evil. It will be seen that God has made the mutual jealousy of the Jew and Gentile an occasion of good to each. The apostacy of the human race was the occasion of Israels election at the first. And when, after repeated apostacies, Israel was abandoned, that became the occasion of salvation to the Gentiles (verse 15). Their slavery in Egypt was a time of merciful visitation for that country. Their seventy years captivity in Babylon were calculated to enlighten and to bless the people of that empire. And at their conversion they will see with amazement that the very act which completed their guilt–the crucifixion of Christ–has become the means of their own salvation.
4. The timing and distribution of Gods judgments and mercies so as to make us feel our entire dependence on Him. Would you know, e.g., why it was that Israel, when brought out of Egypt, was not led straight to Canaan? (Deu 8:2-3). Would you know why it was that the coming of Christ was so long delayed; and why the conversion of the Jews did not take place at the commencement of the Christian dispensation? (verse 32). God waited for the Gentiles till they had proved that the world by wisdom would never know God. And He is now waiting for the Jews till it shall be evident that all ground for self-dependence has utterly perished.
IV. But what if this great system of discipline should leave them worse than it found them? Would not their conversion redound, to a degree inconceivable, to the glory of God? The strength of a mechanical power is estimated by the resistance which it overcomes. And the honour which will accrue to the grace of God in the conversion of the Jews is to be estimated partly by the amount and the duration of their previous resistance to that grace.
1. Viewed in this light their conversion will reflect transcendent honour on the power of the grace which effects it. For we are not now speaking of the conversion of a people who had never before enjoyed the light of revelation, but of a people who, in this sense, have never been in darkness. Nor are we speaking of a people who were merely indifferent to Christianity, but of a people who have ever been actively hostile to all spiritual religion. Nor are we speaking of this people as nominally converted merely, as many of the European nations were. To exchange the form of godliness for the power proclaims the presence of a Divine agent; but to worship the very Being on whom the heart had hitherto vented its bitterest execrations, implies a change so great that it might almost excuse unbelief for saying, If the Lord would open windows in heaven, might this thing be? But unbelief itself is silenced by the declaration, I will pour My Spirit upon thy seed, and My blessing upon thine offspring.
2. Associated with this display of omnipotent energy there will be the exercise of unlimited grace in forgiveness. When it is remembered that the Jews of that future day will be the descendants and approvers of those who shouted, Away with Him; crucify Him; His blood be upon us and upon our children! and that, by their persevering unbelief, generation after generation have virtually crucified the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame, how amazing appears that exercise of mercy which is to cancel such an accumulation of guilt! When they shall see that they owe their forgiveness to that blood which they invoked in guilty imprecations on their own heads, what all-subduing views will they obtain of the prevalence of His intercession, of the unchangeableness and riches of His grace!
3. This change will take place at such a period as shall still further redound to the glory of God. There is a fulness of time for it. As the coming of Christ took place at a crisis when the state of the world demonstrated the necessity for it, and displayed its grace, so doubtless will be His coming in the conversion of the Jews. Probably they will have reached the last stage of guilty unbelief; or they will be sorely pressed by evils from without; or, abandoning all expectation of ever beholding their Messiah, they will have given themselves up to despair; or all these forms of evil will have combined in one. This we know, that the design of the whole gospel constitution is that no flesh should glory in His presence; that the inscription on the topstone of the fabric will be, To the praise of the glory of His grace.
4. In harmony with the spiritual and Divine character of this event will be the means or manner of its accomplishment. Not that all means will be dispensed with. But these shall be of so humble a character, and their success shall so far exceed all human calculation as to furnish the most glorious exposition of the words, Not by might, nor by power, but by My Spirit, saith the Lord.
V. Another element of the glory which will redound to God will be found in the number of the converted. A few here and there will doubtless be renewed, from time to time, prior to that period. But then the change will be so general as to satisfy the large prediction that all Israel shall be saved. They shall come from the east and from the west, etc., to swear allegiance to the Cross of Christ. And what joy will seize the Gentile Church when it shall be announced, Then hath God also to the Jews granted repentance unto life! And if there is joy in heaven among the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth, who can conceive the rapture when it shall be there proclaimed, All Israel is saved!
VI. This reminds us of the further accession of glory to God from the conversion of the Jews, resulting from the effects of the event upon others.
1. For what an unsurpassable proof will it furnish of the Divinity of the whole scheme of revelation! As the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost was reserved by God for the crowning proof of the new economy, so the greater effusion of the same Spirit, upon the same people, is reserved to complete the proof of its claims as it draws towards a close.
2. What an unsurpassable proof will that event display of the all-sufficiency of the grace of God! At the opening of the Christian economy in the conversion of Saul Christ showed forth all long-suffering for a pattern, etc. In a similar manner God appears to be reserving the richest display of His saving grace till towards the last.
3. What an impulse, too, will be given to the piety of every part of the Christian Church l (verse 12). The newly-converted Jews will probably exhibit a measure of self-denying zeal for the glory of God, which the Church had come to consider absolutely impracticable, For he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them.
4. How eminently will this increase of the Church tend to the union of all its parts! That most ancient of all schisms between Jew and Gentile shall then be healed. Every minor distinction in the Church shall cease. And thus it will be seen that an important step has been gained towards the attainment of that which God hath purposed in Himself, that in the dispensation,, of the fulness of times He might gather together in one all things in Christ.
5. And will not–must not all this inconceivably augment the joy of the Church? (J. Harris, D.D.)
Gods remainder
1. We are living in a time when the reigning influences of society tempt or drive from integrity and purity; and some who were venerated shock the confidence reposed in them by grievous falls. There are dangers in such times that touch conscience and try faith. But God is not changed; moral virtue is not unreal; there are still men good and true. God hath not cast away His people. There are seven thousand reserved amid the general degeneracy.
2. Baal was the idea of prolific reproduction in nature. His was a popular worship ever, and set up its accursed altars in the Holy Land. Pouring light upon the faith of the new kingdom of redeeming grace from ancient history, as was his wont, Paul goes back to that dark spot. He is showing that no matter how many fall away faith lives on. The times are never so bad that they can corrupt utterly the immortal grace that lies hidden in the heart of the Church. Mammon may establish its worship, but there is still a holy place, and an ark of the covenant, sacraments and ministry, and heavenly grace. God does not cast away His people.
3. The apostle recalls the old prophet Elijah, and makes a strong case. Matters in Church and State had come to the worst. Two tottering thrones, on soil soaked with family blood, frowned at one another in anger, but upheld no just law and protected no personal rights. Over one of the fragments of the schism ruled a tyrant–Ahab–consistent in cruelty and persevering in appetite, with Jezebel, who made royalty contemptible and womanhood shameful. Ahab and Jezebel are names of vices almost as much as of persons, and have been for nearly three thousand years. After his victory at Carmel, Elijahs splendid dream of the reformation of Gods kingdom was broken. When men animated by great purposes fail, they seem smaller to themselves than ever. It was like the hiding of the face of God. But now there comes a magnificent revelation which shows that true greatness does not stand in great results that can be seen. Success does not lie in the numbers counted. Power is stored up in hidden places and in lonely consciences. Have done with measuring Gods power with your geometry, or estimating His army by arithmetic. Do the duty that lies nearest thee. It scatters doubt; overcomes opposition; breaks up despair. The Almighty takes care of His reserves. We want the inspiration of this better faith. Consider two facts–
I. The inroads of a subtle and popular worldly-mindedness, weakening the Church deplorably in its conscience and its heart. There is a power attacking Christianity from without, and corrupting it within. What are the foremost among the objects of the people in business and social life? Duty and righteousness? Do the young enter social life to carry there the influence of Christ? What spirit is in the ascendant in our populations? Is there not here the man of sin who is anti-Christ? Worldliness is a false god; lying, because it makes promises which are never kept; cruel, because it kills the better life; impious, because it defeats the glorious end for which God put His image in every man. This impious secularism creeps into the Church. It is charged that its converts do not come up to its standard, and that concessions are made of principle, and mercenary treacheries adopted to crowd its seats. Retribution cannot but follow if these things be true. But spiritual power is not to be judged by outward achievements. Granted that the world is as worldly, unbelief as prevalent, inconsistency as widespread, the Church as timid and supple as prophets fear or sceptics declare. What saith the answer of God? I have reserved, etc. This opens to us the opposite fact–
II. The immortal survival of the secret life of the Church and of personal piety, although it is in a minority, and cometh not with observation. God makes much out of little, and saves by a handful of heroes, calling up His reserves out of obscurity, and never letting His altar fires die out. Seven thousand a slight proportion. They were out of sight, scattered saints crouching in corners. Elijah was looking on things on their earthly side. Not so the All-seeing. There was an unreckoned hope in obscure men and women Elijah did not know. Always a light left burning in Switzerland, in Germany, in England, in Scotland. The gates of hell do not prevail.
III. Here is, then, a law for practical use. What God requires of us is personal fidelity, or the earnest training of private Christian character in each one by himself, irrespective of any visible results or any possible discouragements. For this there are the clearest grounds.
1. It follows straight on in the way of the beginnings of the Church under the hand of the Lord. Get one man brave enough to do right against any maxims of a majority; one woman brave enough to lift others into her own pathway of light, and you are working precisely in the line of Him who knows what is in man, and redeems the race.
2. The doctrine is strong in that it is practicable. Every individual has one realm all his own–his conscience. Disappointed, baffled, elsewhere, he can make that all Christian. Pagan pleasures may allure others. You may not know where others–helpers–are. But your own place is in the munitions of rocks. And the Master will always be there with you.
3. This sphere of personal Christian character touches others wonderfully, but never depends upon them so as to surrender to them if they go over to Baal. Your knees are your own to bend to whom you will. The apostles called no convention. Great reforms are in single souls before they are in parliaments, synods, or constitutions. Gods harvests spring from single, solitary seeds. It is not miracle but law. The patient power of the Lord reserves His remnant of faithful hearts. His work is done first by single, then by united hands. Character, steadfast, pure, holy, is at once its force and its fruit. (Bp. Huntington.)
Wot ye not what the Scripture saith of Elias?—
The Old Testament Scriptures
I. Are not superseded.
II. Ought to be carefully studied.
III. Illustrate the principles of the new. (J. Lyth, D.D.)
The prophets complaint and Gods answer
I. The complaint of the prophet.
1. Hasty.
2. Erring.
3. Desponding.
II. The answer of god.
1. Exact.
2. Reproving.
3. Inspiring. (J. Lyth, D.D.)
Mistakes concerning the number of the righteous
Sometimes we make them from–
I. The peculiar state of our own minds. This seems to have been the condition of Elijah. His language betrays–
1. Severity.
2. Petulance.
3. Despair.
II. Observing multiplied instances of false profession. The apostasy of one pretender excites more attention than the lives of solid, steady Christians.
III. The righteous themselves. Because of.–
1. The obscurity of their stations.
2. The diffidence of their dispositions.
3. The manner of their conversion.
4. The diversity of their opinions.
5. The imperfection of their character.
Application:
1. The use which the apostle makes of his subject.
2. Are you among the number of the saved?
3. Let all true Christians consider the Author and end of their salvation.
4. Remember also for whom you have been saved. (W. Jay.)
Despondency
I. Looks at the things which are seen.
II. Overlooks those which are unseen. (J. Lyth, D.D.)
But what saith the answer of God?—
The answer of God to Elijah
I. All doubts in matters of religion are to be decided by the Word of God (Joh 5:39; Mar 12:24). Elijah erred because he spake without his book. Remember this–
1. In all matters controverted. When it is questioned whether images are to be worshipped, angels and saints prayed to, etc., who shall resolve us? We are to take no mans word, not even the word of Elijah for a matter of faith. What saith the Scripture? Men may err, but the answer of God is according to truth.
2. In matters of practice. If it be questioned whether thou shalt break the Sabbath, deceive thy neighbour, etc. Thy companions, it may be, and thine own heart will entice thee to do such things, but what saith the Scripture? They which do such things shall be damned.
II. The Church of God shall never be brought to such an exigent in the most difficult times, but that there shall be many thousands which shall worship God in spirit and truth.
1. The best on earth do err, as Elijah who erred by a passion of anger and fear. Order your passions by the law of grace, for if they be ungoverned they blind the mind, and as unruly horses draw the chariot of our judgment into the bye-paths of error.
2. Elijah erred in his censure concerning true worshippers; be not, then, rash in censuring. It is rashness to censure particular men, much more whole Churches to be antichristian. How darest thou refuse communion with them who have communion with Christ?
3. Neither multitude nor visibility are certain notes of the true Church, for then there had been no Church in Elijahs time, for the multitude was with Ahab and Jezebel, and Elijah could not discern one beside himself. The Papists say the Church was always visible, but the creed confuteth them, for we believe in the holy Catholic Church. But holiness is invisible and so is Catholicity. We may grant that particular Churches are visible, and yet here some cautions are to be remembered. They may be invisible in respect–
(1) Of place. As the sun is always visible, but to us only when it ariseth in our hemisphere. So at Jerusalem the Church was not to be seen when it removed to Pella.
(2) Of the time, as in Elijahs and Queen Marys days. As the sun behind a cloud in some respect is invisible, so may it be said of a Church.
(3) Of persons which should discern it. A Church is sometimes invisible through the fault of mens eyes, which are either weak as of Elijah, or blind as of them which hate the Church.
III. Those who in dangerous times are preserved in grace are so preserved merely by the power and goodness of God (1Sa 25:39; 1Th 5:23; 2Ti 4:18; Jud 1:24).
1. Though Jezebel search every corner of the land, yet God reserveth seven thousand which bow not the knees to Baal. God can keep us from our enemies; let persecutors cease their malicious practices, and let us serve God without fear.
2. In regard to the preaching of the gospel these are golden days, but in regard of the overflowing of iniquity these are perilous times. Art thou preserved? glorify God. It is not thy goodness that thou dost not as others, but the goodness of God.
3. Be admonished of two things.
(1) Presume not of thine own strength. Peter bragged of his courage, and yet played the coward. Hazael thought great scorn ever to do as Elisha foretold to him, and yet afterwards he did such things.
(2) Be not secure and careless. God reserveth some, but those which use the means to persevere in well doing. (Elnathan Parr, B.D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER XI.
God has not universally nor finally rejected Israel; nor are
they all at present rejecters of the Gospel, for there is a
remnant of true believers now, as there was in the days of the
Prophet Elijah, 1-5.
These have embraced the Gospel, and are saved by grace, and not
by the works of the law, 6.
The body of the Israelites, having rejected this, are blinded,
according to the prophetic declaration of David, 7-10.
But they have not stumbled, so as to be finally rejected; but
through their fall, salvation is come to the Gentiles, 11-14.
There is hope of their restoration, and that the nation shall
yet become a holy people, 15, 16.
The converted Gentiles must not exult over the fallen Jews; the
latter having fallen by unbelief, the former stand by faith,
17-20.
The Jews, the natural branches, were broken off from the true
olive, and the Gentiles having been grafted in, in their place,
must walk uprightly, else they also shall be cut off, 21, 22.
The Jews, if they abide not in unbelief, shall be again grafted
in; and when the fulness of the Gentiles is come in, the great
Deliverer shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob, according to
the covenant of God, 23-27.
For the sake of their forefathers God loves them, and will again
call them, and communicate His gifts to them, 28, 29.
The Gospel shall he again sent to them, as it has now been sent
to the Gentiles, 30-32.
This procedure is according to the immensity of the wisdom,
knowledge, and unsearchable judgments of God, who is the
Creator, Preserver, and Governor of all things, and to whom all
adoration is due, 33-36.
NOTES ON CHAP. XI.
This chapter is of the prophetic kind. It was by the spirit of prophecy that the apostle foresaw the rejection of the Jews, which he supposes in the two preceding chapters; for when he wrote the epistle they were not in fact, rejected, seeing their polity and Church were then standing. But the event has proved that he was a true prophet; for we know that in about ten or eleven years after the writing of this letter the temple was destroyed, the Jewish polity overthrown, and the Jews expelled out of the promised land, which they have never been able to recover to the present day.
This, 1. confirms the arguments which the apostle had advanced to establish the calling of the Gentiles. For the Jews are, in fact, rejected; consequently, our calling is, in fact, not invalidated by any thing they suggested, relative to the perpetuity of the Mosaic dispensation. But that dispensation being wholly subverted, our title to the privileges of God’s Church and people stands clear and strong; the Jewish constitution only could furnish objections against our claim; and the event has silenced every objection from that quarter.
2. The actual rejection of the Jews proves Paul to be a true apostle of Jesus Christ, and that he spoke by the Spirit of God; otherwise, he could not have argued so fully upon a case which was yet to come, and of which there was no appearance in the state of things when he wrote this epistle. And this very circumstance should induce us to pay great attention to this chapter, in which he discourses concerning the extent and duration of the rejection of his countrymen, to prevent their being insulted and despised by the Gentile Christians.
(1) As to the extent of this rejection, it is not absolutely universal; some of the Jews have embraced the Gospel, and are incorporated into the Christian Church with the believing Gentiles. Upon the case of these believing Jews he comments, Ro 11:1-7.
(2) As to the duration of it, it is not final and perpetual, for all Israel, or the nation of the Jews, which is now blinded, shall one day be saved or brought again into the kingdom or covenant of God. Upon the state of these blinded Jews he comments, Ro 11:7 to the end of the chapter. His design, in discoursing upon this subject, was not only to make the thing itself known, but partly to engage the attention of the unbelieving Jew; to conciliate his favour, and, if possible, to induce him to come into the Gospel scheme; and partly to dispose the Gentile Christians not to treat the Jews with contempt; (considering that they derived all their present blessings from the patriarchs, the ancestors of the Jewish nation, and were engrafted into the good olive tree, whence the Jews had been broken;) and to admonish them to take warning by the fall of the Jews; to make a good improvement of their religious privileges, lest, through unbelief, any of them should relapse into heathenism, or perish finally at the last day.
The thread of his discourse leads him into a general survey and comparison of the several dispensations of God towards the Gentiles and Jews; and he concludes this survey with adoration of the depths of the Divine knowledge and wisdom exercised in the various constitutions erected in the world, Ro 11:30-36.
Verse 1. I say then, hath God cast away his people?] Has he utterly and finally rejected them? for this is necessarily the apostle’s meaning, and is the import of the Greek word , which signifies to thrust or drive away, from , from, and , to thrust or drive; has he thrust them off, and driven them eternally from him? God forbid-by no means. This rejection is neither universal nor final. For I also am an Israelite-I am a regular descendant from Abraham, through Israel or Jacob, and by his son Benjamin. And I stand in the Church of God, and in the peculiar covenant; for the rejection is only of the obstinate and disobedient; for those who believe on Christ, as I have done, are continued in the Church.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The apostle having shown, in the end of the foregoing chapter, that the Jews were for their obstinacy rejected, and the Gentiles called, he here prevents or answers an objection. Some might be ready to say: If this be so, then God hath cast away his covenant people, which he hath promised not to do; see Psa 94:14. To this he answers, first, by his accustomed form of denial: God forbid; and then he proceeds to show, that the rejection of the Jews was neither total nor final. That it was not total, he proves, first, by a particular instance in the following words.
I also am an Israelite; i.e. I am a Jew by descent, of the seed of Abraham according to the flesh, and yet am not cast off by God.
Of the tribe of Benjamin: some think this is added to intimate, that he was born of an honourable tribe, out of which king Saul sprang, 1Sa 9:1, and Esther the queen, Est 2:5. Others think this is added for a contrary reason; lest his calling should be ascribed to the dignity of his tribe, he says, he was of Benjamin, the last and least of all the tribes. And others rather think, that this particular recital of his genealogy is only to show, that he was a Jew by nature and nation, and not a proselyte converted to the faith: see Phi 3:5.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
1. I say then, Hath“Did”
God cast away his people? GodforbidOur Lord did indeed announce that “the kingdom ofGod should be taken from Israel” (Mt21:41); and when asked by the Eleven, after His resurrection, ifHe would at that time “restore the kingdom to Israel,”His reply is a virtual admission that Israel was in some sensealready out of covenant (Ac 1:9).Yet here the apostle teaches that, in two respects, Israel was not“cast away”; First, Not totally; Second, Notfinally. FIRST,Israel is not wholly cast away.
for I also am anIsraeliteSee Php 3:5, andso a living witness to the contrary.
of the seed of Abrahamofpure descent from the father of the faithful.
of the tribe of Benjamin(Php 3:5), that tribe which, onthe revolt of the ten tribes, constituted, with Judah, the onefaithful kingdom of God (1Ki12:21), and after the captivity was, along with Judah, the kernelof the Jewish nation (Ezr 4:1;Ezr 10:9).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
I say then, hath God cast away his people?…. The Alexandrian, copy adds here, “whom he foreknew”, as in Ro 11:2: upon the citation of the above passages out of Moses and Isaiah, relating to the calling of the Gentiles, and the rejection of the Jews, the apostle saw an objection would arise, which he here takes up from the mouth of an adversary, and proposes it; in which is suggested, that God has cast away all his people the Jews, according to this count; and if so, where is his covenant with Abraham? what is become of his promises? and how is his faithfulness to be accounted for? and what hope can any Israelite have of ever obtaining salvation? than which, nothing can be thought more injurious to God, and absurd in itself. This was an old prejudice of the Jewish nation, and still continues, that God never would, nor has he cast them away, even in their present condition; it is one of the articles of their creed, received by the Karaites o, a sect among them, that
“the blessed God , “hath not cast away the men of the captivity”, though they are under the chastisements of God; but it is fit that they should every day obtain salvation by the hands of Messiah, the Son of David.”
Now to this objection the apostle makes answer; “first”, in his usual way,
God forbid, when anything was objected which was displeasing to him, abhorred by him, which was not agreeable to the perfections of God, to the truth of his word, and promises, and could by no means be admitted of; and next by observing his own case, which was a standing instance to the contrary; for God had chosen him unto eternal salvation, Christ had redeemed him by his blood, and he was effectually called by grace; and as to his eternal state, he had no doubt or scruple about it; and besides, the Lord had made him a minister of the Gospel, had greatly qualified him for that work, had raised him to the high office of an apostle, and had made him very useful to the souls of many, both Jews and Gentiles; and yet he was one of the nation of the Jews, and therefore God had not cast them all away, as the objection insinuates:
for I also am an Israelite; according to the flesh, by lineal descent from Jacob or Israel; see 2Co 11:22; as well as in a spiritual sense:
of the seed of Abraham; “the grandfather of Israel”; the head of the Jewish nation he was, both of his natural and of his spiritual seed, who is the father of us all:
of the tribe of Benjamin; a very little tribe, which in the time of the Judges was near being destroyed, and, upon the return from the captivity of Babylon, was very small, as it was at this time; and yet God had not cast away this, much less all the tribes of Israel.
o Apud Trigland. de Sect. Karaeorum, c. 10. p. 151.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
| The State of the Jews; The State of the Gentiles; The Gentiles Warned; The Future Conversion of the Jews. | A. D. 58. |
1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, 3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. 4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. 5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. 6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. 7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded 8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day. 9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them: 10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway. 11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. 12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness? 13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office: 14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them. 15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? 16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches. 17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; 18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. 19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. 20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded, but fear: 21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. 22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. 23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again. 24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? 25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. 26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: 27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. 28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. 29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. 30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: 31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. 32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
The apostle proposes here a plausible objection, which might be urged against the divine conduct in casting off the Jewish nation (v. 1): “Hath God cast away his people? Is the rejection total and final? Are they all abandoned to wrath and ruin, and that eternal? Is the extent of the sentence so large as to be without reserve, or the continuance of it so long as to be without repeal? Will he have no more a peculiar people to himself?” In opposition to this, he shows that there was a great deal of goodness and mercy expressed along with this seeming severity, particularly he insists upon three things:– 1. That, though some of the Jews were cast off, yet they were not all so. 2. That, though the body of the Jews were cast off, yet the Gentiles were taken in. And, 3. That, though the Jews were cast off at present, yet in God’s due time they should be taken into his church again.
I. The Jews, it is true, were many of them cast off, but not all. The supposition of this he introduces with a God forbid. He will by no means endure such a suggestions. God had made a distinction between some of them and others.
1. There was a chosen remnant of believing Jews, that obtained righteousness and life by faith in Jesus Christ, v. 1-7. These are said to be such as he foreknew (v. 2), that is, had thoughts of love to, before the world was; for whom he thus foreknew he did predestinate. her lies the ground of the difference. They are called the election (v. 7), that is, the elect, God’s chosen ones, whom he calls the election, because that which first distinguished them from the dignified them above others was God’s electing love. Believers are the election, all those and those only whom God hath chosen. Now,
(1.) He shows that he himself was one of them: For I also am an Israelite; as if he had said, “Should I say that all the Jews are rejected, I should cut off my own claims, and see myself abandoned.” Paul was a chosen vessel (Acts ix. 15), and yet he was of the seed of Abraham, and particularly of the tribe of Benjamin, the least and youngest of all the tribes of Israel.
(2.) He suggests that as in Elias’s time, so now, this chosen remnant was really more and greater than one would think it was, which intimates likewise that it is no new nor unusual thing for God’s grace and favour to Israel to be limited and confined to a remnant of that people; for so it was in Elijah’s time. The scripture saith it of Elias, en Elia—in the story of Elias, the great reformer of the Old Testament. Observe, [1.] His mistake concerning Israel; as if their apostasy in the days of Ahab was so general that he himself was the only faithful servant God had in the world. He refers to 1 Kings xix. 14, where (it is here said) he maketh intercession to God against Israel. A strange kind of intercession: entynchanei to Theo kata tou Israel—He deals with God against Israel; so it may be read; so entynchano is translated, Acts xxv. 24. The Jews enetychon moi—have dealt with me. In prayer we deal with God, commune with him, discourse with him: it is said of Elijah (Jam. v. 17) that he prayed in praying. We are then likely to pray in praying, to make a business of that duty, when we pray as those that are dealing with God in the duty. Now Elijah in this prayer spoke as if there were one left faithful in Israel but himself. See to what a low ebb the profession of religion may sometimes be brought, and how much the face of it may be eclipsed, that the most wise and observing men may give it up for gone. So it was in Elijah’s time. That which makes the show of a nation is the powers and the multitude. The powers of Israel were then persecuting powers: They have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars, and they seek my life. The multitude of Israel were then idolatrous: I am left alone. Thus those few that were faithful to God were not only lost in the crowd of idolaters, but crushed and driven into corners by the rage of persecutors. When the wicked rise, a man is hidden, Prov. xxviii. 12.– Digged down thine altars; not only neglected them, and let them go out of repair, but digged them down. When altars were set up for Baal, it is no wonder if God’s altars were pulled down; they could not endure that standing testimony against their idolatry. This was his intercession against Israel; as if he had said, “Lord, is not this a people ripe for ruin, worthy to be cast off? What else canst thou do for thy great name?” It is a very sad thing for any person or people to have the prayers of God’s people against them, especially of God’s prophets, for God espouses, and sooner or later will visibly own, the cause of his praying people. [2.] The rectifying of this mistake by the answer of God (v. 4): I have reserved. Note, First, Things are often much better with the church of God than wise and good men think they are. They are ready to conclude hardly, and to give up all for gone, when it is not so. Secondly, In times of general apostasy, there is usually a remnant that keep their integrity–some, though but a few; all do not go one way. Thirdly, That when there is a remnant who keep their integrity in times of general apostasy it is God that reserves to himself that remnant. If he had left them to themselves, they had gone down the stream with the rest. It is his free and almighty grace that makes the difference between them and others.–Seven thousand: a competent number to bear their testimony against the idolatry of Israel, and yet, compared with the many thousands of Israel, a very small number, one of a city, and two of a tribe, like the grape-gleanings of the vintage. Christ’s flock is but a little flock; and yet, when they come all together at last, they will be a great and innumerable multitude, Rev. vii. 9. Now the description of this remnant is that they had not bowed the knee to the image of Baal, which was then the reigning sin of Israel. In court, city, and country, Baal had the ascendant; and the generality of people, more or less, paid their respect to Baal. The best evidence of integrity is a freedom from the present prevailing corruptions of the times and places that we live in, to swim against the stream when it is strong. Those God will own for his faithful witnesses that are bold in bearing their testimony to the present truth, 2 Pet. i. 12. This is thank-worthy, not to bow to Baal when every body bows. Sober singularity is commonly the badge of true sincerity. [3.] The application of this instance to the case in hand: Even so at this present time, v. 5-7. God’s methods of dispensation towards his church are as they used to be. As it has been, so it is. In Elijah’s time there was a remnant, and so there is now. If then there was a remnant left under the Old Testament, when the displays of grace were less clear and the pourings out of the Spirit less plentiful, much more now under the gospel, when the grace of God, which bringeth salvation, appears more illustrious.–A remnant, a few of many, a remnant of believing Jews when the rest were obstinate in their unbelief. This is called a remnant according to the election of grace; they are such as were chosen from eternity in the counsels of divine love to be vessels of grace and glory. Whom he did predestinate those he called. If the difference between them and others be made purely by the grace of God, as certainly it is (I have reserved them, saith he, to myself), then it must needs be according to the election; for we are sure that whatever God does he does it according to the counsel of his own will. Now concerning this remnant we may observe, First, Whence it takes its rise, from the free grace of God (v. 6), that grace which excludes works. The eternal election, in which the difference between some and others is first founded, is purely of grace, free grace; not for the sake of works done or foreseen; if so, it would not be grace. Gratia non est ullo modo gratia, si non sit omni modo gratuita–It is not grace, properly so called, if it be not perfectly free. Election is purely according to the good pleasure of his will, Eph. i. 5. Paul’s heart was so full of the freeness of God’s grace that in the midst of his discourse he turns aside, as it were, to make this remark, If of grace, then not of works. And some observe that faith itself, which in the matter of justification if opposed to works, is here included in them; for faith has a peculiar fitness to receive the free grace of God for our justification, but not to receive that grace for our election. Secondly, What it obtains: that which Israel, that is, the body of that people, in van sought for (v. 7): Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for, that is, justification, and acceptance with God (see ch. ix. 31), but the election have obtained it. In them the promise of God has its accomplishment, and God’s ancient kindness for that people is remembered. He calls the remnant of believers, not the elect, but the election, to show that the sole foundation of all their hopes and happiness is laid in election. They were the persons whom God had in his eye in the counsels of his love; they are the election; they are God’s choice. Such was the favour of God to the chosen remnant. But,
2. The rest were blinded, v. 7. Some are chosen and called, and the call is made effectual. But others are left to perish in their unbelief; nay, they are made worse by that which should have made them better. The gospel, which to those that believed was the savour of life unto life, to the unbelieving was the savour of death unto death. The same sun softens wax and hardens clay. Good old Simeon foresaw that the child Jesus was set for the fall, as well as for the rising again, of many in Israel, Luke ii. 34.– Were blinded; eporothesan—they were hardened; so some. They were seared, and made brawny and insensible. They could neither see the light, nor feel the touch, of gospel grace. Blindness and hardness are expressive of the same senselessness and stupidity of spirit. They shut their eyes, and would not see; this was their sin: and then God, in a way of righteous judgment, blinded their eyes, that they could not see; this was their punishment. This seemed harsh doctrine: to qualify it, therefore, he vouches two witnesses out of the Old Testament, who speak of such a thing.
(1.) Isaiah, who spoke of such a judgment in his day, Isa 29:10; Isa 6:9. The spirit of slumber, that is, an indisposedness to mind either their duty or interest. They are under the power of a prevailing unconcernedness, like people that are slumbering and sleeping; not affected with any thing that is said or done. They were resolved to continue as they were, and would not stir. The following words explain what is meant by the spirit of slumber: Eyes, that they should not see, and ears, that they should not hear. They had the faculties, but in the things that belonged to their peace they had not the use of those faculties; they were quite infatuated, they saw Christ, but they did not believe in him; they heard his word, but they did not receive it; and so both their hearing and their seeing were in vain. It was all one as if they had neither seen nor heard. Of all judgments spiritual judgments are the sorest, and most to be dreaded, though they make the least noise.–Unto this day. Ever since Esaias prophesied, this hardening work has been in the doing; some among them have been blind and senseless. Or, rather, ever since the first preaching of the gospel: though they have had the most convincing evidences that could be of the truth of it, the most powerful preaching, the fairest offers, the clearest calls from Christ himself, and from his apostles, yet to this day they are blinded. It is still true concerning multitudes of them, even to this day in which we live; they are hardened and blinded, the obstinacy and unbelief go by succession from generation to generation, according to their own fearful imprecation, which entailed the curse: His blood be upon us and upon our children.
(2.) David (Rom 11:9; Rom 11:10), quoted from Psa 69:22; Psa 69:23, where David having in the Spirit foretold the sufferings of Christ from his own people the Jews, particularly that of their giving him vinegar to drink (v. 21, which was literally fulfilled, Matt. xxvii. 48), an expression of the greatest contempt and malice that could be, in the next words, under the form of an imprecation, he foretels the dreadful judgments of God upon them for it: Let their table become a snare, which the apostle here applies to the present blindness of the Jews, and the offence they took at the gospel, which increased their hardness. This teaches us how to understand other prayers of David against his enemies; they are to be looked upon as prophetic of the judgments of God upon the public and obstinate enemies of Christ and his kingdom. His prayer that it might be so was a prophecy that it should be so, and not the private expression of his own angry resentments. It was likewise intended to justify God, and to clear his righteousness in such judgments. He speaks here, [1.] Of the ruin of their comforts: Let their table be made a snare, that is, as the psalmist explains it, Let that which should be for their welfare be a trap to them. The curse of God will turn meat into poison. It is a threatening like that in Mal. ii. 2, I will curse your blessings. Their table a snare, that is, an occasion of sin and an occasion of misery. Their very food, that should nourish them, shall choke them. [2.] Of the ruin of their powers and faculties (v. 10), their eyes darkened, their backs bowed down, that they can neither find the right way, nor, if they could, are they able to walk in it. The Jews, after their national rejection of Christ and his gospel, became infatuated in their politics, so that their very counsels turned against them, and hastened their ruin by the Romans. They looked like a people designed for slavery and contempt, their backs bowed down, to be ridden and trampled upon by all the nations about them. Or, it may be understood spiritually; their backs are bowed down in carnality and worldly-mindedness. Curv in terris anim–They mind earthly things. This is an exact description of the state and temper of the present remainder of that people, than whom, if the accounts we have of them be true, there is not a more worldly, wilful, blind, selfish, ill-natured, people in the world. They are manifestly to this day under the power of this curse. Divine curses will work long. It is a sign we have our eyes darkened if we are bowed down in worldly-mindedness.
II. Another thing which qualified this doctrine of the rejection of the Jews was that though they were cast off and unchurched, yet the Gentiles were taken in (v. 11-14), which he applies by way of caution to the Gentiles, v. 17-22.
1. The rejection of the Jews made room for the reception of the Gentiles. The Jews’ leavings were a feast for the poor Gentiles (v. 11): “Have they stumbled that they should fall? Had God no other end in forsaking and rejecting them than their destruction?” He startles at this, rejecting the thought with abhorrence, as usually he does when any thing is suggested which seems to reflect upon the wisdom, or righteousness, or goodness of God: God forbid! no, through their fall salvation is come to the Gentiles. Not but that salvation might have come to the Gentiles if they had stood; but by the divine appointment it was so ordered that the gospel should be preached to the Gentiles upon the Jews’ refusal of it. Thus in the parable (Mat 22:8; Mat 22:9), Those that were first bidden were not worthy–Go ye therefore into the highways, Luke xiv. 21. And so it was in the history (Acts xiii. 46): It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you; but, seeing you put it from you, lo, we turn to the Gentiles; so Acts xviii. 6. God will have a church in the world, will have the wedding furnished with guests; and, if one will not come, another will, or why was the offer made? The Jews had the refusal, and so the tender came to the Gentiles. See how Infinite Wisdom brings light out of darkness, good out of evil, meat out of the eater, and sweetness out of the strong. To the same purport he says (v. 12), The fall of them was the riches of the world, that is, it hastened the gospel so much the sooner into the Gentile world. The gospel is the greatest riches of the place where it is; it is better than thousands of gold and silver. Or, The riches of the Gentiles was the multitude of converts among them. True believers are God’s jewels. To the same purport (v. 15): The casting away of them is the reconciling of the world. God’s displeasure towards them made way for his favour towards the Gentiles. God was in Christ reconciling the world, 2 Cor. v. 19. And therefore he took occasion from the unbelief of the Jews openly to disavow and disown them, though they had been his peculiar favourites, to show that in dispensing his favours he would now no longer act in such a way of peculiarity and restriction, but that in every nation he that feared God and wrought righteousness should be accepted of him, Act 10:34; Act 10:35.
2. The use that the apostle makes of this doctrine concerning the substitution of the Gentiles in the room of the Jews.
(1.) As a kinsman to the Jews, here is a word of excitement and exhortation to them, to stir them up to receive and embrace the gospel-offer. This God intended in his favour to the Gentiles, to provoke the Jews to jealousy (v. 11), and Paul endeavours to enforce it accordingly (v. 14): If by any means I might provoke to emulation those who are my flesh. “Shall the despised Gentiles run away with all the comforts and privileges of the gospel, and shall not we repent of our refusal, and now at last put in for a share? Shall not we believe and obey, and be pardoned and saved, as well as the Gentiles?” See an instance of such an emulation in Esau, Gen. xxviii. 6-9. There is a commendable emulation in the affairs of our souls: why should not we be as holy and happy as any of our neighbours? In this emulation there needs no suspicion, undermining or countermining; for the church has room enough, and the new covenant grace and comfort enough, for us all. The blessings are not lessened by the multitudes of the sharers.–And might save some of them. See what was Paul’s business, to save souls; and yet the utmost he promises himself is but to save some. Though he was such a powerful preacher, spoke and wrote with such evidence and demonstration of the Spirit, yet of the many he dealt with he could but save some. Ministers must think their pains well bestowed if they can but be instrumental to save some.
(2.) As an apostle to the Gentiles, here is a word of caution for them: “I speak to you Gentiles. You believing Romans, you hear what riches of salvation are come to you by the fall of the Jews, but take heed lest you do any thing to forfeit it.” Paul takes this, as other occasions, to apply his discourse to the Gentiles, because he was the apostle of the Gentiles, appointed for the service of their faith, to plant and water churches in the Gentile nations. This was the purport of his extraordinary mission, Acts xxii. 21, I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles; compare Acts ix. 15. It was likewise the intention of his ordination, Gal. ii. 9. Compare Acts xiii. 2. It ought to be our great and special care to do good to those that are under our charge: we must particularly mind that which is our own work. It was an instance of God’s great love to the poor Gentiles that he appointed Paul, who in gifts and graces excelled all the apostles, to be the apostle of the Gentiles. The Gentile world was a wider province; and the work to be done in it required a very able, skilful, zealous, courageous workman: such a one was Paul. God calls those to special work whom he either sees or makes fit for it.–I magnify my office. There were those that vilified it, and him because of it. It was because he was the apostle of the Gentiles that the Jews were so outrageous against him (Act 22:21; Act 22:22), and yet he thought never the worse of it, though it set him up as the butt of all the Jewish rage and malice. It is a sign of true love to Jesus Christ to reckon that service and work for him truly honourable which the world looks upon with scorn, as mean and contemptible. The office of the ministry is an office to be magnified. Ministers are ambassadors for Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God, and for their work’s sake are to be esteemed highly in love.–My office; ten diakonian mou—my ministry, my service, not my lordship and dominion. It was not the dignity and power, but the duty and work, of an apostle, that Paul was so much in love with. Now two things he exhorts the Gentiles to, with reference to the rejected Jews:–
[1.] To have a respect for the Jews, notwithstanding, and to desire their conversion. This is intimated in the prospect he gives them of the advantage that would accrue to the church by their conversion, Rom 11:12; Rom 11:15. It would be as life from the dead; and therefore they must not insult and triumph over those poor Jews, but rather pity them, and desire their welfare, and long for the receiving of them in again.
[2.] To take heed to themselves, lest they should stumble and fall, as they Jews had done, v. 17-22. Here observe,
First, The privilege which the Gentiles had by being taken into the church. They were grafted in (v. 17), as a branch of a wild olive into a good olive, which is contrary to the way and custom of the husbandman, who grafts the good olive into the bad; but those that God grafts into the church he finds wild and barren, and good for nothing. Men graft to mend the tree; but God grafts to mend the branch. 1. The church of God is an olive-tree, flourishing and fruitful as an olive (Ps. lii. 8; Hos. xiv. 6), the fruit useful for the honour both of God and man, Judg. ix. 9. 2. Those that are out of the church are as wild olive-trees, not only useless, but what they do produce is sour and unsavoury: Wild by nature, v. 24. This was the state of the poor Gentiles, that wanted church privileges, and in respect of real sanctification; and it is the natural state of every one of us, to be wild by nature. 3. Conversion is the grafting in of wild branches into the good olive. We must be cut off from the old stock, and be brought into union with a new root. 4. Those that are grafted into the good olive-tree partake of the root and fatness of the olive. It is applicable to a saving union with Christ; all that are by a lively faith grafted into Christ partake of him as the branches of the root–receive from his fulness. But it is here spoken of a visible church-membership, from which the Jews were as branches broken off; and so the Gentiles were grafted in, autois—among those that continued, or in the room of those that were broken off. The Gentiles, being grafted into the church, partake of the same privileges that the Jews did, the root and fatness. The olive-tree is the visible church (called so Jer. xi. 16); the root of this tree was Abraham, not the root of communication, so Christ only is the root, but the root of administration, he being the first with whom the covenant was so solemnly made. Now the believing Gentiles partake of this root: he also is ason of Abraham (Luke xix. 9), the blessing of Abraham comes upon the Gentiles (Gal. iii. 14), the same fatness of the olive-tree, the same for substance, special protection, lively oracles, means of salvation, a standing ministry, instituted ordinances; and, among the rest, the visible church-membership of their infant seed, which was part of the fatness of the olive-tree that the Jews had, and cannot be imagined to be denied to the Gentiles.
Secondly, A caution not to abuse these privileges. 1. “Be not proud (v. 18): Boast not against the branches. Do not therefore trample upon the Jews as a reprobate people, nor insult over those that are broken off, much less over those that do continue.” Grace is given, not to make us proud, but to make us thankful. The law of faith excludes all boasting either of ourselves or against others. “Do not say (v. 19): They were broken off that I might be grafted in; that is, do not think that thou didst merit more at the hand of God than they, or didst stand higher in his favour.” “But remember, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. Though thou art grafted in, thou art still but a branch borne by the root; nay, and an engrafted branch, brought into the good olive contrary to nature (v. 24), not free-born, but by an act of grace enfranchised and naturalized. Abraham, the root of the Jewish church, is not beholden to thee; but thou art greatly obliged to him, as the trustee of the covenant and the father of many nations. Therefore, if thou boast, know (this word must be supplied to clear the sense) thou bearest not the root but the root thee.” 2. “Be not secure (v. 20): Be not high-minded, but fear. Be not too confident of your own strength and standing.” A holy fear is an excellent preservative against high-mindedness: happy is the man that thus feareth always. We need not fear but God will be true to his word; all the danger is lest we be false to ours. Let us therefore fear, Heb. iv. 1. The church of Rome now boasts of a patent of perpetual preservation; but the apostle here, in his epistle to that church when she was in her infancy and integrity, enters an express caveat against that boast, and all claims of that kind.–Fear what? “Why fear lest thou commit a forfeiture as they have done, lest thou lose the privileges thou now enjoyest, as they have lost theirs.” The evils that befal others should be warnings to us. Go (saith God to Jerusalem Jer. vii. 12), and see what I did to Shiloh; so now, let all the churches of God go and see what he did to Jerusalem, and what is become of the day of their visitation, that we may hear and fear, and take heed of Jerusalem’s sin. The patent which churches have of their privileges is not for a certain term, nor entailed upon them and their heirs; but it runs as long as they carry themselves well, and no longer. Consider, (1.) “How they were broken off. It was not undeservedly, by an act of absolute sovereignty and prerogative, but because of unbelief.” It seems, then, it is possible for churches that have long stood by faith to fall into such a state of infidelity as may be their ruin. Their unbelief did not only provoke God to cut them off, but they did by this cut themselves off; it was not only the meritorious, but the formal cause of their separation. “Now, thou art liable to the same infirmity and corruption that they fell by.” Further observe, They were natural branches (v. 21), not only interested in Abraham’s covenant, but descending from Abraham’s loins, and so born upon the premises, and thence had a kind of tenant-right: yet, when they sunk into unbelief, God did not spare them. Prescription, long usage, the faithfulness of their ancestors, would not secure them. It was in vain to plead, though they insisted much upon it, that they were Abraham’s seed, Mat 3:9; Joh 8:33. It is true they were the husbandmen to whom the vineyard was first let out; but, when they forfeited it, it was justly taken from them, Mat 21:41; Mat 21:43. This is called here severity, v. 22. God laid righteousness to the line and judgment to the plummet, and dealt with them according to their sins. Severity is a word that sounds harshly; and I do not remember that it is any where else in scripture ascribed to God; and it is here applied to the unchurching of the Jews. God is most severe towards those that have been in profession nearest to him, if they rebel against him, Amos iii. 2. Patience and privileges abused turn to the greatest wrath. Of all judgments, spiritual judgments are the sorest; for of these he is here speaking, v. 8. (2.) “How thou standest, thou that art engrafted in.” He speaks to the Gentile churches in general, though perhaps tacitly reflecting on some particular person, who might have expressed some such pride and triumph in the Jews’ rejection. “Consider then,” [1.] “By what means thou standest: By faith, which is a depending grace, and fetches in strength from heaven. Thou dost not stand in any strength of thy own, of which thou mightest be confident: thou art no more than the free grace of God makes thee, and his grace is his own, which he gives or withholds at pleasure. That which ruined them was unbelief, and by faith thou standest; therefore thou hast no faster hold than they had, thou standest on no firmer foundation than they did.” [2.] “On what terms (v. 22): Towards thee goodness, if thou continue in his goodness, that is, continue in a dependence upon and compliance with the free grace of God, the want of which it was that ruined the Jews–if thou be careful to keep up thine interest in the divine favour, by being continually careful to please God and fearful of offending him.” The sum of our duty, the condition of our happiness, is to keep ourselves in the love of God. Fear the Lord and his goodness. Hos. iii. 5.
III. Another thing that qualified this doctrine of the Jews’ rejection is that, though for the present they are cast off, yet the rejection is not final; but, when the fulness of time is come, they will be taken in again. They are not cast off for ever, but mercy is remembered in the midst of wrath. Let us observe,
1. How this conversion of the Jews is here described. (1.) It is said to be their fulness (v. 12), that is, the addition of them to the church, the filling up again of that place which became vacant by their rejection. This would be the enriching of the world (that is, the church in the world) with a great deal of light and strength and beauty. (2.) It is called the receiving of them. The conversion of a soul is the receiving of that soul, so the conversion of a nation. They shall be received into favour, into the church, into the love of Christ, whose arms are stretched out for the receiving of all those that will come to him. And this will be as life from the dead–so strange and surprising, and yet withal so welcome and acceptable. The conversion of the Jews will bring great joy to the church. See Luke xv. 32, He was dead, and is alive; and therefore it was meet we should make merry and be glad. (3.) It is called the grafting of them in again (v. 23), into the church, from which they had been broken off. That which is grafted in receives sap and virtue from the root; so does a soul that is truly grafted into the church receive life, and strength, and grace from Christ the quickening root. They shall be grafted into their own olive-tree (v. 24); that is, into the church of which they had formerly been the most eminent and conspicuous members, to retrieve those privileges of visible church-membership which they had so long enjoyed, but have now sinned away and forfeited by their unbelief. (4.) It is called the saving of all Israel, v. 26. True conversion may well be called salvation; it is salvation begun. See Acts ii. 47. The adding of them to the church is the saving of them: tous sozomenous, in the present tense, are saved. When conversion-work goes on, salvation-work goes on.
2. What it is grounded upon, and what reason we have to look for it.
(1.) Because of the holiness of the first-fruits and the root, v. 16. Some by the first-fruits understand those of the Jews that were already converted to the faith of Christ and received into the church, who were as the first-fruits dedicated to God, as earnests of a more plentiful and sanctified harvest. A good beginning promises a good ending. Why may we not suppose that others may be savingly wrought upon as well as those who are already brought in? Others by the first-fruits understand the same with the root, namely, the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, from whom the Jews descended, and with whom, as the prime trustees, the covenant was deposited: and so they were the root of the Jews, not only as a people, but as a church. Now, if they were holy, which is not meant so much of inherent as of federal holiness–if they were in the church and in the covenant–then we have reason to conclude that God hath a kindness for the lump–the body of that people; and for the branches–the particular members of it. The Jews are in a sense a holy nation (Exod. xix. 6), being descended from holy parents. Now it cannot be imagined that such a holy nation should be totally and finally cast off. This proves that the seed of believers, as such, are within the pale of the visible church, and within the verge of the covenant, till they do, by their unbelief, throw themselves out; for, if the root be holy, so are the branches. Though real qualifications are not propagated, yet relative privileges are. Though a wise man does not beget a wise man, yet a free man begets a free man. Though grace does not run in the blood, yet external privileges do (till they are forfeited), even to a thousand generations. Look how they will answer it another day that cut off the entail, by turning the seed of the faithful out of the church, and so not allowing the blessing of Abraham to come upon the Gentiles. The Jewish branches are reckoned holy, because the root was so. This is expressed more plainly (v. 28): They are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. In this love to the fathers the first foundation of their church-state was laid (Deut. iv. 37): Because he loved they fathers, therefore he chose their seed after them. And the same love would revive their privileges, for still the ancient loving-kindness is remembered; they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. It is God’s usual method of grace. Kindness to the children for the father’s sake is therefore called the kindness of God,2Sa 9:3; 2Sa 9:7. Though, as concerning the gospel (namely, in the present dispensation of it), they are enemies to it for your sakes, that is, for the sake of the Gentiles, against whom they have such an antipathy; yet, when God’s time shall come, this will wear off, and God’s love to their fathers will be remembered. See a promise that points at this, Lev. xxvi. 42. The iniquity of the fathers is visited but to the third and fourth generation; but there is mercy kept for thousands. Many fare the better for the sake of their godly ancestors. It is upon this account that the church is called their own olive-tree. Long it had been their own peculiar, which is some encouragement to us to hope that there may be room for them in it again, for old acquaintance-sake. That which hath been may be again. Though particular persons and generations wear off in unbelief, yet there having been a national church-membership, though for the present suspended, we may expect that it will be revived.
(2.) Because of the power of God (v. 23): God is able to graft them in again. The conversion of souls is a work of almighty power; and when they seem most hardened, and blinded, and obstinate, our comfort is that God is able to work a change, able to graft those in that have been long cast out and withered. When the house is kept by the strong man armed, with all his force, yet God is stronger than he, and is able to dispossess him. The condition of their restoration is faith: If they abide not still in unbelief. So that nothing is to be done but to remove that unbelief that is the great obstacle; and God is able to take that away, though nothing less than an almighty power will do it, the same power that raised up Christ from the dead, Eph 1:19; Eph 1:29. Otherwise, can these dry bones live?
(3.) Because of the grace of God manifested to the Gentiles. Those that have themselves experienced the grace of God, preventing, distinguishing grace, may thence take encouragement to hope well concerning others. This is his argument (v. 24): “If thou wast grafted into a good olive, that was wild by nature, much more shall these that were the natural branches, and may therefore be presumed somewhat nearer to the divine acceptance.” This is a suggestion very proper to check the insolence of those Gentile Christians that looked with disdain and triumph upon the condition of the rejected Jews, and trampled upon them; as if he had said, “Their condition, bad as it is, is not so bad as yours was before your conversion; and therefore why may it not be made as good as yours is?” This is his argument (Rom 11:30; Rom 11:31): As you in times past have not, c. It is good for those that have found mercy with God to be often thinking what they were in time past, and how they obtained that mercy. This would help to soften our censures of those that still continue in unbelief, and quicken our prayers for them. He argues further from the occasion of the Gentiles’ call, that is, the unbelief of the Jews thence it took rise: “You have obtained mercy through their unbelief; much more shall they obtain mercy through your mercy. If the putting out of their candle was the lighting of yours, by that power of God which brings good out of evil, much more shall the continued light of your candle, when God’s time shall come, be a means of lighting theirs again.” “That through your mercy they might obtain mercy, that is, that they may be beholden to you, as you have been to them.” He takes it for granted that the believing Gentiles would do their utmost endeavour to work upon the Jews–that, when God had persuaded Japhet, Japhet would be labouring to persuade Shem. True grace hates monopolies. Those that have found mercy themselves should endeavour that through their mercy others also may obtain mercy.
(4.) Because of the promises and prophecies of the Old Testament, which point at this. He quotes a very remarkable one, Rom 11:26; Isa 59:20; Isa 59:21. Where we may observe, [1.] The coming of Christ promised: There shall come out of Zion the deliverer. Jesus Christ is the great deliverer, which supposes mankind in a state of misery and danger. In Isaiah it is, the Redeemer shall come to Zion. There he is called the Redeemer; here the deliverer; he delivers in a way of redemption, by a price. There he is said to come to Zion, because when the prophet prophesied he was yet to come into the world, and Zion was his first head-quarters. Thither he came, there he took up his residence: but, when the apostle wrote this, he had come, he had been in Zion; and he is speaking of the fruits of his appearing, which shall come out of Zion; thence, as from the spring, issued forth those streams of living water which in the everlasting gospel watered the nations. Out of Zion went forth the law, Isa. ii. 3. Compare Luke xxiv. 47. [2.] The end and purpose of this coming: He shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob. Christ’s errand into the world was to turn away ungodliness, to turn away the guilt by the purchase of pardoning mercy, and to turn away the power by the pouring out of renewing grace, to save his people from their sins (Matt. i. 21), to separate between us and our sins, that iniquity might not be our ruin, and that it might not be our ruler. Especially to turn it away from Jacob, which is that for the sake of which he quotes the text, as a proof of the great kindness God intended for the seed of Jacob. What greater kindness could he do them than to turn away ungodliness from them, to take away that which comes between them and all happiness, take away sin, and then make way for all good? This is the blessing that Christ was sent to bestow upon the world, and to tender it to the Jews in the first place (Acts iii. 26), to turn people from their iniquities. In Isaiah it is, The Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto those that turn from transgression in Jacob, which shown who in Zion were to have a share in and to reap benefit by the deliverance promised, those and those only that leave their sins and turn to God; to them Christ comes as a Redeemer, but as an avenger to those that persist in impenitence. See Deu 30:2; Deu 30:3. Those that turn from sin will be owned as the true citizens of Zion (Eph. ii. 19), the right Jacob, Psa 24:4; Psa 24:6. Putting both these readings together, we learn that none have an interest in Christ but those that turn from their sins, nor can any turn from their sins but by the strength of the grace of Christ.–For this is my covenant with them–this, that the deliverer shall come to them–this, that my Spirit shall not depart from them, as it follows, Isa. lix. 21. God’s gracious intentions concerning Israel were made the matter of a covenant, which the God that cannot lie could not but be true and faithful to. They were the children of the covenant, Acts iii. 25. The apostle adds, When I shall take away their sins, which some think refers to Isa. xxvii. 9, or only to the foregoing words, to turn away ungodliness. Pardon of sin is laid as the foundation of all the blessings of the new covenant (Heb. viii. 12): For I will be merciful. Now from all this he infers that certainly God had great mercy in store for that people, something answerable to the extent of these rich promises: and he proves his inference (v. 29) by this truth: For the gifts and callings of God are without repentance. Repentance is sometimes taken for a change of mind, and so God never repents, for he is in one mind and who can turn him? Sometimes for a change of way, and that is here understood, intimating the constancy and unchangeableness of that love of God which is founded in election. Those gifts and callings are immutable; whom he so loves, he loves to the end. We find God repenting that he had given man a being (Gen. vi. 6, It repented the Lord that he had made man), and repenting that he had given a man honour and power (1 Sam. xv. 11, It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king); but we never find God repenting that he had given a man grace, or effectually called him; those gifts and callings are without repentance.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
I say then ( ). As in verse 11. looks back to 9:16-33 and 10:19-21.
Did God cast off? ( ?). An indignant negative answer is called for by and emphasized by (God forbid). Paul refers to the promise in the O.T. made three times: 1Sam 12:22; Ps 94:14 (Ps 93:14 LXX); Ps 94:4. First aorist middle indicative (without augment) of , to push away, to repel, middle, to push away from one as in Ac 7:27.
For I also ( ). Proof that not all the Jews have rejected Christ. See Php 3:5 for more of Paul’s pedigree.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
I say then [ ] . Then introduces the question as an inference from the whole previous discussion, especially vers. 19 – 21.
Hath God cast away [ ] . A negative answer required. “Surely God has not, has He?” The aorist tense points to a definite act. Hence Rev., better, did God cast off. The verb means literally to thrust or shove. Thus Homer, of Sisyphus pushing his stone before him (” Odyssey, “11, 596). Oedipus says :” I charge you that no one shelter or speak to that murderer, but that all thrust him [] from their homes “(” Oedipus Tyrannus,” 241).
People [] . See on 1Pe 2:9; Act 13:17.
An Israelite, etc. See on Phi 3:5. Paul adduces his own case first, to show that God has not rejected His people en masse. An Israelite of pure descent, he is, nevertheless a true believer.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
ALL ISRAEL IS NOT ABANDONED V. 1-7
1) I say therefore,” (lego oun) “Therefore I logically say what I say;” I conclude – Paul had shown four things 1) that God had not pledged eternal life unconditionally to all Abraham’s seed, 2) that God was sovereign in mercy grants, 3) that the Old Dispensation was for the purpose of preparing for the later, and that 4) Faith of the Gentiles and unbelief of the Jews was foretold in the Old Testament.
2) “Hath God cast away his people?” (me aposato ho theos ton laon autou) “God has not set aside his people, has he?” The casting off of “his people,” the Jews, it has been maintained, and is to be further shown, is not to be forever. It is a long chastening for them as God’s unfaithful wife, not an eternal abandonment, Jer 3:1-14; Amo 9:8-9. As an adulterous wife, natural Israel now has a bill of divorcement.
3) “God forbid,” (me genaito) May it not be so assumed;” God will not cast off or abandon his chosen nation forever, Psa 94:14, though he did and has cut them off for a time of national chastisement, among the nations, as he warned them in their law, Deu 28:15-68.
4) “For I am an Israelite,” (kai gar ego Israelites eimi) “For even I am an Israelite,” both nationally and spiritually, a true Israelite, which means “man of God;” If he cut off, even all national Israel forever, he would even cut me off, Paul is asserting. He is an Israelite, a man of God by faith in Jesus Christ, Rom 4:16.
5) “Of the seed of Abraham,” (ek spermatos Abraam) “Out of the natural seedline of Abraham”; as such he had the future hope of the restoration of national Israel, as well as a national Jewish heritage. In this he took Holy pride and expressed it, 2Co 11:22; Act 26:4-5.
6) “Of the tribe of Benjamin,” (phules Beniamin) “Of the tribe (file) of Benjamin,” circumcised, marked, and identified as an Israelite of the stock of Israel, tribe of Benjamin, and an Hebrew of the Hebrews, of national descent, Php_3:5; Act 23:1-6.
Tho Israel as a nation was unfaithful to God he abides faithful to his oft-repeated promises that they should possess a fixed land-grant territory in peace and he would send His Son to reign over them. That Israel has not been cut off or set aside forever is the theme of this chapter: Gen 15:18; Gen 17:7-8; Luk 1:32-33.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
1. I say then, etc. What he has hitherto said of the blindness and obstinacy of the Jews, might seem to import that Christ at his coming had transferred elsewhere the promises of God, and deprived the Jews of every hope of salvation. This objection is what he anticipates in this passage, and he so modifies what he had previously said respecting the repudiation of the Jews, that no one might think that the covenant formerly made with Abraham is now abrogated, or that God had so forgotten it that the Jews were now so entirely alienated from his kingdom, as the Gentiles were before the coming of Christ. All this he denies, and he will presently show that it is altogether false. But the question is not whether God had justly or unjustly rejected the people; for it was proved in the last chapter that when the people, through false zeal, had rejected the righteousness of God, they suffered a just punishment for their presumption, were deservedly blinded, and were at last cut off from the covenant.
The reason then for their rejection is not now under consideration; but the dispute is concerning another thing, which is this, That though they deserved such a punishment from God, whether yet the covenant which God made formerly with the fathers was abolished. That it should fail through any perfidiousness of men, was wholly unreasonable; for Paul holds this as a fixed principle, that since adoption is gratuitous and based on God alone and not on men, it stands firm and inviolable, howsoever great the unfaithfulness of men may be, which may tend to abolish it. It was necessary that this knot should be untied, lest the truth and election of God should be thought to be dependent on the worthiness of men.
For I am also an Israelite, etc. Before he proceeds to the subject, he proves, in passing, by his own example, how unreasonable it was to think that the nation was utterly forsaken by God; for he himself was in his origin an Israelite, not a proselyte, or one lately introduced into the commonwealth of Israel. As then he was justly deemed to be one of God’s special servants, it was an evidence that God’s favor rested on Israel. He then assumes the conclusion as proved, which yet he will hereafter explain in a satisfactory manner.
That in addition to the title of an Israelite, he called himself the seed of Abraham, and mentioned also his own tribe; this he did that he might be counted a genuine Israelite, and he did the same in his Epistle to the Philippians, Phi 3:4. But what some think, that it was done to commend God’s mercy, inasmuch as Paul sprung from that tribe which had been almost destroyed, seems forced and far-fetched.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL NOTES
Rom. 11:1.; Did God cast off His own people? Observe the aorist. When God accepted a universal Church from all nations in Christ, did He by so doing cast off His own people the Jews? God forbid! God did not cast off the Jewish nation when He admitted all nations to His Church, for I, who address you in the name of Christ, am a Jew (Wordsworth). There may be a general falling away seemingly, and yet a large number remain faithful. Elijah did not see and know all. We may mistake.
Rom. 11:4.The reason why the Septuagint sometimes used the feminine, and why St. Paul adopts it here, appears to be because not only a heathen god but a goddess also was worshipped under the name of Baal, and because by this variety of gender the reader is reminded that there was no principle of unity in the heathen worship, and thus the vanity of the worship itself is declared (Wordsworth). , a response from God, oracle.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Rom. 11:1-5
The divine response to the human complaint.St. Paul argues from the known to the unknown. A master of the deductive process. God has not cast away His people; for I am saved who am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. Here is definiteness which precludes the idea of forgery; here is an appeal to the national instinct. God has not cast away His people, for Gods act and word show that His love is unchangeable. Paul, an Israelite, is saved. Elias is comforted by the assurance that a remnant is always preserved by God.
I. A lonely mans complaint.Great men stand alone. By material means we may reach to physical heights; but we cannot climb to those heights where intellectual and moral giants dwell. We cannot always understand their lofty motives and moral purposes. Elijah was a man of the wilderness; he was lonely from necessity, and this loneliness rendered him despondent. What a mournful wail comes from the depths of his stern nature! Lord, they have killed Thy prophets, etc.
1. Spiritual workers have their times of trial. All workers have their difficulties; spiritual workers have their special difficulties. Elijahs life seemed to be spent in battling with difficulties. His complaint was that his moral work did not succeed. Elijah, in the sorrow of his heart, in the depression that overtook him on account of seeming failure, claims our sympathies.
2. Spiritual workers have troubles of their own making. Elijah had ground for complaint; but things were not so bad as they appeared. Blessed are the hopeful! But do not let popular preachers rave against the unpopular and despondent Elijahs. Our helpful sympathies should go out towards the lonely souls weeping under the juniper trees and craving for death.
3. Spiritual workers must ask, What saith the answer of God? They must look to God and away from themselves. The wise mans words are true: He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool. We are shortsighted; we take narrow views; we think things are going wrong if they are not moving according to our notions. Gods ways are above ours; His remnants are mightier and more glorious than human majorities.
II. A merciful Gods response.The answer of God came sweetly to Elijah in the time of his trouble. The richness and sweetness of the divine voice are noted in times of trouble; the silence and darkness of troubles night are cheered by the eternal music which is lost to the soul in the bright day of prosperity. God speaks to the souls of His faithful ones in their despondency. The words give peace and encouragement; they teach right views of life. The answers of God should hush the complaints of men. The answer of God makes known:
1. The greatness of the divine reserve force. When God answers out of material nature, we are astonished at the greatness of the reserve force. Human blindness says not one is left: Omniscience shows seven thousand. Complainers say nature is being exhausted: Gods answer is the continued richness of nature and the opening out of fresh fields of supply. Complainers say monotheism is dead: Gods answer is the muster-roll of seven thousand. Complainers say Protestantism is dying, that semi-popish churches are most crowded: Gods answer isI have a reserve force; the truth shall prevail, falsehood must work to its own unmasking, and the heart of civilisation is this day true to the eternal principles of right. Let us not wait under our juniper trees, but go forth and fight the prophets of Baal.
2. The faithful ones are hidden. These seven thousand men hidden from the gaze even of a good man like Elijah. Gods children are often as hidden ones. Their worth as well as their number is hiddencomparable to fine gold, but esteemed as earthen pitchers. Call to remembrance the former times when Gods children were hidden in deserts, in mountains, in dens and caves of the earth. Let us be thankful to God for our times; let us use our privileges; let us unfurl the banner of the truth; let us maintain our spiritual freedom.
3. The remnant which is to be considered. Elijah has his descendants. They are good mathematicians, but poor reckoners; they count easily; they are good at addition, subtraction, and multiplication. They do not reckon up the remnant; God would have us reckon up the remnant. Noah was a remnant, but from him came mighty peoples. The Jews were a remnant, but what influence they have exerted! The followers of the Crucified were only a remnant, but they soon overtopped the worlds majorities. Our reformers were only as a remnant, and yet they filled England with light. There may be a remnant still. We vote with majorities to-day; but it might be safer to side with the remnant left according to the election of grace. Reckon the remnant; measure its moral force; estimate its spiritual power; see if it is being impelled by divine ideas. Is it a remnant according to the election of grace? We for our part are not afraid of the remnants when they are on the side of the evil: the remnants on the side of the good must be omnipotent. If the remnant have in it a Paul and a Peter, it shall outlive all the majorities of time.
The practical question: If God were to tell some modern Elijah, Yet I have reserved unto Myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal, would God reckon us among the noble band? Do we bow the knee to our own images? Are we guilty of modern idolatry? Are we bowing to the images of the nineteenth-century Baals? Or are we bowing at the footstool of the Creator? Do we acknowledge His guidance in the affairs of life? Do we trust Him in all darknesses? Can we for Him stand alone against a multitude of false prophets?
Rom. 11:3. Divine reservation.The Mohammedan saying quoted by Tholuck is interesting, that God never allows the world to be without a remainder of seventy righteous people, for whose sake He preserves it. This thought is encouraging to all despondent Elijahs. We cannot see or know all. This may be a necessary discipline for our faith. Ignorance arises from our limitation, and in this state of limitation we must walk by faith and not by sight. And faith will lead us to lay hold of the wisdom, power, and love of God. Holding by these, we shall not be without light in the darkest night, not be without hope even in our moments of despondency; and in spite of despondency we shall continue in the pathway of faithful adhesion to duty. This is one of the pleasing and relieving features in Elijahs character, that though despondent and almost despairing he was not recreant to the voice of duty. He stood alone against the prophets of Baal. Alone, yet not alone, for God was with him. Alone, yet not alone, for he was unknowingly supported, as we may well believe, by the prayers and sympathies of some, if not all, of the seven thousand who had not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. We may say that it would have looked better of them if they had come forth from their hiding-places and had rallied round Elijah in the day of battle. But we do not know all, and must not be too ready to blame. Perhaps after all they helped very effectually by their secret prayers, by their silent but forceful sympathies. Ah, we know not how far these may reach! How little true faith we have in the power of prayer and in the help of sympathy! If it be at all true that the world is preserved for the sake of the righteous people, then we may rightly suppose that the influence of the righteous is far-reaching. An invisible host helped Elijah in the day of conflict. Shall we not also believe that we are compassed about with a great cloud of witnesses? Let the thought of isolation be destroyed by the thought of Gods hosts in reserve. He has His purposes; let us believe that they are wise and good.
I. Gods reservations are perfect.The number seven is the perfect number in the sacred writings, and may here be fittingly employed to indicate the perfection of the divine reservation. God has reserved to Himself seven thousanda perfect host to set forth the perfection of the divine plan and the divine purposes. Whether the number stated be either a literal or an allegorical assertion, we may rightly make use of its allegorical teaching. It opens out before our minds the perfection of the divine reservations. If God be perfect in wisdom, power, and goodness, then we may rest assured that perfection marks and attends all the steps of His divine and mysterious processes. It is the glory of God to conceal a thing. The glory of His perfection is made known by His reservations as well as by His revelations. In fact, there cannot be perfection without concealment and reservation. The great mind cannot reveal itself to the shallow soul; yea, the great mind cannot reveal itself to kindred souls. The mind is greater than its own revelations. It agonises with mighty thoughts which it cannot express. And so the perfect God cannot reveal Himself to the imperfect creature. God has no limit in mastering His own thought movements; but surely there is no irreverence in saying that God is limited in this particular, that His perfection cannot be communicated to our imperfection. The perfection of His nature implies and indicates the perfection of His plan. His reserve forces speak of the perfection of His restraining power. Imperfect man does not indulge himself in reserve forces. He has no self-restraint. If he have seven thousand things or people at his disposal, he wishes to show them on his parade ground. Even when self-interest tells him not to make a display of his wealth, he breaks through all considerations of a prudential character, and lets the world into his secret. The child has no secrets; its mind is too small and open. The man-child, through the imperfection and vanity of his nature, is often hurrying to display his wealth. God is great and perfect, and His revelations are only the faint indications of the infinite nature of His resources. Elijah is shown, and he was in himself a host. But Elijah speaks to us of Gods seven thousand.
II. Gods reservations cannot be either seen or counted.For aught we know to the contrary, Elijah was keen-eyed enoughcertainly he possessed the vision of the seer. He could see into some of the mysteries of the infinite movements. He was one of the characters in the olden time who were before their age, and saw what other men did not see; and yet he had no knowledge of the seven thousand hidden away in the recesses of the divine keeping. What blindness of vision! Seven thousand righteous ones in that early period of the worlds history, when the population could not be very extensive, and yet Elijah had not the pleasure of their acquaintance. A man might be pardoned if he lived in London and did not know that there were seven thousand righteous amongst its teeming millions; and yet what shall be said of Elijah, who thought that he stood alone, and was ignorant of a mighty but unseen army? But we are often possessed of the Elijah-like blindness. How little we know! How blear-eyed is our vision! The microscope does not reveal to us the laws and methods by which the atom is ruled and guided. There are mysterious pathways far beyond the range of the best-constructed telescope. Gods reserve forces can be neither seen nor counted. We talk very glibly of seven thousand, but we fail to grasp the meaning. The numbers of God are not recorded in human mathematical treatises, and vast beyond the mathematicians power of computation. Lo, these are part of the divine ways! How little is known of them! We see and hear the Elijahs. Gods seven thousand move in solemn and wondrous silence. Elijahs name is written on the page of the worlds greatest book; Elijahs fame and greatness are sounded in the worlds ear. We do not know the name of one of those seven thousand; they have no earthly fame. God is so great and has so much patience that He can keep in reserve the large number of seven thousand. What are we when God can hold back so many? Let us learn our littleness and Gods greatness; let us pray for divine light and help.
III. Gods reservations are for moral purposes.He rescues seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. God permits the existence of the Baal worshippers; He looks after and promotes the existence of the righteous remnant. But how is it when the righteous are killed? How is it when the prophets of the Lord are killed by the wicked Jezebels? He has still a righteous remnant of a hundred prophets hidden away by fifty in a cave. The death of the other prophets will create mantles of greater consecration for the living prophets. God only permits a good man to die when that good mans death will be more productive than his life. The slaughtered prophets speak from their tombs of truth and righteousness. Seven thousand righteousa sweet, saving, wholesome remnant according to the election of grace. Seven thousand good men and women as seed corn to fill the world with the golden grain of divine truth! The seven thousand are gone, and have left no name behind; but their righteous testimony is not destroyed; their saving influence floats along the stream of time. They are not dead. A good man can never die. The voice of goodness is eternal. The helpful sympathy and influence of the seven thousand have cheered and strengthened many Elijahs sorrowing over the failure of their life-work. Failure? There is no failure with God; there can be no failure in Gods work. Selfishness speaks of failure. Benevolent faith says we cannot fail. Gods kingdom must be established in the earth.
Rom. 11:6. The remnant saved owes all to divine grace.The gospel is a way of salvation by free, unmerited favour, as opposed to all self-righteousness. It may be humiliating to be able to contribute nothing to our own salvation, but to have to accept it full and free from a risen Lord; yet salvation through humiliation is better, surely, than being lost. Grace, says Dr. R. W. Hamilton, is free favour; it can be related to no right and contained in no law. It is extrajudicial: whenever bestowed, it depends upon the mere will of him who exercises it, or upon, what is the same thing, his voluntary pledge and agreement. If this latter be withdrawn, there may be a forfeiture of integrity and fidelity, but it is only so far unjust to those deprived of it that a claim arose out of it; but no injustice accrues to them, considered in their original circumstances. A simple test of grace is presented by the following inquiries: Ought it to be exercised? Can it be righteously withheld? If we affirm the one, if we deny the other, it may be obligation, debt, reasonit cannot be grace, for this principle never owes itself to its object; and in not showing it, the person still is just. If there be any necessity for it, save that of demerit and its misery, it is no more grace. By keeping the meaning of the term steadily in view, then, it will be seen that no injustice is done any who decline salvation by free grace and insist on some form of self-righteousness. For the latter is pure favouritism, and the former can alone be adopted by a God who is no respecter of persons.R. M. E., in Pulpit Commentary.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Rom. 11:1-5
The words denote merely that Paul was a descendant of Abraham.For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. Interpreters have conceived various reasons for the mention of the tribe to which the apostle belonged. But there seems to be no other reason for it but that it was customary with the Jews, in stating their descent from the patriarchs, to mention the tribe through which their descent was traced. The words denote merely that the apostle was a descendant of Abraham, entitled to all the privileges of an Israelite; and the inference which he means his countrymen to deduce from them is, that, by believing in Christ, he is a member of the Church of God as it now exists under the Christian dispensation. He is therefore an instance of the continued favour of God to all of His ancient people who believe the gospel, and an example to prove that all of them are not rejected. He then solemnly repeats his affirmation that God hath not totally rejected the Israelites. There is no reason to think that this is meant to represent the exact number of the faithful worshippers of God in Israel at that period. The number mentioned seems rather intended to denote an indefinite and very considerable number. This answer furnishes a warning against those gloomy views of human nature which lead some pious men to think that, because wickedness seems to them to abound, there are few sincere worshippers of God; and especially against that uncharitable spirit which leads the zealot to presume that none but those who concur in his views of religion can expect to enjoy the favour of Heaven.Ritchie.
The Lords people a chosen remnant.It is the part both of wisdom and of love to guard our statements against misconception. We are of necessity constrained sometimes to state truth in strong and general terms; but in all such cases it becomes us to anticipate and to remove, as much as in us lies, all occasion for misapprehension or mistake; we should make everything so clear that the ignorant should have nothing to ask, the captious nothing to object. St. Paul was ever alive to this duty; he foresaw and answered every objection that could be urged against the truths he maintained. He had in the preceding chapter spoken of the Gentiles as adopted into Gods family, whilst the Jews, for their obstinate disobedience, were cast off. Hence it might have been supposed that God had cast off His people altogether: but he tells them that this was not the case; for that he himself, though a Jew, was a partaker of all the blessings of salvation; and that as in the days of Elijah there were among the Jews more faithful servants of Jehovah than was supposed, so it was at that timethere was a remnant, and a considerable remnant too, according to the election of grace. We will
I. Show that Gods people are a chosen remnant.The Lord has at this day a remnant of chosen people. In every age of the world there have been some faithful worshippers of Jehovah. Even in the antediluvian world, when all flesh had so corrupted their way that God determined to destroy them utterly, there was one pious man who boldly protested against the reigning abominations, and with his family was saved from the universal deluge. Abraham, Melchizedek, and Lot were also rare instances of piety in a degenerate age, as were also Job and his little band of friends. In Israel too, even under the impious and tyrannic reign of Ahab, there was an Elijah who was a bold and faithful witness for his God. Thus at this day also there are some who serve their God with fidelity and zeal. Neither the example of the multitude nor the menaces of zealots can induce them to bow down to Baal, or to walk after the course of a corrupt world. They are not of the world, even as Christ was not of the world; nor will they conform to it in its spirit and conduct; they will have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but they will rather reprove them. To serve, to enjoy, to glorify, the Lord Jesus Christ is all their desire; and they cleave unto Him with full purpose of heart. They are, however, but a remnant. We are persuaded that there are many Nicodemuses and Nathanaels at present in the shade who yet in due time will come forth to light and be burning and shining lights in their day and generation. There may be at this day thousands in the world who in the sight of God are faithful and beloved, though they have not at present any name or place in the Church of Christ. Yet, after all, in comparison of the careless and ungodly world, they will be found a small remnant, a little flock. And for their distinguished privileges they are altogether indebted to the love of God. We should not state these things in a crude and rash way. We know they are deeply mysterious; and we are most anxious to
II. Guard this doctine against abuse.Much is this doctrine hated; much, too, is it abused; but however hated, or however abused, it is the truth of God, and therefore must be maintained. Let none, however, pervert it, or draw false conclusions from it. Let none say: If this doctrine be true, no blame attaches to me. If this doctrine be true, I may sit still till God shall come and help me. If this doctrine be true, I am in no danger whatever I may do. That no solid objection lies against this doctrine will appear whilst we
III. Suggest the proper improvement of it.It should encourage all to seek for mercy at Gods hands, it should fill all who are the subjects of it with the deepest humility, and it should stimulate them also to universal holiness.Simeon.
ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 11
Rom. 11:1-5. Brave the perils of ridicule.As the crackling of thorns under a pot, so is the laughter of a fool, and he is a poor invertebrate creature who allows himself to be laughed down when he attempts to stick to his principles and tries to do what he believes to be right. Learn from the earliest days, says Sidney Smith, to inure your principles against the perils of ridicule; you can no more exercise your reason if you live in the constant dread of laughter, than you can enjoy your life if you are in constant terror of death. No coward is greater than he who dares not to be wise because fools will laugh at him. Elijah bore more than ridicule: he exposed himself to death.
Rom. 11:4-5. Salvation by grace.Some are all their days laying the foundation, and are never able to build upon it to any comfort to themselves or usefulness to others; and the reason is, because they will be mixing with the foundation-stones that are only fit for the building. They will be bringing their obedience, duties, mortification of sin, and the like unto the foundation. These are precious stones to build with, but unmeet to be first laid to bear upon them the whole weight of the building. The foundation is to be laid in mere grace, mercy, pardon in the blood of Christ; this the soul is to accept of and to rest in merely as it is grace, without the consideration of anything in itself, but that it is sinful and obnoxious to ruin. This it finds a difficulty in, and would gladly have something of its own to mix with it; it cannot tell how to fix these foundation-stones without some cement of its own endeavours and duty, and because these things will not mix they spend fruitless efforts about all their days. But if the foundation be of grace, it is not at all of works, otherwise grace is no more grace. If anything of our own be mixed with grace in this matter, it utterly destroys the nature of grace, which if it be not alone, it is not at all.Biblical Museum.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Text
Rom. 11:1-10. I say then, Did God cast off his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. Rom. 11:2 God did not cast off his people which he foreknew. Or know ye not what the scripture saith of Elijah? how he pleadeth with God against Israel: Rom. 11:3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, they have digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. Rom. 11:4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have left for myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to Baal. Rom. 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. Rom. 11:6 But if it is by grace, it is no more of works: Otherwise grace is no more grace. Rom. 11:7 What then? That which Israel seeketh for, that he obtained not; but the election obtained it, and the rest were hardened: Rom. 11:8 according as it is written, God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear, unto this very day. Rom. 11:9 And David saith,
Let their table be made a snare, and a trap,
And a stumblingblock, and a recompense unto them:
Rom. 11:10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see,
And bow thou down their back always.
REALIZING ROMANS, Rom. 11:1-10
465.
The question of the first verse is not easy to understand. God has cast off his people. The last chapter demonstrated that. Why, then, does Paul ask the question here? Note Pauls answer.
466.
Paul was an Israelite, but was not cast off. What should this teach the Jews?
467.
In what sense could we say God has not cast off his people?
468.
How did the foreknowledge of God enter into his decision not to reject Israel entirely?
469.
The attitude of Elijah was the same as someone elses. Who was it?
470.
The remnant according to the election of grace refers to whom?
471.
Who does the voting in this election?
472.
The election of those among Israel was on a basis of Gods choice and their faith. Explain how this shows the grace of God.
473.
Verse seven is most difficult of understanding until it is related to the actual circumstances of the obtaining and rejecting of salvation by the Jews. Refer to an example in the book of Acts and explain.
474.
Remember now as you attempt to understand Rom. 11:8-10 the example you have just worked out. The spirit of stupor, eyes that should not see, etc., are caused by God, but in what manner?
475.
As best you can, explain the figure David uses. (Rom. 11:9-10)
Paraphrase
Rom. 11:1-10. I ask then, Do you from these prophecies infer that God hath cast off his people for ever? By no means, For even I am one of the ancient people of God, a descendant of Abraham, and sprung of the tribe of Benjamin: Yet I am not cast off; I am still one of Gods people, by believing in Christ.
Rom. 11:2 God hath at no time cast off the whole of the Jewish nation whom he formerly chose. In the greatest national defections, there were always some who continued faithful to God. Know ye not what the scripture saith was spoken to Elijah, when he complained to God against the Israelites as having all followed idols, saying,
Rom. 11:3 Lord, The children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword, and I, even I only, am left, and they seek my life to take it away. 1Ki. 19:10.
Rom. 11:4 Elijah imagined that the whole nation had been guilty of idolatry. But what saith the answer of God to him? I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto Baal; 1Ki. 19:18.
Rom. 11:5 So then, even at this present time, there is a remnant, who, by believing on Jesus, continue to be the people of God still, according to an election by favor.
Rom. 11:6 And if this election to be the church of God is by favor, it cannot have happened on account of works performed, otherwise favor is no more favor: but if it be on account of works meriting it, there is no more favor in it, otherwise work is no more work: it merits nothing.
Rom. 11:7 What then is the sum of my discourse? Why this: The honor of continuing to be the people of God, which the Jewish nation earnestly seeketh, that it hath not obtained, having rejected Jesus; but the elected remnant hath obtained that honor, and the rest are blinded.
Rom. 11:8 Blindness hath ever been the disease of the Jews, as appears from what is written: The Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep.Hear ye indeed, but understand not; see ye indeed, but perceive not; which stupidity and blindness hath continued with the Jews to this present day.
Rom. 11:9 And to show the causes and consequences of that spiritual blindness, David saith of Messiahs enemies, Let their table become a snare to them, and that which should have been for their welfare, let it become a trap, (Psa. 69:22.), and a stumbling-block, and a punishment to them.
Rom. 11:10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they see not, and make their loins continually to shake: In consequence of their sensuality, their understanding shall be darkened, and as a punishment they shall be made slaves.
Summary
God has not wholly rejected Israel, as the case of Paul itself would prove. To suppose them wholly rejected is to repeat the error of Elijah. That prophet imagined that all Gods prophets, except himself, had been killed. But God let him know that seven thousand still remained true to him. In like manner, there is now a large remnant of Israel who have not been rejected. This remnant is a chosen remnant, the choice proceeding from a principle of favor, and not from works or perfect obedience. Had the choice proceeded from perfect obedience, it could not have been from favor, for favor and perfect obedience mutually exclude each other. Israel sought to be retained as Gods people, but failed through unbelief. The chosen, however, have been retained because they sought the honor by belief in Christ. The rejected Jews have grown hard in heart and feeling, as well as dull in perceptionall of which has happened in accordance with predictions of their prophets.
Comment
5.
This Rejection Neither Total Nor Final. Rom. 11:1-36
Introductory Remarks.
We come now to the final section in the study of Gods rejection of Israel, and also to the closing chapter of the doctrinal portion of the book. The last two chapters have been concerned with but one subject: the rejection of the Jews. In the eleventh chapter Paul is still discussing their rejection, but he here demonstrates that it was neither total nor final. This thought would help the Jews to realize that God had not rejected them unconditionally, nor was their rejection without hope of restoration.
a. Their Rejection Not Total. Rom. 11:1-10
275.
What was the underlying reason for Israels rejection?
276.
What particular phase of Israels rejection is discussed in the eleventh chapter?
277.
What subject is discussed in the first ten verses of chapter 11?
(1) Reasons for concluding that their rejection was not total. Rom. 11:1-5
In verse one the question is raised: I say then, did God cast off his people? That is, did God cast off his people en masse? Did he cast them from him as a nation? The answer comes immediately in the negative: God forbid. This thought of total rejection is not to be entertained for a moment. One good reason for repudiating this idea is found in the fact that Paul was an Israelite. Indeed, he was of the seed of Abraham and of the tribe of Benjamin. Was Paul rejected? No, God had not rejected him; he had rather dealt with him in a special way. Jehovah had abundantly shown to Paul that he was in his favor. The conclusion then to Pauls case is that God has not cast off or rejected his people completely, for Paul could not have stood in Gods favor if this were true. Rom. 11:1
The first part of verse two is the conclusion to the case of Paul. But what is the meaning of the words: whom he foreknew? We take the position that Paul is speaking of the nation of Israel, of the special favor they enjoyed, that of all the nations of the history God knew or recognized the Jews. In other words, we might say, God has not rejected his people whom he has known for so long. He will not with one sweep of divine wrath reject the people he has known and loved over all these centuries. Rom. 11:2 a
An illustration is now given of the true condition of Israel. Was it possible that God had totally forsaken Israel? That was what Elijah thought, for the scriptures tell us how he pleaded with God respecting Israel because they had killed all the prophets, they had digged down thine altars. Elijah believed Israel to be forsaken of God. The only faithful one left in the nation was Elijah, and his life was in danger. But this complaint was made in ignorance, for the Lord made it known that there were yet seven thousand men who had not bowed the knee to Baal. The application of this illustration is made in verse five: Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. In other words, although a vast segment of Israel was cast off through their rejection of Christ, yet there were those here and there who had accepted him, and together they served to make up the remnant. This remnant is referred to as being a remnant according to the election of grace. What is the import of this?
The same subject has appeared before in our study, and there we discovered that the election of certain individuals to become participators in Gods grace was dependent upon their own choice, not upon the arbitrary election of God. So, then, we can say that this remnant was made up of those Jews who heard of the grace of God through Jesus Christ and chose to accept him. Thus they became Gods remnant. God chose to elect all those who would choose to accept the grace extended through his son. Rom. 11:2 b Rom. 11:5
278.
What is the thought of the question raised in Rom. 11:1? How is it answered?
279.
What is the meaning of the phrase whom he foreknew?
280.
What illustration is given to answer the objection? How does it answer it?
281.
Who is the remnant and how is it saved according to the election of grace?
(2) The Reason for Their Rejection. Rom. 11:6-10
The words, election of grace, suggest the thought that is developed in Rom. 11:6 through Rom. 11:10. Israel was rejected because they rejected the grace of God. Paul deems the thought of election by grace worthy of an extended explanation since this was the reason for the rejection of Israel. Notice his comments upon this subject.
(a) Acceptance by God is by grace; it cannot be by works, for works exclude grace, just as grace excludes works. Rom. 11:6
(b) This acceptance Israel sought but did not find; the elect alone obtained acceptance. Rom. 11:7 a.
(c) All but the elect (those who chose the grace of God through Christ) were hardened, even as it was prophesied: God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that they should not see and ears that they should not hear unto this very day. David also spoke about this condition when he said: Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling block, and a recompense unto them: and bow thou down their back always. Rom. 11:7 b Rom. 11:10
How were the rest hardened? One look at the occasion of hardening will answer this question. The statement is made that the elect obtained acceptance. How did they obtain it? By accepting Christ. And what happened to those who heard but did not accept? The answer in the words of the apostle was simply, they were hardened. How did it come about? Through their own rejection, choosing rather to obey Satan and his suggestions than the grace of God.
But how can the words of the prophets be understood? God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear. If we will keep before us the circumstances of this action, we will encounter little difficulty in understanding them. Let us remember that Paul was speaking of the Jewish rejection of the gospel and Jesus as the Messiah.
282.
Why is the thought of election by grace discussed here?
283.
Give two points in the discussion of salvation by grace.
284.
How were the rest hardened?
285.
How can it be said that God gave them a spirit of stupor?
When we consider the refusal of the Jews to accept the plain evidence before them, we can understand that the spirit of stupor was brought about by their own stubbornness, and not by an arbitrary act on the part of Jehovah. The spirit of stupor was the result of a continual refusal to heed the truth. As in the case of Pharaoh, God provided in his love the means of convincing man of the truth at hand, but man perverted these provisions and the result was even as Isaiah and David prophesied.
It has ever been the nature of God to give man abundant opportunity to do his will, but when man rejects this opportunity, then God cannot and will not project himself into the realm of mans free choice. Man is then left to receive the recompense of his wrong choice. Davids descriptive words in Rom. 11:9-10 tell of the dire results of rejecting Christ. These words have had and are now having their fulfillment in the lives of the Jews who have rejected their Messiah.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(1) I say then.Are we to infer from the language of Isaiah just quoted that God has cast away his people? Far be the thought. The Apostle is himself too closely identified with his countrymen to look upon it with anything but horror.
I also.This appeal to his own descent from Abraham seems to be called forth by the Apostles patriotic sympathy with his people, and not merely by the thought that he would be included in their rejection. This last explanation, which is that usually given, is less accordant with the generous chivalry of his nature, and does not agree so well with Rom. 9:3.
Of the tribe of Benjamin.And therefore of the purest blood, because the tribes of Judah and Benjamin alone kept up the theocratic continuity of the race after the Exile. (Comp. Php. 3:5.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 11
THE CALLUS ON THE HEART ( Rom 11:1-12 ) 11:1-12 So then, I ask, “Has God repudiated his people?” God forbid! I, too, am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not repudiated his people whom long ago he marked out for his purposes. Do you not know what scripture says in the passage about Elijah? You remember how he talked to God in complaint against Israel: “Lord, they have killed your prophets; they have torn down your altars; and I alone am left and they are seeking my life.” But what was the answer that came to him? “I have kept for myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” So, then, at this present time too, there is a remnant chosen by his grace. And if they were chosen by grace, their relationship to God is no longer dependent on works, for, if that were so, grace is no longer grace. What then? Israel has not obtained that for which she is searching; but the chosen remnant has obtained it, while the rest have been made so dull and insensitive in heart that they cannot see. As it stands written: “God gave them a spirit of lethargy–eyes not to see, ears not to hear–down to this day.” And David says: “Let their table become a snare, and a trap, and a thing to trip them up, and a retribution for them. and let their backs be bent for ever.” So, I say, “Have they stumbled that their fall might be complete?” God forbid! So far from that, salvation has become a gift for the Gentiles because of their fall, so as to move them to jealousy of the Gentiles. If their fall has brought wealth to the world, if their failure has brought wealth to the Gentiles, how much more shall the whole world be enriched, when they come in, and the whole process of salvation is completed?
There was a question now to be asked which any Jew was bound to ask. Does all this mean that God has repudiated his people? That is a question that Paul’s heart cannot bear. After all, he himself is a member of that people. So he falls back on an idea which runs through much of the Old Testament. In the days of Elijah, Elijah was in despair ( 1Ki 19:10-18). He had come to the conclusion that he alone was left to be true to God. But God told him that, in fact, there were still seven thousand in Israel who had not bowed the knee to Baal. So into Jewish thought came the idea of The Remnant.
The prophets began to see that there never was a time, and never would be, when the whole nation was true to God; nevertheless, always within the nation a remnant was left who had never forsaken their loyalty or compromised their faith. Prophet after prophet came to see this. Amos ( Amo 9:8-10) thought of God sifting men as corn is in a sieve until only the good are left. Micah ( Mic 2:12; Mic 5:3) had a vision of God gathering the remnant of Israel. Zephaniah ( Zep 3:12-13) had the same idea. Jeremiah foresaw the remnant being gathered from all the countries throughout which they had been scattered ( Jer 23:3). Ezekiel, the individualist, was convinced that a man could not be saved by either a national or an inherited righteousness; the righteous would deliver their own souls by their righteousness ( Eze 14:14; Eze 14:20; Eze 14:22). Above all, this idea dominated the thought of Isaiah. He called his son Shear-Jashub, which means The Salvation of the Remnant. Again and again he returns to this idea of the faithful remnant who will be saved by God ( Isa 7:3; Isa 8:2; Isa 8:18; Isa 9:12; Isa 6:9-13).
There is a tremendous truth beginning to dawn here. As one great scholar put it: “No Church or nation is saved en masse.” The idea of a Chosen People will not hold water for this basic reason. The relationship with God is an individual relationship. A man must give his own heart and surrender his own life to God. God does not call men in crowds; he has “His own secret stairway into every heart.” A man is not saved because he is a member of a nation or of a family, or because he has inherited righteousness and salvation from his ancestors; he is saved because he has made a personal decision for God. It is not now the whole nation who are lumped together as the Chosen People. It is those individual men and women who have given their hearts to God, of whom the remnant is composed.
Paul’s argument is that the Jewish nation has not been rejected; but it is not the nation as a whole, but the faithful remnant within it who are the true Jews.
What of the others? It is here that Paul has a terrible thought. He has the idea of God sending a kind of torpor upon them, a drowsy sleep in which they cannot and will not hear. He puts together the thought of a series of Old Testament passages to prove this ( Deu 29:4; Isa 6:9-10; Isa 29:10). He quotes Psa 69:22-23. “Let their table become a snare.” The idea is that men are sitting feasting comfortably at their banquet; and their very sense of safety has become their ruin. They are so secure in their fancied safety that the enemy can come upon them all unaware. That is what the Jews were like. They were so secure, so self-satisfied, so at ease in their confidence of being the Chosen People, that that very idea had become the thing that ruined them.
The day will come when they cannot see at all, and when they will grope with bent backs like men stumbling blindly in the dark. In Rom 11:7 the King James Version says, “they have been blinded.” More correctly, it should be, “they have been hardened.” The verb is poroun ( G4456) . The noun porosis ( G4457) will give us the meaning better. It is a medical word, and it means a callus. It was specially used for the callus which forms round the fracture when a bone is broken, the hard bone formation which helps to mend the break. When a callus grows on any part of the body that part loses feeling. It becomes insensitive. The minds of the mass of the people have become insensitive; they can no longer hear and feel the appeal of God.
It can happen to any man. If a man takes his own way long enough, he will in the end become insensitive to the appeal of God. If he goes on sinning, he will in the end become insensitive to the horror of sin and the fascination of goodness. If a man lives long enough in ugly conditions he will in the end become insensitive to them. As Burns wrote:
“I waive the quantum of the sin,
The hazard of concealing;
But och! it hardens a’ within,
And petrifies the feeling!”
Just as a callus can grow on the hand, a callus can grow on the heart. That is what had happened to the mass of Israel. God save us from that!
But Paul has more to say. That is tragedy, but out of it God has brought good, because that very insensitiveness of Israel opened the way to the Gentiles to come in. Because Israel did not want the message of the good news, it went out to people who were ready to welcome it. Israel’s refusal has enriched the world.
Then Paul touches on the dream which is behind it all. If the refusal of Israel has enriched the world by opening a door to the Gentiles, what will the riches be like at the end of the day, when God’s plan is fully completed and Israel comes in, too?
So, in the end, after tragedy comes the hope. Israel became insensitive, the nation with the callus on her heart; the Gentiles came by faith and trust into the love of God; but a day will come when the love of God will act like a solvent, even on the callus of the heart, and both Gentile and Jew will be gathered in. It is Paul’s conviction that nothing in the end can defeat the love of God.
THE WILD OLIVE–PRIVILEGE AND WARNING ( Rom 11:13-24 ) 11:13-24 Now I speak to you Gentiles. You well know that in so far as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my office, for somehow I want to find a way to move my own flesh and blood to envy of the Gentiles, so that I may save some of them; for, if the fact that they are cast away has resulted in the reconciliation of the world to God, what will their reception mean? It can only be like life from the dead! If the first part of the dough is consecrated to God, so is the whole lump; if the root is consecrated to God, so are the branches. If some of the branches have been cut off, and if you like a wild olive have been grafted in among them, and if you have become a sharer in the rich root of the olive, do not allow yourself to look down boastfully upon the branches. If you are tempted to act like that, remember you do not bear the root but the root bears you. You will say: “Branches have been broken off that I may be grafted in.” Well said! They were broken off because of their lack of faith; and you stand because of faith. Do not become proudly contemptuous, but keep yourself in godly fear; for if God did not spare the branches, which were natural branches, neither will he spare you. See, then, the kindness and the severity of God. On those who fell there comes the severity.. on you there comes the kindness of God, if only you remain in that kindness. If you do not, you, too, will be cut away. But they, if they do not continue in their lack of faith, will be grafted in; for God is able to graft them in again. For, if you were cut from the olive, which is by nature a wild olive, and, if, contrary to nature, you were engrafted into the garden olive, how much more will the natural branches be engrafted into the olive to which they really belong?
It is to the Jews that Paul has been talking up to this time, and now he turns to the Gentiles. He is the apostle to the Gentiles, but he cannot ever forget his own people. In fact he goes the length of saving that one of his main objects is to move the Jews to envy when they see what Christianity has done for the Gentiles. One of the surest ways to make a man desire Christianity is to make him see in actual life what it can do.
There was a soldier who was wounded in battle. The padre crept out and did what he could for him. He stayed with him when the remainder of the troops retreated. In the heat of the day he gave him water from his own waterbottle, while he himself remained parched with thirst. In the night, when the chill frost came down, he covered the wounded man with his own coat, and finally wrapped him up in even more of his clothes to save him from the cold. In the end the wounded man looked up at the padre. “Padre,” he said, “you’re a Christian?” “I try to be,” said the padre. “Then,” said the wounded man, “if Christianity makes a man do for another man what you have done for me, tell me about it, because I want it.” Christianity in action moved him to envy a faith which could produce a life like that.
It was Paul’s hope and prayer and ambition that some day the Jews would see what Christianity had done for the Gentiles and be moved to desire it.
To Paul it would be paradise if the Jews came in. If the rejection of the Jews had done so much, if, through it, the Gentile world had been reconciled to God, what superlative glory must come when the Jews came in. If the tragedy of rejection has had results so wonderful, what will the happy ending be like, when the tragedy of rejection has changed to the glory of reception? Paul can only say that it will be like life from the dead.
Then Paul uses two pictures to show that the Jews can never be finally rejected. All food, before it was eaten, had to be offered to God. So the law laid it down ( Num 15:19-20) that, if dough was being prepared, the first part of it must be offered to God; when that was done, the whole lump of dough became sacred. It was not necessary, as it were, to offer every separate mouthful to God. The offering of the first part sanctified the whole. It was a common thing to plant sacred trees in places sacred to the gods. When the sapling was planted, it was dedicated to God; and thereafter every branch that came from it was sacred to God.
What Paul deduces from that is this–the patriarchs were sacred to God; they had in a special way heard God’s voice and obeyed God’s word; in a special way they had been chosen and consecrated by God. From them the whole nation sprang; and just as the first consecrated handful of dough made the whole lump sacred and the dedication of the sapling made the whole tree sacred, so the special consecration of its founders made the whole nation sacred in a special way to God. There is truth here. The remnant in Israel did not make themselves what they were; they inherited faith from their forefathers before them. Every one of us lives to some extent on the spiritual capital of the past. None of us is self-made. We are what godly parents and ancestors have made us; and, even if we strayed far away and shamed our heritage, we cannot totally part ourselves from the goodness and fidelity that made us what we are.
Paul goes on to use a long allegory. More than once the prophets had pictured the nation of Israel as the olive tree of God. That was natural, because the olive tree was the common est and most useful tree in the Mediterranean world. “The Lord once called you a green olive tree, fair with goodly fruit” ( Jer 11:16). “His shoots shall spread out; his beauty shall be like the olive” ( Hos 14:6). So Paul thinks of the Gentiles as branches of wild olive engrafted into the garden olive tree which was Israel. From the point of view of horticulture Paul’s picture is impossible. In horticulture it is the good olive that is grafted into the stock of the wild olive so that a fruit-bearing olive may result. The process that Paul pictures was never used in actual practice, because it would have served no useful purpose. But the point Paul wishes to make is quite clear. The Gentiles had been out in the deserts and the wildernesses and among the wild briars; and now, by the act of God’s grace, they are engrafted into the richness and fertility of the garden olive tree.
Out of this picture Paul has two words to speak.
(i) The first is a word of warning. It would have been easy for the Gentiles to develop an attitude of contempt. Had not the Jews been rejected that they might enter in? In a world where the Jews were universally hated such an attitude would have been all too easy. Paul’s warning is still necessary. In effect, he says there would have been no such thing as Christianity unless there had been Judaism first. It will be a bad day when the Christian Church forgets its debt to the root from which it sprang. It has a debt to Judaism which it can never pay by any other means than by bringing Christianity to the Jews. So Paul warns the Gentiles against contempt. Grimly, he says that if the true branches were lopped off because of their unbelief, still more can that happen to the branches which were only grafted on.
(ii) The second is a word of hope. The Gentiles have experienced God’s kindness; and the Jews his severity. If the Gentiles remain in faith they will remain in that kindness; but, if the Jews come out of their unbelief and enter into belief, once again they, too, will be engrafted in; for, says Paul, if it was possible for a wild olive to be engrafted into the garden olive tree, how much more is it possible that the olive tree’s own natural branches can be grafted in again? Once again Paul is dreaming of the day when the Jews will come in.
Much in this passage is hard to understand. It thinks in pictures which are out of our world altogether; but one thing is crystal clear–the connection between Judaism and Christianity, between the old and the new. Here is the answer to those who wish to discard the Old Testament as merely a Jewish book which is irrelevant for Christianity. He is a foolish man who kicks away the ladder which raised him to the height which he has reached. It would be a foolish branch which cut itself off from its stem. The Jewish faith is the root from which Christianity grew. The consummation will come only when the wild olive and the garden olive are one, and when there are no branches at all left unengrafted on the parent stem.
THAT ALL MAY BE OF MERCY ( Rom 11:25-32 ) 11:25-32 Brothers, I do want you to grasp this secret which only those who know God can understand, because I do not want you to become conceited about your own wisdom. I want you to understand that it is only a partial hardening which has happened to Israel, and it will last only until the full number of the Gentiles shall have come in. And then, in the end, all Israel will be saved, as it stands written: “A Saviour will come forth from Zion; and he will remove all kinds of wickedness from Jacob. This is the fulfilment of my covenant with them when I take away their sins.” As far as the good news goes, they are enemies of God–but it is for your sake. But as far as God’s choice goes, they are beloved of God, for their fathers’ sakes, for the free gifts and the calling of God can never be gone back upon. Once you disobeyed God, but now you have found his mercy because of their disobedience; just so, they have now disobeyed, so that they now may enter into the same mercy as you have now found. For God has shut up all men to disobedience, that he may have mercy upon all.
Paul is coming to the end of his argument. He has faced a bewildering, and, for a Jew, a heartbreaking situation. Somehow he has had to find an explanation of the fact that God’s people rejected his Son when he came into the world. Paul never shut his eyes to that tragic fact, but he found a way in which the whole tragic situation could be fitted into the plan of God. It is true that the Jews rejected Christ; but. as Paul saw it, that rejection happened in order that Christ might be offered to the Gentiles. To maintain the sovereignty of God’s purpose, Paul even went the length of saying that it was he himself who hardened the hearts of the Jews in order to open a way to the Gentiles; but, even then, however contradictory it might sound, he still insisted on the personal responsibility of the Jews for their failure to accept God’s offer. Paul held fast at one and the same time to divine sovereignty and human responsibility. But now comes the note of hope. His argument is a little complicated, and it will make it easier if we try to separate the various strands in it.
(i) Paul was sure that this hardening of the hearts of the Jews was neither total nor permanent. It was to serve a purpose, and when that purpose had been achieved, it would be taken away.
(ii) Paul sets out the paradox of the Jewish place in the plan of God. In order that the Gentiles might come in and that the universal purpose of the gospel might be fulfilled, the Jews had arrived at a situation where they were the enemies of God. The word that Paul uses is echthroi ( G2190) . It is difficult to translate, because it has both an active and a passive meaning. It can mean either hating or hated. It may well be that in this passage it has to be read in the two meanings at the one time. The Jews were hostile to God and had refused his offer, and therefore they were under his displeasure. That was the present fact about the Jews. But there was another fact about them. Nothing could alter the fact that they were God’s chosen people and had a special place in his plan. No matter what they did, God could never go back upon his word. His promise had been made to the fathers, and it must be fulfilled. It was therefore clear to Paul, and he quotes Isa 59:20-21 to prove it, that God’s rejection of the Jews could not be permanent; they, too, in the end must come in.
(iii) Then Paul has a strange thought. “God,” he says, “shut up all men to disobedience that he may have mercy upon all.” The one thing Paul cannot conceive of is that any man of any nation could merit his own salvation. Now, if the Jews had observed complete obedience to God’s will, they might well have reckoned that they had earned the salvation of God as a right. So Paul is saying that God involved the Jews in disobedience in order that when his salvation did come to them it might be unmistakably an act of his mercy and due in no way to their merit. Neither Jew nor Gentile could ever be saved apart from the mercy of God.
In many ways Paul’s argument may seem strange to us and the “proofs” he brings forward unconvincing. Our minds and hearts may even shudder at some of the things he says. But the argument is not irrelevant, for the tremendous thing at the back of it is a philosophy of history. To Paul, God was in control. Nothing moved with aimless feet. Not even the most heartbreaking event was outside the purpose of God. Events could never run amok. The purposes of God could never be frustrated.
It is told that once a child stood at the window on a night when the gale was terrifying in its savage velocity. “God,” she said, “must have lost grip of his winds tonight.” To Paul, that was precisely what never happened. Nothing was ever out of God’s control; everything was serving his purpose.
To that Paul would have added another tremendous conviction. He would have insisted that in it and through it all, Gods purpose was a purpose of salvation and not of destruction. It may well be that Paul would even have gone the length of saying that God’s arranging of things was designed to save men even against their will. In the last analysis it was not the wrath of God which was pursuing men, but the love of God which was tracking them down.
The situation of Israel was exactly that which Francis Thompson so movingly portrayed in The Hound of Heaven.
“I fled him down the nights and down the days;
I fled him down the arches of the years;
I fled him down the labyrinthine ways
Of my own mind; and in the mist of tears
I hid from him, and under running laughter.
But with unhurrying chase,
And unperturbed pace,
Deliberate speed, majestic instancy,
They beat–and a Voice beat
More instant than the feet–
All things betray thee, who betrayest me.'”
Then comes the time when the fugitive is beaten.
“Naked I wait thy love’s uplifted stroke!
My harness piece by piece thou hast hewn from me,
And smitten to my knee,
I am defenceless utterly.”
Then comes the end:
“Halts by me that footfall;
Is my gloom. after all,
Shade of his hand, outstretched caressingly?
‘Ah, fondest, blindest, weakest,
I am he whom thou seekest!
Thou dravest love from thee, who dravest me!'”
That was exactly Israel’s situation. They fought their long battle against God; they are still fighting it. But God’s pursuing love is ever after them. Whatever else Rom 9:1-33; Rom 10:1-21; Rom 11:1-36 may sometimes read like, it is in the last analysis the story of the still uncompleted pursuit of love.
THE CRY OF THE ADORING HEART ( Rom 11:33-36 ) 11:33-36 O the depth of the riches and the wisdom and the knowledge of God! How his decisions are beyond the mind of man to trace! How mysterious are his ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or, who has become his counsellor? Who has first given anything to him, so that he is due any repayment from God? For all things come from him, and exist through him, and end in him. To him be glory for ever! Amen.
Paul never wrote a more characteristic passage than this. Here theology turns to poetry. Here the seeking of the mind turns to the adoration of the heart. In the end all must pass out in a mystery that man cannot now understand but at whose heart is love. If a man can say that all things come from God, that all things have their being through him, and that all things end in him, what more is left to say? There is a certain paradox in the human situation. God gave man a mind, and it is man’s duty to use that mind to think to the very limit of human thought. But it is also true that there are times when that limit is reached and all that is left is to accept and to adore.
“How could I praise,
If such as I might understand?”
Paul had battled with a heartbreaking problem with every resource which his great mind possessed. He does not say that he has solved it, as one might neatly solve a geometrical problem; but he does say that, having done his best, he is content to leave it to the love and power of God. At many times in life there is nothing left but to say: “I cannot grasp thy mind, but with my whole heart I trust thy love. Thy will be done!”
-Barclay’s Daily Study Bible (NT)
Fuente: Barclay Daily Study Bible
1. The Palliation amid Aggravation of Israel’s Present Condition , Rom 11:1-10 .
1. Cast away Wholly and irrecoverably? Not wholly, for there is an accepted minority. Not irrecoverably, for an entire future generation will be restored to Divine favour. Israel is, therefore, prospectively, as well as in the past, “his people.”
I A very signal I. The stern proclaimer of Israel’s downfall is a living proof that the downfall is not absolute. The apostle’s own person is pledge of God’s continued mercy to Israel; and proof that it is not his mercy, but their faith, that has failed.
An Israelite Not by proselytism, but by pure blood of Abraham; not of dubious relationship, but duly authenticated as to tribe; that tribe not born of Leah, or a bonds-woman, but of beloved Rachel the tribe which with Judah formed the substantial stock of the Israel of Paul’s age.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘I say then, Did God cast off his people? Certainly not. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.’
In his usual manner Paul raises a question in order to answer it. His question is, ‘did God cast off His people’, and it is asked on the basis of the quotation in Isaiah which he has just used, ‘all day long have I held out My hands to a disobedient and obstinate people’ (Rom 10:21). His initial answer is that this cannot possibly be so because he himself is one of ‘His people’ and has not been cast off (the ‘for’ confirms that this is the initial part of his argument in this passage). Thus it is not true Israel who has been cast off, only unbelieving Israel. Indeed a good proportion of the church in 1st century AD were recognised as Jewish Christians. They were ‘the remnant according to the election of grace’ (Rom 11:5). They could have been cited as added evidence that God had not cast off His true people, the elect to whom His promises were made (Rom 9:6 onwards). But this was probably something which Paul expected his readers to infer.
So here Paul is powerfully arguing that Israel does continue to exist, even though God has purged it. It continues on in Paul and in the elect among the Jews. It is they who are the true Israel. In contrast modern man disinherits this Israel, and opts for unbelieving Israel as representing Israel. But to Paul ‘Israel’ as an existing, continuing, and vibrant entity was represented by believing Jews, supplemented by Gentile converts. While modern man looks to Palestine for Israel (the old unbelieving Israel which was cast off), God (and Paul) looks to the true congregation of Jesus Christ around the world. Here in fact was Paul’s dilemma. In order for men to understand what he was saying he had to refer to the old cast off Israel as Israel, for there was no other way in which to identify them. But to him the genuine Israel was the renewed Israel under the Messiah.
‘For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.’ In these words Paul establishes his credentials. He is an Israelite (compare Rom 9:4), he is ‘of the seed of Abraham’ and he is ‘of the tribe of Benjamin’. These were credential which could be demonstrated tangibly. Whilst he may well not have been able to prove that he was a direct descendant of Abraham, something which few Jews could do, he could certainly prove that he was accepted as such on a basis satisfactory to Jews. The fact that he was recognised as being of the tribe of Benjamin explains why he was originally named Saul, for King Saul had been of the tribe of Benjamin.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
God’s Purpose For Israel Is Being Fulfilled Through A Remnant (11:1-10).
Paul now deals with the question as to whether Israel has been ‘cast off’. And his reply is ‘certainly not’, and this reply is based on the fact that many true Israelites, like Paul, are still acceptable to God. This, therefore, demonstrates that the whole people have not been cast off. And he then ties this in with his previous argument about God’s elective purpose within Israel (Rom 9:6-29). Israel has not been cast off as a whole. It is only that part of Israel which did not believe in the Jesus the Messiah (Rom 9:30 to Rom 10:21), which has been cast off. And one reason why this has occurred is in order that salvation might come to the Gentiles in order to provoke them to jealousy (Rom 11:11). Here the distinction between believers (the elect) and unbelievers (the hardened) is made crystal clear (Rom 11:7). And it is the former who make up the true Israel. The same distinction was made apparent in Rom 9:18 against the background of Rom 9:6-13.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
God’s Purpose With Regard Both To The Jews and The Gentiles (11:1-36).
Paul now carries forward the doctrine of the Israel within Israel, and evidences it again from Scripture, making clear that those who were saved in Israel, in other words were the true Israel, were always a remnant. He then brings out that in accordance with Scripture God has removed from Israel the unbelieving and unfruitful branches, (those who did not believe in the Messiah), and has replaced them with believing branches from among the Gentiles. This is an advance on the idea in Joh 15:1-6 where Jesus had represented Himself as the True Vine, the true Israel, for their Gentiles were not specifically in mind, but the idea is the same. Believers received their life from the vine. Unbelievers were broken off. Both the vine (in the person of Jesus as ‘the true vine’) and the olive tree in some way represent Israel.
Indeed Jeremiah brings out that the olive tree is the representative of Israel par excellence, for in Jer 11:16, speaking of Israel/Judah, we read, ‘The LORD called your name “a green olive tree, fair with goodly fruit”.’ We should note the phrase ‘the LORD called your name’. ‘The LORD called your name –’ is patterned on Gen 5:2, where God ‘called their name Adam’. Thus in being especially named in this way as ‘a green olive tree’ Israel were following in the footsteps of Adam. They were being revealed as being chosen as an entity (although not as a whole as Jeremiah’s prophecy makes clear). So in so ‘naming Israel’ God was, therefore, revealing that through them His purposes of restoration would be fulfilled. They would accomplish what Adam had failed to accomplish, a people true to God. But even in Jeremiah’s day branches were being broken (Jer 11:16). It was not the whole of Israel who would be fruitful and would remain as the olive tree.
This passage can be divided up as follows:
God’s purpose for Israel is being fulfilled through a remnant (Rom 11:1-12 compare Rom 9:7-13)).
God has removed from the olive tree of Israel the unbelieving branches (the unbelieving Jews), and has replaced them with wild olive branches (the Gentiles), who stand by faith (Rom 11:13-24; compare Rom 9:6; Rom 9:24).
In the end the whole of God’s Israel will be saved (Rom 11:25-32).
The expression of incomprehensible (to man) wonder at what God has done. Who would have thought that He would establish an Israel from within Israel, supplemented by Gentile believers? (Rom 11:33-36).
We should note in this respect that Paul speaks of four ‘Israels’:
1) There is the whole of Israel, of which there is a remnant, the elect. It is noteworthy that when using ‘Israel’ in this sense as ‘the whole of Israel’ the ‘elect’ or ‘remnant’ are in one way or another mentioned in every use ( Rom 9:6; Rom 9:27; Rom 11:2-7), thus it includes believing and unbelieving Israel, but with the elect or remnant seen as in some way separate.
2) There is unbelieving Israel (Rom 9:31 to Rom 10:2; Rom 10:19; Rom 10:21), which excludes the true Israel. In Rom 9:31 to Rom 10:2 their way of attaining righteousness is contrasted with the way in which believing Gentiles attain righteousness, and Paul is concerned that they might be saved. In Rom 10:19; Rom 10:21 they are contrasted with all believers, both Jew and Greek (Rom 10:14).
3) There is the true Israel, the Israel within Israel which is the elect, that is, believing Israel (specifically called Israel in Rom 9:6, and implied in Rom 9:27; Rom 11:4-7).
4) There is the olive tree, the remaining branches of which, once it has been pruned, represent the Israel within Israel, which is then extended by the Gentiles who have been grafted in. All unbelieving branches having been broken off. This is the purified Israel. Here Israel includes both believing Jews and believing Gentiles (Rom 11:25-26).
It Isaiah 3). which is Paul’s specific theological definition of Israel as found in Rom 9:6, which is then in chapter 11 increased by the addition of believing Gentiles. The references to Israel in 1). and 2). arise from the fact that he has no alternative but to use the title in order to make his point understood. How else was he to distinguish them from the Gentiles? Especially as he clearly hesitates about using the term ‘Jew’ (only in Rom 9:24; Rom 10:12, where believing Jews are very much in mind). But they are not his theological view of Israel. That view is that theologically speaking the true Israel are the elect within physical Israel (Rom 9:6), as later supplemented by the Gentiles. Thus the true continuation of Israel in God’s eyes consists of believing Jews and believing Gentiles, with those who have rejected the Messiah being excluded. Israel in 1). refers to an entity to which God still shows favour. 2). is man’s definition of Israel
There is also a mention of Jews as a whole, which includes Messianic Jews (Rom 9:24; Rom 10:12). In these cases the point is that from the Jews as a whole certain Jews become Christian Jews. Note with regard to the unbelieving Israel that, in Rom 10:14-21, it is not contrasted with the Gentiles, but with all believers (both Jew and Greek – Rom 11:12). It is therefore contrasted with the combination of believing Israel plus believing Gentiles. Open to question is the meaning of the ‘all Israel’ in Rom 11:26 who ‘will be saved’. As there it is used theologically there are good grounds for suggesting that it signifies ‘the elect within physical Israel’, which is the theological definition in Rom 9:6, supplemented by the Gentiles who have been grafted in (Rom 11:17-24). This can be seen as supported by the fact that ‘it is (only) the remnant who will be saved’ (Rom 9:27). But the question then is, can we really see it as including believing Gentiles?
We must ask this question because in Rom 11:17-24 it is indicated that believing Gentiles become a part of the olive tree, that is, of Israel. This is then in favour of seeing ‘all Israel’ as signifying both believing Jews and believing Gentiles. And this would remove the contradiction which would otherwise occur between Rom 11:25-26 and Gal 3:28. In Gal 3:28 Paul says that in the church there is ‘neither Jew nor Greek’ indicating that the distinction has been removed. Can we really then see Paul distinguishing between ‘the fullness of the Gentiles’ and ‘all Israel’ when considering the final days of the age? He would be restoring the distinction that he claimed had been removed. On the other hand if ‘all Israel’ includes believing Gentiles then the problem is removed.
This is especially so as elsewhere Paul calls the whole church, ‘the Israel of God’ (Gal 6:16), and the same idea is present in 1Co 10:1-13. In Eph 2:19 Gentiles are ‘no longer sojourners and strangers, but — fellow-citizens with the saints and of the household of God’. The distinction between ‘the circumcision’ and ‘the uncircumcision’ is removed in terminology which indicates that both are included in Israel. To Peter the church is ‘the elect race’ and ‘the holy nation’ (1Pe 2:9; compare Exo 19:6 where Israel is the ‘holy nation’). It is ‘the dispersion’ (1Pe 1:2; a term used for worldwide Jewry). To James it is the twelve tribes of Israel (Jas 1:1). According to Paul to belong to Messiah is to be Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise (Gal 3:29). For as Jesus said to the Jews, ‘the Kingly Rule of God will be taken away from you, and will be given to a nation bringing forth its fruits’ (Mat 21:43), that is the new nation built on the Apostolic preaching. See also Joh 15:1-6.
This is not to say that the church replaces Israel. The contention is that it IS Israel. It is the genuine continuation of the true elect Israel, with unbelieving Israel being cast off. Israel had been severely pruned, and was being renewed. We can compare the severe pruning of Israel here with what happened as a result of the different captivities (first the Galilean – 2Ki 15:29, then the Samarian – 2Ki 17:6; 2Ki 18:11, then Judah, as their cities were taken one by one – 2Ki 19:8; then Jerusalem – 2Ki 24:14-16; 2Ki 25:11), when large parts of Israel were absorbed into the Gentile world. The renewed Israel is founded on the Messiah as a new congregation (Mat 16:18) and on the twelve Jewish Apostles (Eph 2:20), with large numbers of followers of Jesus in Galilee as a result of Jesus’ ministry (e.g. the five thousand and the four thousand who had partaken in the covenant feasts) and initially made up almost exclusively of Jews (Acts 1-9), with ‘proselytes’ eventually being accepted from among the Gentiles, but without the need for circumcision because they have received the circumcision of Christ (Col 2:11). See also Eph 2:11-22. . Note our excursus on ‘Is the Church Israel’ at the end of this chapter which examines the question more fully.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Messsiah Has Come And Is For All. God Has Not Failed In His Promises To The True Israel. Salvation For All is Through Faith In The Messiah (9:1-11:36)
Paul now expands on chapters 1-8, in which he has demonstrated that all, both Jews and Gentiles, have sinned, and that all must therefore find salvation by faith through Jesus Christ, God’s Messiah. And he does it by 1). demonstrating the relationship of both Jews and Gentiles to the Messiah Who has come, and 2). showing that Salvation is for all through faith. This is because salvation comes about on God’s part through God’s election of both Jews and Gentiles (Rom 9:6-29), and on man’s part through the faith of both believing Jews and Gentiles in the Messiah Who is LORD of all (Rom 9:30 to Rom 10:21), something which God has brought about by uniting both believing Jews and believing Gentiles in one olive tree (Rom 11:12-24). And the end in view is that the fullness of the Gentiles might come in, so that in this way all Israel might be saved.
Chapters 9-11 are built around a number of themes:
1). The Coming Of The Messiah.
2). The Election Unto Salvation Of All Who Believe.
3). Salvation Is For Both Jews And Gentiles.
4). The Vexed Question As To Whether God Has Failed In His Promises To Israel As Given In The Old Testament Scriptures?
5). Citations Which Demonstrate That All That Has Happened Is In Fulfilment Of Scripture.
1). The Coming Of The Messiah.
The Messiah is immediately introduced in Rom 9:1; Rom 9:3; Rom 9:5, and is revealed to be active throughout the three chapters. This looks back to the great emphasis that Paul has previously put on the saving activity of Jesus Messiah in men’s salvation. See for example Rom 3:24-28; Rom 5:15-21; Rom 6:1-14; Rom 8:1-18.
Thus
a). In Rom 9:1-5 Paul brings out that one major purpose for the existence of Israel was in order that they might bring forth the Messiah, the One Who is over all (and therefore concerned about both Jew and Gentile), Who is God, blessed for ever (Rom 9:5; compare Rom 1:3-4). In consequence of their attitude to Him the elect as represented by Paul are ‘in Messiah’ (Rom 9:1), whilst the unbelieving among the Israelites are ‘accursed from the Messiah’ (Rom 9:3). Thus by His coming the Messiah has divided natural Israel into the true Israel who have responded to the Messiah on the one hand, and rejected, unbelieving Israel who are no longer a part of the true Israel on the other. And this on the basis of whether they respond to God, or whether they choose their own way. This had in fact been Israel’s problem throughout history, which is why the prophets had emphasised that only a remnant would be saved.
b). In Rom 9:30 to Rom 10:21 he brings out initially that Israel have stumbled on the Stone (a Messianic title in Isaiah), whilst those who believe (in Him) will not be put to shame (Rom 9:30-33). And this is because Messiah is the end of the Law unto righteousness for all who believe (Rom 10:4). Thus those who glorify, and seek after, the Law will reject Him, for they want the Law to continue to rule their lives. But those who seek righteousness by faith find that He is close to them. They have discovered that we do not have to climb into Heaven to bring Messiah down, because He was freely sent down from God. We do not have to descend into the Abyss in order to bring Messiah up from the dead, because He rose triumphantly from the dead. Indeed He is not far off from us. He dwells with us and is in us. He is near us, being on our lips and in our hearts (Eph 3:17), and thus with our lips we will confess Jesus as LORD, and in our hearts we will believe that God raised Him from the dead, in order that we might be saved, for ‘whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame (Rom 10:6-11). Such a state is inevitable if the Messiah is in us.
Notice the change from Messiah initially to LORD later on in this particular passage (compare Rom 9:5 where He is ‘over all’). It is because He is both Messiah and LORD (compare Act 2:36), that He offers salvation to the Gentiles. Thus there is now no difference between Jew and Greek (Gentile) for the same ‘LORD of all’ (compare Rom 9:5) is rich to all who call on Him, for whoever calls on the name of the LORD will be saved (Rom 10:13). This faith will result in righteousness by faith (Rom 10:6), and it comes through hearing, and that comes through the word of Messiah (Rom 10:17) proclaimed by His messengers (Rom 10:15). Even the Jews know Him as LORD, for they say, ‘LORD, who has believed our report’ (Rom 10:16). Thus all are called on to respond to the Messiah as LORD, (the equivalent in the Greek of Yahweh in the Old Testament Scripture as the Scriptures cited reveal).
c). In Rom 11:1-32 we may have a veiled reference to Jesus Messiah in His capacity as the One who sums up Israel in Himself (Mat 2:15; Joh 15:1-6) in the olive tree, which speaks of ideal Israel (Rom 11:16-24). That depends on how we see the olive tree. But the most important reference is to Him as the Deliverer Who will come out of Zion, banishing ungodliness from Jacob, renewing the covenant and taking away sin. As a consequence the fullness of the Gentiles will come in, and thereby ‘all Israel will be saved’ (Rom 11:25-26 a).
So the Messiah comes from Israel, is rejected by unbelieving Israel when He reveals Himself as LORD, but has come to redeem His true people, Whom He will bring through to salvation without losing a single one (Joh 10:27-29).
2). The Election Unto Salvation Of All Who Believe.
A second theme of these chapters is that God is sovereign, and that it is He Who elects men to be saved. That is why His purposes are certain to come through to fruition.
a). Rom 9:6-29. ‘Not all Israel is of Israel’ (Rom 9:6). In these words Paul commences his teaching concerning the true remnant who in God’s eyes represent the true Israel. And within this elect Israel are Gentiles like Eliezer of Damascus (Gen 15:2) and Hagar the Egyptian (Gen 16:3). That Eliezer is of the elect comes out in chapter 24 where he reveals his allegiance to Yahweh when seeking for a bride for Isaac. That Hagar is revealed as one of the elect comes out by her experiencing theophanies (e.g. Gen 16:7-13). There can be little doubt that among the retainers of the Patriarchs there were other foreigners (Gentiles) who also believed in Yahweh, as the fathers led them in worship (e.g. Gen 12:8). Thus ‘Israel’ from the commencement was a mixed society. (The idea that all Jews are direct descendants of Abraham is therefore incorrect).
In this passage Paul demonstrates that God chooses out an elect from the wider whole (an Israel from within Israel). And this is so that God’s purpose ‘according to election’ might stand. Thus not all the sons of Abraham are true believers, nor are all the sons of Isaac (while some of their Gentile retainers are). And that this idea of election carries on is demonstrated by the fact that ‘God has mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardens’ (Rom 9:18). As a result of this election He ‘makes know the riches of His glory’ through the ‘vessels of mercy prepared beforehand for glory’ (Rom 9:23), which are made up of ‘the called, not only of the Jews, but also of the Gentiles’ (Rom 9:24). So the elect are made up of both Jews and Gentiles. Furthermore of the children of Israel ‘only a remnant will be saved’ (Rom 9:27), a ‘seed’ from among Israel (Rom 9:29). In consequence it is clear that God elects to salvation some from among both Jews and Gentiles (Rom 9:24).
b). In Rom 9:30 to Rom 10:21 ‘whoever calls on the Name of the LORD (Jesus as LORD – Rom 10:9) will be saved’ (Rom 10:13) and they are then seen to be the elect from both Jews and Gentiles. And this fact is revealed by them ‘believing’ (in the Messiah through ‘the word of Messiah’ (Rom 10:17)), and ‘confessing Him as LORD, believing in their hearts that God raised Him from the dead’.
c). In Rom 11:1-32, there is within Israel, (an Israel which has already absorbed into itself many Gentiles either as proselytes or by forced circumcision, and is therefore made up of both Jew and Gentile), ‘a remnant according to the election of grace’ (Rom 11:5). Galilee, for example, had been the scene of enforced circumcision under Aristobulus I when, on Israel taking over Galilee from the Ituraeans by military force, Galilean Gentiles had been forced to be circumcised and to submit to the Jewish Law (104/103 BC). No doubt many of their descendants had followed Jesus when He was preaching in Galilee and had responded to the preaching of the early church. Thus this remnant according to the election of grace included both home born Jews and former Gentiles. And we are further told concerning salvation that ‘the elect had obtained it and the rest had been hardened’ (Rom 11:7). In Rom 11:25 b we learn that ‘the full number of the Gentiles had come in’, again indicating election. Thus the branches which were being engrafted into the olive tree of Israel were being portrayed as the elect.
3). The Theme Of Salvation For Jew And Gentile.
The theme of salvation is closely connected with the theme of election and also runs throughout chapters 9-11. While salvation is not mentioned in Rom 9:6-13 it is clear that those described therein are seen as saved (see the commentary), whilst in Rom 9:14-18 Paul points out from Scripture that God has compassion on whom He will, and hardens whom He will. Thus He elects to salvation vessels of mercy which He has beforehand prepared for glory. This statement confirms that the salvation in mind is speaking of eternal salvation. And this includes both Jews and Gentiles who are believers in the Messiah (Rom 9:24). This idea of election is then carried through into Israel’s history so that in Rom 9:27 we learn that ‘although the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant will be saved’. Thus the election previously spoken of in Rom 9:6-24, whereby only a proportion of Israel were chosen, was clearly election to salvation.
In Rom 10:1 Paul declares that his heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they might be ‘saved’. However small the remnant may be (and it was not all that small for the Gospel had spread widely in Jerusalem, Judaea, Samaria and Galilee, and soon throughout synagogues around the world) he wants to enlarge on it. But he then makes clear that the reason why unbelieving Israel have not been saved is because they are seeking to establish their own righteousness rather than looking to the righteousness of God which is available through faith in Messiah (Rom 10:3). This again makes clear what Paul means by ‘saved’. Now, however, Paul makes clear that a new situation has arisen as a result of the coming of the Messiah. And that is that salvation is available to both Jew and Gentile quite apart from proselytisation. ‘For there is no difference between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord of all is rich towards all who call upon Him, for whoever will call on the Name of the Lord will be saved’ (Rom 10:12-13), and this again is related to the coming of the Messiah (Rom 9:14-17).
In chapter 11, as a result of the stumbling of the Jews, salvation is opened to the Gentiles (Rom 11:11). Thus a good part of this chapter concentrates on the riches received by the Gentiles by their being united with Israel, (‘riches for the world’, ‘riches for the Gentiles’ – Rom 11:12) although it is intermingled with warnings to them not to become arrogant, but to treat unbelieving Jews respectfully and decently, in the hope that they might be saved. However, as we have already seen, this introduction of Gentiles into Israel is no new thing. It had occurred from the beginning. Many Gentiles had become Jewish proselytes in one way or another. But what is new is the number being saved, and the means, of their salvation, faith in the Messiah. Meanwhile Paul is urgent to save more Jews (Rom 11:14) by provoking them to jealousy. Thus we are faced with a salvation about to occur for both Jews and Gentiles. Rom 9:16-24 then describe the process by which this is taking place, by unbelieving Israel being broken off the olive tree of ideal Israel, and being replaced by the engrafting of branches from the wild olive of the Gentiles, thus strengthening the branches that remain. There is, however no mention of either Israel or the Gentiles in these verses because the identification has already been made or is assumed to be understood. Both are in fact involved. The branches that are broken off are the unbelieving Jews, the branches that remain are the believing Jews, with their Gentile proselytes, and the branches that are engrafted in are the Gentiles converted to the Messiah, and any Jews who may later be converted. The consequence of this is that the Gentiles become one with Israel, resulting in the fact that the fullness of the Gentiles come in and in this way ‘all Israel will be saved’, because in order for ‘all Israel’ to be saved it was necessary that all the elect from among the Gentiles should come in.
4). The Vexed Question As To Whether God Has Failed In His Promises To Israel As Given In The Old Testament Scriptures?
In chapters 9-11 Paul also looks into the vexed question as to why, with their promised Messiah having come, the Jews have, on the whole, not benefited by His coming. Does this then mean that God has cast off Israel, demonstrating that what the Scriptures have promised is rendered invalid? Furthermore, can Gentiles really be saved by faith alone without being circumcised and becoming Jews under the Law? These are important questions, not only for the Jews, but also for all who see the Old Testament Scriptures as the word of God, and he deals with them from three aspects:
Firstly, the rejection of the majority of the Jews is because of God’s elective purpose, and this has been revealed in Scripture. For the Scriptures, far from being mistaken about God’s purposes for the Jews, had clearly revealed that God always chooses His elect out of a wider entity. Thus He did not choose all of the sons of Abraham. Rather He chose one, Isaac, in whom Abraham’s seed would be ‘called’. But even though Isaac was the promised line in whom Abraham’s seed would be ‘called’, even so not all of his seed would be elect. For of Isaac’s seed He chose one, Jacob. And this was as a result of God’s sovereign decree. Thus at each stage God’s elect are only a part of the whole, even in the promised line. For, as the Scriptures have revealed, only a remnant were to be saved. It is noteworthy that in this passage the words ‘faith’ and ‘believe’ are not mentioned once (in vivid contrast with the next chapter). The whole emphasis in the passage is on God acting sovereignly (Rom 9:6-21). Meanwhile, acting sovereignly, God has also called Gentiles, who are called on equal terms with Jews (Rom 9:24). He had, of course, always made provision for Gentiles to become a part of Israel (Exo 12:48; Deu 23:1-8). But now they were to be called in large numbers so as to become a part of the true Israel, while as the Scriptures have made clear only a remnant of Israel will be saved (Rom 9:6-29).
Secondly, the rejection of the majority of Israel is because Israel as a whole failed to believe in and submit to the Messiah, Who was born among them. The believing Gentiles on the other hand have responded to the Messiah in true faith. Thus the majority in Israel have failed to achieve salvation through unbelief, while the minority of the Jews (the elect) and the Gentiles who believe, will, by responding in faith, be saved (Rom 9:30 to Rom 10:21). In contrast to the previous passage, in this passage the words ‘faith’ or ‘belief’ are mentioned in almost every verse (Rom 9:30 to Rom 10:21).
Thirdly, it is because, while the elect of Israel have been saved as God promised, the remainder have been blinded by unbelief in order that the Gentiles might find salvation. For the Gentiles will be united with the olive tree of the ideal Israel, something which will finally also be to the benefit of Israel. (We can compare with this the uniting of all believers in Christ in chapter 6). But all of what God sees as the true Israel will finally be saved. God’s promises have not failed (Rom 11:1-36).
5). That All Is In Fulfilment Of Scripture.
Underlying all that Paul argues in these three chapters is his use of Scripture, which was seen as authoritative by the Jews and by interested Gentiles. In Rom 9:6-29 he uses first the Law of Moses and then the prophets for the purpose of demonstrating his case for election, and closes with a selection of Scriptures from the prophets (Hosea and Isaiah) demonstrating that Scripture taught the acceptance of the Gentiles, and the fact that only a remnant of Israel would be saved.
In Rom 9:30 to Rom 10:21 we again find a miscellany of quotations, together with indirect references, from the Law, the prophets and the holy writings, demonstrating that the rejection of the Messiah by Israel, and the proclamation of the Gospel to all, was prepared for in Scripture, as was the unbelief and disobedience of the Jews.
In Rom 11:1-32 we have quotations from both the Prophets and the Holy Writings which demonstrate that only a remnant of Israel will be saved, while the larger part of Israel will fall into a spirit of stupor, the consequence being that, as a result of their stumbling, salvation will go out to the Gentiles, so as to provoke the Jews to jealousy. The illustration of the olive tree which follows is itself based on Scripture, and demonstrates the uniting into one of believing Jews and believing Gentiles. And finally it is Scripture that proclaims the coming of a Redeemer, as promised in Rom 3:24, who will cause ‘all Israel’ (Jacob) to be saved.
Why Does Paul Concentrate So Much On The Problem Of Israel?
We might now ask, Why in a doctrinal letter like this should Paul concentrate so much on Israel? One reason is apparent above. He was seeking to explain God’s sovereign activity in salvation, and was demonstrating the foundational basis of the true Israel of which the church consisted, from its very commencement. After all the church of his day held the Old Testament to be their Scriptures and looked to them for spiritual guidance. It was therefore necessary to make clear how those Scriptures revealed what had happened to God’s people, and connected the old with the new.
But another factor that affected Paul’s decision was that he was very conscious when writing his letter that he was writing to a church where many, even though the minority, still had close links with Judaism, and he knew that many Christian Jews may well still have been attending the synagogue on the Sabbath, while worshipping with Christians on the first day of the week, this in the same way as Christian Jews were observing Temple requirements in Jerusalem (Act 21:24). This could unquestionably also have been true of Gentile Christians who had formerly been Jewish proselytes. It may also even have been true of some God-Fearers, those Gentiles who had adhered to Jewish teaching whilst remaining uncircumcised, and who had responded eagerly to the Gospel. In consequence Paul recognised that unless they were aware of the truth, there would be the danger of their slipping back into Judaism in the same way as those to whom the letter to the Hebrews was written were in danger of slipping back, losing sight of how the coming of the Messiah, and what He had accomplished through His death and resurrection, had totally altered their situation. This was partly what he was hoping to guard against.
Indeed, many Jews who claimed to believe in Jesus as the Messiah were nevertheless trying to convince Gentile Christians that they needed to be circumcised and obey the whole Law, including dietary restrictions and observance of the Jewish Feasts (Rom 14:3; Rom 14:6; Rom 14:14-15; Act 15:1; Gal 2:3-5; Gal 2:12-14; Col 2:16), because they had failed to recognise the fullness of what Christ had done for them. They too had to be combated.
So that is why he now sets out to demonstrate that it is not physical Israel which is the true Israel, but that the true Israel is made up of ‘the elect’, that is of those who truly follow the Messiah (Jesus Christ), and respond to Him solely through faith (whether Jew or Gentile), seeking the righteousness of God through Him, the consequence being that all who fail to do so are no longer a part of the true Israel (Rom 10:3-4; Rom 10:9; Rom 11:17-28).
This aim has already been apparent in his letter earlier. During his attempts to demonstrate that all men are sinners Paul had specifically had to deal with the question of the special privileges claimed by the Jews, something which he had then dealt with in some detail because of what he saw as its importance (Rom 2:1 to Rom 3:9). As part of his argument he had set forward a summary of their main claims, ‘You bear the name of a Jew, and rest on the law, and glory (boast) in God, and (claim to) know his will, and approve the things which are excellent, being instructed out of the law, and are confident that you yourself are a guide of the blind, a light of those who are in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having in the law the form of knowledge and of the truth’ (Rom 2:17-20). In other words he made it plain that the Jews alone, among all nations, had received the direct revelation of God. This Paul was mainly willing to grant them, with reservations. But as he had also pointed out, due to their failure to actually observe the Law of which they were so proud, these privileges actually condemned them (Rom 2:1 to Rom 3:20).
But it could then be asked, had God not included the Jews in the number of His elect as described in Rom 8:29-30? This was the position held by many Jews. And it could further be asked, ‘If they were so privileged by God as to have the Law and the covenant sign of circumcision, why did they now suffer God’s rejection? Did not all Scripture make clear that such were the people of God?’ If the Scriptures did so, and if the Jews were no longer fulfilling God’s purpose, did it not mean that the Scriptures were wrong?
Paul had partially dealt with these points when he pointed out that many of those who called themselves Jews were in fact not true Jews, because their lives fell short of what was required of a true Jew (Rom 2:28). In his eyes the true Jew was a person who was a Jew inwardly, whose circumcision was that of the heart, and was spiritual (‘in the spirit’). It was not simply a matter of obeying what was written down (‘in the letter’). They had to be those whose praise came from God not from men. And he pointed out that this was true of both Jews and Gentiles (Rom 2:26; Rom 2:29). Thus he considered that there were still ‘true Jews’ but that they were in the minority. Indeed, he argued that all men, whether Jew or Gentile, could be ‘true Jews’ if their hearts were directed properly and they had experienced the work of God in their spirits. (The Jews would not actually have denied that Gentiles could become Jews. It was happening all the time. But what they would have argued was that it was only on condition of their being circumcised and submitting to the Law of Moses as interpreted by the elders. This was why some who believed in Jesus as the Messiah wanted all Gentile converts to follow this procedure).
On the other hand he saw that the majority of those who claimed to be true Jews were in fact not true Jews because they had not experienced that transformation of heart that was Scripturally required in order to be so (Rom 2:28-29). Thus he had already prepared for the idea that not all of Israel were ‘the elect’. This did, however, still leave open the claim of the Jews to be ‘sons of Abraham’, to be God’s people and the elect of God, and to have special privileges not available to Gentiles, something which they considered made them ‘a special case’, and put them in the ‘favourites’ category. Paul now answers these claims by demonstrating that not all Jews are seen by God as true sons of Abraham (Rom 9:7-8); by pointing out that God’s elect were but a minority of Israel (Rom 9:9-29), and by claiming that God in His sovereignty has the right to save whom He will, and has elected to save some from among both Jews and Gentiles (Rom 9:14-29).
He will then go on to demonstrate that the true Israel are those who believe in the Jesus as the Messiah (Rom 10:4; Rom 10:9), something which the majority of Israel have failed to do (Rom 10:16; Rom 10:19; Rom 10:21), and that the true Israel is therefore made up of both believing Jews and believing Gentiles who have been incorporated as one into ‘the olive tree’ (chapter 11), thus tying in with his position in Rom 2:26; Rom 2:29 and with Rom 9:23-24.
For all these reasons, therefore, these three chapters form an essential part of his argument for ‘justification by faith’ as being through faith in Christ Jesus alone. They demonstrate why so many Jews were excluded from it because of their unbelief, something clearly evidenced by Scripture, and why so many Gentiles were being accepted on the basis of faith in the Messiah (Christ). They also serve to demonstrate why the Jews were not being incorporated into Christ, and why they were bereft of the Spirit. It is because they do not respond in faith to their Messiah.
It is thus a mistake to see these chapters as only dealing with the question of the position of the Jews (or more strictly or Israel), even though Israel feature prominently in his argument. They also deal in some depth with:
1) The question of the acceptability of the Gentiles through faith, and their right to be incorporated into the true Israel which is now ‘the church’ (ekklesia, a Greek word which in LXX was one of those which indicated the ‘congregation of Israel’).
2) The danger of the Gentiles dismissing the idea of the privileges of the Jews, or of themselves slipping back (Rom 11:17-28).
For a detailed examination of the question as to whether the church (ekklesia – ‘congregation’) is the true Israel see the excursus after chapter 11.
The Jews And Israel.
One important point to be kept in mind when studying these chapters is Paul’s use of the terms ‘Jew’ and ‘Israel’. The term Jew(s) is used nine times in chapters 1-3, but only otherwise occurs in Rom 9:24, where it is stressing that both Jews and Gentiles are included among the elect, and in Rom 10:12 where it is used in the stereotyped idea of ‘Jew and Greek’ (compare Rom 1:16; 1Co 1:22-24; Gal 3:28; Col 3:11). It mainly indicates Jews in contrast with Gentiles, but is distinctively used of ‘true Jews’, which includes believing Gentiles, in Rom 2:26-29. In the remainder of his letters Paul uses the term fifteen times.
On the other hand the term Israel occurs twelve times in Romans, but only in chapters 9-11, and it should be noted that in these chapters there are in fact three/four different meanings of the term Israel. The term is incontrovertibly used:
1) To depict the totality of Israel (Rom 9:6; Rom 9:27; Rom 10:19; Rom 10:21; Rom 11:1-2; Rom 11:7; Rom 11:25).
2) To depict unbelieving Israel (Rom 9:4; Rom 9:31; Rom 10:1).
3) To depict the elect in Israel (Rom 9:6).
We would also claim that it is used to include both Jews and believing Gentiles (as with the term Jew in Rom 2:26-29) in Rom 11:25-26.
The term Israel appears only seven times throughout the remainder of his other letters, in which he speaks of Jew/Jews fifteen times. It refers:
Twice to ‘the children of Israel’ referring back to an historical situation (2Co 3:7; 2Co 3:13).
Once to ‘Israel after the flesh’ (1Co 10:18) which suggests that there is an Israel not after the flesh.
Once to ‘the Israel of God’ (Gal 6:16) where it appears in context to include all believers.
Once in Eph 2:12, where Paul then goes on to demonstrate that believing Gentiles have been incorporated into it.
Twice where Paul makes clear that he is an Israelite (2Co 11:22; Php 3:5.
It is quite clear therefore that the term ‘Israel’ is fluid.
These distinctions were presumably made because in Romans 1-3 he was deliberately aiming to make clear that it was the current Jews whom he had in mind in his strictures, while acknowledging that they were in the main not really ‘true Jews’, whilst in chapters 9-11 his arguments very much had in mind the days of ‘Israel’, and the Old Testament viewpoint on them. It was to ‘Israel’ that a large part of his quotations were addressed (e.g. by Moses, Isaiah, Hosea, David, etc.). However, as we have noted, he specifically seeks in those chapters to demonstrate that there is a true Israel in the midst of physical Israel, and as we will argue, that that true Israel includes believing Gentiles.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Israel Has Stumbled, but a Remnant Endures In Rom 11:1-10 Paul explains how Israel has rejected the Messiah. Although a remnant has been saved (Rom 11:1-6), the rest have been blinded (Rom 11:7-10).
Outline Here is a proposed outline:
1. The Remnant of God Rom 11:1-6
2. The Blinding of Israel Rom 11:7-10
Rom 11:1-6 The Remnant of Israel In Rom 11:1-6 Paul explains how a remnant of Israel has remained faithful to God’s promises. Paul uses himself as an example of this remnant (Rom 11:1), and he gives an example from the Old Testament of this remnant during the time of Elijah when Israel had rejected God (Rom 11:2-4). Paul says this remnant remains based upon God’s grace and not because of anyone’s good works before Him.
Rom 11:1 Comments – Israel is still God’s people, although some of them were cast off, while a remnant remains. Some Gentiles have been grafted in (Rom 11:17); However, Israel is still God’s beloved (Rom 11:28) (1Ch 17:22).
1Ch 17:22, “For thy people Israel didst thou make thine own people for ever ; and thou, LORD, becamest their God.”
God has not cast away all of Israel, since Paul was proof of some Israelites being saved and still God’s chosen.
Rom 11:4 Comments – God left a remnant of seven thousand (7,000) in Elijah’s time, and now, in Paul’s time, God still has a remnant left in Israel.
Rom 11:7-10 The Blinding of the Jews – The Jews are looking for a king as their Messiah, the Lion of Judah, as they did in the first century of Christ and not as a Suffering Servant. Therefore, they did not recognize Jesus when He first came as a Lamb slain from the foundation of the earth. However, this passage of Scripture seems to indicate that the Jews will receive Jesus in His Second Coming, when He appears from heaven in all of His glory. They will see Him as a King and receive Him at that time.
Rom 11:8 Word Study on “slumber” Strong says the Greek word “slumber” ( ) (G2659), “a prickling (sensation as of the limbs asleep), stupor (lethargy).”
Rom 11:9 Comments – The phrase “their table” refers to the blessings of the Lord. In the Tabernacle, the bread sat on the table. Jesus is the Bread of Life. This could mean that the blessed promises that God had given Israel turned into a curse for them.
Heb 9:2, “For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.”
The term “table” is also figurative of all the blessings that God gave to Israel. Their table of blessings is describe in Rom 9:4-5:
Rom 9:4-5, “Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.”
These were God’s blessings, which were intended to work in the nation of Israel to accomplish His divine purpose.
The Pharisees thought that they could not fall from this covenant with God:
Joh 8:33, “They answered him, We be Abraham’s seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?”
However, the Scriptures warn us against such pride:
1Co 10:12, “Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.”
Rom 11:10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
Rom 11:10
2Co 4:4, “In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.”
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Election Revealed in Israel’s Future Salvation – In Rom 11:1-32 Paul discusses God’s role of divine election for Israel in the future. He will explain how Israel has rejected the Messiah. Although a remnant has been saved (Rom 11:1-6), the rest have been blinded (Rom 11:7-10). This has opened the door for the Gentiles to be grafted into the vine of Israel (Rom 11:11-24), who shall later be restored to Him because they are His elect (Rom 11:25-32).
Outline – Here is a proposed outline:
1. Israel Has Stumbled, but a Remnant Endures Rom 11:1-10
2. The Grafting in of the Gentiles Rom 11:11-24
3. The Restoration of Israel Rom 11:25-32
Both Jews and Gentiles are in Need of Redemption – The warnings in Rom 11:1-32 are both to the Gentiles and to the Jews that all are in need of Jesus. Paul is giving neither people group too much self-confidence, nor is he being too hard on them.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Doctrinal Message: The Doctrine of Justification (An Exposition of The Gospel of Jesus Christ) In Rom 1:8 to Rom 11:36 Paul the apostle gives an exposition of the Gospel of Jesus Christ; but it is presented from the perspective of the office and ministry of God the Father as He makes a way of justifying mankind and bringing him into his eternal glory in Heaven. Thus, we can describe Rom 1:8 to Rom 11:36 as an exposition of the doctrine of justification through faith in Jesus Christ. The body of the epistle of Romans discusses God the Father’s method of justification for mankind (Rom 3:21 to Rom 8:16), while His predestination is emphasized in the introduction (Rom 1:1-7), His divine calling introduces this section of doctrine (Rom 1:8 to Rom 3:20), and His plan of glorification for the Church (Rom 8:17-28) and for Israel are given (Rom 9:1 to Rom 11:36) are given last.
In this grand exposition of the doctrine of justification through faith in Jesus Christ Paul uses a number of examples to explain God’s way of justifying mankind. For example, Abraham’s faith is used to explain how we also put our faith in Christ to be justified before God. The analogy of Adam being a type and figure of Christ is used to explain how divine grace takes effect in the life of the believer. He uses the example of the laws of slavery and freedmen to explain our need to walk in our new lives, no longer under the bondages of sin. The illustration of marriage and widowhood is used to explain how we are now free from the Law and bound to Christ. It is very likely that the Lord quickened these examples and analogies to Paul while he sought to understand and explain this doctrine of justification in the synagogues and to the Gentiles during his years of evangelism and church planting. So, when he sat down to write out an exposition of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, Paul drew upon many of the examples that he had used over the years under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Outline Here is a proposed outline:
1. The Calling of Gentiles Rom 1:8 to Rom 3:20
2. God’s Righteousness Revealed In Christ Rom 3:21 to Rom 8:16
3. Glorification by Divine Election: Glorification Rom 8:17-28
4. Summary of God’s Divine Plan of Redemption Rom 8:29-39
5. Divine Election and Israel’s Redemption Rom 9:1 to Rom 11:32
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Divine Election and Israel Having revealed God’s four-fold plan of redemption (Rom 1:16 to Rom 8:39), Paul next explains the role of Israel in His plan of election and glorification for the Church. Chapter nine discusses Israel’s past election by God (Rom 9:1-33), while chapter ten explains Israel’s current role in divine election (Rom 10:1-21). Chapter eleven explains Israel’s future role in God’s plan of election (Rom 11:1-32). These passages serve to explain how Israel and the Church are one, but its primary emphasis is to show that the Church’s glorification is dependent upon and awaiting Israel’s restoration and glorification.
Having revealed God’s plan for the church in the first eight chapters, we can say, “But wait a minute, the story of redemption is not complete. What about Israel and the fulfillment of Old Testament Scriptures? How does this plan a role in the Church’s redemption? The story of redemption is more glorious than has been revealed up to now. Rom 9:1 to Rom 11:36 expounds upon God’s plan of divine election for His people Israel. In this lengthy passage Paul will quote directly from no less than twenty-seven passages in the Old Testament, and with others implied, thus relying heavily upon his knowledge of these Scriptures in order to establish his points concerning Israel’s divine election. He will quote from eleven books of the Old Testament, relying heavily upon the book of Isaiah (Isaiah 10, Genesis 3, Hosea 3, Deuteronomy 3, Exodus 2, Leviticus 1,1 Kings 1, Job 1, Psalms 1, Joel 1, Malachi 1).
Paul has just explained the glorification of the Church in Rom 8:17-39. He will now turn his attention to the restoration and redemption of Israel as a part of this overall plan. The reason is because the Church’s glorification is wrapped up and dependent upon Israel’s glorification. God’s redemptive plan for Israel was never nullified, but only postponed while provision was made to include the Gentiles into this wonderful plan. Israel’s restoration will also mean the glorification of the Church (Rom 11:11-12) In other words, the Gentiles have been grafted into the vine, not taken the place of Israel, as Paul will explain in Rom 11:15-19. This is exactly what Jesus meant in Joh 4:22 when He said that “salvation was of the Jews.”
Paul will begin this lengthy passage in Romans 9-11 by stating Israel’s divine plan of redemption as “the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises” (Rom 9:4). He will say that God is “over all” (Rom 9:5). That is, God is watching over His divine plan of redemption to perform it. Paul will take three chapters to explain how God is performing His plan in and through Israel. Thus, the word of God has taken effect, as Paul asks rhetorically in Rom 9:6 a.
Chapter nine discusses Israel’s past election by God (Rom 9:1-33), while chapter ten explains Israel’s current role in divine election (Rom 10:1-21). Chapter eleven explains Israel’s future role in God’s plan of election (Rom 11:1-32). These passages serve to explain how Israel and the Church have become one body in God’s plan of redemption.
However, the fact that the epistle of Romans separates the discussion of the divine election of Israel from its discussion of the election of the Church reveals that God has a parallel, but unique, plan for His people Israel. Old Testament prophecy supports this unique plan that God is orchestrating through Israel by the very fact that many of these prophecies are for Israel and not the Church.
The fact that Paul takes three chapters to discuss Israel’s redemption reveals the love and importance that this subject had in his heart. His opening statements in Rom 9:1-3 express his sorrow and pain because of their rejection of Christ. If Paul the apostle could have chosen his own calling, he would have wanted to evangelize his own people Israel, whom he loved. In God’s divine order, He sent Peter to the Jews and Paul far away to the Gentiles.
Paul will open this lengthy passage by explaining that God’s plan of redemption for Israel is only for those Israelites who have chosen to believe in the promises to Israel; for he says, “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,” (Rom 9:8).
Outline Here is a proposed outline:
1. Election Revealed in Israel’s Past Election Rom 9:1-33
2. Election Revealed in Israel’s Present Rejection Rom 10:1-21
3. Election Revealed in Israel’s Future Salvation Rom 11:1-32
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
A Remnant of Israel Saved.
Meeting a further objection:
v. 1. I say, then, Hath God cast away His people? God forbid! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
v. 2. God hath not cast away His people which he foreknew. The apostle here in his own words states a false conclusion which some of his readers might draw from his previous presentation. Is it to be inferred that God has rejected His own people, those who are in truth His own? Note the emphasis on the pronoun “His. ” There is a vast difference between the people of the Jews and His people Israel. Considering that fact: Is the doctrine of Paul inconsistent with the Word of God? Paul answers with great emphasis: By no means! God would be contradicting Himself were He to reject His own people. And to substantiate his words, Paul refers to his own case. He himself was an Israelite according to the flesh, the blood of the patriarchs of old flowing in his veins. He was a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin, the youngest son of Jacob, or Israel. The fact that Paul claimed for himself a part in the kingdom of the Messiah showed that he did not teach the rejection of the true Israel.
The apostle repeats his assertion in v. 2: Not did God reject His people whom He foreknew. The true Israel, the spiritual Israel, the real children of God, stood before the eyes of God from eternity as His own people, as those whom He had selected for His own, whom He, according to His eternal counsel, chose for His own. That fact makes the later rejection of the people an impossibility.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
Rom 11:1-36
(4) The Jews are not finally rejected, but, through the calling of the Gentiles, will be brought into the Church at last. St. Paul, painfully recognizing the fact of the present exclusion of Israel as a nation from the inheritance of the promises made to their fathers, and having in Rom 9:1-33. and 10. accounted for and justified such exclusion, proceeds now to the questionBut is Israel as a nation finally rejected after all? He answersNo; impossible! God’s ancient covenant with his people stands; the remnant of believers even now is a sign of his continued favour to his ancient people, as was, in the time of Elijah, the remnant that had not bowed the knee to Baal; nor does the fact of its being a remnant only imply now, any more than then, that the nation as such is cast off; and further, the calling of the Gentiles, far from being intended to exclude God’s ancient people, will be the means eventually of bringing it wholly in. Such is the apostle’s prophetic vision of the future, in view of which he bursts at the end of the chapter into glowing admiration of the inscrutable ways of God. In the course of it also (Rom 9:17-25) he introduces a warning to Gentile believers not to pride themselves against the Jews because of present preference to them, or to regard their own position of privilege as indefeasible. It must still be borne in mind that it is the position before God of Israel as a nation that is all along in view.
Rom 11:1-6
I say then, Hath God east away his people! God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not east away his people which he foreknew (or, predetermined. See the same word, Rom 8:29). Wot ye not what the Scripture saith of (rather, in; i.e. in the passage concerning) Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel saying, Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what faith the answer of God ( , denoting a Divine communication to man; in this case by the “still small voice.” Only here in the New Testament; but cf. Mat 2:12, ; also Luk 2:26; Act 10:22; Heb 8:5; Heb 11:7) unto him? I have left to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to Baal. Even so at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. The usual interpretation of this whole passage, and notably that of the ancients, has been to take the proof of God not having cast off his people as beginning in Rom 11:1, with “for I also,” etc., and all the rest to be in sequence. Chrysostom’s explanation of the argument is to the following effect: God has not rejected his ancient people; for I myself am eminently of it; and I have been selected as a chief proclaimer and expounder of the gospel to the world; this would not have been the case if the nation had been cast off. But it may be said to me,” You are only one of the ancient people; you are not the people.” Nay, but I do not stand alone; there are thousands of Israelite believers as well as myself; and these are God’s true people, the people whom he foreknew. And of them there may be more than we are aware of; it is as it was in the days of Elias; he had supposed himself to be left alone; but he was told that there were seven thousand with him who were God’s true people still. And so now, there is a faithful remnant, the number of which is known to God alone, which is his people still, according to the election of grace. The same Father further understands the citation of the whole of the passage from 1Ki 19:14, though not required for the apostle’s proof, to be intended as significant. It would have sufficed, he says, to cite only what was said about a remnant being left; but the whole complaint of Elias is cited, so as to show by the way that the present rejection of Christ and persecution of the Church by the majority of the Jews had also its counterpart in ancient times; and thus the apostle, he says, (i.e. of the unbelieving Jews) . It is to be observed that the above interpretation of the passage, which in its main points has been most generally adopted, goes on two suppositions; vie. that “for I also,“ in 1Ki 19:1, is the first part of the proof that Israel is not cast off; and that “which he foreknew,” in 1Ki 19:2, is intended as a limitation of the meaning of “his people.” According to another view, decidedly upheld by Meyer, “for I also” is not part of the proof, but connected with : “I must needs say, God forbid! being myself a Hebrew of the Hebrews” Then, according to this view, comes the positive statement that God has not east off his people in the same general sense as before, after which the proof begins; the addition of not being a limitation of , but intended to enforce the idea of the impossibility of the final rejection of the race of Israel (cf. verse 29; also Psa 94:14 and 1Sa 12:22). The fact that, throughout the chapter, it is Israel as a nation that is in view, and that the coming of the whole nation into the kingdom of Christ is contemplated in the end, adds decided probability to this view of the significance of , though , etc., in 1Ki 19:1, may still be regarded as possibly part of the proof. St. Paul’s designation of himself as “of the seed of Abraham” seems meant to express that he was an Israelite of pure descent, not a proselyte or descended from proselytes. In Php 3:5, as well as here, he specifies his tribe as that of Benjamin, the tribe that with Judah had clung to the house of David, and had shared the privileges of Judah. The quotation from 1Ki 19:1-21. is given freely from the LXX., varying a little, but not so as to affect the meaning. One variation is in the feminine, instead of masculine, article before , which has been explained by supposing understood (so in the Authorized Version, “the image of Baal “), or by there having been a female Baal, or by the god having been supposed androgynous, or by the feminine being used of idols in contempt. St. Paul may possibly have found this reading in his copy of the LXX. The variation is of no importance with regard to the drift of the passage. “According to the election of grace,” at the end of 1Ki 19:5, does not seem to be directly suggested by the passage cited, but added by St. Paul so as to make plain his positionmaintained throughout the Epistle, and about to be pressed in this chapter on the consideration of Gentile Christiansthat the calling of all, whether Jews or Gentiles, is “of grace,” and not claimable as of right by any on the ground of the merit of their own works. And in order to enforce this position, he adds, And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace; i.e. the word “grace” loses its essential meaning. [But if of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.] The preponderance of ancient authorities is against the retention of the clause within brackets, which does not seem required. It is the same as in Rom 4:4.
Rom 11:7
What then? (What is the present state of things?) That which Israel seeketh for (i.e. ; of. Rom 9:30, Rom 9:31) he hath not obtained; but the election (i.e. the elect of the Gentiles, with a remnant only of the Jews being abstr, pro concret., like , elsewhere) hath obtained it, and the rest were hardened (). The verb denotes callousness rather than blindness, usually in the New Testament referring to the heart (cf. especially Joh 12:40, ). And such hardening is no new and strange thing, or to be taken as implying failure of God’s promises to his people; for it is but what Scripture tells us of.
Rom 11:8-10
According as it is written, God gave them a spirit of slumber (rather, stupor. The word is , cited from Isa 29:10 in the LXX. Cf. Psa 60:3, where the LXX. has . It is from the verb which means , properly “to prick” (see Act 2:37, ). The noun seems to have got its sense as above from the idea of a pricking shock, causing stupefaction), eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear, unto this day. And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling-block, and a recompense unto them. Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway. The references in Psa 60:8 are a combination of Deu 29:3 and Isa 29:10, quoted freely from the LXX.; that in Isa 29:9 is to Psa 69:23, Psa 69:24, also quoted freely. (For similar combination and free quotation of texts, so as to bring out Old Testament ideas, cf. Rom 3:10-19; Rom 9:32, Rom 9:33.) It is not necessary that the passages here referred to should be regarded as directly prophetic of the time of Christ. It is enough for the purpose of the argument that God’s people should be shown to be liable to the state of stupefaction described, without ceasing to be his people. And so the thought, which has been in view all along, is now taken up, of the present hardening of Israel as a nation not being intended to be permanent.
Rom 11:11, Rom 11:12
I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? i.e. in such wise as to fall, rightly given in the Vulgate as sic ut caderent. There is no need here to press the telic use of in , so as to require the translation, “that they might fall.” It is rather the use of contemplated result. God forbid. But by their fall (rather, trip, or false step). The word is , suitably used here in view of the figure of stumbling. The idea is that they had stumbled over the “stumbling-block” above spoken of, but not so as to lie hopelessly prostrate. Calvin translates well, “Num impegerunt ut corruerent?” and “eoram lapsu.” Alford adopts “lapse” for . But the word, as used in English, is not equivalent. If we retain the rendering “fall,” we must understand a partial or temporary fall, not prostration from which there is no recovery. Salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. (The word with the idea conveyed by it, is from Deu 32:21, which see.) Now if the fall (, as above) of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles, how much more their fulness? The words and , rendered in tile Authorized Version “diminishing“ and “fulness,“ have been variously understood. They are in contrast with each other, and must evidently be understood with reference to the same idea. Now, , as used afterwards in Rom 11:25 ), seems plainly to mean the full complement of the Gentiles; and so here must surely be meant the full complement of the Jews, pointing to the same idea as ,as in Rom 11:26. If so, must mean the defect from such full complementnot. indeed (as some have explained), the small number (i.e. of believers) now opposed to the full number in the future, but abstractedly, defect, or fewness, as opposed to fulness. This interpretation agrees with the meaning of in the only other place where it occurs in the New Testament, viz. 1Co 6:7, where it seems to signify “defect,” though used in that passage with a moral reference. The reason why the present of the Jews is the riches of the Gentiles is that the refusal of the Jews to accept the gospel had been the occasion of its being offered to the Gentiles (cf. Act 13:46; Act 28:28; also Mat 15:24; Mat 22:9). It is not, of course, meant that the gospel was not originally intended for all the world, but only that the present and immediate promulgation of it to the Gentiles had been due to the Jews’ refusal. Otherwise, we may conceive, it would have been after the fulness of the Jews had come in that it would have been extended through them to the Gentiles (el. Rom 15:8, Rom 15:9). Cf. Isa 60:1-22, where, as in other prophetic passages, the vision presented is that of the scattered sons of Israel being first brought into the glorified holy city, and the Gentiles gathering round them through the ever-open gates.
Rom 11:13, Rom 11:14
But ( is better supported than ) I speak to you the Gentiles. Inasmuch (or, so far) then (, which is not in the Textus Receptus, being read, and so connecting this clause with what follows) as I am an apostle of the Gentiles, I glorify my ministry, if by any means I may provoke to jealousy (in the Authorized Version, emulation, but it is the same word as in Rom 11:11) my flesh (i.e. my kindred), and may save some of them. To the Gentiles, whom he now directly addresses, he thus intimates that, though he is especially their apostle, yet beyond them he has his own countrymen still in view, whose conversion, through theirs, he has ever close to his heart. I glorify () my ministryi.e, my apostleship to the Gentilesmay mean that I add glory to it, if I may, through it, attain that further purpose.
Rom 11:15
For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? The vivid force of this concluding expression is weakened by attempts to define what is exactly meant by it; as, for instance (as some interpret), that the general resurrection will come when the fulness of the Jews as well as the Gentiles has come in. It is best to leave the grandeur of the conception to be felt rather than explained.
Rom 11:16
And if the firstfruit be holy, so also is the lump; and if the root be holy, so also are the branches. By the firstfruit and the root is signified the original stock of Israel, the patriarchs; by the lump and the branches, the subsequent nation through all time. The word , being here connected with , may be understood as referring to Num 15:19-22. The people are there enjoined to take of the first dough () kneaded after harvest a cake for a heave offering, called (LXX.). This consecrated sanctified the whole .
Rom 11:17, Rom 11:18
But if some of the branches were broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree (i.e. of the stock of a wild olive tree; cf. Rom 5:1-21 :34) wast grafted in among them, and wast made partaker with them of the root and the fatness of the olive tree, boast not against the branches. But if thou boastest, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. In thus addressing the Gentile in the second person singular, the apostle brings his warning home to any individual Gentile Christian who might be inclined to boast; though regarding him still as representing Gentile believers generally. They are compared to slips of the wild olive tree ( , oleaster), which was unproductive (cf. “Infelix superat foliis oleaster amaris”), acquiring richness and fertility by being grafted into the cultivated tree ( , oleo). Whether or not such a reversal of the usual system of grafting would have the imagined effect does not matter, as long as the illustration serves St. Paul’s purpose well, and helps us to grasp, his conception. The common process is
“… to marry
A gentle scion to the wildest stock,
And make conceive a bark of baser kind,
By bud of nobler race.”
In the illustration before us a scion of wildest stock is supposed to be made to conceive through the stock of nobler race to which it is united. The selecting the olive tree for illustration is happy, inasmuch as it was not only a characteristic produce of Palestine, but also regarded as symbolical of a plant of grace; cf. Psa 52:8, “I am a green olive tree in the house of God;” also Jer 11:16; Hos 14:6. See also the parable of Jotham (Jdg 9:8, Jdg 9:9), where the trees apply first to the olive tree to be their king; and observe also there the word “fatness,” used here also by St. Paul: ; (LXX.). The “branches” against which the ingrafted scion is warned not to beast are not exclusively either the broken-off or the remaining ones, but, as the sequel shows, the natural branches of the tree generally. The Gentile Christian is not to contemn the race of Israel because so large a portion of it is at present apart from the Church and under judgment; for it is, after all, from the stock of Israel, into which he has been engrafted, that he derives all his own fertility. As to the Christian Church being ever regarded as derived from that of Israel, the fulfilment and outcome of the ancient covenant, see note on Rom 1:2; and cf. Joh 4:22, “For salvation is of the Jews.”
Rom 11:19
Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. Though I might not beast against the original branches that remain, and among whom I have been grafted, yet I may against those which, for their unworthiness, have been broken off to make room for me: though not boasting against the faithful Jews, I surely may against the unfaithful and rejected ones.
Rom 11:20, Rom 11:21
Wellthe fact of the case is as you say; but why?because of unbelief they were broken off; and thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded, but fear: for if God spared not the natural branches, neither will he spare thee. (So, rather than as in the Authorized Version, according to the best-supported readings.) Thou art on thy trial, as they were, and alike liable to be broken off for the like cause; their present rejection should inspire in thee, not boast-fullness, but fear. The question has been raised whether St. Paul (using, as he does, the terms and ) has now the election and final salvation of individuals in view, or still only the calling to a state of salvation of races or communities of menof the Jewish race on the one hand, and Gentile Churches on the other. The whole purport of this section of the Epistle (Rom 9:1-33; Rom 10:1-21; Rom 11:1-36.) seems to demand the latter view. (As to , see on Rom 11:17.) Besides, if by the broken-off branches were meant simply individual unbelievers, how could we explain their being “grafted in again” (Rom 11:23, Rom 11:24), seeing that the contemplated restoration is regarded in Rom 11:25, Rom 11:26 as something that is to take place in the possibly distant future, after “the fulness of the Gentiles” has come in? Thus this passage is really irrelevant to any doctrines about individual election and salvation that may have been built upon it. It is, however, important as confirming the general view of Divine election not being irrespective of the conditions of human faith and perseverance.
Rom 11:22, Rom 11:23
Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: toward them that fell, severity (to be a warning to thee); but toward thee, God’s goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. And they, if they abide not still in their unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again. The reference here to God’s power to graft them in again may be suggested by the apparent impossibility, from a human point of view, of the Jews as a nation, having rejected Christ in person, and being so inveterately set against the gospel as they were, ever coming into the Church. But “with God all things are possible”. Nayso the thought goes onit would seem in itself more likely, and according to the nature of things, that the Jews should be brought into the Church, which is really their own, and the true fulfilment of their own oracles, than that Gentiles, who had had no similar preparation, should have been so.
Rom 11:24
For if thou wast cut out of that which was by nature a wild olive tree (), and wast grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree (): how much rather shall these, which be branches by nature, be grafted into their own olive tree? In what follows next the eventual coming of the Jewish nation into the Church is not only anticipated as possible or probable, but foretold prophetically. St. Paul announces it as a “mystery,” which his readers may be ignorant of, but which he wishes them to know. By the word , as used by St. Paul, is meant something hidden from man in the Divine counsels till made known by revelation (see 1Co 2:7, 1Co 2:10; 1Co 15:51; and, in this Epistle, Rom 16:25, Rom 16:26a passage which expresses clearly the apostle’s meaning in his use of the word). In the LXX. it denotes any Divine secret, which may or may not be made known to man (cf. Dan 2:18, Dan 2:19, etc.; Job 11:6; Wis. 2:22; Ecclesiasticus 22:22; 27:16). So also in the Gospels it is said to be given to the disciples to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to others in parables. In classical Greek were Divine secrets (as in the Eleusinian Mysteries) which were revealed to the initiated alone. St. Paul uses the word with the same essential meaning; only he speaks of mysteries which had already been revealed to himself and others by the Spirit, and has ever in view the Divine purposes, previously unknown, for the salvation of mankind. Thus in Eph 1:9, seq.; and Eph 3:3, seq., he speaks of the Divine purpose to “gather in one all things in Christ,” and that “the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs,” etc., as a mystery, “not made known in other ages unto the sons of men,” but now revealed to the “holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.” (The other passages in which St. Paul uses the word are 1Co 4:1; 1Co 13:2; Eph 5:32; Eph 6:19; Col 1:26, Col 1:27; Col 2:2; Col 4:3; 1Ti 3:9, 1Ti 3:16; 2Th 2:7.) Here he announces the Divine purpose to save “all Israel” at last through the calling of the Gentiles as a mystery which has been revealed to himself and others, and which he desires the Gentile Christians to be aware of, lest they should be “wise in their own conceits,” i.e. presume on their present position of privilege through ignorance of what is in store for Israel.
Rom 11:25-27
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that hardness (; see Rom 11:8) in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles he come in. And so all Israel shall be saved. here must mean the whole nation; not, as Calvin explains, “complebitur salus totius Israel Dei [i.e. of the spiritual Israel, as in Gal 6:16] quam ex utrisque [i.e. with Jews and Gentiles] colligi oportet;” for “Israel” must surely be understood in the same sense as in the preceding verse, where it denotes the Jewish nation as opposed to the Gentiles. , as seems required by the whole context, means coming into the Church (cf. Act 2:47, ). As it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: and this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. Referring, as throughout the Epistle, to the Old Testament for confirmation, St. Paul here, as in former instances, combines passages, and quotes freely, perhaps from memory. The main citation is from Isa 59:20, Isa 59:21, with an addition from Isa 17:9, the LXX. being followed. The citations are relevant, being specimens of many others that might have been adduced, predicting the final pardon and restitution of the house of Israel itself, notwithstanding judgments, through the Redeemer who was to come.
What follows, to verse 33, is in the way of summary and further comment.
Rom 11:28, Rom 11:29
As touching the gospel indeed (with regard to acceptance of the gospel now) they are enemies for your sakes (for their having become God’s enemies by rejecting and opposing it has been the occasion of your having been now called in): but as touching the election (God’s original choice of Israel to be his people. here cannot well have a concrete sense, as in Rom 11:7), they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts (, meaning “free gifts,” or “gifts of grace;” the word used to denote the special gifts of the Holy Ghost showered after Pentecost in the apostolic Church; but expressing generally, as here, whatever God, of his own good will, grants freely) and the calling of God are without repentance (i.e. unrepented of by him and irrevocable; cf. Num 23:1-30. 19, 20; also 1Sa 15:29). This denial of anthropopathy in God is asserted as a general truth, to be applied to his calling of “the fathers,” i.e. the patriarchs, and their seed after them, to be his people. It is true that, as is shown in Rom 4:1-25., there is a spiritual seed of Abraham, not necessarily of the house of Israel, to whom the promises in their ultimate scope were to be fulfilled; but the apostle regards it as impossible that the promises made primarily to the chosen people themselves should be revoked or fail of eventual fulfilment to them.
Rom 11:30, Rom 11:31
For as ye in times past believed not God,but now have obtained mercy through their unbelief (or, disobedience): even so have these also now not believed (or, obeyed), that through your mercy (i.e. the mercy shown to you) they also may obtain mercy. The position of after has led commentators, ancient and modem, to connect with the preceding , and to try to hit upon a meaning in this connection. But the sense of the passage, as well as the parallalism of the preceding clause, favours the connection of the Authorized Version, as given above. (For a similar position of , cf. 2Co 12:7.)
Rom 11:32
For God hath concluded them all in (literally, shut them all up into) unbelief (or, disobedience), that he might have mercy upon them all. Chrysostom and other Greek Fathers understood to mean only declared them to be unbelieving (or, disobedient), or convicted them of being so. Thus Chrysostom, , . So, it may be said, must the verb he understood where St. Paul elsewhere uses it with a similar reference in Gal 3:22, being there the nominative to the verb. But being the nominative here, the more obvious meaning seems to be that the shutting up was God’s doing. Some, understanding it so, would soften the expression by explaining that God allowed them to become so shut up. (Diodorus), But we need not shrink from the plain meaning of the expression, viz. that it was God’s own act. He is not thus represented as plunging men into inevitable infidelity, having given them no choice. As in the case of the hardening spoken of’ above, his dealings are judicial; the state into which. they are now by him shut up has not been undeserved. And, further, his ultimate purpose is here distinctly declared to be one of mercy. The way in which the apostle regards such present judicial dealing as conducive to final mercy appears to be such as this. It is the doctrine of the whole Epistle that salvation is to be attained by man’s renouncing his own imagined righteousness, and submitting himself to the righteousness of God. It conduces to this end that his should have its course and consequences; so that, conscience being at length awakened, he may long for deliverance from his hopeless state, and appreciate the offered salvation (see ch. 7.). So the Gentile world was long shut up in its self-induced, but also judicial, (Rom 1:18, seq.); that, “the wrath of God” being at length revealed to it from heaven, the “righteousness of God” might also be revealed to it and laid hold of. In like manner God deals now with the Jews, who still persist in going about to establish their own righteousness instead of submitting themselves to the righteousness of God. He shuts them up for the present in their , to the end that at length, after their long judgment, and stirred up by the fulness of the Gentiles coming in, they may feel their need, and accept salvation. in the concluding clause seems to mean generally all mankind, Jews as well as Gentiles; and (as was understood above with respect to “all Israel,” as suggested by the context and the general drift of the chapter) God’s embracing all races of mankind at last in the arms of his mercy by calling them into the Church. Thus the latter expression is not in itself adducible in support of the doctrine of universalism. Certainly the prospect of a universal triumph of the gospel before the end rises here before the apostle in prophetic vision; and it may be that it carries with it to his mind further glories of eternal salvation for all, casting their rays backward over all past ages, so as to inspire an unbounded hope. Such a hope, which seems elsewhere intimated (cf. 1Co 15:24-29; Eph 1:9, Eph 1:10, Eph 1:20-23; Col 1:15-20, would justify the glowing rhapsody of admiration and thanksgiving that follows more fully than if we supposed the apostle to contemplate still the eternal perdition of the multitudes who in all the ages have not on earth found mercy.
Rom 11:33-35
O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge (or, of the riches and wisdom and knowledge) of God! By is signified God’s omniscience; by , his wisdom in ordering events; by , if it be taken as a co-ordinate substantive, the abundance of his goodness. How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding (rather, tracing) out! (cf. Psa 26:6; Job 9:10; Job 11:7). For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? (Isa 40:13, quoted accurately from the LXX.). Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? (cf. Job 41:11, where the Hebrew has (Revised Version), “Who hath first given unto me, that I should repay him?” The LXX. (Job 41:2) gives an entirely different sense of the passage; and it would thus appear, as may be seen also in other eases, that St. Paul, though usually quoting more or less freely from the LXX., was familiar also with the Hebrew text, and exercised judgment in his citations.
Rom 11:36
For of him; and through him, and unto him, are all things. The view advanced by some, that we have here an intimation of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, cannot fairly be maintained. But it is strikingly significant of the apostle’s view of the essential Deity of Christ, that in 1Co 8:6 and Col 1:16, Col 1:17, similar language is applied to him. In the first of these texts it is said of the Father, , and of the “Lord Jesus Christ,” ) ; and in the second, of “the Son of the Father’s love,” , and and also . To him be the glory for ever. Amen.
HOMILETICS
Rom 11:15
“Life from the dead.”
The new wine of Christianity burst the old, worn skin of Judaism. Israelites were indeed the first preachers of the faith, and its first adherents were largely recruited from the synagogues. Still, as years passed on, it became apparent that, as a whole, the favoured nation was unprepared for a religion so spiritual, so universal, as Christianity. The rejection of the gospel by the Jews was the occasion of the progress of the gospel in the larger, the Gentile world. And the apostle, himself a Hebrew, yet the apostle of the Gentiles, recognizing this fact as included in the plans of Providence, yet looked beyond the present into the future, and saw, in the predicted ingathering of the sons of Abraham, the destined revival of true religion throughout the world. When an event so remarkable, so unlikely, yet so clearly foretold, shall occur, its effect shall be prodigious; it shall be nothing less than “life from the dead.” These words contain a principle truly and emphatically Christian. Let them be regarded in this light.
I. THE FOUNDATION OF THIS PRINCIPLE IS LAID IN THE DEATH AND RESURRECTION OF OUR SAVIOR. From the throne of his glory Christ describes himself as the Being who “was dead, and is alive again.” He must needs suffer, and taste death for every man; but it was not possible that he should be holden of it. His rising was more than a sign of his authority and of his acceptance with the Father. He rose as the Mediator and the Representative and the Forerunner of his people.
II. THE APPLICATION OF THIS PRINCIPLE IS SECURED BY THE OPERATIONS OF THIS HOLY SPIRIT. The Church professes, in the ancient Creed, to “believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life.” Without the influences of the Divine Spirit, the moral results secured by Christianity could not have been realized. Like the sunshine and the showers of spring, the Holy Spirit, by his descent and by his shining, fertilizes the barren soil of humanity. Like the breath which came from the four winds, and breathed upon the slain so that they lived, is the influence which awakens the dead. bones of the valley, and makes of them an exceeding great army. All spiritual life is evoked and sustained by the living Spirit of God.
III. THE PRINCIPLE REVEALS ITSELF IN THE NEWNESS OF INDIVIDUAL LIFE WHICH IS THE DISTINCTIVELY CHRISTIAN CHARACTER. The transforming power of the new faith was at once revealed, and has ever continued to be revealed, in the heart and life of the individuals who have received Christ. The former state, the state of heathenism and irreligiousness, the state of sensuality, or worldliness, or unbelief, may well be designated, and by the inspired writers was designated, “death.” And the contrast between that and the state of fellowship with God and of obedience to Christ could not be more strikingly described than in the language of the text, “Life from the dead.” It is nothing less than this that Christianity is intended to effecta change moral, radical, extensive, and enduring.
IV. THE PRINCIPLE IS MANIFESTED ON A LARGER, A SOCIAL SCALE. It is thus that it is represented in the text as operating; it effects a transformation in human society. To many cities and communities in the primitive times, the religion of the Lord Jesus proved an impulse of regeneration. And by it ancient society seems to have been saved from threatening corruption and dissolution. When death was to all appearance imminent, the gospel entered into the heart of humanity as a new vital principle, renewing that which was old, healing that which was sick, and reviving that which was dead. It is still the one, the only, hope for a race “dead in trespasses and sins.”
V. THE PRINCIPLE WILL BE EXEMPLIFIED IN THE ETERNAL LIFE OF CHRIST‘S PEOPLE. Both the resurrection of Christ from the dead, and that transformation of spiritual character which is called “the first resurrection,” are the pledge and earnest of the immortal life of the Lord’s people. It is distinctive of our religion that it holds out a definite and assured prospect of a life beyond the presenta life holy, imperishable, and Divine. The prospect of bright and blessed immortality has strengthened the arms of every true Christian labourer, and has cheered the heart of every Christian sufferer. It has been the joy of the living and the hope of the dying.
APPLICATION.
1. The words are a summons to the spiritually dead. There is life in Christ even for such.
2. They are an encouragement to Christian toil. Those who in their service of benevolence are oppressed by the deadness which encounters them, should recur to first principles, and consider the purposes of infinite grace and power, and the promises of spiritual revival.
3. They are a consolation and inspiration to Christians when drawing near to the death of the body.
HOMILIES BY C.H. IRWIN
Rom 11:1-10
Israel not utterly rejected.
Here the apostle, reflecting on the disobedience of the great majority of the Jewish people, and their consequent rejection, returns to the thought already expressed (Rom 9:27), that “a remnant shall be saved.” He himself is a living proof, he says, that God hath not utterly cast away his people. “For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin” (Rom 11:1). But those who have been rejected have suffered the just and natural punishment of their own unbelief. Two practical lessons are here taught.
I. A WARNING TO THE UNCHARITABLE. Even in the most corrupt Churches there may be true believers. This lesson is practically illustrated by Elijah’s mistaken or exaggerated view of the state of Israel in his time. “Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal” (Rom 11:3, Rom 11:4). How little Elijah knew of the true state of affairs! There is always a great danger, even amongst those who are most zealous for the truth, of depreciating or under-estimating the good that is in others. Want of charity to others may sometimes be found even in good men. Their very zeal leads them to depreciate others. If others do not come up to our standard of Christian doctrine, or Christian character, or Christian work, we are apt to imagine that they are not Christians at all. No doubt these other seven thousand servants of God were to blame for not having declared themselves more openly on the Lord’s side. Had they taken their proper place, and done their duty, they would have encouraged Elijah’s heart and sustained his hands; they would have made him feel that he was not alone in his efforts for the true and right; and they might even have prevented his flight. But there was no excuse for Elijah’s wholesale condemnation of every one in Israel except himself. “Man looketh on the outward appearance, but God looketh on the heart.” Especially in these latter days, when there are so many divisions amongst Christians, we need to cultivate that charity “which thinketh no evil,” which “beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.”
II. A WARNING TO THE CARELESS. One of the great dangers of our time is indifference. Many who regularly attend our churches do so as a mere matter of custom or respectability. They hear the Word of God, but it has no power on their hearts, no influence upon their lives. The fate of rejected Israel is a solemn warning to the careless and indifferent (Rom 11:7-10). If we do not use our privileges, they will one day be taken from us. The neglect of talents or opportunities is as much a sin as the abuse of them. Men very soon become gospel-hardened. Hence the “more convenient season” to which they look forward never comes. They cease to think seriously about their souls; they cease to have any desire for salvation. The spirit of slumber comes upon themthat fatal sleep of spiritual indifference. Their eyes are darkened, and they do not see how fast they are hurrying to their own destruction. Oh, how it becomes us to urge upon men the present acceptance of the present offer of salvation, the present performance of the duties that lie at their door!C.H.I.
Rom 11:11-32
The Jewish people: their past history and their future prospects.
The Jew is the greatest modern miracle. He is an absolutely unique figure in the history of the world. In every nation you find him, an exile and a fugitive, a stranger and a foreigner. Whence came he? how came he hither? He claims our respect, our attention, our pity, our Christian sympathy. These verses are a strong enforcement of the lessons of Israel’s history and a stirring appeal on Israel’s behalf.
I. THEIR PAST HISTORY.
1. They were the chosen people of God. This is an absolutely unique distinction so far as races of men are concerned. All who are believers on the Lord Jesus Christ, of whatever nation they may be, are in that sense the chosen people of God. But no single nation can ever claim to be the chosen people of God, except the Jews.
2. They were chosen to be a blessing to the world. The promise to Abraham was, “In thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” Wherever they went they carried with them the knowledge of the one true God; they have been a testimony to the nations of God’s faithfulness and justice; and at the same time they executed God’s judgments upon the nations for the preserving and purifying of the world. The Jews have been the historians of the world. A Jewish hand wrote the history of the creation. Jewish hands wrote the history of Israel’s connection with Egypt and Assyria and other great nations, which modern discoveries of ancient monuments and relics are confirming more strongly every day. When the Greek historian Herodotus, who has been called “the father of history,” was only beginning to write, Nehemiah, the last of the Old Testament historians, was already beginning to write. The Jews have been the teachers of the world. Unto them were committed the oracles of God. They prepared the way, too, for the coming of the Saviour.
3. Even in their humiliation and dispersion they have brought blessing to the world. “The fall of them” has been “the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles” (verse 12). “Through their fall salvation has came “to the Gentiles” (verse 11). “God hath not cast away his people whom he foreknew. He is still the God of Israel. The Jews may be despised, they may be hated by men, they may be neglected even by Christians who owe so much to them; but they are still the chosen people of God, bringing blessings even in their fall to those that despise them.
II. THEIR FUTURE PROSPECTS.
1. There is hope for Israel in the promises of God. As surely as God predicted the dispersion of the Jews, and that came to pass, so surely has he predicted a restoration of the Jews, and this also will come to pass. Many eminent Christians believe that there will be a literal restoration of the Jews to Palestine. It is remarkable that the late Mr. Lawrence Oliphant, in his book ‘The Land of Gilead,’ advocates, not for Christian reasons at all, but as a mercantile man, the colonization of Palestine by Jews, on the ground that they are the natural cultivators of the land, and that the country has never prospered except under Jewish proprietorship. But we are more specially concerned with the promises of their spiritual restoration. The Old Testament prophecies are full of these. “But Zion said, The Lord hath forsaken me, and my Lord hath forgotten me. Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee. Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands; thy walls are continually before me” (Isa 49:14-16). Again, we are told that it is but for a moment that God’s face is hidden from his people; and that in Israel’s restoration “all flesh shall know that I the Lord am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob” (Isa 49:26). And here in the New Testament, even after Israel’s rejection of the Messiah, St. Paul emphatically reasserts the certainty of Israel’s restoration. Though they, the natural branches, were broken off for a time, “God is able to graft them in again” (verse 23). “Blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in” (verse 25). But when that time comes “all Israel shall be saved” (verse 26). God will yet be as the dew unto Israel.
2. In the present position of the Jews there are many things that point to a bright future for God’s ancient people. Though scattered among the nations, they still preserve their identity and individuality. They have not been absorbed or assimilated by the larger and stronger races among whom they are placed. This in itself would seem to point to a great future in store for them. Not only so, but it points to a great blessing in store for the nations by means of them. “If the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?” (verse 15). When M’Cheyne returned from Palestine, he preached a sermon from the words, “To the Jew first,” advocating Christian missions to the Jews on the ground that judgment will begin with the Jews, on the ground of God’s special love for the Jews, on the ground of peculiar access to the Jews, and on the ground that the Jews, if converted, will give life to the whole world. This last is a point which deserves more attention than it receives. From their peculiar position, scattered throughout the nations, and being of an industrious and commercial disposition, the Jews are specially fitted to do missionary work. Reach the Jews as a people, bring them under the influence of the gospel, and through them you reach the whole world. Many writers who have given careful attention to this subject are of opinion that the success of missions to the heathen will be comparatively small until the Holy Spirit will enable the Jews to acknowledge Jesus as their Messiah, until he employs them as his instrument in the proclamation of the gospel among the nations. The Prophet Zechariah seems to favour that view when he says, “In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you” (Zec 8:23).
III. PRACTICAL LESSONS ENFORCED BY THIS SUBJECT.
1. The necessity of personal faith. While we consider God’s dealings with Israel for their unbelief and disobedience, let us consider our own relationship to God. “Be not highminded, but fear: for if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee” (verses 20, 21). Christian profession and Christian privileges will not save us, unless we have a personal and living union with Jesus Christ the Saviour.
2. The duty of sympathetic efforts on behalf of Israel. “For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy“ (verses 30, 31). God will fulfil his promises of the conversion of Israel just as he fulfils all his promisesby the use of means; by the missionary efforts of the Christian Church.C.H.I.
Rom 11:33-36
The unsearchable things of God.
These words may be taken as a fitting conclusion to the doctrinal or argumentative part of the Epistle. As we see how the apostle shows first of all, in the condition of both the heathen and the Jewish world, that all have sinned, and that all needed a Divine Saviour; and how he then unfolds the great doctrine of justification by faith and its results; as we see also the great privileges for time and eternity which are bestowed upon the Children of God; may we not also exclaim, “Oh the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!”
I. HIS UNSEARCHABLE WISDOM. “Oh the depth of the riches of the wisdom of God!” says the apostle (Rom 11:33); and again he asks, “Who hath been his counsellor?” (Rom 11:34). Beyond all human wisdom is the wisdom of Goda wisdom self-sufficient; derived from no other source; a wisdom of which, indeed, all human wisdom is but the faint reflection, the outcome and the overflow. Take the very wisest of menmen like Socrates, Plato, Seneca, or Bacon: how foolish were some of their thoughts, their proposals, or their actions! Take the very wisest man whom you know, and he will be glad sometimes to take counsel of some one else. Indeed, in this the wise man shows his wisdom. It is fools who despise reproof, and who will not take advice. But God needs no advice. He makes no mistakes. This thought of the unsearchable wisdom of God teaches us a lesson of faith and trust. God’s dealings are often mysterious to us, but there is an infinite wisdom behind them all. He doeth all things well. It teaches us also a lesson of obedience. God’s way is always wisest, safest, best, happiest. It might be said to us as Moses said to the children of Israel, “Behold, I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as the Lord my God commanded me. Keep therefore and do them, for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.”
II. HIS UNSEARCHABLE KNOWLEDGE. We have made much progress in scientific knowledge in this nineteenth century, and yet how very limited, after all, is human knowledge! How many things in chemistry, in geology, in astronomy, are still unrevealed! Even of a single science no man can say that he knows all about it, though he may have given a lifetime to the study of it. And then few men are masters of more than one branch of knowledge. Life is too short to do more than touch the surface of things. But the knowledge of God is unsearchable. “Oh the depth of the riches of the knowledge of God! Who hath known the mind of the Lord?” (Rom 11:33, Rom 11:34). Nothing is hidden from him. Every part and path of the universe is known to him. Every nation is known to himits national history, its national sins. Every family is known to him. The joys and sorrows of every home, he knows them all. The secret thoughts, the secret motives, the secret plans of every life, he knows them all. This thought carries with it great comfort. “Your heavenly Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.” He knows all our difficulties and all our wants. And as we look forward to the future, to the judgment-seat, is there not a comfort in feeling that God’s judgment upon us will be a perfectly fair one, because it will be based upon a complete and accurate and perfect knowledge of our lives? Our motives may be misunderstood by men; but God knows all about them. “Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.” It carries with it also solemn warning. If God knows all about me, how careful I should be to live as in his sight! How careful I should be to live as in the presence of the judgment-seat! “For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; nor hid, that shall not be known.”
III. HIS UNSEARCHABLE MERCY. “For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. Oh the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God!” Here God’s unsearchable wisdom and knowledge are represented as co-operating in his plan of universal mercy. Here again what depths there are that we cannot fathom! How very unmerciful men are at the best! How harsh the judgments even of professing Christians! and how limited and narrow are sometimes their views as to the possibility of the salvation of others! But the mercy of God is wider than all our creeds, and broader than the judgments of individual Christians. What a depth, what a breadth of mercy is revealed in those words of Christ, “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life”! Whosoever! In that word there is hope for the guiltiest of sinners who will repent of his sin, and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. So, while we speak of the unsearchable things of God, we do not take the agnostic position. We do not say that God is unknown and unknowable. We do not know the depth of his wisdom and knowledge and mercy; but we do know that he possesses and manifests all these sublime qualities in his dealings with men. There are mysteries in God’s providences, but there is one great truth which will bring peace to every soul that acts upon it; which will bring every soul that acts upon it into the eternal presence and fellowship of God: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.” There are thoughts that are unsearchable about God, and yet they are thoughts that we can feel within our spirits as the very power of God unto salvation, even as we can feel the warm sunshine on our faces though we cannot walk along the bright pathway by which it comes. Jesus Christ is God’s “unspeakable Gift;” yet many can say of him,” I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.” The love of God is called “the love of God, that passeth knowledge;” and yet many have experienced its power in their hearts. The peace of God is a peace “that passeth all understanding;” yet many have known how, in a time of disquietude or trial, that peace, like a sentinel, has kept our hearts and minds in quiet confidence and calm security. “Now we know in part; but then shall we know even as also we are known.”C.H.I.
HOMILIES BY T.F. LOCKYER
Rom 11:1-10
Grace and unbelief.
The apostle has shown (Rom 9:1-29) that God has the right, in his governance of human affairs, to take an instrument or lay it aside as he will; and (Rom 9:30 – Rom 10:21) that, in using this right, he acts, not arbitrarily, but according to reasons which approve themselves to his infinite wisdom. He will now show that even the unbelief of the elect people, and their consequent rejection by God, shall be made to contribute to the consummation of his purposes in the salvation of the Gentiles and the final salvation of the Jews themselves. But are the Jews even now wholly rejected? No, in truth, but only partially. As a people they are, though this only for the present, but not indiscriminately and totally. For the apostle himself is an Israelite; there is also a remnant of Christian Jews, as in the ancient days a remnant were true to God; and as for the majority, they are blinded in their unbelief, and hence self-excluded from the election of grace.
I. THE ELECTION OF GRACE.
1. There had been times of national reprobation in the past, but in the darkest day there had been gleams of light. For example, the times of Ahab: Elijah’s despair, and the seven thousand. So at intervals, more or less, throughout their history, from Moses onwards. And yet in the worst times some were true to God.
2. So it was even now. Truly the Jewish people had forfeited the privilege of its election, viz. its mission to the Gentiles as heralding the gospel of Christ. But while the people was “cast off,” as it might seem, in its collective capacity, it was not reprobated in its totality as consisting of individuals. Still there was the remnant. And in these latter days of Christian history have not individual Israelites played a distinguished part? e.g. Neander.
3. Yea, even the apostle of the Gentiles himself was an Israelite, of the purest blood; and the very fact that he, an Israelite, was “a chosen vessel” was sufficient to show that God had not “cast off” his people. And in him the Jewish people might almost be said to be fulfilling its office of heralding to the Gentiles the gospel of Christ. He did their work, and right well.
II. THE REPROBATION OF UNBELIEF. While the election, then, was very true, and never withheld from Israelites as suchhow could God deal so with them?yet there was a very terrible reprobation of Israelites alongside the election.
1. Had it not been so in the past? The wilderness-history; the monarchy; the captivities. Yes, truly, reprobation was no new thing.
2. And now: priests, people. Yes, alas! “He came unto his own, and his own received him not.” But this gives us the secret of the reprobation; it was their unbelief. It had been so from the beginning: “An evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God” (Heb 3:12). And this unbelief had blinded them, and hardened them; it had been as a stupor. And the very things in which they boasted themselves, their spiritual privileges, these had been to them a snare. “Now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.”
Let us remember that we may frustrate by our unbelief God’s best purposes concerning us. And also that we do not merely lose the blessing which our privileges are designed to give, but they themselves are perverted to our blindness and spiritual ruin. Our “table” is “made a snare, and a trap.”T.F.L.
Rom 11:11-16
How much more!
Blindness and hardness have come upon Israel, so that they have rejected their Christ, and consequently God has rejected them. They have stumbled, and have missed the way of life. But have they stumbled that they might permanently fall? Can God not work to some other, some better end than this? Shall not even their evil be overruled for good? Such is the question propounded by the apostle here; and in the following verses, glancing with prophetic insight into the promise of the future, he sees and declares the answer. Israel may still be the elect people; its very reprobation works for the world’s salvation; how much more shall its re-election!
I. Israel may still be the elect people. God chose them from the first, doubtless for some special fitness of spiritual temperament, to be his chief workers in the world. In Abraham he called them forth; in Isaac, in Jacob, he blessed them. The fathers of the race had worked for him, responding to his election: they were thus holy unto the Lord. But they were only the firstfruits; they were the root. The whole portion of the human race represented by them were to be similarly set apart for God’s proposes; the branches springing from that root were to blossom and bear fruit likewise. And so, even in the future, this now unbelieving people might fulfil their primal mission, turning unto the Lord.
II. Israel’s reprobation works for the world’s salvation. So close is the connection in which Israel stands to the world’s salvation, that even now, reprobate people as they are, salvation springs from them, and from the very facts which occasioned their own stumbling. The crossoh, how has that symbol of shame become the object towards which all the nations turn! “To the Jews a stumbling-block:” nevertheless, Christ crucified draws all men unto him! Their very fall, then, is the riches of the world; their loss the riches of the Gentiles. Out of them, even in their ruin, must the world’s deliverance come; for “salvation is of the Jews.”
III. What sort of salvation, then, shall be for the world when all Israel shall be saved? This is the final outlook of the apostle’s prophecy. And for this he does so glory in his apostleship. For the very salvation of the Gentiles now, without the Jews, must in time provoke the Jews to jealousy; they must one day look on with hungry, wistful eyes as they see the multitudes that have come from the east and west, and north and south, sitting down at the table of God. And when they turn unto their own Christ, and receive the new life of his gospel, oh, what an electric thrill shall pass through the whole world! It shall be, even to the converted Gentile nations, as life from the dead. “The light which converted Jews bring to the Church, and the power of life which they have sometimes awakened in it, are the pledge of that spiritual renovation which will be produced in Gentile Christendom by their entrance en masse.“ Think, ibr example, again, of the labours of such men as Neander (see Godet, in loc.).
The future is full of glorious hope. But meanwhile how much loss is occasioned by their continued unbelief! Let us beware that the purposes of God through us are not in like manner frustrated; that, being designed to some high mission for the world’s good, we do not make void the election of God.T.F.L.
Rom 11:17-24
The solemn warning.
It may be difficult, in such a passage as this, to keep the matters of individual salvation and election to privileges and responsibilities in the kingdom of God distinct. They do naturally bear an intimate relation the one to the other. But we shall be on safer ground in following the tenor of the entire argument here also, and seeing both the Jews of whom he speaks and the Gentiles to whom he speaks as related to God’s great world-purposes of salvation. For though it is true that the Jews who believed not forfeited their individual part in the kingdom of God, as well as the honour of extending that kingdom in the world; and that the Gentiles who believed became first partakers of a personal salvation, and then agents in disseminating God’s truth in Christ; yet it is the objective kingdom of Christ, and its extension, to which the apostle looks, and to which he would have them look. They, his readers, were now, in place, as it were, of the unbelieving Israelites, entrusted with the living power; it was for them, in conjunction with the believing Jews, to make known salvation to the world. We have heretheir position in the kingdom of God, their danger, and the ultimate aspect of the kingdom.
I. First, the position of these Gentiles in the kingdom of God. “Grafted in among them.” They had been “without God in the world;” but now, what a glory was theirs! made “partakers of the Divine nature”! And, being saved, charged as the heralds of God to carry this salvation to the ends of the earth] Truly, they had become “partaker of the fatness of the olive tree.” And so they seemed to be in the place of the broken-off branches; they were “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets.” Out of the very ruin of the Israelites had come their salvation; in the very room of the rejected Israelites they stood. Here was a transfer of blessing.
II. But this very position was fraught with danger. “Glory not;” “Thou standest by thy faith.” The danger of false pride was not an imaginary one; Gentiles probably did glory over the Jews. Nay, do they not glory still over these “unbelievers”? Do they not sometimes persecute them even to death? But how false was the pride! They were only grafted branches, borne by the ancient root of Israel. And yet they deported themselves with such consequence, and affected to despise their neighbour branches, as well as those that had been broken off. Another danger was involved in this: false, uncharitable pride was perilously near to a damnable unbelief; it was indeed that unbelief begun. Why had these branches been broken from the ancient tree? “Because of their unbelief.” Was not the same excision impending over unbelief still? Instead, then, of pride, let them cherish a holy fear, and walk humbly with their God. For most surely, if God spared not the natural branches, neither would he spare them.
III. Once again, if faith was the condition of a part in the kingdom of God, and unbelief alone incurred exclusion from its benefits and work, then these very Jew. s, unbelieving as they now were, might, in the time to come, by faith become again partakers: “God is able to graft them in again.” God is severe indeed, and all wilfully wicked ones incur his wrath; he cuts off his very chosen ones if they cherish an evil heart of unbelief. But God is good, and none shall ever seek his face in vain. And seeking him, and finding him, they shall surely be restored to their forfeited place. Think of the history of the Gentilestheir long abandonment because of unbelief. But God receives them freely as instruments for his work. “Much more shall the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree.”
Let us learn how terribly we may fall, and therefore be not high-minded. But let us also learn how gracious and forgiving is the God of love, and how he will heal our backslidings, and will not remember our sins.T.F.L.
Rom 11:25-32
The Divine philosophy of history.
The apostle has cautioned them not to be high-minded because of any seeming preference shown to them; he now guards against their gross speculations as to the nature of Israel’s rejection by setting forth emphatically its true character and intent. And in so doing he takes also a bird’s-eye view of the religious history and destinies of the world, especially as regards the mutual relations of Jews and Gentiles. We have here the religious dualism and universalism of the natural history of mankind.
I. THE DUALISM. As Godet very strikingly says, “The entire course of the religious history of the world is determined by the antagomsm created among mankind by the calling of Abraham, between a people specially destined by God to receive his revelations, and the other nations given over to themselves. From that moment (Gen 12:1-20.) there begin to be described those two immense curves which traverse the ages of antiquity in opposite directions, and which, crossing one another at the advent of Christianity, are prolonged from that period in inverse directions, and shall terminate by uniting and losing themselves in one another at the goal of history.”
1. The early period of the history of the world, after the call of Abraham, consisted of the contrast between believing Israel and the unbelieving nations. The Gentiles, as the beginning of the Epistle reminded us, were given over to their ignorance and sin. Why? Because they “were disobedient to God.” Theirs was a negative discipline to fit them for the reception of the truth. They were “shut up unto disobedience,” that they might be prepared to receive unmerited mercy at the hands of God. And the discipline did its work. For them there came a “fulness of the times.” They became sick of their own endeavours after wisdom and righteousness, and when Christ was preached unto them they received him. How had it been with the Jews? They were chosen by God to receive his truth, and the preparations for his salvation, in trust for the world. Theirs was a positive discipline. But the same sinful nature was in them as in the Gentiles, and it operated against the truth. They became hardened. Their very privileges became a snare to them. And at last, the “fulness of the times” having arrived for them also, when their own Christ came unto them, they received him not!
2. The later period of the world’s history, after Christ, consisted of a contrast, which itself was in contrast with the former one. The Jews were given over, are given over still, to their hardness of unbelief. They are the stoutest opponents of the gospel. They are “enemies.” God was compelled to cast them off, that the gospel which they refused might be set free for the acceptance of the world. And the Gentiles are reaping the benefits of their rejection still. Not as dogs, eating the crumbs from the children’s table, but themselves admitted to the forsaken festal board.
II. THE UNIVERSALISM. The dualism shall not always last; God is preparing the way for the religious fusion of all the peoples of the world; they shall become one in Christ.
1. The gospel which the Jews despised, and the salvation of their own Saviour, is leavening the Gentile world; the nations, one by one, are passing out of heathendom into Christendom. Apart from the question of the conversion to true spiritual religion of individuals, the world is being won for Christ.
2. But what of Israel? “The fulness of the Gentiles” shall “come in; and so all Israel shall be saved.” Oh, the strange irony of history! By the agency of the Israelites the world should have been won; now by the example and agency of Gentiles the Israelites shall be won. Yes; the hardening was but “in part,” some being believers from the first; but likewise only temporary”until.” For they are still the people fitted by their gifts for God’s great work, and therefore his call is not revoked. And the very working of their disobedience, as in the case of the heathen nations once, is but to fit them to receive his grace. And according to their own prophecies the Deliverer shall come, and “from Jacob” ungodliness shall be turned away. So then God will “have mercy upon all.”
Let us learn his ways of judgment. He will give us up to our sins, if we persist in cherishing them, till we repent. But let us learn also his marvellous love: repenting, he will receive us freely!T.F.L.
Rom 11:33-36
A hymn of praise.
The apostle has reached the height of his great argument, and now he will take one eagle glance at the whole way by which he has led his readersnay, at an the ways of God. We may not coldly dissect such glowing words as these, but pause with reverence to listen to his adoring wonder, his challenge, and his ascription of praise.
I. He has shown forth the belief and unbelief of man, and the marvellous way in which God, foreknowing all, has yet woven the web of history so that the wrath of man shall praise him. But man is lost in awe and wonder in presence of such knowledge and wisdom as are here
”A vast, unfathomable sea,
Where all our thoughts are drowned.”
The judgments by which God manifests his knowledge, and the ways by which his wisdom marches on to the accomplishment of his designs, are beyond our searching and tracing out. We may know the fact, but not always the cause; we may discern somewhat of the tendency and drift of his dispensations, but not all their force. And when the end breaks upon us at last, in the time of the accomplishment of all things, we shall see that what we formerly discerned was but a part of his ways, and our intensified astonishment must still exclaim, “O the depth of the riches!”
II. Man, then, has not had, cannot have, fellowship with God in the working out of such a high history. Man may indeed have worked, but God has overworked. And even man’s wickedness has been caught up into the general procession of God’s designs. But man has neither known his Maker’s mind, nor certainly has he counselled him with wisdom. And yet did the arrogant Israelite think to have merited aught from God? as though he had given him, forsooth, by his vain services, that it must be recompensed him again? This was indeed to arrogate to himself that knowledge of God’s mind, and counsellorship of his ways, which were impossible, and to affect which was preposterous, and darkly like blasphemy. But the apostle has already cast these presumptions down, even to the dust.
III. It only needs now that he reassert, once for all, the utter freedom of the actions of God, which he has argued, and at the same time the almightiness and goodness of his ways, as also previously set forth. “Of him.” He is the primal Fount of creation and of history. All things proceed forth from him, therefore surely he may put down one and set up another. “Through him.” The very sins of men are open to his pre-vision, and their folly and blindness, and the results therefore do not take him by surprise; but rather they are allowed for in the great plan of his world-kingdom, and therefore through him they may be said to work their way. “To him.” The very sins which he allows, and their consequences, adverse as they may seem to be to his plans, he can so control that they shall work for ultimate good. To him? Yes, to The perfecting of his wise plans. And these plans of his wisdom? They are all in love. Therefore to him we will ascribe the glory evermore. Amen.
Oh how utterly we may trust him, if we will! For only our persistent sin can shut us out from the might of his marvellous love.
“Here, then, I doubt no more,
But in his pleasure rest,
Whose wisdom, love, and truth, and power
Engage to make me blest.”
T.F.L.
HOMILIES BY S.R. ALDRIDGE
Rom 11:13
Magnifying one’s office.
The Epistles are prevented from being a dry compendium of doctrine by the personal notices scattered through them, and by the apostle’s open-hearted references to his plans and feelings. The human element is strong and interesting. What a light is thrown on the apostle’s self-denying labours by the declaration, “I magnify my office”! He gloried in his ministry, in his deaconship.
I. THEY WORK BEST WHO ARE PROUD OF THEIR OFFICE. Such freely devote the necessary time, thought, and energy to the efficient discharge of their duties. It becomes a “labour of love;” the heart quickens the circulation of the blood for all the activity requisite to faithful stewardship. Men can grow to like what at first was irksome, as we often see in prosecuting any study in science or art, till the subject and pursuit fascinate. We get clearer and more extensive views of the achievements possible. The apostle saw that the reception of the Gentiles might provoke the Jews to godly jealousy and fruitful emulation, and that the entry of the Jews into the Christian Church would prove a stimulus and revival to all. It is the office, not the holder, which is to be magnified. Where men have strutted like peacocks, airing their vanity; where Bumbledom has been harsh and overbearing, and man, “drest in a little brief authority, has played fantastic tricks,” the chief regard has been paid to self instead of to the service rendered. To glorify our ministry is to remain humble, and tender in heart, lest the ministry should be discredited and its use diminished.
II. ALL WORK IS HONOURABLE TO WHICH GOD HAS APPOINTED US. To receive a commission from an illustrious sovereign lends dignity to a task, and it is this thought of a Divine mission which has upheld many a hero at his post of toil and peril. In the great house of God vessels of every capacity and form and texture are needed, and whilst we may covet the best gifts and the noblest service, no department is despicable. Said Lincoln the president, when taunted with his former menial occupation, “Didn’t I do it well?” How may we know that we are in the right place? By the character of our work. Does it tend to happiness and usefulness, lessening misery and vice, supplying real wants, and elevating not degrading mankind, not ministering to base passions and low appetites? By success therein. Paul could point to the “signs of an apostleship.” Though some honest labourers may have to wait for the crowning harvest, they can yet discern tokens of its advent, which forbid despondency. By the strength of the inward impulse. There must be a “call,” a necessity within ratified by compulsion without. By the way they have been led. Has not the cloudy pillar guided our steps, the road being blocked in other directions? Our post is to be abandoned only when a higher position manifestly offers itself.
III. WORK DIRECTED TO THE SALVATION OF MEN CANNOT BE TOO HIGHLY ESTEEMED. As apostle of the Gentiles, Paul was charged with a splendid embassage. What hearts were cheered, what minds illumined, what consciences freed from gloom, what holiness and philanthropy effected, by the preaching of Christ crucified and exalted for the redemption of men! We do not disparage aught that ministers to men’s temporal comfort, that enlarges their knowledge of this present world and their mastery over its varied contents, that embellishes their homes and quickens their sensibility to pure sources of delight; yet to turn a soul from the error of his ways, to save from spiritual death, to instil into the breast enthusiastic loyalty to the cause of God, this connecting as it does the transitory with the eternal, preparing the spirit for a nobler exercise of capacity in a boundless congenial sphere hereafter, making earth the pathway to heaven, this must be allowed to be the highest, most awe-stirring mission that can engage our attention and engross our powers. Let those set apart to this work entirely or partially, prize their functions! Pastors, deacons, teachers, visitors, members of committees, etc., down to the very doorkeepers of God’s house, may exult in all that appertains to this vocation, may be conscious that therein they are co-operating with God and the angels. If great thoughts and little souls do not harmonize, neither does it become us to ally grand endeavours with mean conceptions. Behold this title glittering with heavenly radiance, “the work of the Lord.” This enterprise occupies the heart of the ascended Saviour, as it filled his life here below.S.R.A.
Rom 11:16
The dedication of a part the consecration of the whole.
The reference is to Num 15:1-41, where the ordinance is given that before the Israelites ate of the food of Canaan a portion of the dough should be taken as a cake offering to the priests. This was a recognition of God’s sovereignty, of his care and goodness, and by this acknowledgment the entire food was hallowed.
I. THE APPLICATION TO THE APOSTOLIC ARGUMENT CONCERNING THE FUTURE Or ISRAEL. The Jews as a nation seemed cast away, stripped of former privilege and dignity. Yet, since the patriarchs and prophets and priests had been declared holy unto the Lord, and had served him according to his appointment, the remainder of the people must be accounted sacred, and thus the apostle was led to expect the future salvation of Israel when it should turn to the Lord. The inner life of the tree should be restored and invigorated, and then the branches should again acquire beauty and fruitfulness. They were still “beloved for the fathers’ sakes.”
II. THE SAME METAPHOR APPLIES TO THE RELATIONSHIP OF CHRIST TO HIS PEOPLE. His holiness wraps them round. Not only were individual institutions and officers symbolical and prophetical of the Messiah, but the nation as a whole typified the Son of promise. “When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.” This explains many references of Old Testament passages to Christ by the evangelists and apostles. The nation was the “servant” of God, by which title, therefore, Jesus Christ is constantly designated. Israel as a whole was claimed as God’s peculiar possession. By right of redemption, and the death of the firstborn in Egypt, the tribe of Levi was allotted to Jehovah in recognition of his lien upon Israel, and the number of the firstborn over and above the number of that tribe was balanced by a money payment. Yet Israel was “a holy nation unto the Lord,” and the service of the priesthood represented, not superseded, the service of the nation. So is Jesus Christ termed “the Firstborn from the dead,” and the Christian Church is “the general assembly of the Firstborn.” Christ sanctified himself for his people, that his merits might attach to them. We talk much today of the solidarity of the race, and this helps us to realize how the leaven leaveneth the lump. Great men are seen to be universal property; the use of their gifts blesseth all mankind. As one takes a common tool and by deft handling convinces us of what it is capable; as one cultivates his estate as a nursery and pattern for all gardens; as another enlarges the domain of science whereby the navigator, the manufacturer, the thinker, and the consumer all reap a benefit; so did our Saviour teach us how much may be made of human life, how grand and pure and beneficent it may become, and by his sacrifice opened the kingdom of heaven to all believers. Well may we rejoice in his work! Our High Priest before the throne sanctifies all who come to God through him. At the jubilee festivities the Queen of Hawaii claimed precedence as a sovereign, and, her credentials being authenticated, her claim was granted; so may we, as the brethren of Christ, lift up our heads, being made “kings and priests unto God.” It is our connection with him that ennobles our condition.
III.. SOME PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS TO CONDUCT AND PROPERTY. To consecrate the heart to God covers all the life, sanctifies all the issues which flow from it. Here is the difference between religion and morality; here is the reason why some of the characters of Scripture are called “saints,” in spite of infirmities and lapses. The setting apart of Sunday as the Lord’s day hallows all the week. We are then what we are not able to be at other times, free from secular engagements and absorbed in devotion. And like a garden well watered in the early morn, the busy life retains its vigour and freshness through the heated hours which follow. The dedication of youth is a consecration of the after-life. Youth is like the morning of the day, and should be watered betimes with the dews of prayer. Prayer should be the foundation-stone of each enterprise. “When first thy eyes unveil, give thy soul leave to do the like; give God thy first thoughts then, so shalt thou walk with him all day, and in him sleep.” The devotion of a tithe or gift blesses all the increase. The beauty of recurring seasons may fail to arouse because of the very regularity of their succession. Nature’s constant stream of blessings may lull the soul into forgetfulness of the Giver. Hence the rites prescribed to Israel. “The altar unlocks the reaping gate.” The first grains feed the altar, the first sickle cuts an offering for God. The common household routine of baking is transfigured by the appropriation of a part of the dough to religious uses. And this, not as a burden, a hateful tax, but a task of love. Not instead of hearty devotion, but as an outward emblem of gratitude. The followers of Christ are to bless the world. They are “begotten through the Word of truth to be a kind of firstfruits of God’s creatures.” They are as salt to preserve, as light to illumine. All brought into contact with them should be the better because they were called with a holy calling.
CONCLUSION. The topic reminds us of our certain resurrection to heavenly activity and glory. Christ was the Firstfruits of them that sleep. Sad to us the interval when we see our friends no more; death’s icy hand has grasped them, and the worms do their work. Yet as Christ rose, so shall the seed spring up, we know not how. Death’s seeming triumph is a defeat. They shall be changed and glorified; the crumbling dust shall shine brighter than the noonday sun.S.R.A.
Rom 11:20, Rom 11:21
Spiritual pride rebuked.
The pride of man is a bladder easily inflated, and the apostle performed a salutary service when he showed how readily it might be pricked. The throwing open to the Gentile world, with additional advantages, of the religious privileges formerly confined to the Jews, begot in many converts an undue elation. Christianity inspires men with such expansive hopes that there is a danger of overweening vanity and presumption leading to a neglect of the conditions under which alone these hopes can be realized. The mercy of God may be illegitimately strained; the consciousness of spiritual freedom has often degenerated into licence of behaviour, and the “goodness” of God has made men unmindful of his “severity.” Hence the useful caution of the text. Distinguish, however, between “fear” and “dread.” Reverential, humble fear is quite compatible with gladness of soul and with unwavering trust in the promise of a free and full salvation. Let us adduce considerations that justify the caution of these verses.
I. WE HAVE AN IMPARTIAL GOD TO DEAL WITH. An arbitrary capricious monarch may select favourites, and dispense his gifts without regard to the moral worth of the recipients. Gentiles receiving an account of the river of Divine love abandoning its previous channel and inundating with a flood of blessing the surrounding parched lands, might be lapped into a false security, as if this blessing once granted could not again be withheld, no matter what the use made of the fertilizing influences vouchsafed. This would be to overlook the fact that it was for reasons the Jews were stripped of their exclusive advantages, and that the same reasons of abuse and ingratitude might cause the story to be repeated in the case of Christians, boastful of their position of knowledge and close access to God, and omitting to cultivate the appropriate graces and duties.
II. THE LAW AND AIM OF GOD‘S GOVERNMENT IS RIGHTEOUSNESS. Here we ascend to that essential attribute of God which is the guide and end of his dealings with his creatures. Well-being cannot be separated from well-doing. In no other way can the Almighty make his people happy than by inducing them to practise what is “lovely and of good report.” Christ died to save men from their sins. His offering frees men from the overwhelming burden of their past enormities, wipes off the score against them, but requires the pursuit of holiness as the consequence and token of their forgiveness. The bearing of good fruit is the sure criterion of the improved condition of the tree. The rose which blooms not tells not of proper grafting. Faith in Christ admits to his kingdom, and continued faith showing itself by works of obedience keeps us united to the source of prosperity and progress. Heaven needs a prepared people to enter into its bliss and service. Greatly do men err, therefore, who plume themselves on their conversion and go not on unto sanctification of life.
III. HISTORY TEACHES US HUMILITY. History is God in action. The facts of history are naught apart from the revelation of a Divine order they bring to the illumined mind. The fate of Israel is a tablet whose letters of fire should brand themselves on the memory as a declaration of the forbearing goodness of God to the faithful, and his ultimate severity to the disobedient. God changes not; what he has done he may do again. If “the natural branches” were not spared, why should he spare the objects of his after-clemency when they too turn aside to rebel counsels? The story of the antediluvians swept away by a torrent of righteous indignation; of the inhabitants of Sodom smitten in their pride and idleness; of the Canaanites “spued out” of the laud for their wickedness; of Babylon and Nineveh, where civilization was a hot-bed of vice, its riot and fumes extinguished by the desert sands; of Judas, who by transgression fell from his apostleship; of the temple at Jerusalem profaned by its guardians and then given over to the flames; of the candlesticks removed when the Churches of Asia “lost their first love;”all these are so many voices echoing the warning of the text, “Be not high-minded, but fear.” God spares long, but at last the thunderbolt falls. Sin marches to its destined grave.
IV. THE DECEITFULNESS OF OUR HEARTS CALLS FOR CONSTANT VIGILANCE. Human nature remains true to itself, brings forth the same fruit in all ages. Even in the renewed nature of the Christian, “the flesh lusteth against the Spirit.” The serpent of evil is scotched, not killed. Our environment exposes us to unceasing attacks. At any moment of relaxed tension, the foe may assault and carry the fortress. “Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.” The Saviour emphasized the caution, “What I say unto you, I say unto all, Watch!” Children are often reckless because they perceive not the danger; wise men neglect no precautions. Our safest course is to be intent on “the things that accompany salvation,” to fill the hands with beneficent activities, to engage the thoughts on noblest themes. Press toward the goal, and no enchanted meadow shall beguile our steps. Like earnest competitors, read the rules carefully and sedulously conform to them. Prayerful meditation on the Scriptures, humble confidence in God, and the opening of the heart to the sway of the blessed Spirit, will correct any wrong attitude, and enable us to persevere to the end. “Let us therefore fear, lest a promise being left us,” etc.S.R.A.
HOMILIES BY R.M. EDGAR
Rom 11:1-10
The election of grace.
We saw in last chapter how the Jews, absorbed in the task of working out their own self-righteousness, had not as a nation submitted themselves to the righteousness which is of God. The Gentiles were accordingly appealed to, and their reception of the gospel is being used to provoke the Jews to jealousy, and lead them ultimately to a better mind. In the chapter now before us the apostle pursues the argument, and exhibits more in detail the Divine plan in Israel’s rejection. The section now to be considered emphasizes the fact that, notwithstanding the general Jewish rejection of the gospel, there is an election of grace. And
I. PAUL IS HIMSELF AN EXCEPTION TO THE GENERAL REJECTION OF THE GOSPEL ON THE PART OF THE JEWS. (Rom 11:1.) To the question which in the Revised Version is put, “Did God cast off his people?” the apostle virtually answers, “By no means; I am myself a proof to the contrary.” Paul had, like his compatriots, gone about to establish his own righteousness; for years he had been taking that “roundabout way;” but he had been led by his interview with his risen Lord to see in the crucified Nazarene the Messiah of promise, and he had accepted salvation from his holy hands. No arrangement of God prevented any Jew from entering the charmed circle of Christ’s fellowship and identifying himself with the Christian Church. The once-despised Messiah was waiting to receive all that cared to call upon him for his help. It was, of course, a salvation all of grace. Self-righteousness was sacrificed in the process; but it was in consequence the more thoroughly Divine. Consequently, it was the Jews who kept themselves out of the promise and the blessing, and no preventive ordinance of God.
II. THE SAVED EXCEPTIONS ARE ALWAYS MORE NUMEROUS THAN WE IN OUR DOWNCAST CONDITION IMAGINE. (Rom 11:2-5.) The apostle goes back for comfort to the case of Elijah. In his days religion was in a desperate condition. One by one had Jezebel cut off God’s prophets, so that Elijah, as he looked over the doomed land, fancied he was the only witness left. The whole nation, in his judgment, had conformed to the idolatry of the court, and his were the only knees which had not bowed to Baal. It was this view of things which Elijah laid before the Lord. But to his surprise he is informed that God has still seven thousand worshippers who have not bowed to Baal nor kissed the idol. Matters were better than Elijah imagined. There was a larger remnant, according to the election of grace, than he could have anticipated. The same lesson is to be learned at a later period in Hebrew history, in connection with the restoration of the exiles to Canaan. In the restored remnant God had a larger proportion of faithful witnesses than to the outward eye was apparent; and they became a seed of blessing in the promised land. It is so, let us believe, always. We cannot see all the good which has been accomplished through the gospel. We must let God “write up the people,” and make out his own statistics. Our reckoning, like Elijah’s, will usually be astray. God has “hidden ones,” unknown to most, and his cause is not the hopeless one which pessimists suggest.
III. THE REMNANT SAVED OWES ALL TO DIVINE GRACE. (Rom 11:6.) For the gospel is a way of salvation by free, unmerited favour, as opposed to all self-righteousness. It may be humiliating to be able to contribute nothing to our own salvation, but to have to accept it full and free from a risen Lord; yet salvation through humiliation is better, surely, than being lost. “Grace,” says Dr. R. W. Hamilton, “is free favour; it can be related to no right, and contained in no law. It is extra-judicial: whenever bestowed, it depends upon the mere will of him who exercises it, or, upon what is the same thing, his voluntary pledge and agreement. If this latter be withdrawn, there may be a forfeiture of integrity and fidelity, but it is only so far unjust to those deprived of it, that a claim arose out of it; but no injustice accrues to them, considered in their original circumstances. A simple test of grace is presented by the following inquiries: Ought it to be exercised? Can it be righteously withheld? If we affirm the one, if we deny the other, it may be obligation, debt, reason, it cannot be grace, for this principle never owes itself to its object; and in not showing it, the person still is just. If there is any necessity for it, save that of demerit and its misery, ‘it is no more grace.'” By keeping the meaning of the term steadily in view, then, it will be seen that no injustice is done any who decline salvation by free grace and insist on some form of self-righteousness. For the latter is pure favouritism, and the former can alone be adopted by a God who is no respecter of persons.
IV. THE REJECTED JEWS WERE JUDICIALLY BLINDED. (Rom 11:7-10.) Now, when we consider what the Jews generally were seeking after, we can see justice in their rejection. Their idea was essentially ambitious; they wanted a military and worldly Messiah to put them at the head of the nations of the earth. This vaulting ambition overleaped itself and fell on the other side. They obtained not what they were seeking for. But the election, the humble-minded who were ready to be saved by grace, got their salvation and their place in Messiah’s spiritual kingdom. A spiritual Messiah satisfied their longings, while the proud, self-righteous worldlings were sent empty away. Now, what the apostle here notices is that their worldly spirit led to spiritual blindness. They were so engrossed with the table of self-righteousness and ambition that they could not see the offers and education of God’s Mace. This blindness comes in the very order of nature, and is judicial. Engrossed with purely worldly ideas, they get unable to see the gracious opportunities or to appreciate them. And so they experience a fate which they richly deserve. May God preserve us all from judicial blindness!R.M.E.
Rom 11:11-32
Israel’s future.
In the section now before us we find the apostle passing from the judicial blindness which had come upon his countrymen to its providential purpose. For God can make the wrath of man to praise him, and the remainder of that wrath he can restrain (Psa 76:10). Hence the blind course pursued by the Jews is made the opportunity for the Gentiles. Paul, when the Jews would not receive the gospel, turned to the Gentiles, and had his success as apostle to the heathen. But the Gentiles, in their turn, are to contemplate the restoration of the Jews to God’s favour, and to work for it. Israel is to be yet gathered into God, and when this desirable consummation comes, it will be as life unto the rest of the world. The future of Israel is what the apostle consequently in this paragraph discusses. And
I. THE FALL OF ISRAEL OPENED UP A WAY FOR THE SALVATION OF THE GENTILES. (Rom 11:11, Rom 11:12.) There is a strange unity in the human organism, so that when one part suffers another part is saved. How often, by applying a blister to an external part, the inflammation of an internal part is relieved! We have the same law of vicarious suffering obtaining in the human race. It is an organic whole on a vastly larger scale. And so we find one race suffering for the benefit of the others. Take the case of France, for example, and do we not see in it a nation which has been suffering from governmental experiments since before the Revolution, and becoming thereby a beacon and a blessing to the other nations of the earth? In the very same way, the Jewish nation, through rejecting Jesus, led to the evangelization of the Gentiles; and, as the “tribes of the wandering foot and weary breast,” the children of Israel have been among the most precious proofs of the Divinity of our Scriptures. Their fall has thus been the riches of the world; the diminishing of them has been the riches of the Gentiles. The sad fate which made exiles and aliens of Israel has led to the acceptance and sonship of the Gentiles. Moreover, the apostle argues that the fulness of the Jews, when this comes round, will be the condition of still more abundant blessing to the Gentile nations. A suffering nation leads to the blessing of other nations; when the suffering shall cease, still more abundant blessing shall be the result.
II. THE APOSTLE OF THE GENTILES HOLDS BEFORE THEM THE HOPE OF STILL MORE ABUNDANT BLESSING WHEN THE JEWS ARE GATHERED IN. (Rom 11:13-15.) As s skilful apostle, he wants to play the one against the other. He would stir up the Jews to jealousy by showing them how much the gospel has benefited the Gentiles; in this way he would try to save some of them. On the other hand, he would hold before the Gentiles the hope of far greater blessing when the Jews would be gathered in, and so set the Gentiles upon the enterprise of saving the Jews. Israel will thus be a stimulus to missionary enterprise. A great revival of spiritual life is to be expected through the ingathering of the Jews. So great will it be as to be properly compared to a resurrection, “life from the dead;” consequently the Gentiles, as a matter of spiritual profit, should seek the salvation of Israel. In this way Paul promotes the amity of the nations. He shows that in mutual good will is to be found their very highest good.
III. FROM THE HOLINESS OF THE JEWISH FIRSTFRUITS, AND OF THE JEWISH ROOT, THE APOSTLE FURTHER ARGUES TO THE HOLINESS OF THE LUMP AND THE BRANCHES. (Rom 11:16.) Now, the apostle here speaks of the benefit and blessing which the Jewish stock had already been to the world. Some take the reference in the firstfruits and root to be to the fathers referred to in Rom 11:28; the idea being that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were “holy,” that is, set apart, and so are their descendants to be. Others take it as referring to the elect Jews, such as Paul and the eleven, who, being saved, rendered hopeful the salvation of their fellows. But we think the firstfruits and toot can only apply fully to him who was the real Firstfruits and “the Root out of the dry ground.” The apostle’s argument in this case would be this: If Jesus, the seed of Abraham and real root of the true Israelitish race, has been such a pre-eminent blessing to the race, how much may we expect when the Jewish lump and the Jewish branches get consecrated to God as he has been! In this way the apostle follows up his suggested hope, enlarges it, and makes it the fountain of enterprise, with a view to the conversion of the Jewish race. We should not forget that the most influential and life-giving individual who ever lived in this world was a Jew; and, while we can never expect any of his countrymen to come up to his standard of blessing, we may and ought to expect that the conversion of Christ’s race to God must be of pre-eminent service to all the other nations of the earth. And as a matter of fact, Jews like Neander, who have got converted and consecrated, have become mighty blessings to their fellow-men. And so we hope great things from the first fruits and the root.
IV. THE APOSTLE WARNS THE GENTILES THAT THEIR ENGRAFTING INTO THE OLIVE TREE OF CHRISTIANITY CARRIES WITH IT SERIOUS RESPONSIBILITIES. (Rom 11:17-24.)
The Jews who have rejected Christ are branches broken off the real Root. In their place the Gentiles have been engrafted, so that the “eternal sap” proceeding from Christ the Root, and which should otherwise have sustained these Jews, passes over to the Gentiles. But now a fact about the olive tree is utilized by the apostle. Van Lennep tells us, in his work on the Holy Land, that “the olive tree grows to so great an age that the old wild root sometimes conquers the better graft, so that the fruit deteriorates, and the tree must needs be grafted anew”. It is this fact which the apostle makes the ground of his warning. If the Gentiles, forgetting that it was solely through God’s grace they had been grafted in, got infected with Jewish pride and self-righteousness, so that their fruit-bearing deteriorated, there would be nothing for it but through a new engrafting of the better Jewish stock to restore the olive tree to fruitfulness. God’s severity to the broken-off Jewish branches should make the Gentiles very humble and very earnest, lest it come round upon themselves. They should continue in the enjoyment of God’s goodness by exercising humble faith and ardent effort. If they will not discharge their responsibilities, they may expect likewise to be broken off. Unfaithful nations have been cut offthe candlesticks and Churches have been removed.
V. ISRAEL‘S PARTIAL BLINDNESS IS PERMITTED UNTIL THE FULNESS OF THE GENTILES IS COME IN. (Rom 11:25.) To prevent the Gentiles being wise in their own conceits, the apostle explains the mystery that Israel’s blindness has been permitted that the fulness of the Gentiles should be gathered in. The Gentiles have now their chance supplied. Their ingathering into Christ’s kingdom is God’s great present purpose. Missions to the heathen, the continuance of Paul’s work, are to be prosecuted m the hope of abundant ingathering. The privileges of the gospel are thus laid at the door of the heathen. In this way the great pioneer missionary, St. Paul, would foster the twofold missionary enterprise; he would have the most earnest effort put forth that the heathen nations should be gathered in; he would also have the saved Gentiles to seek still greater blessing through the ingathering of the Jew.
VI. ISRAEL AS A NATION IS TO BE SAVED AS THE CROWNING ACT OF GOD‘S MERCY. (Rom 11:26-32.) When it is said, “All Israel shall be saved,” it cannot mean that every individual Jew is to come right at last. Paul’s doctrine is not
“That not one life shall be destroyed,
Or cast as rubbish to the void,
When God hath made the pile complete;”
but evidently that Israel in its national capacity shall yet be gathered home to God. As touching the election, the Jewish nation or race is beloved for the fathers’ sakes. And God’s gifts and callings are without repentance. Consequently, we ought to entertain the hope that the Jewish nation shall yet be restored to God’s favour and be saved. And this is to be done through the mercy extended to the Jews by the saved Gentiles. In other words, the Jewish problem is to be solved by a mission to them from the Gentiles. In this way God has overruled the unbelief of Jews to the conversion of the Gentiles, and the conversion of the Gentiles is next to be utilized for the ingathering of the Jews. When the fulness of the Gentiles is followed by the conversion of the Jewish people, we may expect that unprecedented spiritual life and power and energy shall then be experienced over universal Christendom. May the consummation so desirable be hastened!R.M.E.
Rom 11:33-36
God, his own last End in everything.
The apostle has been throwing a very clear providential light upon God’s dealings with his ancient people. He has shown how their unbelief and fall were permitted in order to the gathering in of the Gentiles; and that the Gentiles thus brought in are to gird themselves for the ingathering of the Jews. But he does not profess to have sounded the depths of the Divine wisdom and knowledge by these suggestions. Before that mighty ocean he stands in unfeigned humility. He may have picked up one or two pebbles on the strand, but he has not explored the caves of ocean that lie before him. Yet amid the unsearchable character of God’s judgments, he can see one supreme end in everything, and this is God himself; “For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things.”
I. WHILE GOD IS KNOWABLE, HE SURPASSES ALL OUR CONCEPTIONS IN HIS WISDOM AND HIS WAYS. (Rom 11:33.) While believing in the radical error which underlies the agnostic philosophy, we must at the same time admit that God’s wisdom and knowledge, his judgments and his ways, are past our comprehension. Just as a child may know, that is, be acquainted with, his parent, while at the same time he is utterly unable to follow him into the regions of pure mathematics, comprehend the differential or integral calculus, or the new department of quaternions; so a Christian may know God as he reveals himself in Christ, and yet stand in awe before his unsearchable judgments. It is God’s glory to conceal a thing. If we saw through the whole administration of God, if there were no mystery or perplexity in his dealings, we should be living by reason and not by faith. It is more consonant with our finiteness in its relation to the infinite God that we should be asked to trust God, even when we see no reason for his action, when clouds and darkness may be round about his throne. What we have to consider, therefore, is the proper attitude of the Christian before the profundities of God. It surely should be one of humility, of reverence, and of thankful praise. Now, the partiality of Paul’s revelation may be profitably contrasted with the fulness of revelation as claimed by Christ. For he claimed to have all that the Father doeth shown to him (Joh 5:20). Nothing was or is concealed from Jesus. God’s ways were not unsearchable to him.
II. MEN SHOULD NOT IN CONSEQUENCE DICTATE TO GOD, OR TRY TO BE BEFOREHAND WITH HIM. (Rom 11:34, Rom 11:35.) Now, when the matter is put broadly in this way, it seems shocking presumption for men to set themselves up as superior persons, capable of dictating to the Eternal. Yet is this not the meaning of a large amount of the pessimistic literature of our time? If the pessimists had only been consulted, they could have planned a much better world than God has given us! His management has been, in their view, a mistake; and the only redeeming feature in the business is that he has somehow created the pessimists with judgments and powers superior to his own] It is time, surely, that these lamentations over a system of things so very imperfectly understood as yet should cease, and that creatures so finite should humble themselves before the Infinite, and acknowledge his superiority in all things.
III. AT THE SAME TIME, THE APOSTLE CONCLUDES THAT GOD IS HIS OWN LAST END IN EVERYTHING. (Rom 11:36.) It seems a hard thing to take in, yet the more it is pondered the truer if appears. “The supreme Sun of the spiritual universe, the ultimate Reason of everything in the world and work of grace, is the glory of God. Whole systems of truth move in subordinate relation to this; this is subordinate to nothing.” “There was nothing,” wrote Robert Haldane to M. Cheneviere of Geneva, “brought under the consideration of the students which appeared to contribute so effectually to overthrow their false system of religion founded on philosophy and vain deceit, as the sublime view of the majesty of God, which is presented in these concluding verses of the first part of the Epistle, ‘Of him, and through him, and to him, are all things.’ Here God is described as his own last End in everything that he does. Judging of God as such a one as themselves, they were at first startled at the idea that he must love himself supremely, infinitely more than the whole universe, and consequently must prefer his own glory to everything besides. But when they were reminded that God in reality is infinitely more amiable and more valuable than the whole creation, and that consequently, if he views things as they really are, he must regard himself as infinitely worthy of being most valued and loved, they saw that this truth was incontrovertible. Their attention was at the same time turned to numerous passages of Scripture, which assert that the manifestation of the glory of God is the great end of creation; that he has himself chiefly in view in all his works and dispensations; and that it is a purpose in which he requires that all his intelligent creatures should acquiesce, and seek to promote as their first and paramount duty. Passages to this effect, both in the Old and New Testaments, far exceed in number what any one who has not examined the subject is at all aware of.” Now, if our idea of God is high enough, we shall conclude that he stands in such perfect relations to his creatures that in seeking his own glory he is at the same time seeking their highest good. Of course, we have the power of resisting this claim of God, and setting ourselves in opposition to his glory; yet this will not defeat his purpose, but be overruled for his praise. It is not selfishness in the most high God to seek his own glory; he is so perfect in his love as to be incapable of selfishness. His glory conflicts with the real good of none of his creatures.
IV. WE OUGHT IN CONSEQUENCE, LIKE THE APOSTLE, TO RAISE OUR DOXOLOGY. It is when from the heart we sing our doxology to this perfect Being that we are rising up into our spiritual birthright and joy. How different Paul’s doxology from the agnostic deliverances before the unknown God! It is possible to adore and praise a God whose judgments are unsearchable, because the guiding principle of his perfect nature is love. May we all be led to praise him!R.M.E.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Rom 11:1, &c. I say then, &c. This chapter is of the prophetic kind. It was by the spirit of prophesy that the Apostle foresaw the rejection of the Jews, which he supposes in the two foregoing chapters; for when he wrote this Epistle, they were not in fact rejected, seeing that their church and polity were then standing: but the event has proved that he was a true prophet; for we know that in about ten or eleven years after the writing of this letter, the temple was destroyed; the Jewish polity overthrown; and the Jews expelled the promised land, which they have never been able to recover to this day. This, first, confirms the arguments which the Apostle has advanced to establish the calling of the Gentiles; for the Jews are infact rejected; consequently our calling is in fact not invalidated by any thing which they have suggested, relating to the perpetuityoftheMosaical dispensation; but that dispensation being wholly subverted, our title to the privileges of God’s church and people stands clear and strong. The Jewishconstitutionalonecouldfurnishobjectionsagainstourclaim; and the event has silenced every objection from that quarter. Secondly, The actual rejection of the Jews proves St. Paul to be a true Apostle of Jesus Christ, who spake by the Spirit of God; otherwise, he could not have argued so fully upon a case which was yet to come, and of which there was no appearance in the state of things, when he wrote this Epistle. This should dispose us to pay great regard to the present chapter, in which he discourses concerning the extent and duration of the rejection of his countrymen, to prevent their being insulted and despised by the Gentile Christians. First, As to the extent ofthis rejection: it is not absolutely universal; some of the Jews have embraced the Gospel, and are incorporated into the church of God with the believing Gentiles. Upon the case of those believing Jews he comments, ver. l-7. Secondly, As to the duration of it; it is not final and perpetual; for all Israel, or the nation of the Jews, who are now blinded, shall one day be saved, or brought again into the peculiar kingdom and covenant of God. Upon the state of those blinded Jews he comments, Rom 11:7 to the end of the chapter. His design in discoursing upon this subject was not only to make the thing itself known, but partly to engage the attention of the unbelieving Jew; to conciliate his favour; and, if possible, to induce him to come into the Gospel scheme; and partly to dispose the Gentile Christians not to treat the Jews with contempt;(consideringthattheyderivedalltheirpresentblessingsfromthepatriarchs, the ancestors of the Jewish nation, and were ingrafted into the good olive-tree, whence they were broken) and to admonish them to take warning by the fall of the Jews, that they improved their religious privileges, lest through unbelief any of them should relapse into heathenism, or perish finally at the last day. The thread of his discourse leads him into a general survey and comparison of the several dispensations of God towards the Gentiles and Jews; which he concludes with adoration of the depths of the divine knowledge and wisdom, exercised in the various constitutions erected in the world: Rom 11:30, &c.
This first verse is a question in the person of a Jew, who made the objections in the foregoing chapter, and continues to object here. The word ‘, rendered cast away, is very strong and emphatical. “Hath God absolutely, universally, and for ever thrust his people away from him?” See Act 27:31; Act 13:46, 1Ti 1:19.
Instead of Wot,Wot ye not,and maketh intercession; some read, Know ye notmaketh complaint.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Rom 11:1 . ] corresponds to the twofold , Rom 10:18-19 , but so, that now this third interrogative is introduced in an inferential form. In consequence, namely, of what had just been clearly laid down in Rom 10:18 ff., as to the guilt of resistant Israel in its exclusion from salvation in Christ over-against the Gentiles’ acceptance of it the difficult question might arise: Surely God has not cast off His people? Surely it is not so tragic a fate, that we must infer it from that conduct of the people? Paul states this question, earnestly negatives it, and then sets forth the real state of the matter. The opinion of Hofmann, that the apostle starts this question because the scriptural passages Rom 10:18 ff. show that it is to be negatived , is the consequence of his incorrect interpretation of those scriptural sayings, and is confuted by the fact that the negation is first given and supported in what follows , not drawn from what precedes , but made good by a quite different scriptural proof, Rom 11:2 .
. . .] Comp. Psa 94:14 ; Psa 95:3 ; 1Sa 12:22 ; on the form, see Winer, p. 86 [E. T. 111]. Reiche thinks, but erroneously, that the question is not expressed sharply enough, and that is to be supplied. has in truth the emphasis, and is placed first on that account; so that Paul’s simple idea is, that the casting off of God’s people, exclusion from the divine decree of the bestowal of salvation, recall of this destination to salvation, may not be inferred from what has gone before. Rightly, too, Bengel remarks: “Ipsa populi ejus appellatio rationem negandi continet.” This ratio negandi is then, in Rom 11:2 , additionally strengthened by .
The expresses horror at the , not at the (van Hengel), as though Paul had written simply without .
. . .] For I also , etc., expresses the motive for ! For Paul, as a true Israelite of patriotic feeling, cannot, in virtue of his theocratic self-esteem, admit that , but can only repel the suggestion with abhorrence. Comp. de Wette and Baumgarten-Crusius. A peculiar proof of the was yet to follow . Usually it is thought that Paul proves the negation by his own example , since he in truth was not cast off. So also Philippi. But apart from the consideration, that the example of a single elected one, however highly favoured, would be far from convincing, we see no reason why Paul should have added . ., . .; moreover, it appears from Rom 11:2 , where he defines the negation, emphatically reiterates it, and then confirms it from Scripture, that he did not intend till Rom 11:2 to adduce the argument against the , which he had only provisionally rejected in Rom 11:1 . Without the least indication from the text, Hofmann introduces into . the reference: Even I, the apostle entrusted with the calling of the Gentile world (which is supposed to imply a sealing of the sacred historical call of Israel); even I, as once upon a time a persecutor, deserving of rejection .
. ., . .] added, in order to exhibit the just and genuine privileges of his birth. Comp. Phi 3:5 ; Act 13:21 ; Test. XII. Patr. p. 746 f. The tribe of Benjamin was in truth, along with that of Judah, the theocratic core of the nation after the exile. Ezr 4:1 ; Ezr 10:3 .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
Third Section.The final gracious solution of the enigma, or the overruling of judgment for the salvation of Israel. Gods judgment on Israel is not one of reprobation. Gods saving economy in His Providence over Jews and Gentiles, over the election and the great majority of Israel, and over the concatenation of judgment and salvation, by virtue of which all Israel shall finally attain to faith and salvation through the fulness of the Gentiles. The universality of judgment and mercy. Doxology
Rom 11:1-36
A
1I say then, Hath [Did] God cast away his people? God forbid. [Let it not be!] For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of 2Benjamin. God hath [did] not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot [Or know] ye not what the Scripture saith of Elias [ , in the story of Elijah]? how he maketh intercession to [pleadeth with] God against Israel, 3saying [omit saying],1 Lord,2 they have killed thy prophets, and [omit and; insert they have]3 digged down thine altars; and I am left alone [the only one],4 and they seek my life. 4But what saith the answer of God [the divine response] unto him? I have reserved5 to myself seven thousand men, who have not [who never] bowed the knee to the image of [omit the image of] Baal. 5Even so then at [, in] this present time also there is a remnant according to6the election of grace. And [Now] if by grace, then is it no more [no longer] of works: otherwise6 grace is no more [no longer becomes] grace. But7 if it be of works, then Isaiah 8 it no more [longer] grace: otherwise work is no more [longer] work.9
B
7What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for [That which Israel seeketh for, he obtained not]; but the election hath [omit hath] obtained 8it, and the rest were blinded [hardened], ([omit parenthesis] According as it is written, God10 hath given [gave] them the [a] spirit of slumber [or, stupor], eyes11 that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto 9[not hear, unto] this day. And David saith,
Let12 their table be made [become] a snare, and a trap,
And a stumbling-block, and a recompense unto them:
10Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see
And bow down their back alway.13
C
11I say then, Have they stumbled that [Did they stumble in order that] they should fall? God forbid: [Let it not be!] but rather through [but by] their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke [in order to excite] them to jealousy [or, emulation]. 12Now if the fall of them [their fall] be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them [their diminishing] the riches 13of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness? For14 I speak [I am speaking] to you Gentiles [;], inasmuch [then]15 as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify [glorify] mine office: 14If by any means I may provoke [excite] to emulation them which are [omit them which are] my [own] flesh, and might save some of them. 15For if the casting away of them be the reconciling [reconciliation] of the world, what shall the receiving [reception] of them be, but life 16from the dead. For [Moreover] if the first-fruit be holy, the lump is also holy [so also is the lump]: and if the root be holy, so are the branches [also].
D
17And [But] if some of the branches be [were] broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed [grafted] in among them, and with them partakest [and made fellow-partaker] of the root and16 fatness of the olive tree; 18Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. 19Thou wilt say then, The17 branches were broken off, that Imight be graffed [grafted] in. 20Well; because of unbelief they were broke off, and thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded,18 but fear: 21For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed [fear] lest19 he also spare not thee. 22Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which [those who] fell, severity;20 but toward thee, goodness [Gods goodness],21 if thoucontinue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. 23And they also [moreover], if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed [grafted] in: forGod is able to graff [graft] them in again. 24For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed [grafted] contrary to nature into a good olive tree; how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed [grafted] into their own olive tree?
E
25For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits,22 that blindness [hardening] in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be [omit be] come in. 26And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written,23 There shall come out of Sion the 27Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant [the covenant from me, ] unto them, when I shall take away their28sins. As concerning [touching]24 the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes:29but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers sakes. For the30gifts and calling of God are without repentance. For as25 ye in times past have not believed [were disobedient to]26 God, yet have now obtained mercythrough their unbelief [the disobedience of these]: 31Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy [i.e., mercy shown to you] they also mayobtain mercy. 32For God hath concluded them all [shut up27 all] in unbelief [disobedience], that [in order that] he might [may] have mercy upon all.33O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom [riches and wisdom] and knowledge of God! how unsearchable28 are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! 34For who hath29 known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his 35counsellor? Or30 who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? 36For of him, and through him, and to [unto] him, are all things: to whom [him] be glory for ever. Amen.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Summary.A. Israel is not rejected; the kernel of itthe electionis saved; Rom 11:1-6. B. The great proportion of Israel, all except the essentially important remnant, the rest, are hardened, as was described by the Spirit in the Old Testament beforehand; but its hardness has become a condition for the conversion of the Gentiles; Rom 11:7 to Rom 11:31 C. Yet, on the other hand, the conversion of the Gentiles is in turn a means for the conversion of Israel, and thereby for the revivification of the world. The saving effect of their rejection gives ground for expecting a still more saving effect of their reception. The significance of the first-fruits and of the root; Rom 11:12-16. D. The very fact that the Gentiles believe, and the Jews do not believe, is largely conditional. Gentiles, as individuals, can become unbelievers; and Jews, as individuals, can become believers. For: a. The Gentiles are grafted on the stem of the Jewish theocracy among believing Jews. b. They can just as readily be cut off by unbelief, as the Jews can be grafted in by faith, because the latter have a greater historical relationship with the kingdom of God; Rom 11:17-24. E. The last word, or the mystery of Divine Providence in the economy of salvation. Every thing will redound to the glory of God. Gods saving economy for the world: The unbelieving Gentiles have been converted by believing Israel; unbelieving Israel shall be converted by believing Gentiles. The judgment on all, that mercy might be shown to all. Praise offered to God for His plan of salvation, for its execution, for its end, and for its ground; Rom 11:25-36. [Dr. Hodge divides the chapter into two parts: Rom 11:1-36. (1) The rejection of the Jews was not total. A remnant (and a larger one than many might suppose) remained, though the mass was rejected. (2) This rejection is not final. The restoration of the Jews is a desirable and probable event; Rom 11:11-24. It is one which God has determined to bring about; Rom 11:25-32. A sublime declaration of the unsearchable wisdom of God, manifested in all His dealings with men; Rom 11:33-36. So Forbes.R.]
Rom 11:1-6 : Israel is not rejected. The real kernel of it is already saved.
Rom 11:1. I say then [ ]. The may appear to be merely an inference from what was said last: All day long God stretched forth His hand. But as, in Rom 11:11, he makes a further assertion, designed to forestall a false conclusion, it has here the same meaning, in antithesis to the strong judgment pronounced on Israel at the conclusion of the previous chapter. Meyer maintains a more definite reference to the in Rom 11:10; Rom 11:18-19.
[Did God cast away his people? ; When Reiche remarks the absence of an from , and Semler an omnino from , they both fail to appreciate the emphasis of the expressions. The people and his people are different ones, just as an economic giving over to judgment and an eonic casting away (Psa 94:14; Psa 95:7). Bengel: Ipsa populi ejus appellatio rationem negandi continet. The Apostle repels such a thought with religious horror: .
For I also [ ]. According to the usual acceptation, he adduces his own call as an example; but Meyer, with De Wette and Baumgarten-Crusius, on the contrary, hold that Paul, on account of his patriotic sense as a true Israelite, could not concede that casting away.32 But it was just this inference from a feeling of national patriotism that was the standpoint of his opponents. A single example, it is said, can prove nothing. But by Pauls using the , he refers to the other examples which were numerously represented by the Jewish Christians among his readers.
Am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin [ , , . The spelling (LXX., Rec.) is poorly supported here and in Php 3:5.] As a true scion of Abraham and Benjaminthe tribe which., together with Judah, constituted the real substance of the people which returned from the captivityhe is conscious that he does not belong to the election as a mere proselyte; if he would speak of a casting away of Gods people, he must therefore deny himself and his faith (Php 3:5). [Alford distinguishes between the popular view, and another which implies, that if such a hypothesis were to be conceded, it would exclude from Gods kingdom the writer himself, as an Israelite. This agrees, apparently, with Langes view, but implies also that his people is used in the national sense, not of the spiritual Israel. See below.R.]
Rom 11:2. God did not cast away []. He follows with a solemn declaration founded upon the testimony of his own conscientiousness and of examples.
His people [ ]. He is as definite in characterizing His people, , as he is grand in his declaration of the not casting away. On the idea of , see Rom 8:29. Two explanations here come in conflict with each other:
1. The spiritual people of God are spoken of, the ; Rom 9:6; Gal 6:16 (Origen, Augustine, Luther, Calvin [Hodge], &c.).
2. Meyer says, on the contrary: The subject of the whole chapter is not the spiritual Israel, but the fate of the nation in regard to the salvation effected by the Messiah. Tholuck and Philippi [De Wette, Stuart, Alford], are of the same view. But the idea of people which the Apostle presents is so very dynamical, that it might be said: to him the election is the people, and Gods true people is an election. This is evidently the thought in chap. 9, and also in Rom 11:4-5 of the present chapter. But if we emphasize properly the idea of casting away, the idea of election does not any more stand in antithesis to it; that is, it is not thereby settled that there is an election. But as the defenders of view (1) mistake the full import of the further elaboration, especially Rom 11:26, so do the defenders of (2) pass too lightly over the gradations made by the Apostle. [Against the interpretation: spiritual people, it may well be urged, that all along the Apostle has been speaking of the nation; that this very chapter treats of the final salvation of Israel as a nation, and Paul says he is an Israelite, &c., of this historical (not spiritual) people. Besides, the Scriptures have suffered very much from assumptions respecting spiritual references. The only argument in favor of this meaning is the phrase: Whom he foreknew. It is held that this defines the people as those referred to in Rom 8:29 ff.; but may there not be a foreknowledge of a nation resulting in national privileges, such as the Jews enjoyed, as really as foreknowledge of an individual and consequent blessing? The whole current of thought in the chapterin fact, in chaps. 911is against any such interpretation as shall make His people = His spiritual Israel, over against Israel as a nation. If any limitation be made, it should be thus expressed: the real people of God among the Jewish people, recognizing them as the pith and kernel of the nation, not as isolated individuals from out the mass. This seems to be Dr. Langes view, and is probably that of many who are quoted in favor of (I). We thus retain the weight of the Apostles proof: For I also am an Israelite, and avoid weakening the main thought of the chapter, which undoubtedly is: the ultimate national restoration of the Jews. Were it not this, the whole argument of chaps. 911 ends with a non sequitur. Comp. Alford, in loco.R.]
What is meant by God casting away His people? 1. There is an election of believers, and it is far greater than one of little faith may think. (How many Jews themselves, of all periods, would like to have been friends of Jesus!) 2. The call of the Gentiles is even designed indirectly for the conversion of Israel, and individuals can always be gained. 3. The whole Divine disposition is designed for the final salvation of all Israel. Here, therefore, the thought of the mercy controlling this whole economy, comes in contrast with the thought of the great economical judgment of hardening. If, however, the expression all Israel be urged, and there be found in individuals of it an assurance of the salvation of the empirical totality, we would have to be indifferent to the idea of election with reference to Israel as a people, and let it consist in the idea of an absolute restoration.
Which he foreknew [ ]. This limits the meaning, in so far as the empirical mass of the people is not meant; but, on the other hand, the small empirical number of believing Jews is also not meant, but the people in their whole regal idea and nature. In this eternal destination of Israel, God cannot contradict himself. [Alford (so Tholuck, De Wette, Meyer) thus paraphrases: which, in His own eternal decree before the world, He selected as the chosen nation, to be His own, the depositary of His law, the vehicle of the theocracy, from its first revelation to Moses, to its completion in Christs future kingdom. Toward this national reference later commentators generally incline. See Hodge, on the other side.R.]
Or know ye not, &c. [ , … introduces a new objection to the matter impugned (Alford). Comp. Rom 9:21; Rom 6:3.R.] Tholuck: , quotation of the section treating of Elijah, as Mar 12:26 : . Examples from the classics in Fritzsche, to which may be added Thucydides i.9, and proofs from Philo, in Grossmann, &c. (see 1Ki 19:10; 1Ki 19:14). Incorrect view: , of Elijah (Erasmus, Luther [E. V.], and others). [Upon this point all modern commentators and translators agree, though they differ about the proper word to be supplied, whether section, history, or story; the last is simplest.R.]
Rom 11:3. Lord, they have killed thy prophets, &c. [, , … See Textual Note2.] The Apostle has quoted freely the real meaning of the words of the text. It makes no difference in the thing itself that, in the complaint which Elijah makes, he understands by the 33 the only remaining prophet, while the present passage understands the only worshipper of God. For the prophet, in his state of mind, was not inclined to acknowledge dumb or absconding worshippers of God as Gods true worshippers. But Paul, in conformity with his view, has transposed the words meaning altars and prophets. Meyer pays attention to the plural, the altars, as the temple at Jerusalem was the only place exclusively designed for service. But even in the temple at Jerusalem there were two altars. Yet the question here is concerning the kingdom of Israel, and therefore the remark of Estius is almost superfluous, that it was even blasphemy to throw down Gods altars on the high places.34
Rom 11:4. But what saith the Divine response unto him? ; On , see the Lexicons. [The substantive occurs only here in the New Testament. The cognate verb is used in Mat 2:12; Mat 2:22; Act 10:22; Heb 8:5; Heb 11:7, in the sense: to be warned of God, as the E. V. expresses it. The obvious meaning here: Divine response, seems to have been thus derived: the word first meant business, then formal audience given to an ambassador, and then an oracular response, though this was not the classical sense. See 2Ma 2:4; 2Ma 11:17.R.]
I have reserved to myself [ . See Textual Note.5To myself, as my possession and for my service, over against the apostasy into idolatrous service (Meyer).R.] The original expression: I will leave me, has been changed by the Apostle into the past tense, without thereby altering the sense, as has been done by the LXX.
Seven thousand men [ ]. It is sufficient to regard the number seven as the sacred number in relation to the services, and the number thousand as a designation of a popular assembly. Tholuck, after Kurtz (p. 591), considers the number seven as the perfect and covenant number. There are different ideas of perfection, according to which the Numbers 3, 4, 7, 10, , 12, may be together regarded as numbers denoting perfection.35 The Mohammedan saying, quoted by Tholuck, is interesting: that God never allows the world to be without a remainder of seventy righteous people, for whose sake He preserves it.
[Who never bowed, . Alford remarks on , which is a variation from the original, that it gives the sense of the saying, as far as regards the present purpose, viz., to show that all these were faithful men; in the original text and LXX., it is implied that these were all the faithful men.R.]
To Baal. The feminine has given occasion for much discussion. In the LXX. the name has sometimes the masculine and sometimes the feminine article. Why does it have the latter? As the LXX. of this passage has , Meyer has admitted a mistake of Pauls memory; Fritzsche holds that the codex which Paul read, contained a different reading. According to Olshausen, Philippi, Meyer [Stuart, Hodge], and others, the feminine form may be explained by the fact that Baal was regarded as an androgynous deity; but this is not sufficiently proved. According to Gesenius, the feminine form was understood as a contemptuous expression of idols; which view is also favored by Tholuck. The elder critics (Erasmus, Beza, Grotius) understood the word as applying to the statue of Baal. [So E. V.] Tholuck replies to this, by saying: without analogy. But the idol is the contemptible image or statue of the false god. Yet, if we hold that Baal had no reality as god to the Jews, but merely as an idol, the whole series of feminine forms used in designating Baal becomes clear at once (1Sa 7:4; Zep 1:4; Hos 2:8). Meyer is of the opinion that, in that case, it would have to read ; but this would fully destroy the probably designed effect of the feminine form. Tholuck observes: In the Gothic language, Guth, as masculine, means God; but gud, as neuter, means idols; and by this means he again approaches the explanation which, in passing, he has rejected. He does the same thing in his preceding remark: In the rabbinical writings, idols are contemptuously called . On Baal,36 comp. Winer, das Wrterbuch fr das christliche Volk, and the Hebrew Antiquities, by De Wette, Ewald, and Keil.
Rom 11:5. Even so then in this present time [ . Alford suggests: even in the present time, sc., of Israels national rejection.R.] God, according to that example, secures for himself a certain remnant [] of the elect, according to His constant law of electionthat is, according to the election of grace [ . Comp. Rom 9:11. Stuart: an election, not on the ground of merit, but of mercy.R.]
Ver 6. Now if by grace [ . logical, now.R.] Namely, that a existed, and always continues to exist. Grace, or the gift of grace, cannot be divided and supplemented by, or confounded with, a merit of works. Augustine: Gratia, nisi gratis sit, gratia non est.
[Then it is no longer of works: otherwise grace no longer becomes grace, , .But if it be of works, then it is no longer grace: otherwise work is no longer work, , , . The critical questions respecting the second clause are discussed in Textual Notes7, 8, 9, and at some length below. The discussion requires us to insert the verse in full.R.] We may now ask how we must understand the parallel clauses? The usual explanation places the following in antithesis to each other: Now if it is by grace (that remnant, or its causality, the election), then it is simply not by the merit of works, otherwise grace is no more grace.But if it be by works, then is it no more grace, otherwise work would be no true work, but mercenary work. In connection with this antithesis, clear and significant in itself, there arise, however, three questions: 1. Why does the Apostle enlarge the first proposition by the second, since the latter seems to be quite self-evident from the former? 2. What should the () mean, where should be so positively expected that the Vulgate [E. V.], and other versions, have even substituted ?Esther 3. Why is used instead of [to correspond with ] in the second sentence?
As far as the first point is concerned, Tholuck says: The genuineness of the antithesis , &c., is more than doubtful. Its oldest authorities are Cod. B., Peshito, Chrysostom, Theodoret (in the text). On the contrary, it is wanting in A. C. D. F. G., Origen (according to Rufinus), Vulgate, the Coptic Translation, and others. Yet Fritzsche has undertaken to defend this reading, and lately Reiche also, in the Comm. Crit., p. 67; Tischendorf has preserved it in the text, &c. According to Tholuck, the addition has the character of a glossarial reflection. This appearance of such a self-evident amplification could, however, have also occasioned the omission.37
The in the first sentence means, according to Tholuck: to result, to come out as. This explanation is just as doubtful as that of Meyer: in its concrete appearance it ceases to be what it is by nature. [So De. Wette, Alford, Philippi. The distinction between and is ignored by many commentators.R.] The , in the second sentence, must be understood, according to the current explanation, as the effect of the in the first sentence. In addition to this, we have the question: What is the meaning of work is no more work? Does the Apostle regard only mercenary work as a true work? We attempt the following explanation: If it is of grace, then it is no more of works; for grace does not first exist, or is not first in process of existence by works. Grace, according to its very nature, must be complete before works. But if of works, then no further grace exists,38 because the work is not yet complete, and never will be complete as meritorious work. Works, considered as meritorious, are always an incomplete infinitude. But if grace should first be the result of works, it would not be present until the boundless future. If we accept this view, the literal expression is saved; and to the first declaration, that grace and the merit of works preclude each other, there is gained a second: Grace is naturally a prepared ground before the existing work, &c. (see also the continuation in Rom 11:7). The reading of Cod. B.: , , , seems also to be a special attempt at an explanation. The real purpose of the antithesis is, that the Apostle proves that the election of the people could only consist of those who establish themselves on grace, but not in the party which establishes itself on works. If the matter were as those who rely on the righteousness of works desire, there would not be any grace; and grace would never be accomplished, because the righteousness of works is never accomplished, just as little as the tower of Babel was ever finished.39
Rom 11:7-11. The great body of unbelievers who have not been able to obtain grace by works, are not the real substance of the people. They are essentially an apostate remnant of hardened ones. Yet their stumbling was not designed for their ruin, but for the salvation of the Gentiles.
Rom 11:7. What then. . This inference, as well as the , becomes quite definite, if we refer to the conclusion of the previous verse.That which Israel seeketh for, he obtained not [ , . The latter verb is usually followed by the genitive; rarely, in the classics, by the accusative, as here. Hence we find, in Rec. (no MSS.), . See Meyer for the authorities for this use of the accusative. The meaning is not: to find, but to attain to, to obtain.R.] Israel did not obtain that which it sought to obtain by worksgrace, as the end of the finished work. Like a phantom beyond the ever unfinished work, grace had to recede ever further in the distance. The can, at all events, also mean zealous striving [Fritzsche, Philippi, Hodge]; but it is clear that this idea would not be in place here. [Meyer says it indicates the direction.R.] The present properly denotes the permanence of the effortthe permanence of the effort to find the city of grace at the end of the long road of self-righteousness.
But the election obtained it [ . The election for the elect, as the circumcision for those circumcised. Vivacious expression.R.] Meyer says: For they were subjects of Divine grace. Paul has already said, in other words: For the elect are distinguished by having received Gods grace in faith.
And the rest were hardened [ . The verb is rendered blinded in the E. V., here, and 2Co 3:14; in other places, hardened, which is decidedly preferable.R.] Israel is divided into two parts. One part is the , although it is the minority; the other is the , the , although they are the majority. Meyer says, they were hardened by God. [So Hodge, Stuart, Philippi (with a reservation), and Tholuck, in later editions; comp. Rom 9:18. The passive certainly, includes this thought.R.] Paul says, they have been hardened by a reciprocal process between their unbelief and Gods judgments. The sense undoubtedly is, that those who remain for the incalculable periods of judgment have become, in understanding and will, insusceptible of the appropriation of salvation in Christ (Meyer), and insusceptible, above all, in their heart and spirit; because the last sparks of the spiritual life in them, which alone can understand the gospel of the Spirit, have expired; just as a sapless plant is no more supported by the sunshine, but is reduced to a dried-up stalk.
Rom 11:8. According as it is written. [Stuart is disposed to find in (. B., Tregelles: ) a declaration of analogy, rather than a citation of prophecy. So Tholuck; but Fritzsche, Meyer, and others, hold the latter view. The perspective of prophecy, in stating such cases, embraces all the analogous ones, especially that great one, in which the words are most prominently fulfilled (Alford). See below, note on Rom 11:10. On the free citation, see Textual Notes9, 10.R.] The citation is freely collated from Isa 29:10; Isa 6:9; Deu 29:4. Meyer denies that Isa 6:9 is taken into consideration; but if we compare the two other passages, they do not suffice for Pauls citation, since the assertion in Deu 29:4 contains merely negations.
God gave them. By no means a mere permission (Chrysostom), but likewise not simply activity, without something further. The ground of the judgment of a spirit of slumber [ ], or of deep sleep ( ), on Israel, is definitely declared, in Isa 29:10, to be the guilt of the people; Rom 11:13 ff.But the passage in Isa 6:9 ff., which constitutes the principal part of the present quotation, is explained immediately afterward in the conduct of Ahaz, in chap. 7. The third passage from Deuteronomy brings out more definitely the negative element in this hardening process: Yet the Lord hath not given you a heart to perceive, &c. On the meaning and interpretations of , see Meyer, p. 420; Tholuck, p. 596.40[Unto this day; to be joined with what immediately precedes, since they are substantially from Deu 29:4. So modern editors and commentators generally.R.]
Rom 11:9. And David saith. The second passage is taken freely from Psa 69:22 (LXX.). Meyer says: David is not the author of this Psalm (against Hengstenberg), which must be judged analogously to the expression in Mat 22:43. Comp. on that passage the Commentary on Matthew, p. 404. First of all, it is quite easy to prove that the sufferings of the people in exile could not have been in mind in writing either the lamentations of Psalms 19., or the imprecations on enemies. First, the theocratic exiles did not say that they had to suffer for the Lords sake (Rom 11:7), and for zeal for His house (Rom 11:9). But they said just the contrary (see Psalms 106; Isaiah 64; Daniel 9.). And though the exile could also invoke Gods wrath on the heathen, and wish them evil (Psa 79:6; Psa 137:9), the prophetic imprecations are very different, for they portray the judgments of blindness that are invoked on the spiritual adversaries of the theocratic faith, and of the house and name of the Lord, who proved their enmity by persecuting Gods servant. Comp., in this respect, Psalms 59; Psalms 64; Psa 69:22-28; Psalms 109. In such Psalms, either the personal, collective, or ideal41 David chiefly speaks, because David has become the type of Gods suffering servant. We therefore hold, with Luther, Rosenmller, and others, that the concluding words (from Rom 11:32) are a later addition.42
The imprecations themselves are a propheticoethical view, clad in the sombre drapery of the Old Testament. [Dr. J. Add. Alexander remarks, on this verse of Psalms 69 : The imprecations in this verse, and those following it, are revolting only when considered as the expression of malignant selfishness. If uttered by God, they shock no readers sensibilities; nor should they, when considered as the language of an ideal person, representing the whole class of righteous sufferers, and particularly Him who, though He prayed for His murderers while dying (Luk 23:34), had before applied the words of this very passage to the unbelieving Jews (Mat 23:38), as Paul did afterwards.R.]
Let their table become a snare [ ]. Philippi, with Origen, Tholuck, and others, has referred the table to the law and its works. But when Melanchthon says: doctrina ipsorum, the latter must be very carefully distinguished from the law itself. Chrysostom: their enjoyments; Michaelis, and others: the Jewish passover meal, at which the Jews were besieged, and which was followed by the destruction of Jerusalem; Grotius: the altar in the temple itself. The point of the figure becomes blunted, if we hold, with Tholuck, that table is mentioned, because it is at the table that surprise by an enemy is most dangerous. Rather, the table, or the enjoyment of life by the ungodly, becomes itself their snare, &c. Now this table can be something different at different times; generally, it is the symbol of comfortable banqueting in wicked security over the ungodly enjoyment of life (see Mat 24:38). With the Jews of the Apostles day, this table was their statutes, and, above all, their illusion that the earthly glory of the kingdom of Israel would be manifested by triumph over the Romans. It is a fact that the table, the ungodly enjoyment of life, becomes a snare for the ruin of the adversaries of the Holy One; just as the pious mans table becomes a sign of blessing and victory (Psalms 23.). While they think they are consuming the spoils of their earthly sense, they become themselves a spoil to every form of retribution; just as the bird is led into the snare, and the deer is hunted, or perishes by a stumbling-blockthat is, a trap.
[And a trap, and a stumbling-block, and a recompense unto them, . See Textual Note11.R.] Paul has freely elaborated the original forms still further, by inserting . Likewise follows in the LXX. The Vulgate interprets by captio; Fritzsche and Meyer adopt the same, while Tholuck and Philippi prefer the instrument [Ewald, Alford: net] of hunting, which applies to both the other means of capture, and not merely as a hunting-spear. Meyer is incorrect in saying that this ruin is explained in what follows. For the following words describe the inward relations of the judgment of the ungodly, in antithesis to the judgment in the outward relations of life, which have been described by the foregoing words.
Rom 11:10. Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see [ ]. Spiritual blindness is one form of the inward judgment, and total despondency of spirit is the other.
And bow down their back alway [ . . See Textual Note12.R.] The LXX. has translated the words of the original text, and make their loins continually to shake, by: make their backs crooked always; a change to which the Apostle adheres, probably because it gives the expression of permanent dejection a somewhat more general character.By bowed-down backs, Meyer understands spiritual slavery, while the early expositors understood Roman slavery. Yet this would be an important deviation from the original text. But, in reality, the bowed-down backs should mean the same thing as shaking or tottering loins.
Tholuck and Philippi have correctly observed, against Fritzsche, and others, that in Rom 11:8 (and the same thing applies also to Rom 11:9) the question is not the citation of a prophecy, according to which the unbelief of the Jews at the time of Christ must be a necessary result. Yet this remark does not suffice to show that the quotation takes place as in the citations in Mat 13:14; Joh 12:40; Act 28:26; which refer, vi analogi, to the classical passage for the unbelieving conduct of Israel toward God, in Isaiah 6. The most direct practical purpose of these citations in the New Testament is to prove to the Jews, from their own Holy Scriptures and history, that there was always in Israel an inclination to apostasy; and that it is therefore not contrary to faith in prophecy to charge the present Israel with apostasy (see the defence of Stephen). But then a really typical prophecy also underlies this purpose; yet it is not a fatalistic prophecy, but the idea of the consequence of ruin even to its historical consummation (see Mat 23:32 ff.).
Rom 11:11. I say then, Did they stumble in order that they should fall? [ , ;] A qualification to guard against a false conclusion. They have certainly stumbled and fallen; but the purpose of their guilty stumbling and falling under the previously described judgment of hardness was not that they should fall, in the absolute sense, into the ruin of the . Their falling is economically limited, and economically turned and applied, to the salvation of the Gentiles (see Rom 9:17; Rom 9:23). The stumbling of the took place against the stone of offence (Rom 9:32-33; Rom 10:11). The denotes the final purpose of the Divine judicial government, and is not merely , as Chrysostom, Augustine, and others, would have it.43 Tholuck makes the noteworthy remark, that , to stumble (which must not be referred, with De Wette, and others, to the mentioned in Rom 11:9, but rather to the in Rom 9:33), has the sense of moral stumbling; Jam 2:10; Jam 3:2; and that , on the contrary, has this ethically figurative sense neither in the Hebrew, nor Greek, nor Latin, but only the sense of yielding to, sinking under.
But by their fall [ . On , see p. 184, Dr. Schaffs note.R.] Meyer has no ground for not finding in . the meaning of falling, but only the delictum (Vulgate) [so Alford], for they have really fallen, yet that was not the object (see also Tholuck, p. 600). Tholuck properly opposes, also, the view that here the principal thought is, that Israel should be restored, although an intimation of the restitution of Israel is included in the words. It is evident that the conversion of the Gentiles is primarily designated as the final object of Israels fall; with this final object there is, indeed, again associated the final object of the preliminarily isolated and of the finally total conversion of Israel. The . here can as little mean a mere passing away, as a mere infortunium, which Reiche and Rckert, with others, would render it.44
Salvation is come. . must be supplied, according to the connection. The Apostle cannot have regarded this tragical condition as an absolute necessity; but he may very well have considered it an historical one. Israel, having been placed in its existing condition by its own guilt, did not desire the Gentiles, under the most favorable circumstances, to participate in the messianic salvation, except as proselytes of the Jews; and still more did it indulge the thought of vengeance on, and dominion over, the Gentiles; but it was impossible for Christianity, as Jewish Christianity, to become universal in the Gentile world. In addition to this came the experience of the Apostle, that he was always driven more decidedly to missionary labors among the Gentiles by the unbelief of the Jews; Mat 21:43; Act 13:46; Act 28:28. The negative condition of this transition was apostolic preaching, and especially that of Paul.
In order to excite them to jealousy [ . Instead of jealousy, we may substitute emulation, as the word is not used in a bad sense (Hodge). The clause is telic; the purpose was not the total fall, but that their moral fall might be used to further the salvation of the Gentiles, and this, in turn, bring about their own salvation as a nation.R.] This purpose was associated from the outset, and the mention of it is here in place for the removal of the fatalistic thought, that their fall was decreed for their ruin.
Rom 11:12-16. As the unbelief of the Jews has been the means of effecting the conversion of the Gentiles, so shall the conversion of the Gentiles be still more not only the means of effecting the belief of the Jews, but, with this return of Israel, still greater things shall occur.
Now if their fall and their diminishing the riches of the Gentiles [ … . In order to explain this difficult verse, we must start with the in Isa 31:8, which does not occur in classical language, but is there represented by [Attic for , a defeat], the contrary of . In the passage cited, means not merely the being overcome, but the military diminution which is the result of defeat. At all events, it is to be taken here as diminution in captivity, according to the original text, for menial servitude. Likewise, in 1Co 6:7, the word means a moral loss, a diminution of the power of believers in opposition to the world. We therefore hold that the expression places the two other ideas in a more definite light, and that the whole expression alludes to the scene of a routed army. Even in military affairs, the dynamical antithesis of broken power and of the full sense of power is connected with the ideas of numerical diminution and numerical fulness; as, in the present instance, the weakening is connected with the loss of men, and full power with the complete number. Tholuck bases his explanation on the meaning of in Rom 11:25.
Explanations of the : diminutio (Vulgate); minority, defectus (Chrysostom, and most commentators); injury, loss, fall (De Wette, and others). De Wette brings this explanation in exclusive antithesis to the first, with reference to 2Co 12:13. Fritzsche: Diminution of messianic salvation. Philippi: The damage to Gods kingdom by their falling away. But Meyer remarks, with good reason, that the thrice-repeated is in the same relation, the subjective genitive. Tholuck: Reduced state.45 According to Tholuck, Meyers explanation is: the minority; but Meyer himself pronounces against this explanation, and understands the word to mean, sinking and ruin. Ulfilas has interpreted the word, which means at the same time the loss of men and the weakening, by the deficiency. There is a real difference made by the reference to the believing Jews as the minority of believers (paucitas Judorum credentium; Grotius), and the antithetical body of unbelievers, the moral field of the dead, or the captured, those subjected to slavery. But here, too, both parts cannot be separated. The are the whole people; the believers are the sound remainder of the army; while the unbelievers, the same as the fallen, or captives, are its .
How much more their fulness [ ]. The . Explanations: The whole body (Tholuck); the full number (Meyer); the restoration of Israel to its proper position (Rckert, Kllner); [Hodge: their full restoration or blessedness; Alford: their replenishment.R.] Philippi: the filling up of the gap caused in Gods kingdom by their unbelief. The latter view, which was first set forth by Origen, is discussed at length by Tholuck, p. 606 ff. But this view confounds in a twofold way: 1. The idea of the full number of Gods eternal community in general, and the idea of material fulness (), the whole number of the Jewish people; 2. The idea of the economic completeness in the present passage, and that of eonic completeness.46
Tholuck very properly calls attention to the apparent tautology in , , which has been very much neglected by expositors. In , he says, there seems to be comprised the idea of the whole extent of humanity; and in . . there appears the more concrete designation: The reduction of the chosen people turned to an enrichment of the profane nations. The former definition regards the qualitative, intensive, and teleological relation in an altogether universal sense: The fall of the historical Israel redounded to the advantage of the world, even including the ideal Israel. The latter definition describes the quantitative and extensive character of the historical course. Jewish tribes, or Jewish communities, drop out of the people, while, on the other hand, whole heathen nations are gained. But if their fall has thus been a gain to the world, how much more their fulnessthat is, a believing Israel!
Rom 11:13. For I am speaking to you Gentiles [ . The sense is the same whether we read or . A colon should follow this clause; the pointing of the E. V. obscures the proper connection.R.] The declared prospect of the full conversion of Israel leads him to the further explanation, that he regards even the conversion of the Gentiles, though an object in itself, as a means for accomplishing the object of Israels conversion. [According to Alford, this verse answers the question: Why make it appear as if the treatment of Gods chosen people were regulated not by a consideration of them, but of the less favored Gentiles?R.]You Gentiles; that is, Gentile Christians.[Inasmuch then . See Textual Note14. The corresponding is wanting, as often in the Apostles writings.R.] , not quamdiu (Origen, Vulgate, Luther).
I glorify mine office [ ]. Not: I praise my office (Luther, Grotius, and Reiche); but: I strive to glorify my office by its faithful discharge (De Wette, Meyer, and others); in which, indeed, he also says, that he esteems his office as a glorious one.47
Rom 11:14. My own flesh [ . On in this peculiar position, see Meyer. D. F. put it after the noun. It is sufficiently emphatic to justify the emendation, my own flesh.R.] An expression of inward participation with Israel in natural descent. Theodoret: The word leads us to understand the denial of spiritual participation. Rom 11:28 proves that this antithesis is not very remote; yet the inward attachment to his people here appears in the foreground.
Rom 11:15. For if the casting away of them [ ]. , throwing away, an antithesis to ; see Rom 11:17. Therefore not their diminution (Vulgate, Luther). [So Bengel, Philippi, who find here also an allusion to the loss in numbers sustained by the kingdom of God.R.] Tholuck alludes to the use of language in the LXX., and the Church (, expulsion).
Be the reconciliation of the world [ ]. Not as causality, but as condition, without which the word of reconciliation did not reach the Gentiles without obstruction. [It is perhaps to express this shade of thought that the E. V. renders: reconciling; but reconciliation is more literal, and shows how important Paul deemed the fact in question, which could thus be characterized.R.] In this free use of language Paul also says , in Rom 11:14, because he is the herald of .
What shall the reception of them be [ ]. Reception to salvation, and to participation in salvation by their conversion.
But life from the dead? [ ;] It is clear that the Apostle awaits a boundless effect of blessing on the world from the future conversion of the Jews. We ask, What is it? We must first look at the antithesis: Their casting away became the reconciling of the world; that is, only conditionally, therefore as if, and indirectly. Thus, we continue, the conversion of the whole people of Israel will also be conditionally, as if, and indirectly, a life from the dead. With the appropriated , there now begins, first, the spiritual resurrection, which is succeeded, second, by the future bodily resurrection. Hence different explanations:
1. Figurative expression of the new spiritual life (Augustine, Calvin, and others) of the Gentile world, or of the world in general, but not of the Jews (as Cocceius, Bengel, and others, explain), since the new life of the latter is regarded as an antecedent means. But this new life is also regarded in different senses: The further extension of Gods kingdom, and the new subjective vivification (Philippi, and others), increase, and advance of piety (Bucer, Bengel). A new life in the higher charismatic fulness of the Spirit shall extend from Gods people to the nations of the world, compared with which the previous life of the nations must be considered dead; Auberlen (calculated to mislead, and over-drawn, so far as the Christian life of the previous world is meant). Other modifications: Highest joy [Grotius, Hodge apparently], highest blessedness. [Stuart: something great, wonderful, surprising, like to what a general resurrection of the dead would be. He thinks it probable Paul had in mind Ezekiels vision of the dry bones.R.]
2. The literal view: The resurrection of the dead is meantthe oldest ecclesiastical explanation (Origen, Chrysostom, Rckert, Tholuck, Meyer, De Wette, &c.). Tholuck says that the meaning of this view is, that the conversion of Israel is regarded as the final act in the worlds drama; but then he makes the objection, that . nowhere stands in the New Testament for the , and thus the expositor finds himself compelled to prefer the metaphorical exposition.
But it has not been sufficiently considered how very conditional the first proposition in the comparison is: for if the casting away of them be the reconciliation of the world. As this is a fact which is realized first up to and in the conversion of the Pleroma of the Gentiles, and then of the Jews, so is the consequence of their reacceptance a fact which is continued from the higher spiritual new life of the world to its consummation, particularly in the first resurrection. To the Apostle, the ideas of spiritual resurrection and bodily resurrection do not lie so far apart (see Rom 8:11) as to our expositors; therefore Olshausen is right in applying the word to a spiritual resurrection, which takes place in the bodily resurrection. [Alford also combines the two views: Standing as it does, it must be qualitative, implying some further blessed state of the reconciled world, over and above the mere reconciliation. This might well be designated life from the dead, and in it may be implied the glories of the first resurrection, and deliverance from the bondage of corruption, without supposing the words to be = the resurrection from the dead.R.]
Rom 11:16. Moreover, if the first-fruit be holy, so also is the lump [ , . Lange: das Earstlingsbrod, the bread of the first-fruitsi. e., the portion of the dough taken as a heave-offering.R.]. After the Apostle has disclosed his prospect of the glorious results of Israels conversion, he returns to the grounds for the hope of this conversion itself. He uses two similes. The first is taken from the significance of the bread of the first-fruit (Num 15:19-21). can, indeed, denote the first-fruit, as well as the bread of the first-fruit; but it receives this meaning from the corresponding idea of the harvest; while, on the other hand, the baking of the first-fruit must correspond to the , the kneaded dough. Therefore the expression here can neither mean first-fruit (Estius, Olshausen, and others), nor the grain for the bread of the first-fruit (Grotius). But the in general denotes the representative offering by which the whole, mass, to which belongs, is consecrated to God. Thus is the consecration of the first-born to the priesthood (with which Levi was charged), the consecration of the people; the consecration of the first-fruit is the consecration of the harvest; and the consecration of the bread of the first-fruit is the consecration of the whole lump, which was afterwards prepared. [So Stuart, Hodge, Alford, De Wette, Tholuck, Meyer, is necessarily defined by its correlative term , the mass of dough for baking.R.]
And if the root be holy, so are the branches also [ , ]. This second simile is clear in itself: The branches correspond to the root (anomalous exceptions to this agreement, which may be found in nature, do not here come into consideration). The general fundamental thought of both figures is, undoubtedly, as Reiche holds, that the whole people is designated as good by its first-fruits as well as by its root. Interpretation of the particular parts:
1. Both figures mean the same thing. The are the patriarchs (Abraham, &c.); , is the whole body of the people. The same relation applies to root and branches (the Greek fathers, Erasmus, Calvin, Tholuck, Meyer [Stuart, Hodge, Alford], &c.).
2. The figures are different. The second figure undoubtedly applies to the patriarchs and their posterity; but the first, by , describes the believing Jews, and, by , the rest (Toletus, Cramer, and others. [So Wordsworth, who understands, by , the whole mass of the world which is to be converted.R.] Also, in reference to the first figure, Ambrosius, and others). Modifications: According to Origen and Theodoret. means Christ himself, and , Christians. Meyer has two objections to the different rendering of the figures. First, it is contrary to the parallelism of the two passages. But apart from the fact that Pauls prose is not subject to the rules of the poetical parallelism of the Old Testament, this reasoning betrays a defective idea of the Old Testament parallelism itself. His second reason, that the Apostle elaborates the second figure only, is of just as little force; for, with the further resumption of the second figure, there is presented a perfectly new thought. The most untenable explanation is, that means the original Christian Church, and are the individual believing Jews.
We hold that the antithesis is very decided. From what follows, it is clear that the ideal theocracy, though represented by the patriarchs, yet not identical with them (see Isa 11:1; Isa 11:10; Rev 5:5; Rev 22:16), must be regarded as the roof of Israel. In fact, from the foregoing citations, the same Christ is certainly the root of the old theocracy, as He is the in the of the new Jewish believing Church, and the causa efficiens of the sanctification of both. But according to the antithesis here presented, is the patriarchal foundation of the theocracy as the natural disposition consecrated to God; while the , on the contrary, is the first Jewish body of believers prepared by God as the bread of the first-fruit for the first harvest festival of the time of fulfilment, the Christian Pentecost. The present passage is related to Rom 9:5, the fathers being regarded as the root, and Christ as the miraculous fruit of the branches.
[It is evident, from Dr. Langes note, how difficult it is to support the twofold sense of the verse. As Tholuck remarks, the is the point of comparison. Holy here means not only as consecrated to God, but as actually pure. If a distinction must be made between the two figures, it seems natural to find these two ideas of holiness given prominence in each respectively. Those certainly miss the point of both figures, and the argument of the Apostle as well, who do not find here, in lump and branches, a reference to Israel, considered as the people of God. Alford: As Abraham himself had an outer and an inner life, so have the branches. They have an outer life, derived from Abraham by physical descent. Of this no cutting off can deprive them. But they have, while they remain in the tree, an inner life, nourished by the circulating sap, by virtue of which they are constituted living parts of the tree. It is of this life that their severance from the tree deprives them; it is this life which they will reacquire if grafted in again. This obviates some difficulties, and is, on the whole, the simplest explanation.R.]
Rom 11:17-24. The conditionality of the new antithesis of believing Gentiles and unbelieving Jews. The figure of the wild and the good olive tree. Warning for the Gentiles, and hope for the Jews.
Rom 11:17. But if some of the branches were broken off [ . The E. V. is too conditional in its form.R.] Although there were many of them, they were nevertheless a small minority, compared with the incorruptible tree of Gods kingdom. With this fact, the heathen should also prize the value of the theocratic institution itself.
And thou being a wild olive tree [ ]. As the expression can mean, as a substantive, the wild olive tree itself, but, as an adjective, the belonging to the wild olive tree, we prefer, with Fritzsche and Meyer, this latter view to the former, which is defended by Luther, Philippi, and Tholuck, with this explanation: The address, thou being a wild olive tree, views the individual Gentiles as a collective person.48 Meyer objects to this, by saying, that not whole trees, and also not quite young ones (against De Wette), are grafted in. Against this we may remark: 1. That the wild olive tree of the Gentile world is destined to be transferred, in all its branches, to the good olive tree; 2. This has already taken place incipiently by Pauls mission to the Gentiles. Meanwhile, the Apostle was as far from supposing a total apostasy of the Gentile Church, as from admitting the possibility of a total apostasy of the Jews. Likewise, he speaks of a being grafted in having already occurred, with reference to the probable boasting of Gentile Christians over Jewish Christians. Besides, the Apostle considers the wild olive tree to be converted in all its branches just as little as in the case of the good olive tree. Likewise, Rom 11:24 must be kept in mind, where the same subject is not the wild olive tree itself, but only one branch of it. On the wild olive tree, or oleaster, comp. Natural History of the Bible, and the Dictionaries. Pareus: oleaster habet quidem formam ole, sed caret succo generoso et fructibus.
On the Oriental custom of strengthening olive trees that had become weak by grafting them, with the wild olive, comp. the citations in Tholuck, p. 617; in Meyer, p. 343. Now, if this custom were frequent, and occurred in various ways, there would be apparently an incongruity in the figure, in so far as the cuttings of the wild olive are designed to strengthen the olive tree; but the question here is a communication of the sap of the good olive tree to the branch of the wild olive. Therefore Tholuck remarks: Paul was either not acquainted with the arboricultural relation of the matter, orwhich is more probable, when we look at the triviality of this noticehe designed to say, that has here taken place by grace, which otherwise is contrary to nature.49 But, in our opinion, this does not settle the question. First, the tertium comparationis does not lie in the breaking off and grafting in of the branches. In relation to this point, the figure is of perfect application. Secondly, though the branches of the wild olive tree communicate to the good olive tree a new and fresher life, and a vegetative vital nourishment (such as, for example, the Germans, at the time of the Reformation, gave to the Christian Church), this does not preclude the necessity of their receiving from the root and stem of the olive tree the good sap and productive power which produce the olive fruit.
Wert grafted in among them [ ]. The is differently rendered. The most simple rendering is: among them. [So Meyer, Alford, and most. Stuart, De Wette, Olshausen: in place of them. The former is preferable on account of .R.]
And made fellow-partaker of the root and fatness [ . See Textual Note15.R.] Not (Grotius, and others). The communication with the root secures participation in the good sap.
Rom 11:18. Boast not against the branches [ ]. The Jews in general were the branches of the olive tree; thus Jewish Christians are as much meant as the unbelieving Jews; not the latter alone (according to Chrysostom [Alford, Stuart, De Wette], and others), but rather the former principally, as is indicated by the . [Meyer: the Jews in general. He rightly adds, that not all Jews, who were not converts as yet, were to be regarded as broken off; only those who had rejected Christ.R.]
But if thou boast [ . The verb, occurring twice in this verse, is unusual.R.] Meyer: Triumphest against them. According to the assumed figure of the wild olive tree, they could be tempted to boast that the members of the Jewish believing Church had received new life through heathenism, just as the boast has been made that Germanism, and especially Lutheranism, has reformed Christianity itself; while Christianity, operating from its very foundation, has reformed, and still reforms, its phenomenal forms. [Mutatis mutandis, of special application everywhere.R.]
Thou bearest not the root [ . Supply: know that, or, let this humble thee, that. See Winer, p. 575.R.] Thou, as a grafted branch, standest in no more favorable relation to the root than those which are broken off and remain standing. Thou remainest thoroughly conditioned by an inward fellowship with the root, which must be confirmed in the humble knowledge of this dependence, and in inward union with the natural branches. The brief explanation is strengthened by the fact that it forms an immediate conclusion. Tholuck remarks: Such a presumption toward the branches could not be without presumption toward the root.
Rom 11:19. Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, &c. [ [] , … See Textual Note16.] The genuineness of the article is rendered very probable by the intention of the Gentile speaking. After this religious warning, he will appeal to a religious decree, to a fait accompli of predestination. He accordingly abuses the truth which the Apostle himself has taught, by saying, negatively: the fate of the branches is irrevocably settledthere is no more salvation for the Jewish people; but he also abuses it, positively, by believing that he himself stands firm through the privilege which he presumes he has acquired. Here, then, we clearly see how the Apostle dismisses such a predestinarian presumption.
Rom 11:20. Well []. Ironical, as if he would say: a fine application of the doctrine of Divine predestination, by overleaping the ethical elements brought into the account by it! [With Stuart, Hodge, Meyer, Alford, and others, it must be held that the Apostle here admits the purpose in the breaking off, as stated in Rom 11:19; but he admits it only to protest against the wrong use made of it.R.]
Because of unbelief they were broken off [. On the dative, see Tholuck and Alford in loco. The latter suggests their unbelief, thy faith (so Amer. Bible Union), but it seems better to take the nouns as abstract.R.] The earnest declaration. That is, because of unbelief, expressed in strengthened form by the dative. That, therefore, is the decisive cause of their hurt, the real hindrance to their salvation.
[And thou standest by faith, .] And thus thou also standest and endurest only by50 faith. The standing means here the being grafted in, and not, standing in the absolute sense, as Meyer correctly observes, against Tholuck, and others. For the opposite of it is not falling, but the being cut off. Essentially, the idea certainly coincides with standing and falling.
[Be not high-minded, . See Textual Note17.R.] Be not therefore proud of an imaginary privilege, but fear [ ]; that is, be all the more afraid of falling, because thou art inclined to boast. Bengel: timor opponitur non fiduci, sed supercilio et securitati.
Rom 11:21. For if God spared not the natural branches[ ]. Nature here evidently denotes the elevated, consecrated, and ennobled nature of the Abrahamic race.Lest he also spare not thee [ . See Textual Note18. Supply fear, or, it is to be feared. See Winer, pp. 442, 470, 556. On the future, Buttmann, N. T. Gram., p. 303.R.] Thou at least hast no claim to this genealogical nobility of Israel. Meyer: The future is more definite and certain than the conjunctive.
Rom 11:22. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God[ ]. The usual predestinarian system would say: The grace and justice of God. Paul says something quite different. The period [E. V., colon] gives grammatical support to the reading , &c., accepted by Lachmann.
On those. . The goodness, as well as the severity or sharpness of God in continual movement, corresponds to human conduct.[Severity, . See Textual Note19.R.]
[But toward thee, Gods goodness, . See Textual Note20. The nominatives give an elliptical construction: there is severity, there is the goodness of God.R.]If thou continue in his goodness [ . That goodness. Alford: If thou abide by.R.] On the living ground of Gods free grace and mercy. Meyer: Wilt have continued. Should the goodness have first begun then?Otherwise thou also shalt be [ . Comp. Rom 11:6. The E. V. conveys the correct meaning of .R.] Meyer very appropriately calls attention to the stronger expression: .
Rom 11:23. [And they moreover, . This is the reading adopted by Griesbach, Scholz, Lachmann, Tischendorf, and critical editors generally, on the authority of . A. B. C. D. F. The rendering is that of Alford, who is unusually happy in expressing the exact force of .R.]For God is able to graft them in again [ , …]. He will not apply His power to compel unbelievers to believe; but if they only do not continue in unbelief, He will graft them in again. He is not wanting in power, and certainly He will not be wanting in the application of it. The becoming strong for faith, and in faith, as well as the being planted in again, is exercised by the power of Divine grace.51
Rom 11:24. For if thou wert cut out. The serves to establish the (Meyer). Likewise the stronger expression here: .Of the olive tree which is wild by nature. This is the idea of the oleaster, or wild olive.And wert grafted contrary to nature [ ]. We doubt the propriety of translating exactly by against nature (contra naturam; Vulgate). Comp. Rom 1:26, p. 87. There exists no absolute opposition between the oleaster and the good olive tree; otherwise the grafting in would have no result. The application is clear.52
How much more. Nevertheless, a greater natural relation exists between the branches which are cut out of the good olive tree, and this olive tree as peculiar to them; so that they, after all, can be grafted more easily into them than the branches of the wild olive are grafted into it. The difficulty which arises from the consideration that the (Jewish) obduratio is more difficult to be overcome than the (Gentile) ignorantia, is removed by Tholuck, when he says that he regards the of the present verse as cordinate with the , so that it would relate to the (Rom 11:23). But this changes the matter very little; the Apostles supposition is, that the economy of Gods government will accomplish the dissolution of the Jewish obduratio.
[Alford clearly defines the meaning: In the case of the Gentile, the Apostle sets the fact of natural growth over against that of engrafted growth; here, the fact of congruity of nature ( ) is set against incongruity, as making the reingrafting more probable. Hodge: The simple meaning of this verse is, that the future restoration of the Jews is, in itself, a more probable event than the introduction of the Gentiles into the Church of God.R.]
Rom 11:25-36. The last word, or the mystery of the Divine government.
Rom 11:25. For I would not, brethren. The confirms the previous ; according to Tholuck, the address, brethren, is directed this time to the Gentile Christians. But why not to all? … , Rom 1:13 [p. 70], &c. An announcement of an important communication.
Of this mystery. . [See Tholuck and Alford in loco on the word mystery.R.] On the basis of the general mystery of the Christian , 1Ti 3:16, revealed to Christians by their becoming believers, there are displayed the individual mysteries which concern the development of Christian life in the world, particularly the universal development of Christianity. In regard to these, the Apostles are illuminated in advance by revelation, in order to communicate them to the Church. Thus Paul communicates, in many ways, to believers, the mystery that the Gentiles shall be joint-heirs of life, without legal conditions, Eph 3:6; also the mystery that, in the last times, the transformation of persons still living will take place, 1Co 15:51; and so here he communicates the mystery of the Divine economy in relation to the results of the conversion of Jews and Gentiles, and especially of the final, universal conversion of Israel.
Lest ye should be wise in your own conceits[ . See Textual Note21.R.] Meyer: According to your own judgment. The Apostle foresees that, in the Gentile Christian Church, there will arise respecting Israels future contemptuous decisions of the unilluminated and self-sufficient judgment. [Calvin, Beza, Stuart, refer it to pride in their own position; but Meyer, De Wette, Hodge, and most, agree, with Dr. Lange, in applying it to a wrong view of the exclusion of the Jews.R.]
That hardening in part is happened to Israel[ . On , see Rom 11:7.R.] ; according to Calvin, qualitative, quodammodo, and not total hardening; yet it evidently refers to the unbelieving portion of Israel. [De Wette, Meyer, Hodge, join it with , not with or (Estius, Fritzsche): Hardening has happened in part. Most commentators now adopt the extensive, rather than the intensive signification.R.] This hardening of a part has befallen all Israel.
Until the fulness of the Gentiles [ ]. For then the hardening shall cease. Meyer: Calvins ita ut is alleged, in spite of the language, to remove the thought of a final object; on which account Calovius, and most, elaborate here a good deal, in order to bring out the sense that partial blindness, and therefore partial conversion, will last until the end of the world. [With Tholuck, Hodge, Alford, and others, we must insist that a terminus ad quem is here affirmed.R.]
The fulness of the Gentiles. Interpretations: 1. The completion of the Israelitish people of God by believing Gentiles (Michaelis, Olshausen, and others); 2. The great majority of the Gentiles (Fritzsche) [Stuart, Hodge: the multitude of the Gentiles.R.]; 3. Meyer, strikingly: The filling up of the Gentilesthat is, that by which the body of the Gentiles (only a part of whom have as yet been converted) is fullthe fulness of the Gentiles. [So De Wette. This makes it = .R.] As the Apostle could not have meant an indefinite mass of Gentiles, nor yet all the Gentiles down to the last man, he evidently had in view an organically dynamic totality of the heathen world, in which he unquestionably bethought himself of the conversion of the Gentile world. [Alford: The totality of the Gentiles, as nations, not as individuals. This is substantially the view of Lange, and differs but little from that of Meyer. The idea of an elect number, however true in itself, does not seem to belong to this passage. Wordsworth is not likely to favor a predestinarian view, and yet he finds in the notion of the complement of a ships crewi. e., of the Church, the Ark of Salvation!R.]
Come in [. Shall have come in (Noyes)]. In the absolute sense; therefore, into the kingdom of God (Mat 7:13, &c.). Meyer says, oddly enough: The kingdom of the Messiah, the establishment of which is later, is not yet in question. [Meyer refers to the personal reign of the Messiah, beginning with the Second Advent. This period, on which he lays great stress in his commentary, will come in, he thinks, after the event here predicted.R.]
Rom 11:26. And so. , in this order and succession, and in this mode of accomplishment; after the conversion of the Gentiles, and by means of it.
All Israel [ ]. This is not spoken of all Israel in isolated examples, nor of the totality without exception. The former supposition, for example, that only the elect part, the true , is meant (Bengel, Olshausen, and others), or only the greater number and mass (Rckert and Fritzsche), does not arrive at the idea of the nation, which here, in its totality, as all Israel, comes just in antithesis to the mere . The latter supposition (Gennadius, Meyer, and others) transcends the idea of the Pleroma, which will suffice here in the case of the Jews as in that of the Gentiles.
This simple apostolic prophecy, pronounced directly in the future, has been much criticized, and much fanaticism has played about it.
Definitions narrowing the meaning: (1) The spiritual Israel of the elect, from Jews and Gentiles (Augustine, Theodoret, Calvin, Bengel, Olshausen [Wordsworth], &c.); (2) An election from Israel will be saved in the millennial kingdom (Baldwin, Bengel). The one hundred and forty-four thousand of Rev 7:4, in which the number is literally interpreted as the principal citizens of the city of Jerusalem; (3) Israel will be able to be saved (Episcopius, Semler, and others); (4) The prophecy has already been fulfilled by the myriads of Jews, of whom Eusebius speaks, 3:35 (Wetstein, and others); (5) Luther, as Jerome before him, has fallen into glaring contradictions in relation to this question (see Tholuck, pp. 629, 630, and the quotation in Meyer, note, on p. 439); and on this point Melanchthon has proved, by his vacillations, his fear of Luthers decisive declarations on the hopelessness of the Jews (Tholuck, p. 630). On the further shape which Lutheran exegesis has taken on this point, see the same. With Spener there came a change.
In opposition to all these, there are definitions exaggerating the meaning: (1) The must be so much emphasized, as to lead us to suppose that Israel, dying in unbelief, will be raised from the dead for the realization of this hope (Petersen, Mystische Posaune; see Tholuck, p. 628). (2) We do not include here the idea of a return of the main part of the Israelites, as a nation, to Palestine, but the ideas that a special Jewish Church will again arisethat a temple will be built in Jerusalem, in which a sort of restitution of the Israelitish worship will take place, and that then the Jewish people will stand as the preferred priestly and noble people in the midst of the believing Gentile world (comp. Tholucks quotations, p. 625, in addition to which many others might be easily collected).
These fanatical apologists for Judaism should not forget that Israel has fallen so deeply, just because of such aristocratic and priestly claims to the messianic sphere of salvation, and that the only help for it is to acquiesce modestly in the glory of the New Testament spirit of Christ, and to take its place among the Gentile Christian nations as a fully authorized Christian nation, without legal privileges, but full of an humble sense of its long apostasy, yet in the power and demonstration of the Spirit, which will then be imparted to it according to its giftthat is, according to its great natural state transformed by grace. The scholastics Abelard, Thomas Aquinas, and others, had in view the proper mean, a conversion of the collective tribes, or tribal fragment, of the nation, but not the conversion of each individual, which is qualified as such by free self-determination. The hope of Israels conversion has been warmly defended in the Reformed Church; first by Beza. See Tholuck, p. 629 ff.53
The question of the source from which Paul drew this has engaged much attention. Tholuck, following in the wake of others, properly calls attention to the fact that the Apostles quotations from the prophets were given by him as a warrant of his hope, but not as its ground; p. 625 ff. Paul, as an Apostle, was also a prophet, apart from the consideration that he could already find the germs of this prophecy in the gospel tradition (see Mat 23:39; Joh 12:32). However, we take for granted that he could have drawn his warrants from the Old Testament as freely as he desired, though Tholuck raises the question why he did not do this, but contented himself with citing two passages not belonging to that class, and of doubtful relevancy (the declarations cited by Auberlen, p. 625). We must here refer to biblical theology, as well as to the writings which have treated especially on this eschatological part of the theology of the Old Testament.54
There shall come out of Zion, &c. [ , … Forbes makes the four lines of the quotations correspond alternately: covenant-promiseremoval of sin.R.] The two connected quotations are from Isa 59:20; Isa 27:9; not (according to Calvin [Stuart], and others) from Jer 31:33, although there is a kindred sense.55 They are freely treated, and joined together (from the LXX.). Yet, in reality, they perfectly answer to their application. We must not forget that the armor of deliverance which the Lord puts on, according to Isa 59:17 ff., is a further enlargement of the armor of the Messiah in Isa 11:5 ff. Now, if we adhere to the position that prophecy makes no retrograde movementthat therefore Jehovah, instead of the Messiah, must denote a progressthe passage cannot be understood merely to denote the first appearance of the Messiah, as Isaiah 11, but, in any case, the eschatological appearance of Jehovah is also conjoined in the Messiah. This is favored by the grand expression in Rom 11:19. The Apostle, with his usual masterly skill, therefore makes use of the proper passage here, similarly to the exegesis of Christ, which has also been a subject of surprise to many expositors.
The original text (Isa 59:20-21) reads: And the God (Redeemer) shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression () in Jacob, saith the Lord. As for me (on my side), this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord: My Spirit, &c. The Septuagint: , , . , , , … Chap. 27. also treats of the restoration of Israel. Rom 11:6 gives the more definite starting-point. The sense of Rom 11:8 is: God punishes Israel with moderation. The form of this punishment is hardening, and being carried off as by an east-wind storm. Then we read: Therefore (by this means) shall the iniquity of Jacob be purged; and this is all the fruit (the use) to take away his sin. The LXX.: , , . Paul took into consideration three modifications: (1) From Zion, instead of for Zion, in which we must not forget that also in Isaiah Jehovah must come from Zion for Zion; (2) The original text assumes conversion at the announced redemption; with the Apostle it was self-evident that the redemption precedes the conversion; (3) The Apostle describes the new covenant with Israel, by inserting the passage from Isaiah 29; that is, he here describes the purging and taking away of Jacobs sin as the essential part of the covenant, instead of the promise of the impartation of the Spirit, in Isaiah 59, because he knows that both are indissolubly connected. Yet these modifications of form do not prevent the citation from being a proof, as Tholuck supposes. See, on the further exposition of this passage, Tholuck, p. 631.
[Tholuck: How came the Apostle, if he wished only to express the general thought that the Messiah was come for Israel, to choose just this citation, consisting of two combined passages, when the same is expressed more directly in other passages of the Old Testament? I believe that the gave occasion for the quotation: if he did not refer this directly to the second coming of the Messiah, yet it admitted of being indirectly applied to it.R.]
Rom 11:28. As touching the gospel, they are enemies [ ]. As enemies, they are said, by Meyer and Tholuck, to be hostilely treated by God [Alford, Hodge] (Tholuck: invisi deo). But it is difficult to establish the antithesis, that they can be simultaneously odious to, and beloved by, God, except in different relations. See the Exeg. Notes on Rom 5:10 [p. 165]. Other explanations: regarded by Paul as enemies (Grotius, Luther); enemies of God (Thomas Aquinas, Bengel). According to the gospelthat is, according to the relation of the gospel to believers and unbelieversthey are enemies; this means not merely that they are adversaries of the gospel (Chrysostom, and others), but that, as adversaries of the gospel, they are regarded by God as adversaries, and then by His messengers alsofor your sakes [ ]: from the ground of the saving economy already set forth.
But as touching the election, they are beloved [ ]. We would here also protest against the favorite division: beloved of God, or of the Apostle, or of Christians. They are enemies in their falling out with the gospel, yet they are favorites according to the election, but simply for the sake of their connection with the fathers.For the fathers sakes [ ]. Meyer says: in favor of the patriarchs; the sense is, because they are included in general in the election of the fathers; according to Rom 11:28, are made partakers in the gifts of the fathers, in the call of Israel.56
Rom 11:29. Without repentance [. The reference here is evidently national, not individual, though the proposition is general in its form and force.R.]. Unrepented. Irrevocable in the sense of a Divine, ethical, and self-conditional result (see 2Co 7:10).
Rom 11:30. For as ye, &c. [ . See Textual Notes24, 25.] The Gentiles.Formerly disobedient. The is toward Gods word, which was promulgated to the Gentiles by the creation (Rom 1:21). [Forbes finds, in Rom 11:30-32, a six-lined stanza, two lines in each verse, with the alternating thoughts: Disobediencemercy, recurring three times.R.]
Rom 11:31. That through the mercy shown to you they also may obtain mercy [ . We accept (with E. V., Hodge, Meyer, De Wette, Alford, and most) a trajection of the .R.] Meyer would join to what follows: In order that, by the mercy manifested to you (which mercy provokes them to jealousy of your faith; Rom 11:11), mercy might be shown to you. This construction must be rejected outright, because by it the Apostle would say to the Gentiles what is both ill-bred and untruthful, namely, that their conversion was merely a means for the purpose of the further conversion of the Jews.57 The opposite construction: non crediderunt in vestram misericordiam (Vulgate), emphasizes the conversion of the Gentiles as an end in itself, and then makes the further purpose of the conversion of the Jews, thereby brought about, to follow.
Rom 11:32. For God hath shut up all under disobedience [ . On the verb, comp. Gal 3:22-23, Textual Note26, and below.R.] That is, the Jews as well as the Gentiles. According to Meyer, all and every Gentile and Jew are meant, and not merely the masses of both (according to Tholuck, and others). True, the masses are, in a certain sense, the all-concluding; yet, strictly emphasized, all and every one cannot be spoken of, because the question is not simply the fall of man, but the generic consequences of the fall (Vulgate and Luther have the neuter). [The neuter is probably borrowed from Gal 3:22. The sense is the same, whether we accept the view of Meyer or that of Tholuck; but by pressing the former in the second clause, a conclusion might be inserted, which Meyer himself does not accept, viz., the actual exercise of saving mercy in the case of every individual.R.]
But what does shut up mean? Meyer would explain it, according to the peculiarity of the later Greek: to give over to, or under, the effective power, but not merely a declarative (Chrysostom, and others), or permissive power (Origen, and others). [Meyer, Alford, and others, remark that the in composition strengthens the simple verb, without, however, introducing the idea of shutting up together.R.] The real explanation of the expression is contained in Rom 5:12 and Gal 3:22. The state of the totality of men (their being shut up under disobedience) is based on the organic (generic, social, political, and sympathetical) connection. By the organic connection, all men are shut up in the consequences of the fall. Then, by the organic connection, the Gentiles are first shut up in the process of unbelief (see chap. 1); and in the same way are the Jews also shut up by means of this organic connection (chap. 2). In the collective character of the history of the world, this makes a collective conclusion [Zusammengeschlossenheit]. Thus the Jews, by their organic connection (according to Gal 3:22), were shut up under the law, as it were, in a prison or place of custody58 ( ); although, after the confinement was abolished, it turned out that they consisted of two parts, the children of the bondwoman and the children of the freewoman. Thus it could only come to pass, by the fearful power of the connection of the universal currents, that sin should be consummated in unbelief under Gods judgment, in order that sinners might become receptive of Divine mercy (Rom 5:20; Rom 7:13).
In order that he may have mercy upon all[ ]. The purpose of this authoritative judgment of God (that is, of this Divine hardening, which was carried constantly further by the reciprocal action with human guilt) was, first, that fulfilment in the ancient time, when the heathen world was ripe for mercy, and will be hereafter the fulfilment of the New Testament time, when Israel shall be ripe for mercy.
[Alford remarks on in the two clauses: Are they the same? And, if so, is any support given to the notion of an of all men? Certainly they are identical, and signify all men, without limitation. But the ultimate difference between the all men who are shut up under disobedience, and the all men upon whom the mercy is shown, is, that by all men this mercy is not accepted, and so men become self-excluded from the salvation of God. Gods act remains the same, equally gracious, equally universal, whether men accept His mercy or not. This contingency is here not in view, but simply Gods act itself. We can hardly understand the nationally. The marked universality of the expression recalls the beginning of the Epistle, and makes it a solemn conclusion to the argumentative portion, after which the Apostle, overpowered with the view of the Divine mercy and wisdom, breaks forth into the sublimest apostrophe existing even in the pages of Inspiration itself. Comp. Doctr. Note 21.R.]
Rom 11:33. Oh the depth of the riches, and Wisdom, &c.[ , … In the English, that interpretation has been followed which regards the three genitives, , , , as cordinate. is joined with all three.R.] Constructions:
A. What a depth: 1. Of riches; 2. Of Wisdom 3. Of knowledge (Chrysostom, Grotius, Olshausen, Philippi [Hodge, Alford, De Wette], &c.
B. What a depth of riches: 1. Of Wisdom 2. Of knowledge (Luther, Calvin, Reiche).59 Meyer says, in favor of the first construction: As Rom 11:33-34 portray the and , but Rom 11:35-36 the , the former construction is preferable. Besides, the depth of the riches would be, in a certain measure, tautological. But can also not (according to the same writer) mean the great fulness and superabundance, because there would merely result such a tautology. The depth, whose outward figure is the ocean, is also a spiritual depth (see the quotations in Meyer). There is also another sort of fulness, as a rich and fruitful plain. Here Gods miracles are obscured by a holy darkness. But the riches of God are not merely Gods riches of grace in the special sense, for the fulness of creation and the treasures of redemption constitute a more general unity in the all-sufficiency of God. This is the entire ontological and soteriological foundation of Gods kingdom. If, now, be defined as the exercise of Gods designing attribute, the idea also usually includes the knowledge and choice of means; here, however (according to Meyer, for example), denotes the knowledge of means. Proof: , His measures, must be referred to the latter. But the ways have just as decided a relation to the starting-points as to the final points, and we would here also hold to the distinction: relates chiefly to the and its consequences, and chiefly to and their premises.60
How unsearchable, &c. [, … See Textual Note27. Meyer refers to , to ; the former in the sense of His modes of dealing, His economies, the latter, His judicial decisions (as Rom 11:32). So Tholuck, but the distinctions are very subtle. See below.R.] The most unsearchable character of Gods judgments consists in His causing redeeming acts to arise from them (Genesis 3 : the flood; the Egyptian plagues; the Babylonian captivity; the cross of Christ); and the peculiarity of His ways as past finding out, consists in His leading the minds which He has created through byways, circuitous paths, apparently contrary roads, and even impassable roads, safely to their object (see Job 5:9; Job 9:10; Job 34:24).
Rom 11:34. For who hath known the mind of the Lord? &c. [ ; …] Isa 40:13, almost exactly from the LXX. The mind took knowledge of the object; the counsel took knowledge of the ways. Or, the former word applies to the , the latter to the (Theodoret, and others). In wisdom He is exalted even above the understanding of man (My thoughts are not your thoughts), with respect to His counsel, above the necessity of mans being a counsellor with Him; finally, with respect to His riches, no one has enriched Him or given to Him so that He had to recompense unto him again; He is the absolute source of all good things.
Rom 11:35. Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? [ ; See Textual Note29, for the text of the Hebrew and LXX.R.] From the original text of Job 41:11. No gift must be regarded as a recompensing of God.
Rom 11:36. For of him, and through him [ ]. The negation of the previous proposition is carried out positively in the completion of the doxology. All things are of Him. He is the original fountain, original ground and author.Through Him. Preservation, government, redemption.
And unto him [ ]. Toward Him as end. That He may become all in all (1Co 15:28); He is glorified in all, and all is glorified in Him. Meyer says: In so far as every thing serves Gods purposes (not merely Gods honor, as many would have it). But every thing always serves Gods purpose. Yet the final, absolute glorification of God cannot be separated from the purpose of the revelation of His in Christ, and by Him in His children, His inheritance.
Ambrose, Hilary, Olshausen, Philippi, and others, have regarded this passage as an expression of the relation of Father, Son, and Spirit.61 Meyer opposes this, by urging that neither Chrysostom, cumenius, Theophylact, Calvin, nor Beza, have referred to the Trinity in their expositions. The context speaks simply of God the Father. Yet it cannot be doubted, if we take into consideration other passages of the Apostle (for example, 1 Corinthians 15; Colossians 1), that Paul here had in mind at least the difference of the revelations of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is certain that the view of Gods absolute unity predominates here, but not therefore in the exclusive, doctrinal definiteness of God the Father. The Trinitarian relation lies beyond subordinationism.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. While the whole of Pauls Epistle to the Romans has been called a christological philosophy of the history of the world and of salvation, the term applies more specially to the section chap. 911, and preminently to chap. 11.
2. God has not cast away His people: Proofs: (1) The public history of Israel: Paul and his Jewish companions in faith; (2) Israels concealed history, disclosed by Gods declaration to Elijah; (3) The teleology of the partial blindness of Israel: a. a condition for the conversion of the Gentiles; b. then this a condition for the conversion of the Jews; c. then this, finally, a condition for the completion of Gods saving work on earth; (4) Gods exercise of judgment on all humanity has always a merciful purposethat is, deliverance and restoration. The history of proselytes proves that the attraction of the Jews to faith is constantly fulfilled in the individual.
3. The history of the seven thousand hidden worshippers of God at the time of Elijah, a type of similar cases in all ages. Not merely the heroic witnesses for Gods honor are His people, but all who do not bow the knee to idols. The kingdom of God has not merely its lions, but also its doves. The mildness of the Divine judgment on the remnant of piety on earth, in antithesis to the severity and indignation of the human zeal of the well-meaning servants of God.
4. God preserves at all periods, even in the worst, a . When the enemies of the gospel think that Christianity will soon decline, they miscalculate, especially on two or three points: (1) They do not observe that the blight of division is unavoidable in their own camp; (2) That a new Divine seed of Divinely chosen children, of sincere adversaries converted and led by God, and of courageous witnesses for God, are in His plan; (3) That every direction which apostasy takes, leads to a dispersion and taint like that of the Jews, while the deep current of the worlds history takes its course with Gods kingdom. This confidence is resplendent even throughout the Old Testament, and especially in the prophets.
5. Rom 11:6-7. The unanswerable syllogism of the evangelical Church against the decree of the Council of Trent (see Exeg. Notes). To seek grace beyond works is an , comprising in itself a self-contradiction.
6. Rom 11:8-11. The twofold judgment of blindness: a. By external, seeming happiness (see Rom 2:4); b. By inward disobedience, whose fundamental characteristics are presumptuous blindness and inconsolable, cowardly despondency in relation to the highest good.On the process of hardening as a continual reciprocity between human offence and Gods sovereign judgment, see Exeg. Notes on chap. 9. On Jelaledin Rumis doctrine of predestination, see Tholuck, p. 595.
7. From the fact that judgments on unbelievers are remedial judgments, which are the means of producing faith in the elect, there follows the expectation that the judgments are not of an eonic, but of an economic nature. God always seeks, through the believers, indirectly to reach again the unbelievers. Therefore the messengers of salvation must shake the dust from their feet when they are not received. That is, they must go farther and farther! The gospel went from Mesopotamia to Jerusalem, from Jerusalem to Rome, from Rome to Wittenberg and Geneva; and in roundabout ways and circles it again goes from New York to Jerusalem and Mesopotamia. Nearness and farness in Gods kingdom are not determined by geographical and national proximity and remoteness, but by the relations of spiritual life.
8. The idea of the temporary filling up of the breaches made by the unbelief of the Jews by means of the heathen, has penetrated, though in obscure form, even the Talmud (see Tholuck, p. 600).
9. On the reflection of the truth of the historical character of the Acts of the Apostles, in Rom 11:11, see Tholuck, against Baur, p. 602. See the same, p. 606, for Origens view that the number of saints is definite; which, indeed, only has an incidental importance for the question before us (see Exeg. Notes).
10. The tragical fate of the Jews. Their fall the riches of the world, notwithstanding they number among them the richest people; their casting away the reconciling of the world. This latter thought refers to the crucifixion of Christ. Such a tragical judicial fate is such a profound enigma of Divine sovereignty, that not only the whole course of the world, but also the future world and eternity, belong to its full glorification in the light of Divine mercy.
11. As the wild olive tree enters into a relation of exchange with the good olive tree by giving to it earthly nutriment, or nutriment for development and for strengthening the stock, while, on its part, its branches are made good, so have the nations brought new organs to Christianity, in order to receive from it the Divine spirit of life. Germany may exult, in a special sense, in having done this, but nothing further. If we arrogantly identify German Christianity with Lutheranism,62 the boast has a German Catholic sound; it is a boast of the branchesof only the grafted branches against those branches previously standingyea, against the root itself.
12. The figure of the relation between the root and the branches condemns that entire theory of the development of Christianity, which the school of Baur has colored according to the Hegelian principles of history.
13. Rom 11:20-21. Tholuck: The predestinarian view here becomes involved in difficulty, in so far as it traces not only faith, but also unbelief, to the Divine causality. Evidently, the exclusion of the Jews is here designated as the result of their own guilt, &c.
14. On the possibility of falling from grace, see Meyer, p. 435, on Rom 11:23. Sealed believers are not here specially spoken of, but, in a general way, the called, the awakened.
15. There subsists not only an antithesis and a relation of degree between the wild olive tree and the good olive tree, but also a natural affinity, which, as well as the heterogeneousness, comes into consideration in the application of the figure.
16. On the discussions of recent theology respecting the relation of the Old Testament to the prophecy of the Apostle about the restoration of Israel, see Tholuck, p. 625.
17. In spite of the Apostles warning, the grafted branches have in many ways boasted against the natural branches. Under this head belong the conduct of Christians toward the Jews, the judgments passed upon the capability of the Jews for conversion, and, finally, the opinion pronounced on converted Jews. Here belong also the predestinarian appeals to Gods decree, under a disregard of the ethical conditions.
18. The mystery. Tholuck: According to the ecclesiastical definition, res captum human rationis tum regenit quum irregenit transcendens (Quenstedt, 1:44). According to the later expositors, on the contrary, it means, at least in Paul, unknown truths, hitherto concealed from humanity, and only known by revelation (Rckert, Fritzsche, Meyer, and Philippi). The latter, or formal idea of the mystery, underlies the former, the material one. This is proved by 1Ti 3:16. But it is clear, from Rom 11:33, that a mystery, in the material sense, is so called because it is of unfathomable depth; not because it merely extends beyond the human understanding in the abstract senseor, in other words, because it is not attainable by the understandingbut only by the believing intellectual perception, because it ever reveals itself, in its Divine depth, in infinitum, but not because it should remain in infinitum an unsolved enigma.
19. Meyer acknowledges that the conversion of all Israel has not yet taken place; but he adds, that it lies in a very distant time, although the Apostle has regarded the matter as already near at hand; p. 442. This is the usual misconception arising from the failure to distinguish between the religious and chronological idea of the nearness and remoteness of time!
20. On the different renderings of and , see Tholuck, p. 633. A series of insufficient explanations of the in Rom 11:32, is on p. 635; and discussions on the meaning of , on p. 637.
21. It is worthy of note, that the usual doctrine of predestination, as well as the doctrine of restoration, has been connected with the present chapter, particularly with Rom 11:33. This contradiction is adjusted, if, with Schleiermacher, we regard predestination as economical, and restoration as eonic. True, even in that case, the consequence of the former idea is strongly affected by the reference to faith and unbelief as ethical motives for the Divine sovereignty. Against the latter idea, viz., the usual doctrine of the , Meyer observes, that the universality of the Divine intention does not preclude the partially finite non-realization of it through the guilt of human individuals. But this observation applies also to yesterday and to-day. Important weight rests upon the fact that the , which is similar to fate in the organic connection of men (for example, a Jewish child, born in a Jewish alley, &c.), should be removed by Gods sovereign grace; yea, that the currents of unbelief should give place to a current of faith. Judas has proved that a false individual can, at all events, swim against the stream of salvation. The eons of God and the freedom of man tower above the usual ideas of the apocatastasis, as well as above the usual ideas of eternal = endless condemnation.63
22. The anthology of distinctions between and , see Tholuck, p. 641. The former (Abelard) constitutes just the reverse of ours: sapientia quantum ad prscientiam ipsius scientia quantum ad ipsius operis effectum, &c. Tholuck defines the , according to Proverbs, as the economic and architectural wisdom of God, and the as the knowledge of the nature of the universe. He, in opposition to Meyer, refers the to the , and the to the . On the latter point, we must coincide with Meyer. The ideas: and the essence of things, and and architectural dispositions, do not fit very well together. The refer to final points; the are at least connected with starting-points. See Exeg. Notes. We must also refer, in reference to Rom 11:36, to Tholucks instructive statements.
23. Rom 11:36; comp. 1Co 8:6; Col 1:16; Heb 2:10; also the doxologies in the New Testament, and especially those in Revelation. [Stuart: Such is the conclusion of the doctrinal part of our Epistle; a powerful expression of profound wonder, reverence, and adoration, in regard to the unsearchable ways of God in His dealings with men; and an assertion of the highest intensity respecting His sovereign right to control all things so as to accomplish His own designs. A doctrine truly humbling to the proud and towering hopes and claims of self-justifying men; a stumbling-block to haughty Jews, and foolishness to unhumbled Greeks. I scarcely know of any thing in the whole Bible which strikes deeper at the root of human pride than Rom 11:33-36.But sovereignty in God does not imply what is arbitrary, nor that He does any thing without the best of reasons. It only implies that those reasons are unknown to us.And if our hearts are ever tempted to rise up against the distinctions which God has made, either in a temporal or spiritual respect, in the bestowment of His favors, let us bow them down to the dust, as well as silence and satisfy them, with the humbling, consoling, animating, glorious truth, that of God, and through Him, and for Him, are all things. To Him, then, be the glory forever and ever! Amen.R.]
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
A. Rom 11:1-6. Has God cast away His people? God forbid! 1. The thought is intolerable to the Apostle as a true Israelite. 2. He repudiates the fact in the most positive manner; because, a. God has provided for His people beforehand; b. In times of great apostasy He has preserved His remnant of seven thousand who did not bow the knee to Baal; c. He will deal likewise with those who have been reserved through grace.Paul, as a model of truly national feeling. 1. He was a Christian with all his heart; 2. But he was also an Israelite with all his heart (Rom 11:1-2).The example of the Apostle Paul shows how Christianity and national feeling not only do not preclude each other, but agree very well together.I also am an Israelite! An expression: 1. Full of manly power; 2. Full of Christian love (Rom 11:1-2).The example of Elijah. 1. His complaint against Israel; 2. Gods answer for Israel (Rom 11:2-4).God still has His seven thousand who have not bowed their knee to Baal (Rom 11:4-6).Let the apostasy be never so great, God never wholly casts away His people (Rom 11:4-6).
Luther: Not all are Gods people who are called Gods people; therefore not all will be cast away, though the greater portion be cast away.
Starke: Gods children often make unnecessary complaints, and if the Lord should answer them, He would not reply in any other way than: Ye know not what ye should pray for as ye ought (Rom 11:2).God can permit no such confusion of ideas, as that we are to be saved partly through grace and partly through merit; Rom 3:28 (Rom 11:6).Hedinger: God has more saints in the world than we often imagine. Much of the good seed lies under the ground; in the Spring, when the right time comes, it germinates. Be comforted by this truth, ye faithful teachers; Isa 49:1; 1 Kings 19:48 (1Ki 11:1-3).Nova Bibl. Tb.: God does not cast us away, if we have not previously cast Him away (Rom 11:1).You regard that church and congregation as the best one to which the most belong, which the great men in the world honor, and which, therefore, has the most splendor, show, and consideration. Oh, no; it is the small and insignificant number which God has preserved for salvation according to the election. Fear not, little flock; for it is your Fathers good pleasure to give you the kingdom (Rom 11:5).Spener: God looks with other eyes than mens, and perceives those who were imperceptible to others. Yet such persons did not exist by their own strength, but the Lord has reserved them (Rom 11:4).
Lisco: The fall of Israel is neither altogether universal nor perpetual. The Gentiles becoming Gods people, and participants in His kingdom, is a fulfilment of Gen 9:27, that Japheth shall dwell in the tents of Shem.As surely as unbelief, according to chap. 10, is an offence, so sure is the better disposition of these better ones among the people not any work of theirs, but a work of Divine grace (Rom 11:5-6).
Heubner: There is a divine casting away, the most terrible penal judgment of God, in which He takes His Holy Spirit from man, and quenches the spark of good within him, so that he morally dies out, is without the feeling and power for good, and, shut out from heaven, must bear misery and torment.This is what pious people since the fall have been anxiously praying God to ward off; Psalms 51 (Rom 11:1).Elijah believed that he was the only one left. How often does many a pious person believe himself alone! This is a divine trial; but in such hours there also comes equal consolation (Rom 11:3).There is a seed of good people which never dies out. (Indefectibilitas ecclesi.)
B. Rom 11:7-10. The judgment of hardening on the Israelites not belonging to the election. 1. Why is this judgment inflicted upon them? a. Not because it was determined from eternity against them; but, b. Because they, according to Rom 9:30 ff., sought righteousness by works and not by faith, and, accordingly, became guilty themselves. 2. In what does this judgment consist? God fulfils in them what He, a. Has said by Isaiah; b. By David.
Nova Bibl. Tb.: The terrible judgment of hardening! They have hell, who are smitten and do not feel it; who have eyes, and do not see; who have ears, and do not hear; who have poison and death instead of the bread of life; who have ruin, punishment, and condemnation, instead of strength, joy, and comfort; who have darkness instead of light, and earth instead of heaven.Cramer: O God, Thou beautiful and clear light, Thou wouldst blind no one; and Thou only dost it as a righteous Judge after one has blinded himself in the power of the devil; 2Co 4:4 (Rom 11:10).Roos: When the table (where they concoct mischievous devices), where they usually sit unconcernedly and eat good things, becomes a rope, a trap, ruin, and a recompense for the unfaithfulness and violence which they have exercised against others, it is a symbol of all the means by which men unexpectedly become involved in dangers by their words, or, by their deception or power, are led into the hands of their enemies, and sustain real injury (Rom 11:9).
Lisco: The burdens of agedim-sightedness and crookednessare likewise a symbol of ruin (Rom 11:10).
Heubner: God has given them such a spirit; that is, He has permitted it to visit them as a necessary consequence, as a righteous punishment, because they made such resistance to the strivings of the Divine Spirit (Rom 11:8). Comp. Act 2:37; Act 7:51.Man, both the individual and the people, declines into wretched slavery by apostasy from God (Rom 11:10).
C. Rom 11:11-12. The fall of the Jews is the salvation of the Gentiles. 1. No dark fatality rules here; but, 2. The loving providence of God, which continually turns every thing evil to a good purpose.Nothing is so bad that God cannot make it serve a good purpose.Providential sovereignty: 1. It is mysterious, in so far as we often cannot understand why it permits evil; 2. It is clear and plain, in so far as it always causes good to come from evil. Comp. Gen 1:20.
Starke, Hedinger: What a great Artificer is God! He makes good out of evil, medicine out of poison, and something out of nothing.Roos: Has God brought nothing good out of this evil? God forbid! From their fall there has taken place the salvation of the nations, to which the gospel was directed after it had been scorned by the Jews (Mat 21:43; Act 13:46-48; Act 22:18-21; Act 28:27-28), that the latter might be provoked to jealousy by the former.
Gerlach, Calvin: As a wife who has been cast away from her husband because of her guilt is so inflamed by jealousy that she feels herself impelled by it to become reconciled again to her husband, so shall it now come to pass that the Jews, having seen the Gentiles taking their place, and being pained by their being cast away, shall strive after reconciliation with God; comp. Eph 5:25-33.
Lisco: Gods wisdom brings good out of Israels perversity. Paul does not say that the individual unbelieving Israelite cannot be lost; but there is quite a difference between the individual and the people (Rom 11:11).
D. Rom 11:13-28. How does Paul wish to be regarded by the Gentiles? 1. By all means as their Apostle, who magnifies this his office; 2. But yet, at the same time, as a true friend of his lineal kindred, who wishes to be the means of saving some of them, because they are destined for life (Rom 11:13-16).The rich mercy shown to Israel; perceptible, 1. From its rejection, which is the reconciling of the world; 2. From its reception, which is life from the dead (Rom 11:13-15).The figure of the first-fruits as related to the justification of infant baptism; comp. 1Co 7:14 (Rom 11:16).Likewise the figure of the root and the branches. (Comp. also the Zurich Catechism, Question 73, b.) The figure of the olive tree. 1. The Apostle warns the Gentile Christians against pernicious presumption (Rom 11:17-18); 2. He takes away the strength from such a possible and proud objection on their part (Rom 11:19-21); 3. He exhorts them to behold Gods goodness and severity (Rom 11:22); 4. He also declares to them his joyous hope of the future conversion of Israel (Rom 11:23-24).The branches do not bear the root, but the root bears the branches. Application: 1. To the relation of children and parents; 2. To the unconfirmed and the Church (Rom 11:18).Do you stand by faith? Then do not be proud, but fear (Rom 11:20).Gods goodness and severity (Rom 11:22).God can graft them in again; as this was the Apostles hope for the children of Israel, so is it ours (Rom 11:24).The future conversion of all Israel. 1. When will it take place? When the fulness of the Gentiles is come into the kingdom of God, and the time of the blindness in part of Israel is past. 2. Why will it take place? a. Because God has promised it by the prophets; b. Because God has once chosen His people; c. Because He does not repent His gifts and call (Rom 11:25-29).The future conversion of Israel is a mystery, in the sense of Mat 13:11; 1Co 15:51.The entrance of the fulness of the Gentiles into Gods kingdom. 1. It will be effected by the preaching of the gospel among them; 2. It will take place amid praise and thanksgiving (Rom 11:25).
Starke: It is part of a teachers wisdom to address himself especially to every class of men in an assembly (Rom 11:13).One often falls, and yet by his fall another rises; oh, wonderful and yet holy government of God (Rom 11:15)!A whole church, a whole ministry, a whole community, and a whole generation, must not be rejected on account of a few fools (Rom 11:16).The living of the Jews among us in a dispersed way can be of use to us, for the frequent sight of a Jew, and his intercourse with us, remind us frequently of this Pauline admonition (Rom 11:21).Why should you trouble yourself if you are not remembered in any earthly will as an inheritor of corruptible goods? If you stand in Gods covenant of grace, you are more than rich (Rom 11:27).Cramer: Let no one forget his origin, for that will teach him to be humble (Rom 11:17).The human heart is guilty of two sins: it is deceitful, and desperately wicked; Jer 17:9. Therefore God must oppose it by goodness and righteousness (Rom 11:22).Hedinger: Do not cast away so soon what does not please you. Many sin by doing this. God has many ways to souls. Your neighbor is guilty, and so are you. Shall the Lord cast both away? Bear and forbear. Time produces roses even from thorn-bushes (Rom 11:17).Oh, how I wish that no one would sin against the poor Jews! Are they not Abrahams seed, and the lineal kindred of the Church? O God, take compassion on these hardened ones, and remember thy covenant!The Jews, you say, only steal and cheat; they are a frivolous people! Are you better than they? Cannot God convert them? They hear the word, and so do you; neither you nor they are pious. Which has the greater condemnationyou, or these who are under a judgment? The same blindness will come over you, if you do not turn to Christ (Rom 11:23).If it is a mystery, who would be so daring as to desire to fathom it? If it is a revealed mystery, who will deny the conversion of the Jews? Though you cannot imagine how it will come to pass, neither can I imagine how those who were formerly Gentiles and servants of the devil, shall now be Gods children and the temple of His Spirit (Rom 11:25).Nova Bibl. Tb.: Every thing which God does must be regarded as for our improvement; His judgments to lead us to it, and His mercy and grace to keep us to it, even to the end. Because thy loving-kindness is better than life, my lips shall praise thee; Psa 63:3 (Rom 11:22).Quesnel: Let no sinner despair! There is no abyss of sin from which God cannot rescue him. He who returns to Him with faith and confidence, will find His bosom open to him (Rom 11:23).
Spener, on Rom 11:23 : We have here the clear testimony that the poor castaway people shall hereafter be received to grace, and be converted to their Saviour; and the promises once given them repeatedly in the prophets, shall be fulfilled in them. From the beginning of the Christian Church down to the present time, this has been taught and believed by its dearest teachers, from many passages of the Old and New Testament Scriptures; and we, too, have no ground of departing from it, or looking more at the hardness of those hearts which appear impossible to be converted, than at Gods promise. Yet the time and manner of Gods effecting the work we should as well commit to Divine wisdom, as rejoice with thanksgiving for Divine grace because of the thing itself; and when such a result is effected, we hope for all the more blessed condition of the Church, but meanwhile heartily pray for the fulfilment of such hope.
Gerlach, on Rom 11:16 : The first figure says, the part has the nature of the whole; the second, the derived has the nature of its origin. The Apostle lays greatest stress upon the latter figure, for he dwells upon it afterward, and portrays it in clearer colors.The Apostle purposely uses here a very striking figure, from a transaction which did not in reality occurthe grafting of the branch of a wild olive tree on a good stockin order to show that the Gentiles, in a higher sense than the Jews, are called to salvation contrary to nature (Rom 11:24)that is, by supernatural grace overcoming their nature; comp. Luk 12:37 (Rom 11:18).Paul calls every thing mystery which man cannot know of himself, and can only perceive by Divine revelation. Previously it was the call of the Gentiles (Rom 16:25; Eph 3:3), but now it is that of the Jews. Comp. Col 2:2; 1Co 15:51 (Rom 11:25).The continued existence of the Israelites among all the remaining nationsthis perfectly isolated phenomenon in historyis therefore designed by God to glorify hereafter His covenant faithfulness by a future total conversion of the people (Rom 11:26).
Lisco: Under what conditions we become and remain participants of Gods grace (Rom 11:22-24).
Heubner, on Rom 11:16 : Honorable forefathers an earnest admonition to their posterity (Rom 11:16).Nothing more clearly proves the strict righteousness of God, than His judgment on the fallen angels and the unbelieving people of Israel. This should inspire every one with awe, and with solicitude for himself (Rom 11:21).It is very necessary to bear in mind both Gods severity and goodness; His severity, in order to be preserved from indulgence, false security, and backsliding; and His goodness, in order to be encouraged, and to hope for forgiveness and improvement. God has revealed both. Without the two together there would be no training of men (Rom 11:22).Israel is without God, because it is without Christ; God has disappeared from the synagogue. He who would find God, must be converted to Christ (Rom 11:26).The true deliverance of Israel does not take place by civil, but by spiritual, emancipationthe mercy of God. Mercy is the object of the reception of the Jews into the Christian Church (Rom 11:27).Gods friendship with the patriarchs endures eternally (Rom 11:28).
Besser: It is with Mary, with the shepherds, with Simeon, with the first-called disciples, with the Galilean women, with the Apostles, and with the pentecostal Church of Jerusalem, and not without or separated from them, that thou, Gentile, hast a share in the root and sap of the olive tree. Paul loves the little word with, says Bengel, in speaking of the Gentiles; Rom 15:10; Eph 2:19; Eph 2:22; Eph 3:6 (Rom 11:17-18).See that you are not led into the folly of planting the top of the tree in the earth, and imagining that you bear the root, and that first from you, German blood, the good sap of the olive tree has really received strength and impulse (Rom 11:18).
Deichert (Rom 11:11-21): What serves for the fall of some, must serve for the support of others. 1. Corroboration of this experience generally and particularly; 2. For what should it serve both the fallen and the raised?
E. Rom 11:29-36. Gods general compassion on all. 1. On the Gentiles, who formerly did not believe, but now believe; 2. On the Jews, who do not believe, but shall hereafter believe (Rom 11:29-32).All concluded in unbelief. 1. How far? 2. To what end? (Rom 11:32.)The universality of Divine grace (Rom 11:32).An apostolical song of praise: 1. For Gods fulness of grace; 2. For His Wisdom 3. For His knowledge (Rom 11:33-36).Every thing is of, through, and in (to) God (Rom 11:36).To God alone be the honor (Rom 11:36)!
Luther, on Rom 11:32 : Observe this principal declaration, which condemns all righteousness of man and of works, and praises only Gods compassion in our obtaining it by faith.Starke: God must be the beginning, the middle, and the end of all things (Rom 11:36).Hedinger: How audacious not only to look upon Gods council-chamber, but to become master of it! Men do not allow their political follies to be known; should we blind ones, thenwe who are of yesterday and know nothinginvade Gods wisdom? Job 8:9. O man, be acute with the Scriptures, but not on and beside the Scriptures. Hypercritics mount high, and fall low; and it all amounts to nothing with the Divine Being (Rom 11:33).
Spener: The loftiness of the divine Majesty (Rom 11:33-36).Roos: What Paul has called the election, he immediately afterward divides into two ideas, gifts and calling, and says that God does not repent them. God has chosen Israel, and remains firm to it. He has from the beginning shown great mercy to this people; and He does not repent of all this. Single branches can, indeed, be cut off, and individual Jews can be lost in great numbers; but the whole tree will not be cut off, the whole people cannot be cast away (Rom 11:29).
Gerlach: Gods purposes for Israel will continue uninterruptedly until the end of the present course of the world; as the fulfilment of all the promises, there is yet to take place a great popular conversion, and a mighty activity within the Church itself. But from all this we cannot conclude that there will be an external restoration of the Jews to a people in the political sense, and their return to the land of Canaan (Rom 11:29).The survey of the wonderfully glorious saving purpose of God, as He gradually unfolded it in the foregoing verses to the eyes of the Apostle, leads the latter to make, from the bottom of his heart, this exclamation of amazed and adoring wonder. The wisdom of God comprehended the purpose which His love had prompted; and Gods knowledge marked out the way, defined the measure, and ordered the course for its execution. His judgments even on His own children, when they wish to set up their own righteousness, and the ways in which He draws the most remote Gentiles and most hardened Pharisees to himself, are unsearchable; but they are not absolutely and eternally concealed, but the light of revelation is disclosed to man by the Spirit, which searcheth after the deep things of God, and reveals them to those who love God (Rom 11:33-36).
Schleiermacher: The contemplation of the order of salvation, that God has concluded all in unbelief, is also necessary to us for wonder at Divine Wisdom 1. Gods concluding all in unbelief, constitutes the nature of this Divine order of salvation and of redemption through Christ. 2. In this, Divine wisdom is most to be perceived and admired (Rom 11:32-33).Schweizer: The unfathomable depth of Gods Wisdom 1. We represent this unfathomable depth to ourselves in humility; 2. We lift ourselves up in faith, since therein the ways of Divine wisdom are concealed (Rom 11:33).
The Pericope for the Sunday after Trinity (Rom 11:33-36).Wolf: How our reflection should be directed to the unsearchable purposes of God. We see, 1. From whence it should proceed; and, 2. To what it must lead.Ranke: How one can learn to submit to Gods incomprehensible ways: 1. By being humble; 2. By being confident.Petri: How should we act in regard to the incomprehensibility of God? 1. We should be discreet in our opinions; 2. We should be humble in our disposition: 3. We should be faithful in our work.Kapff: The Holy Trinity: 1. An unfathomable depth; 2. But an inexhaustible fountain of life.Florey: Our inability to comprehend God is a reminder that should lead us to a careful reflection. It is: 1. A reminder of the narrowness of our mind, that we should be warned by it against useless subtleties; 2. A reminder respecting the Scriptures, that we should be moved thereby to hold fast to Gods revealed word; 3. A reminder of eternity, that we should thereby think of the perfect knowledge which awaits us in the future world.Schultz: The Lords ways: 1. How God glorifies them before our eyes; 2. To what end Gods glory, which is declared in His ways, summons us.
[Bishop Hall: On Divine severity. With how envious eyes did the Jews look upon those first heralds of the gospel, who carried the glad tidings of salvation to the despised Gentiles! What cruel storms of persecution did they raise against those blessed messengers, whose feet deserved to be beautiful! wherein their obstinate unbelief turned to our advantage; for, after they had made themselves unworthy of that gospel of peace, that blessing was instantly derived upon us Gentiles, and we happily changed conditions with them.The Jews were once the children, and we the dogs under the table: the crumbs were our lot, the bread was theirs. Now is the case, through their wilful incredulity, altered: they are the dogs, and we the children; we sit at a full table, while their hunger is not satisfied with scraps.On the necessity of a living faith in Christ. If ever, therefore, we look for any consolation in Christ, or to have any part in this beautiful union, it must be the main care of our hearts to make sure of a lively faith in the Lord Jesus; to lay fast hold upon Him; to clasp Him close to us; yea, to receive Him inwardly into our bosoms, and so to make Him ours, and ourselves His, that we may be joined to Him as our Head, espoused to Him as our Husband, incorporated into Him as our Nourishment, engrafted in Him as our Stock, and laid upon Him as a sure Foundation.On the incomprehensibility of Divine wisdom. It is unfitting for the vulgar mind to attempt with profane foot to ascend the highest pinnacles of heaven, and there to scrutinize with presumptuous eyes the holy innermost places of God, and to pronounce an opinion on the most profound secrets of the Divine wisdom!Shall we dare to measure the depths of the Divine law with the diminutive standard of our intellect? Shall we trample on things which even the angels gaze on with awe? But in this respect I do not so much blame the people as the teachers themselves, who have so inopportunely supplied the ears and minds of the multitude with these subjects.
[Farindon: What better spectacle for the Church than the synagogue, in whose ruins and desolation she may read the dangerous effects of spiritual pride and haughtiness of mind, and thence learn not to insult, but tremble?Take virtue in its own shape, and it seems to call for fear and trembling, and to bespeak us to be careful and watchful that we forfeit not so fair an estate for false riches; but take it, as from the devils forge, and then, contrary to its own nature, it helps to blind and hoodwink us, that we see not the danger we are in, how that not only the way, but our feet, are slippery. It unfortunately occasions its own ruin, whilst we, with Nero in Tacitus, spend riotously upon presumption of treasure.Leighton: Our only way to know that our names are not in that black line, and to be persuaded that He hath chosen us to be saved by His Son, is this, to find that we have chosen Him, and are built on Him by faith, which is the fruit of His love who first chooseth us, and which we may read in our esteem of Him.
[Charnock: On regeneration. The increasing the perfection of one species, can never mount the thing so increased, to the perfection of another species. If you could vastly increase the heat of fire, you could never make it ascend to the perfection of a star. If you could increase mere moral works to the highest pitch they are capable of, they can never make you gracious, because grace is another species, and the nature of them must be changed to make them of another kind. All the moral actions in the world will never make our hearts of themselves of another kind than moral. Works make not the heart good, but a good heart makes the works good. It is not our walking in Gods statutes materially, which procures us a new heart, but a new heart is necessary before walking in Gods statutes.On the misery of unbelief. Some humbled souls think God is not so merciful as He declares; He swears to expel their doubts. Presumptuous persons think God is not so just; He swears to expel their vain conceits. This sin ties up, as it were, the hands of an omnipotent mercy from saving such a one.
[Tillotson: We are apt to attribute all things to the next and immediate agent, and to look no higher than second causes; not considering that all the motions of natural causes are directly subordinate to the first cause, and all the actions of free creatures are under the government of Gods wise providence, so that nothing happens to us besides the design and intention of God.If God be the last end of all, let us make Him our last end, and refer all our actions to His glory. This is that which is due to Him, as He is the first cause, and therefore He does most reasonably require it of us.
[Hopkins: Fear God, lest at any time, through any neglect or miscarriage of yours, He should be provoked to suspend His influence, and withdraw His grace from you, and to leave you to your own weakness and impotency, upon whose influence all your obedience doth depend.
[Henry: The best evidence of integrity is a freedom from the present prevailing corruptions of the times and places that we live in;
to swim against the stream when it is strong. Those God will own for His faithful witnesses that are bold in bearing their testimony to the present truth. This is thankworthy: not to bow to Baal when every body bows. Sober singularity is commonly the badge of true sincerity.
[J. Wesley: God always reserved a seed for himself; a few that worshipped Him in spirit and in truth. I have often doubted whether these were not the very persons whom the rich and honorable Christians, who will always have number as well as power on their side, did not stigmatize, from time to time, with the title of heretics. Perhaps it was chiefly by this artifice of the devil and his children, that the good which was in them being evil spoken of, they were prevented from being so extensively useful as otherwise they might have been. Nay, I have doubted whether that arch-heretic, Montanus, was not one of the holiest men in the second century.
[Clarke: The designs are the offspring of infinite wisdom, and therefore they are all right; the means are the most proper, as being the choice of an infinite knowledge that cannot err: we may safely credit the goodness of the design, founded in infinite wisdom; we may rely on the due accomplishment of the end, because the means are chosen and applied by infinite knowledge and skill.
[Barnes, on Rom 11:14 : We may see here, 1. That it is the earnest wish of the ministry to save the souls of men; 2. That they should urge every argument and appeal with reference to this; 3. That even the most awful and humbling truths may have this tendency; 4. It is right to use all the means in our power, not absolutely wicked, to save men. Paul was full of devices; and much of the success of the ministry will depend on a wise use of plans, that may, by the Divine blessing, arrest and save the souls of men.J. F. H.]
Footnotes:
[1]Rom 11:2.[The Rec. inserts ; supported by 1. L. It is omitted in 3. A. B. C. D. F., versions and fathers. The probability of an interpolation is so great, that modern editors unhesitatingly reject it.Some MSS. insert (from the first clause of Rom 11:2) in the first clause of Rom 11:2. The similarity of the clauses readily explains this.
[2]Rom 11:3.[A free citation from the LXX., 3 (1) 1Ki 19:10 (1Ki 11:14 is almost a repetition of 1Ki 11:10): (Rom 11:14 : ), , , . The Apostle has omitted a few unimportant words, transposed the clauses, substituted for , and the aorist for the perfect. The LXX. follows the Hebrew closely.
[3]Rom 11:3.[ (Rec 3. D. L.) is omitted in 1. A. B. C. F., by recent editors. The vivacious form of the Greek is restored by the above emendation. So Noyes, Alford, Five Ang. Clergymen, and Dr. Lange in his German text. Lord, they have killed thy prophets, they have digged down thine altars.
[4]Rom 11:3.[Five Ang. Clergymen: I only am left. The above emendation is more strictly literal, although it would answer still better to the of the LXX.
[5]Rom 11:4.[From 1Ki 19:18, but varying from both the Hebrew and the LXX.; not materially, however. The LXX. reads: (complut. ed., ) , . Alford: The Apostle here corrects a mistake of the LXX., who have, for , . He has added to the Hebrew, .I have left, kept as a remainder,, a simple and obvious filling up of the sense.On, instead of , see Exeg. Notes. The italicized words of the E. V. are omitted, although defended to some extent by Dr. Lange, who supplies, in his German text: [der Sule.des]. It seems unnecessary to insert a comment of such doubtful correctness.
[6]Rom 11:6.[Otherwise is sufficiently correct, although , literally, means: since in that case., which has been altered in one MS., and taken as = , in most versions, is to be rendered exactly. On the meaning, see Exeg. Notes. The simplest view is: ceaseth to be; but Dr. Lange finds more in the expression.
[7]Rom 11:6.[The whole clause: . , is omitted in 1. A. C. D. F., versions and fathers; it is rejected by Erasmus, Grotius, Wetstein, Griesbach, Scholz, Lachmann, Meyer, Tregelles; bracketted by Alford, and in version of Amer. Bible Union (rejected by Five Ang. Clergymen). On the other hand, it is found (with some variations noticed in the following notes) in 3. B. L., the older versions, in Chrysostom and Theodoret (text, not commentary). It is retained by Beza, Bengel, Rinck, Fritzsche, Reiche, Tholuck, by Tischendorf in later editions, Wordsworth, Hodge, Lange. It is difficult to decide, but the critical ground for retaining it is very strong. See Exeg. Notes.
[8]Rom 11:6.[Rec.: , on very slight authority.
[9]Rom 11:6.[B. has for ; either a mistake of the transcriber, or an attempt at explanation. See Exeg. Notes.
[10]Rom 11:8.[The first clause is a free citation from Isa 29:10. LXX: . Hebrew: .
[11]Rom 11:8.[It is much disputed whether these words are borrowed from Deu 29:4, or from Isa 6:9. The former passage reads thus (LXX.): … , . The latter contains the same idea, but still further removed in form from Pauls language. Dr. Lange thinks both were in mind. In that case, as well as if Deuteronomy is cited, the parentheses must be omitted, so as to join unto this day with the rest of the verse. Noyes tones down the telic force thus: eyes that were not to see, and ears that were not to hear.
[12]Rom 11:9.[From Psa 69:23 (E. V., 22). The LXX. is followed more closely than the Hebrew text. The latter is literally: Let their table before them be for a snare, and to those secure (), a trap. (The E. V. in loco, gives an unnecessarily forced and circuitous rendering.) The LXX. renders: , , . The Apostle follows the first clause quite closely, then inserts , and putting next, substitutes for the LXX. equivalent. The main difficulty is with the expression last named. The Hebrew word, according to the present pointing (given above), does not mean requitals, recompense; although this sense may be deduced from the verbal root (), and belongs to several collateral derivatives, it has no existence in the usage of the one before us (J. A. Alexander). The usual explanation is, that the LXX. pointed the word thus, ; for retributions, and the Apostle, finding this meaning in keeping with the spirit of the original, adopted it in the varied form of the text.
[13]Rom 11:10.[The LXX. version of Psa 69:24 (23) is followed with great exactness. But it varies from the Hebrew text ( , make their loins to waver, or tremble) in the last clause. The meaning is preserved, however. See Exeg. Notes.
[14]Rom 11:13.[The Rec. D. F. L., fathers, read , A. B., versions, . Lange adopts the former, mainly on exegetical grounds; Lachmann, Alford, Tregelles, the latter. C. has ; hence Meyer thinks it impossible to decide which is the genuine particle; nor is it of importance.
[15]Rom 11:13.[In Rec., L., some versions and fathers, is omitted; in D. F., ; both are found in . A. B. C. De Wette and Tholuck reject both, on exegetical grounds; most critical editors retain , and Meyer accounts for as inserted because the corresponding was wanting. On the whole, it is safest to retain both, with Lachmann and Alford. Tregelles brackets .
[16]Rom 11:17.[The (Rec.) is omitted in 1. B. C., but found in 3. A. L. Still another reading in D1. F. Alford rejects, Tregelles brackets, but most editors retain it. If retained, the note of Dr. Lange in loco is correct.The E. V. has paraphrased : with them partakest. The above emendation is more literal.
[17]Rom 11:19.[The article before is omitted in . A. C. D3. L.; rejected by Scholz, Lachmann, Meyer, Wordsworth (who incorrectly cites B. as omitting it), Tregelles; bracketted by Alford. It is found in B. D1.; retained by Tischendorf, De Wette, Tholuck, Lange. Meyer thinks it is a mechanical repetition from Rom 11:17-18; while De Wette thinks it was omitted on account of the euphony: . In any case, the reference is to the branches broken off.
[18]Rom 11:20.[Instead of (Rec., C. D. F. G.), Lachmann and Tregelles adopt , on the authority of . A. B. The first word is so unusual that it was likely to be changed. Most editors follow the Rec.
[19]Rom 11:21.[The uncial authority is against . It is omitted in . A. B. C., but found in D. F. L. It is rejected by Lachmann and Tregelles, bracketted by Alford. But the probability of an omission, because of the future () which follows, is so great, that most critical editors retain it. To obviate the same difficulty, the subj. is substituted in Rec., but with no uncial support.
[20]Rom 11:22.[Instead of the accusative (Rec., D. F. L.) most editors adopt the nominative, on the authority of 1. A. B. C. The punctuation favors the latter, as the former would be governed by , which is separated from it by a colon. The absence of a predicate for the nominatives led to the change. So Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Alford, De Wette, Tregelles, Lange. The same remarks apply to .
[21]Rom 11:22.[Instead of (Rec., D3. F. L.), on the authority of A. B. C. D1. . has .Rec., D2 3. F. L. omit , which is found in . A. B. C. D1. The critical editors generally adopt it, on the ground that it was likely to have been omitted as unnecessary. The later revisions retain and render as above, except Amer. Bible Union, which follows the E. V.
[22]Rom 11:25.[Rec., with . C. D, L., reads . A. B. have . The preposition is omitted in F. and some cursives. Lachmann, Tischendorf, Alford, Hodge, Tregelles, adopt ; but the sense is much the same, whichever preposition be adopted. The phrase is found in Rom 12:16, and Pro 3:7 (LXX.); hence the probability of an alteration to correspond.
[23]Rom 11:26.[According to the view of most of the best expositors, the citation is from Isa 59:20-21 (from to , Rom 11:27); the last clause of Rom 11:27 is from Isa 27:9. The text of the LXX., and the more important variations from the Hebrew, will be found in the Exeg. Notes.
[24]Rom 11:28.[, according to, as respects, &c. The version of Five Ang. Clergymen adopts as touching, in both clauses; Amer. Bible Union: as concerning. If a choice must be made between the two, the former is preferable, although neither is altogether exact.
[25]Rom 11:30.[The Rec. inserts , on the authority of 3. L., and some versions. It is omitted in corr.1 A. B. C. D1., versions and fathers; rejected by modern editors generally. Scholz retains it.
[26]Rom 11:30.[The E. V. confounds here the nearly related ideas of unbelief and disobedience. Later revisions correct the rendering of both verb and noun. Dr. Hodge claims that the E. V. is correct; but it is only inferentially so. These remarks apply also to (Rom 11:32).
[27]Rom 11:32.[Concluded, was once a literal rendering of ; included (Amer. Bible Union), while it expresses a part of the meaning, is not strong enough; delivered up (Noyes), is an interpretation rather than a translation. It seems best, then, to substitute the simple, literal Saxon: shut up. So E. V., Gal 3:23, though concluded is found in Rom 11:22.Instead of the masculine , we find , and (so Vulg.), but very weakly supported.
[28]Rom 11:33.[Both and are found. The former is supported by . A. B1.; adopted by Alford, Tregelles (Meyer, De Wette, adopt the latter).
[29]Rom 11:34.[The aorists of Rom 11:34-35 are rendered by simple past tenses in the Amer. Bible Union, at the expense both of rhythm and strict adherence to the sense of the Hebrew at least.The LXX. (Isa 40:13) is followed very closely.
[30]Rom 11:36.[From Job 41:3 ( Job 41:11, E. V.), where the LXX. (Job 41:2) have , . ; But the Hebrew is , who hath anticipated (i. e., by the context, conferred a benefit) on me, that I may repay him? And to this the Apostle alludes, using the third person (Alford).R.]
[31][Dr. Lange divides the text so as to include only Rom 11:7-10 in this paragraph, which is the usual division; but here, and in the exegesis, he adds Rom 11:11.R.]
[32][Wordsworth supposes that he is speaking as an Apostle: Do not imagine (he says to the Jews) that God cast off His ancient people when He admitted the Gentiles to the Church. No; I, who am His chosen instrument for admitting them, am a Jew. But this is an inference rather than an interpretation. He also explains of the tribe of Benjamin: the son of Israel by his beloved wife Rachel, not by Leah, or by one of their handmaids 1R.]
[33][See Textual Note4: I am left the only one.R.]
[34][Still with Estius, Philippi, Hodge, De Wette, and others, it must be noted that, although the erection of the altars on the high places was originally forbidden in the kingdom of Israel (where Elijah lived), they had become the only places of true worship; and neglect of these would be really neglect of Jehovah.R.]
[35][The simplest explanation is that which takes this as a definite expression for an indefinite number (Stuart, Hodge, and others), without attaching any special significance to the number seven.R.]
[36][Wordsworth combines all the explanations: The reason why the Septuagint sometimes used the feminine, why St. Paul adopts it here, appears to be, because not only a heathen God, but a goddess also (Astart), was worshipped under the name of Baal, and because, by this variety of gender, the reader is reminded that there was no principle of unity in this heathen worship; and thus the vanity of the worship itself is declared. The fact that the LXX. uses both, seems to render the italics of the E. V. unnecessary, and to render the interpretation thus assumed very doubtful.R.]
[37][Alford well remarks: The object being precision, it is much more probable that the Apostle should have written both clauses in their present formal parallelism, and that the second should have been early omitted from its seeming superfluity, than that it should have been inserted from the margin. The want of exact correspondence is also against the probability of an interpolation, as Fritzsche has remarked: ; ; at the close, where might have been expected.R.]
[38][So Wordsworth, who accepts the very weakly-supported of the Rec., and accenting it thus: , renders: there is no longer any place for the existence of grace. But this is very doubtful.R.]
[39][The following paraphrase (abridged from Alford) may give a clearer view: But if (the selection has been made) by grace, it is no longer (we exclude its being) of works (as its source); for (in that case) grace no longer becomes (loses its efficacy as) grace (the freedom of the act is lost, it having been prompted from without): but if of works (as the cause and source of the selection), no longer is it (the act of selection) grace; for (in that case) work is no longer work (work being that which earns reward, its character is contradicted). The same author remarks, that this point is stated so fully just here, because the Apostle was to enter upon such an exposition of the Divine dealings as rendered it necessary to show that their severity did not contradict their general character of grace and love.R.]
[40][Fritzsche has an Excursus on this word, pp. 588 ff. He makes it = stupor, numbness, as from stupefying wine. Only here, and not in the classics. Incorrect, according to this view; Calvin: spiritus compunctionis; Luther: einen erbitterten Geist.R.]
[41][Philippi (following Keil) says that the subject in this Psalm is not the ideal, but the concrete person of the righteous. Hengstenberg (so J. A. Alexander) adopts the other view.R.]
[42][The Psalm purports to be written by David. Dr. Langes remarks are in support of this view of the authorship, though he finds it necessary, in order to sustain it by internal evidence, to admit the later addition of the concluding verses. The question of authorship does not, indeed, affect the question of the propriety of the phrase: David saith; but when it is so likely that David did write the Psalm, inventing theories to prove that he did not, seems to be useless ingenuity.R.]
[43][Although is telic, as is now held by most commentators, the emphasis does not rest upon it, as though only the purpose were denied, and the fact admitted. Taking as representatives of the whole nation, the Apostle admits the stumbling, and denies the final fall, intimating by his use of , that another purpose was involved, viz., the salvation of the Gentiles.R.]
[44][The fall here must be taken as a less strong expression than the verb which precedes, if the view be adopted that denies the fact of a final fall. We must, then, hold that the national fall into utter ruin is denied throughout, while the stumbling and the moral fall of the individuals are admitted. So Alford.R.]
[45][So Hodge, Alford: their impoverishment. The numerical idea is quite objectionable, although Dr. Lange seems to think it is included also. The whole verse, according to this view, means: If their unbelief (i. e., of one part of them) is the worlds wealth, and their small number (i. e., of believers, the other part of them) the wealth of the Gentiles, how much more their full (restored) number? This arbitrarily changes the reference of , puts a forced meaning on , and really weakens the force of the argument, which is: if their sin has done so much, how much more their conversion?R.]
[46][The numerical idea is lexically admissible in , whence it has been transferred to , but even here it is not the prominent one. It is, however, to be understood, that the spiritual fulness will necessarily include the conversion of the nation as a whole.R.]
[47][Meyer thus paraphrases: I seek, indeed, inasmuch as I am he, who has the apostolic mission to the Gentiles (notice the emphatic ), to do honor to mine office, but purpose therewith to excite my kinsmen, &c. This brings out the force of , and the connection of thought.R.]
[48][There is a lexical objection to taking . as an adjective, since, when thus used, it means: made out of the wood of the olive (Alford). The reason for adopting this view is to escape from the thought that the whole. Gentile world, as such, was grafted in. This is done quite as properly by supposing the whole tree here put for a branch of it. The tree, moreover, is introduced to recognize the fact of a distinctively Gentile life existing as a whole.R.]
[49][This last view is that of the majority of the best commentators, and is so natural and obvious, that nothing is gained by departing from it. Meyer intimates that the Apostles illustration must be taken in accordance with the facti. e., the fact respecting the coming in of the Gentileswhich was undoubtedly the grafting of wild branches on a good tree, to partake of the life and bear the fruit of that good tree. Furthermore, as a fact, there was no new and fresher life imparted by the Gentiles at that time, as Dr. Lange intimates. The Roman and Greek civilization, continually decaying, was only preserved so long by the new religious life from the patriarchal root.R.]
[50][Both datives are rendered: durch, by Dr. Lange. The E. V., however, varies from because of to by. Alford has the following discriminating note: Through indicates better the prompting cause of a definite actby the sustaining condition of a continued state. Thus we should always say that we are justified through, not by, faith; but that we stand by, not through, faith. Hence the propriety of the rendering of this verse in the E. V.R.]
[51][As Stuart well remarks, this verse speaks of what can be done; the next, of what will be done. It is greatly to be doubted whether the verse has any bearing on the questions of perseverance, conversio resistibilis, &c., which Meyer, and others, find involved here.R.]
[52][There seems no good ground for departing from the common rendering. Dr. Langes idea about real fresh life in the branches is not admissible. For, although fresh physical and intellectual life has again and again come into the Church from new races, it has always been, for a time, at the expense of spiritual vigor. Not until the new spiritual life, contrary to nature, had been felt, was there any gain by such grafting.R.]
[53][The view now generally adopted, and supported by Beza, Estius, Koppe, Reiche, Kllner, Meyer, Tholuck, De Wette, Hodge, Stuart, Alford, and a host of others, is: that the ancient people of God (so marvellously preserved in their distinctive life, as if in earnest of this) shall be restored, as a nation, to Gods favor. With all the modifications of this view from other passages, we have not to do. Thus much ought to be admitted by all fair rules of exegesis.R.]
[54][The Literature on this subject is very extensive. The passages bearing on this particular point are grouped by Demarest and Gordon, Christocracy, pp. 234 ff. Comp. Meyer, pp. 442 f.R.]
[55][So Tholuck, De Wette, Meyer, Alford. Dr. Hodge thinks it probable that here, as elsewhere, he does not intend to refer exclusively to any one prediction, but to give the general sense of many specific declarations of the ancient prophets. The objections urged throughout against such a view of the Apostles citations are applicable here.Philippi remarks that these citations support the affirmation: so all Israel shall be saved, not the continuance of the hardening until the fulness of the Gentiles come in.R.]
[56][The obvious meaning is, that the election of Israel as the people of God involves such a hope of blessing to the children of Abraham, that the mercy will at last coins, even after thousands of generations. If the Abrahamie covenant is abrogated, the Apostles words have little force.R.]
[57][Notwithstanding this very strong assertion of Dr. Lange, on the ground of the parallelism, as well as on account of the general thought of the whole passage, the construction of Meyer is to be preferred. The trajection gives emphasis to . . The other views are: They are disobedient through the mercy, &c. (Calvin, and others); they have not believed on the mercy shown to you, &c. (Luther, Estius, Lange). But to these there is the same grammatical objection. Tholuck says: with the same mercy; which obviates Dr. Langes difficulty, but is against the parallelism.R.]
[58][Comp. Langes Comm. Galatians, p. 85 ff.R.]
[59]Reiches arguments, and the answers given by Tholuck, will be found in Alford in loco.R.]
[60][Bengel: Sapientia dirigit omnia ad finem optimum: cognitio novit finem illum et exitum. See Doctr. Note22.R.]
[61][Alford, who is unusually happy in his comments on this chapter, remarks: If this be rightly understoodnot of a formal allusion to the three Persons in the Holy Trinity, but of an implicit reference (as Tholuck) to the three attributes of Jehovah, respectively manifested to us by the three coequal and coeternal Personsthere can hardly be a doubt of its correctness. Only those who are dogmatically prejudiced can miss seeing that, though St. Paul has never definitively expressed the doctrine of the Holy Trinity in a definite formula, yet he was conscious of it as a living reality.R.]
[62][Lutherthum; Lutherism, rather than Lutheranism. There is no thought of the Lutheran Church, as such, but of that spirit which traces all evangelical Christianity to the great reformer and his associates. If the figure of the Apostle has any special application now, it is against that illogical ultra-Protestantism, which, on the one hand, boasts itself against the medival Christianity, and, on the other, denies that any advance can be made beyond the theological thought of the seventeenth century.R.]
[63][A comparison of Rom 11:32 with Gal 3:22 will assist us in arriving at a correct explanation of its meaning. It expresses a bold, genial, and comprehensive thought, and contains the key to the understanding of the fall, as well as of the whole history of the world. The profound mystery of sin is here solved in the lustre of the Divine wisdom and love. The temporary abasement and neglect of countless individuals, of whole races and nations, is here subordinated to a more profound and exalted plan for general blessing. The Apostle, here and in Gal 3:22, teaches a universality of sin and disobedience, and a universality of Divine grace (so also Rom 5:12 ff.; 1Co 15:21-22), and so places them in bold contrast, that the former must subserve the latter. This universality of grace refers: (1) To the internal power and capability; (2) To the purpose and design; (3) To the proffering of the opportunity, or the calling. God can and will have mercy upon all men, and gives to all (at some period) this opportunity. But further than this we cannot go. Paul does not teach a universalism of actual redemption to all men. The acceptance or rejection of grace is made dependent on belief or unbelief. Hence, in Gal 3:22, he does not say, in the second clause: that the promise might be given to all, but to believers. For redemption is no natural process, no work of necessity, but a free act of God in Christ, and must be apprehended and appropriated in a free moral manner by each individual subject.P. S.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
The Apostle here takes up the Subject again concerning Election. He states the Doctrine particularly, as relating to the Jew and to the Gentile.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. (2) God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the Scripture saith of Elijah? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, (3) Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. (4) But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. (5) Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. (6) And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. (7) What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded. (8) (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day. (9) And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompense unto them: (10) Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back always.
The doctrine of election hath been, and must be, to every carnal mind, of all others the most offensive. And as the Apostle, when entering upon this Epistle, engaged in it, with a special view to establish the Church in the grand truth, of justification before God in Christ, without the deeds of the law; this involved in it the doctrine of election. And the Apostle, in the ninth Chapter, devoted the whole of it to this one purpose. And, in that very interesting part of the Epistle, he most fully proved the certainty of the doctrine, in the rejection of the Jews, and the call of the Gentiles. Foreseeing, however, that what he had there advanced, would rouse the resentment of the carnal and ungodly, and that some would misconstrue the doctrine, as though the whole body of the Jews had been rejected of God; he enters upon this Chapter with shewing, the mistake of such men, and in his own instance proves, that there were among the Jews, as well as among the Gentiles, the Lord’s chosen ones. He begins the Chapter with a question, which was Paul’s usual method, when he had some grand, and momentous point of doctrine, more particularly to establish, in order that he might the better confirm it. Hath God (saith he) cast away his people? And, he answers it with a kind of abhorrence; God forbid! Yea, the whole of God’s purposes, is with an eye to the preservation of his people. The whole, and every individual of that mystical body the Lord gave to his Son before the world, is to be gathered out of the present time-state of the Church. It was for this Church, the Lord went forth in acts of creation. everything in nature, and in providence, is made to minister to this one purpose. And when the grand object, in the recovery of the Church is accomplished, from the present time-slate in which she is now involved; the earth itself, with all that is in it, will be done away, like the scaffolding for a building, which is taken down when the building itself is finished; and Christ will bring home his Church to the eternal state of glory all along intended. The Apostle intimates, that this hath been the design of Jehovah, from the beginning. And in proof, he adverts to a well-known part of the scripture history, in the days of Elijah; 1Ki 19:10-14 , where, in the worst of times, there were in Israel seven thousand, whom the Lord, by electing grace, had preserved from the general apostacy. And hence Paul, in a most decided and unanswerable manner shews, that as it is electing grace in God, and not the smallest merit of man, which makes this difference there must be, for the carrying on the Lord’s designs in relation to Christ’s Church, in the present time, and in all times, until the whole purposes of the Lord in his Church are accomplished; a remnant according to the election of grace. For, such is the everlasting and unalterable nature of things in their distinct properties, that grace in God, and merit in man, (if he had any,) must be always opposite to each other. It ceaseth to be grace, if man obtains anything by merit. And thus the Apostle, in a single verse, proves beyond all possible dispute, that all the Church of God, in every single instance receives, from beginning to end, in electing, regenerating, redeeming, justifying, sanctifying love, is wholly of grace. Through all the departments of nature, providence, grace, and glory, there is, there can be, not an atom in either, but what springs from this source, This people have I formed for myself, they shall shew forth my praise, Isa 43:21 .
But, while the Apostle thus clearly and unanswerably sets the doctrine of election upon its own just basis, he again foresaw an objection, which the unbelieving part of mankind would bring still against it. Israel, that is, Israel as a nation in the flesh, had not obtained what they sought after. But the election (saith he) hath. So that here seemed some difficulty. Nay, the objector would add, it is said, that God gave to them that were blinded a spirit of slumber, that they should not see. And the Apostle makes quotations, both from the Prophets David, and Isaiah, in confirmation, Isa 6:9 ; Psa 69:22-23 . But these points, so far from becoming arguments, to call in question the reality of the doctrine itself, only tend the more to establish it. everything in the word of God, connected with the history of the Church, proves God’s original and eternal choice, in the appointment. And, it is impossible to trace that history, through any of the several parts of it, without being led to see, the Lord’s distinguishing grace, and mercy, ordering and directing the whole.
In following up the Apostle’s statement, as here given, between the Church and the world, between the remnant, as he calls them, according to the election of grace, and the rest which he describes as blinded, it may not be improper to call in to our aid, what the word of God hath said, in relation to both; by which, under divine teaching, we shall discover, that while the one received all from grace, and therefore had nothing to boast, but everything to be thankful for; the other had no right to complain, having no pretensions to divine favor, and therefore no injustice done him. This view of the subject may be made evident, under both branches of it In relation to the Church. When it pleased God, in his threefold character of Persons, to raise up a Church, at the head of which the Son of God in our nature was placed, to be for Jehovah’s glory and the Church’s happiness; the Lord was pleased to love this Church with an everlasting love, and in proof of it, chose this Church, in all the individual members of it, in Christ: gave them being in Christ, and a well-being of endless life and blessedness in Christ; predestinating them to the adoption of sons, and appointing them to an everlasting state of holiness, and glory, in Christ; or, to speak in Scripture language, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love, Eph 1:4-6 .
Thus ordaining, and appointing things, in the infinite mind and will of Jehovah, before all worlds; the events, which were to take place during the time-state of the Church, could not be supposed as counteracting what had been before arranged in eternity; but rather promoting, and bringing about, the Lord’s original designs and purposes. When, therefore, the Lord went forth in acts of creation, and the Church, which had existed in the divine mind from all eternity, was now to be brought forth into being in the Adam-nature so ordained; the fall which followed, and in which the whole Church, as well as the whole world in the Adam – race were involved, could not do away God’s purposes, neither destroy that grace-union with Christ, which arose out of an everlasting love, incapable of being lessened or changed. It might, as it did indeed, lay the foundation for bringing greater glory to the Lord, in affording occasion, as had been before determined, for the Son of God, in the nature of his Church, to redeem her from the ruins of the fall, and for raising her up a spotless Church, to be the partaker with him, of all his communicable glory, in his kingdom forever. Here we discover somewhat of the electing love of God, to the Church. To this source, as to a fountain, must be ascribed all the blessings manifested in such a distinguishing way, as is discovered, in the several streams, of redeeming, calling, justifying, sanctifying grace, which maketh glad the city of God.
In relation to the world, by which I mean the Christless world, the doctrine is equally plain and evident. The whole as well as the Church, had their being in Adam, the one common head. And, had they continued in the perfection of being in which they were created, this creature-perfection, with all its happiness, would have continued with them. But when in Adam all fell, and none but those who from grace-union in Christ, were to be recovered by Christ; Of consequence, those who never had any other relation to Christ, than as his creatures, and not the members of his mystical body, could not be interested in his salvation. The one could not lose their blessings in Christ, because, as members of his body, they were part of Christ. The other could not receive benefit from Christ, having no union with Christ. And indeed, had the fail never taken place, the consequence of election would have still made a striking difference, between the Church of Christ, and the world. For while the world, in the Adam-nature derived from the first man, could have arrived to no higher source, than the nature from whence it originated; the Church from her union with Christ, and interest in Christ as her Head, must have had communion in all that belonged to Christ, and enjoyed the peculiar and personal blessings founded in that union, in time, and to all eternity.
Here then we may safely rest. Christ and his Church are One, And by electing love, with all its blissful properties, every child of God, who is conscious, that by regenerating grace he is brought out of the Adam-nature of the fall, into the glorious liberty of the sons of God; may well contemplate, for it is his privilege, and must be his happiness so to do, the wonderful subject, with the most profound reverence, adoration, humbleness of soul, and praise to God, in his daily walk through life. Oh I how often, and how earnest, will that cry of the soul arise before God, when, with the astonishment of the Apostle, he will feel himself constrained to say, Lord! how is it that thou hast manifested thyself to me, and not unto the world? Joh 14:22 .
And, in respect to the Christless world, the fall of man cannot, in its nature and consequences, be a source of disquietude to the Church, more than the fall of Angels. Secret things belong to the Lord our God; but those things which are revealed, belong unto us and to our children forever, Deu 29:29 . The Lord’s sovereignty is an everlasting answer to all the cavils of the ungodly. Neither can the justice of God be impeached, if sin brings forth death; for this is but the natural consequences of cause and effect. And the words of our Lord are sweetly formed, for the uninterrupted repose of all his children, when at any time (tempted by the world, by Satan, or the ill-judged and mistaken feelings of nature, untaught by grace,) unbecoming thoughts may arise in the mind. At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, 0 Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Even so, Father! for so it seemed good in thy sight, Mat 11:25-26 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
The Doctrine of Election
Rom 11:5
The argument of the three chapters of the Epistle to the Romans, the reading of which we conclude this morning, is one of the most difficult of the Bible. It suggests problems concerning the moral government of God which perplex, if they do not appal, the mind which entertains them.
I. Now it was one of those deep problems that confronted the mind of St Paul when he had surrendered to the victorious Christ and had been received into the fellowship of His disciples in the Straight Street at Damascus. Never for a moment did he waver in his allegiance to the exalted Nazarene or doubt the reality of the vision, to which from the first he had not been disobedient. But the blinding of his natural sight in the early hours of his new and startling experience was typical of that readjustment of focus which the strange and marvellous fact, thrust thus unexpectedly into his spiritual consciousness, demanded of the exclusive Pharisee when he found himself called to be a universal missionary to the nations. He had now to meet the prejudice which hitherto he had shared. If Jesus, with his subversive claim, were indeed the Messiah, as by his conviction no less than by his allegiance he was now bound to declare Him, why this obstinate rejection on the part of Israel itself? This is a problem which must present itself under various aspects in every age to the followers of the Crucified, when they are brought face to face, as we are in Manchester today, with the stubborn, persistent fact of the Hebrew race, which, thrusting itself into our commerce, our government, our social life, yet maintains the identity of its exclusive customs, its worship of the God of Abraham, its obstinate refusal of the cross of Christ. No one can ignore the Hebrew people. No one can deny to them a zeal of God which puts many Christians to shame, a genius for religion which makes it the crowning characteristic of the race. No attitude towards them is more unworthy of the philosopher or the historian than that antipathy which is the sad inheritance of centuries nominally Christian, and with which the Gentile has abundantly repaid the proud superiority of the Jew.
II. If we are to understand the argument by which St. Paul vindicates the righteousness of God in His dealings with the chosen people, we must first of all be in sympathy with his spiritual apprehension of the power and love of Christ. Those whose faith is an inherited tradition rather than a living experience may well rise from the problems of the world’s religious beliefs in the spirit of intellectual scepticism. God’s purpose of love must first of all meet you, my brother, in the practical issues of your personal life before you can discuss its methods and its mystery in relation to the universal history of mankind. By the very limitations of your human destiny which involve you in the responsibilities for which God calls you to account, the sins for which Christ atones, the guilt from which the cross redeems, you are precluded from occupying the position of the impartial critic of the relations between God and His world. St. Paul only began to write the ninth chapter of the Romans when he had finished the wonderful eighth. ‘The law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.’ Only when he had received the assurance for himself that to them that are in Christ Jesus there is no condemnation did the message of the redemptive love for the world shed the light of its benediction over the tangled story of the painful earth. So the rejection of God’s ancient people is itself luminously explained by the Apostle, as evidence not of the caprice, still less of the impotence, of a faithless Creator, but of those unfailing methods which in every age have marked the progress of God’s universal purpose of redemption.
(a) And first there is the Divine method of selection. God works ‘according to election’. God is choosing every day, every hour, every moment Two men are in one bed; two women grinding at the mill; one is taken, the other left. And it is this selective method of Divine working which St. Paul sees in the ancient history of Israel. God never gives away the mode in which He will be true to His own promises. He is able of the very stones to raise up children to Abraham. That is what he means when he compares the story of Jacob and Esau. Children of one birth surely they, at least, might claim an equal share in the blessing of Abraham. But, even when St. Paul wrote, the facts of history were irrefragable. And today the Bedouin scours the barren sand, the hand of the Israelite is on the forces which move the world. We are always telling our Lord God how He must fulfil His Word, and He is always disappointing our faithless and unfounded claim.
(b) The second principle of Divine action upon which St. Paul insists is the old prophetic teaching of the remnant This again is universal in its application. The infallibility of majorities is no more a fact of the eternal order than the Divine right of kings. If Csar is not Divine, neither is the voice of the people the voice of God. A critical investigation of the contents of Christianity, an impartial view of the origins of the Church, reveal its character, not as a protest against the Hebrew polity, but as a true and legitimate expansion of the commonwealth of Israel. And what would Christianity have been without that spiritual genius which passed with the faithful remnant across the breach which Christ had made in the middle wall of partition which separated the Gentile from the household of God? A shallow estimate of missionary effort as a narrow commercial enterprise is content to measure values in the kingdom of God by repeating the unworthy statement that it costs 2000 to convert a Jew. Two thousand pounds! Why, it cost a miracle to convert St. Paul, but the work was cheap at the price. Millions have had reason to give thanks for the ‘remnant according to the election of grace’. That remnant is the promise of the future which St. Paul himself greeted from afar. ‘If the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be but life from the dead!’
(c) And lastly, the act by which God redeems is an act of grace. The power of the cross, its immense claim on the adoring gratitude of the children of men, is the wonder of the free favour of a loving Father which is there displayed. ‘Not by works done in righteousness which we did ourselves but according to His mercy He saved us.’
J. G. Simpson, The Guardian, 19th August, 1910.
References. XI. 7. Expositor (7th Series), vol. v. p. 67. XI. 11. Ibid. (4th Series), vol. ix. p. 424. XI. 12. Ibid. (6th Series), vol. vii. p. 258. XI. 13. Ibid. (4th Series), vol. i. p. 79; ibid. (6th Series), vol. viii. p. 236. XI. 15. G. C. Lorimer, Christian World Pulpit, vol. liv. pp. 205, 220. XI. 16-21. Expositor (4th Series), vol. vii. p. 359. XI. 17-24. Ibid. (6th Series), vol. xi. p, 16. XI. 22. J. A. Alexander, The Gospel of Jesus Christ, p. 174. Expositor (6th Series), vol. viii. p. 130; ibid. vol. x. p. 177. XI. 25. Ibid. vol. vii. p. 268. XI. 25, 26. D. Heagle, That Blessed Hope, p. 90. XI. 26. Expositor (4th Series), vol. i. p. 141. XI. 29. Ibid. (6th Series), vol. viii. p. 426. XI. 32. J. Carter, Preacher’s Magazine, vol. xvii. p. 367. Bishop Browne, Sermons on the Atonement, p. 1.
The Depth of God’s Wealth
Rom 11:33
It is a familiar thought of the Old Testament that it is not possible to give anything to God, because everything is already His. While the contemplation of human wealth is apt to provoke envy, covetousness, and the evils into which the love of money leads, it is possible that the contemplation of the Divine wealth may enlarge our minds and liberate us from all the cramping and paralysing effects of greed. Nothing has a more salutary and sobering effect than to bring forcibly before the mind this universal ownership of God; to pass through the possessions of the world and to mark on each thing in succession the owner’s name. Though the world and its contents is but a grain of His wealth, it is certain that everything here, without exception, belongs to Him.
I. Now as this depth of God begins to be revealed to us, does it not invest with a certain absurdity our strident proprietary claims? The greater part of men seem to be entirely occupied in obtaining what can by no possibility belong to them; clutching at goods which prove to be inalienably another’s; and involving themselves in the terrible responsibility of using what is not theirs. What’s Mine’s Mine, is the title of a noble book of George Macdonald’s. The gist of the book is to show that the apparent truism is indeed a fallacy. The truth is exactly the opposite; what’s mine is not mine, it is God’s.
II. Let us state this truth now emerging into sight a little more carefully. For any man to own anything without reference to God, the real Owner, involves a spiritual offence, which may easily develop into a spiritual disease; and the disease may soon be mortal. The effect of the love of money is seen in degradation, bondage, misery, crime, spiritual death.
III. But there is also a mystery of love in this depth of the Divine wealth. Christ always laid stress on the thought that we should not be of anxious mind about material things. The heavenly Father will clothe and feed His children. What a lamentable illusion is that which custom, the unbelief of the world, and personal sin, have thrown around our eyes! A great part even of Christian people are constantly worried about ways and means, and have no faith in the depth of the wealth of God. How utterly misplaced is your anxiety, how essentially Godless is your worry! Look into the depth of the wealth of God, and have faith in Him.
R. F. Horton, The Trinity, p. 57.
Rom 11:33
When all is said and done the rapt saint is found the only logician. Not exhortation, not argument, becomes our life, but paeans of joy and praise.
Emerson.
‘I found it,’ says Adam Bede in George Eliot’s romance, ‘better for my soul to be humble before the mysteries of God’s dealings, and not be making a clatter about what I could never understand.’ One truth discovered, one pang of regret at not being able to express it, is better than all the fluency and flippancy in the world.
Hazlitt.
Nowhere so much as in the writings of St. Paul, and in that great Apostle’s greatest work, the Epistle to the Romans, has Puritanism found what seemed to furnish it with the one thing needful, and to give it canons of truths absolute and final. Now, all writings, as has been already said, even the most precious writings and the most fruitful, must inevitably, from the very nature of things, be but contributions to human thought and human development, which extend wider than they do. Indeed St. Paul, in the very Epistle of which we are speaking, shows, when he asks, Who hath known the mind of the Lord? who hath known, that is, the love and Divine order of things in its entirety that he himself acknowledges this fully.
M. Arnold, Culture and Anarchy.
Rom 11:33
We see His working and we sorrow: the end of His counsel and working both hidden, and underneath the ground, and therefore we cannot believe. Even amongst men, we see hewn stones, timber, and a hundred scattered parcels and pieces of our house, all under-tools, hammers, and axes, and saws; yet the house, the beauty and the use of so many lodgings and ease-rooms, we neither see nor understand for the present; these are but in the mind and heart of the builder as yet We see red earth, unbroken clods, furrows, and stones; but we see not the summer, lilies, roses, the beauty of a garden.
Samuel Rutherford.
Rom 11:33
When Richard Baxter was dying, someone reminded him of the good which his works had produced. He replied, ‘I was but a pen in God’s hands, and what praise is due to a pen? ‘When extremity of pain constrained him to pray for release, he would check himself with the words, ‘It is not fit for me to prescribe when Thou wilt, what Thou wilt, and how Thou wilt!’ ‘Oh, how unsearchable are His ways, and His paths past finding out! the reaches of His Providence we cannot fathom! Do not think the worse of religion for what you see me suffer.’ When asked how he did, he replied Almost well.
Dr. Stoughton, History of Religion in England, vol. v. p. 135.
References. XI. 33. J. Budgen, Parochial Sermons, vol. ii. p. 142. Expositor (5th Series), vol. vii. p. 320.
Rom 11:36
The motto of Whittier’s poem The Overheart.
References. XI. 36. Archbishop Maclagan, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlv. p. 72. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. x. No. 672.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
XV
PAUL’S EARLY LIFE BEFORE HE ENTERS THE NEW TESTAMENT STORY
Act 21:39
This discussion does not make much headway in the text book, but it covers an immense amount of territory in its facts and significance. This section is found in Goodwin’s Harmony of the Life of Paul, pages 15-17, and the theme is Paul’s history up to the time that he enters the New Testament story. Saul, now called Paul, a Jew, of the tribe of Benjamin, of the sect of the Pharisees, yet a freeborn Roman citizen, by occupation a tentmaker, by office a rabbi, and a member of the Sanhedrin, was born in the city of Tarsus, in the province of Cilicia, about the time of our Lord’s birth. Tarsus was situated on the narrow coast line of the eastern part of the Mediterranean, just under the great Taurus range of mountains, and on the beautiful river Cydnus, which has a cataract just before it reaches the city, and a fall, beautiful then and beautiful now, coming down into that fertile plain where the city goes into a fine harbor, which opens the city to the commerce of the world through the Mediterranean Sea. It was on the great Roman thoroughfare, which was one of the best roads in the world. There were two of these mountain ranges, one of them right up above the city through the Taurus range into the coast of Asia Minor, the other following the coast line, which leads into Syria. This is the way that the mountains came down close to the sea, making a certain point very precipitous, and there was a typical beach between those mountains and the sea. That road into Syria was called the Oriental way. Over the Roman thoroughfare passed the land traffic, travel and marching armies for centuries. It was in that pass that Alexander fought his first great battle against the Persians, and thus obtained an entrance into the East. It was through that pass that, marching westward, and before Alexander’s time, Xerxes the Great, the husband of Esther (mentioned in the Bible), marched his 5,000,000 men to invade Greece. I could mention perhaps fifty decisive battles in ancient history that were set and were successful conquests by preoccupation of that pass. That shows the strategical position of this city that it commanded the passes of the Taurus into Asia Minor, and the pass into Syria, and through its fine harbor came in touch with the commerce of the world on the Mediterranean Sea.
Paul says that it was “no mean city,” in size or in population. It was notable, (1) for its manufacture, that of weaving, particularly goat’s hair, for on that Taurus range lived goats with very long hair, and this was woven into ropes, tents, and things of that kind; (2) because it was the capital of the province of Cilicia; (3) because, under Rome, it was a free city, i.e., it had the management of its own internal affairs, which constituted a city a free city, like the free city of Bremer in the early history of Germany. Other cities would be under the feudal lords, but there were a number of cities free, and these elected their own burghers, and governed their own municipal matters a tremendous advantage.
Tarsus received from the Roman Emperor the privilege of being a free city. Keep these facts well in mind, especially and particularly as regards the land and sea commerce. (4) Because it possessed one of the three great world-famous universities. There were just three of them at that time: One at Tarsus; one at Alexandria, at the mouth of the Nile; and one at Athens. It was not like some other cities, remarkable for its great buildings, its public games and its works of art. You could see more fine buildings in Athens or in Ephesus or in Corinth than you had any right to look for in Tarsus. It celebrated no such games as were celebrated in the May festivals at Ephesus, and in the great Greek amphitheater in that city, or in such games as the Isthmian, celebrated in Corinth. It was not remarkable for any of these. Its popular religion was a low and mixed order of Oriental paganism. There is this difference between the Oriental and Occidental heathen the former in the East, and the latter at Rome, and the West. Ephesus had an Oriental religion, though it was a Greek city. Tarsus, too, was a Greek city, but was partly Phoenician and partly Syrian. There were more arts and intellectuality in western paganism than in the Oriental, which was low, bestial, sensual, in every way brutal, shameful, immodest, and outrageous. The Phoenicians, who had a great deal to do with establishing the city of Tarsus, had that brutal, low form of paganism. That infamous emperor, Sargon, celebrated in the Bible, the Oriental king of the original Nineveh, was worshiped in that city. There never lived a man that devoted himself more than he to luxury in its fine dress, gorgeous festivals, its gluttony, its drunkenness, its beastiality. Paul was born in that city, and he could look out any day and see the heathen that he has so well described in chapter 1 of the letter to the Romans.
Citizenship in a free city under Rome did not make one a Roman citizen, as did citizenship in Philippi, a colony. To be born in a free city did not make one a Roman citizen. It conferred upon its members, its own citizens, the right to manage their own municipal affairs. To be born in Philippi would make one a Roman citizen, because Philippi was a colony. The name of its citizens were still retained on the muster roll in the city of Rome. They had all the privileges of Roman citizenship. Their officers were Roman officers. They had processions, with the magistrates, and the lictors and with the bundles of rods. But there was nothing like that in Tarsus. The question came up in Paul’s lifetime, when the commander of a legion heard Paul claiming that be was a Roman citizen. This commander says that with a great sum of money he did purchase his citizenship in Rome. Paul says, “But I was freeborn.” If freeborn, how then could he have obtained it? In one of two ways: Before Christ was born, Pompey invaded Jerusalem, and took it. He was one of the first great triumvirate, with Julius Caesar and Marcus L. Crassus. Pompey’s field of labor was in the East, Caesar’s was in the West, and he (Pompey) took Jerusalem and led into slavery many Jews of the best families. When these slaves were brought to Rome, if they showed culture, social position, educational advantages, they were promoted to a high rank or office, among slaves; and if they particularly pleased their owners they were manumitted, either during the lifetime of their owner, or by will after his death. In this way many noble captives from all parts of the world were carried as slaves to Rome. They were first set free and then had conferred upon them the rights of Roman citizenship. It could have been that Cassius, who with Brutus, after the killing of Julius Caesar, combined against Mark Anthony, and Octavius (Augustus), who became the emperor and was reigning when Christ was born, captured this city of Tarsus and led many of its citizens into Rome as slaves. Paul’s grandfather, therefore, or his father, might have been led away captive to Rome, and through his high social position and culture may have been manumitted, and then received as a citizen. Necessarily it occurred before this boy’s time, because when he was born, he was born a Roman citizen. It could be transmitted, but he had not acquired it.
There is a difference between the terms Jew, Hebrew, Israelite, Hellenist, and a “Hebrew of the Hebrews.” All these are used by Paul and Luke in Acts. We get our word, “Hebrew” from Heber, an ancestor of Abraham. Literature shows that the descendants of Heber were Hebrews, and in the Old Testament Abraham is called “the Hebrew.” That was not the meaning of the word in New Testament times. We come to the New Testament meaning in Act 6 , which speaks of the ordination of deacons, and uses the word “Hebrew” in distinction from “Hellenist.” They both, of course, mean Jews. While a Hebrew in the New Testament usually lived in Palestine, but not necessarily, he was one who still spoke or was able to read the original Hebrew language and who practiced the strict Hebrew cult. A “Hellenist” was a Jew who had either been led into exile, or who, for the sake of trade, had gone into other nations, and settled among those people and had become liberalized, lost the use of the Hebrew tongue entirely, and neither spoke nor wrote the Hebrew language, but who spoke and wrote mainly in Greek. “Hellenist” is simply another term for “Greek.” Whether used in the New Testament Greek or the Hellenistic Greek, it means Jews living among Greek people, and who had acquired the language, and in the many respects had followed more liberal Greek customs. Then a Hebrew living in Palestine would not allow himself to be liberalized.
Paul lived out of Judea. He, his father, and indeed his grandfather, adhered strictly to all the distinguishing characteristics of the Hebrews. The “Israelite” and the “Jew” mean anybody descended from Jacob. “Israelite” commenced lower down in the descent. “Hebrew” gets its name from the ancestor of Abraham, but an Israelite was a descendant of Jacob. The distinction of “Jew” came a little later to those descendants of Jacob living in Judea. The “Hebrew of the Hebrews” means a Jew-who went to the greatest possible extreme in following the Hebrew language, cult, habits, training, and religion. He was an extremist among them.
Some people would suppose from Paul’s occupation tentmaking (he worked at that occupation, making tents with Aquila and Priscilla) that from this unskilled labor his family were low in the social position, and poor. The inference is wholly untenable. In the first place, every Jew had to have a trade, even though he were a millionaire, and Paul’s old teacher, Gamaliel, used this language: “Any kind of learning without a useful trade leads to sin.” Paul took up this trade because he lived at Tarsus. There anybody could go out and learn the trade of weaving ropes and check-cloth made out of the long hair of Mount Taurus goats. The trade would not simply satisfy the Jewish requirement, but a man could make his living by it. We see Paul a little later making his living just that way. Well for Paul that he knew something besides books.
I am more and more inclined to follow an industrial idea in systems of education. We have our schools and universities where the boys and girls learn a great deal about books, and the girl goes home and does not know how to make bread. She does not know how to rear a brood of chickens; she does not know how a house is to be kept clean, nor how to keep windows clean. The floors in the corners and in places under the beds and sofas are unswept. Boys come home that cannot make a hoe handle. They have no mechanical sense, no trade. They can neither make a pair of shoes nor a hat nor a pair of socks, nor anything they wear. And thus graduates of universities stand with their fingers in their mouths in the great byways of the world practically beggars not knowing how to do anything.
The Jews guarded against that. Let Paul fall on his feet anywhere, and withdraw from him every outside source of financial support, and he would say, “With these hands did I minister to my necessities.” He could go out and get a piece of work. He knew how to do it. All this is bearing on the social and financial position of Paul’s family. Everything indicates the high social position of his family, and that it occupied a high financial position. They did not take the children of the lowest abode and give them such an ecclesiastical training as Paul had. They did not educate them for the position of rabbi, nor let them take a degree in the highest theological seminary in the world. Paul’s family, then, was a good one.
Paul’s religious and educational advantages were on two distinct lines: Purely ecclesiastical or religious, and I can tell just exactly what it was. A little Hebrew boy five years old had to learn the Ten Commandments, and the hallelujah psalms. When six, he advanced to other things which could be specified particularly. His education commenced in the home and went on until he entered the synagogue, which trained him in all the rudiments of biblical education. When he was twelve or thirteen years old he was called “a son of the commandments.” Just like the occasion suggests when Jesus was twelve years old he had them take him to Jerusalem, and he was allowed to go into the Temple and to be with the great doctors there.
When Paul was twelve or thirteen his influential father sent him to the great theological seminary. There were two of these seminaries. One had a greater influence than the other in the city of Jerusalem. Therefore, he says, “I was brought up in this city. I was born in Tarsus, but brought up in the city of Jerusalem, at the feet of Gamaliel.” He was a very noble character. The opposite seminary differed from this one. It was the Shammai Seminary, differing from the other on this point: The Shammai Seminary was very narrow; did not allow its pupils to know anything about literature whatsoever except religious literature. But the aged Gamaliel said to Paul and to all his other students, “There are certain classical lines along which you may study and learn.” This is the kind which Paul attended, the school of Gamaliel, graduating there and becoming a doctor of divinity, or a rabbi. He studied profoundly. This religious part of his education he got in the original Hebrew. When he and Jesus met at the time of his conversion, they spoke in the Hebrew tongue to each other. “There came a voice which said in the Hebrew [the old Hebrew tongue], Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?” And he answered in the Hebrew. Then, of course, he spoke and wrote in the Aramaic, which was the common dialect in Judea, and different from the Hebrew, since the Hebrew had gone altogether out of use in the ordinary speech, and almost in the ordinary reading.
The New Testament abounds in evidence of Paul’s general educational advantages. The city of Tarsus possessed one of the three great universities of the world. Did Paul take a course in that? There is no evidence that he did, and no probability that he did. For the universities in that day did not mean as much as they do today in a certain line, though I am sorry to say that the great universities of the present day are dropping back and adopting the old utterly worthless studies of the universities of that day; that is, speculative philosophy about the origin of things, and they do not know anything more when they get through than when they began. Also the Epicurean philosophy, which we now call “Darwinism,” making a speculative study of biology, botany, geology, etc., trying to prove that everything came from a primordial germ, and that man not only developed from a monkey, but from a jellyfish, and that the jellyfish developed from some vegetable, and that the vegetable is a development of some inorganic and lifeless matter.
There never was at any time in the world one particle of truth in the whole business. None of it can ever be a science. It does not belong to the realm of science.
Saul never had a moment’s time to spend in a heathen university, listening to their sophistries, and to these philosophical speculations, or vagaries. If he were living now he would be made president of some university. We learn from the Syrians that one of these universities, the one in Tarsus, had a professor who once stole something, and was put in “limbo.” Their university professors were also intensely jealous. They had all sorts of squabbles, one part in a row with another part; so that after all there was not much to be learned in the universities of those times, and after a while there will not be much in ours, if we go on as we are now going. I am not referring to any university, particularly, but I am referring to any and all, where philosophical speculations are made thee basis of botany, zoology, natural history of any kind, geology, or any kindred thing. Paul struck it in the city of Athens, its birthplace, and smote it hip and thigh.
I do not suppose at all that Paul was a student in the university of Tarsus, but that while he was at Jerusalem, and under the teaching of Gamaliel, he did study such classics as would be permitted to a Jewish mind. Hence we find in his letters expressions like this: “One of themselves, a prophet of their own said, Cretans are always liars,” and when at Athena he says, “Certain, even of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.” How could he become acquainted with those classical allusions if he had never studied such things? That chiliarch, who commanded a thousand men a legion said to Paul, “Do you speak Greek?” He had heard him speaking Greek. Of course he spoke Greek, and wrote Greek, All of his letters were written in Greek. He had learned that Greek language somewhere. He had not learned it in that university at Tarsus, but in the Seminary at Jerusalem. Take his letters and see his profound acquaintance with the Greek games of every kind. Some of them he may have attended, but he certainly knew all about them as though he had witnessed them. He may have seen only an occasional game. So he must have learned it from the literature, for he discusses every phase of it, especially the foot-racing, the combats in the arena between the gladiators, and the wrestling with the lions in the arena. His letters are full of allusions that indicate his acquaintance with the Greek literature. At Alexandria there was one of the other universities, a much greater one in its Greek literature than the university of Tarsus. Alexandria was founded by a Greek, Alexander the Great. One of the Ptolemies had a great library, the greatest library in the world, which was destroyed by the Saracens. But notice also how Paul puts his finger right upon the very center and heart of every heathen philosophy, like that of Epicureanism our Darwinism; that he debated in Athens; and note the Stoics whom he met while there, and the Platonians, or the Peripatetics. You will find that that one little speech of his, which he delivered in the city of Athens, contains an allusion which showed that he was thoroughly and profoundly acquainted with every run and sweep of the philosophic thought of the day, and anybody not thus acquainted could not have delivered that address. This is to show the general culture of his mind.
Take the mountain torrent of his passion in the rapid letter to the Galatians. Take the keen logic, the irresistibility of its reasoning, which appears in the letter to the Romans, or take that sweetest language that ever came from the lips or pen of mortal man, that eulogy on love in 1Co 13 . Then take the letter to Philemon, which all the world has considered a masterpiece in epistolary correspondence. It implies that he was scholarly. Look at these varieties of Saul’s education. He was a man whose range of information swept the world. He was the one scholar in the whole number of the apostles the great scholar and I do not see how any man can read the different varieties of style or delicacy of touch, the analysis of his logic or reasoning, which appear in Paul’s letters, and doubt that he had a broad, a deep, a high, and a grand general education.
As to Paul’s family the New Testament tells us in Act 23:16 that he had a married sister living in Jerusalem, and that that sister had a son, Paul’s nephew, who intervened very heroically to help Paul in a certain crisis of his life. And in Rom 16:7-11 are some other things that give light as to his family: “Salute Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners . . . who also have been in Christ before me.” Here are a man and a woman, Andronicus and Junias, Paul’s kinsfolk, well known to the apostles in Jerusalem, for he says, “Who are of note among the apostles.” They were influential people, and they had become Christians before Paul was a Christian. Take Rom 16:11 : “Salute Herodion my kinsman,” and Rom 16:21 : “Timothy, my fellow worker saluteth you; and Lucius and Jason and Sosipater, my kinsmen.” So here we have found six individuals who are kinspeople to Paul, and who were all members of the church at Rome. We know that much of his family, anyhow.
The things which distinguished a Pharisee from a Sadducee were of several kinds: (1) The latter were materialists, whom we would call atheists. They believed in no spirit; that there was nothing but matter; that when a man died it was the last of him. (2) There were Epicureans: “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die,” they said. (3) Also in their political views they differed from the Pharisees. The Pharisees were patriotic, and wanted the freedom of their nation. The Sadducees were inclined to the Roman government, and wanted to keep up the servitude to the Romans. (4) The Pharisees also cared more about a ritualistic religion. They were Puritans stern, and knew no compromise, adhering strictly to the letter of the law, in every respect. If they tithed, they would go into the garden and tithe the cummin and the anise. The phrase, “Pharisee of the Pharisees,” means one who would whittle all that down to a very fine point, or an extremist on that subject. He said (Gal 1:14 ), “I advanced in the Jews’ religion beyond many of mine own age among my countrymen, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers.” They were just Pharisees he was a Pharisee of the Pharisees. He went all the lengths that they would go, and he topped them. It meant something like this: “I am a son of Abraham; I am freeborn; I have never sinned; I need no vicarious expiation for me; I need no Holy Spirit; I was never in that bunch; you need not talk or present regeneration to me; I am just as white as snow.” It followed that they were not drunkards, they were not immoral; they were chaste, and did not have any of the brutal vices.
Paul had perhaps never met Jesus. They were about the same age. Paul went to Jerusalem when he was thirteen years old, and stayed there until he graduated in the same city. Some contend from certain expressions, as, “I have known Christ after the flesh; henceforth I will know him . . . no more,” that he had known Jesus in the flesh. It will be remembered that in the public ministry of Christ he was very seldom in Jerusalem. He stayed there a very short time when he did go. His ministry was mainly in Galilee. Even in that last mighty work of his in Jerusalem there is a big account of it but it just lasted a week. And Saul may have been absent at Tarsus during that time. I think when he saw Jesus the fact that he did not recognize him is proof enough, for if he had known him in the flesh he would have recognized him. But he said, “Who art thou?” when he saw him after he arose from the dead.
Paul, before conversion, was intensely conscientious in whatever he did free from all low vice, drunkenness and luxurious gluttony and sensuality of every kind. He was a very chaste man, a very honest man, a very sincere man, a very truthful man, and all this before conversion. I take it for granted that he was a married man. An orthodox Jew would not have passed the age of twenty unmarried. He could not be a member of the Sanhedrin without marrying; and in that famous passage in Corinthians he seems to intimate clearly that he was a married man. Speaking to virgins (that means unmarried men and women and includes both of them that had never married) he says so and so; and to widows and widowers, “I wish they would remain such as I am.” It seems to me that the language very clearly shows that at that time he was a widower. Luther says that no man could write about the married state like Paul writes if he was an old bachelor. I think Luther is right; his judgment is very sound. Paul did not marry again; he remained a widower, and in the stress of the times advised other widowers and widows to remain in that state; but if they wanted to marry again to go ahead and do so; that it was no sin; but the stress of the times made it unwise; and he boldly took the position that he had a right to lead about a wife as much as Peter had, and Peter had a wife.
QUESTIONS
1. What the theme of this section?
2. What Saul’s name, nation, tribe, sect, citizenship, occupation, office, birthplace, and date of birth?
3. Give an account of Tarsus as to its political, strategical, commercial, manufacturing, educational advantages, and its popular religion.
4. Did citizenship in a free city under Rome make one a Roman citizen as did citizenship in Philippi, a colony?
5. How, then, could one obtain it?
6. Distinguish the difference between these terms: Jew, Hebrew, Israelite, Hellinist, and a “Hebrew of the Hebrews.”
7. What the social and financial position of Paul’s family, particularly in view of his occupation?
8. What Paul’s religious and educational advantages?
9. What New Testament evidences are there of Paul’s general educational advantages?
10. What do we know about Paul’s family as seen in the New Testament?
11. Was Paul a rabbi? If so, where did he probably exercise his functions as a rabbi?
12. What is the meaning of the phrase, “Pharisee of the Pharisees?”
13. Did Paul ever meet Jesus before his death? If not, how account for it in view of the interest and publicity of the last week of our Lord’s life?
14. What was Paul’s character before conversion?
15. Was he a married man, and what the proof?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
Ver. 1. I say then, Hath God, &c. ] As I may seem to have said, Rom 10:1-21 Ministers must do their utmost to prevent mistakes. Zuinglius, when in his sermons he had terrified the wicked, was wont to shut up with Bone vir, hoc nihil ad te, Thou good man, I mean not thee.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1 10. ] Yet God has not cast off His people, but there is a remnant according to the election of grace ( Rom 11:1-6 ), the rest being hardened ( Rom 11:7-10 ).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1 .] I say then (a false inference from ch. Rom 10:19-21 , made in order to be refuted), Did ( , it cannot surely be, that) God cast off His people (as would almost appear from the severe words just adduced)? Be it not so: for I also am an Israelite ( ., Php 3:5 ), of the seed of Abraham (mentioned probably for solemnity’s sake, as bringing to mind all the promises made to Abraham), of the tribe of Benjamin (so Php 3:5 ). There is some question with what intent the Apostle here brings forward himself . Three ways are open to us: either (1) it is as a case in point , as an example of an Israelite who has not been rejected but is still one of God’s people : so almost all the Commentators but this is hardly probable, for in this case ( ) he would not surely bring one only example to prove his point, when thousands might have been alleged ( ) it would be hardly consistent with the humble mind of Paul to put himself alone in such a place, and ( ) does not go simply to deny a hypothetical fact , but applies to some deprecated consequence of that which is hypothetically put: or (2) as De Wette, al., he implies, ‘ How can I say such a thing, who am myself an Israelite , &c.?’ ‘Does not my very nationality furnish a security against my entertaining such an idea?’ or (3) which I believe to be the right view, but which I have found only in the commentary of Mr. Ewbank, as implying that if such a hypothesis were to be conceded, it would exclude from God’s kingdom the writer himself, as an Israelite . This seems better to agree with , as deprecating the consequence of such an assertion.
But a question even more important arises, not unconnected with that just discussed: viz. who are ? In order for the sentence . . . to bear the meaning just assigned to it, it is obvious that . must mean the people of God nationally considered. If Paul deprecated such a proposition as the rejection of God’s people , because he himself would thus be as an Israelite cut off from God’s favour, the rejection assumed in the hypothesis must be a national rejection . It is against this that he puts in his strong protest. It is this which he disproves by a cogent historical parallel from Scripture, shewing that there is a remnant according to the election of grace: and not only so, but that that part of Israel (considered as having continuity of national existence) which is for a time hardened, shall ultimately come in, and so all Israel (nationally considered again, Israel as a nation ) shall be saved. Thus the covenant of God with Israel, having been national , shall ultimately be fulfilled to them as a nation : not by the gathering in merely of individual Jews, or of all the Jews individually , into the Christian church, but by the national restoration of the Jews, not in unbelief, but as a Christian believing nation, to all that can, under the gospel, represent their ancient pre-eminence , and to the fulness of those promises which have never yet in their plain sense been accomplished to them . I have entered on this matter here, because a clear understanding of it underlies all intelligent appreciation of the argument of the chapter. Those who hold no national restoration of the Jews to pre-eminence , must necessarily confound the remnant according to the election of grace, with the , who nationally shall be grafted in again. See this more fully illustrated where that image occurs, Rom 11:17 ff.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Rom 1:18 to Rom 11:36 . ] THE DOCTRINAL EXPOSITION OF THE ABOVE TRUTH: THAT THE GOSPEL IS THE POWER OF GOD UNTO SALVATION TO EVERY ONE THAT BELIEVETH. And herein, ch. Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:20 , inasmuch as this power of God consists in the revelation of God’s righteousness in man by faith, and in order to faith the first requisite is the recognition of man’s unworthiness, and incapability to work a righteousness for himself, the Apostle begins by proving that all, Gentiles and Jews, are GUILTY before God, as holding back the truth in unrighteousness. And FIRST, ch. Rom 1:18-32 , OF THE GENTILES.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Rom 11:1-10 . : the intimates that it is with the conclusion reached in chap. 10 before his mind that Paul puts the following question: the unbelief of Israel naturally suggested it. ; For the words, cf. Psa 94:14 (93 LXX), 1Sa 12:22 . In both places the promise is given . . . , and the familiar words give the effect of asking, Has God broken His express and repeated promise? suggests the negative answer, which is expressed more passionately in . Cf. Rom 3:6 , Rom 9:14 . Israel may be faithless to Him, but He abides faithful. : This is often read as if it were an argument in favour of the negative answer; as if Paul meant, God has not cast off His people, I myself am a living proof to the contrary. But this is hardly conciliatory, to say the least; and it is better to take the words as explaining why Paul puts the question with (suggesting the negative answer), and why he then gives the denial with such vehemence. “I, too, am an Israelite, to whom the very idea of God’s rejection of His people is an impious and incredible idea, to be repelled with horror.” . : no proselyte. : the one tribe which with Judah mainly represented the post-exilic theocratic people.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Romans Chapter 11
It was the prophet Isaiah then, after Moses, not Paul, who had distinctly pronounced Israel a rebellious people, spite of God’s daily pleading with them, and the call of the Gentiles who had not sought it. It was in vain to quarrel with the gospel on this score. The question is raised consequently whether Israel was wholly to lose their position in God’s favour according to promise. The apostle proves the contrary in this chapter.
“I say then, Hath God cast away his people? Far be it! For I also am an Israelite, of Abraham’s seed, of Benjamin’s tribe. God hath not cast away his people whom he foreknew. Know ye not what the scripture saith in [the section of] Elias, how he pleadeth with God against Israel? ‘Lord, they have killed thy prophets, they have dug down thine altars; and I only am left, and they seek my life?’ But what saith the divine answer to him? ‘I have left to myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.’* Thus then in the present time also there hath been a remnant according to election of grace; but if by grace, no longer of works, otherwise grace becomes no longer grace [; but if of works, it is no longer grace, otherwise work is no longer work]. What then? That which Israel seeketh for he did not obtain, but the election obtained, and the rest were hardened; even as it is written, ‘God gave them a spirit of stupefaction, eyes not to see and ears not to hear unto this day.’ And David saith, ‘Let their table be for a snare, and for a trap, and for a stumbling-block, and for a recompense to them; let their eyes be darkened not to see, and bow down their back alway.” (Ver. 1-10.)
*In the LXX, as the text at present stands, the masculine article is prefixed, not as here the feminine; but it may originally have been otherwise as elsewhere. (Jdg 2:13 ; Hos 2:8 ; Zep 1:4 .) The quotation is the sense, not the precise transcript of either the Heb. or the LXX. Abarbanel speaks of a male image for men, a female for women; but this scarcely accounts for the case before us. Others (as Authorized Version) suppose an ellipse of .
The Vatican, which is the best support of this doubtful clause, reads , grace.
This is the first answer to the question of Israel’s total and final rejection. God foreknew* His people when He chose and called them; and, knowing all their evil beforehand, He certainly will not cast them off. He has not done so, as Paul’s own case proved; for he was no bad instance – he who had shared in the nation’s guiltiest prejudices and bitterest unbelief and rejection of Jesus; yet had God called him. His love lingered over His poor unworthy people even now, as Paul was also a pattern for them who should hereafter believe on Christ Jesus to eternal life. On him first was the Lord showing the whole of His longsuffering: yet was he also an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin, the one recalling the ancient promises, the other subsequent sin, himself withal present electing mercy, a pledge of the future grace which would save the people fully. Were the exclusion absolute, Paul certainly could not have been brought into His favour. But there is further proof still. “Know ye not what the scripture saith” in the account of Elijah? The disheartened prophet saw himself alone faithful in that dark page of Israel’s history – himself therefore the object of hatred unto death as far as king and people could. But the divine admonition let him know of a complete remnant, “seven thousand, such as bowed not the knee to Baal.” Thus then in the present time also there has been a remnant “according to election of grace.” It was electing grace now as then. The general state was at that time undeniably apostate: what was it in Paul’s day?
* It is a mistake to call this an election before the world’s foundation which is only said of Christians, of the church. Israel were chosen in time.
This gives the apostle the occasion, never let slip by the Holy Spirit, of asserting grace in its exclusion of works – in their mutual exclusion, if we accept the received reading. But I do not see that the bracketed clause adds to the precision of the truth; whereas it was natural enough to tack it on, especially as the form in the Vatican copy seems in evident error ( instead of in the end of the disputed clause).
How then stands the case? “What Israel seeketh, this it obtained not, but the election obtained; and the rest were hardened.” It will be noticed that those we call ordinarily the remnant or righteous portion of Israel are designated “the election,” while the mass are called the rest or remnant. “Hardened” also is the right sense, rather than blinded (though this is also taught elsewhere). It may be that was confounded in thought and sense with , as another has pointed out to be the fact in the Vatican text of Job 17:7 in the LXX.
This leads the apostle to adduce the testimony of scripture, in the words (apparently mingled) of Isa 29:10 and Deu 29:4 , followed up by the still more tremendous imprecation of David in Psa 69:22 , Psa 69:23 , all speaking of the ungodly in Israel. Here again the law, the psalms, and the prophets gave their joint overwhelming evidence in terms so vehement that the apostle had rather to bring in “strong consolation” from the unfailing faithfulness of God for at least a remnant as we have seen, before he established every word by these “two or three witnesses” for the general condition of Israel. What more apt to clench the question? What wiser course possible for the apostle?
But let me refer to Calvin’s comment on these quotations; for, able as he was, pious too and grave in general, his narrow system exposed him here to adventure remarks on the apostle no less unworthy than presumptuous. “Quae adducit testimonia, quanquam ex variis potius scripturae locis collecta, quam ex uno loco desumpta sunt, omnia tamen videntur aliena esse ab ejus proposito, si ex circumstanciis suis ea propius expendas. Ubique enim videas excaecationem et indurationem commemorari, tanquam Dei flagella, quibus jam admissa ab impiis flagitia ulciscitur: Paulus autem probare hic contendit, excaecari non eos, qui sua malitia jam id meriti sint, sed qui ante mundi creationem reprobati sunt a Deo. (?) Hunc nodum ita breviter solvas, Quod origo impietatis, quae ita in se provocat Dei furorem, est perversitas naturae a Deo derelictae. Quare non abs re Paulus de aeterna reprobatione (?) haec citavit, quae ex ea prodeunt ut fructus ex arbore, et rivus a scaturigine. Impii quidem propter sua scelera justo Dei judicio caecitate puniuntur: sed si fontem exitii eorum quaerimus, eo deveniendum erit, quod a Deo maledicti, nihil omnibus factis, dictis, consiliis suis, quam maledictionem accersere et accumulare possunt. Imo aeternae reprobationis ita abscondita est causa, ut nihil aliud nobis supersit, quam admirari incomprehensibile Dei consilium sicuti tandem ex clausula patebit. Stulte autem faciunt, qui simulac verbum factum est de propinquis causis, earum praetextu hanc primam, quae sensum nostrum latet, obtegere tentant: acsi Deus non libere ante Adae lapsum statuisset de toto humano genere quod visum est, quia damnat vitiosum ac pravum ejus semen: deinde quia peculiariter singulis quam meriti sunt scelerum mercedem rependit.”* (Calv. in loc. i. 149, ed. Tholuck, Halae, 1831.)
* “The quotations which he adduces, collected from various parts of scripture, and not taken from one passage, do seem, all of them, to be foreign to his purpose, when you closely examine them according to their contexts; for you will find that in every passage, blindness and hardening are mentioned as scourges, by which God punished crimes already committed by the ungodly; but Paul labours to prove here, that not those were blinded who so deserved by their wickedness, but who were rejected by God before the foundation of the world.” [Paul really does nothing less.]
“You may thus briefly untie this knot – that the origin of the impiety which provokes God’s displeasure is the perversity of nature when forsaken by God. Paul therefore, while speaking of eternal reprobation, has not without reason referred to those things which proceed from it, as fruit from the tree or river from the fountain. The ungodly are indeed for their sins visited by God’s judgment with the blindness; but if we seek for the source of their ruin, we must come to this, – that being accursed by God they cannot by all their deeds, sayings, and purposes, get and obtain anything but a curse. Yet the cause of eternal reprobation is so hidden from us, that nothing remains for us but to wonder at the incomprehensible purpose of God, as we shall at length see by the conclusion. But they reason absurdly who, whenever a word is said of the proximate causes, strive, by bringing forward these, to cover the first, which is hid from our view; as though God had not, before the fall of Adam, freely determined to do what seemed good to him with respect to the whole human race on this account, – because he condemns his corrupt and depraved seed, and also because he repays to individuals the reward which their sins have deserved.” I purposely cite from the Calvin Transl. series, Comm. on Rom., p. 417. Edinb. 1849.
One could understand a believer perhaps saying that the citations of an apostle seemed foreign to his purpose when not examined with their context; but is it too much if we denounce as irreverent no less than unintelligent the man who could venture so to speak, for no better reason than a blind love of his own scheme? It is excellent and right that scripture should declare hardening to be an infliction of God after men have already proved their ungodliness. It is false and bad to say that Paul labours to prove here that the blinding was not because it was deserved but in consequence of eternal reprobation. In fact scripture teaches no such doctrine. Nowhere are any said to be rejected before the foundation of the world. Nor this only: they are punished at the world’s end for their wickedness, not because of a divine decree. Indeed a judgment in this case would be nugatory. But they are judged each according to their works, and the lake of fire is their sentence; though scripture takes care after this to append the divine side, adding that, if any one was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire. So in a previous chapter of this epistle Paul had carefully shown how God, willing to show His wrath and make His power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath fitted for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy which He had before prepared for glory. To me I confess it looks like the blinding influence of falsehood when men overlook the difference of vessels of wrath fitted on the one hand to destruction, and of vessels of mercy which He on the other hand before made ready for glory. It is guilty man who is the agent in sin and misery; God only who is the source of all the good, though His longsuffering be conspicuous most of all if possible in bearing with the evil who at last come into judgment.
In short then not only not Paul but no other inspired writer ever speaks of “eternal reprobation;” it is merely a dream of a certain school. So the curse of God follows, instead of causing, the impious ways of men. Arminianism is wholly astray no doubt in reducing God’s election to a mere foresight of good in some creatures; but Calvinism is no less erroneous in imputing the evil lot of the first Adam race to God’s decree. They both spring from analogous roots of unbelief: Calvinism reasoning, contrary to scripture, from the truth of election to the error of eternal reprobation; Arminianism rightly rejecting that reprobation but wrongly reasoning against election. Like other systems they are in part true and in part false – true in what they believe of scripture, false in yielding to human thoughts outside scripture: happy those, who are content as Christians with the truth of God and refuse to be partisans on either side of men! Our wisdom is to have our minds open to all scripture, refusing to go a hair-breadth farther.
The next position of the apostle is, in great part, decided by the question: “I say then, Did they stumble in order that they should fall? Far be it: but by their trespass salvation [is come] to the Gentiles to provoke them to jealousy. But if their trespass be [the] world’s riches and their loss [the] Gentiles’ riches, how much more their fulness? Now* I speak to you, the Gentiles; inasmuch therefore as I am apostle of Gentiles I glorify my ministry, if by any means I shall provoke to jealousy my flesh and save some of them. For if their rejection [be the] world’s reconciliation, what the reception but life from [the] dead?” (Ver. 11-15.)
* “but,” “now,” is the reading of A B and other good authorities, instead of the more common and easy , “for.” The difference in sense seems slight.
Thus the very slip of Israel from its place of witness and depositary of promise, turned as it is through divine mercy into present favour towards the Gentile world, becomes an argument in the hands of grace to assure their future restoration. The apostle alludes to the words of Deu 32 , the bearing of which on the question is as evident as to the Jew their authority is indisputable. It was not Paul but Moses who declared that the Jew provoked Jehovah to jealousy, that he was unmindful of the Rock who begat him, the glory of God that formed him. It was Moses who testified that Jehovah said, “I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be; for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith. They have moved me to jealousy with [that which is] not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with [those which are] not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.” Undoubtedly it is the sure and solemn threat of God’s displeasure in turning from Israel to the Gentiles, as certainly as Israel used to turn from Jehovah to false gods. But the threat, now accomplishing after the utmost patience, and only accomplished when they added to their old idolatry the still graver sin of rejecting the Messiah and disdaining the gospel that offered them the pardon of these and all other sins by His blood, – the threat itself contains the no less sure intimation of restoring mercy in the end. For certainly He who acts with a view to provoke them to jealousy through blessing the Gentiles does not mean to cast them off eventually; rather the very reverse. One sees by such admirable reasoning and such profoundly accurate employment of the Old Testament scripture how truly it is the same Spirit who wrote of old by Moses working now by Paul.
Apart from any particular allusion, the state of things whether now or by and by accords perfectly both with the facts of Christianity and with the general prospects for the world according to the prophets. For it is just when the Jews lose all their place and nation no less than distinctive rank as a witnessing and worshipping people in their land that we see the Gentiles gradually renouncing their idols, and the true God and His word incomparably better known than even of old in Israel. Revealed truth, having its centre and display in Christ, alone accounts for the eclipse on the one side and the possession of a brighter light on the other. Did not the Jews reject the true light which now shines on nations so long benighted in idolatry? Again, while owning the mercy of God, which has thus wondrously turned aside to visit the Gentile with the gospel during the continued unbelief and consequently dark and wretched nothingness of the Jew, who can overlook the rich and full stream of Old Testament scripture which depicts the joy and blessedness of the whole earth only when God causes His face to shine on Israel? “God shall bless us” (says the inspired Jewish psalmist); “and all the ends of the earth shall fear him.” It is right to preach, a privilege to look for souls to be blessed; but it is vain, because unscriptural, to expect universality of blessing and delivering power over the world as a whole till Zion’s light is come and the glory of Jehovah is risen on her. Then and not before shall the Gentiles come to her light, and kings to the brightness of her rising; then the nation and kingdom that will not serve Zion shall perish – a state of things in evident contrast with the grace that goes out now to Jew and Gentile indiscriminately, and gathers believing souls by the Spirit for heavenly and eternal glory, instead of being a display of the righteous government of Jehovah-Messiah in Israel and over all the earth.
Hence it is obvious with what strict truth the apostle could affirm that the salvation to the Gentiles, by the slip or trespass of the Jews, is but to provoke them to jealousy instead of being a sign of being abandoned for ever as a people by God. Nay further he could reason, in harmony with the prophets, that if their trespass is the world’s wealth, and their loss and diminution the Gentiles’ wealth, how much more their fulness? The apostle here accounts, or, if one will, apologizes, for his bringing in the Gentiles when discussing the destiny of Israel. He was speaking to the saints at Rome, “to you the Gentiles.” Further, “inasmuch therefore as I am apostle of Gentiles, I glorify my ministry:” how or why should he forget the divine mercy to such hinging on God’s ways with Israel that now occupied him? Especially too as he was thereby seeking to further that provocation to jealousy for which he had the authority of Him who alone is good and of whose compassion toward Israel he was no less assured than of His righteous displeasure at their sins. “If by any means I may provoke to jealousy [those who are] my flesh and may save some of them.” (Ver. 14.) “For if their rejection [be the] world’s reconciliation, what their reception but life from among [the] dead?” Such we have seen is the uniform impression left by the Psalms and the Prophets, as every candid and intelligent Jew must feel. Then only will be “the regeneration” when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of His glory with His glorified assessors, and all the nations as well as the twelve tribes of Israel shall know what it is to have a king reigning in righteousness and princes ruling in judgment. It is the mistake of Origen, Chrysostom, and Theodoret, of Meyer, Fritzsche, Tholuck, etc., to bring in the resurrection literally as meant here, though I doubt not that the first resurrection will have then taken place as proved by the most positive evidence of scripture. Nor is there just ground for Dean Alford’s singular indecision who objects both to the true and to the erroneous view. Whatever the divine mercy in the “world’s reconciling” which we now know while the gospel goes forth to every creature, a wholly different blessedness awaits the whole earth as “life from the dead,” when all Israel received back and saved, far from their old envy and churlish scorn, shall bid all the lands to sing joyfully to Jehovah and come before His presence with triumphal song. If His house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations, in that day also is His name to be great among the nations, and in every place incense is to be burnt and a pure offering offered to His name. How far beyond the present, and how different, though the present may be an earnest and pledge! Will it not be for all on earth “life from the dead?”
It seems to my mind that Calvin is far from having a simple, clear, or strong view of the argument, though I do in no wise deny his generally grave and pious sentiments. But he says that you will be greatly hampered in understanding this discussion, except you take notice that the apostle speaks, sometimes of the whole nation of the Jews, sometimes of single individuals. The truth is that the question is exclusively about the nation as God’s witness on earth and inheriting the line of promise from Abraham. There was no doubt about individuals. But Paul, we have seen, beautifully uses the faith of himself and others as a proof that even during the judicial hardening there is a remnant according to the election of grace, and that the call of Gentiles meanwhile is but a provocation to jealousy, instead of implying that God cast away His people, and that they have fallen never more to be received as Israel. And here I cannot but deplore the presumption, as well as ignorance, with which even so godly a person as the Genevese chief speaks, especially on verse 12.* The apostle should have been humbly listened to, not corrected. Need I add that the rudeness of speech belongs exclusively to the critic, and that the inspiration is thoroughly exact, not the too confident commentator? A human antithesis, which Calvin ventured to say would have been more proper, is in force, beauty, and truth far short of that which the Spirit has given. A rising or raising up of Israel conveys no such import of necessary blessedness as their “reception” after their stumble, loss, and rejection. Even if we did not see and could not prove this, every believer is bound to resent such want of respect to scripture.
* “Magis autem proprie locutus fuisset, si lapsui opposuisset suscitationem. Quod ideo admoneo, nequis dicendi ornatum hic requirat, aut offendatur ista dicendi ruditate. Pectus enim, non linguam, ut formarent, haec scripta sunt.” In loc. p. 151.
Here the apostle adds some observations which not only confirm but explain much: these the reader should the more sedulously weigh because they are in general ill understood. “But if the first-fruit* [be] holy, the lump also; and if the root [be] holy, the branches also. But if some of the branches were broken off, and thou, being a wild olive, wast graft in among them and wast made fellow-partaker of the root and** of the fatness of the olive tree, boast not against the branches: but if thou boastest, not thou bearest the root but the root thee. Thou wilt say then, Branches were broken off in order that I might be graft in. Well; through unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded but fear: for if God spared not the natural branches, it may be he will not spare even thee.” (Ver. 16-21.) From principles familiar to the Jew in the Old Testament the reasoning is drawn, and the ways of God in government are vindicated with singular force. The Jew, springing from Abraham, the one first chosen and called out to have promises in his line (though for all others in their effects), had been the natural trunk or branches of the olive tree. The Gentile grew wild outside. But God must have branches in keeping with the root, and, because the Jews were not, judgment proceeded against them. It was evident then, first, that boasting least became the Gentiles, who had no necessary or natural connection with the root, the father of the faithful, like the Jews; secondly, that they had most reason to fear, for if God had dealt with the failure of the seed of Abraham, it was not to be conceived that He would tolerate Gentile iniquity. It belonged to the plan of God to graft the Gentile into the line of promise on earth, in place of Jewish branches broken off through their unbelief. By faith the Gentile stands: let him not be highminded but fear. Otherwise God will not spare.
* There is not the least ground for the strange notion of Chalmers after Mede that by the first-fruit the apostle meant the earliest Jewish converts to Christianity, though no one denies that Jas 1:18 applies the term to the Christian believers out of Israel, as Jer 2:3 had already done to Israel originally as such. It is demonstrable from the context that by the figures of the first-fruit with the lump (compare Num 15:19-21 ) and the root with the branches the apostle is setting forth the relation and responsibility of those who followed him to whom the promises were given, as the stock of divine testimony on earth after men at large had fallen into idolatry. Theodoret, like Origen, indulges in the odd conceit that Christ is “the first-fruit,” while rightly regarding Abraham as “the root.” Both illustrations really point to the same.
The rendering here is as certain as the sense resulting from it is clear and good. With plurals or collectives regularly means “among,” as in the Authorized Version, or “inter illos” as Grotius correctly translates The Vulgate (“in illis”) is obscure; Calvin and Beza, not without predecessors among the fathers and followers in modern Germany, including even Olshausen and Meyer, give “pro illis” which is unequivocally without warrant. Erasmus is far more right in his comment than Beza who cavils at it and adopts the sense which the former justly censures. But there is no need of resorting to the influence of the Hebrew preposition in however largely true elsewhere in the New Testament. What we find here is as common in classical as in Hellenistic Greek; but = in loco (or locum) is the usage nowhere that I know, and in my judgment impossible to reconcile with the genius of the language.
** The “and” is doubtful; * B C, with the Coptic, and Damasus, reject it, probably others also; and we can readily see why some might bring it in to soften a phrase seemingly rugged without it.
A B C Dc F G L P and many cursives and fathers omit , which may readily have crept in from the context.
“Behold then God’s goodness and severity: upon them that fell severity, but upon thee God’s goodness if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. And they too, if they abide not in unbelief, shall be graft in, for God is able to graft them in again. For if thou wast cut off from the olive tree wild by nature, and contrary to nature wast graft into a good olive tree, how much more shall these who are according to nature be graft into their own olive tree?” (Ver. 22-24.)
* is attested by A B C D* beside many ancient versions.
It is of the greatest moment to avoid confounding the continuous line of the inheritance of the promise on earth, the olive tree, with the mystery of Christ and the church where all is new and above nature. There is no breaking off members from the body, nor is the Jew a natural limb any more than the Gentile. All is heavenly grace and entirely distinct from the system of administered promises which began with Abraham, the first-fruit. No doubt those who compose the church, Christ’s body, come in as branches standing through faith in the room of the broken off Jewish ones; but others do also who are mere professors of Christ, and do not appreciate God’s goodness but forsake it for forms or scepticism or open evil, and will thus fall under His just severity when the moment arrives to cut off the faithless Gentile graft, as before the unbelieving natural boughs of Israel. It is no question of saving grace here but of earthly responsibility according to the respective testimony, first of Israel, next of Christendom. A man of exercised conscience, or even of ordinary knowledge of the New Testament, cannot look on the Gentile profession of Christ east, west, north, south, and affirm seriously that they have continued in God’s goodness; if not, the sentence is excision for the Gentile, as of old for the Jew. Will the tree then be cut down? In nowise more in the future than in the past. Contrariwise the judgment of the Gentile branches makes way for the grafting in of the Jews, for they will then no longer abide in unbelief, and God is able to graft them in again. It is indeed “their own olive tree,” which God never forgets, nor should the Gentile.
Thus we all may and should clearly see the distinctness of the responsibility of the creature, whether in Israel or in Christendom, from the security of the elect who are saved by grace. Salvation is of Him who is rich in mercy, possible only, though given fully and freely, to the believer in virtue of redemption. But this does not hinder the trial of now, as of Israel in the past. The revealed result is the apostasy; but grace will translate the saints risen or changed to meet the Lord at His coming, as His day will fall with unsparing judgments on His enemies and most severely on those who abuse in the worst way the best and brightest privileges. The cutting off of the apostate Gentile profession will make way for the reception of Israel.
The apostle had reasoned against the notion that God had cast away His people; first, from the remnant according to the election of grace, of whom he was himself a sample; and next, from God’s revealed object in calling Gentiles to provoke Israel to jealousy, which brought in the beautiful and instructive episode of their own olive tree, still pointing in a similar direction; but now we come to a ground more definite and conclusive. The word of God has given express testimony to His purpose of recalling Israel in sovereign mercy after and spite of all their sins, giving them in the latter thorough repentance and turning their heart toward their Messiah so long rejected.
“For I do not wish you, brethren, to be ignorant of this mystery, in order that ye be not wise in your own conceits, that hardness in part is happened to Israel until the fulness of the Gentiles shall have come in; and so all Israel shall be saved, even as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer; he shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob. And this is the covenant on my part to them when I shall have taken away their sins.” (Ver. 25-27.) If the apostle used the Septuagint Version of two passages in Isaiah (Isa 59:20 , Isa 27:9 ; compare also Jer 31 ), in the Greek text as it now stands the phrase is neither “to” Zion, as in the Hebrew, nor “out of” Zion as in the epistle, but (“for the sake of”), save in two copies referred to by Holmes and Parsons in their great edition of the LXX, one of which is certainly a correction, the other probably so. That Origen, Chrysostom, and Theodoret cite according to the New Testament decides nothing against the common text of the Seventy. And this is confirmed by the plain fact that Origen, who had quoted the prophet when interpreting Psa 14 according to the apostle’s form of citation, gives in his Hexapla the text of the LXX. just as it now stands, while we see Aquila and Symmachus adhering precisely to the Hebrew. It is evident to me that the last verses of Psa 16 and Psa 52 fully and literally justify the apostle, who was directed by the Holy Spirit to use the Old Testament in such a way as looks lax to the hasty, careless, or unbelieving, too disposed to regard an inspired man as like themselves, but really with the most comprehensive wisdom and the nicest exactitude, so as to convey the mind of God as contained in His word, not in one text only but out of many interwoven into one. The Deliverer will come to Zion, out of which He will subsequently send the rod of His power for the full deliverance of His people, in the day that He shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob and place him for ever under the new covenant.
Thus if the hardening of Israel (though, we may bless God, only in part) was then true and still goes on, long before announced, the same prophet and, we may add, the rest of the prophets anticipate the bright day for the earth when all Israel, as such, shall be saved. The , fulness or full complement of the Gentiles, who now believe, will have come in; and so the long guilty, long chastened, people of Jehovah will turn to the Lord and own Him in the crucified Nazarene, their Lord and their God; even as Thomas who in this represents them, seeing Him and believing.
There is no comment in the New Testament more important for determining the just meaning of Old Testament prophecy. The allegorical school of ancients from Origen down to the moderns of our own day are in this far from the truth of God. Indeed it is as a system mere trifling and its root unbelief, as its dogmatic effect is to shake confidence in the plain written word, and its practical result is not only to deprive the ancient people of God of their hope, but to lower and obscure our own by substituting the earthly position of Israel (confused and spoiled by a so-called spiritualism) for separation to and union with Christ in heaven, the true place of the Christian and of the church. It will astonish some of my readers to learn that Origen, undoubtedly one of the ablest and most learned of the early Greek fathers, speaks of Zion as representing the Father in this very connection! Others may be more sober; but they understood the truth no better than he, if they did not commit themselves to such wild flights of fancy. If some might have hoped better things of Theodoret, like Chrysostom, I am forced to prove how precarious is the teaching which, after saying truly that the Jews will believe, on the conclusion of the work spoken of among the Gentiles, tells us that “all Israel” means those who believe whether of Jews or of Gentiles. Even this meagre expectation of blessing at the end for Israel is boldly denied by Jerome (Comm. Esai. xi.), who will have all to be understood of the first advent!
Nor did the reformers clear themselves from the ignorance and prejudice of the fathers, partly through their dread of Anabaptist violence and fanaticism in their dreams of a fifth kingdom, dreams which after all are far more akin to the theories of Rome and the fathers than to the holy and heavenly hopes given in the written word. For it will be observed that such visionaries look for a Zion of their own on earth, just as in a modified sense their adversaries interpret the prophets of the church. All were at fault, though in different directions; so must all be who do not see the church’s portion to be a heavenly one with Christ at His coming, who will restore His people to the enjoyment of every promised blessing and glory on the earth, the nations being then only blessed as a whole though subordinately. But the risen saints will reign with Christ over the earth. We are blessed in heavenly places in Him.
Hence we can understand the vacillation of Luther. But Calvin was always wrong, as an instance of which may suffice his interpretation of this place where he makes “all Israel” to mean the whole of those saved, the Jews having only the superior place as the firstborn.*
*”Multi accipiunt de populo Judaico, acsi Paulus diceret instaurandum adhuc in eo religionem ut prius; sed ego Israelis nomen ad totum Dei populum extendo, hoc sensu: Quum Gentes ingressae fuerint, simul et Judaei ex defectione se ad fidei obedientiam recipient: atque ita complebitur salus totius Israelis Dei, quem ex utrisque colligi oportet: sic tamen ut priorem locum Judaei obtineant, ceu in familia Dei primogeniti.” (Comm. in loc.) Nor is his reason sounder than his conclusion; for he considers the mystic sense to suit better because Paul wished to point out here the consummation of Christ’s kingdom, “quae in Judaeis minime terminatur sed totum orbem comprehendit.” The argument really goes to confirm what is denied; for the church is essentially an election out of Jews and Gentiles, and never can embrace the whole world; whereas the salvation of Israel at Christ’s coming to reign inaugurates and characterizes His kingdom over all the earth. Compare Zec 12:14 .
Much more correctly have Beza on the Protestant side, and Estius on the Catholic expounded the verse and shown the opposition of in the future hardening , which strictly means “in part,” not a mere qualifying of a severe declaration, “until” also specifying the point of time at which the great change takes place. To say with Calvin that “until” ( ) does not mark this but only equivalent to “that” shows the strong prejudice of a good man whose knowledge of the language was imperfect and who missed to a great extent the point of the chapter before him, through that wisdom in one’s own conceit against which the apostle is warning the Gentiles. That “the fulness of the Gentiles” cannot mean the general conversion of the world to Christ, is perfectly certain if it were only from the previous reasoning of the apostle in the central portion of the chapter, where he asks if the slips of the Jews were the world’s riches, how much more their fulness? and shows how he was provoking them to jealousy to save some; for if their rejection be the world’s reconciling, what their reception but life from among the dead? And this, as already shown, harmonizes with the constant testimony of the Law, and the Psalms, and the Prophets, which invariably make the blessing of Israel as a creation the condition and under God the means of the blessing of all the earth – a new state of things, not the gospel or the church as now known, both of which are inconsistent with it, but the kingdom in its manifestation of glory when in the broadest sense all flesh shall see the salvation of God. Here the commentators are, I must say, painfully defective. The effort of some ancients, and of moderns like Grotius and Hammond, to find the accomplishment in the apostolic times is of all schemes the grossest absurdity, and the most directly opposed to the text commented on.
It may be added that, though Dean Alford took the term Israel in its proper sense, he like the rest spoils much of the force of the truth by winding up with the assertion that the matter here treated is their reception into the church of God. Not so. The question of the olive tree stands wholly distinct from the church, though no doubt there are branches now in the olive tree since Pentecost which are also members of Christ’s body, the assembly of God. But the olive tree is another idea altogether and embraces the dealings of God on the footing of promise since Abraham through Israel of old, the Gentile profession now, and Israel again in the millennial age, not believers only but responsibility according to the privileges given, with judgment executed on the faithless Jewish branches of the tree to let in the Gentiles, as it will be executed on the disobedient Gentiles when God will give repentance to Israel and remission of sins at the appearing of Christ and His kingdom.
Hence the apostle goes on to affirm what is wholly different from the gospel and church state. “According to the gospel, [they are] enemies on your account; but according to the election, beloved on account of the fathers.* For the gifts and the calling of God [are] irrevocable.” (Ver. 28, 29.) The meaning is that, after the Jews proved their hostility to the gospel instead of being saved by it, which God turns, as we have seen, to His gracious call of the Gentiles meanwhile, election love will still prove faithful in the latter day to the sons for the sake of the fathers. This is not the principle on which souls are blessed now whether from Gentiles or from Jews. There is no difference. All are alike guilty and lost through their sins; all alike forgiven and saved through faith. But after the actual unbelief of the Jews, sovereign mercy will interpose at the end of the age. For the gifts and the calling of God admit of no regret on His part. He may repent of creation (Gen 6 ), never of what grace gave in promise to Abraham and to his seed, never of His call which was first illustrated publicly in the father of the faithful. According to that “election” He will yet break their stony heart and put a new spirit within them.
*”Incredulos fuisse redditos misericordia Gentibus exhibita, paulo asperius est; nihil tamen continet absurdi, quia Paulus excaecationis causam non assignat, sed tantum significat, quod ad Gentes transtulit Deus Judaeis fuisse ademptum.” Comm. in loc. ed. Tholuck, p. 158.
“For as ye were once disobedient to God but now have become objects of mercy through their disobedience, so have they also now become disobedient to the mercy shown to you, in order that they also may become objects of mercy. For God shut up together all in disobedience in order that he might show mercy to all.” (Verses 30-32.)
Wiclif, Tyndale, and Cranmer, with the Vulgate, the Peshito and the Philoxenian Syriac, the Arabic, are here more correct than the Geneva Version, Beza, and the Authorized. Calvin seems nearer to the truth, but has not quite hit the mark. “That they became unbelievers through the mercy shown to the Gentiles” is indeed somewhat harsh; nor is there any need of his explanation for clearing up a difficulty created by his own mistake. The Jews rebelled against the mercy shown to the Gentiles as we learn from the Acts, 1Th 2 , etc., and as experience shows in fact to this day.
There appears to my mind not only an absence of any just sense in the modern view but positive error at issue with the chapter, the context, and scripture in general. With the chapter it clashes, because the previous argument treats the restoration of the Jews as life from the dead to the world, not the fulness of the Gentiles the means of their restoration; with the context, because the express point is to crush all conceit from both Jew and Gentile, and especially from the Gentile as now enjoying light whilst the Jew knows a dark and cold eclipse; with scripture at large, because nowhere is the mercy shown to the Gentiles hinted at as the (or a) means of Israel’s recovery. No doctrine can be conceived more foreign to the Bible than that it is by the instrumentality of believing Gentiles that Israel as a nation shall at length look to Christ and so obtain mercy. As the Gentiles were warned that they must be cut off if they continued not in God’s goodness (and none but the most unspiritual, not to say hardened, can affirm that they have so continued), the sentence is excision, not the honour of bringing Israel into the faith. No doubt the believing Gentiles will be translated to higher blessedness, as the believing Jews were when the faithless Jews were cut off. Thus the prime object is to extinguish all self-confidence and boasting. As mercy alone accounted for bringing in the Gentiles on Israel’s rebellion against God, so the Jews when grafted into their own olive tree will feel that nothing but mercy could have done it or explain it, somewhat in unison of spirit with the apostle of the circumcision when at the council of Jerusalem he uttered the memorable words, so worthy of the occasion, “We believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved even as they” (the Gentiles), not they, even as we (the Jews).
Thus they were all sinners; and the dealings of God in holiness and love and truth only brought out the stubborn insubjection of both Jew and Gentile, on the one hand, and the incomparable mercy of God, on the other: man’s claims, righteousness, privileges, all ending in unbelief and rebellion, but God never more truly shining as God than in His mercy enduring for ever.
Can one wonder that the large and fervent heart of the apostle, animated and filled yet guarded by the inspiring Spirit, breaks forth in an outburst of praise as he looks back on the grace and ways of God in Christ? “O depth of God’s riches* and wisdom and knowledge: how unsearchable his judgments and untraceable his ways! For who hath known Jehovah’s mind? or who became his counsellor? or who first gave to him and it shall be repaid to him? Because of him and through him and to him [are] all things: to him the glory unto the ages. Amen.” (Ver. 33-36.) He is the source, means, and end of all He has counselled, accomplished, or purposes still to effect for His own glory.
*Or “both of God’s wisdom” etc. as in the Authorized Version.
The appropriateness of the doxology to the epistle is not only remarkable in itself but exactly in place where it stands. Indeed it is not alone; for, as we have a very brief one in the first chapter, we have another very notable in the last. Here it is the admiration of his soul as he looks back on the triumphs of divine mercy – the last thing of which man would think in discussing the dispensations of God. Yet to the spiritual mind subject to the written word and confiding in the known characters of God as He has revealed Himself in Christ, such is the bright and blessed and adoring conclusion. The depth of His wealth, wisdom, and knowledge is to be seen, felt, proved, but unfathomable; His decisions beyond scrutiny, His ways not to be traced out, yet all open to our learning of Him with ever swelling praise. For who knew Jehovah’s mind? or who became His counsellor? Yet has not the apostle touched on other and heavenly purposes for the glory of Christ in the church, of which he speaks to the Ephesian saints in due season. Here he had only been given to develop the righteousness of God in the face of man’s unrighteousness, known from the beginning and revealed all along, and the methods by which God humbles the pride of each and gives the fullest scope to His mercy, causing evil itself to set forth good with the utmost lustre. Who then has given to God and made Him debtor to repay? For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things: to Him be the glory for ever. The gospel is His, the righteousness His, the grace His, and so is the glory. To Him then with the apostle our hearts join in ascribing the display of perfect excellency without end.
Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Rom 11:1-6
1I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? 3″Lord, they have killed Your prophets, they have torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they are seeking my life.” 4But what is the divine response to him? “I have kept for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” 5In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God’s gracious choice. 6But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.
Rom 11:1 “God has not rejected His people, has He” This question expects a “no” answer. Paul answers this question in Rom 11:1-10. This section must relate to Paul’s previous argument. Romans 9-11 form a literary unit, a sustained argument.
The word translated “reject” (aorist middle [deponent] indicative) basically means “to refuse” or “to cast off.” It is used in
1. Act 7:39 – Israel in the wilderness rejecting Moses’ leadership
2. Act 13:46 – the Jews of the synagogue in Pisidian Antioch rejecting Paul’s preaching of the gospel
3. 1Ti 1:19 – some members of the church at Ephesus rejecting and making shipwrecks of their faith (i.e., Hymenaeus and Alexander)
YHWH did not cast off Israel! Israel cast off YHWH by her continued disobedience, idolatry, and now self-righteous legalism.
It is interesting to note that the early Greek papyrus manuscript P46 and the uncials F and G have “inheritance” instead of “people,” which may be from the LXX of Psa 94:14. The UBS4 gives “people” an “A” rating (certain).
“May it never be” This is Paul’s characteristic way of rejecting the questions of the hypothetical objector (diatribe, cf. Rom 3:4; Rom 3:6; Rom 3:31; Rom 6:2; Rom 6:15; Rom 7:7; Rom 7:13; Rom 9:14; Rom 11:1; Rom 11:11).
“I too am an Israelite” Paul uses himself to prove the existence of a believing Jewish remnant. For further amplification of Paul’s Jewish background see Php 3:5.
Rom 11:2 “God has not rejected His people” This may be an allusion to Psa 94:14 (cf. Deu 31:6; 1Sa 12:22; 1Ki 6:13; Lam 3:31-32). It is a specific answer to the question of Rom 11:1.
“whom He foreknew” This is an obvious reference to God’s election of Israel. See note at Rom 8:29. It takes the argument back to Romans 9, as do Rom 11:4-6. The key was not Israel’s performance, but God’s choice. God is faithful to His promises because of who He is, not because of Israel’s performance (cf. Eze 36:22-32).
“the Scripture says” This is a reference to the account of Elijah’s flight from Jezebel in 1Ki 19:10, quoted in Rom 11:3.
Rom 11:4 “I have kept for Myself seven thousand” “For Myself” is not in the Masoretic Hebrew text of
1Ki 19:18 (Paul does not quote the MT or the LXX), but is added by Paul to emphasize God’s choice. The faithful remnant of 1Ki 19:18 is viewed from God’s choice, not their rejection of Ba’al worship.
The point Paul is making is that there was a small group of believers even in faithless, idolatrous Israel of Elijah’s day. In Paul’s day there was also a believing remnant of Jewish people (see Special Topic at Rom 9:27-28). In every age some Jews have responded by faith. Paul asserts that these believing Jews are energized by the mercy and grace of God (Rom 11:5-6).
“to Baal” This is a feminine article with a masculine noun. This was because the Jews regularly inserted vowels from the feminine Hebrew word “shame” (bosheth) into the consonants of the names of pagan deities to make fun of them.
Rom 11:5-6 These are key verses. They link the past actions of God in the OT to the current situation. The link is the election of God by mercy (cf. Rom 9:15-16; Rom 9:18; Rom 11:30-32). God’s Grace is priority, but human faith is necessary (cf. Mar 1:15; Act 3:16; Act 3:19; Act 20:21), however, not based at all on human merit (cf. Eph 2:8-9; 2Ti 1:9; Tit 3:5). These truths are crucial in Paul’s argumentation throughout Romans 9-11.
Rom 11:6 “if” This is a first class conditional sentence which is assumed to be true from the author’s perspective or for his literary purposes. Salvation is by God’s grace (see note at Rom 3:24, cf. Rom 6:23; Eph 2:8-9).
The KJV adds a concluding phrase to Rom 11:6, “But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no longer work.” This phrase is not included in most ancient Greek manuscripts P46, *, A, C, D, G, or P, and the Old Latin versions, but two different forms of the phrase appear in manuscripts c and B. The UBS4 rates their omission as “A” (certain).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Hath = Did.
God. App-98.
cast away = thrust aside. See Act 7:27.
people. See Rom 10:21.
God forbid. See Rom 3:4.
also = indeed.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
1-10.] Yet God has not cast off His people, but there is a remnant according to the election of grace (Rom 11:1-6),-the rest being hardened (Rom 11:7-10).
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Shall we turn in our Bibles to Romans, chapter 11.
In chapters 9-11 Paul is dealing with a couple of subjects; one the sovereignty of God, but it is the sovereignty of God in setting aside the nation Israel as God’s primary target, you might say for work, and beginning to pour out His Spirit and work among the Gentiles. Because Paul is a Jew through and through, his heart, his prayer for Israel is that they might be saved, and yet, he can see in the scriptures those prophecies of God’s move among the Gentiles. In the later portion of chapter 10, he gives some of those prophecies of how God was going to be found of them that did not seek for Him; He was going to manifest Himself unto the Gentiles, but of the Jew He said, “All day long have I stretched out my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.”
Chapter 11 is really just a continuation of chapter 10. The chapter distinctions were not in the original writings; they have been placed there by men to help us to reference the scriptures, to reference passages, but sometimes we have a tendency of just reading a chapter and quitting and then beginning a new chapter and you are not continuing in the same thought as though there were not the chapter or verse distinction. You must remember that in the original this was just one continuous letter. Chapter and verse distinction distinguishing facts are placed there by man only for the help in referencing passages.
God has said He was going to manifest Himself unto the Gentiles. He has stretched out His hand all day long to the disobedient and gainsaying people.
I say then, Has God cast away his people? [The answer is] God forbid ( Rom 11:1 ).
Now it is unfortunate that there is a certain branch of theologians today who do declare that God has cast away His people. They endeavor to spiritualize Israel to make it apply to the church, and those prophecies that relate to Israel they seek to relate to the church. And as a consequence, they really get the whole prophetic picture totally confused. There are those who seek to identify the Anglo-Saxon nations as Israel. There is a lot of talk of the ten lost tribes, which is not really a true scriptural type of a reference. He said the lost sheep of the house of Israel, sent them to the lost sheep, but He didn’t say anything about ten lost tribes. But just those who were lost, the lost sheep in the house of Israel. The Lord knows exactly where the twelve tribes are and who comprises the twelve tribes. And in the book of the Revelation the Lord will be sealing 12,000 out of each tribe to preserve them through a portion of the judgments in the book of Revelation. But again, to try to make the church Israel or to make the Anglo-Saxon’s race Israel is just unscriptural and is not valid at all.
They use such arguments as the nation of Denmark they say is actually, Dan mark, actually the tribe of Dan, or the Danish people. The word ish in Hebrew means man, so Danish, so they are Danish people or Danish people according to pronunciation and, of course, you have the British, and foolish, so it doesn’t really prove too much. But it does confuse the whole prophetic scene. God is now working among the Gentiles, and God will continue to work among the Gentiles until the fullness of the Gentiles is come in, when we get to Rom 11:25 .
So the question is, has God cast away His people? Is He through with them forever? God forbid. The whole prophecy picture of the Old Testament dealt with Israel’s fall, but in order that they might rise again. Hosea was an interesting prophet. God told him to take a prostitute for a wife, and he began to name the children with prophetic names or names of prophetic significance. And, of course, the one child he called Lo-ammi, which means not my child. His wife had gone out and was engaging in her old practices again even while married to him, and had a child that wasn’t his. And finally she just left him completely and her life went down the tube. Until she was a slave, almost destitute and destroyed, and God said to Hosea, “Go take her again, buy her out of her slavery, wash her up, cleanse her, and take her as your wife once more.” And the whole life of Hosea with this unfaithful wife became a picture of God’s relationship with the nation of Israel, how He took her, espoused her unto Himself, married her, the glories of that first bloom of love. But then how Israel began to turn away unto other gods. They began to forsake the fountains of living waters and worship idols. And how they finally turned their back on God completely, but yet, God’s undying love and, of course, bringing them back again, and God’s work of restoration, which is yet future but shall be.
So God has not cast away His people in a final sense, for Paul said,
I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin ( Rom 11:1 ).
Now Benjamin was one of the supposed lost tribes, but it sure wasn’t as far as Paul was concerned, he knew what tribe he was from. He didn’t say, “We Benjamites,” you know, “We are lost; we don’t know who we are or where we are.” But he knew that he was of the tribe of Benjamin.
Jesus was from the tribe of Judah, and they say that the Jews today are for the most part from the tribe of Judah. However, other tribes were lost, Judah and Benjamin remain, but the rest of them were lost. Not so. That is not the case. So most Jews today have lost their genealogies and could not tell you exactly what tribe they are from, yet they know they are Jews.
Paul of the tribe of Benjamin and,
God has not cast away his people which he foreknew. Don’t you know what the scripture said in and of Elijah? that how when he was making intercession to God against Israel, saying, Lord, they have killed your prophets, and tore down thy altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what did the Lord answer him? I have reserved for myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed their knee to the image of Baal ( Rom 11:2-4 ).
Elijah had experienced one of the greatest victories in his career as he had challenged the prophets of Baal there on Mount Carmel, building the altars, “Let’s pray unto their gods,” the four hundred priests of Baal. “You can pray to them and I will pray to the living God, and the god that answers by fire let him be the God.” And, of course, the priests of Baal prayed and nothing happened, and Elijah prayed and God sent down fire and consumed the offering and the altar and all. Elijah took the priests of Baal and at that moment of victory down to the brook Kishon and slayed them. Killed four hundred of them, the prophets and priests of Baal. And the next day when Jezebel, the wife of the wicked king, found out what Elijah had done, she said, “God do so to me also if I don’t have the head of that man.” So Elijah fled from Jezebel.
It is so typical how that the times of greatest trial often follow the times of greatest victory. Thus with Elijah, tremendous victory, but now he is running from this queen–not afraid to face up to the four hundred prophets and priests of Baal, but one angry woman and he ran clear on down to the area of Mount Sinai, and there he hid in a cave. And as he was standing in the entrance of the cave, the Lord said, “Elijah what are you doing here?” He said, “I have been zealous for God, and they have all turned from You, and I am the only one You have left, and they are seeking my life. God, You are just about out of business; I am Your last one and they have got a contract out on me.”
God responded to Elijah, “I have 7,000 who have not bowed their knee to Baal.” There was the remnant, the faithful remnant that were there, and God knew who they were, and God had them numbered. As Paul is going to point out, God has always had His faithful remnant–those believers among the Jewish people, those special persons, super special persons among the Jewish people who have recognized the true work of God and are walking with God in fellowship with Him. With God there have always been a special number, a remnant, the faithful remnant. So in the time of Elijah, Paul said, “Don’t you remember that God said, ‘There are 7,000 that I have reserved unto Me’?” The true remnant that worshipped God, that served God, that had not turned after Baal. Even so, Paul said,
At this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace ( Rom 11:5 ).
There were those in Paul’s day and, of course, the early church was a Jewish church to begin with. There was some problem when even it was thought that they might introduce Gentiles into the church. It was, first of all, strictly Jewish, but among the Jews there were many believers, the remnant, God’s faithful remnant who now are according to the election of grace.
And it is now by grace, it is no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it is of works, then it is no longer grace ( Rom 11:6 ):
In other words, grace and works are mutually exclusive. If I am expecting God to accept me by His grace, then there is no work that I can do to make me acceptable. If I am seeking to be accepted by God by my works, then grace has no affect upon my life. They are mutually exclusive, and yet, we are so often trying to make a combination out of the two. Saved by grace, but oh, you know, let me do my works. But if it is of grace, then it cannot be of works. But if it is of works, then it can’t be of grace; they are mutually exclusive.
What then? Israel has not obtained that which it sought for; but the election have obtained it, and the rest were blinded ( Rom 11:7 )
Now, what was Israel seeking? They were seeking to be righteous before God. That was the whole purpose of the sacrifice of the law, in order to develop a righteous standing before God.
Now it is interesting that Paul makes reference here that they were seeking it by works. That continues to the present day, a Jew today is seeking to be accepted today on the basis of his good works. Yom Kippur is not a day of sacrifice, the priest entering in with the offering before the Lord in the Holy of Holies, but Yom Kippur is a day of reflection as you sat and you reflect upon your good works and upon your evil works and balancing the good works against the evil, so it is a seeking acceptance by God on the basis of works.
Paul speaks about them doing it in his day, and they are doing it to the present day–still seeking an acceptance by God on the basis of their works. The Jews are not alone in that, that same concept has crept over into church so that in many different churches there are people who are looking to their works as the basis of being accepted by God. “God will accept me if I am faithful to the ordinances of the church and the sacraments of the church, and if I am doing this and this.” They are looking for acceptance on the basis of their good works.
When you are looking to your good works as the basis of your acceptance for God, surely that doesn’t prompt a lot of works, so these people are real workers. They have a practice of going around, many of them from door to door. It is easy to tell the difference from where they’re coming from. If they are riding bicycles and have shirts and ties, then, you know, they are working their way through the Mormon system. If they carry a little magazine bag, then you know that they are working their way through the Jehovah Witness. They are both systems that are predicated on works and looking to their works as the basis of being accepted.
If it is of works then it is no more of grace; it can’t be of both. So Israel did not obtain that acceptance before God, that righteous standing, because they sought it by their works. Whereby their election did obtain it, the election of grace. But the rest were blinded.
(According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, ears that they should not hear;) unto this day. David said ( Rom 11:8-9 ),
Paul just starts passages of scriptures out of the Old Testament to prove his point. And this is good solid teaching when a man will make a statement and then give you three or four verses to confirm that statement. And so he first quotes from Isaiah, then he quoted from David, and he said,
Let their table be made a snare, a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompense unto them: let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back always. I say always then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? ( Rom 11:9-11 )
Have they stumbled that they should be put out of the game forever?
God forbid: but rather that through their fall there is come salvation unto the Gentiles, in order to provoke them to jealousy. Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world ( Rom 11:11-12 ),
In other words, by Israel falling out of the place of divine favor in the sense that now set them aside that He might work among the Gentiles, His work of Grace. Their being set aside brought to us the riches of God’s grace, goodness and love unto the Gentiles.
the diminishing of them or the riches of the Gentiles; how much more will their fullness be? ( Rom 11:12 )
God is yet to work with them, and when the fullness comes and God begins to work again with Israel, if their fall brought such glory to the Gentile world, what will it be when God restores them, but of course the Kingdom Age, that glorious age to which we look.
For I speak unto you Gentiles, as much as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify my office ( Rom 11:13 ):
So Paul now turns to speak to the Gentiles, and he calls himself the apostle of the Gentiles. And Paul, of course, paid quite a price for this position as an apostle to the Gentiles; he had to take all types of guff from people, especially from the Jews. They considered him a traitor because he was telling the Gentiles that they didn’t need to obey the law of Moses to be accepted by God. All they had to do was believe in Jesus Christ. He was telling the Gentiles that they did not have to offer sacrifices in the temple in order to be saved, all they had to do was believe in Jesus Christ and, of course, this created quite a conflict between those Jews who were still seeking a righteousness by the law. It was a threat to them, even as the declaration that a person could be saved through faith in Jesus Christ alone today is a threat to many churches and church systems.
I have a friend who was in the Anglican Church in Canada. He was a dean in one of the cathedrals there, and this man became born again, really turned on to the Lord. And he began to have prayer meetings with the Episcopalian or the Anglican Church there. And in these prayer meetings people really were beginning to experience the power of God and the Holy Spirit in their lives. The church was a very liberal church, and that was quite fine if that makes you feel good, more power to you, a very tolerant attitude. And then he started teaching the people that you have to be born again. He was kicked out because that was contrary to the basic church belief that you were born again when you were baptized as an infant and then later your confirmation, you were only confirming your salvation at infant baptism. And when he started saying you have go to be born again it created such a problem that he was dismissed from his church for teaching the people that you had to be born again. They were trusting in their works, infant baptism and confirmation, instead of just that faith in Jesus Christ.
Paul magnifying his position as an apostle as he sought:
to provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, that I might save some of them ( Rom 11:14 ).
He was just really in his heart as he said, “My heart-felt prayer and desire for Israel is that they might be saved.” Even though he was called of God as the apostle of the Gentiles, then was in all kinds of hot water for preaching the gospel to the Gentiles, declaring that the Gentiles could be saved, especially could be saved apart from becoming a Jew. They could be saved by just believing in Jesus Christ and they didn’t have to proselytize and become a Jew, that made him a heretic, and for this reason they tried to kill him when he was in Jerusalem. But yet, Paul’s desire and prayer for Israel was for their salvation. He goes on to say,
If the casting away of them was the reconciling of the world ( Rom 11:15 ),
God reconciled the world to Himself through Jesus Christ. Not just the Jewish people, but now the world.
what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? ( Rom 11:15 )
Again dealing with the contrast from the lesser to the greater if their casting away brought such reconciliation of the world to God, the Gentile world, then what will it be when God receives them again and gives His divine favor and grace upon them?
For if the firstfruits be holy, the whole lump is also holy: and if the root is holy, so are the branches ( Rom 11:16 ).
And, of course, the firstfruit Abraham, the patriarchs, the fathers, the root from which these people spread.
If some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and you have partaken of the root and the fatness of the olive tree; don’t boast against the branches. But if you boast, you bear not the root, but the root thee. I will say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. Well; it was because of unbelief that they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Don’t be high-minded, but fear ( Rom 11:17-20 ):
There has been through history of the church a very unfortunate relationship between the church and the Jews, and unfortunately, the church has been responsible for much of the persecution of the Jews today. I think that is indeed tragic. That for years the Catholic Church led in the persecution of the Jews, and it was something when Martin Luther broke away from the Catholic Church, he carried with him his anti-Semitism, and Martin Luther also encouraged the persecution of the Jews.
It crept on into Protestantism. There are many Protestant ministers today who are very anti-Semitic. And I get hate mail from them because of my known position of support for Israel and for the Jews. There are those who would boast themselves against the natural branches, “God’s cut them off, God is through with them; we are now the people.” And he says, “Wait a minute, you are a wild olive branch and you have been grafted into the vine or into the tree, contrary to nature. And they were broken off because of their unbelief, and you are only standing by faith, so don’t be so high-minded.”
I do believe that as Paul, our hearts and desire and prayers for Israel, that they should be saved. Now that doesn’t mean that I have a great burden to establish a Calvary Chapel in Jerusalem and to start a mission there to save the Jews. I do not feel that God has called me as an evangelist to the Jewish nation or to the Jewish people parse. God has called me to just teach His Word and that I am to do faithfully. However, I do not feel that I can undo what God has done, and that is why I don’t have a burden for Jewish evangelism. And so in this I am neither fish or fowl, I get it from both sides because some people have a tremendous zeal for Jewish evangelism that I don’t have. I believe that God will evangelize them when He is ready, and that God will graft them back in when He is ready, and that God will open their eyes when He is ready. In the meantime, God has poured out His grace, His Spirit upon the Gentiles, and thus, I like to fish where the fish are biting. And so, these are the fruitful fields among the Gentiles, and I really feel that, for the most part, Jewish evangelism is a waste of church finances that can be better used to evangelize the Gentiles at this time. And that when the day comes God Himself is going to reveal Himself to the Jewish nation, to Israel, and God is going to work there among them. So, I like to go over and provoke them to jealousy, and tell them how wonderful their Messiah is and what He has done for me, and how much I love Him, and how glorious it is to walk in fellowship with God, and to have peace with God and the joy of the Lord and all, and just what a glorious Messiah they have. And I like to provoke them to jealousy, but I am quite interested in them and I do share with them and I share my beliefs and my faith with them, but I am amazed at how blind they are. Because some of them are extremely knowledgeable in the Word of God, yet they are so totally blind when it comes to Jesus Christ. Blindness has happened to Israel and that is true.
When I was speaking a few years back at the International Congress in Jerusalem, sharing the platform with then Prime Minister Begin, I got some hate mail from some of the rabbis in the Meo Sharem area of Jerusalem, who are ultra orthodox, rebuking me for trying to support the nation of Israel with understanding from the Christians, because the purpose of the rally was to bring understanding to the Jews and the evangelical Christians, and these radical rabbis wrote me these letters rebuking me and telling me I had no business being there and Israel had no right to even exist as a nation because the Messiah had not yet come. They did not yet have their temple, and they were very opposed to the nation of Israel themselves. They lived there in the Meo Sharem district of Jerusalem, but they did write to King Hussin in Jordan and they asked him to annex the Meo Sharim into Jordan. They didn’t want to have anything to do with the nation of Israel. They feel that it is sort of an illegitimate state right now. And so they wrote me these letters and all. So these guides that I had been talking to for so long and witnessing to, I said, “Hey fellows I want to show you…” They were so pleased. And, “It’s so nice that you are here,” and all this kind of stuff. And I said, “Look at what some of your rabbis sent me.” And I gave them these hate letters that I had from the rabbis there. And they read it and said, “Oh, this is just junk. Those guys are just a bunch of religious fanatics. They don’t know what they are talking about. They’re just religious fanatics.” And I said, “But they are rabbis.” “Oh, but they’re just religious fanatics.” And I said, “You mean a rabbi can be a religious fanatic?” “Oh, ya, ya.” “Have you ever stopped to think that it was probably those same kind of rabbis that rejected Jesus as the Messiah, because He didn’t fit the patterns. A bunch of radicals, and yet, you today are following those radicals.” They didn’t have much to say. So I get my little witness in.
They were broken off because of their unbelief, and we only stand by faith.
For if God spared not the natural branch, take heed lest he also spare not thee ( Rom 11:21 ).
Jesus said, “I am the true vine, My Father is the husbandman. Every branch in Me that bears fruit, He washes it that it might bring forth more fruit. Now you are clean through the Word that I have spoken unto you. Abide in Me, and let my words abide in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine, neither more can thee, except you abide in me” ( Joh 15:1-5 ). Abide in Me, the emphasis of abiding. We are branches, and we have been grafted in contrary to nature. We receive the blessings of God, the blessings of the promises of God to Abraham and to David. We have received the benefit of them through receiving Jesus Christ, and we partake of the fatness and the richness and the fullness of God’s love and grace that He had promised unto Abraham, unto Isaac, unto Jacob, and unto David. But we only stand by faith. And again, we are encouraged to abide there. “For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest He does not spare thee.”
Behold therefore the goodness and the severity of God: on them which fell ( Rom 11:22 ),
It was quite severe upon the fall of Israel from the place of God’s favor and blessings.
severity; but toward you, the goodness, if you continue in his goodness: otherwise you also will be cut off. They also, if they abide not still in unbelief, will be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again ( Rom 11:22-23 ).
When they turned from their unbelief, God will receive them again.
For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and you were grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree ( Rom 11:24 );
You were cut out of this wild olive tree of the Gentile’s race, and you were grafted into the good tree.
how much more shall these, which are the natural branches, be grafted back into their own olive tree? For I would not, brethren, that you to be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own conceit ( Rom 11:24-25 ),
Ignorant of what mystery? That God is yet going to deal with the nation of Israel as the nation of Israel. And unfortunately, there are many people who are ignorant of that mystery, and many ministers ignorant of that ministry.
blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in ( Rom 11:25 ).
God has sent His Spirit into the world, into the highways and byways, to compel men to come to the supper. As Jesus gave the parable, you know, the king prepared a great supper and they said, “Go out to the invited guests and invite them to come in and to eat.” And the servants came back and they said, “Well, they said that they couldn’t come,” and the various excuses. So the king said, “Then go out to the highways and the byways and compel men to come in that my house may be full.” The invited guest rejected the invitation, and so it has come to us, the Gentiles, and blindness has happened in part to Israel, not to all of Israel, again there is that remnant, but in part to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.
I do believe that God knows exactly how many Gentiles are going to be brought into the wedding feast, that God knows the exact number. If He is an omniscient God, He has to know the exact number, because that means all knowledge; He knows everything. I do believe that God does know and does have a specified number of Gentiles that are going to believe and to be a part of that kingdom, and that number is referred to as the fullness of the Gentiles.
Now there is another phrase in Luk 21:1-38 , the time of the Gentiles. That is a little different. I believe that the time of the Gentiles technically was over in 1967, for Jerusalem shall be trodden under foot of the Gentiles until the time of the Gentiles be fulfilled. But since 1967. And now we are living in a short period of an age of grace between the time of the fulfillment of the Gentiles until the time of the fullness of the Gentiles is come in. Not all the Gentiles that were to be saved were saved in 1967, a lot of you weren’t, God waited for you. But somewhere alive on the earth today is some person whom God has known, and he is the last one among the Gentiles to be a part of God’s glorious eternal kingdom. The moment that person opens up his heart to Jesus Christ, we are all going to be caught up to meet the Lord in the air. I am convinced of that. It is just like walking into Disneyland and having the lights flash, and the trumpets go off, and the drums roll, and they say, “You are the five millionth visitor to Disneyland,” and everything is celebration. They have been counting the people as they have been coming through, and you are it. Now the big gala celebration, and such shall be the case when the fullness of the Gentiles be come in. I wish I knew who that person was. I think I would be tempted to do a little coercion. God has called out a people for Himself. I am so grateful that God has called me. I am so thankful that God chose me to be a part of His eternal kingdom. Oh, the goodness and the grace of God, that I was chosen in Christ, that I should be an heir in the kingdom of God. I thank God daily for that blessing, as you should thank God daily that He chose you.
Now, when the fullness of the Gentiles is come in, then the blindness will be taken away from Israel. I believe that this will transpire when Russia is defeated by God as she invades the Middle East. I received some reports from Israel this past week of the tensions that are building up as the result of Russia’s deployment of the SS21 ‘s in Syria. Some of the military leaders there were declaring that this is a definite threat to Israel’s security and will probably mean war with Syria very soon, knowing that war with Syria could very easily escalate into war with Russia. We do know that Russia is going to get involved and, of course, as the result of those tragedies today, the tensions are mounting in the Middle East. I would not be at all surprised but what we will not be forced to call on Israel to bail us out of Lebanon. I think that our government has made some serious miscalculations and some serious blunders in the decisions concerning the Middle East. It is like my friends in Israel say, “Those men sitting over in Washington don’t know what is going on over here, nor do they understand the mentality of the people that we are dealing with.”
The Syrian government recently released films of the young girls and boys in their training. These films, some of them, the ones concerning the girls were shown in Israel on television, but CBS and NBC, ABC, felt that they weren’t really newsworthy. They really showed the kind of people we dealing with, and because this kind of news is withheld, we don’t understand the mess we are in when we try to interfere with these people, because they don’t think as we think. These particular films made by the Syrian government showing the training of the young girls for battle, for their army, and the Russians are now expanding their advisors to 8,000 in Syria.
But these pictures show these girls taking snakes and handling the snakes and so forth. They are in training in their service, and they begin to bite the snakes until their mouths are covered with blood, and then they began to eat the snakes–they roast them, then eat them after biting them to death. A bloody mess, and it was shown on Israeli TV. It’s filmed out of Syria. The fellows, of course, they felt that the Israelis couldn’t stomach this film, so they didn’t show it, choking to death little dogs and ripping them apart. Part of their training in just being cold, calloused, vicious, and that is the kind of people we are dealing with, and we are not prepared to deal with people like that, because we can’t understand how they think. And we send our Marines in there, and we restrict them and make them sitting ducks, and this is not right. The Israelis know it isn’t right, but we have tied the Israeli’s hands too, and they say, “If you are going to tie our hands, we aren’t going to stay around; we are getting out of here.” They move back behind the river where they can sit up defensible positions, and they said, “You can’t treat the people that way, you can’t stay there like that, they are just going to do murderous acts against you.” They say, “We have got it all managed.” But we don’t understand the mentality of the people we are dealing with. It is a very tragic thing, but Russia is going to be moving into the Middle East, and when Russia moves into the Middle East, God Himself is going to intervene and utterly destroy that Russian invading army.
When that day takes place, the blindness that Israel has experienced will be over and they will recognize their God. In Eze 39:1-29 , God declared, “And in that day when I am sanctified before the nations of the world (that is, the day when He destroys the Russian army), then will I pour out my Spirit again upon the nation of Israel.” Right now, God’s Spirit is being poured out upon we Gentiles until the fullness of the Gentiles is come in, but as soon as that takes place, then God is going to deal with the nation of Israel. Blindness has happened to Israel in part until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in, but then all of Israel shall be saved, because God is going to move by His Spirit again, and in a powerful way among the Gentile people; they are going to recognize.
They will come out of Zion the deliverer, and he shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: for this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. As concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sakes ( Rom 11:26-28 ):
It is to your blessing and benefit because the gospel is come unto us and the Spirit of God bringing the truth of God.
as touching the election, there is still beloved for the father’s sake ( Rom 11:28 ).
God said, “I can’t let you go.” He will not let them go.
For the gifts and the calling of God are without repentance [or changing] ( Rom 11:29 ).
God is not changing; He still loves these people.
For as you in times past have not believed God, yet now have obtained mercy through their unbelief: even so these also now not believing, that through your mercy they also obtain mercy. For God has included them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God! and how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! ( Rom 11:30-33 )
So he is dealing with the sovereignty of God setting aside of Israel, the work of grace among the Gentiles, the wisdom, the knowledge, the ways of God past our finding out.
For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counselor? or who hath first given to him, and it has been recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory forever. Amen ( Rom 11:34-36 ).
“
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Rom 11:1. ) hath He cast away entirely? So Gideon, expostulating in faith, says , now He has forsaken us (cast us away, Jdg 6:13). But , but the Lord will not cast away His people, Psalms 94 (93):14. Has He cast them away, says Paul, so that they are no longer the people of God? In ch. 10 after he so impressively exhibited the grace [which God exercised] towards the Gentiles, and the rebellion of the Jews, this objection might be made. He therefore answers, far be it from us to say, that God has rejected His people, when the very appellation, His people contains a reason for denying it. The negative assertion, far be it, [God forbid], is made distinctly, (1.) concerning the present time of the offending people; both that there are now some, [believers among them]; comp. Act 21:20, note; and that in the successively increasing admission of Gentiles, there will be very many of Israel, who shall believe. These are called the remnant and the election Rom 11:5; Rom 11:7. (2.) As to the future; that the people themselves, will at last be converted Rom 11:24, note.-, I) Paul would rather draw a favourable conclusion from the individual [believing Israelites, as himself] to the genus, [the whole nation,] than one, on the unfavourable side, from the genus [the unbelieving nation] to the species [the individual];-I, formerly a persecutor, deserved to be cast away. The genus is the whole Jewish people: the species is believers among the Jews (of whom Paul was one as an individual) or such of that people as should hereafter believe.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Rom 11:1
Rom 11:1
I say then, Did God cast off his people?-Paul, having shown that the Jews had rejected Christ and that God rejected
them, sees the conclusion liable to be reached by them-that God had cast off the Israelites as a nation; so he asks the question and responds to it.
God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.-Paul was of the purest blood of the Israelites. Had God cast them off because they were Israelites, Paul would not have been his servant. They broke themselves off because they rejected the long-expected Messiah.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
This discussion now gives rise to a new question, “Did God cast off His people?” They were created a nation in order that through them all the nations should be blessed. Failing to realize the divine intention concerning their own national life, they consequently and necessarily failed to fulfil that intention concerning the nations outside. God, however, does not allow the outside nations to suffer, but in infinite grace works through the fall of His earthly people toward enriching the whole world.
Most carefully and solemnly should the apostle’s words be noted, “Behold then the goodness and severity of God.” His severity is manifested in cutting off the natural branches because of unbelief. His goodness is evidenced in His reception of the Gentiles on the basis of their belief.
A doxology closes the whole doctrinal statement of the epistle. The outburst of rapturous praise was the result of the apostle’s consciousness of the wonderful victory of God through Christ over all the opposing forces of evil, and His solution in infinite wisdom of the problems that baffle the intellect of man. The notes of the doxology are fist a recognition of the depth of the riches of God’s wisdom and knowledge, and then of man’s utter inability to understand.
At the close of this section it is important to remember that the only interpretation of the inscrutable wisdom and operation of God is to be found in the revelation of His grace in Jesus, which is the foundation doctrine of the whole epistle.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
THE REJECTION OF ISRAEL NOT COMPLETE
11:1-10. Israel then has refused to accept the salvation offered it; is it therefore rejected? No. At any rate the rejection is not complete. Now as always in the history of Israel, although the mass of the people may be condemned to disbelief, there is a remnant that shall be saved.
1 The conclusion of the preceding argument is this. It is through their own fault that Israel has rejected a salvation which was fully and freely offered. Now what does this imply? Does it mean that God has rejected His chosen people? Heaven forbid that I should say this! I who like them am an Israelite, an Israelite by birth and not a proselyte, a lineal descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe that with Judah formed the restored Israel after the exile. 2 No, God has not rejected His people. He chose them for His own before all time and nothing can make Him change His purpose. If you say He has rejected them, it only shows that you have not clearly grasped the teaching of Scripture concerning the Remnant. Elijah on Mt. Horeb brought just such an accusation against his countrymen. 3 He complained that they had forsaken the covenant, that they had overthrown Gods altars, that they had slain His Prophets; just as the Jews at the present day have slain the Messiah and persecuted His messengers. Elijah only was left, and his life they sought. The whole people, Gods chosen people, had been rejected. 4 So he thought; but the Divine response came to him, that there were seven thousand men left in Israel who had not bowed the knee to Baal. There was a kernel of the nation that remained loyal. 5 Exactly the same circumstances exist now as then. Now as then the mass of the people are unfaithful, but there is a remnant of loyal adherents to the Divine message:-a remnant, be it remembered, chosen by God by an act of free favour: 6 that is to say those whom God has in His good pleasure selected for that position, who have in no way earned it by any works they have done, or any merit of their own. If that were possible Grace would lose all its meaning: there would be no occasion for God to show free favour to mankind.
7 It is necessary then at any rate to modify the broad statement that has been made. Israel, it is true, has failed to obtain the righteousness which it sought; but, although this is true of the nation as a whole, there is a Remnant of which it is not true. Those whom God selected have attained it. But what of the rest? Their hearts have been hardened. Here again we find the same conditions prevailing throughout Israels history. 8Isaiah declared (29:10; 6:9, 10) how God had thrown the people into a state of spiritual torpor. He had given them eyes which could not see, and ears which could not hear. All through their history the mass of the people has been destitute of spiritual insight. 9 And again in the book of Psalms, David (69:23, 24) declares the Divine wrath against the unfaithful of the nation: May their table be their snare. It is just their position as Gods chosen people, it is the Law and the Scriptures, which are their boast, that are to be the cause of their ruin. They are to be punished by being allowed to cleave fast to that to which they have perversely adhered. 10 Let their eyes be blinded, so that they cannot see light when it shines upon them: let their back be ever bent under the burden to which they have so obstinately clung. This was Gods judgement then on Israel for their faithlessness, and it is Gods judgement on them now.
1-36. St. Paul has now shown (1) (9:6-29) that God was perfectly free, whether as regards promise or His right as Creator, to reject Israel; (2) (9:30-10:21) that Israel on their side by neglecting the Divine method of salvation offered them have deserved this rejection. He now comes to the original question from which he started, but which he never expressed, and asks, Has God, as might be thought from the drift of the argument so far, really cast away His people? To this he gives a negative answer, which he proceeds to justify by showing (1) that this rejection is only partial (11:1-10), (2) only temporary (11:11-25), and (3) that in all this Divine action there has been a purpose deeper and wiser than man can altogether understand (11:26-36).
1. . This somewhat emphatic phrase occurring here and in ver. 11 seems to mark a stage in the argument, the as so often summing up the result so far arrived at. The change of particle shows that we have not here a third question parallel to the of 10:18, 19.
; Is it possible that God has cast away His people? The form of the question implies necessarily a negative answer and suggests an argument against it. (1) By the juxtaposition of and . Israel is Gods people and so He cannot reject them. Ipsa populi eius appellatio rationem negandi continet. Beng. (2) By the use made of the language of the O. T. Three times in the O. T. (1Sa 12:22; 93 [94], 14; 94 [95], 4) the promise occurs. By using words which must be so well known St. Paul reminds his readers of the promise, and thus again implies an answer to the question.
This very clear instance of the merely literary use of the language of the O. T. makes it more probable that St. Paul should have adopted a similar method elsewhere, as in 10:6 ff., 18.
. St. Paul repudiates the thought with horror. All his feelings as an Israelite make it disloyal in him to hold it.
… These words have been taken in two ways. (1) As a proof of the incorrectness of the suggestion. St. Paul was an Israelite, and he had been saved; therefore the people as a whole could not have been rejected. So the majority of commentators (Go. Va. Oltr. Weiss). But the answer to the question does not occur until St. Paul gives it in a solemn form at the beginning of the next verse; he would not therefore have previously given a reason for its incorrectness. Moreover it would be inconsistent with St. Pauls tact and character to put himself forward so prominently.
(2) It is therefore better to take it as giving the motive for his deprecation, not a proof of his denial (Mey. Gif. Lips.). Throughout this passage, St. Paul partly influenced by the reality of his own sympathy, partly by a desire to put his argument in a form as little offensive as possible, has more than once emphasized his own kinship with Israel (9:1-3; 10:1). Here for the first time, just when he is going to disprove it, he makes the statement which has really been the subject of the two previous passages, and at once, in order if possible to disarm criticism, reminds his readers that he is an Israelite, and that therefore to him, as much as to them, the supposition seems almost blasphemous.
… Cf. 2Co 11:22; Php 3:5.
, which is added by Lachmann after , has the support of A D Chrys. and other authorities, but clearly came in from ver. 2.
2. . St. Paul gives expressly and formally a negative answer to the question he has just asked, adding emphasis by repeating the very words he has used.
. The addition of these words gives a reason for the emphatic denial of which they form a part. Israel was the race which God in His Divine foreknowledge had elected and chosen, and therefore He could not cast it off. The reference in this chapter is throughout to the election of the nation as a whole, and therefore the words cannot have a limiting sense (Orig. Chrys. Aug.), that people whom He foreknew, i.e. those of His people whom He foreknew; nor again can they possibly refer to the spiritual Israel, as that would oblige a meaning to be given to different from that in ver. 1. The word may be taken, (1) as used in the Hebrew sense, to mean whom He has known or chosen beforehand. So in the LXX. Amo 3:2 1 . And in St. Paul 1Co 8:3 , . Gal 4:9 , . 2Ti 2:19 . Although there is no evidence for this use of it represents probably the idea which St. Paul had in his mind (see on 8:29). (2) But an alternative interpretation taking the word in its natural meaning of foreknowledge, must not be lost sight of, that people of whose history and future destiny God had full foreknowledge. This seems to be the meaning with which the word is generally used (Wisd. 6:13; 8:8; 18:6; Just. Mart. Apol. i. 28; Dial. 42. p. 261 B.); so too is used definitely and almost technically of the Divine foreknowledge (Act 2:23), and in this chapter St. Paul ends with vindicating the Divine wisdom which had prepared for Israel and the world a destiny which exceeds human comprehension.
: cf. 2:4; 6:3; 7:1; 9:21. You must admit this or be ignorant of what the Scripture says. The point of the quotation lies not in the words which immediately follow, but in the contrast between the two passages; a contrast which represented the distinction between the apparent and the real situation at the time when the Apostle wrote.
: in the section of Scripture which narrates the story of Elijah. The O. T. Scriptures were divided into paragraphs to which were given titles derived from their subject-matter; and these came to be very commonly used in quotations as references. Many instances are quoted from the Talmud and from Hebrew commentators: Berachoth, fol. 2Ch_1, fol. 4.Col_2 id quod scriptum est apud Michel, referring to Isa 6:6. So Taanijoth, ii. 1; Aboth de-Rabbi Nathan, c. 9; Shir hashirim rabbai. 6, where a phrase similar to that used here, In Elijah, occurs, and the same passage is quoted, I have been very jealous for the Lord, the God of Hosts. So also Philo, De Agricultura, p. 203 (i. 317 Mang.) , referring to Gen 3:15. The phrase Mar 12:26; Luk 20:37; Clem. Hom. xvi. 14; Apost. Const. v. 20, is often explained in a similar manner, but very probably incorrectly, the being perhaps purely local. The usage exactly corresponds to the method used in quoting the Homeric poems. As the Rabbis divided the O. T. into sections so the Rhapsodists divided Homer, and these sections were quoted by their subjects, , . (See Fri. Delitzsch ad loc., Surenhusius, , p. 31.)
: he accuses Israel before God. The verb means, (1) to meet with, (2) to meet with for the purposes of conversation, have an interview with, Act 25:24; hence (3) to converse with, plead with, Wisdom 8:21, either on behalf of some one ( ) Rom 8:27, Rom 8:34; Heb 7:25; or against some one ( ), and so (4) definitely to accuse as here and 1 Macc. 11:25 : 8:32; 10:61, 63.
The TR. adds at the end of this verse with *L al. pler., it is omitted by c A B C D E F G P min. pauc., Vulg. Sah. Boh., and most Fathers.
3. , … The two quotations come from 1Ki 19:10, 1Ki 19:14, 1Ki 19:18; the first being repeated twice. Elijah has fled to Mt. Horeb from Jezebel, and accuses his countrymen before God of complete apostasy; he alone is faithful. God answers that even although the nation as a whole has deserted Him, yet there is a faithful remnant, 7,000 men who have not bowed the knee to Baal. There is an analogy, St. Paul argues, between this situation and that of his own day. The spiritual condition is the same. The nation as a whole has rejected Gods message, now as then; but now as then also there is a faithful remnant left, and if that be so God cannot be said to have cast away His people.
The quotation is somewhat shortened from the LXX, and the order of the clauses is inverted, perhaps to put in a prominent position the words to which there was most analogy during St. Pauls time (cf. Act 7:52; 1Th 2:14). The between the clauses of the TR. is read by D E L and later MSS. Justin Martyr, Dial. 39. p. 257 D, quotes the words as in St. Paul and not as in the LXX: , . , , .
4. : the oracle. An unusual sense for the word, which occurs here only in the N. T., but is found in 2 Macc. 2:4; Clem.Rom; xvii. 5 and occasionally elsewhere. The verb meant (1) originally to transact business; then (2) to consult, deliberate; hence (3) to give audience, answer after deliberation; and so finally (4) of an oracle to give a response, taking the place of the older ; and so it is used in the N. T. of the Divine warning Mat 2:12, Mat 2:22 : Luk 2:26; Act 10:22; Heb 8:5; 11:7: cf. Jos. Antt. V. i. 14; X. i. 3; XI. iii. 4. From this usage of the verb was derived , as the more usual from . See also p. 173.
: substituted by St. Paul (as also by Justin Martyr, loc. cit.) for the LXX , according to a usage common in other passages in the Greek Version.
The word Baal, which means Lord, appears to have been originally used as one of the names of the God of Israel, and as such became a part of many Jewish names, as for example Jerubbaal (Jud 1:6:32; Jud 1:7:1), Eshbaal (1Ch 9:39), Meribbaal (1Ch 9:40), &c. But gradually the special association of the name with the idolatrous worship of the Phoenician god caused the use of it to be forbidden. Hos 2:16, Hos 2:17 and it shall be at that day, saith the Lord, that thou shalt call me Ishi; and shalt call me no more Baali. For I will take away the names of the Baalim out of her mouth, and they shall no more be mentioned by their name. Owing to this motive a tendency arose to obliterate the name of Baal from the Scriptures: just as owing to a feeling of reverence Elohim was substituted for Jehovah in the second and third books of the Psalms. This usage took the form of substituting Bosheth, abomination, for Baal. So Eshbaal (1Ch 8:33, 1Ch 9:39) became Ishbosheth (2Sa 2:8; 2Sa 3:8); Meribbaal (1Ch 9:40) Mephibosheth (2Sa 9:6 ff.); Jerubbaal Jerubbesheth (2Sa 11:21). See also Hos 9:10; Jer 3:24; Jer 11:13. Similarly in the LXX represents in one passage Baal of the Hebrew text, 3 Kings 18:19, 25. But it seems to have been more usual to substitute in reading for the written , and as a sign of this Qeri the feminine article was written; just as the name Jehovah was written with the pointing of Adonai. This usage is most common in Jeremiah, but occurs also in the books of Kings, Chronicles, and other Prophets. It appears not to occur in the Pentateuch. The plural occurs 2Ch 24:7; 2Ch 33:3. This, the only satisfactory explanation of the feminine article with the masculine name, is given by Dillmann, Monatsberichte der Akademie der Wissenschaft zu Berlin, 1881, p. 601 ff. and has superseded all others.
The LXX version is again shortened in the quotation, and for is substituted , which is an alternative and perhaps more exact translation of the Hebrew.
5. . The application of the preceding instance to the circumstances of the Apostles own time. The facts were the same. St. Paul would assume that his readers, some of whom were Jewish Christians, and all of whom were aware of the existence of such a class, would recognize this. And if this were so the same deduction might be made. As then the Jewish people were not rejected, because the remnant was saved; so now there is a remnant, and this implies that God has not cast away His people as such.
(on the orthography cf. WH. ii. App. p. 154, who read ), a remnant. The word does not occur elsewhere in the N. T., and in the O. T. only twice, and then not in the technical sense of the remnant. The usual word for that is .
. Predicate with . There has come to be through the principle of selection which is dependent on the Divine grace or favour. This addition to the thought, which is further explained in ver. 6, reminds the reader of the result of the previous discussion: that election on which the Jews had always laid so much stress had operated, but it was a selection on the part of God of those to whom He willed to give His grace, and not an election of those who had earned it by their works.
6. … A further explanation of the principles of election. If the election had been on the basis of works, then the Jews might have demanded that Gods promise could only be fulfilled if all who had earned it had received it: St. Paul, by reminding them of the principles of election already laid down, implies that the promise is fulfilled if the remnant is saved. Gods people are those whom He has chosen; it is not that the Jews are chosen because they are His people.
: this follows from the very meaning of the idea of grace. Gratia nisi gratis sit gratia non est. St. Augustine.
The TR. after adds , with c (B) L and later MSS., Syrr., Chrys. and Thdrt. (in the text, but they do not refer to the words in their commentary). B reads , . The clause is omitted by A C D E F G P, Vulg. Aegyptt. (Boh. Sah.) Arm., Orig.-lat. Jo.-Damasc. Ambrst Patr.-latt. There need be no doubt that it is a gloss, nor is the authority of B of any weight in support of a Western addition such as this against such preponderating authority. This is considered by WH. to be the solitary or almost the solitary case in which B possibly has a Syrian reading (Introd. ii. 150).
7. ; This verse sums up the result of the discussion in vv. 2-6. What then is the result? In what way can we modify the harsh statement made in ver. 1? It is indeed still true that Israel as a nation has failed to obtain what is its aim, namely righteousness: but at the same time there is one portion of it, the elect, who have attained it.
: i. e. . The abstract for the concrete suggests the reason for their success by laying stress on the idea rather than on the individuals.
: while the elect have attained what they sought, those who have failed to attain it have been hardened. They have not failed because they have been hardened, but they have been hardened because they have failed; cf. 1:24 ff., where sin is represented as Gods punishment inflicted on man for their rebellion. Here St. Paul does not definitely say by whom, for that is not the point it interests him to discuss at present: he has represented the condition of Israel both as the result of Gods action (ch. 9) and of their own (ch. 10). Here as in 9:22, he uses the colourless passive without laying stress on the cause: the quotation in ver. 8 represents God as the author, in ver. 11 suggests that they are free agents.
The verb (derived from a callus or stone formed in the bladder) is a medical term used in Hippocrates and elsewhere of a bone or hard substance growing when bones are fractured, or of a stone forming in the bladder. Hence metaphorically it is used in the N. T., and apparently there only of the heart becoming hardened or callous: so Mar 6:52; Joh 12:40; Rom 11:7; 2Co 3:14: while the noun occurs in the same sense, Mar 3:5; Rom 11:25; Eph 4:18. The idea is in all these places the same, that a covering has grown over the heart, making men incapable of receiving any new teaching however good, and making them oblivious of the wrong they are doing. In Job 17:7 ( ) the word is used of blindness, but again only of moral blindness; anger has caused as it were a covering to grow over the eyes. There is therefore no need to take the word to mean blind, as do the grammarians (Suidas, , : , : Hesychius, , ) and the Latin Versions (excaecati, obcaecati). It is possible that this translation arose from a confusion with (see on below) which was perhaps occasionally used of blindness (see Prof. Armitage Robinson in Academy, 1892, p. 305), although probably then as a specialized usage for the more general maimed. Although the form occurs in some MSS. of the N. T., yet the evidence against it is in every case absolutely conclusive, as it is also in the O. T. in the one passage where the word occurs.
8. . St. Paul supports and explains his last statement by quotations from the O. T. The first which in form resembles Deu 29:4, modified by Isa 29:10; Isa 6:9, Isa 6:10, describes the spiritual dulness or torpor of which the prophet accuses the Israelites. This he says had been given them by God as a punishment for their faithlessness. These words will equally well apply to the spiritual condition of the Apostles own time, showing that it is not inconsistent with the position of Israel as Gods people, and suggesting a general law of Gods dealing with them.
The following extracts, in which the words that St. Paul has made use of are printed in spaced type, will give the source of the quotation. Deu 29:4 . Isa 29:10 : cf. Isa 6:9, Isa 6:10 . , ; While the form resembles the words in Deut., the historical situation and meaning of the quotation are represented by the passages in Isaiah to which St. Paul is clearly referring.
: a spirit of torpor, a state of dull insensibility to everything spiritual, such as would be produced by drunkenness, or stupor. Isa 29:10 (RV.) For the Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes, the prophets; and your heads, the seers, hath He covered.
The word is derived from . The simple verb is used to mean to prick or strike or dint. The compound verb would mean, (1) to strike or prick violently, and hence (2) to stun; no instance is quoted of it in its primary sense, but it is common (3) especially in the LXX of strong emotions, of the prickings of lust Susan. 10 (Theod.); of strong grief Gen 34:7; Ecclus. 14:1; and so Act 2:37 of being strongly moved by speaking. Then (4) it is used of the stunning effect of such emotion which results in speechlessness: Isa 6:5 : Dan 10:15 , and so the general idea of torpor would be derived. The noun appears to occur only twice, Isa 29:10 , 59:4[4] . In the former case it clearly means torpor or deep sleep, as both the context and the Hebrew show, in the latter case probably so. It may be noticed that this definite meaning of torpor or deep sleep which is found in the noun cannot be exactly paralleled in the verb; and it may be suggested that a certain confusion existed with the verb , which means to nod in sleep, be drowsy, just as the meaning of was influenced by its resemblance to (cf. 2:8). On the word generally see Fri. ii. p. 558 ff.
: cf. Act 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did so do ye. St. Stephens speech illustrates more in detail the logical assumptions which underlie St. Pauls quotations. The chosen people have from the beginning shown the same obstinate adherence to their own views and a power of resisting the Holy Ghost; and God has throughout punished them for their obstinacy by giving them over to spiritual blindness.
9. ..: quoted from the LXX of 68 [69]. 23, 24 , … (which is ascribed in the title to David) with reminiscences of 34:8 [8], and 27:4[4]. The Psalmist is represented as declaring the Divine wrath against those who have made themselves enemies of the Divine will. Those who in his days were the enemies of the spiritual life of the people are represented in the Apostles days by the Jews who have shut their ears to the Gospel message.
: their feast. The image is that of men feasting in careless security, and overtaken by their enemies, owing to the very prosperity which ought to be their strength. So to the Jews that Law and those Scriptures wherein they trusted are to become the very cause of their fall and the snare or hunting-net in which they are caught.
: that over which they fall, a cause of their destruction.
: 27:4 [4.]. A requital, recompense. The Jews are to be punished for their want of spiritual insight by being given over to blind trust in their own law; in fact being given up entirely to their own wishes.
10. … May their eyes become blind, so that they have no insight, and their backs bent like men who are continually groping about in the dark! They are to be like those described by Plato as fast bound in the cave: even if they are brought to the light they will only be blinded by it, and will be unable to see. The judgement upon them is that they are to be ever bent down with the weight of the burden which they have wilfully taken on their backs.
It may be worth noticing that Lipsius, who does not elsewhere accept the theory of interpolations in the text, suggests that vv. 9, 10 are a gloss added by some reader in the margin after the fall of Jerusalem (cf. Holsten, Z. f. w. T. 1872, p. 455; Michelsen, Th. T. 1887, p. 163; Protestanten-bibel, 1872, p. 589; E. T. ii. 154). It is suggested that is inconsistent with ver. 11 ff. But it has not been noticed that in ver. 11 we have a change of metaphor, , which would be singularly out of place if it came immediately after ver. 8. As it is, this word is suggested and accounted for by the metaphors employed in the quotation introduced in ver. 9 If we omit vv. 9, 10 we must also omit ver. 11. There is throughout the whole Epistle a continuous succession of thought running from verse to verse which makes any theory of interpolation impossible. (See Introduction, 9.)
The Doctrine of the Remnant
The idea of the Remnant is one of the most typical and significant in the prophetic portions of the O. T. We meet it first apparently in the prophetic narrative which forms the basis of the account of Elijah in the book of Kings, the passage which St. Paul is quoting. Here a new idea is introduced into Israels history, and it is introduced in one of the most solemn and impressive narratives of that history. The Prophet is taken into the desert to commune with God; he is taken to Sinai, the mountain of God, which played such a large part in the traditions of His people, and he receives the Divine message in that form which has ever marked off this as unique amongst theophanies, the still small voice, contrasted with the thunder, and the storm, and the earthquake. And the idea that was thus introduced marks a stage in the religious history of the world, for it was the first revelation of the idea of personal as opposed to national consecration. Up to that time it was the nation as a whole that was bound to God, the nation as a whole for which sacrifices were offered, the nation as a whole for which kings had fought and judges legislated. But the nation as a whole had deserted Jehovah, and the Prophet records that it is the loyalty of the individual Israelites who had remained true to Him that must henceforth be reckoned. The nation will be chastised, but the remnant shall be saved.
The idea is a new one, but it is one which we find continuously from this time onwards; spiritualized with the more spiritual ideas of the later prophets. We find it in Amos (9:8-10), in Micah (2:12, 5:3, in Zephaniah (3:12, 13), in Jeremiah (23:3), in Ezekiel (14:14-20, 22), but most pointedly and markedly in Isaiah. The two great and prominent ideas of Isaiahs prophecy are typified in the names given to his two sons,-the reality of the Divine vengeance (Maher-shalal-hash-baz) and the salvation of the Remnant (Shear-Jashub) and, through the Holy and Righteous Remnant, of the theocratic nation itself (7:3; 8:2, 18; 9:12; 10:21, 24); and both these ideas are prominent in the narrative of the call (6:9-13) Hear ye indeed, but understand not, and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes Then said I, Lord, how long? And He answered, Until cities be waste without inhabitant and homes without men, and the land become utterly waste. But this is only one side. There is a true stock left. Like the terebinth and the oak, whose stock remains when they are cut down and sends forth new saplings, so the holy seed remains as a living stock and a new and better Israel shall spring from the ruin of the ancient state (Robertson Smith, Prophets of Israel, p. 234). This doctrine of a Remnant implied that it was the individual who was true to his God, and not the nation, that was the object of the Divine solicitude; that it was in this small body of individuals that the true life of the chosen nation dwelt, and that from them would spring that internal reformation, which, coming as the result of the Divine chastisement, would produce a whole people, pure and undefiled, to be offered to God (Isa 65:8, Isa 65:9).
The idea appealed with great force to the early Christians. It appealed to St. Stephen, in whose speech one of the main currents of thought seems to be the marvellous analogy which runs through all the history of Israel. The mass of the people has ever been unfaithful; it is the individual or the small body that has remained true to God in all the changes of Israels history, and these the people have always persecuted as they crucified the Messiah. And so St. Paul, musing over the sad problem of Israels unbelief, finds its explanation and justification in this consistent trait of the nations history. As in Elijahs time, as in Isaiahs time, so now the mass of the people have rejected the Divine call; but there always has been and still is the true Remnant, the Remnant whom God has selected, who have preserved the true life and ideal of the people and thus contain the elements of new and prolonged life.
And this doctrine of the Remnant is as true to human nature as it is to Israels history. No church or nation is saved en masse, it is those members of it who are righteous. It is not the mass of the nation or church that has done its work, but the select few who have preserved the consciousness of its high calling. It is by the selection of individuals, even in the nation that has been chosen, that God has worked equally in religion and in all the different lines along which the path of human development has progressed.
[On the Remnant see especially Jowett, Contrasts of Prophecy, in Romans ii. p. 290; and Robertson Smith, The Prophets of Israel, pp. 106, 209, 234, 258. The references are collected in Oehler, Theologie des alten Testaments, p. 809.]
THE REJECTION OF ISRAEL NOT FINAL
11:11-24. The Rejection of Israel is not complete, nor will it be final. Its result has been the extension of the Church to the Gentiles. The salvation of these will stir the Jews to jealousy; they will return to the Kingdom, and this will mean the final consummation (vv. 10-15).
Of all this the guarantee is the holiness of the stock from which Israel comes. God has grafted you Gentiles into that stock against the natural order; far more easily can He restore them to a position which by nature and descent is theirs (vv. 16-24).
11The Rejection of Israel then is only partial. Yet still there is the great mass of the nation on whom Gods judgement has come: what of these? Is there no further hope for them? Is this stumbling of theirs such as will lead to a final and complete fall? By no means. It is only temporary, a working out of the Divine purpose. This purpose is partly fulfilled. It has resulted in the extension of the Messianic salvation to the Gentiles. It is partly in the future; that the inclusion of these in the Kingdom may rouse the Jews to emulation and bring them back to the place which should be theirs and from which so far they have been excluded. 12And consider what this means. Even the transgression of Israel has brought to the world a great wealth of spiritual blessings; their repulse has enriched the nations, how much greater then will be the result when the chosen people with their numbers completed have accepted the Messiah? 13In these speculations about my countrymen, I am not disregarding my proper mission to you Gentiles. It is with you in my mind that I am speaking. I will put it more strongly. I do all I can to glorify my ministry as Apostle to the Gentiles, 14and this in hopes that I may succeed in bringing salvation to some at any rate of my countrymen by thus moving them to emulation. 15And my reason for this is what I have implied just above, that by the return of the Jews the whole world will receive what it longs for. The rejection of them has been the means of reconciling the world to God by the preaching to the Gentiles; their reception into the Kingdom, the gathering together of the elect from the four winds of heaven, will inaugurate the final consummation, the resurrection of the dead, and the eternal life that follows.
16But what ground is there for thus believing in the return of the chosen people to the Kingdom? It is the holiness of the race. When you take from the kneading trough a piece of dough and offer it to the Lord as a heave-offering, do you not consecrate the whole mass? Do not the branches of a tree receive life and nourishment from the roots? So it is with Israel. Their forefathers the Patriarchs have been consecrated to the Lord, and in them the whole race; from that stock they obtain their spiritual life, a life which must be holy as its source is holy. 17For the Church of God is like a green olive tree, fair with goodly fruit, as the Prophet Jeremiah described it. Its roots are the Patriarchs; its branches the people of the Lord. Some of these branches have been broken off; Israelites who by birth and descent were members of the Church. Into their place you Gentiles, by a process quite strange and unnatural, have been grafted, shoots from a wild olive, into a cultivated stock. Equally with the old branches which still remain on the tree you share in the rich sap which flows from its root. 18Do not for this reason think that you may insolently boast of the position of superiority which you occupy. If you are inclined to do so, remember that you have done nothing, that all the spiritual privileges that you possess simply belong to the stock on which you by no merit of your own have been grafted. 19But perhaps you say: That I am the favoured one is shown by this that others were cut off that I might be grafted in. 20I grant what you say; but consider the reason. It was owing to their want of faith that they were broken off: you on the other hand owe your firm position to your faith, not to any natural superiority. 21It is an incentive therefore not to pride, as you seem to think, but to fear. For if God did not spare the holders of the birthright, no grafted branches but the natural growth of the tree, He certainly will be no more ready to spare you, who have no such privileges to plead. 22Learn the Divine goodness, but learn and understand the Divine severity as well. Those who have fallen have experienced the severity, you the goodness; a goodness which will be continued if you cease to be self-confident and simply trust: otherwise you too may be cut off as they were. 23Nor again is the rejection of the Jews irrevocable. They can be grafted again into the stock on which they grew, if only they will give up their unbelief. For they are in Gods hands; and Gods power is not limited. He is able to restore them to the position from which they have fallen. 24 For consider. You are the slip cut from the olive that grew wild, and yet, by a process which you must admit to be entirely unnatural, you were grafted into the cultivated stock. If God could do this, much more can He graft the natural branches of the cultivated olive on to their own stock from which they were cut. You Gentiles have no grounds for boasting, nor have the Jews for despair. Your position is less secure than was theirs, and if they only trust in God, their salvation will be easier than was yours.
11. St. Paul has modified the question of ver. 1 so far: the rejection of Israel is only partial. But yet it is true that the rest, that is the majority, of the nation are spiritually blind. They have stumbled and sinned. Does this imply their final exclusion from the Messianic salvation? St. Paul shows that it is not so. It is only temporary and it has a Divine purpose.
. A new stage in the argument. I ask then as to this majority whose state the prophets have thus described. The question arises immediately out of the preceding verses, but is a stage in the argument running through the whole chapter, and raised by the discussion of Israels guilt in 9:30-10:21.
, ; have they (i.e. those who have been hardened, ver. 8) stumbled so as to fall? Numquid sic offenderunt, ut caderent? Is their failure of such a character that they will be finally lost, and cut off from the Messianic salvation? expresses the contemplated result. The metaphor in (which is often used elsewhere in a moral sense, Deu 7:25; Jam 2:10; Jam 3:2; 2Pe 1:10) seems to be suggested by of ver. 9. The meaning of the passage is given by the contrast between and ; a man who stumbles may recover himself, or he may fall completely. Hence is here used of a complete and irrevocable fall. Cf. Isa 24:20 , : Ps. Sol. 3:13 , : Heb 4:11. It is no argument against this that the same word is used in vv. 22, 23 of a fall which is not irrevocable: the ethical meaning must be in each case determined by the context, and here the contrast with suggests a fall that is irrevocable.
There is a good deal of controversy among grammarians as to the admission of a laxer use of , a controversy which has a tendency to divide scholars by nations; the German grammarians with Winer at their head ( liii. 10. 6, p. 573 E. T.) maintain that it always preserves, even in N. T. Greek, its classical meaning of purpose; on the other hand, English commentators such as Lightfoot (on Gal 5:17), Ellicott (on 1Th 5:4), and Evans (on 1Co 7:29) admit the laxer use. Evans says that , like our that, has three uses: (1) final (in order that he may go), (2) definitive (I advise that he go), (3) subjectively ecbatit (have they stumbled that they should fall); and it is quite clear that it is only by reading into passages a great deal which is not expressed that commentators can make in all cases mean in order that. In 1Th 5:4 , , , where Winer states that there is a Divine purpose of God, this is not expressed either in the words or the context. In 1Co 7:29 , , is it probable that a state of sitting loose to worldly interests should be described as the aim or purpose of God in curtailing the season of the great tribulation? (Evans.) Yet Winer asserts that the words … express the (Divine) purpose for which . So again in the present passage it is only a confusion of ideas that can see any purpose. If St. Paul had used a passive verb such as then we might translate, have they been hardened in order that they may fall? and there would be no objection in logic or grammar, but as St. Paul has written , if there is a purpose in the passage it ascribes stumbling as a deliberate act undertaken with the purpose of falling. We cannot here any more than elsewhere read in a Divine purpose where it is neither implied nor expressed, merely for the sake of defending an arbitrary grammatical rule.
. St. Paul indignantly denies that the final fall of Israel was the contemplated result of their transgression. The result of it has already been the calling of the Gentiles, and the final purpose is the restoration of the Jews also.
: by their false step, continuing the metaphor of .
. St. Paul is here stating an historical fact. His own preaching to the Gentiles had been caused definitely by the rejection of his message on the part of the Jews. Act 13:45-48; cf. 8:4; 11:19; 28:28.
: to provoke them (the Jews) to jealousy. This idea had already been suggested (10:19) by the quotation from Deuteronomy .
St. Paul in these two statements sketches the lines on which the Divine action is explained and justified. Gods purpose has been to use the disobedience of the Jews in order to promote the calling of the Gentiles, and He will eventually arouse the Jews to give up their unbelief by emulation of the Gentiles. , , . Euthym.-Zig.
12. St. Paul strengthens his statement by an argument drawn from the spiritual character of the Jewish people. If an event which has been so disastrous to the nation has had such a beneficial result, how much more beneficial will be the result of the entrance of the full complement of the nation into the Messianic kingdom?
: the enriching of the world by the throwing open to it of the kingdom of the Messiah: cf. 10:12 , .
: their defeat. From one point of view the unbelief of the Jews was a transgression (), from another it was a defeat, for they were repulsed from the Messianic kingdom, since they had failed to obtain what they sought.
occurs only twice elsewhere: in Isa 31:8 , : and in 1Co 6:7 , . The correct interpretation of the word as derived from the verb would be a defeat, and this is clearly the meaning in Isaiah. It can equally well apply in 1 Cor., whether it be translated a defeat in that it lowers the Church in the opinion of the world, or a moral defeat, hence a defect, The same meaning suits this passage. The majority of commentators however translate it here diminution (see especially Gif. Sp. Comm. pp. 194, 203), in order to make the antithesis to exact. But as Field points out (Otium Norv. iii. 97) there is no reason why the sentence should not be rhetorically faulty, and it is not much improved by giving the meaning of impoverishment as opposed to replenishment.
: their complement, their full and completed number. See on 11:25.
The exact meaning of has still to be ascertained. 1. There is a long and elaborate note on the word in Lft. Col. p. 323 ff. He starts with asserting that substantives in – formed from the perfect passive, appear always to have a passive sense. They may denote an abstract notion or a concrete thing; they may signify the action itself regarded as complete, or the product of the action: but in any case they give the result of the agency involved in the corresponding verb. He then takes the verb and shows that it has two senses, (i) to fill, (ii) to fulfil or complete; and deriving the fundamental meaning of the word from the latter usage makes it mean in the N. T. always that which is completed. 2. A somewhat different view of the termination – is given by the late T. S. Evans in a note on 1Co 5:6 in the Sp. Comm. (part of which is quoted above on Rom 4:2.) This would favour the active sense id quod implet or adimplet, which appears to be the proper sense of the English word complement (see the Philological Societys Eng. Dict. s. v.). Perhaps the term concrete would most adequately express the normal meaning of the termination.
13, 14. These two verses present a good deal of difficulty, of rather a subtle kind.
1. What is the place occupied by the words … in the argument? (i) Some (Hort, WH. Lips.) place here the beginning of a new paragraph, so Dr. Hort writes: after a passage on the rejection of unbelieving Israel, and on God`s ultimate purpose involved in it, St. Paul turns swiftly round. But an examination of the context will show that there is really no break in the ideas. The thought raised by the question in ver. 11 runs through the whole paragraph to ver. 24, in fact really to ver. 32, and the reference to the Gentiles in ver. 17 ff. is clearly incidental. Again ver. 15 returns directly to ver. 12, repeating the same idea, but in a way to justify also ver. 13. (ii) These verses in their appeal to the Gentiles are therefore incidental, almost parenthetic, and are introduced to show that this argument has an application to Gentiles as well as Jews.
2. But what is the meaning of (that this is the correct reading see below)? It is usual to take in its ordinary sense of therefore, and then to explain by supposing an anacoluthon. or by finding the contrast in some words that follow. So Gif. St. Paul, with his usual delicate courtesy and perfect mastery of Greek, implies that this is but one part () of his ministry, chosen as he was to bear Christs name before Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel. Winer and others find the antithesis in . But against these views may be urged two reasons, (i) the meaning of . The usage at any rate in the N. T. is clearly laid down by Evans on 1Co 6:3 (Speakers Comm. p. 285), the may signify then or therefore only when the falls back upon the preceding word, because it is expectant of a coming or , otherwise, as is pointed out, the must coalesce with the , and the idea is either corrective and substitutive of a new thought, or confirmative of what has been stated and addititious. Now if there is this second use of possible, unless the is clearly expressed the mind naturally would suggest it, especially in St. Pauls writings where is generally so used: and as a matter of fact no instance is quoted in the N. T. where in has its natural force in a case where it is not followed by (Heb 9:1 quoted by Winer does not apply, see Westcott ad loc.). But (ii) further is not the particle required here. What St. Paul requires is not an apology for referring to the Gentiles, but an apology to the Gentiles for devoting so much attention to the Jews.
If these two points are admitted the argument becomes much clearer. St. Paul remembers that the majority of his readers are Gentiles; he has come to a point where what he has to say touches them nearly; he therefore shows parenthetically how his love for his countrymen, and his zeal in carrying out his mission to the Gentiles, combine towards producing the same end. Do not think that what I am saying has nothing to do with you Gentiles. It makes me even more zealous in my work for you. That ministry of mine to the Gentiles I do honour to and exalt, seeking in this way if perchance I may be able to move my countrymen to jealousy. Then in ver. 15 he shows how this again reacts upon the general scheme of his ministry. And this I do, because their return to the Church will bring on that final consummation for which we all look forward.
13. … The expresses a slight contrast in thought, and the is emphatic: But it is to you Gentiles I am speaking. Nay more, so far as I am an Apostle of Gentiles, I glorify my ministry: if thus by any means, &c.
: comp. Act 22:21; Gal 2:7, Gal 2:9; 1Ti 2:7.
. He may glorify his ministry, either (i) by his words and speech; if he teaches everywhere the duty of preaching to the Gentiles he exalts that ministry: or (ii), perhaps better, by doing all in his power to make it successful: comp. 1Co 12:26 .
This verse and the references to the Gentiles that follow seem to show conclusively that St. Paul expected the majority of his readers to be Gentiles. Comp. Hort, Rom. and Eph. p. 22 Though the Greek is ambiguous the context appears to me decisive for taking as the Church itself, and not as a part of it. In all the long previous discussion bearing on the Jews, occupying nearly two and a half chapters, the Jews are invariably spoken of in the third person. In the half chapter that follows the Gentiles are constantly spoken of in the second person. Exposition has here passed into exhortation and warning, and the warning is exclusively addressed to Gentiles: to Christians who had once been Jews not a word is addressed.
The variations in reading in the particles which occur in this verse suggest that considerable difficulties were felt in its interpretation. For A B P minusc. pauc., Syrr. Boh. Arm., Theodrt. cod. Jo.-Damasc.; we find in C ; while the TR with D E F G L &c. Orig.-lat. Chrys. &c. has . Again is read by A B C P, Boh., Cyr.-Al. Jo.-Damasc.; only by TR with L &c., Orig.-lat. Chrys. &c. (so Meyer); while the Western group D E F G and some minuscules omit both.
It may be noticed in the Epp. of St. Paul that wherever or occur there is considerable variation in the reading.
Rom 9:20: A K L P &c., Syrr. Boh.; B; omit altogether D F G
10:18 om. F G d, Orig.-lat.
1Co 6:4: most authorities; F G .
6:7: A B C &c.; D Boh.
Php 3:8: B D E F G K L &c.; A P Boh.
The Western MSS. as a rule avoid the expression, while B is consistent in preferring it.
14. . is used here interrogatively with the aorist subjunctive (cp. Php 3:10, Php 3:11). The grammarians explain the expression by saying that we are to understand with it . occurs Act 27:12 with the optative, Rom 1:10 with the future.
15. The two previous verses have been to a certain extent parenthetical; in this verse the Apostle continues the argument of ver. 12, repeating in a stronger form what he has there said, but in such a way as to explain the statement made in vv. 13, 14, that by thus caring for his fellow-countrymen he is fulfilling his mission to the Gentile world. The casting away of the Jews has meant the reconciliation of the world to Christ. Henceforth there is no more a great wall of partition separating Gods people from the rest of the world. This is the first step in the founding of the Messianic kingdom; but when all the people of Israel shall have come in there will be the final consummation of all things, and this means the realization of the hope which the reconciliation of the world has made possible.: the rejection of the Jews for their faithlessness. The meaning of the word is defined by the contrasted .
: cf. vv. 10, 11. The reconciliation was the immediate result of St. Pauls ministry, which he describes elsewhere (2Co 5:18, 2Co 5:19) as a ministry of reconciliation; its final result, the hope to which it looks forward, is salvation ( ): the realization of this hope is what every Gentile must long for, and therefore whatever will lead to its fulfilment must be part of St. Pauls ministry.
: the reception of the Jews into the kingdom of the Messiah. The noun is not used elsewhere in the N. T., but the meaning is shown by the parallel use of the verb (cf. 14:3; 15:7).
. The meaning of this phrase must be determined by that of . The argument demands something much stronger than that, which may be a climax to the section. It may either be (1) used in a figurative sense, cf. Eze 37:3 ff.; Luk 15:24, Luk 15:32 , , . In this sense it would mean the universal diffusion of the Gospel message and a great awakening of spiritual life as the result of it. Or (2), it may mean the general Resurrection as a sign of the inauguration of the Messianic Kingdom. In this sense it would make a suitable antithesis to . The reconciliation of the heathen and their reception into the Church on earth was the first step in a process which led ultimately to their . It gave them grounds for hoping for that which they should enjoy in the final consummation. And this consummation would come when the kingdom was completed. In all contemporary Jewish literature the Resurrection (whether partial or general) is a sign of the inauguration of the new era. Schrer, Geschichte, &c. ii. p. 460; Jubilees xxiii. 29 And at that time the Lord will heal his servants, and they will arise and will see great peace and will cast out their enemies; and the just shall see it and be thankful and rejoice in joy to all eternity. Enoch Lev_1 (p. 139 ed. Charles) And in those days will the earth also give back those who are treasured up within it, and Shel also will give back that which it has received, and hell will give back that which it owes. And he will choose the righteous and holy from among them: for the day of their redemption has drawn nigh. As in the latter part of this chapter St. Paul seems to be largely influenced by the language and forms of the current eschatology, it is very probable that the second interpretation is the more correct; cf. Origen viii. 9, p. 257 Tunc enim erit assumtio Israel, quando iam et mortui vitam recipient et mundus ex corruptibili incorruptibilis fiet, et mortales immortalitate donabuntur; and see below ver. 26.
16. St. Paul gives in this verse the grounds of his confidence in the future of Israel. This is based upon the holiness of the Patriarchs from whom they are descended and the consecration to God which has been the result of this holiness. His argument is expressed in two different metaphors, both of which however have the same purpose.
. The metaphor in the first part of the verse is taken from Num 15:19, Num 15:20 It shall be, that when ye eat of the bread of the land, ye shall offer up an heave offering unto the Lord. Of the first of your dough ( LXX) ye shall offer up a cake for an heave offering: as ye do the heave offering of the threshing floor, so shall ye heave it. By the offering of the first-fruits, the whole mass was considered to be consecrated; and so the holiness of the Patriarchs consecrated the whole people from whom they came. That the meaning of the is the Patriarchs (and not Christ or the select remnant) is shown by the parallelism with the second half of the verse, and by the explanation of St. Pauls argument given in ver. 28 .
: consecrated to God as the holy nation in the technical sense of , cf. 1:7.
. The same idea expressed under a different image. Israel the Divine nation is looked upon as a tree; its roots are the Patriarchs; individual Israelites are the branches. As then the Patriarchs are holy, so are the Israelites who belong to the stock of the tree, and are nourished by the sap which flows up to them from those roots.
17-24. The metaphor used in the second part of ver. 16 suggests an image which the Apostle developes somewhat elaborately. The image of an olive tree to describe Israel is taken from the Prophets; Jer 11:16 The Lord called thy name, A green olive tree, fair with goodly fruit: with the noise of a great tumult He hath kindled fire upon it, and the branches of it are broken; Hos 14:6 His branches shall spread, and his beauty shall be as the olive tree, and his smell as Lebanon. Similar is the image of the vine in Isa 5:7; Psa 80:8; and (of the Christian Church) in Joh 15:1ff.
The main points in this simile are the following:-
The olive = the Church of God, looked at as one continuous body; the Christian Church being the inheritor of the privileges of the Jewish Church.
The root or stock () = that stock from which Jews and Christians both alike receive their nourishment and strength, viz. the Patriarchs, for whose faith originally Israel was chosen (cf. vv. 28,29).
The branches ( ) are the individual members of the Church who derive their nourishment and virtue from the stock or body to which they belong. These are of two kinds:
The original branches; these represent the Jews. Some have been cut off from their want of faith, and no longer derive any nourishment from the stock.
The branches of the wild olive which have been grafted in. These are the Gentile Christians, who, by being so grafted in, have come to partake of the richness and virtue of the olive stem.
From this simile St. Paul draws two lessons. (1) The first is to a certain extent incidental. It is a warning to the heathen against undue exaltation and arrogance. By an entirely unnatural process they have been grafted into the tree. Any virtue that they may have comes by no merit of their own, but by the virtue of the stock to which they belong; and moreover at any moment they may be cut off. It will be a less violent process to cut off branches not in any way belonging to the tree, than it was to cut off the original branches. But (2)-and this is the more important result to be gained from the simile, as it is summed up in ver. 24-if God has had the power against all nature to graft in branches from a wild olive and enable them to bear fruit, how much more easily will He be able to restore to their original place the branches which have been cut off.
St. Paul thus deduces from his simile consolation for Israel, but incidentally also a warning to the Gentile members of the Church- a warning made necessary by the great importance ascribed to them in ver. 11f. Israel had been rejected for their sake.
17. : a meiosis. Cf. 3:3 ; , , , . Euthym.-Zig.
. The same simile is used, with a different application, Enoch xxvi. 1 , , .
: the wild olive. The olive, like the apple and most other fruit trees, requires to have a graft from a cultivated tree, otherwise the fruit of the seedling or sucker will be small and valueless. The ungrafted tree is the natural or wild olive. It is often confused with the oleaster (Eleagnus angustifolius), but quite incorrectly, this being a plant of a different natural order, which however like the olive yields oil, although of an inferior character. See Tristram,Natural Hist. of the Bible, pp. 371-377.
: wert grafted in amongst the branches of the cultivated olive. St. Paul is here describing a wholly unnatural process. Grafts must necessarily be of branches from a cultivated olive inserted into a wild stock, the reverse process being one which would be valueless and is never performed. But the whole strength of St. Pauls argument depends upon the process being an unnatural one (cf. ver. 24 ); it is beside the point therefore to quote passages from classical writers, which, even if they seem to support St. Pauls language, describe a process which can never be actually used. They could only show the ignorance of others, they would not justify him. Cf. Origen viii. 10, p. 265 Sed ne hoc quidem lateat nos in hoc loco, quod non eo ordine Apostolus olivae et oleastri similitudinem posuit, quo apud agricolas habetur. Illi enim magis olivam oleastro inserere, et non olivae oleastrum solent: Paulus vero Apostolica auctoritate ordine commutato res magis causis, quam causas rebus aptavit.
: 1Co 9:23; Php 1:7; and cf. Eph 3:6 .
: comp. Jud 1:9:9 , ; Test. XII. Pat. Levi, 8 . The genitive is taken by Weiss as a genitive of quality, as in the quotation above, and so the phrase comes to mean the fat root of the olive. Lips. explains the root from which the fatness of the olive springs.
The genitive seemed clumsy and unnatural to later revisers, and so was modified either by the insertion of after , as in c A and later MSS. with Vulg. Syrr. Arm. Aeth., Orig.-lat. Chrys., or by the omission of in Western authorities D F G Iren.-lat.
18. . St. Paul seems to be thinking of Gentile Christians who despised the Jews, both such as had become believers and such as had not. The Church of Corinth could furnish many instances of new converts who were carried away by a feeling of excessive confidence, and who, partly on grounds of race, partly because they had understood or thought they had understood the Pauline teaching of , were full of contempt for the Jewish Christians and the Jewish race. Incidentally St. Paul takes the opportunity of rebuking such as them.
… All your spiritual strength comes from the stock on which you have been grafted. In the ordinary process it may be when a graft of the cultivated olive is set on a wild stock the goodness of the fruit comes from the graft, but in this case it is the reverse; any merit, any virtue, any hope of salvation that the Gentiles may have arises entirely from the fact that they are grafted on a stock whose roots are the Patriarchs and to which the Jews, by virtue of their birth, belong.
19. . The Gentile Christian justifies his feeling of confidence by reminding St. Paul that branches (, not ) had been cut off to let him in: therefore, he might argue, I am of more value than they, and have grounds for my self-confidence and contempt.
20. . St. Paul admits the statement, but suggests that the Gentile Christian should remember what were the conditions on which he was admitted. The Jews were cast off for want of faith, he was admitted for faith. There was no merit of his own, therefore he has no grounds for over-confidence: Be not high-minded; rather fear, for if you trust in your merit instead of showing faith in Christ, you will suffer as the Jews did for their self-confidence and want of faith.
21. … This explains the reason which made it right that they should fear. The Jews-the natural branches- disbelieved and were not spared; is it in any way likely that you, if you disbelieve, will be spared when they were not-you who have not any natural right or claim to the position you now occupy?
is the correct reading (with A B C P min. pauc., Boh., Orig.-lat., &c.); either because the direct future seemed too strong or under the influence of the Latin (ne forte nec tibi parcat Vulg. and Iren.-lat.) was read by D F G L &c., Syrr. Chrys. &c., then was changed into (min. pauc. and Chrys.) for the sake of the grammar, and found its way into the TR.
22. The Apostle sums up this part of his argument by deducing from this instance the two sides of the Divine character. God is full of goodness (, cf. 2:4) and loving-kindness towards mankind, and that has been shown by His conduct towards those Gentiles who have been received into the Christian society. That goodness will always be shown towards them if they repose their confidence on it, and do not trust in their own merits or the privileged position they enjoy. On the other hand the treatment of the Jews shows the severity which also belongs to the character of God; a severity exercised against them just because they trusted in themselves. God can show the same severity against the Gentiles and cut them off as well as the Jew.
and should be read in the second part of the verse, with A B C Orig. Jo.-Damasc. against the accusative of the Western and Syrian text. D has a mixed reading, and : the assimilation was easier in the first word than in the second. The after is omitted by later MSS. with Clem.-Alex., Orig. from a desire for uniformity.
. The condition of their enjoying this goodness is that they trust in it, and not in their position.
: emphatic like the of ver. 19 You too as well as the Jews.
23. St. Paul now turns from the warning to the Gentile Christians, which was to a certain extent incidental, to the main subject of the paragraph, the possibility of the return of the Jews to the Divine Kingdom; their grafting into the Divine stock.
: yes, and they too.
24. This verse sums up the main argument. If God is so powerful that by a purely unnatural process ( ) He can graft a branch of wild olive into a stock of the cultivated plant, so that it should receive nourishment from it; can He not equally well, nay far more easily, reingraft branches which have been cut off the cultivated olive into their own stock? The restoration of Israel is an easier process than the call of the Gentiles.
The Merits of the Fathers
In what sense does St. Paul say that Israelites are holy because the stock from which they come is holy (ver. 16), that they are (ver. 28)? He might almost seem to be taking up himself the argument he has so often condemned, that the descent of the Jews from Abraham is sufficient ground for their salvation.
The greatness of the Patriarchs had become one of the commonplaces of Jewish Theology. For them the world was created (Apoc. Baruch, xxi. 24). They had been surrounded by a halo of myth and romance in popular tradition and fancy (see the note on 4:3), and very early the idea seems to have prevailed that their virtues had a power for others as well as for themselves. Certainly Ezekiel in the interests of personal religion has to protest against some such view: Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith the Lord God (Eze 14:14). We know how this had developed by the time of our Lord, and the cry had arisen: We have Abraham for our father (see note on 2:3). At a later date the doctrine of the merits of the Fathers had been developed into a system. As Israel was an organic body, the several members of which were closely bound together, the superfluous merits of the one part might be transferred to another. Of Solomon before he sinned it was said that he earned all by his own merit, after he sinned by the merit of the Fathers (Kohel rabba 60c). A comment on the words of Son 1:5 I am black, but comely, closely resembles the dictum of St. Paul in ver. 18 The congregation of Israel speaks: I am black through mine own works, but lovely through the works of my fathers (Shemoth rabba,c. 23). So again: Israel lives and endures, because it supports itself on the fathers (ib. c. 44). A very close parallel to the metaphor of ver. 17 f. is given by Wajjikra rabba, c. 36 As this vine supports itself on a trunk which is dry, while it is itself fresh and green, so Israel supports itself on the merit of the fathers, although they already sleep. So the merit of the fathers is a general possession of the whole people of Israel, and the protection of the whole people in the day of Redemption (Shemoth rabba, c. 44; Beresch rabba, c. 70). So Pesikta 153b The Holy One spake to Israel: My sons, if ye will be justified by Me in the judgement, make mention to Me of the merits of your fathers, so shall ye be justified before Me in the judgement (see Weber, Altsyn. Theol. p. 280 f.).
Now, although St. Paul lays great stress on the merits of the Fathers, it becomes quite clear that he had no such idea as this in his mind; and it is convenient to put the developed Rabbinical idea side by side with his teaching in order to show at once the resemblance and the divergence of the two views. It is quite clear in the first place that the Jews will not be restored to the Kingdom on any ground but that of Faith; so ver. 23 . And in the second place St. Paul is dealing (as becomes quite clear below) not with the salvation of individuals, but with the restoration of the nation as a whole. The merits of the Fathers are not then looked upon as the cause of Israels salvation, but as a guarantee that Israel will attain that Faith which is a necessary condition of their being saved. It is a guarantee from either of two points of view. So far as our Faith is Gods gift, and so far as we can ascribe to Him feelings of preference or affection for one race as opposed to another (and we can do so just as much as Scripture does), it is evidence that Israel has those qualities which will attract to it the Divine Love. Those qualities of the founders of the race, those national qualities which Israel inherits, and which caused it to be selected as the Chosen People, these it still possesses. And on the other side so far as Faith comes by human effort or character, so far that Faith of Abraham, for which he was accounted righteous before God, is a guarantee that the same Faith can be developed in his descendants. After all it is because they are a religious race, clinging too blindly to their own views, that they are rejected, and not because they are irreligious. They have a zeal for God, if not according to knowledge. When the day comes that that zeal is enlisted in the cause of the Messiah, the world will be won for Christ; and that it will be so enlisted the sanctity and the deep religious instinct of the Jewish stock as exhibited by the Patriarchs is, if not certain proof, at any rate evidence which appeals with strong moral force.
MERCY TO ALL THE ULTIMATE PURPOSE OF GOD
11:25-36. All this is the unfolding of a mystery. The whole world, both Jew and Gentile, shall enter the Kingdom but a passing phase of disobedience has been allowed to the Jews now, as to the Gentiles in the past, that both alike, Jew as well as Gentile, may need and receive the Divine mercy (vv. 25-32). What a stupendous exhibition of the Divine mercy and wisdom (vv. 33-36)!
25But I must declare to you, my brethren, the purpose hitherto concealed, but now revealed in these dealings of God with His people. I must not leave you ignorant. I must guard you against self-conceit on this momentous subject. That hardening of heart which has come upon Israel is only partial and temporary. It is to last only until the full complement of the Gentiles has entered into Christs kingdom. 26When this has come about then the whole people of Israel shall be saved. So Isaiah (59:20) described the expected Redeemer as one who should come forth from the Holy city and should remove impieties from the descendants of Jacob, and purify Israel: 27 he would in fact fulfil Gods covenant with His people, and that would imply, as Isaiah elsewhere explains (27:9), a time when God would forgive Israels sins. This is our ground for believing that the Messiah who has come will bring salvation to Israel, and that He will do it by exercising the Divine prerogative of forgiveness; if Israel now needs forgiveness this only makes us more confident of the truth of the prophecy. 28 In the Divine plan, according to which the message of salvation has been preached, the Jews are treated as enemies of God, that room may be found for you Gentiles in the kingdom; but this does not alter the fact that by the Divine principle of selection, they are still the beloved of the Lord, chosen for the sake of their ancestors, the Patriarchs. 29 God has showered upon them His blessings and called them to His privileges, and He never revokes the choice He has made. 30 There is thus a parallelism between your case and theirs. You Gentiles were once disobedient to God. Now it has been Israels turn to be disobedient; and that disobedience has brought to you mercy. 31 In like manner their present disobedience will have this result: that they too will be recipients of the same mercy that you have received. 32 And the reason for the disobedience may be understood in both cases, if we look to the final purpose. God has, as it were, locked up all mankind, first Gentiles and then Jews, in the prison-house of unbelief, that He may be able at last to show His mercy on all alike.
33 When we contemplate a scheme like this spread out before us in vast panorama, how forcibly does it bring home to us the inexhaustible profundity of that Divine mind by which it was planned! The decisions which issue from that mind and the methods by which it works are alike inscrutable to man. 34 Into the secrets of the Almighty none can penetrate. No counsellor stands at His ear to whisper words of suggestion. 35 Nothing in Him is derived from without so as to be claimed back again by its owner. 36 He is the source of all things. Through Him all things flow. He is the final cause to which all things tend. Praised for ever be His name! Amen.
25-36. St. Pauls argument is now drawing to a close. He has treated all the points that are necessary. He has proved that the rejection of Israel is not contrary to Divine justice or Divine promises. He has convicted Israel of its own responsibility. He has shown how historically the rejection of Israel had been the cause of preaching the Gospel to the heathen, and this has led to far-reaching speculation on the future of Israel and its ultimate restoration; a future which may be hoped for in view of the spiritual character of the Jewish race and the mercy and power of God. And now he seems to see all the mystery of the Divine purpose unfolded before him, and he breaks away from the restrained and formal method of argument he has hitherto imposed upon himself. Just as when treating of the Resurrection, his argument passes into revelation, Behold, I tell you a mystery (1Co 15:51): so here he declares not merely as the result of his argument, but as an authoritative revelation, the mystery of the Divine purpose.
25. : cf. 1:13; 1Co 10:1; 1Co 12:1; 2Co 1:8; 1Th 4:13: a phrase used by St. Paul to emphasize something of especial importance which he wishes to bring home to his readers. It always has the impressive addition of brethren. The connects the verse immediately with what precedes, but also with the general argument. St. Pauls argument is like a ladder; each step follows from what precedes; but from time to time there are, as it were, resting-places which mark a definite point gained towards the end he has in view.
. On the meaning of mystery in St. Paul see Lightfoot, Colossians, i. 26; Hatch, Ess. in Bibl. Gk. p. 57 ff. Just at the time when Christianity was spreading, the mysteries as professing to reveal something more than was generally known, especially about the future state, represented the most popular form of religion, and from them St. Paul borrows much of his phraseology. so in Col 1:28, 1Co 2:6 we have , in Php 4:12 , in Eph 1:13 ; so in Ign. Ephes. 12 . But whereas among the heathen was always used of a mystery concealed, with St. Paul it is a mystery revealed. It is his mission to make known the Word of God, the mystery which has been kept silent from eternal ages, but has now been revealed to mankind (1Co 2:7; Eph 3:3, Eph 3:4; Rom 16:25). This mystery, which has been declared in Christianity, is the eternal purpose of God to redeem mankind in Christ, and all that is implied in that. Hence it is used of the Incarnation (1Ti 3:16), of the crucifixion of Christ (1Co 2:1,1Co 2:7), of the Divine purpose to sum up all things in Him (Eph 1:9), and especially of the inclusion of the Gentiles in the kingdom (Eph 3:3, Eph 3:4; Col 1:26, Col 1:27; Rom 16:25). Here it is used in a wide sense of the whole plan or scheme of redemption as revealed to St. Paul, by which Jews and Gentiles alike are to be included in the Divine Kingdom, and all things are working up, although in ways unseen and unknown, to that end.
: that you may not be wise in your own conceits, i. e. by imagining that it is in any way through your own merit that you have accepted what others have refused: it has been part of the eternal purpose of God.
ought probably to be read with A B, Jo.-Damasc. instead of C D L &c., Chrys. &c., as the latter would probably be introduced from 12:16. Both expressions occur in the LXX. Isa 5:21 , Pro 3:7 .
…: a hardening in part (cf. 1Co 12:27). St. Paul asserts once more what he has constantly insisted on throughout this chapter, that this fall of the Jews is only partial (cf. vv. 5, 7, 17), but here he definitely adds a point to which he has been working up in the previous section, that it is only temporary and that the limitation in time is until all nations of the earth come into the kingdom; cf. Luk 21:24 and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
: the full completed number, the complement of the Gentiles, i. e. the Gentile world as a whole, just as in ver. 12 is the Jewish nation as a whole.
There was a Jewish basis to these speculations on the completed number. Apoc. Baruch 23:4 quia quando peccavit Adam et decreta fuit mors contra eos qui gignerentur, tunc numerata est multitudo eorum qui gignerentur, et numero illi praeparatus est locus ubi habitarent viventes et ubi custodirentur mortui, nisi ergo compleatur numerus praedictus non vivet creatura 4 (5) Ezr 2:40, Ezr 2:41 (where Jewish ideas underlie a Christian work) recipe, Sion, numerum tuum et conclude candidatos tuos, qui legem Domini compleverunt: filiorum tuorum, quos optabas, plenus est numerus: roga imperium Domini ut sanctificetur populus tuus qui vocatus est ab initio.
was used almost technically of entering into the Kingdom or the Divine glory or life (cf. Mat 7:21; Mat 18:8; Mar 9:43-47.), and so came to be used absolutely in the same sense (Mat 7:13; Mat 23:13; Luk 13:24).
26. : and so, i.e. by the whole Gentile world coming into the kingdom and thus rousing the Jews to jealousy, cf. ver. 11f. These words ought to form a new sentence and not be joined with the preceding, for the following reasons: (1) the reference of is to the sentence … We must not therefore make coordinate with and subordinate to , for if we did so would be explained by the sentence with which it is coordinated, and this is clearly not St. Pauls meaning. He does not mean that Israel will be saved because it is hardened. (2) The sentence, by being made independent, acquires much greater emphasis and force.
. In what sense are these words used? (1) The whole context shows clearly that it is the actual Israel of history that is referred to. This is quite clear from the contrast with in ver. 25, the use of the term Israel in the same verse, and the drift of the argument in vv. 17-24. It cannot be interpreted either of the spiritual Israel, as by Calvin, or the remnant according to the election of grace, or such Jews as believe, or all who to the end of the world shall turn unto the Lord.
(2) must be taken in the proper meaning of the word: Israel as a whole, Israel as a nation, and not as necessarily including every individual Israelite. Cf. 1Ki 12:1 : 2Ch 12:1 : Dan 9:11 .
: shall attain the of the Messianic age by being received into the Christian Church: the Jewish conception of the Messianic being fulfilled by the spiritual of Christianity. Cf. 10:13.
So the words of St. Paul mean simply this. The people of Israel as a nation, and no longer , shall be united with the Christian Church. They do not mean that every Israelite shall finally be saved. Of final salvation St. Paul is not now thinking, nor of Gods dealings with individuals, nor does he ask about those who are already dead, or who will die before this salvation of Israel is attained. He is simply considering Gods dealings with the nation as a whole. As elsewhere throughout these chapters, St. Paul is dealing with peoples and classes of men. He looks forward in prophetic vision to a time when the whole earth, including the kingdoms of the Gentiles ( ) and the people of Israel ( ), shall be united in the Church of God.
26, 27. . The quotation is taken from the LXX of Isa 59:20, the concluding words being added from Isa 27:9. The quotation is free: the only important change, however, is the substitution of for the of the LXX. The Hebrew reads and a Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob. The variation apparently comes from Ps. 13:7, Psa 52:7 (LXX) ;
The passage occurs in the later portion of Isaiah, just where the Prophet dwells most fully on the high spiritual destinies of Israel; and its application to the Messianic kingdom is in accordance with the spirit of the original and with Rabbinic interpretation. St. Paul uses the words to imply that the Redeemer, who is represented by the Prophets as coming from Zion, and is therefore conceived by him as realized in Christ, will in the end redeem the whole of Israel. The passage, as quoted, implies the complete purification of Israel from their iniquity by the Redeemer and the forgiveness of their sins by God.
In these speculations St. Paul was probably strongly influenced, at any rate as to their form, by Jewish thought. The Rabbis connected these passages with the Messiah: cf. Tract. Sanhedrin, f. 98. 1 R. Jochanan said: When thou shalt see the time in which many troubles shall come like a river upon Israel, then expect the Messiah himself as says Isa 59:19. Moreover a universal restoration of Israel was part of the current Jewish expectation. All Israel should be collected together. There was to be a kingdom in Palestine, and in order that Israel as a whole might share in this there was to be a general resurrection. Nor was the belief in the coming in of the fulness of the Gentiles without parallel. Although later Judaism entirely denied all hope to the Gentiles, much of the Judaism of St. Pauls day still maintained the O. T. belief (Isa 14:2; Isa 66:12, Isa 66:19-21; Dan 2:44; Dan 7:14, Dan 7:27). So Enoch xc. 33 And all that had been destroyed and dispersed and all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the heaven assembled in that house, and the Lord of the sheep rejoiced with great joy because they were all good and had returned to his house. Orac. Sibyll. iii. 710 f. , , . Ps. Sol. xvii. 33-35 And he shall purge Jerusalem and make it holy, even as it was in the days of old, so that the nations may come from the ends of the earth to see his glory, bringing as gifts her sons that had fainted, and may see the glory of the Lord, wherewith God hath glorified her. The centre of this kingdom will be Jerusalem (compare the extract given above), and it is perhaps influenced by these conceptions that St. Paul in ix. 26 inserts the word there and here reads . If this be so, it shows how, although using so much of the forms and language of current conceptions, he has spiritualized just as he has broadened them. Gal 4:26 shows that he is thinking of a Jerusalem which is above, very different from the purified earthly Jerusalem of the Rabbis; and this enables us to see how here also a spiritual conception underlies much of his language.
: Jesus as the Messiah. Cf. 1Th 1:10.
27. …: and whensoever I forgive their sins then shall my side of the covenant I have made with them be fulfilled.
28. : as regards the Gospel order, the principles by which God sends the Gospel into the world. This verse sums up the argument of vv. 11-24.
: treated by God as enemies and therefore shut off from Him.
: for your sake, in order that you by their exclusion may be brought into the Messianic Kingdom.
: as regards the principle of election: because they are the chosen race. That this is the meaning is shown by the fact that the word is parallel to . It cannot mean here, as in vv. 5, 6, as regards the elect, i. e. the select remnant. It gives the grounds upon which the chosen people were beloved. With , cf. 9:25; the quotation there probably suggested the word.
: cf. 9:4; 11:16 f.: for the sake of the Patriarchs from whom the Israelites have sprung and who were well-pleasing to God.
29. St. Paul gives the reason for believing that God will not desert the people whom He has called, and chosen, and on whom He has showered His Divine blessings. It lies in the unchangeable nature of God: He does not repent Him of the choice that He has made.
: 2Co 7:10. The Divine gifts, such as have been enumerated in 9:4, 5, and such as God has showered upon the Jews, bear the impress of the Giver. As He is not one who will ever do that for which He will afterwards feel compunction, His feelings of mercy towards the Jews will never change.
: the calling to the Kingdom.
30. The grounds for believing that God does not repent for the gifts that He has given may be gathered from the parallelism between the two cases of the Jews and the Gentiles, in one of which His purpose has been completed, in the other not so. The Gentile converts were disobedient once, as St. Paul has described at length in the first chapter, but yet God has now shown pity on them, and to accomplish this He has taken occasion from the disobedience of the Jews: the same purpose and the same plan of providence may be seen also in the case of the Jews. Gods plan is to make disobedience an opportunity of showing mercy. The disobedience of the Jews, like that of the Gentiles, had for its result the manifestation of the mercy of God.
The shows that this verse is written, as is all this chapter, with the thought of Gentile readers prominently before the writers mind.
31. : by that same mercy which was shown to you. If the Jews had remained true to their covenant God would have been able on His side merely to exhibit fidelity to the covenant. As they have however been disobedient, they equally with the Gentiles are recipients of the Divine mercy. These words go with , cf. Gal 2:10; 2Co 12:7, as is shown by the parallelism of the two clauses
This parallelism of the clauses may account for the presence of the second with , which should be read with B D, Boh., Jo. Damasc. It was omitted by Syrian and some Western authorities (A E F G, &c. Vulg. Syrr. Arm. Aeth., Orig.-lat. rell.) because it seemed hardly to harmonize with facts. The authorities for it are too varied for it to be an accidental insertion arising from a repetition of the previous .
32. St. Paul now generalizes from these instances the character of Gods plan, and concludes his argument with a maxim which solves the riddle of the Divine action. There is a Divine purpose in the sin of mankind described in 1:18-3:20; there is a Divine purpose in the faithlessness of the Jews. The object of both alike is to give occasion for the exhibition of the Divine mercy. If God has shut men up in sin it is only that He may have an opportunity of showing His compassion. So in Gal 3:22 , , the result of sin is represented as being to give the occasion for the fulfilment of the promise and the mission of the Messiah. All Gods dealings with the race are in accordance with His final purpose. However harsh they may seem, when we contemplate the final end we can only burst forth into thankfulness to God.
: cf. 1:24 f., and see below, p. 347.
: Psa 78:62, 77:62] He gave his people over unto the sword ( ). Used with the pregnant sense of giving over so that there can be no escape.
. Not necessarily every single individual, but all looked at collectively, as the and . All the classes into which the world may be divided, Jew and Gentile alike, will be admitted into the Messianic Kingdom or Gods Church. The reference is not here any more than elsewhere to the final salvation of every individual.
33. St. Paul has concluded his argument. He has vindicated the Divine justice and mercy. He has shown how even the reign of sin leads to a beneficent result. And now, carried away by the contrast between the apparent injustice and the real justice of God, having demonstrated that it is our knowledge and not His goodness that is at fault when we criticize Him, he bursts forth in a great ascription of praise to Him, declaring the unfathomable character of His wisdom.
We may notice that this description of the Divine wisdom represents not so much the conclusion of the argument as the assumption that underlies it. It is because we believe in the infinite character of the Divine power and love that we are able to argue that if in one case unexpectedly and wonderfully His action has been justified, therefore in other cases we may await the result, resting in confidence on His wisdom.
Marcions text, which had omitted everything between 10:5 and 11:34 (see on ch. 10) here resumes. Tert. quotes vv. 32, 33 as follows: o profundum divitiarum et sapientiae Dei, et ininvestigabiles viae eius, omitting and . Then follow vv. 34, 35 without any variation. On ver. 36 we know nothing. See Zahn, p. 518.
: inexhaustible wealth. Cf. Pro 18:3 , troubles to which there is no bottom. The three genitives that follow are probably coordinate; means the wealth of the Divine grace, cf. 10:12; and are to be distinguished as meaning the former, a broad and comprehensive survey of things in their special relations, what we call Philosophy: the latter an intuitive penetrating perception of particular truths (see Lft. on Col 1:9).
: Pro 25:3, Sym.; and perhaps Jer 17:9, Sym. (Field, Hexapla, ii. 617), unsearchable; , not judicial decisions, but judgements on the ways and plans of life. Cf. Ecclus. 17:12 , .
: that cannot be traced out, Eph 3:8; Job 5:9; Job 9:10; Job 34:24. This passage seems to have influenced 1 Clem. Rom. 20:5 .
34. … This is taken from Isa 40:13, varying only very slightly from the LXX. It is quoted also 1Co 2:16.
35. , ; taken from Job 41:11, but not the LXX, which reads (ver. 2) ; The Hebrew (RV.) reads, Who hath first given unto me that I should repay him? It is interesting to notice that the only other quotation in St. Paul which varies very considerably from the LXX is also taken from the book of Job (1Co 3:19, cf. Job 5:13), see p. 302. This verse corresponds to . So rich are the spiritual gifts of God, that none can make any return, and He needs no recompense for what He gives.
36. God needs no recompense, for all things that are exist in Him, all things come to man through Him, and to Him all return. He is the source, the agent, and the final goal of all created things and all spiritual life.
Many commentators have attempted to find in these words a reference to the work of the different persons of the Trinity (see esp. Liddon, who restates the argument in the most successful form). But (1) the prepositions do not suit this interpretation: indeed expresses the attributes of the Son, but can not naturally or even possibly be used of the Spirit. (2) The whole argument refers to a different line of thought. It is the relation of the Godhead as a whole to the universe and to created things. God (not necessarily the Father) is the source and inspirer and goal of all things.
This fundamental assumption of the infinite character of the Divine wisdom was one which St. Paul would necessarily inherit from Judaism. It is expressed most clearly and definitely in writings produced immediately after the fall of Jerusalem, when the pious Jew who still preserved a belief in the Divine favour towards Israel could find no hope or solution of the problem but in a tenacious adherence to what he could hold only by faith. Gods ways are deeper and more wonderful than man could ever understand or fathom: only this was certain-that there was a Divine purpose of love towards Israel which would be shown in Gods own time. There are many resemblances to St. Paul, not only in thought but in expression. Apoc. Baruch xiv. 8, 9 Sed quis, Dominator Domine, assequetur iudicium tuum? aut quis investigabit profundum viae tuae? aut quis supputabit gravitatem semitae tuae? aut quis poterit cogitare consilium tuum incomprehensibile? aut quis unquam ex natis inveniet principium aut finem sapientiae tuae? 20:4 et tunc ostendam tibi iudicium virtutis meae, et vias [in] investigabiles 21:10 tu enim solus es vivens immortalis et [in] investigabilis et numerum hominum nosti 54:12, 13 ecquis enim assimilabitur in mirabilibus tuis, Deus, aut quis comprehendet cogitationem tuam profundam vitae? Quia tu consilio tuo gubernas omnes creaturas quas creavit dextera tua, et tu omnem fontem lucis apud te constituisti, et thesaurum sapientiae subtus thronum tuum praeparasti 74 quis assimilabitur, Domine, bonitati tuae? est enim incomprehensibilis. Aut quis scrutabitur miserationes tuas, quae sunt infinitae? aut quis comprehendet intelligentiam tuam? aut quis poterit consonare cogitationes mentis tuae? 4 Ezra 5:34 torquent me renes mei per omnem horam quaerentem apprehendere semitam Altissimi et investigare partem iudicii eius. et dixit ad me Non potes 40 et dixit ad me Quomodo non potes facere unum de his quae dicta sunt, sic non poteris invenire iudicium meum aut finem caritatis quam populo promisi.
The Argument of Romans 9-11
In the summary that has been given (pp. 269-275) of the various opinions which have been held concerning the theology of this section, and especially of ch. 9, it will have been noticed that almost all commentators, although they differed to an extraordinary degree in the teaching which they thought they had derived from the passage, agreed in this, that they assumed that St. Paul was primarily concerned with the questions that were exercising their own minds, as to the conditions under which grace is given to man, and the relation of the human life to the Divine will. Throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries a small number of commentators are distinguished from the general tendency by laying stress on the fact that both in the ninth and in the eleventh chapter, it is not the lot of the individual that is being considered, nor eternal salvation, but that the object of the Apostle is to explain the rejection of the Jews as a nation; that he is therefore dealing with nations, not individuals, and with admission to the Christian Church as representing the Messianic and not directly with the future state of mankind. This view is very ably represented by the English philosopher Locke; it is put forward in a treatise which has been already referred to by Beyschlag (p. 275) and forms the basis of the exposition of the Swiss commentator Oltramare, who puts the position very shortly when he says that St. Paul is speaking not of the scheme of election or of election in itself, but of Gods plan for the salvation of mankind, a plan which proceeded on the principle of election.
It is true that commentators who have adopted this view (in particular Beyschlag) have pressed it too far, and have used it to explain or explain away passages to which it will not apply; but it undoubtedly represents the main lines of the Apostles argument and his purpose throughout these chapters. In order to estimate his point of view our starting-point must be the conclusion he arrives at. This, as expressed at the end of ch. 11, is that God wishes to show His mercy upon all alike; that the world as a whole, the fulness of the Gentiles and all Israel, will come into the Messianic Kingdom and be saved; that the realization of this end is a mystery which has now been revealed, and that all this shows the greatness of the Divine wisdom; a wisdom which is guiding all things to their final consummation by methods and in ways which we can only partially follow.
The question at issue which leads St. Paul to assert the Divine purpose is the fact which at this time had become apparent; Israel as a nation was rejected from the Christian Church. If faith in the Messiah was to be the condition of salvation, then the mass of the Jews were clearly excluded. The earlier stages of the argument have been sufficiently explained. St. Paul first proves (9:6-29) that in this rejection God had been neither untrue to His promise nor unjust. He then proves (9:30-10:13) that the Israelites were themselves guilty, for they had rejected the Messiah, although they had had full and complete knowledge of His message, and full warning. But yet there is a third aspect from which the rejection of Israel may be regarded-that of the Divine purpose. What has been the result of this rejection of Israel? It has led to the calling of the Gentiles,-this is an historical fact, and guided by it we can see somewhat further into the future. Here is a case where St. Paul can remember how different had been the result of his own failure from what he had expected. He can appeal to his own experience. There was a day, still vividly before his mind, when in the Pisidian Antioch, full of bitterness and a sense of defeat, he had uttered those memorable words from henceforth we will go to the Gentiles. This had seemed at the moment a confession that his work was not being accomplished. Now he can see the Divine purpose fulfilled in the creation of the great Gentile churches, and arguing from his own experience in this one case, where Gods purpose has been signally vindicated, he looks forward into the future and believes that, by ways other than we can follow, God is working out that eternal purpose which is part of the revelation he has to announce, the reconciliation of the world to Himself in Christ. He concludes therefore with this ascription of praise to God for His wisdom and mercy, emphasizing the belief which is at once the conclusion and the logical basis of his argument.
St. Pauls Philosophy of History
The argument then of this section of the Epistle is not a discussion of the principles on which grace is given to mankind, but a philosophy of History. In the short concluding doxology to the Epistle-a conclusion which sums up the thought which underlies so much of the previous argument-St. Paul speaks of the mystery which has been kept silent in eternal times, but is now revealed, the Counsel, as Dr. Hort (in Lft. Biblical Essays, p. 325) expresses it, of the far-seeing God, the Ruler of ages or periods, by which the mystery kept secret from ancient times is laid open in the Gospel for the knowledge and faith of all nations. So again in Eph 1:4-11 he speaks of the foreknowledge and plan which God had before the foundation of the world; a plan which has now been revealed: the manifestation of His goodness to all the nations of the world. St. Paul therefore sees a plan or purpose in history; in fact he has a philosophy of History. The characteristics of this theory we propose shortly to sum up.
(1) From Rom 5:12 ff. we gather that St. Paul divides history into three periods represented typically by Adam, Moses, Christ, excluding the period before the Fall, which may be taken to typify an ideal rather than to describe an actual historical period. Of these the first period represents a state not of innocence but of ignorance Until the Law, i. e. from Adam to Moses, sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law. It is a period which might be represented to us by the most degraded savage tribes. If sin represents failure to attain an ideal, they are sinful; but if sin represents guilt, they cannot be condemned, or at any rate only to a very slight degree and extent. Now if God deals with men in such a condition, how does He do so? The answer is, by the Revelation of Law; in the case of the Jewish people, by the Revelation of the Mosaic Law. Now this revelation of Law, with the accompanying and implied idea of judgement, has fulfilled certain functions. It has in the first place convicted man of sin; it has shown him the inadequacy of his life and conduct. For I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not lust. It has taught him the difference between right and wrong, and made him feel the desire for a higher life. And so, secondly, it has been the schoolmaster leading men to Christ. It has been the method by which mankind has been disciplined, by which they have been gradually prepared and educated. And thirdly, Law has taught men their weakness. The ideal is there; the desire to attain it is there; a struggle to attain it begins, and that struggle convinces us of our own weakness and of the power of sin over us. We not only learn a need for higher ideals; we learn also the need we have for a more powerful helper. This is the discipline of Law, and it prepares the way for the higher and fuller revelation of the Gospel.
These three stages are represented for us typically, and most clearly in the history of the Jewish dispensation. Even here of course there is an element of inexactness in them. There was a knowledge of right and wrong before Moses, there was an increase in knowledge after him; but yet the stages do definitely exist. And they may be found also running through the whole of history; they are not confined to the Jewish people. The stage of primitive ignorance is one through which presumably every race of men has passed; some in fact have not yet passed beyond it: but there has been progress upwards, and the great principle which has accompanied and made possible that progress is Law. The idea of Law in St. Paul is clearly not exhausted in the Jewish law, although that of course is the highest example of it. All peoples have been under law in some form. It is a great holy beneficent principle, but yet it is one which may become a burden. It is represented by the law of the conscience; it is witnessed by the moral judgements which men have in all ages passed on one another; it is embodied in codes and ordinances and bodies of law; it is that in fact which distinguishes for men the difference between right and wrong. The principle has worked, or is working, among mankind everywhere, and is meant to be the preparation of, as it creates the need for, the highest revelation, that of the Gospel.
(2) These three stages represent the first point in St. Pauls scheme of history. A second point is the idea of Election or Selection, or rather that of the Purpose of God which worketh by Selection. God did not will to redeem mankind by a nod as He might have done, for that, as Athanasius puts it, would be to undo the work of creation; but He accepts the human conditions which He has created and uses them that the world may work out its own salvation. So, as St. Paul feels, He has selected Israel to be His chosen people; they have become the depositary of Divine truth and revelation, that through them, when the fulness of time has come, the world may receive Divine knowledge. This is clearly the conception underlying St. Pauls teaching, and looking back from the vantage ground of History we can see how true it is. To use modern phraseology, an ethical monotheism has been taught the world through the Jewish race and through it alone. And St. Pauls principle may be extended further. He himself speaks of the fulness of time, and it is no unreal philosophy to believe that the purpose of God has shown itself in selecting other nations also for excellence in other directions, in art, in commerce, in science, in statesmanship; that the Roman Empire was built up in order to create a sphere in which the message of the Incarnation might work; that the same purpose has guided the Church in the centuries which have followed. An historian like Renan would tell us that the freer development of the Christian Church was only made possible by the fall of Jerusalem and the divorce from Judaism. History tells us how the Arian persecutions occasioned the conversion of the Goths, and how the division of the Church at the schism of East and West, or at the time of the Reformation, occasioned new victories for Christianity. Again and again an event which to contemporaries must have seemed disastrous has worked out beneficially; and so, guided by St. Pauls example, we learn to trust in that Divine wisdom and mercy which in some cases where we can follow its track has been so deeply and unexpectedly vindicated, and which is by hypothesis infinite in power and wisdom and knowledge.
(3) These then are two main points in St. Pauls teaching; first, the idea of gradual progress upwards implied in the stages of Adam, Moses, Christ; secondly, the idea of a purpose running through history, a purpose working by means of Selection. But to what end? The end is looked at under a twofold aspect; it is the completion of the Messianic Kingdom, and the exhibition of the Divine mercy. In describing the completion of the Messianic Kingdom, St. Paul uses, as in all his eschatological passages, the forms and phrases of the Apocalyptic literature of his time, but reasons have been given for thinking that he interpreted them, at any rate to a certain extent, in a spiritual manner. There is perhaps a further difficulty, or at any rate it may be argued that St. Paul is mistaken as regards the Jews, in that he clearly expected that at some time not very remote they would return to the Messianic Kingdom; yet nothing has yet happened which makes this expectation any more probable. We may argue in reply that so far as there was any mistaken expectation, it was of the nearness of the last times, and that the definite limit fixed by St. Paul, until the fulness of the Gentiles come in, has not yet been reached. But it is better to go deeper, and to ask whether it is not the case that the rejection of the Jews now as then fulfils a purpose in the Divine plan? The well-known answer to the question, What is the chief argument for Christianity?-the Jews-reminds us of the continued existence of that strange race, living as sojourners among men, the ever-present witnesses to a remote past which is connected by our beliefs intimately with the present. By their traditions to which they cling, by the O. T. Scriptures which they preserve by an independent chain of evidence, by their hopes, and by their highest aspirations, they are a living witness to the truth of that which they reject. They have their purpose still to fulfil in the Divine plan.
St. Pauls final explanation of the purpose of God-the exhibition of the Divine mercy-suggests the solution of another class of questions. In all such speculations there is indeed a difficulty, -the constant sense of the limitations of human language as applied to what is Divine; and St. Paul wishes us to feel these limitations, for again and again he uses such expressions as I speak as a man. But yet granting this, the thought does supply a solution of many problems. Why does God allow sin? Why does He shut up men under sin? It is that ultimately He may exhibit the depths of His Divine mercy. We may feel that some such scheme of the course of history as was sketched out above explains for us much that is difficult, but yet we always come back to an initial question, Why does God allow such a state of affairs to exist? We may grant that it comes from the free-will of man; but if God be almighty He must have created man with that free-will. We may speak of His limitation of His own powers, and of His Redemption of man without violating the conditions of human life and nature; but if He be almighty, it is quite clear that He could have prevented all sin and misery by a single act. What answer can we make? We can only say, as St. Paul does, that it is that He may reveal the Divine mercy; if man had not been created so as to need this mercy, we should never have known the Love of God as revealed in His Son. That is the farthest that our speculations may legitimately go.
(4) But one final question. What evidence does St. Paul give for a belief in the Divine purpose in history? It is twofold. On the one hand, within the limited circle of our own knowledge or experience, we can see that things have unexpectedly and wonderfully worked out so as to indicate a purpose. That was St. Pauls experience in the preaching to the Gentiles. Where we have more perfect knowledge and can see the end, there we see Gods purpose working. And on the other hand our hypothesis is a God of infinite power and wisdom. If we have faith in this intellectual conception, we believe that, where we cannot understand, our failure arises from the limitations not of Gods power and will, but of our own intelligence.
An illustration may serve to bring this home. We can read in such Jewish books as 4 Ezra or the Apocalypse of Baruch the bewilderment and confusion of mind of a pious Jew at the fall of Jerusalem. Every hope and aspiration that he had seems shattered. But looked at from the point of view of Christianity, and the wider development of Christianity, that was an inevitable and a necessary step in the progress of the Church. If we believe in a Divine purpose in history, we can see it working here quite clearly. Yet to many a contemporary the event must have been inexplicable. We can apply the argument to our time. In the past, where we can trace the course of events, we have evidence of the working of a Divine purpose, and so in the present, where so much is obscure and dark, we can believe that there is still a Divine purpose working, and that all the failures and misfortunes and rebuffs of the time are yet steps towards a higher end. Et dixit ad me: Initio terreni orbis et antequam starent exitus saeculi , et antequam investigarentur praesentes anni, et antequam abalienarentur eorum qui nunc peccant adinventiones et consignati essent qui fide thesaurisaverunt: tunc cogitavi et facta sunt per me solum et non per alium, ut et finis per me et non per alium (4 Ezr 6:1-6).
The Salvation of the Individual. Free-will and Predestination
While the Nationalist interpretation of these chapters has been adopted, it has at the same time been pointed out that, although it correctly represents St. Pauls line of argument, it cannot be legitimately used as it has been to evade certain difficulties which have been always felt as to his language. St. Pauls main line of argument applies to nations and peoples, but it is quite clear that the language of 9:19-23 applies and is intended to apply equally to individuals. Further it is impossible to say, as Beyschlag does, that there is no idea in the Apostles mind of a purpose before time. It is Gods purpose before the foundation of the world which is being expounded. And again, it is quite true to say that the election is primarily an election to privilege; yet there is a very intimate connexion between privilege and eternal salvation, and the language of 9:22, 23 fitted unto destruction, prepared unto glory, cannot be limited to a merely earthly destiny. Two questions then still remain to be answered. What theory is implied in St. Pauls language concerning the hope and future of individuals whether Christian or unbelievers, and what theory is implied as to the relation between Divine foreknowledge and human free-will?
We have deliberately used the expression what theory is implied?; for St. Paul never formally discusses either of these questions; he never gives a definite answer to either, and on both he makes statements which appear inconsistent. Future salvation is definitely connected with privilege, and the two are often looked at as effect and cause. If while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more being reconciled shall we be saved by His life (5:10). Whom He called, them He also justified: and whom He justified, them He also glorified (8:30). But, although the assurance of hope is given by the Divine call, it is not irrevocable. By their unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by thy faith. Be not highminded, but fear: for if God spared not the natural branches, neither will He spare thee (11:20, 21). Nor again is future salvation to be confined to those who possess external privileges. The statement is laid down, in quite an unqualified way, that glory and honour and peace come to everyone that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek (2:10). Again, there is no definite and unqualified statement either in support of or against universalism; on the one side we have statements such as those in a later Epistle (1Ti 2:4) God our Saviour, who willeth that all men should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth; or again, He has shut allup to disobedience, but that He might have mercy upon all (Rom 11:32). On the other side there is a strong assertion of wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgement of God, who will render to every man according to his works; unto them that are factious and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that worketh evil (2:5-9). St. Paul asserts both the goodness and the severity of God. He does not attempt to reconcile them, nor need we. He lays down very clearly and definitely the fact of the Divine judgement, and he brings out prominently three characteristics of it: that it is in accordance with works, or perhaps more correctly on the basis of works, that is of a mans whole life and career; that it will be exercised by a Judge of absolute impartiality,-there is no respect of persons; and that it is in accordance with the opportunities which a man has enjoyed. For the rest we must leave the solution, as he would have done, to that wisdom and knowledge and mercy of God of which he speaks at the close of the eleventh chapter.
There is an equal inconsistency in St. Pauls language regarding Divine sovereignty and human responsibility. Ch. 9 implies arguments which take away Free-will; ch. 10 is meaningless without the presupposition of Free-will. And such apparent inconsistency of language and ideas pervades all St. Pauls Epistles. Work out your own salvation, for it is God that worketh in you both to will and to do of His good pleasure (Php 2:12, Php 2:13). Contrast again God gave them up unto a reprobate mind, and wherefore thou art without excuse (Rom 1:18; Rom 2:1). Now two explanations of this language are possible. It may be held (as does Fritzsche, see p. 275) that St. Paul is unconscious of the inconsistency, and that it arises from his inferiority in logic and philosophy, or (as Meyer) that he is in the habit of isolating one point of view, and looking at the question from that point of view alone. This latter view is correct; or rather, for reasons which will be given below, it can be held and stated more strongly. The antinomy, if we may call it so, of chaps. 9 and 10 is one which is and must be the characteristic of all religious thought and experience.
(1) That St. Paul recognized the contradiction, and held it consciously, may be taken as proved by the fact that his view was shared by that sect of the Jews among whom he had been brought up, and was taught in those schools in which he had been instructed. Josephus tells us that the Pharisees attributed everything to Fate and God, but that yet the choice of right and wrong lay with men ( , , , B. J. II. viii.14; comp. Ant. XIII. v. 9; XVIII. i. 3): and so in Pirq Aboth, iii. 24 (p. 73 ed. Taylor) Everything is foreseen; and free-will is given: and the world is judged by grace; and everything is according to work. (See also Ps. Sol. ix. 7 and the note on Free-will in Ryle and James edition, p. 96, to which all the above references are due.) St. Paul then was only expanding and giving greater meaning to the doctrine in which he had been brought up He had inherited it but he deepened it. He was more deeply conscious of the mercy of God in calling him; he felt more deeply the certainty of the Divine protection and guidance. And yet the sense of personal responsibility was in an equal degree intensified. But I press forward, if so be I may apprehend, seeing that also I was apprehended by Christ (Php 3:12).
(2) Nor again is any other solution consistent with the reality of religious belief. Religion, at any rate a religion based on morality, demands two things. To satisfy our intellectual belief the God whom we believe in must be Almighty, i. e. omnipotent and omniscient; in order that our moral life may be real our Will must be free. But these beliefs are not in themselves consistent. If God be Almighty He must have created us with full knowledge of what we should become, and the responsibility therefore for what we are can hardly rest with ourselves. If, on the other hand, our Will is free, there is a department where God (if we judge the Divine mind on the analogy of human minds) cannot have created us with full knowledge. We are reduced therefore to an apparently irreconcilable contradiction, and that remains the language of all deeply religious minds. We are free, we are responsible for what we do, but yet it is God that worketh all things. This antithesis is brought out very plainly by Thomas Aquinas. God he asserts is the cause of everything (Deus causa est omnibus operantibus ut operentur, Cont. Gent. III. lxvii), but the Divine providence does not exclude Free-will. The argument is interesting: Adhuc providentia est multiplicaliva bonorum in rebus gubernatis. Illud ergo per quod multa bona subtraherentur a rebus, non pertinet ad providentiam. Si autem libertas voluntatis tolleretur, multa bona subtraherentur. Tolleretur enim laus virtutis humanae, quae nulla est si homo libere non agit, tolleretur enim iustitia praemiantis et punientis, si non libere homo ageret bonum et malum, cessaret etiam circumspectio in consiliis, quae de his quae in necessitate agunlur, frustra tractarentur, esset igitur contra providentiae rationem si subtraheretur voluntatis libertas (ib. lxxiii). And he sums up the whole relation of God to natural causes, elsewhere showing how this same principle applies to the human will: palet etiam quod non sic idem effectus causae naturali et divinae virtuti attribuitur, quasi partim a Deo, partim a naturali agenti fiat, sed totus ab utroque secundum alium modum, sicut idem effectus totus attribuitur instrumento, et principali agenti etiam totus (ib. lxx). See also Summa Theologiae, Pars Prima, cv. art. 5; Prima Secundae, cxiii).
This is substantially also the view taken by Mozley, On the Augustinian Doctrine of Predestination. The result of his argument is summed up as follows, pp. 326, 327: Upon this abstract idea, then, of the Divine Power, as an unlimited power, rose up the Augustinian doctrine of Predestination and good; while upon the abstract idea of Free-will, as an unlimited faculty, rose up the Pelagian theory. Had men perceived, indeed, more clearly and really than they have done, their ignorance as human creatures, and the relation in which the human reason stands to the great truths involved in this question, they might have saved themselves the trouble of this whole controversy. They would have seen that this question cannot be determined absolutely, one way or another; that it lies between two great contradictory truths, neither of which can be set aside, or made to give way to the other; two opposing tendencies of thought, inherent in the human mind, which go on side by side, and are able to be held and maintained together, although thus opposite to each other, because they are only incipient, and not final and complete truths;-the great truths, I mean, of the Divine Power on the one side, and mans Free-will, or his originality as an agent, on the other. And this is in fact, the mode in which this question is settled by the practical common-sense of mankind. The plain natural reason of mankind is thus always large and comprehensive; not afraid of inconsistency, but admitting all truth which presents itself to its notice. It is only when minds begin to philosophize that they grow narrow,-that there begins to be felt the appeal to consistency, and with it the temptation to exclude truths.
(3) We can but state the two sides; we cannot solve the problem. But yet there is one conception in which the solution lies. It is in a complete realization of what we mean by asserting that God is Almighty. The two ideas of Free-will and the Divine sovereignty cannot be reconciled in our own mind, but that does not prevent them from being reconcilable in Gods mind. We are really measuring Him by our own intellectual standard if we think otherwise. And so our solution of the problem of Free-will, and of the problems of history and of individual salvation, must finally lie in the full acceptance and realization of what is implied by the infinity and the omniscience of God.
Beng. Bengel.
Go. Godet.
Va. Vaughan.
Oltr. Oltramare.
Mey. Meyer.
Gif. Gifford.
Lips. Lipsius.
A Cod. Alexandrinus
D Cod. Claromontanus
Chrys. Chrysostom.
Orig. Origen.
Aug. Augustine.
Fri. Fritzsche (C. F. A.).
Cod. Sinaiticus
L Cod. Angelicus
Cod. Sinaiticus, corrector c
B Cod. Vaticanus
C Cod. Ephraemi Rescriptus
E Cod. Sangermanensis
F Cod. Augiensis
G Cod. Boernerianus
P Cod. Porphyrianus
Vulg. Vulgate.
Sah. Sahidic.
Boh. Bohairic.
Jos. Josephus.
&c. always qualify the word which precedes, not that which follows:
WH. Westcott and Hort.
Syrr. Syriac.
Aegyptt. Egyptian.
Arm. Armenian.
Orig.-lat. Latin Version of Origen
RV. Revised Version.
Euthym.-Zig. Euthymius Zigabenus.
Lft. Lightfoot.
pauc. pauci.
Theodrt. Theodoret.
K Cod. Mosquensis
om. omittit, omittunt, &c.
d Latin version of D
Aeth. Ethiopic.
Clem.-Alex. Clement of Alexandria.
Ign. Ignatius.
Cod. Sinaiticus
B Cod. Vaticanus
D Cod. Claromontanus
Boh. Bohairic.
A Cod. Alexandrinus
E Cod. Sangermanensis
F Cod. Augiensis
G Cod. Boernerianus
&c. always qualify the word which precedes, not that which follows:
Vulg. Vulgate.
Syrr. Syriac.
Arm. Armenian.
Aeth. Ethiopic.
Orig.-lat. Latin Version of Origen
Tert. Tertullian.
Lft. Lightfoot.
RV. Revised Version.
Fuente: International Critical Commentary New Testament
a Remnant Saved by Grace
Rom 11:1-12
In the worst days of Hebrew apostasy there was always an elect handful that did not go astray after other gods. It was so in the days of Elijah; and it was a comfort to the faithful heart of Paul to believe that, amid the general opposition excited by the preaching of the gospel, there were many secret lovers of the Cross who were true to the Messiah and His claims. Man can never count these quiet, unknown, holy souls, who, like the sweetest wild flowers, can be detected only by the fragrance of their lives. But God counts them, to whose grace and care all that is good in them is due.
The few seek and find, because they stoop to seek in Gods predetermined way and along His lines. But when men set themselves against these, they become hardened and overwhelmed by a spirit of stupor, Rom 11:8, r.v. When Scripture says that God gives them this, it simply means that such state of insensibility is the working out of an inevitable law. But the Apostle cherished the secret hope that the avidity with which the Gentiles were accepting the gospel would, in the mystery of Gods providence, have the ultimate effect of bringing the Chosen People back to Him whom their fathers crucified, Rom 11:11.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
Lecture 9 – Romans Chapter 11
Gods Future Dealings with Israel in Fulfilment of the Prophetic Scriptures
Chapter 11
This eleventh chapter is most illuminating in regard to Gods dispensational plan. We have already seen how His past dealings with Israel proved His righteousness in acting toward the Gentiles as He now does, despite the covenant made with the earthly people. Then in chapter 10 we have seen that although the nation as such is set to one side, this does not in any way hinder the individual Israelite from turning to God and finding that same salvation which He, in His sovereignty, is proclaiming through His servants to the Gentiles. In the first part of our present chapter, verses Rom 11:1-6, the subject of chapter 10 is continued and brought to a conclusion. The question is asked: Hath God cast away His people? By no means. Pauls own experiences proved that this was not the case; for he was an Israelite, of the natural seed of Abraham, and of the tribe of Benjamin; yet he had been laid hold of by the Spirit of God and brought to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ. And what was true of him might be true of any other. What had really happened was simply the fulfilment of the words of the prophet Elijah in a wider sense than when he spoke in Ahabs day. The nation had rejected every testimony sent to it. As a people they had killed the prophets and defiled Jehovahs altar. But as in Elijahs day, God had reserved seven thousand to Himself who had not bowed the knee to the image of Baal, so at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. God rejects the nation, but grace goes out to the individual.
The great thing, however, for Israel to understand is that, if saved at all, they are saved exactly as Gentiles are saved, and that is by grace. Grace, as we have seen, is unmerited favor. Yea, we may put it even stronger: it is favor against merit. This precludes all thought of work. If merit of any sort is taken into consideration, then it is no more grace. On the other hand, if salvation be of works, this leaves no place whatever for grace, because it would take from work its meritorious character. The two principles-salvation by grace and salvation by works-are diametrically opposed, one to the other. There can be no admixture of law and grace; they are mutually destructive principles.
Beginning with verse Rom 11:7, the apostle now undertakes to show Gods secret purpose in connection with Israel in the coming day. What the nation sought it has failed to obtain; but the election (that is, those who are content to be saved by grace) do obtain it; and as to the rest, they are judicially blinded. Again he quotes from the Old Testament to show that this is in full accord with the prophetic Word. As Isaiah wrote, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear; and He shows that this is true unto this day. David, too, had written: Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling-block, and a recompense unto them: let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway. These terrible imprecations were fulfilled when the representatives of the nation deliberately rejected Christ and called down judgment upon the heads of their descendants when they cried in Pilates judgment hall, His blood be upon us, and upon our children. Rejecting Messiah, God rejected them. And many Christians have taken it for granted that He is through with them as a nation forever. This, the apostle now shows, is far from the truth. He asks, Have they stumbled that they should fall?; that is, utterly fall, fall without any hope or possibility of recovering. The answer again is, By no means. God has overruled their present defection to make known His riches of grace toward the Gentiles, and this, in turn, will be used eventually to provoke Israel to jealousy and to turn them back to the God of their fathers and to the Christ whom they have rejected. This recovery will be a means of untold blessing to that part of the world which has not yet come to a saving knowledge of the gospel. With holy enthusiasm he exclaims: Now if the defection of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness? It is well to note the use he makes of this word, fulness, as we shall come upon it lower down in the chapter. The fulness of Israel will be the conversion of Israel-the fulfilment of Gods purpose regarding them.
Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, and as such, he magnified his office; but he would not have the Gentiles for a moment think that he had lost his interest in Israel: rather he would see them stirred to emulation, that many might be saved from among them as they saw the grace of God going out to the Gentiles; on the other hand, he would not have the Gentile glory over the Jew because the latter was set aside and the former enjoyed the blessings that the Jew would have had, had he been ready to receive them. He continues his argument by introducing a parable, which brings out most vividly the divine plan. He says: For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? That is, if, as they wander among all the nations, a disappointed and weary people, under the ban of the God of their fathers, the message of grace is going out to the Gentiles, and an election from them are receiving the message, what will it mean to the world as a whole when Israel nationally will turn back to the Lord and become in very truth a holy people, His witnesses to all nations?
For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches. If the regenerated remnant in Israel be indeed a people set apart to God, so eventually will the nation be to which they belong. And if the root of the covenant olive tree be holy (that is, Abraham, who believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness), so are all those who are really linked with him by faith. They were natural branches in the olive tree-Israelites by birth but not by grace, who were broken off. And in order that the promises of God to Abraham should not fail, In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, the branches of the wild olive tree-the Gentiles-were grafted in among the remnant of Israel, and thus Jew and Gentile believing together, partake of the root and fatness of the olive tree. But now the grave danger is lest the Gentile should rest on mere outward privileges, and while linked with the children of the promise, should fail to appreciate for themselves the gospel of God, and so prove unreal. In that case, God will have to deal with the Gentiles as He had dealt with the Jews. And so we get the solemn warning: Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. Some might say, Well, but the natural branches were broken off, that I, a Gentile, might be grafted in. The answer is clear and distinct: They were broken off because of unbelief, and thou standest by faith. Therefore the admonition, Be not high-minded, but fear: for if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest He also spare not thee.
Do we need to pause to ask whether the Gentiles have valued their privileges? Is it not patent to every observing spiritually-minded person that conditions in Christendom are as bad to-day as they ever were in Israel? Do we not see apostasy from the truth everywhere prevalent? Are not the characteristic features of the last days, as depicted in 2Timothy Chapter 3, everywhere manifest? If so, may we not well be warned that the time is near when the unfruitful branches will be torn out of the olive tree and the natural branches, at last turning back to God, be grafted in again to their own olive tree?
In these dispensational ways we see manifested that goodness and severity of God, which has already been so clearly brought out in the ninth chapter: on those who fell, who refused to believe the testimony, severity; but toward ignorant and unworthy Gentiles, goodness, but this goodness only to be continued toward them if they continue to appreciate it, otherwise they, too, shall be cut off. Who can doubt that the day of the cutting off is near at hand, when the true Church having been caught up to be with the Lord, judgment will be meted out to unfaithful Christendom, and then God will turn back in grace to Israel, if they abide not still in unbelief, and they shall be re-grafted into their own olive tree, according to the power of the God of resurrection?
I recall an article by a well-known higher critic, which I read some years ago, in which he was ridiculing the idea of the apostle Pauls inspiration because of his apparent ignorance of one of the first principles of horticulture: Paul, said he, was actually so ignorant of the art of grafting that he speaks of grafting wild branches into a good tree, evidently not aware of the fact that it is customary to graft good branches into a wild tree. It is clear that the reverend critic had never carefully read the apostles own words, as given in the next verse, or he would not have been caught in such a trap. Paul clearly indicates that his illustration is one which he well knew to be opposed to that which was ordinarily done. He says: For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?
No; Paul was not ignorant of horticulture, nor was the Holy Ghost ignorant, who was guiding him and inspiring him as he wrote. That which is not customary to man is often in full accord with the divine plan, as here.
And so, in verses Rom 11:25-32, we see just what must take place before this re-grafting, and what will follow afterwards. I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part has happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved.
This, then, is one of the secret things hidden in the mind of God until the due time for its revelation: Israel will be blinded in part, but, thank God, only in part, until the present work of God among the Gentiles be completed. Here we have the second use of this word fulness. The fulness of the Gentiles is the completion of the work among the nations which has been going on ever since Israels rejection. This fulness, as we know from other scriptures, will come in when our Lord calls His Church to be with Himself, in accordance with 1Thes Chapter 4, and 1Corinthians Chapter 15. It is then that, all Israel shall be saved. We are not to understand by the term all Israel everyone of Israels blood, for we have already learned that they are not all Israel who are of Israel, but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. So the remnant will be the true Israel in that glorious day when, There shall come out of the Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob, for God has said: This is My covenant unto them when I shall take away their sins.
So then, the apostle concludes, they are enemies of the gospel for the present time; but through their enmity grace goes out to the Gentiles. Nevertheless, according to the divine plan, they are still beloved for the fathers sakes, for Gods gifts and calling He never retracts; the promises made to the patriarchs and to David shall and must be fulfilled. Study carefully the 89th Psalm in this connection. And just as the Gentiles, who in time past had not believed God but have now obtained mercy through the Jews unbelief, so, in like manner, when the Gentiles prove unbelieving and are set to one side, Israel will obtain mercy when they turn back in faith to God.
Whether Jew or Gentile, all alike are saved on the same principle, For God hath concluded all in unbelief, that He might have mercy upon all.
The last four verses are in the nature of a Doxology. The apostles heart is filled with worship, and praise, and admiration as the full blaze of the divine plan fills the horizon of his soul. He exclaims: O the depths of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out!
Apart from revelation none could have known His mind, just as no created being could ever have been His counsellor. No one ever earned grace by first giving to Him, in order that blessing might be recompensed; but everything is of Him, and through Him, and unto Him, to whom be glory forever. Amen.
Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets
Rom 11:36
God’s Creative and Providential Government.
I. All things are of God. All the good is of God by authorship, all the evil is of God by permission. In the great things of redemption all things are emphatically of God. For there is no spiritual life in the soul of a fallen man. If it ever lives it is through the vivifying energy of God’s Holy Spirit. He excites the prayer and the desire to pray; He gives the ability to pray; His mercies yearned over us; so that He sent His well-beloved Son to die for transgressors. And His justice accepted a vicarious offering, and His faithfulness is pledged to cast out none who come unto Him through Christ.
II. All things are through God. We consider the first fact as referring to creation; the second merely to the providence of God. Elevated as God is above all that is human, why should we imagine that the scale on which we estimate proportions is that on which He estimates them, so that what we count great or small is similarly accounted by God? We believe of God’s providence that it extends itself into every household, throws itself round every individual, takes part in every business, and is concerned with every sorrow and accessory to every joy. All things are through God as well as of God.
III. All things are to God-they conduce in one way or another to God’s glory. Though to our dim reason many things seem rather from God, yet the day of judgment will discover that tribute is rendered faithfully and the very uttermost farthing is exacted, as well from sin which has scorned, as from guilt which has sought forgiveness through, the Redeemer’s blood
H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 1914.
References: Rom 11:36-G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines, p. 37; Spurgeon, Morning by Morning, p. 322.
Fuente: The Sermon Bible
Israels Restoration.
CHAPTER 11
(The Jewish Question, by A. C. G., gives a complete exposition of this great chapter.)
1. God Hath not Cast Away His People. (Rom 11:1.)
2. Israels Apostasy not Complete; a Remnant Saved. (Rom 11:2-6.)
3. Israels Blindness for a Season. (Rom 11:7-10.)
4. To Provoke Them to Jealousy. (Rom 11:11.)
5. Their Fulness and Reception Life from the Dead. (Rom 11:12-15.)
6. The Parable of the Two Olive Trees. (Rom 11:16-24.)
7. A Mystery Made Known. All Israel Saved. (Rom 11:25-32. )
8. The Doxology. (Rom 11:33-36.)
Rom 11:1
In view of the preceding chapter on Israels rejection, the question is asked Hath God cast away His People? Is there nothing more in store for national Israel? God forbid. If it were so, Gods gifts and calling would be subject to repentance and He would not be the faithful, covenant-keeping God. He foreknew His people Israel and that foreknowledge embraced all their sad history of failure and apostasy. The Apostle Paul speaks of himself as an Israelite of the seed of Abraham. He demonstrates in his own experience the fact that God hath not cast away His people. Hating Christ, having zeal for God without knowledge, a persecutor of the church, he had obtained mercy that in him Jesus Christ might show forth all long-suffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on Him (1Ti 1:16). His unique conversion must be looked upon as a prophetic type of the conversion of the remnant of Israel, when the Lord comes. As Saul of Tarsus saw Him in the glory-light, so the Israel living in the day of the second Coming of Christ will behold Him (Zec 12:10; Rev 1:7). This vision will result in their national conversion.
Rom 11:2-6
The time of Elias was one of the darkest Periods of their history. it seemed as if the whole nation had apostatized from God. Elias had this conception when he complained in his despondency. They have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. The Lord told him then that there were seven thousand men who had not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. The apostasy of Israel was not a complete apostasy. The Lord had preserved a faithful remnant. Even so at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. In the beginning of this present age there was in existence a distinctive Jewish remnant. This Jewish-Christian remnant in the beginning of the dispensation was an evidence that God had not cast away His people. A similar remnant of believing Jews will be called for a definite work and testimony during the end of the age. And throughout this Christian dispensation it has been abundantly demonstrated that God has not cast away His ancient people, for thousands of them have been saved by grace and have become members of the body of Christ.
Rom 11:7-10
When the apostle speaks here of the election he has in view the believing part of the nation at all times, the remnant past, the future remnant and all those who believe in Christ now. When he speaks of the rest being blinded he means the unbelieving part of the nation. Judicial blindness has come upon them for their unbelief. Three quotations are given from the Old Testament showing that the Lord foreknew their unbelief and predicted the judgment which was to come upon the nation (Deu 29:4; Isa 29:10 and Psa 69:22-24). A careful study of these chapters will show that the threatened judgments and the judicial blindness are not permanent. All the Prophets and many of the prophetic Psalms reveal the fact that the judgments which have come upon the people are for a season only and that there is glory and blessing in store for them. The curses pronounced upon them have found their literal fulfillment; the unfulfilled promises of blessing and glory will also be literally fulfilled and Israel will be saved and restored to their land.
Rom 11:11
The setting aside of Israel is not final; their present blindness is not their permanent condition. But have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid. They stumbled over Him in whom they saw no beauty and whom they did not desire. They received Him not, who had come to His own. But this did not result in their complete fall. God in His infinite wisdom and all-wise purpose brought by their fall salvation to the Gentiles to provoke them to jealousy. In this statement we see again that God has not cast away His people Israel. If He had cast them away, why should He wish to provoke them to jealousy? And this provoking to jealousy is with the intent that some of them might be saved (Rom 11:14).
Rom 11:12-15
And now the Apostle of the Gentiles addresses us Gentiles. I speak to you Gentiles. It is a message of much importance. The fall of Israel was the riches of the world, the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles (Rom 11:13); the casting away was the reconciling of the world. Thus blessing, great blessing came to the Gentiles by Israels unbelief and fall. But this is not all. All this is far from accomplishing the promise made to the father of the nation, when God said to Abraham In thy seed all the nations of the earth shall be blest. Israels fall, the means in Gods purpose to bring salvation to the Gentiles, is not the final thing, and the blessings the Gentiles received by their fall is not the fullest blessing which God has in store for the world. Much more is in store for the world in blessing through Israels restoration. To Israel is promised in the Old Testament a time of fulness, a time when they shall be taken back. Their time of fulness comes when Christ returns in power and in glory. If then God brought blessing to the Gentiles by their fall, how far greater will be the blessings for the world, when their time of fulness has come. It will be life from the dead. Israel is now nationally and spiritually dead. They will be nationally and spiritually made alive (see Eze 37:1-17; Eze 39:25-29; Hos 5:15; Hos 6:1-5). And the whole world comes in for blessing then. The nations will be converted and the kingdom will be set up on earth (see Zec 2:10-13).
Rom 11:16-24
The parable of the two olive trees illustrates great dispensational facts and contains solemn warnings for Christendom. The good olive tree typifies Israel in covenant relation with God in the Abrahamic covenant. The olive tree is evergreen; and so is the covenant, unchangeable. Israels faithlessness and disobedience cannot annul it. The root is Abraham, who was holy, separated unto God. On account of unbelief some of the branches were broken off. They are now separated from the good olive tree and are withered. The wild olive tree is a picture of the Gentiles. The branches of this wild olive tree are grafted among the branches of the good olive tree to partake of the root and fatness of the good olive tree. The wild olive tree branches grafted upon the good olive tree do not represent the true church. The Gentiles are meant by it, who are, after Israels unbelief, put upon the ground of responsibility which Israel had, to partake now of the promised covenant blessings. The grafted in branches represent the Christian profession, Christendom, as we call it. The grafted in branches are solemnly warned. They are not to boast, not to be high-minded; they must abide in goodness. If the warning is unheeded they will not be spared but cut off. And when that happens God will graft in again the natural branches into their own olive tree if they no longer abide in unbelief. God is able to do this. He can and will put back Israel into their former relation. It is prophetic. Christendom is exactly that which is here warned against–boasting, high-minded, not abiding in goodness, in one word, apostate. The unbelief and failure of professing Christendom is as great, if not greater than the unbelief and failure of Israel. The time will come when God will not spare, but execute judgment upon Christendom. He will spew Laodicea out of His mouth (Rev 3:16). Then the hour of Israels restoration has come.
Rom 11:25-32
A mystery is made known. Blindness in part has happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. The fulness of the Gentiles means, the full number of the saved, gathered out from among the Gentiles, who constitute the church, the body of Christ. And when the body is joined to the Head in glory, the time of the coming of the Lord for His Saints (1Th 4:17), the Lord will turn again to Israel. All Israel, that is, the all Israel living in the day will be saved, when the Deliverer comes out of Zion (Isa 59:20; Psa 14:7). It is the second, visible, personal and glorious coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob and take away their sins. Between the coming of the Lord for the Saints, who will meet Him in the air, and His coming in great power and glory, are the days of Jacobs trouble, when the nation will have to pass through the fires of tribulation and the wicked among Israel will be cut off. And after He has come and has taken away their sins, all the great prophecies of Israels earthly glory will be fulfilled. Rom 11:33-36.–A doxology closes this dispensational section of the epistle. What depths of riches, both of wisdom and knowledge of God, in His merciful dealings with the Gentiles and the Jews! How unsearchable His judgments! How untraceable His ways! For of Him, and through Him and to Him are all things to whom be glory forever. Amen.
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
cast
That Israel has not been forever set aside is the theme of this chapter.
(1) The salvation of Paul proves that there is still a remnant (Rom 11:1)
(2) The doctrine of the remnant proves it (Rom 11:2-6).
(3) The present national unbelief was foreseen (Rom 11:7-10).
(4) Israel’s unbelief is the Gentile opportunity (Rom 11:11-25).
(5) Israel is judicially broken off from the good olive tree, Christ (Rom 11:17-22).
(6) They are to be grafted in again (Rom 11:23; Rom 11:24).
(7) The promised Deliverer will come out of Zion and the nation will be saved (Rom 11:25-29). That the Christian now inherits the distinctive Jewish promises is not taught in Scripture. The Christian is of the heavenly seed of Abraham; Gen 15:5; Gen 15:6; Gal 3:29 and partakes of the spiritual blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant.
(See Scofield “Gen 15:18”) but Israel as a nation always has it own place, and is yet to have its greatest exaltation as the earthly people of God. See “Israel” Gen 12:2; Rom 11:26 “Kingdom”; Gen 1:26-28; Zec 12:8.
For Another Point of View: See Topic 301242
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Hath God: 1Sa 12:22, 2Ki 23:27, Psa 77:7, Psa 89:31-37, Psa 94:14, Jer 31:36, Jer 31:37, Jer 33:24-26, Hos 9:17, Amo 9:8, Amo 9:9
God forbid: Rom 3:4
For I also: Rom 9:3, Act 22:3, Act 26:4, 2Co 11:22, Phi 3:5
Reciprocal: 2Ki 17:20 – rejected 1Ch 17:22 – thy people 2Ch 15:2 – if ye forsake Psa 44:9 – General Psa 60:1 – O God Psa 74:1 – O God Isa 2:6 – Therefore Isa 6:12 – a great Isa 40:27 – sayest Isa 41:9 – I have chosen Isa 49:14 – The Lord Isa 63:8 – Surely Isa 66:19 – I will send Jer 4:27 – yet Jer 5:18 – I will not make Jer 6:30 – the Lord Jer 14:19 – utterly Jer 51:5 – Israel Lam 3:31 – General Eze 39:28 – and have Zec 13:8 – but Mar 12:9 – and will Luk 15:31 – General Act 3:12 – Ye men Rom 3:2 – Much Rom 3:3 – if some Rom 9:6 – as though Rom 11:15 – the casting 1Co 15:10 – by
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
THOUGH ISRAEL, as a nation, has been set aside for a time, they have not been cast away for ever. Some Gentiles in the conceit of their hearts thought so when Paul was writing, and not a few think so today. But God forbid that it should be so, for they are His people foreknown for a special object, and in that event His object would be defeated. The Apostle immediately cites his own case as proof. Mercy had been shown to him and he was an Israelite, a sample of that remnant which God was then calling, and a pledge of the ultimate restoration of his nation. God is still today calling a remnant just as one was preserved in the days of Elijah.
I also am an Israelite, says Paul. In passing let us place against those words that other declaration of Paul made to an unfriendly and critical audience of his own nation, I am verily a man which am a Jew. (Act 22:3) The two statements are worthy of note in view of the widespread propaganda of British-Israelism which rests so largely upon the assumption that Jew always means the two tribes, who are utterly rejected; whereas Israel means the ten, to whom all the blessings belong, and who are identified by them with the English-speaking peoples. If that assumption be wrong the main part of their theory collapses like a bubble. Paul punctures British-Israelism.
But let us pick up the thread of the argument. When Israel was practically apostate in the days of Ahab, God reserved to Himself no less than seven thousand who were true to Himself at heart, though only Elijah was an outstanding figure in testimony. This was the fruit of His grace, and the same grace still works. The result is a remnant according to the election of grace (v. Rom 11:5). As a nation Israel had despised grace and sought for righteousness by law-keeping, only to miss it and to be blinded (v. Rom 11:7). Bowing to grace the remnant had been saved.
Verses Rom 11:8-10 show us how their stumbling and consequent blindness had been anticipated by Old Testament prophets. Verse Rom 11:11 indicates one great result flowing from it: thereby salvation had been presented to the Gentiles. The succeeding verses down to 15 contemplate their ultimate national restoration, and its results are strikingly contrasted with the results of their setting aside.
As a result of their stumble the Gospel of grace has been sent forth among the nations and the Gentile world greatly enriched. It has meant the reconciling of the world; that is, the world which was left alone and in the dark, while God was concentrating all His dealings upon Israel, has now come up for favourable consideration in the light of the Gospel. The reconciliation spoken of here is not, as in Rom 5:1-21, something vital and eternal, the fruit of the death of Christ, but something provisional and dispensational, the fruit of Israels stumble.
Today Israel is fallen and diminished and broken, and lo! all this has worked out in favour of the Gentiles. What then will be the result of the receiving of them, of their fulness?-that is, of God once more taking them back into favour? A further great accession of blessing in the earth, so great as to be likened to life from the dead. The main point of the passage, however, is that Israel having been set aside from the exclusive place they once held, the Gentiles are now being visited in blessing, whilst at the same time God is still preserving an election from amongst Israel according to His grace.
This is confirmed and amplified, in verses Rom 11:16-24, by an illustration concerning an olive tree and grafting. No doubt the olive is specially chosen for the illustration, inasmuch as being the source of oil it is figurative of spiritual fatness, or blessing. Israel once had this place of blessing in the earth in connection with Abraham their ancestor. They forfeited it, as we have seen, and now Gentiles have come into it; as we read, That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ. (Gal 3:14.)
This transference is pictured as the breaking off of natural branches from the olive tree, and the grafting in of branches from a wild olive, so that these formerly wild branches now partake of the fatness of the good olive, drawing their supplies from its root. The grafting process suggested is contrary to nature, as verse Rom 11:24 points out. It is nothing new however to discover that the processes of grace work on opposite lines to the processes of nature.
It is important for us Gentiles to realize what has happened, and the way in which it has happened. Israel has lost their old position through unbelief, and we hold our new position by faith. So let us beware! If Gentiles do not abide in faith what can they expect but that they too in turn shall be broken off? The grafted-in branches from the wild olive cannot expect better treatment than the original branches of the tree. Again bear in mind that the point here is not the spiritual blessing of individual believers, but the dispensational change in Gods ways, which has put rebellious Israel under His governmental displeasure and brought Gentiles into a place of favour and opportunity in connection with the Gospel.
Gods dealings in this matter illustrate the two sides of His character- goodness and severity-as verse Rom 11:22 makes plain. The severity of God is tremendously discounted, if not denied, in many religious circles today. It exists nevertheless, and those who discount or deny it will have to face it in due season. The natural branches-poor scattered Israel-are going to be grafted in again, and the high-minded Gentile branches broken off. The times of the Gentiles are running to their end.
With verse Rom 11:25 we drop the figure of the olive tree and resume the main theme of the chapter. The apostle very plainly predicts Israels blindness is only going to last until the fulness of the Gentiles is come in. Then their eyes will be opened, and Israel as a whole will be saved. This will happen when once more the Lord Jesus returns. The blindness is only in part, since all along God has been calling out an election from amongst them. When Jesus comes again all Israel will be saved: that is, Israel as a whole, or nationally. It does not mean that every individual Israelite will be, for the Scriptures show that many amongst them will worship anti-christ and perish.
The fulness of the Gentiles refers to Gods present work of calling out an election from amongst the Gentile nations also. When that work is complete and the whole fulness or complement secured, the end will come. Gods present purposes of grace to the nations will be secured, and then He will proceed to secure His purposes in regard to Israel; for He never repents, or changes His mind, regarding His gifts or His calling. Only He will secure those purposes, not on the ground of mans merit but of His mercy.
The rendering of verse Rom 11:31 in the New Translation is, So these also have now not believed in your mercy, in order that they also may be objects of mercy. The Jews nationally rejected the Gospel just because it was mercy, sent specially to the Gentiles (Act 22:21, Act 22:22, exemplifies this), and eventually they will be profoundly humbled and receive blessing on the same ground as the Gentile dog.
As Paul concluded his survey of Gods dispensational dealings and ways, as He saw mercy ultimately flowing out even to his own countryman, once so hardened and self-righteous, his soul was filled with adoration. He burst out in the doxology with which the chapter closes. We may call it the doxology of the wisdom of God, just as that at the end of Eph 3:1-21 is the doxology of His love, and that in 1Ti 1:1-20 the doxology of His grace. The apostle glorifies that wisdom which lies behind all His ways, carrying everything finally to a glorious consummation, wherein is jointly achieved His own glory and the blessing of His creatures.
Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary
1:1
Rom 11:1. The last verses in the preceding chapter indicates a dismal prospect for God’s ancient people. Realizing such a possible conclusion being formed by his readers, Paul clarifies the subject in this chapter. The Jews were stubborn, and as a nation had alienated themselves from God; there were some exceptions such as the apostle Paul.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Rom 11:1. I say then. Then introduces the question as a plausible, but incorrect, inference from the entire previous discussion; especially, however, from the Scriptural proof of Rom 11:19-21.
Did God cast off his people? Cast off is preferable to cast away; comp. Psa 94:14. The divine act of casting off from Himself is not viewed as the cause (against this is chap. Rom 10:21), but as the penal consequence, of the disdaining Gods loving will (Meyer). His people refers to the Jewish nation, and the phrase itself contains the reason for the denial (Bengel). Some however find here, as in Rom 11:2, an exclusive reference to the elect among the Jews. So Hodge: The rejection of the Jews as a nation was consistent with all that God had promised to their fathers. Those promises did not secure the salvation of all Jews, or of the Jews as a nation, This view is objectionable on many accounts: it removes the discussion from the historical point of view to a strictly theological one; it proposes a less natural inference; it uses people in a different sense from that of the preceding verse, and is less suited to the entire discussion than the other view. See further on Rom 11:2.
For I also, etc. The indignant denial is followed by this proof from the Apostles descent. But what is the nature of this proof? Three views are held: (1.) He is one among many examples (also) that God had not entirely rejected His people. This is the common one. (2.) His patriotic feeling leads him to deny this indignantly; the proof of his denial follows in Rom 11:2, etc. This is favored by the detailed reference to his descent. (3.) The restoration of Israel as a nation is so prominent, that if such a hypothesis were to be conceded, it would exclude from Gods kingdom the writer himself as an Israelite (Alford). But this, however well suited to the thought of the next section, does not suit the immediate context. As between (1.) and (2.), the latter is tenable, if the theocratic idea is included, but the former is on the whole preferable. Weizsacker well suggests that such an argument proves that the Roman congregation included no large Jewish element.
Of the seed of Abraham; to whom the covenant promise was first made.
Of the tribe of Benjamin; comp. Php 3:5; this tribe with Judah made up the nation of Israel after the captivity. This does not exclude the patriotic feeling, which has appeared throughout the whole discussion.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Subdivision 3. (Rom 11:1-36.)
How Israel’s portion will be made good to them.
We are now to see how Israel’s portion is yet to be made good to them. We have seen already, that, in fact, the promises of God must be fulfilled. They are not, if we think of those to Abraham, conditioned upon any response on man’s part. God alone is the Speaker in them, and as the apostle tells us in the next epistle (Galatians) the law which was 430 years after could not be added, as a condition to what God had already unconditionally declared. Israel’s portion is then, yet to be made good to them; but this involves another thing. If the special place and privileges of the nation are to be restored, the church subsists only by the breaking down of these very distinctions. In it there is neither Jew nor Gentile, but it is composed of both, united by one Spirit in the body of Christ. Thus, then, the Church must have passed away from the earth before Israel’s promises can be fulfilled. The two could not exist together at the same time, and so it is stated in this chapter; as concerning the gospel, with regard to that, Israel, although always beloved for the fathers’ sakes, is yet treated nationally as an enemy, and it is not, therefore, by the gospel as it goes out at present, that Israel as a whole can be brought back to God.
1. The apostle dwells first of all upon the fact of this present election of grace as declaring God’s unchanged favor towards them. “God,” he says, “hath not cast off His people whom He foreknew.” That foreknowledge embraced, assuredly, all the history of the people of His choice. He at least could not be disappointed, nor could the evil in them work change in Him. He could certainly never be deceived. The heart of man, which man indeed is incompetent to fathom, He Himself claims to know perfectly. If there is a remnant preserved among them at all, it is an election of grace, and therefore independent of works, as the apostle says here, -of works of any kind. Grace, he adds, becomes grace no longer if works are mingled with it. Through all their history, even at the time of most complete national apostasy, still, as he reminds us here, there was ever a remnant. Elias, even, could make intercession to God, alas, against Israel. “Lord,” he says, “they have killed Thy prophets and digged down Thine altars, and I am left alone, and they seek my life”; but it was a mistake in every way. God had still reserved to Himself, as He says, 7,000 men who had not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. That was His work, and therefore no power of the enemy could overthrow it. The remnant in Israel is, according to the prophet, the sap of the tree, which, though the tree be cut down, shows nevertheless that there is life in it. If there were no sap, there would be no life; but as long, therefore, as there is a remnant according to the election of grace, Israel still in that sense lives before God.
2. Blindness in part, however, has happened to them. That which Israel sought for, they have not obtained. We have already seen that the most zealous seekers were apparently those farthest from fulfilling the conditions of successful search. “The election hath obtained it,” says the apostle, “and the rest were blinded.” They have fallen under the judicial sentence of God, as again their prophets witnessed. God had given them such eyes as did not see, and such ears as did not hear.
3. They had stumbled confessedly over the Stumbling Stone. They had not eyes for Christ. They saw “no beauty in Him, that they should desire Him.” They had stumbled, but not that they might utterly fall, as is plain from the fact that the salvation of the Gentiles was in order to provoke them to jealousy. God still then was expecting from them what His own grace alone could produce. But then, if such consequences and blessings were the result of their fall, would not their fulness, when it should take place, be for still greater blessing to men at large? If their casting away nationally resulted in the message of reconciliation going out to the world, will not their being received back again be life from the dead? This, as we know, in fact, has been abundantly promised. There is no blessing for the earth apart from the blessing of Israel. There could be no fulfilment of the prophecies of that time of the earth’s blessing without Israel being in the centre of it, as every picture shows Of course, if, for Israel in the prophet we are content to read the Church, then everything will be changed indeed, but God’s word, read in the simplicity of its ample statement, cannot possibly allow of this.
4. The present mercy to the Gentiles is, however, (and that of necessity,) the testing of these also. The witness of what man is must surely go on throughout the ages as man himself goes through them. Solemn it is to realize this in the case of Christianity, with all its fulness of blessing. Men are willing enough to forget what Scripture, however, so thoroughly assures us of. In Paul’s day, the mystery of iniquity was at work; and this was to go on to its end in an apostasy out of which the man of sin, to be destroyed at the coming of Christ Himself, will arise. Grace indeed reigns in the gospel; but if we argue that this means that it is to conquer the world, this is directly denied by Scripture itself. “Let favor (or grace) be shown to the wicked,” says Isaiah, “yet will he not learn uprightness.” “When Thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness.” It is that which we find in Judges with regard to Israel, the King must come. Nothing will do but the coming of the King; and this not because of the power of the enemy simply, for the power of God is with His people and there can be no failure there, but because of the wickedness and failure of God’s people themselves.
The apostle in the type of the olive ignores all that is distinctive of Christianity and speaks of the Gentiles as simply grafted into the place of Israel’s broken off branches. These parables from nature are never pictures of grace in its fulness. In the tree, we have ever considered the responsibility for fruit; so with the vine, whether we look back to the prophet’s application of this to Israel herself, or in the Lord’s application of it to Christian profession now. The vine above all, perhaps, speaks of the necessity of fruit; it is of no use except for fruit; but here we find that there are branches also which are broken off, and in the Old Testament prophet, the vine itself is laid waste and trampled down.
The fig-tree planted in the vineyard now desolate as such, refers to the remnant returned from Babylon in Ezra’s and Nehemiah’s time; but here again the Lord takes up that figure, in order to show God’s expectation of fruit from it, and how, when Christ Himself came, there was still none. Sentence was ready to go forth: “Cut it down, why cumbereth it the ground?” Still His own intercession causes it to be spared for a while yet. It is digged about and dunged; and now, if it will bring forth fruit, well; but, as we know, this was fulfilled when the Spirit of God came down amongst men at Pentecost, and still there was no answer from the people of that day.
The olive again speaks naturally of that in which the Spirit is found, for the oil, as we know, is the type of the Spirit; but the same element of responsibility is found in it. What is looked for may not be there in fact. The branches are broken off for lack of a faith which they never had, and one may partake of the fatness of the olive-tree and yet not have this. The Spirit’s work, in a sense, is implied, but not, as we see, of necessity, any inward work. If the apostle speaks of the lump being holy as the firstfruit was, he is referring to Abraham as set apart to God, and Israel had the same setting apart, but it was not necessarily more than external. The branches and the root are similar.
The root again was Abraham, and it is clear that in Abraham you have, in fact, the first separation to God out of the world that history furnishes. The nations had now gone off into idolatry, gone fully away from God, although we might find exceptionally a Melchisedec amongst them. Out of that general corruption, God separates Abraham to Himself, and thus begins a new principle upon the earth. Israel manifest still God’s principle, however little they realize the spiritual character of it in His thought; however little they might be indeed separate from the mass of the nations round about them.
God acting indeed in His grace in this way has made Israel to be, as it were, the very tree itself into which the Gentiles have now been grafted. Here the New Testament speaks with the Old. As the vessel of the Spirit, who can deny Israel’s special place? Paul himself, the very apostle of the Gentiles, was, nevertheless, not a Gentile, as he puts it here, in the sense in which he is speaking. The Gentile is a wild graft, which, therefore, if grafted into the olive is “contrary to nature.” It is, as we know, contrary to nature to graft that which is wild upon the good. Faith is required now, and the branches are broken off, therefore, because they do not answer to this. They are not competent to meet the claim which Christianity makes upon them, and they are broken off from their own olive-tree. Thus, if God be pleased to graft Israel back again, we need not be surprised. The Gentile cannot possibly claim, according to this, to have any necessary right in it, much less to be the whole thing, as he is apt to claim. Israel is only blinded in part until the fulness of the Gentiles is come in.
5. There is a limit to the present blinding; there is a limit to the time of blinding altogether. When, in God’s mind, the complete number of the Gentiles is brought in, Israel will, as a whole, be saved; not, as the apostle says here, by the gospel, but by the Deliverer coming, not now out of Bethlehem, as once He came, to be rejected; but out of Zion. He does not come as the Babe born to the nation any more, but as the King and Conqueror, and then it is when “Every eye” sees Him. “They also who pierced Him” shall see him, and the outburst of confession on the part of the people will be the beginning of their national blessing. Enemies indeed they now are, that is, treated by God as enemies; which does not, of course, refer simply to the enmity in their heart, but that God treats them for what they are, enemies, as to the gospel, -while it goes out, though still the gifts and calling of God abide for them unchangeable.
For us there is a solemn consideration here. How fully that which is characteristically Gentile Christianity has come in the minds of the vast number to be considered the whole thing, scarcely needs to be insisted on. Israel are to be saved, no doubt, but simply by the extension of the blessings of the gospel to them. Christians are that spiritual Israel, which is to bud and blossom, and fill the face of the earth with fruit. Thus the Gentiles have become, in spite of the apostle’s warning against it, “wise in their own conceits.” They have indeed thought that they bore the root, rather than the root them, and ignored the conditional footing upon which we, in common with Israel, as the professing people of God, stand. But the apostle brings it out fully here. “Behold, then,” he says, “the goodness and severity of God: upon those that fell, severity, but toward thee goodness, if thou continue in His goodness, otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.” Now have we -could we venture to say we have -continued in God’s goodness? Who will say so? Why then do we hear so much of revival, and the need of revival, except because of the constant tendency to decline? But is it a tendency only? What does the very Reformation, which we rejoice over so much, bear witness as to the general condition of Christendom at the time in which this took place? What was that of the Romanism out of which the Protestant churches through the mercy of God emerged? Out of Rome, what could we say of the Greek and eastern churches, which God allowed to be smitten with the rod of Mohammedanism for their idolatrous abominations? To come closer home, what shall we say of the condition of the Protestant churches themselves since God broke the papal chain, and set them free? What of Unitarianism, Rationalism, and the hundreds of sects and heresies, which are the unanswerable reproach and witness against them? What are we sliding into now, which allows Romanism today to boast herself, however foolishly and falsely, as being the preserver of Scripture? Alas, we have not continued in God’s goodness; and thus the sentence of excision is clearly upon us, “thou also shalt be cut off.”
Thus when, according to Isaiah, the light shall arise again upon Israel, it will not be merely to add new splendor to a day already bathing with its brightness the nations of the earth, but on the contrary, as he -most unaccountably according to the dreams men are indulging in -most plainly says, when “darkness shall cover the earth, gross darkness the nations” (Isa 60:1-3). The Gentile church is become apostate, as Paul elsewhere shows (2Th 2:3-12), the true saints having been removed to heaven. How important to realize the times in which we are, and what is before us, that we do not go with the mass in the smooth ways in which they are prophesying to themselves peace, but walk in separation to God from all that is bringing in the end in judgment!
6. But the victory over sin is thus, after all, God’s alone. Israel’s unbelief has been the occasion of His mercy to the Gentiles in this very way; through the impossibility of any claim on their part any more to the privileges that were theirs, they become objects of mercy merely. They had refused God’s mercy when it went out to the Gentiles. They are to be blessed finally as themselves mere Gentiles, having no claim beyond that. Thus, they are brought upon the common ground in which alone blessing can be found for any man. God could not bless them in self-righteousness it is clear; and He must in all His ways show that man throughout is a debtor to mercy alone. This is the occasion for the apostle’s adoring recognition of the “riches, both of the wisdom and knowledge of God.” The plan is clearly His; man could never have thought it out in this way. Naturally, he would never put himself in the position in which, nevertheless, divine grace finds him. He has not even “known the mind of the Lord,” much less “been His counselor.” “Of God and through God and to God are all things, to whom be glory for ever!”
The Epistle to the Romans.
Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary
Our apostle having shown, in the end of the foregoing chapter, that the Jews would be rejected, and the Gentiles called, begins this chapter by answering a great and popular objection. Some hereupon might be ready to say, “If this be so, then God has cast away his covenant people, violated his covenant promise, forgot the seed of Abraham his friend.” He answers by his accustomed form of denial, God forbid: and then proceeds to show, that the rejection of the Jews was not total: God did not reject them all, but the unbelieving part of them only. And this he proves by producing himself as an instance in the case; I myself, says he, am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
As if he had said, “I am myself a Jew by nature and nation; not a proselyte converted to the Jewish faith, but a Jew by lineal descent, of the seed of Abraham, according to the flesh; yet am not I cast off by God; therefore God has not cast away all his people.”
Learn hence, How many unbelievers soever God rejects, he will not cast away one soul that sincerely believes in his Son. and gives up himself to the obedience of the gospel. Believers are God’s jewels; he will not cast them away. They are his children, his portion, his inheritance; he will never cast them off. They are united to him by the bond of the Holy Spirit, and he has engaged himself to them by the bond of an everlasting covenant. Believers love God and his truth for ever, and the God of truth will love them for ever. God has not cast away his people.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Rom 11:1-3. I say then, &c. As if he had said, We have just seen how the perverseness of the Jews and the calling of the Gentiles have been foretold; but do I say then that God hath entirely cast off his whole people, so as to have mercy on none of them? God forbid In no wise; for I should then pronounce a sentence of reprobation upon myself; for I also am an Israelite As it is well known; of the seed of Abraham, &c. To whom, through the tribe of Benjamin, I can trace my genealogy; yet I am not cast off; I am still one of Gods people, by believing in Christ. God hath not cast off that part of his people whom he foreknew, as repenting and believing. The apostle speaks after the manner of men. For in fact, knowing and foreknowing are the same thing with God, who knows or sees all things at once, from everlasting to everlasting. Wot ye not Know ye not, that in a parallel case, amid a general apostacy, when Elijah thought the whole nation was fallen into idolatry, God knew there was a remnant of true worshippers. How he maketh intercession Or complaineth, as the verb , here used, evidently signifies, Act 25:24, where Festus says, The Jews, , complained to me concerning Paul; against Israel The ten tribes, who had generally revolted to idolatry; saying, Lord, they have killed thy prophets See note on 1Ki 19:10; 1Ki 19:14; and digged down thine altars Built upon extraordinary occasions by special dispensation, and with the authority of the Lords prophets; altars which pious people attended who could not go up to Jerusalem, and would not worship the calves, nor Baal; these separate altars, though breaking in upon the unity of the church, yet being erected and attended by those that sincerely aimed at the glory of God, and served him faithfully, God was pleased to own for his altars, as well as that at Jerusalem; and the pulling of them down is mentioned and charged upon Israel by Elijah as a heinous sin. And I am left alone Of all thy prophets who boldly and publicly plead thy cause; and they seek my life Send murderers in pursuit of me from place to place.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Vv. 1-10.
The partial character of the rejection of God’s people is proved, first by the conversion of St. Paul himself (Rom 11:1); then by the existence of a whole Judeo-Christian church (Rom 11:2-6). And if this church does not contain the entire Jewish people, it is the effect of a judgment of a partial hardening rendered necessary by the moral state of the people (Rom 11:7-10).
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
[In the tenth chapter Paul’s argument for gospel universality only required him to show by Scripture that the Gentiles were to be received independently; i. e., without first becoming Jews. But the Scripture which best established this fact also proved a larger, greater fact; viz., that the reception of the Gentiles would so move the Jews to anger and jealousy that they would, as a people, reject the gospel, and thereby cease to be a covenant people, and become a cast-off, rejected nation. This fact is so clearly and emphatically proved that it might be thought that, as Tholuck puts it, “the whole nation, conjointly and severally, had, by some special judgment of God, been shut out from the Messiah’s kingdom.” The denial of this false inference is the burden of the section now before us. In this section he will show that the casting off of Israel is not total, but partial: in the next section he will show that it is not final, but temporary.] XI. I say then Again, as in [verses 18 and 19 of the previous chapter, Paul, for the benefit of the Jewish objector, draws a false inference from what has been said, that he may face it and correct it], Did God cast off his people? [Apparently, yes; but really, no. He had only rejected the unbelieving who first rejected him. True, these constituted almost the entire nation; but it was not God’s act that rejected them; it was what they themselves did in rejecting God in the person of his Son that fixed their fate. Israel as believing was as welcome and acceptable as ever. So God has not rejected them. “The very title his people,” says Bengel, “contains the reason for denying it.” Comp. 1Sa 12:22) God had promised not to forsake his people (Psa 94:14). He kept the promise with those who did not utterly forsake him, but as to the rest, the majority, Jesus foretold that the kingdom should be taken from them (Mat 21:41-43). Comp. Mat 22:7; Luk 21:24] God forbid. [A formal denial to be followed by double proof.] For I also am an Israelite [De Wette, Meyer and Gifford construe this as equal to: I am too good a Jew, too patriotic, to say such a thing. As if Scripture were warped and twisted to suit the whims and to avoid offending the political prejudices of its writers! If Paul was governed by his personal feelings, he ceased to be a true prophet. Had he followed his feelings, instead of revealed truth, he would have avoided the necessity for writing the sad lines at Rom 9:1-3 . The true meaning is this: God has not cast away en masse, and without discrimination or distinction, the totality of his ancient people, for I myself am a living denial of such a conclusion; or, as Eubank interprets it, such a concession would exclude the writer himself (as to whose Christianity no Jew has ever had any doubts). “Had it been,” says Chrysostom, “God’s intention to reject that nation, he never would have selected from it the individual [Paul] to whom he was about to entrust [had already entrusted] the entire work of preaching and the concerns of the whole globe, and all the mysteries and the whole economy of the church”], of the seed of Abraham [“A Jew by nurture and nation” (Burkitt). Not a proselyte, nor the son of a proselyte, but a lineal descendant from Abraham. Compare his words at Act 22:28], of the tribe of Benjamin. [Comp. Phi 3:5 . Though the apostle had reason to be proud of his tribe as furnishing the first king in Saul (1Sa 9:16) and the last Biblical queen in Esther (Est 2:17), yet that is not the reason for mentioning Benjamin here. He is showing that God had not cast off the Theocracy, and he mentions himself as of Benjamin, which was second only to Judah in theocratic honor. On the revolt of the ten tribes it constituted with Judah the surviving Theocracy (1Ki 12:21), and after the captivity it returned with Judah and again helped to form the core or kernel of the Jewish nation (Ezr 4:1; Ezr 10:9). The apostle was no Jew by mere family tradition (Ezr 2:61-63; Neh 7:63-65), nor was he of the ten tribes of outcasts, but he was duly registered as of the inner circle, and therefore his acceptance proved the point desired.]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Romans Chapter 11
Hereupon the question is immediately raised, has God then rejected His people? To this chapter 11 is the answer. The apostle gives three proofs that it is by no means the case. Firstly, he is himself an Israelite; there is a remnant whom God has reserved, as in the days of Elias-a proof of the constant favour of the Lord, of the interest He takes in His people, even when they are unfaithful; so that when the prophet, the most faithful and energetic among them, knew not where to find one who was true to God besides himself, God had His eyes upon the remnant who had not bowed the knee to Baal. Secondly, the call of the Gentiles, and their substitution for Israel, was not the definitive rejection of the latter in the counsels of God; for God had done it to provoke Israel to jealousy. It was not, then, for their rejection. Thirdly, the Lord would come forth out of Sion. and turn away the iniquities of Jacob.
That which the apostle, or rather which the Holy Ghost, says on this point requires to be looked at in more detail.
The apostle, in quoting the case of Elias, shews that when Israel was in such a state that even Elias pleaded against them, yet God had not rejected them, He had reserved for Himself seven thousand men. This was the election of sovereign grace. It was the same thing now. But it was by grace, and not by works. The election then, has obtained the blessing, and the rest was blinded. Even as it was written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, etc.
Had they then stumbled that they should fall? No! But through their fall salvation is come to the Gentiles to provoke Israel to jealousy-a second proof that it was not for their rejection. But if their diminishing and fall was a blessing to the Gentiles, what should not the fruit be of their restoration? If the first-fruits are holy, so is the lump; if the root, the tree also. Now, as to the continued chain of those who enjoy the promises in this world, Abraham was the root, and not the Gentiles; Israel, the natural stock and branches. And here is that which happened in the good olive-tree of promise in this world, of which Abraham was the root (God Himself the source of leaf and fruit), and Israel the stem and the tree. There had been some bad branches, and they had been cut off; and others from the Gentiles grafted in, in their place, who thus enjoyed the richness natural to the tree of promise. But it was on the principle of faith that they, being of the wild olive-tree, had been grafted in. Many of the Israelite branches, the natural heirs of the promises, had been cut off because of their unbelief; for when the fulfilment of the promises was offered them, they rejected it. They rested on their own righteousness, and despised the goodness of God. Thus the Gentiles, made partakers of the promises, stood on the principle of faith. But if they abandoned this principle, they should lose their place in the tree of promise, even as the unbelieving Jews had lost theirs. Goodness was to be their portion in this dispensation of Gods government, with regard to those who had part in the enjoyment of His promises, if they continued in this goodness; if not, cutting off. This had happened to the Jews; it should be the same with the Gentiles if they did not continue in that goodness. Such is the government of God, with regard to that which stood as His tree on the earth. But there was a positive counsel of God accomplished in that which took place, namely, the partial blinding of Israel (for they were not rejected) until all the Gentiles who were to have part in the blessing of these days should have come in. After this Israel should be saved as a whole; it should not be individuals spared and added to the assembly, in which Israel had no longer any place as a nation; they should be saved as a whole, as Israel. Christ shall come forth from Sion as the seat of His power, and shall turn away iniquity from Jacob, God pardoning them all transgressions.
This is the third proof that Israel was not rejected. For while enemies, as concerning the gospel at the present time, they are still beloved for the fathers sakes. For that which God has once chosen and called He never casts off. He does not repent of His counsels, nor of the call which gives them effect. But if the counsel of God remains unchangeable, the way in which it is accomplished brings out the marvellous wisdom of God. The Gentiles had long continued in the disobedience of unbelief. God comes in in grace. The Jews opposed themselves to the actings of grace. They lose all right to the promises through this unbelief, so that they must receive the effect of the promise on the footing of pure mercy and the sovereign grace of God, [52] in the same way as the poor Gentile. For He had shut them all up in unbelief, that it might be pure mercy to all. Therefore it is that the apostle exclaims, O depth of wisdom and knowledge! The promises are fulfilled, and the pretension to human righteousness annihilated; the Jews who have lost everything receive all on the true ground of the goodness of God. Their apparent loss of all is but the means of their receiving all from sovereign grace, instead of having it by virtue of human righteousness, or an unforfeited promise. All is grace: yet God is ever faithful, and that in spite of mans unfaithfulness. Man is blessed; the Jew receives the effect of the promise; but both the one and the other have to attribute it to the pure mercy of God. There is nothing about the assembly here: it is the tree of promise, and those who in virtue of their position have part successively in the enjoyment of the promises of earth. The unbelieving Jews were never cut off from the church, they were never in it. They had been in the position of natural heirs of the right to the promises. The assembly is not the Jews own olive-tree according to nature, so that they should be grafted into it again. Nothing can be plainer: the chain of those who had a right to the promises from Abraham was Israel; some of the branches were then cut off. The tree of promise remains on the earth: the Gentiles are grafted into it in place of the Jews, they also become unfaithful (that is to say, the case is supposed), and they would in their turn be cut off, and the Jews be reinstated in the old olive-tree, according to the promises and in order to enjoy them; but it is in pure mercy. It is clearly not by the gospel they get the blessing; for, as touching the gospel, they are enemies for the Gentiles sake; as touching election, beloved for the fathers sake.
Remark further here an important principle: the enjoyment of privileges by position makes us responsible for them, without saying the individual was born again. The Jewish branch was in the tree of promise and broken off: so the Gentiles. There was nothing vital or real; but they were in the place of blessing, partakers of the root and fatness of the olive tree, by being grafted in.
These communications of the mind of God end this portion of the book, namely, that in which the apostle reconciles sovereign grace shewn to sinners (putting all on a level in the common ruin of sin) with the especial privileges of the people of Israel, founded on the faithfulness of God. They had lost everything as to right. God would fulfil His promises in grace and by mercy.
Footnotes for Romans Chapter 11
52:Rom 11:31 should be translated, Even so these [the Jews] have now been unbelieving with regard to your mercy, in order that they should receive mercy (or that they should be the objects of mercy)-your mercy, that is to say, the grace in Christ which extended to the Gentiles. Thus the Jews were the objects of mercy, having forfeited all right to enjoy the effect of the promise. God would not fail to fulfil it. He bestows it on them in mercy at the end, when He has brought in the fulness of the Gentiles.
Fuente: John Darby’s Synopsis of the New Testament
GODS COVENANT WITH THE JEWS INFALLIBLE
1. Therefore I can say, Whither did God cast away his people? It could not be so; for truly I am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham of the tribe of Benjamin. Here Paul utterly annihilates the popular dogma that Jesus has cast away the Jews. It is utterly untrue; his covenant still abides with the faithful remnant of which Paul himself was a member.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Rom 11:1. Hath God cast away his people? The jews would say, what else can we infer? If the gentiles are now become the Israel of God, and if we are rejected for not embracing what Paul calls the righteousness of God? St. Paul denies this, for he himself, and the thousands which believed in Judea, as well as the thousands dispersed on Stephens persecution, were all jews, and afforded proof to the contrary. Though God had denationalized them, and sentenced them to dispersion; and though no nation was so inveterate against the christians; yet the door of hope was ever open for their conversion.
Rom 11:5. Even so then at this present time also, there is a remnant according to the election of grace. In Elijahs time, when the prophets were murdered, there was a remnant of seven thousand men, for whose sakes the nation was spared. When king Ahaz had lost the whole of his kingdom, except Jerusalem, there was a small remnant that saved them from being destroyed like Sodom and Gomorrah. Isa 1:9. In Pauls time the remnant obtained mercy for their city; but when they fled, the Romans burned it.
Rom 11:6. If by grace, then is it no more of works. The whole of the new covenant is grace; nothing remains for impotent man but consent, and as the article says, God working with us when we have that will, to look, to believe, or come to Christ. God so loved the world that he gave his only- begotten Son. Not by works of righteousness that we have done, but by his mercy he saveth us. Tit 3:5.
I, a wretch undone and lost, Am freely saved by grace. C. WESLEY.
Rom 11:9. Let their table be made a snare and a trap. So David prayed in his troubles; and thence was transported in the Spirit to speak of Christ. Psa 69:23. When the jewish sanhedrim were specially convened on the resurrection of Lazarus, they took counsel to put Jesus to death, and effectuated their purpose at the feast of the passover. In thirty seven years more, the blood of saints and prophets still crying to heaven, when they thought themselves strong enough to throw off the Roman yoke, they assembled all the young men they could, under the pretense of a great passover, and involved them in the rebellion. So their table was made a snare and a trap; and judgment came upon them to the uttermost.
Rom 11:17. If some of the branches be broken off, and thou wert grafted in. The art of grafting trees is coval with horticultural science, and it is therefore no wonder that it should be improved by inspired men. But grafts and buds are always of the choicest fruits; here they are of the sour, degenerate, and vilest species. They are cut off from the old stock by the knife of excision, a law-work on the mind, of weeping, grief, and pain. Then their nature is changed by grace; for Adams sin cannot be grafted on the stock of Christ. Faith joins us in Christ to all that is holy, glorious, and divine. We become one with him, and bring forth fruit to God.
What a transfer of covenant favour, from the unbelieving jews to the believing gentiles. But let not the gentile graft boast against the natural branches. There is no merit in the graft; it bears not the root, but the root supports the graft. Thou standest by faith. The jew may yet come in again, and the haughty gentile may again be cut off, and perish with Gog and Magog, fighting against the truth. What forms does grace assume, and all to bring the soul to God.
Rom 11:22. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God. St. Paul, as a prophet, and the first of prophets, often names the destruction of Jerusalem with as much certainty as though it had been accomplished. Heb 10:25. On them we see the severity of God in requiring blood for blood. Act 8:4. How great then was his goodness in calling the gentiles to be his new or peculiar people. But if they should substitute Arian philosophy for the gospel, the Lord would cut them off also, by the bloody armies of Mahomedan fury, or by hell let loose upon the earth, Rev 9:1-12, and substitute mosques instead of churches. Zion spoiled by vain philosophy, has her candlestick removed. In the conquests of Mahomed, we see the utopian glory of natural religion realized.
Rom 11:25. Blindness in part has happened to Israel, until the fulness of the gentiles be come in. This great prophet, this doctor taught in the third heaven, clearly foresaw that the jews would remain in unbelief, until christian missionaries should have succeeded in largely converting the gentiles of every name and nation, and in disseminating the holy scriptures in every language. He foresaw that the veil would then be taken away by the lucid comments which providence would give to prophecy. He saw that the jews, struck with this work of heaven in causing the stumbling-stone, the rock cut out of the mountain without hands and filling the whole earth, would read their prophets with new eyes; would study their ancient targums or paraphrases with divine light, and perceive that their elder rabbins were in effect all christians. What then shall the receiving them back be, but life from the dead? David Kimchi speaks to the same effect. When Rome shall be laid waste, then salvation shall come to Israel.
Now as the jews, estimated at seven millions of people, wander in all countries, and speak all languages, heaven has reserved them in store as a world of missionaries, to look on Him whom their fathers have pierced, and glory only in the cross of the great Redeemer.
The first christians, after they came into power, retaliated on the jews the blood of Christ, and the persecution of their two thousand brethren, Act 8:4 : but now they nowhere find friends like the true believers in Christ. Let us continue that kindness towards them, till the full accomplishment of our Redeemers promise of one fold, and one shepherd. Joh 10:16.
Rom 11:28. As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes; but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers sakes. By consequence, the election of the Hebrews, and the election of the Gentiles was identically the same in covenant, in promises, in calling, and in all its characters.
Rom 11:29. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. The Lord changeth not. Mal 3:6. He repents not of the designations of grace in the redemption of the world by our Lord Jesus Christ. The covenant declares his grace; it has its oath, its promises, its conditions, as in the preseding words: Rom 11:20-22. 1Sa 2:30. 1Ch 28:10. It is enough for a child to rest on a fathers love, lending a willing ear to all the cautions in the christian scriptures.
Rom 11:33. Oh the depth of the riches, both of the wisdom and knowledge of God, in the recovery of fallen man. What a harmony of the divine attributes in this work; what a display of the righteousness of God. Salvation is all of grace, and not by works of righteousness that we have done. The salvation which comprises the gentile as well as the jew, is by faith. Behold in this plan the goodness of God to every creature, goodness which leads to repentance, which debars no one from righteousness and life. Oh the depth also of his severity! He cut off the ancient gentiles for idolatry. He called Abraham, and chose Israel. He rejected the jews, because of unbelief. All is the impartial administration of justice and of grace. How else could God judge the world. Why then should mortal men take the gracious predestinations of providence and grace in an ill sense? God hateth nothing that he hath made.
REFLECTIONS.
The believing jews were a remnant according to the election of grace: the rest of the nation were blinded. God sent them the spirit of slumber, Isa 30:10, which the LXX read, a spirit of grief, compunction, or sorrow. When they saw the gentiles converted, and endowed with gifts and every grace, it was enough to provoke them to jealousy, and move them to embrace the same faith and worship.
What can be more apparent than that the blinding, and casting off of Israel was temporary. It was designed to promote their conversion by jealousy. The apostle still took all possible pains to remove their prejudice and to promote their conversion, well knowing that God was able to graft them in again, if they abode not still in unbelief.
The caution, not to be highminded, Rom 11:20, is applicable to every christian; a sanctifying fear is the guard of sanctifying joy. Let us flee apostasy, pride, and all the errors which ruined the jews, and come daily to the atoning righteousness of our Redeemer and Lord.
But while we fear, let us be comforted, for the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. He never repented of the gift of his Son, and of the new covenant, comprising pardon and every good. His only reproof is because we do not ask enough, that our joy may be full. Let us be assured that no father ever repented of doing good to his children, and who did not think himself more than paid if they do well. But let not apostates, and the unregenerate, wrest this text; for God called the jews out of Egypt, yet because of their rebellion he sware that they should not enter into his rest. God called Eli to the mitre, and Saul to the throne, and afterwards rejected them for disobedience. Yea, and our Lord, in the parable of the talents, warns every wicked and slothful servant in the church, that he will resume his gifts, and cast the unprofitable into outer darkness.
The apostrophe in Rom 11:33-34, is sublime, judicious, and happy beyond example. Oh the depth of the riches, both of the wisdom and knowledge of God. What a flood of day burst on the apostles mind. What kindness to Israel, what corrections for their sins, what paternal objects of judgment. God had now concluded them all in unbelief, not for a dire reprobation, but that he might have mercy upon them all. Oh what grace, and what riches of goodness also to the gentile world. Oh the depth, the depth unfathomable. Here is an intellectual feast for angels. Prepare fresh songs of praise, oh celestial world, and close them with the ancient chorus, Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts. Oh the depth, how unsearchable. Here, christian, is the study of thy life. Here is the food of thy devotion, leading to rapture and joy. His ways are past finding out. Here is a reserve of studies for glory, and of employment for eternity. Eye hath not seen, ear hath not heard, neither have entered the heart of man the things that God hath prepared for them that love him.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Rom 11:1-12. The Elect Remnant.Paul comes to the third part of his proof that Gods word to Israel has not fallen through, despite the national rejection of Jesus Christ.
Rom 11:1. Rom 11:2 a. That God has not cast away His people (cf. 1Sa 12:22, Psa 94:14, etc.), the Israelite Paul is a living proofGods people, that is, whom He foreknew (cf. Rom 8:29*, 1Pe 1:2).
Rom 11:2 b Rom 11:4. One remembers how Elijah mourned over prophets slain and altars overthrown and cried, I alone am left, though 7000 Israelites bent no knee to Baal!
Rom 11:5 f. Even so to-day there is a remnant in whom Israel lives on (cf. Rom 9:29, etc.)those chosen in Gods grace, on no ground of works and merit. Grace is grace no longer when works make their claim (cf. Rom 4:4 f.).
Rom 11:7. Thus finally the matter stands: Israel has missed the righteousness it sought (Rom 9:31 f., Rom 10:2 f.); only the election obtained it, and the rest were hardened.This hardening is not that of Rom 9:18imperviousness to fear of judgment; but that of 2Co 3:14, Eph 4:18, Mar 3:22-30, the imperviousness to conviction described in the OT sayings quoted in Rom 11:8-10. The spirit of deep slumber, eyes unseeing and ears unhearing, mark a people sunk in spiritual lethargy: this condition God gave them (cf. Rom 1:18; Rom 1:24, etc.)a penal consequence of habitual sin; and it is chronic (cf. 2Co 3:15, 1Th 2:15, Act 7:51 f., Mat 23:31-36).The imprecation cited from Psalms 69 (cf. Joh 19:28 f., Act 1:20, quoting the same context) implies treachery, as well as stupidity, in anti-Christian Jews.
Rom 11:11 f. Sad as it is, Israels error is a stumble, not a final fall, a trespass overruled for salvation to the Gentiles, whose gain will in turn stir Israels jealousy (cf. Rom 10:19). Now if their trespass is a world-enrichment, how much more their replenishment! The calamity which distresses lovers of Israel, God turns into blessing for mankind; and in the worlds blessedness Israel is bound to participate.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Israel Yet to be Restored
We have seen in Rom 9:1-33 that there is an election according to the grace of God in Israel: in Rom 10:1-21 this is shown to be on the basis of faith in contrast to law: now in Rom 11:1-36 this masterly treatise concludes with the consideration of how Israel will eventually enter into their promised portion. This is plainly by a mostly humbling process but it is nonetheless certain. Was this not always in the mind of God? Could we allow the thought that He must change His counsel on account of a history so unworthy as that of Israel? Has their complete breakdown taken Him by surprise? Rather, may we not say, the sin and unbelief of the nation is but the occasion for the fulfillment of the counsel of holy omniscience – and this the end of our chapter blessedly affirms.
But it is good to mark the orderly argument of the apostle. The first six verses show that even during the present Christian times God maintains a clear testimony to the fact that He has not utterly cast Israel away. Jews may bitterly accuse Paul of inferring this because of his carrying the gospel to Gentiles; or Gentiles may proudly assume this – considering themselves more worthy than Israelites: but there is an answer to it within the very ranks of Christians. Indeed, this answer is seen in Paul personally, as he observes in verse 1. He himself was an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin; and he was not cast away, nor any other Israelite who had believed in Jesus.
Is this so small a percentage of Israel as to be treated with contempt, as of no consequence at all? No doubt the pride of man would so argue. But what about God’s thoughts? Elijah had witnessed circumstances that bore striking resemblance to those of the present day. Indeed, he had supposed there was no faithful remnant in Israel other than himself alone. The nation had madly turned to idols, and in spite of the clear demonstration of God’s glory the condition of things showed no improvement. It may not be surprising, but yet sad to say, Elijah makes intercession against Israel – putting the whole nation in contrast to his faithfulness. But God had not given up His people – nor had He suffered them all to lapse into idolatry, as the faulty reasoning of Elijah had judged. He had reserved to Himself seven thousand who had not bowed the knee to Baal. Perhaps indeed they were not organized as a powerful opposition to the mass of the people, but they were God’s election of grace, and His own eye was upon them for good. So indeed now: the small number of converted Israelites is God’s seed to keep alive the hope of Israel – a remnant according to the election of grace.
It is not according to their obedience to law. God’s sovereign power and will must come in, for under law there was complete breakdown, and God is not now dealing upon such a principle. “And if by grace, then it is no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.” The two cannot be mixed. If I work for wages it is no grace on the part of my employer to pay me my wages. Or if I insist on working to merit a gift that has been graciously offered me, I make it no longer a gracious gift: I insult the gift and turn it into a mere wage: I show no appreciation of grace.
From verse 7 to 10 we see the present blinded condition of the remaining mass of Israel. The elect remnant had obtained the object Israel sought, but the rest had sought it not by faith, but by works of law. But this was no surprise to God. He had long before declared it in prophetic scriptures.
The blinding here is plainly judicial – God Himself having given them sightless eyes and unhearing ears. But why is this? It is no arbitrary judgment. Mat 13:13-15 shows clearly that Israel’s willful blindness preceded their judicial blindness. The willful blindness of the nation rose to its full head following the resurrection of Christ and in the martyrdom of Stephen. Now God, in His absolute justice has confirmed this blindness for all the length of the present period of grace to the Gentiles – “until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.” It is the same with their ears: when mercy was offered them, even following the resurrection of Christ, they would not hear – “stopped their ears” to the preaching of Stephen, and ratified their rejection of Christ by stoning His witness to death. Consequently God has put His judicial mark upon them: He has confirmed their deafness to this very day – a solemn warning to all who dare trifle with Him.
Psa 69:1-36 is quoted also in verses 9 & 10 – the words written by David, but issuing actually from the lips of the Lord Jesus – “Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompense unto them. Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.” These are solemn words of retribution – a marked contrast to the lowly words from the cross – “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” But the forgiveness could only apply to the remnant who would receive it – as many did, even following the crucifixion. The rest cannot remain a matter of indifference to Him: He pleads against them for present governmental judgment.
But it is discipline with a view to restoration: the treatment is stern, but no other method could meet so aggravated a case. Do they choose a willful course? Very well, let them learn the awful consequences of it, in the earnest desire that they may learn their deep need of a suffering, redeeming Saviour. Their present state then, as verses 11 to 15 show, is the means used by the wisdom of God to bring them to eventual repentance. But this is not all. The very stumbling of the Jews is used as an occasion for the present blessing of the Gentiles – and not only for the sake of Gentiles, but as a means of provoking Israel to jealously.
Little indeed do the nations realize their indebtedness to the Gospel. Yet everywhere that Christianity has spread its blessed influences, civilization has been lifted to a higher, more honorable and sensible level. Only blindness can ignore this. The fall of the Jews has been the riches of the world: the nations themselves have profited on this very account. Gentiles have become rich through the diminishing of Israel. Then “how much more their fullness?” When God restores His ancient people, and uses them as the very means of blessing to the nations in the millennium, how much more blessedness will earth behold than ever it has before! Israel then will be the fit representative of God – not, as under law, the selfish arrogators of all blessing to themselves, but the wholehearted dispensers of blessing to the nations. Blessed prospect for this now so selfish world!
It is to Gentiles he speaks – not to the body of Christ as such, but to what may be called “Christendom” – the sphere that has been privileged with the knowledge and benefits of Christianity. For God has plainly transferred His sphere of blessing from Israel to Gentile nations today – that is, of manifest public blessing. Of course, Gentile abuse of it has been as shameful as was that of Israel, and the writing is on the wall: they themselves will be spared no less than Israel.
But let Jews see today that God has sent this stern discipline to them, for those who do so may be provoked to emulate Paul: they may be personally saved, though this reverses the judgment of their own nation. And this Paul was seeking – the salvation of “some of them.”
“For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?” Above all this shameful fall and restoration of Israel is the sovereign wisdom of God, bringing forth present blessing for the nations, (not indeed that this implies the full response of all the nations, but they have been blessed with a testimony that has borne rich fruit), and manifesting His power in a figurative resurrection of Israel, in the future, which will fill the earth with fruit.
Now from verses 16 to 21 we see that the natural successors to blessing (Israel) being set aside, and the blessing given to Gentiles, who are no successional line at all, this becomes necessarily a test to them, as to whether there will be the lowliness of appreciation and dependence, or the highminded pride that regards the blessing as a matter of title, and despises the natural successors.
There seems no doubt that “the firstfruit” and “the root” of verse 16 have reference to Abraham, the father of all Israel, the first man publicly selected to be blessed of God and made a blessing to others (Gen 12:2). Israel then are the natural branches, and on this account are “holy” – not intrinsically, of course, but as to outward position, just as are children of believers. Cf. 1Co 7:14. God remembers this, though at present some of the branches are broken off, and branches from the wild olive tree grafted in. It is the public sphere of blessing, manifestly, which today is predominantly Gentile. Now Gentiles partake of the blessing of Abraham. This was given on the principle of faith, and Abraham received it by faith. Thus all who are of faith – Jews or Gentiles – are children of Abraham (Gal 3:7).
What then? Does this give Gentiles occasion for highminded contempt of Israel? Will they boast against the natural branches – forgetting that mercy has given them their own place of blessing? The thought is a moral outrage. Yet today the fact of this is palpably fulfilled before our eyes. Gentiles take advantage of their now superior position, to pour contempt upon the ancient chosen people of God.
If they proudly say, “The branches were broken off that I might be grafted in” – assuming by this that Jews had proven themselves a lower class of people than Gentiles – they have a solemn answer from God – “Well, because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear; for if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest He also spare not thee.” Presumptuous claims and a pharisaical spirit are no evidence of faith, and where faith is lacking the cutting off is to be expected. Faith gives the spirit of godly fear – a healthy reverential regard for the just government of God. But who today cannot see that Gentile Christendom, with all its proud boast of prosperity and prominence, has practically thrown to the winds all real, vital faith in the living God? This haughty spirit is the sure precursor of a humiliating fall.
For God’s government is not arbitrary, nor has He respect of persons: there is perfect equality in His treatment of men. When it becomes necessary for Him to make a change in dispensational dealings, it is because of distinctly moral reasons. These reasons were abundantly plain in Israel when they were broken off. Have Gentiles the least cause for expecting different treatment? This question is entered into from verse 22 to verse 29.
Well are we bidden to “Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God.” Those who have fallen are a solemn lesson to us as to the latter. Have we taken to heart this poignant lesson from Israel’s history? Toward Gentiles on the other hand has been the plain exercise of goodness. But an appreciation of His goodness – a continuing in it – is to be expected. But indeed today, how many even acknowledge that it is God’s goodness that has given Gentiles this privileged place of blessing? God’s goodness has become to them no matter of goodness at all. And when this is so, the word is plain – “Thou shalt be cut off.”
And Jews – is there not hope that they will learn their lesson? Will they always abide in unbelief? Other Scriptures affirm clearly that they will in fact be restored. Let us remark the pleading of God in Hos 14:1-2 – “O Israel, return unto the Lord thy God – say unto Him, Take away all iniquity.” Then the strong promise of God, “I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely” (v. 4). And again, “They that dwell under His shadow shall return; they shall revive as the corn, and grow as the vine” (v. 7).
The olive tree wild by nature is the natural course of Gentiles in ungodliness and rebellion. Grafted now into the place of divine privilege and blessing, they ought to partake of the character of the root: if not, the natural branches, which have the greater propensity for this, are “much more” to be expected to displace the wild branches again, and be grafted into their own olive tree.
Now from verse 25 to 29 we have the clear declaration that this will indeed be so. It is the plain, unmistakable word of prophecy, affirming a certainty that brooks no doubt or question. Humbling truth this for Gentile Christendom. Yet we know that none but true saints of God will be humbled by it, and learn the lesson not to be wise in their own conceits. Let all saints however, take serious heed to this, for ignorance of this mystery (a mystery at least until Paul revealed it) is certainly neither virtue nor bliss.
“Blindness in part is happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.” If the wilful blindness of Israel has brought down God’s present governmental blindness for nearly 2000 years, what shall we say of the Gentile Church in her closing her eyes more and more against the truth of God? Shall this willful blindness be spared? No; when the full number of Gentiles is saved, God will open Israel’s eyes. “And so all Israel shall be saved.”
But how is this to come about? By the instrumentality of the Gentile Church preaching the gospel to Jews? Not at all. It is not to be by faith in an absent Christ, but in One whom they shall see visibly, coming out of Sion, to turn away ungodliness from Jacob. When they see they will believe.
But what does this imply? Rev 19:1-21 tells us that when He appears it will be to “smite the nations.” Hence salvation to Israel will mean judgment to Gentiles. Zec 12:10-14 gives to us the magnificent result as to Israel – Judah at least – in the deep repentance of soul that affects every individual. Zec 14:3 brings before us Gentiles, whom the Lord fights against. Gentiles will have so hardened themselves in proud arrogance that not even the Lord’s personal appearance will bring them to repentance. They will be cut off; while Jews, repentant, will be grafted in again. This is no doubtful issue: God’s covenant with them was to send His Son to them in glory and majesty. True, He came once in lowliness, and was refused, but this cannot annul God’s promise as to His coming in glory. It is at this time He will take away their sins – the basis for it having been laid at Calvary, of course.
Yet now they are enemies of the gospel, for the sake of Gentiles – that is in order that Gentiles might receive blessing. But they are elect of God, and beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For God does not repent of His gifts and calling. Blessed truth! whether in reference to His beloved people of old, Israel, or to those who today have been redeemed by the blood of His Son, and therefore have a heavenly inheritance in contrast to Israel’s which is earthly.
From verse 30 to the end of the chapter we are invited to mark the infinite wisdom by which God accomplishes His complete victory whether over Gentiles or Jews, -the victory of Divine mercy,-the putting down of the proud claims and self-righteousness of men, to make them all merely “objects of mercy.”
First, Gentiles,-outsiders,-without God, without hope in the world, are wondrously made to enter into this mercy by means of the very unbelief of Israel. Let Gentiles learn well by this that they are but a second choice, having never been the chosen people of God. This surely dismisses all high thinking. God has conquered them by mercy.
But Israel, unbelieving, refusing the fulfillment of God’s promise when He sent them His beloved Son – what claim can they dare to make now? The promises truly were theirs, but if they have so arrogantly refused them, then to receive them now it is plain they also must become mere “objects of mercy.” This is the true reading of v. 31 (JND). The mercy given to Gentiles is therefore a lesson of humbling to Israel: they are reduced to the same level.
So verse 32 summarizes that God has shut up all together in unbelief, that He might have the sovereign title of showing mercy to all. Human wisdom would never have conceived such a conclusion, wondrously simple though it is, and which rightly leads out the apostle’s heart in his following, beautiful ascription of honor and glory to the God of such pure and matchless wisdom.
Do our inmost souls not share the blessed sentiment that the apostle here expresses? Are we not left amazed at the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God? Does all this glory not affect us in greater, deeper measure than did the wisdom of Solomon the Queen of Sheba? “There was no more spirit in her.” This is truly the effect of quiet meditation upon God Himself – as the psalmist, in considering God’s knowledge of him personally, exclaims “Such knowledge is too wonderful for me: it is high, I cannot attain unto it” (Psa 139:6). Nor does the thought of this discourage him, the rather it fills him with joy – “How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O my God! how great is the sum of them!” (v. 17). Need we add the testimony of Cleopas and his companion, after the Lord Jesus in resurrection had appeared to them? – “Did not our heart burn within us, while He talked with us by the way, and while He opened to us the Scriptures?”
His judgments are unsearchable, His ways past finding out: they are impossible to be discovered by all man’s ingenuity and searching: He must Himself reveal them if they are to be known at all – nor does this mean that on account of revelation we therefore know everything about His ways. Indeed, how much still we are ignorant of. But He reveals to us what He knows is good for us, and this is sufficient to subdue our hearts with awe when we listen to it aright.
We have neither known His mind, nor had anything to do with His counsel, much less have been original givers to Him in order that He should thus be indebted to repay us. This has been Israel’s folly, and that of how many more who would feign make themselves creditors of God, as though their good works and assumed righteousness were a claim upon Him! Well did Elihu demand of Job, “If thou be righteous, what givest thou Him? or what receiveth He of thine hand?” (Job 35:7).
“For of Him, and through Him, and for Him, are all things; to whom be glory forever. Amen.” He is the Originator, Executor, and eternal Master of all things. Who will proudly dare the attempt to usurp these grand prerogatives of His? Ah no! He stands alone – perfect in wise counsels, perfect in work, perfect in mastery of all things. “To Him be glory forever.” “And let all the people say, Amen.”
Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible
SECTION 35 YET GOD HAS NOT CAST OFF HIS PEOPLE
CH. 11:1-10
I say then, has God cast off His people? Be it not so. For I also am an Israelite, from Abrahams seed, the tribe of Benjamin. God has not cast off His people, whom He foreknew. Or, know ye not what in Elijahs case the Scripture says? how he intercedes to God against Israel, Lord Thy prophets they have killed, Thy altars they have pulled down, and I have been left alone, and they seek my life. But what says the response to him? I have left for Myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed knee to Baal. In this way then also in the present season there has come to be a remnant according to an election of grace. But if by grace, it is no longer from works: else grace is no longer grace.
What then? That which Israel seeks for, this he has not obtained: but the election obtained it; and the rest were hardened: according as it is written, God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that they may not see, and ears that they may not hear, until this day. And David says,
Let their table become trap and a capture and a snare and a recompense to them. Let their eyes be darkened that they may not see, and their back bend Thou down always.
Rom 11:1. A possible inference from the foregoing, at once repudiated. To suggest it, Paul put last in Romans 10, the terrible words from Isa 65:1-2. It might be thought that because of their disobedience God had resolved to shut out Israel from the salvation. By putting his question in words borrowed from Psa 94:14, Paul suggests the answer.
The Greek aorists in Rom 11:1-4 do not refer to any definite time in the past, as would the English preterite, but cover the whole past time. I have therefore rendered them by the English perfect: has God cast off etc.?
Be it not so: a denial, of which all Romans 11, is a proof.
For I etc.: not so much a proof of the denial as a reason for its earnestness. For a single exception proves nothing; and Pauls denial needs complete proof. Far be it from me, who am myself an Israelite, to say that God has cast off His people.
Abrahams seed: recalling the promises to Abraham.
Tribe of Benjamin: giving definiteness to I am an Israelite. Paul knew even the name of his tribe: so Php 3:5. Benjamin was one of the two tribes which returned from captivity: Ezr 4:1; Ezr 10:9.
Rom 11:2 a. Solemn repetition of the denial.
Whom He foreknew: recalling the same word in Rom 8:29. It develops the proof already suggested by the words His people. To cast off one whom we promised to favour, because of his bad conduct, implies ignorance at the time of the promise, of what his conduct would be. Jehovah promised, without any mention of conduct, to be a God to Abrahams seed for ever: and, when He gave the promise, He foresaw all that Abrahams seed would do. Gods perfect foreknowledge makes inconceivable that He will change His purpose or leave His promise unfulfilled.
Rom 11:2-4. Confirmation, from an incident in the life of Elijah, of the foregoing denial: see 1Ki 19:10; 1Ki 19:18.
Or, know ye not etc.: cp. Rom 6:3; Rom 7:1. Intercedes: his words are a complaint against Israel. Thy prophets they have killed: so 1Ki 18:4.
Thy altars etc.: so 1Ki 18:30. This suggests that Lev 17:8; Deu 12:5; Deu 12:13-14 had become obsolete. Or these may have been memorial altars, as in Jos 22:10-34.
Left alone: a solitary surviving servant of God: for the reply of God speaks not of prophets but of faithful men.
The response: an oracular voice of God, as in 2 Macc. ii. 4; a cognate verb in same sense in Mat 2:12 : cp. 2 Macc. xi. 17. When God took away, by the sword of Jezebel, most of His servants, He says, I have left behind for Myself, i.e. to be His witnesses to the nation, seven thousand faithful men. This suggests that all others in the kingdom of Israel had worshipped Baal.
Rom 11:5. In this way then: what happened in Elijahs day has happened again. Although we must add to the seven thousand in Israel a number probably much larger in the kingdom of Judah, it is still certain that, owing to the apostasy of the mass of the nation, the true people of God were reduced to a small remnant. Yet God continued to be the God of Israel, and fulfilled the promises made to Abraham and David. He preserved for Himself a faithful remnant, and in them preserved the sacred race. So in Pauls day the true worshippers were few. That they were more numerous than some thought, is suggested by Pauls quotation of Elijahs complaint.
The incident proves that the reduction of the true Israel to a small remnant, and the punishment to be inflicted on the unbelievers, do not imply that God has cast off His people. This incident is also a reply to the covert objection that the Gospel cannot be true, because, if true, the ancient people of God would be reduced to a mere handful. For it shows that this happened once, and may therefore happen again. Consequently, the fewness of the Jewish followers of Jesus is no disproof that they only are the heirs of Abrahams promises.
Election: as in Rom 9:11 : to take, not the whole, but a part. See note on p. 279. {Rom 9:33}
Of grace: a selection made on the ground, not of merit, but of undeserved favour. Such is Gods purpose, revealed in Christ, to save all who put faith in Christ. Same word in Rom 1:5; Rom 1:7; Rom 3:24; Rom 4:4; Rom 4:16; Rom 5:2; Rom 5:15; Rom 5:17; Rom 5:20-21; Rom 6:1; Rom 6:14.
Rom 11:6. Inference from the foregoing words.
Grace works: recalling Rom 4:4-5. These are mutually exclusive.
Else grace etc.: proof of the foregoing inference.
No longer: twice: the continuity of logical necessity: so Rom 7:17; Rom 7:20. Unless grace and works are mutually exclusive, grace loses its essential character and is no longer grace.
Is: literally becomes, i.e. continuously manifests itself in its true character.
Rom 11:7. Summary of the argument, introduced by the question What then? as in Rom 3:9.
What Israel seeks for: viz. righteousness, as in Rom 9:31; Rom 10:3; cp. Act 26:7.
Obtained: had the good fortune to get: same word in Heb 6:15; Heb 11:33; Jas 4:2.
The election: the elected ones, abstract for concrete as in Rom 2:26-27.
And the rest etc.: the only alternative for those who did not attain that for which they sought.
Hardened: same word in same sense in 2Co 3:14; Mar 6:52; Mar 8:17, Joh 12:40; cognate word in Eph 4:18; Mar 3:5. It denotes a weakening or destruction of capacity for discerning spiritual things. Same idea, but other word, in Rom 9:18. The sum of all is that Israel has failed to get that for which the nation sought, and by that failure has suffered loss of spiritual susceptibility; but those whom God in undeserved favour selected, i.e. those who believed the Gospel, have-obtained it.
Rom 11:8. A quotation combining two passages, in proof that this hardening is in harmony with O.T. teaching. In Isa 29:10, we read, Jehovah has poured out upon you a spirit of deep sleep, and has bound up your eyes.
Spirit of stupor: cp. Rom 8:15; Eph 1:17 : either the Holy Spirit producing as a punishment spiritual insensibility; or an evil spirit as in 2Co 4:4; Eph 2:2. Since God thinks fit to impose such punishment, to inflict it is not unworthy of the Spirit of God. Or, if Satan be the agent, he is such because God uses an enemy to work out His purpose of justice: cp. 2Sa 24:1 with 1Ch 21:1. The words Jehovah poured out, rendered by Paul God gave them, assert that spiritual insensibility fell upon them because God willed it: so Rom 9:18. The quotation therefore proves that to harden the hearts even of Jews is consistent with Gods character and covenant. It also recalls Deu 29:4, where Moses teaches that power to understand spiritual things is Gods gift; and that the Israelites had not received it during their long wanderings in the wilderness: another proof that the spiritual blindness of Israel was not new.
Rom 11:9-10. Another quotation in support of the above: Psa 69:22.
David: as in Rom 4:6.
A trap: to catch birds: same word in 1Ti 3:7; 1Ti 6:9; 2Ti 2:26.
Capture: cognate to the common word for wild beast, e.g. Mar 1:13; Act 11:6. It suggests the ways in which they are caught while securely feeding.
A snare: same word in Rom 9:33; Rom 14:13 : literally the part of the trap on which the bait is put.
Recompense: cognate word in Rom 11:35; Rom 12:19; cp. Luk 14:12; Luk 14:14. The Psalmist prays, May the abundance of the good things of the wicked be like a bait which decoys a bird into a trap, and like the grass which the wild deer securely eats while the huntsman draws his bow; and may they thus receive in their own pleasures a recompense for their sin.
Eyes darkened etc.: means by which the former prayer is to be answered: cp. Rom 1:21; Eph 4:18.
Bend down their back: by laying on them a heavy burden. They will thus become blind slaves. This prayer has often been answered. The good things of this life have made men blind to their spiritual needs and peril; and have thus become the bait with which they have been caught and destroyed.
The vindictive tone of Psalms 69, especially Psa 69:22-28, falls far below the teaching of Christ, e.g. Mat 5:44-45, and of the entire New Testament. Yet it is quoted by Paul. But we notice that it is quoted only to prove that a mans sins are his destruction and that sin is followed by inward blindness. For this purpose, the proof is decisive. All else probably lay outside his thought. See further in Diss. iii.
This section began with words of hope: it ends in deepest gloom. It is true that amid the general apostasy God has reserved for Himself a small band of men whose faithfulness is made the more conspicuous by the faithlessness around. But among these Pauls opponents, in spite of their possible morality, have no place. And they have been smitten with spiritual blindness.
The teaching of Rom 11:8-10 is the only explanation of the indifference to eternal interests manifested by many around us who constantly hear and reject the Gospel. And, if so, this spiritual indifference has an awful significance. It is a mark of Gods anger and a foretaste of more terrible punishment. It is the shadow of eternal death. Moreover, what God has inflicted, only God can remove. Hence our own efforts to arouse ourselves will be in vain. The eyes which God has closed, He only can open.
Fuente: Beet’s Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament
11:1 I say then, {1} Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For {2} I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, [of] the tribe of Benjamin.
(1) Now the apostle shows how this doctrine is to be applied to others, remaining still in his propounded cause. Therefore he teaches us that all the Jews in particular are not cast away, and therefore we ought not to pronounce rashly of individual persons, whether they are of the number of the elect or not.
(2) The first proof: I am a Jew, and yet elected, therefore we may and ought fully to be sure of our election, as has been said before: but of another man’s we cannot be so certainly sure, and yet ours may cause us to hope well of others.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
1. Israel’s rejection not total 11:1-10
The first pericope gives hope for the future by showing that even now some Jews believe.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
The opening question carries on the diatribe rhetorical style of Rom 10:18-19. God has not rejected the Israelites because they have, on the whole, rejected Him. The proof of this is that Paul himself was a member of the believing remnant, a Christian Jew. Many Jewish Christians today prefer to refer to themselves as Messianic Jews. Paul even came from the small and sometimes despised tribe of Benjamin (cf. Judges 19-21), yet God had saved him.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 22
ISRAEL, HOWEVER, NOT FORSAKEN
Rom 11:1-10
“A PEOPLE disobeying and contradicting.” So the Lord of Israel, through the Prophet, had described the nation. Let us remember as we pass on what a large feature in the prophecies, and indeed in the whole Old Testament, such accusations and exposures are. From Moses to Malachi, in histories, and songs, and, instructions, we find everywhere this tone of stern truth telling, this unsparing detection and description of Israelite sin. And we reflect that every one of these utterances, humanly speaking, was the voice of an Israelite; and that whatever reception it met with at the moment-it was sometimes a scornful or angry reception, oftener a reverent one-it was ultimately treasured, venerated, almost worshipped, by the Church of this same rebuked and humiliated Israel. We ask ourselves what this has to say about the true origin of these utterances, and the true nature of the environment into which, they fell. Do they not bear witness to the supernatural in both? It was not “human nature” which, in a race quite as prone, at least, as any other, to assert itself, produced these intense and persistent rebukes from within, and secured for them a profound and lasting veneration. The Hebrew Scriptures, in this as in other things, are a literature which mere man, mere Israelite man, “could not have written if he would, and would not have written if he could.” Somehow, the Prophets not only spoke with an authority more than human, but they were known to speak with it. There was a national consciousness of divine privilege: and it was inextricably bound up with a national conviction that the Lord of the privileges had an eternal right to reprove His privileged ones, and that He had, as a fact, His accredited messengers of reproof, whose voice was not theirs but His; not the mere outcry of patriotic zealots, but the Oracle of God. Yea, an awful privilege was involved in the reception of such reproofs: “You only have I known; therefore will I punish you”. {Amo 3:2}
But this is a recollectlon by the way. St. Paul, so we saw in our last study, has quoted Isaiahs stern message, only now to stay his troubled heart on the fact that the unbelief of Israel in his day was, if we may dare to put it so, no surprise to the Lord, and therefore no shock to the servants faith. But is he to stop there, and sit down, and say, “This must be so”? No; there is more to follow, in this discourse on Israel and God. He has “good words, and comfortable words,” {Zec 1:13} after the woes of the last two chapters, and after those earlier passages of the Epistle where the Jew is seen only in his hypocrisy, and rebellion, and pride. He has to speak of a faithful Remnant, now as always present, who make as it were the golden unbroken link between the nation and the promises. And then he has to lift the curtain, at least a corner of the curtain, from the future, and to indicate how there lies waiting there a mighty blessing for Israel, and through Israel for the world. Even now the mysterious “People” was serving a spiritual purpose in their very unbelief; they were occasioning a vast transition of blessing to the Gentiles, by their own refusal of blessing. And hereafter they were to serve a purpose of still more illustrious mercy. They were yet, in their multitudes, to return to their rejected Christ. And their return was to be used as the means of a crisis of blessing for the world.
We seem to see the look and hear the voice of the Apostle, once the mighty Rabbi, the persecuting patriot, as he begins now to dictate again. His eyes brighten, and his brow clears, and a happier emphasis comes into his utterance, and he sets himself to speak of his peoples good, and to remind his Gentile brethren how, in Gods plan of redemption, all their blessing, all they know of salvation, all they possess of life eternal, has come to them through Israel. Israel is the Stem, drawing truth and life from the unfathomable soil of the covenant of promise. They are the grafted Branches, rich in every blessing-because they are the mystical seed of Abraham, in Christ.
I say therefore, did God ever thrust away His people? Away with the thought! For I am an Israelite, of Abrahams seed, Benjamins tribe; full member of the theocratic race and of its first royal and always loyal tribe; in my own person, therefore, I am an instance of Israel still in covenant. God never thrust away His people, whom He foreknew with the foreknowledge of eternal choice and purpose. That foreknowledge was “not according to their works,” or according to their power; and so it holds its sovereign way across and above their long unworthiness. Or do you not know, in Elijah, in his story, in the pages marked with his name, what the Scripture says? How he intercedes before God, on Gods own behalf, against Israel, saying, {1Ki 19:10} “Lord, Thy prophets they killed, and Thy altars they dug up; and I was left solitary, and they seek my life”? But what says the oracular answer to him? “I have left for Myself seven thousand men, men who bowed never knee to Baal”. {1Ki 19:18} So therefore, at the present season also, there proves to be a remnant, “a leaving” left by the Lord for Himself, on the principle of election of grace; their persons and their number following a choice and gift whose reasons lie in God alone. And then follows one of those characteristic “footnotes” of which we saw an instance above: {Rom 10:17} But if by grace, no longer of works; “no longer,” in the sense of a logical succession and exclusion: since the grace proves, on the other principle, no longer grace. But if of works, it is no longer grace; since the work is no longer work. That is to say, when once the grace principle is admitted, as it is here assumed to be, “the work” of the man who is its subject is “no longer work” in the sense which makes an antithesis to grace; it is no longer so much toil done in order to so much pay to be given. In other words, the two supposed principles of the divine Choice are in their nature mutually exclusive. Admit the one as the condition of the “election,” and the other ceases; you cannot combine them into an amalgam. If the election is of grace, no meritorious antecedent to it is possible in the subject of it. If it is according to meritorious antecedent, no sovereign freedom is possible in the divine action, such freedom as to bring the saved man, the saved remnant, to an adoring confession of unspeakable and mysterious mercy.
This is the point, here in this passing “footnote,” as in the longer kindred statements above (chap. 9), of the emphasised allusion to “choice” and “grace.” He writes thus that he may bring the believer, Gentile or Jew, to his knees, in humiliation, wonder, gratitude, and trust. “Why did I, the self-ruined wanderer, the self-hardened rebel, come to the Shepherd who sought me, surrender my sword to the King who reclaimed me? Did I reason myself into harmony with Him? Did I lift myself, hopelessly maimed, into His arms? No; it was the gift of God, first, last, and in the midst. And if so, it was the choice of God.” That point of light is surrounded by a cloud world of mystery, though within those surrounding clouds there lurks, as to God, only rightness and love. But the point of light is there, immovable, for all the clouds; where fallen man chooses God, it is thanks to God who has chosen fallen man. Where a race is not “thrust away,” it is because “God foreknew.” Where some thousands of members of that race, while others fall away, are found faithful to God, it is because He has “left them for Himself, on the principle of choice of grace.” Where, amidst a widespread rejection of Gods Son Incarnate, a Saul of Tarsus, an Aquila, a Barnabas, behold in Him their Redeemer, their King, their Life, their All, it is on that same principle. Let the man thus beholding and believing give the whole thanks for his salvation in the quarter where it is all due. Let him not confuse one truth by another. Let not this truth disturb for a moment his certainty of personal moral freedom, and of its responsibility. Let it not for a moment turn him into a fatalist. But let him abase himself, and give thanks, and humbly trust Him who has thus laid hold of him for blessing. As he does so, in simplicity, not speculating but worshipping, he will need no subtle logic to assure him that he is to pray, and to work, without reserve, for the salvation of all men. It will be more than enough for him that his Sovereign bids him do it, and tells him that it is according to His heart.
To return a little on our steps, in the matter of the Apostles doctrine of the divine Choice: the reference in this paragraph to the seven thousand faithful in Elijahs day suggests a special reflection. To us, it seems to say distinctly that the “election” intended all along by St. Paul cannot possibly be explained adequately by making it either an election (to whatever benefits) of mere masses of men, as for instance of a nation, considered apart from its individuals; or an election merely to privilege, to opportunity, which may or may not be used by the receiver. As regards national election, it is undoubtedly present and even prominent in the passage, and in this whole section of the Epistle. For ourselves, we incline to see it quite simply in ver. 2 {Rom 11:2} above; “His people, whom He foreknew.” We read there, what we find so often in the Old Testament, a sovereign choice of a nation to stand in special relation to God; of a nation taken, so to speak, in the abstract, viewed not as the mere total of so many individuals, but as a quasi-personality. But we maintain that the idea of election takes another line when we come to the “seven thousand.” Here we are thrown at once on the thought of individual experiences, and the ultimate secret of them, found only in the divine Will affecting the individual. The “seven thousand” had no aggregate life, so to speak. They formed, as the seven thousand, no organism or quasi-personality. They were “left” not as a mass, but as units; so isolated, so little grouped together, that even Elijah did not know of their existence. They were just so many individual men, each one of whom found power, by faith, to stand personally firm against the Baalism of that dark time, with the same individual faith which in later days, against other terrors, and other solicitations, upheld a Polycarp, an Athanasius, a Huss, a Luther, a Tyndale, a De Seso, a St. Cyran. And the Apostle quotes them as an instance and illustration of the Lords way and will with the believing of all time. In their case, then, he both passes as it were through national election to individual election, as a permanent spiritual mystery; and he shows that he means by this an election not only to opportunity but to holiness. The Lords “leaving them for Himself” lay behind their not bowing their knees to Baal. Each resolute confessor was individually enabled, by a sovereign and special grace. He was a true human personality, freely acting, freely choosing not to yield in that terrible storm. But behind his freedom was the higher freedom of the Will of God, saving him from himself that he might be free to confess and suffer. To our mind, no part of the Epistle more clearly than this passage affirms this individual aspect of the great mystery. Ah, it is a mystery indeed; we have owned this at every step. And it is never for a moment to be treated therefore as if we knew all about it. And it is never therefore to be used to confuse the believers thought about other sides of truth. But it is there, as a truth among truths; to be received with abasement by the creature before the Creator, and with humble hope by the simple believer.
He goes on with his argument, taking up the thread broken by the “footnote” upon grace and works: What therefore? What Israel, the nation, the character, seeks after, righteousness in the court of God, this it lighted not upon as one who seeks a buried treasure in the wrong field “lights not upon” it; but the election, the chosen ones, the “seven thousand” of the Gospel era, did light upon it. But the rest were hardened, (not as if God had created their hardness, or injected it; but He gave it to be its own penalty;) as it stands written, {Isa 29:10, and Deu 29:4} “God gave them a spirit of slumber, eyes not to see, and ears not to hear, even to this day.” A persistent (“unto this day”) unbelief was the sin of Israel in the Prophets times, and it was the same in those of the Apostles. And the condition was the same; God “gave” sin to be its own way of retribution. And David says, {Psa 69:22} in a Psalm full of Messiah, and of the awful retribution justly ordained to come on His impenitent enemies, “Let their table turn into a trap, and into toils, and into a stumbling block; and into a requital to them; darkened be their eyes, not to see, and their back ever bow Thou together.”
The words are awful, in their connection here, and in themselves, and as a specimen of a class. Their purpose here is to enforce the thought that there is such a thing as positive divine action in the self-ruin of the impenitent; a fiat from the throne which “gives” a coma to the soul, and beclouds its eyes, and turns its blessings into a curse. Not one word implies the thought that He who so acts meets a soul tending upward and turns it downward; that He ignores or rejects even the faintest inquiry after Himself; that He is Author of one particle of the sin of man. But we do learn that the adversaries of God and Christ may be, and, where the Eternal so sees it good, are, sentenced to go their own way, even to its issues in destruction. The context of every citation here, as it stands in the Old Testament, shows abundantly that those so sentenced are no helpless victims of an adverse fate, but sinners of their own will, in a sense most definite and personal. Only, a sentence of judgment is concerned also in the case; “Fill ye up then the measure”. {Mat 13:32}
But then also in themselves and, as a specimen of a class, the words are a dark shadow in the Scripture sky. It is only by the way that we can note this here, but it must not be quite omitted in our study. This sixty-ninth Psalm is a leading instance of the several Psalms where the Prophet appears calling for the sternest retribution on his enemies. What thoughtful heart has not felt the painful mystery so presented? Read in the hush of secret devotion, or sung perhaps to some majestic chant beneath the minster roof, they still tend to affront the soul with the question, Can this possibly be after the mind of Christ? And there rises before us the form of One who is in the act of Crucifixion, and who just then articulates the prayer, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” Can these “imprecations” have His sanction? Can He pass them, endorse them, as His Word?
The question is full of pressing pain. And no answer can be given, surely, which shall relieve all that pain; certainly nothing which shall turn the clouds of such passages into rays of the sun. They are clouds; but let us be sure that they belong to the cloud land which gathers round the Throne, and which only conceals, not wrecks, its luminous and immovable righteousness and love. Let us remark, for one point, that this same dark Psalm is, by the witness of the Apostles, as taught by their Master, a Psalm full of Messiah. It was undoubtedly claimed as his own mystic utterance by the Lamb of the Passion. He speaks in these dread words who also says, in the same utterance (ver. 9) {Rom 11:9}, “The zeal of Thine house hath eaten me up.” So the Lord Jesus did endorse this Psalm. He more than endorsed it; He adopted it as His own. Let this remind us further that the utterer of these denunciations, even the first and non-mystical utterer, -David, let us say, – appears in the Psalm not merely as a private person crying out about his violated personal rights, but as an ally and vassal of God, one whose life and cause is identified with His. Just in proportion as this is so, the violation of his life and peace, by enemies described as quite consciously and deliberately malicious, is a violation of the whole sanctuary of divine righteousness. If so, is it incredible that even the darkest words of such a Psalm are to be read as a true echo from the depths of man to the Voice which announces “indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, to every soul of man that doeth evil”? Perhaps even the most watchful assertor of the divine character of Scripture is not bound to assert that no human frailty in the least moved the spirit of a David when he, in the sphere of his own personality, thought and said these things. But we have no right to assert, as a known or necessary thing, that it was so. And we have right to say that in themselves these utterances are but a sternly true response to the avenging indignation of the Holy One.
In any case, do not let us talk with a loose facility about their incompatibility with “the spirit of the New Testament.” From one side, the New Testament is an even sterner book than the Old; as it must be of course, when it brings sin and holiness “out into the light” of the Cross of Christ. It is in the New Testament that “the souls” of saints at rest are heard saying, {Rev 6:10} “How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost Thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?” It is in the New Testament that an Apostle writes, {2Th 1:6} “It is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them which trouble you.” It is the Lord of the New Testament, the Offerer of the Prayer of the Cross, who said {Mat 23:32-35} “Fill ye up the measure of your fathers. I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes, and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth.”
His eyes must have rested, often and again, upon the denunciations of the Psalms. He saw in them that which struck no real discord, in the ultimate spiritual depth, with His own blessed compassions. Let us not resent what He has countersigned. It is His, not ours, to know all the conditions of those mysterious outbursts from the Psalmists consciousness. It is ours to recognise in them the intensest expression of what rebellious evil merits, and will find, as its reward.
But we have digressed from what is the proper matter before us. Here, in the Epistle, the sixty-ninth Psalm is cited only to affirm with the authority of Scripture the mystery of Gods action in sentencing the impenitent adversaries of His Christ to more blindness and more ruin. Through this dark and narrow door the Apostle is about to lead us now into “a large room” of hope and blessing, and to unveil to us a wonderful future for the now disgraced and seemingly rejected Israel.