BOOKS: BIBLICAL STUDIES (1500BC-AD70) / EARLY CHRISTIAN PRETERISM (AD50-1000) / FREE ONLINE BOOKS (AD1000-2008)
AD70 Dispensationalism: According to
that view, AD70 was the end of 'this age' and the start of the 'age to come'.
Those who lived before AD70 could only 'see in part' and such, lacking
the resurrection and redemptive blessings which supposedly came only
Herod's Temple in Jerusalem
fell. Accordingly, AD70 was not only the end of Old
Testament Judaism, but it was also the end of the revelation of
Christianity as seen in the New Testament.
AD70 Dispensationalism: According to that view, AD70 was the end of 'this age' and the start of the 'age to come'. Those who lived before AD70 could only 'see in part' and such, lacking the resurrection and redemptive blessings which supposedly came only when Herod's Temple in Jerusalem fell. Accordingly, AD70 was not only the end of Old Testament Judaism, but it was also the end of the revelation of Christianity as seen in the New Testament.
material is being archived for balanced representation of all preterist views,
but is classified under the theological term hyper (as in beyond
the acceptable range of tolerable doctrines) at this website. The
classification of all full preterism as Hyper Preterism (HyP) is built
upon well over a decade of intense research at PreteristArchive.com, and
the convictions of
the website curator (a
former full preterist pastor). The HyP
theology of final resurrection and consummation in the fall of Jerusalem, with its dispensational line in AD70
(end of old age, start of new age), has never been known among authors
through nearly 20 centuries of Christianity leading up
to 1845, when the earliest known full preterist book was written.
Even though there may be many secondary points of agreement between
Historical/Modern Preterism and Hyper Preterism, their premises are undeniably and
THE FOLLOWING MATERIAL HAS BEEN CLASSIFIED AS "HYPER PRETERIST"
"Full preterist" material is being archived for balanced representation of all preterist views, but is classified under the theological term hyper (as in beyond the acceptable range of tolerable doctrines) at this website. The classification of all full preterism as Hyper Preterism (HyP) is built upon well over a decade of intense research at PreteristArchive.com, and the convictions of the website curator (a former full preterist pastor). The HyP theology of final resurrection and consummation in the fall of Jerusalem, with its dispensational line in AD70 (end of old age, start of new age), has never been known among authors through nearly 20 centuries of Christianity leading up to 1845, when the earliest known full preterist book was written. Even though there may be many secondary points of agreement between Historical/Modern Preterism and Hyper Preterism, their premises are undeniably and fundamentally different.
WARNING: THE FOLLOWING MATERIAL HAS BEEN CLASSIFIED AS "HYPER PRETERIST"
SOME DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINES OF SYSTEMATIZED HYPER PRETERISM
It is important to keep in mind that many ideas and doctrines full preterism appeals to - such as the complete end of the Old Covenant world in AD70 - are by no means distinctive to that view. Many non HyPs believe this as well, so one need not embrace the Hyper Preterist system in order to endorse this view. Following are exceptional doctrines which, so far as I've seen, are only taught by adherents of Hyper Preterism.:
DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINES TAUGHT BY STANDARD FULL PRETERISM
DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINES TAUGHT BY VARIOUS FORMS
By Daniel Thompson
We must introduce ourselves to: 1) Romans in general, 2) Romans chapters 9-11, and 3) Romans 11 in particular.
The General outline of Romans
Romans is Paul's unfolding of the gospel in a systematic form. The basic outline is as follows: (Note Romans 11:11-32.)
I. Romans 1:1-15, Introduction
II. Romans Chapters 9,10, and 11
In the book of Romans, chapters 9,10, and 11 are a pause in Paul's thesis of justification to deal with the problem of God's old covenant people - the Jews - and their rejection of this gospel provision. If any people should have been prepared for the coming and reception of the Messiah, it was the nation of Israel. As Paul says in Romans 9:4, “to whom [Israel] pertain[s] the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises...”. But although Israel partook of such privileges and preparation, the [gospel] Word had no effect (cf. Rom 9:6).
The above is the main theme of Romans 9. Paul was in deep sorrow because his kinsman according to the flesh were not partakers of the grace that is in Christ Jesus. And as those who should have been prepared, the natural objection Paul must have faced on occasion was “God has not kept His Word/promise.”
Indeed, we have seen this very issue arise in Romans 9:6a. Paul answers this (9:6b-13), followed by two possible problems that arise out of the doctrine of election (9:14-18; 19-24), and then concludes by completing his thoughts of verse 24 via the Old Testament, “even of us, whom He hath called, not of the Jews only, but of the Gentiles.” (9:25-33).
Romans 10 deals with the present Jewish dilemma of a nation seeking a redemption through a law/righteousness that God never ordained (10:1-3). Christ is the end (telos / end-goal) of the law for eis/ relating to) righteousness (10:4). The subsequent statements of Paul (10:5-21) draw out the error of the Jew from different Old Testament perspectives.
Romans 11 is interested not in past promises (chp 9) or present issues (chp 10) but the future of this Christ-rejecting nation. As Romans 11: la puts it, “Has God cast off His people” (that is, in light of the rejected promises [chp 9] and the false self righteousness [chp 10])? In v.v. 1b-10 Paul moves in two basic directions.
First, he declares emphatically that God has not cast off Israel redemptively for: 1) Paul himself was an example of one who sought righteousness via the law and yet God had pity on Him (v. lb cf. Phil 3:4ff; 1 Tim 1:12-14), and 2) God declared through Elijah that he has set aside a faithful remnant in the midst of apostasy and it was true in Paul's day as well (v.v.2-5). Paul then clarifies (v.6), draws an inescapable inference (v. 7), and concludes on the state of those outside the remnant (v.v. 8- 10).
This line of thought from the apostle's pen is simple and clear to follow in v.v. 1-10. He is establishing both the truth of grace to Israelites, and the practical state of those still apart from God's righteousness in Christ. But in its simplicity, we may be inclined to overlook certain truths that will become essential to a proper interpretation of 11:11-32.
First, although Paul is discussing the nation of Israel, his interest is in the individual Israelite, for although redemption occurred nationally under the Old Covenant, redemption is ever and only personal under the New Covenant. Thus, although Paul speaks of an Old Covenant people, he is expounding a New Covenant redemption. THERE IS NO LONGER SUCH A THING AS CORPORATE REDEMPTION - a redemption such as we find in Exodus. I do not want to be misunderstood at this point. There were many individuals of faith redeemed personally in the Old Testament as Hebrews 11 clearly indicates. I am only speaking covanentally. Under the Old Covenant, God blessed or cursed a people according to their birth (cf. Deut 27-28). Under the New Covenant, God deals only with people according to the new birth (that is, as individuals).
This might at first seem perplexing, but if we look at redemption's two prerequisites - faith and repentance - we will see a clear difference in Old and New Covenant redemption. Throughout Old Testament history, it seems if the leadership - and some portion of the Israelites professed faith in God and claimed to forsake their sins, God would redeem them out of a given national bondage or tyranny (i.e. Assyrian, Babylonian, etc.).
In other words, only some - and probably not even a majority - need have faith or repentance to partake of a given “redemption” in the Old Covenant sense of the word (restoration to the promise land, etc.). The corporate body repented, believed, and were thereby delivered. 2 Chronicles 7:14 is the classic example of the corporate, Old Covenant promise; “If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.” It is most certainly true that not all Israelites truly repented, prayed, and trusted God in a given situation of their history. Yet (and this is key) Israel as a nation would be healed - Israel as a nation would be redeemed.
None of the above Old Covenant redemptive themes are applicable in New Testament redemption.1 It is as individuals we repent, as individuals we believe, and as individuals we are delivered. Under the Old Covenant you might or might not know God, and still partake of covenantal blessings simply by virtue of birth. This is completely contrary to the New Covenant. Unlike the Old Covenant (where those born to the Old Covenant were instructed), under the New Covenant, “all... know me” (Heb 8:11). The Old Covenant is gone (Heb 8:7-8,13), and with it the type of faith/repentance/redemption associated with that covenant - national.
Second, notice the contemporary nature of Romans 11. Paul speaks of truths “at the present time” (v.5); these include himself (v.1b), a remnant (v.v.2-4, cf. v.5), and a people hardened (8-10). This hardened, slumbering Israel is Paul's concern in his subsequent question (v.1 la). The Gentiles who are saved are Paul's contemporaries (v.1 ib), and they were to provoke Jewish
contemporaries of his day (v.1 ib). Paul exalts his ministry (v.13) to save people in his own day (v.14). The branches broken off are contemporary Israelites (v.v.17-21), just as the engrafted Gentiles are contemporary (v.v.20,21), and the Jews who had been broken off in unbelief grafted in again by faith (v.v.23-24). This all must be true, for the unveiling of all this was to keep the recipients of the letter from boasting (v.25, cf. v.18). All of the above is confirmed and repeated in Paul's concluding comments of v.v.30- 32.
I have left out v.v. 12,15-16,26-29 on purpose that we might be able to stand back and look at the context which surrounds these interesting statements. That the future is discussed is not in doubt. What IS perplexing is that so much of what is written by commentators upon Romans 11:11-32 interprets this section as
far future and not contemporary or near future (that is, promises relating to Paul's contemporaries). We shall have opportunity to return to this theme often, especially in v.v.25-26.
III. Romans 11:11 - 32, Commentary
As to the way we shall attempt to understand Romans 11:11-32, we shall break down each verse into five essential spheres of truth: 1) the general context which surrounds our verse, 2) the major issues at hand in the verse, 3) the key words to comprehend in the verse, 4) the key cross references elsewhere in Scripture relating to the verse, and 5) a summery of the meaning of the verse as derived from the preceding four spheres of study.
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.
v.11 - General Context
As has been noted previously, Paul concludes part 1 of Romans 11 (11:1-10) describing those who are not part of the remnant - that is, those who have rejected Christ. These “hardened” Israelites (v.v.7,25) are those who have “stumbled,” (v.11), have “fallen,” (v.12), were “broken off,” (v.v.17,19), and are in “unbelief,” (v.20,30). The three verses prior to verse 11 (v.v.8- 10) have the hardened Israelites as “slumbering,” spiritually blind and deaf, and, in general, darkened.
Thus the question that arises in verse 11 is quite natural; “Have they (hardened Israel) stumbled that they should fall?” On the heals of Paul's vivid description of the state of unbelieving Israel, it was of great interest to the apostle to display the mercies of God toward this apostate people - mercies which will bring forth praise from Paul in his closing doxology (11:33-36).
The key to the context of Romans 11:11 is Israel. The question of verse 11 directs us to the fate of Israelites and their future, just as the previous discussion related directly to those Israelites who are unbelievers. This will be essential as we approach verse 12. In short, the question in Romans 11:11 as defined by the context of Romans 11:7-10 may be summarized by the following; “The blind and hardened Israelites... are they blind such that they shall never see, and hardened beyond reach such that their future is hopeless?”
v.11 - Major Issues
Pauline style when questions arise Paul has a particular style of discourse when inquiries are involved such as we have in verse 11. His style may be summarized as follows:
1. question... 2. short retort... 3. summary answer... 4. detailed answers, issues and explanations.
Note this four part linkage in Romans 6:1-3: 1) Question, “Shall we continue in sin (v.1);” 2) short retort, “May it never be (mee genoito), (v.1);” 3) summary answer, “how shall we who died to sin live any longer therein; (v.2)” 4) detail, “Do you not know...” (v.3ff). Romans 7:13-14 is the same: 1) Question, “Is that which is sin become death to me, (v.13);” 2) short retort, “May it never be (v.13);” 3) summary answer, “But sin, that it might appear sin...(v. 13);” 4) detail, “for we know the law is spiritual...” (v.14ff).
Thus we have been well prepare for the movement of Paul's thought by his style of question/answer in 6:1, 6:15, 7:7, 7:13, 9:14, 9:18,and 11:1. We are most assuredly well prepared for the flow of thought in Romans 11:11 and following. Indeed, a quick look at Romans 11:11 will reveal this question-short answer- summary answer style: 1) Question, “Have they stumbled that they should fall; 2) short retort, “May it never be;” 3) summary answer, “but [rather] through their fall salvation [is come] unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.” The detail - 4) - will begin in verse 12. We will briefly approach each of the parts to Paul's inquiry in the “Key Words” section.
The Gentile recipients of “Romans”
His question arises from many reasons; love for countryman (9:1ff; 10:1ff etc.), defense of truth (9:6b; 10:3) etc. Yet the preeminent, as well as a common theme that runs throughout this section (11:11-32), is the pride of the Gentile Romans in their salvation when for so long they lay in spiritual darkness, while the Israelites, with all the covenants, promises, etc. (Rom 9:40) had rejected the gospel light. This is abundantly evident, for Paul will make such comments to his Roman Gentile brethren as: “boast not against the branches” (11:18), “be not high-minded” (v.20), “wise in your conceits,” (v.25). Indeed, Paul has no encouraging words for his Gentile readers in this section (a point that will become important in our subsequent verse)!
What is of importance to the rest of Romans 11 (11:12-32) is that: 1) Paul wants to settle the issue of the future and his contemporary Israelites, and 2) he is interested in the Gentiles only so far as it helps answer the question of his contemporary kinsman and their future hope.2
v.11 - Key Words (Greek/English)
mee / not - The sentence before us in verse 11a should really be translated; “They have not stumbled that they should fall, have they?”- a question which anticipates a no answer. Inevitably in greek, if a inquiry has “mee” in its structure, the writer or speaker is expecting a “no” response. An example of this is the Lord's question posed to the apostles after a crowd had displayed its dislike for His teachings. In John 6:67, the Lord said, “Will you also go away” (greek - mee kai umeis thelete upagein)? With the use of “mee,” our Lord expected his disciples to answer in the negative - the very answer which Peter subsequently gave the Savior.
Such is true as well with Romans 11:11. With his use of “mee,” Paul is already committing us to the truth that the Jews described in v.v.8-10 - the “hardened” Jews of 11:7 - are not beyond redemptive hope and have not stumbled so as to fall beyond God's grace.
Pesosi / fall - It should first be understood that the use of “fall” in verse 11 could not imply that the Jews have never fallen, for verse 22 states plainly that they have indeed done just that (e.g. “on them (Jews) which fell”). Paul is taking about a stumbling and falling that is permanent (i.e. “have they (Jews) fallen so as to be in a hopeless condition - beyond God's mercies”). The word “fall” is in a greek tense (aorist) which can be used to express a state of being or condition (what is called the cumulative aorist, similar to the greek perfect tense). This issue of a irretrievably fallen state is Paul's interest when raising the question of Romans 11:11. Paul is writing Romans 11:1-10 to inquire about the nation of Israel and their hope; in Romans 11:11-32, He is inquiring about the condition of those Israelites who have turned from the gospel. Paul is asking if they are hopeless; he is asking if these fallen Israelites are irrevocably lost.
Mee genoito / May it never be! - This is Paul's emphatic denial of a given proposition. Fourteen of the fifteen New Testament uses are found in Paul's writings - most all of these in Romans. Galatians 6:14 affords us the classic example of “mee genoito” when Paul says, “May it never be (mee genoito) that I glory save in the cross of Christ.” Here, in Romans 11:11, Paul's “mee genoito” provides the final word on the subject of any permanent, hopeless condition for the Jews described in v.v.8-10. There is hope for the redemption of Israelites, and Paul will provide the proof for that hope in the subsequent verses.
Soteria / salvation - Eternal redemption is Paul's concern when dealing with these Jews. He says this in verse 11, in verse 14, as well as verse 26. We need this established prior to Paul's use of his “grafting” illustration (v.v. 17-24). One might be tempted (as many have) to conclude that it is national redemption that is being discussed via the illustration in v.v.17-24, - but the salvation of v.v.11,14, and 26 is individual, not national. Branches are broken off because of unbelief (v.v.17,19-22). The grafting back in (v.v.23,24) is by faith unto eternal salvation, and such salvation is individual. We shall return to this point with regularity - especially in v.v.25 and 26.
Fall ® Salvation ® Jealousy
This link of (1) fall ® (2) salvation (Gentiles) ® (3) jealousy (Jews) ® (4) salvation (Jews) is the most important series of ideas that Paul will establish in Romans 11:11-32. We will encounter part or all of this contiguous series of ideas frequently in verses 11 through 32. Note the following linkage of the above themes (1), (2), (3), and (4):
In v.v. 13-14, Paul magnified his ministry - Gentile salvation (2) - such that he would provoke to jealousy the Jews (3) and save some (4). Verse 15 says, “if the casting away of them (1) [be] the reconciliation of the world (2), what shall the receiving of them be... (4). Again, in v.v.19-20, we find Paul putting these words into the mouths of the disdainful Gentiles; “Thou wilt say then, `the branches were broken off, that I may be grafted in (2). Well, because of unbelief they were broken off... (1).” Still again, in 11:25-26, Paul says, “...blindness in part is happened to Israel (1) until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in (2). And thus (3) all Israel shall be saved... (4). Lastly, Romans 11:30-31 states, “these also have now not believed (1), that through your mercy (2) they may also obtain mercy (3).”
From the inception of this part of Romans (11:11), to the central discussion (11:13-14; 11:15; 11:19-20), to the unveiled mystery (11:25-26), to the conclusion (11:30-31)Paul's theme is the grace available to Israel if they return to Him. The issue of the fall of the Jews (1) granting an open gospel door to the Gentiles (2) and thus provoking the fallen Jews (3) such that they turn from unbelief to faith and salvation (4) is not just present, but clearly prevalent, pervasive - in a word, ubiquitous - in the Pauline argument of Romans 11:11-32.
The above must be grasped, because there will be a great temptation to start thinking Paul has left the main issue for other eschatological themes. This will be true in particular of 11:12 and 11:25-29. We must not venture to think Paul is pursuing new theological issues anywhere in Romans 11:11-32. He is solely interested in answering the question of 11:11!
The clear proof of this is the theme at the beginning of 11:11-32 is the same as at the end (cf. 11:11 and the Jews fall bringing in the Gentiles which in turn brings in the Jews (11:1 lb); compare 11:31 and “Even so have these (Jews) now not believed, that through your mercy (i.e. Gentile redemption) they (Jews) also may obtain mercy.”
v.11 - Cross References
The verse of note to help us on in our understanding of Romans 11:11 is 11:14. We can be sure of Paul's meaning of “jealousy” in verse 11 because Paul completes the thought in verse 14. Note:
salvation [is come] to the Gentiles, for to provoke them (Jews) to jealousy,” v.11. “I (through Gentile ministry) may provoke to emulation (greek/jealousy) and save some of them,” v.14.
This is Paul's theme, interest, and intent in his ministry - which ministry also was the proof that God still held out grace for the slumbering, hardened Jew.
Romans 10:19 - Paul has already announced this theme to some degree in the previous chapter (e.g. Gentile salvation provoking Israelite jealousy
v.11 - Summary
In summary, Paul begins a new division in Romans 11:11. He began the chapter with an inquiry into the grace of God and whether the whole nation of Israel, having put their own Savior to death (Acts 2:22ff; 7:52), had been rejected by God. This Paul emphatically denies, for there is a remnant according to the election of grace who are Israelites and do believe (Rom 11:5). Yet many do not believe, and the state of these Jews is delineated in 11:8-10.
This is what 11:11-32 is all about - the fate of those fallen Jews. Paul inquires regarding those Jews who are in a state of lostness. Do they have any hope to lay hold of the grace of God (11:11)? Paul says yes, and explains that God is using the fall of these Jews to bring in Gentiles to the kingdom. But this Gentile salvation is only a means to an end - the end being the provocation of the fallen Jews to lay hold of Christ and His gospel. Thus the question of “Have they (Jews) stumbled that they should fall (that is, fall irrevocably)?” Paul says “mee genoito” - No! God will use their own fall to bring them back.
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 fullness?
v.12 - General Context
We must draw on vocabulary right away to establish context and the relationship between verse 11 and verse 12. The first two words of verse 12 are “ei de,” variously translated “now if,” or “but if,” or “and if” in the New Testament. In Romans, there are 15+ uses of “ei de” alone, and inevitably it is used to continue a previous line of thought.
There are cases like Romans 8:10, where after stating “if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His (8:9), Paul follows with “but if (ei de) Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin but the spirit is alive because of righteousness.” In this case, there is a clear contrast between clauses. Yet this is not typical of Pauline use. Normally (and this is true of the “ei de” of Romans 11:12) “ei de” is used to continue or further expand the thoughts and ideas of the previous verse/subject.
This is essential for the proper interpretation of verse 12. Paul's interest is fallen/hardened Israel's hope for grace and redemption. Does their sin of rejecting Christ preclude all prospects of forgiveness? What is of importance here is that with Paul's “ei de“ at the beginning of verse 12, he is continuing the issue of Israel and redemption started in verse 11. For Paul, there is no break in his theme or thought.
v.12 - Major Issues
In Romans 7:15-16 we read,
“For that which I do I know not: for what I would, that do I not, but what I hate, that do I (v.15). If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law, that it is good” (v.16).
Now the logic of verses 15-16 can be summed up as follows: if we assign the content of verse 15 the letter “A,” and if we recognized that the first clause of verse 16 (16a) is a condensed expression of verse 15 (“now if I do what I would not”), and if we assign “B” to the final clause verse 16 (16b, “I consent with the law that it is good”), then we might summarized Paul's logic of 7:15-16 as follows: “A” is true (“I do not do what I would,” v.15). And thus if “A” is true (“Now if I do not do what I would,” v. 16a), then “B” (“I consent with the law that it is good”) is the sure and necessary consequence of “A.” Looking at a side by side view might help:
“for that which I do I know not: for what I would, that do I not, but what I hate, that do I,” v.15 “if then I do that which I would not, (v.16a - a summary of v.15) I consent with the law that it is good,” (v. 16b, the necessary deduction of the truth of v.15)
Paul's conclusion of the goodness of the law (v.16) is true because of his impotent strife described in verse 15. It is not my intention to expound the difficulties involved in Romans seven, but what is crucial is to know and heed Paul's style of argumentation. This argumentation for Paul in Romans 7:15-16 is an exposition of a particular truth, followed by arguing that if this truth be so, there are theological certainties which must accompany the aforementioned truth. This process of reasoning which Paul uses in Romans 7:15-16, he will use in Romans 11:11-12.
Now keeping the above issues in mind, Paul is stating in Romans ll:llb that “through their (Jews) fall salvation has come to the Gentiles, for to provoke them (Jews) to jealousy.” Let us diagram Paul's ideas and concepts:
As above, let us assign the letter “A.” to the concept spanning the fall of the Jews which brings salvation for the Gentiles, to the jealousy of the Jews in light of this salvation. This means that when Paul says in verse 12a, “now if the fall of them (Jews) [be] the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them (Jews) the riches of the Gentiles,” he is saying nothing more or less than “if “A” is true,” then 12b, “how much more their fullness” (e.g. “B”), is the sure and necessary consequence of l1b and its reiteration, 12a. Whatever “how much more there fullness” means, Paul is saying that this “fullness” is the certain, unfailing issuance of 1 lb and 12a.
In other words, if Paul's inquiry of verse 11 is concerned with whether the fallen Jews might ever partake of mercy, and his goal expressed by “mee genoito” is to argue passionately in the affirmative, then 1 lb and 12a are intended to establish without doubt that fallen Israel can be redeemed. This conclusion of available salvation is the essence of what “how much more their fullness” means.
At this point it is necessary to deal with the phrase “how much more their fullness” in the history of Christian interpretation.
Because of the give and take / back and forth / Jew and Gentile style of the first part of v.12 (“now if the fall of them (Jews) [be] the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles...”), without exception, interpreters have felt that the last clause of verse 12 must consist of something akin to “how much more their fullness means blessing for the Gentiles/church.”
This writer has yet to run across an exception to this rule in some 30+ works on Romans 11. Some examples of what “how much more their fullness” means in the finest expositors ever: “The conversion of the Jews will, directly and indirectly, do more for the advantage of the Gentiles than their unbelief has done,” John Brown, 1857; “If an event so untoward as Israel's fall was the occasion of such unspeakable good to the Gentile world, of how much greater good may we expect an event so blessed as their recovery to be productive,” Jamieson, Fausett, and Brown, approx. 1870; “the salvation of the full number of Israelites... would progressively bring an abundance of blessing to the entire world,” William Hendrickson, 1980; “their (Jews) restoration as a body, when they (Jews) shall acknowledge Christ as the Messiah - will yet prove a far greater blessing to the Gentiles,” Robert Haldane, approx. 1839; “how much greater blessing (e.g. for the world) which will result from their fullness,” Albert Arnold (American Baptist Commentary), 1882; “This (the conversion of the Jews) will be of great ascension to the Gentile church, bring much glory to it,” John Gill, 1770; “the fullness of Israel will involve for the Gentile a much greater enjoyment of gospel blessing,” John Murray, 1959. All the best works read, more or less, the same.
In these works, the reasons given that Paul might intend this idea in verse 12 are: first, the pattern or flow of thought in verse 12 of Jew-World / Jew-Gentile, lends itself to the translated idea at the end of verse 12 as “how much more the fullness of the Jew means fullness for the Gentiles (or most say fullness for the church).
Second, there are prophetic passages in the Old Testament that seem to underscore a glorious period of Jew-Gentile revival such as might be reflected in Romans 11:12 (cf. Is 2:2 “in the last days, the mountain of the Lord shall be established... and all nations shall flow unto it;” Is 11:9, “the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord.” etc.).
In spite of this, the reasons for not translating the end of verse 12 in such a fashion are overwhelming. First and foremost, there is no hint from Paul that he has any other issue in mind than the salvation of the Jew who fits the description of 11:8-10. The question is in reference to redeeming the Jew, the basic answer of Paul in verse 11 (after his mee genoito!) is in regard to provoking the Jews to jealousy and saving them (cf. v.14). There is no hint of a new subject as we come to verse 12. On the contrary, Paul's “ei de” at the beginning of verse 12 makes it clear he is expanding on the truths of verse 11 - truths that are dealing with the question of Jewish redemptive hope in light of their fall, and the reasoned proof of that hope.
Second, for Paul in Romans 11, the Gentiles are a means to an end - the provoking of Israelites to salvation. This is made absolutely plain in the succeeding verses (v.v.13-14). Paul would not bring up a question of possible redemption for fallen Israelites in a chapter dealing solely with the question of Israel, and then end his basic thesis (v.v. 11-12) with Gentile growth!
Third, in Romans 11:11-32, Paul's whole purpose is to explain the Jewish situation in such a way as to negate the pride of the Gentiles at Rome. This is clear from his statements to the Roman readers: “I magnify my office (as apostle to the Gentiles) if by any means I may provoke [them which are of] my flesh and save some” (v.v.13-14); “Boast not against the branches,” (v.18); “Be not high-minded but fear (v.20); “I would not ... that you should be ignorant...lest you be wise in your own concepts” (v.25). Paul would never - in the midst of purposing to negate Gentile pride in Rome - expound in verse 12 Israelite salvation as being a means to more glory for Gentiles!
Fourth - and we shall deal with this in detail in the section on key words - Paul's use of greek in “how much more (poso mallon) their fullness” is also found in verse 24. The parallels are both striking and instructive. Paul says in 11:24, “if thou (Gentiles)...were grafted contrary to nature... how much more (poso mallon) shall these (Jews), which be natural [branches], be grafted into their own olive tree.” It would seem clear by comparing verse 24 with verse 12 that the interest of Paul's “how much more” in verse 12 is to express “how much more sure” is Jewish redemption possible (which, of course, is the question at hand). There is no hint of Pauline interest in Gentile or church benefits in either verse 24 or verse 12 when examining Paul's use of poso mallon. This should leave little doubt regarding Paul's interest and intent, or, more to the point, what is not Paul's intent.
Thus: In Romans 11:12b - “how much more their fullness” - Paul wants to establish the possibility of future grace to the hardened Israelites of 11:8-10, NOT future glory for the Gentiles (or the church).
v.12 - Key Words
ei de / and/but/now if - see General Context, v.12.
poso mallon / “how much more” - There are seven uses of poso mallon in the New Testament (excluding Romans 11:12,24): Matt 7:11/Lk 11:13; Matt 10:28; Lk 12:24,28; Phm 16; Heb 9:14. Let us look at each.
“if you give good gifts...how much more you heavenly Father...,” Mt 7:11; Lk 11:13 “if they call the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more...his household,” Mt 10:25 “if God feeds the ravens... of how much more worth... are you,” Lk 12:24 “if God so clothed the grass...how much more... will He cloth you,” Lk 12:28 “(Onesimus) a beloved brother...to me...how much more unto thee,” Phm 16 “if the blood of bulls and goats...purifies...how much more...the blood of Christ,” Heb 9:13, 14
As a brief perusal will show, the phrase “poso mallon” (our greek phrase in verse 12 translated “how much more”) is used as a transition to say if a lesser idea is true, a related greater idea must be true (Mt 7:11; Lk 11:13; 12:24,28; Plm 16; Heb 9:14); or, if a greater idea is true, then a lesser idea must be true (Mt 10:25). Again, the point of comparison is to show that if the greater issue is true, the lesser one must surely be true also; and if the lesser idea is true, the greater must surely be true as well.
Notice similar reasoning by Paul in verses such as Romans 8:32; “He (God) that spared not His own Son... will He not... give us all things” (the greater truth establishes the veracity of the lesser truth[s]), and 2 Corinthians 3:9, “For if the ministration of condemnation is glory, much rather the ministration of righteousness exceed[s] in glory” (the lesser truth establishes the veracity of some greater truth[s]).
The common denominator in all this is the idea that if in a sentence the clause prior to “poso mallon/how much more” is true, the clause subsequent to “poso mallon/how much more” is true, whether the argument is lesser to greater, or greater to lesser.
pleeroma / fullness - The word which confronts us now has been written and discussed extensively with (it seems) little progress in understanding. This is true in particular of its verb form, pleeroma. But oftimes context gives us insight where etymological studies fail. In Romans 11:12, fullness ( pleeroma) is such a word - a word understood by the study of context.
If we follow Paul's train of thought, we see he is intent on defending his view that an Israelite who has initially rejected Christ can still be the recipient of the grace of God in the gospel (thus Paul's “may it never be!” to the inquiry of verse 11 “have they (Jews) stumbled so as to fall irretrievably”).
Paul then makes known to us that Israel's fall will in fact be used to redeem them via Gentile salvation and subsequent provocation unto faith (v.1 ib). He then says in verse 12 that if grace came in light of the fall of Israelites, then most certainly grace is available upon the return of Israelites.
This means of necessity that the term “fullness” must be equal to redemptive ingathering - i.e. salvation. This is assured in four ways. First, the word is used of ingathering or pouring of wine in Matthew 9:16 and Mark 2:21. Second, in Romans 11:12, “fullness” is intended to be antithetical to the words “fall” (greek, “parapatoma” / “transgression”) and “diminishing,” - terms that relate to Israel's lost condition. Third, in Romans 11:15 - the parallel passage to 11:12 - Paul uses the word “receiving” instead of “fullness,” and this is surely gospel receiving. Fourth, in Paul's analogy of vine/branches (Romans 11:17-24), the “grafting” is clearly analogous to “fullness” and plainly implies salvation (cf. 11:17).
In summary, “fullness / pleeroma” implies the opposite of “transgression,” (11:12a) and is parallel conceptually to “receiving,” (11:15b). This means “fullness” refers to redemptive reception - in this case, Israel(ites).
v.12 - Cross References
Again, we should remind ourselves that the theme of Gentile salvation ® Israelite jealousy has already been broached in Romans 10:19.
The two clear cross references relating to 11:12 are Romans 11:15 and 11:24. Note Romans 11:12 as compared with Romans 11:15:
“now if the fall of them [be] riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fullness,” v.12 “for if the casting away of them [be] the reconciliation of the world what will the receiving of them be but life from the dead,” v.15
Note the parallels:
“fall,” “diminishing,” v.12/”casting away,” v.15
What should be clear is that the phrase “life from the dead” is the conclusion to both “what will the receiving of them be,” v.15, and “how much more their fullness,” v.12. We need not guess at this point as to Paul's meaning in verse 12, for we have a detailed parallel in verse 15.
Also, in verse 12, Paul is stating one idea in two different ways. If I might paraphrase: “if the fall of them [be] the riches of the world... that is, if the diminishing of them [be] the riches of the Gentiles...”. This duplication is not meant to set up a back- and-forth / Jew-Gentile, Jew-Gentile picture in our mind such that we conclude that Paul - after announcing the “fullness” of the Jew - is now going back to comment on a related Gentile matter.
As is often seen in the book of Proverbs, Paul is enunciating the same truth two slightly different ways to give emphasis, not to the back-and-forth of Jew/Gentile, but to reiterate that God brought gospel riches to the Gentiles out of sin. And as Paul wants to answer the issue of whether the Jews have stumbled and thus fallen irretrievably (11:11a), the Bible truth of “grace out of sin” is a potent argument for grace to the Jew. For (if I may paraphrase the Pauline contention of Romans 11:11-12), if grace came from God when Israel turned away, grace shall surely come to them if they return.
Romans 11:24 is a second parallel to Romans 11:12. Both verses use poso mallon / “how much more” in their argument - 11:12 and “how much more their fullness,” whereas 11:24 states “how much more... shall these... be grafted.”
Further - and as important - is that both verses are arguing that if grace came to Gentiles, it will most assuredly come to the Israelite (cf. “shall be grafted” / “egkentristheesontai,” greek future tense implying a certain result under proper conditions [Gnomic future]). In the case of 11:12, grace will come to returning Israel because grace came to the Gentiles by virtue of departing Israel. In 11:24, returning Israelites, being a natural branches, will surely be grafted back in because Gentiles - unnatural branches - were grafted in. The reasoning behind both 11:12 and 11:24 is.. If God did the more difficult (brought good via evil), He will surely do the less difficult (bring good via good).
v.12 - Summary
In conclusion, Romans 11:12 is a continuation of Paul's journey into the question of fallen Israel's future (cf. 11:11). Those Israelites who are depicted as spiritually blinded and hardened in v.v.8-1O - are they without hope of salvation? Paul's answer is no, because God has ordained that through their fall, grace would come to them by means of Gentile redemption and the jealousy this would engender. Paul's “ei de/now if' at the outset of verse 12 continues this inquiry. The apostle argues that the Jews who fell must have grace - and thus salvation - available to them because grace was made available through their fall! Therefore, Paul reasons; if through their transgression grace came (to the Gentiles), grace will most certainly come to them (the Jews) through their repentance and faith!
We might paraphrase Paul's verse 12 in this fashion:
“now, as I have just stated in short form in 11:11b, if the transgression of the Jews (i.e. their turning from Christ and His gospel) meant redemption for the world; or - to put it another way - if the diminishing of the Jews brought riches to the Gentiles, how much more sure and certain is it that God will be gracious to Israel in her return.” 3
13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
v.v. 13-14 General Context
Paul is still interested in his readers understanding that the Jews who have rejected Christ initially still have a gracious offer to return and - as the prodigal son - will be received with the open arms of grace. He makes us aware that he has more to say by beginning verse 13 with “for.”
The great apostle continues by stating that in speaking (or writing) to the Roman Gentiles, the goal in relation to his brethren according to the flesh was to magnify his ministry (v.13), and thus provoke and save some of his people (v.14). This is the theme Paul began with in verse 11 when he said, “...salvation [is] come to the Gentiles, for to provoke them (the Jews) to jealousy” and - as verse 14 completes the thought - “might save some of them.”
Observe that this issue of Paul and his call to a Gentile ministry is everywhere in the book of Acts. In Acts 9:15, “Go...bear my name before the Gentiles;” Acts 13:46-47, “We turn to the Gentiles” and “... a light to the Gentiles;” Acts 22:21, “I...send thee...unto the Gentiles;” Acts 26:17, “...the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee.” Further, Paul's epistles such as Galatians are full of the same declaration of his Gentile ministry: “...I might preach Him (Christ) among the heathen” 1:16; “the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me” 2:7; “for He...was mighty in me toward the Gentiles” 2:8.
As has been noticed in prior verses, the issue of Gentiles is brought in only as a means to an end - the end being to resolve the question of Israel, their fall, and the possibility of grace. The issue of Paul's ministry is discussed only so as to let the prideful Gentiles might grasp that their redemption is accomplished for the purpose of others - Israelites. Paul is saying, “Do not boast in your redemption as if you are the end-all of God's work, for in His plan, your redemption is accomplished not for your sake but for the sake of a hardened, rebellious people - Israel.”
v.v.13-14 - Major Issues
The major issue that allows us to understand properly verses such as 11:12 and 11:25-26 (admittedly the most controversial texts of Romans 11) is to notice that there is no change in context, subject, or purpose in the words of Romans 11:13-14. This will continue to be true (indeed, Paul will repeat himself in verse 15 - compare verse 15 to verse 12). Paul is still speaking to the question of verse 11 - and will continue to do so through verse 32. If that be kept in mind, the difficulties that arise will be solvable. Our verses here are an excellent example of how Paul stays on theme.
v.v.13-14 - Key Words
parazeeloso / provoke to jealousy - The KJV translation has for “parazeeloso” the phrase “provoke to emulation.” Although the phrase is interesting, one might miss that the word is the same as in verse 11, translated “provoke.., to jealousy.” The word is literally “to make jealous.” What must not be missed is that the theme of making Israelites jealous unto salvation is in verse 11, and continues in verse 14 (just as the terminology of verse 12 will continue in verse 15!).
soso / save - What might become lost in our exposition is the truth of salvation. Paul is satisfied with nothing less; indeed the great lack of his brethren believing the truth as it is in Christ was a source of great desire mixed with sorrow (Rom 10:1; 9:1). The word “salvation” is used here, in verse 11, in verse 26, and is implied in the Pauline illustration of “grafting,” 11:19,23,24. Romans 11 is concerned with the eternal salvation of the Israelite sinner.
v.v.13-14 - Cross Reference
See Romans 11:11, Cross Reference, notes.
v.v.13-14 - Summary
Paul is continuing to prosecute the theme of God's assured and certain grace for all Israelites who turn back from their unbelief. The Lord will receive them. Indeed, Paul was aware that, having brought Gentiles to the grace of God, God used his ministry to provoke Israel to reconsider their unbelief and lay hold of Christ. As verse 14 says, some might be saved, which is the answer to Paul's query in verse 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?
v.15 - General Context
Again, it is clear from the context that the apostle's theme has not changed at all from verse 11. This is evidenced by the parallels between verse 12 and verse 15. Moreover, note the similarities between v.v.11-12 and 13-15.
We cannot establish to strongly that: 1) v.11 and v.12 are inextricably linked and, 2) the truths of v.v. 11b-12 are reiterated in v.v.13-15. This premise must be established! We will not be assured of our interpretation of verse 12 (“how much more their fullness”) and other issues that follow unless our starting point is well known. And our starting point is Paul's question of v.11!
As has been pointed out previously, the errors regarding the exposition of Romans 11 are just at this point. Where is Paul going? And in this direction of ideas, how does he proceed? At the very outset of 11:11-32, Paul establishes - then reiterates - his interests.
v.15 - Major Issues
The apostle wants to accomplish three things in verse 15:1) complete his reason for exalting his own personal ministry, 2) complete the reiteration of v.v.11-12 and v.v.13-15, and 3) in v.15, complete the idea begun in verse 12.
First, Paul must explain why he desired to exalt his own ministry, for this is a route he took only reluctantly (cf. 2 Cor 12:1). He knew a mystery which God had revealed unto him - a mystery which he would shortly pass on to his Roman readers (v.25) - that God had chosen to glorify His own grace (and prove man's dependence) by bringing this glory out of sin. Paul would bring this out categorically in his summarizing statement of v.v.11-32, “For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that He might have mercy upon all, v.32.
We should have expected the above truth. Two other well known times, God glorified Himself by bringing grace from sin - the life of Joseph and the Cross of the Son of God. With Joseph, although sold into slavery by his eleven brothers, we learn through the patriarch that “God meant it unto good,” Gen 50:20. In our Lord's case, the apostle Peter tells us at Pentecost “Him (Christ), being delivered by the determined council and foreknowledge of God, Acts 2:23.
Now this is what God is doing in Paul's day, as he explains. He makes known the glory of God's grace to the Gentiles (by virtue of the fall/transgression of the Jews), that his brethren according to the flesh might be provoked to jealousy and come to the Savior themselves. Paul knows by revelation that God will bring those who initially followed the cry of the Jewish rulers in cutting off their own promised Messiah (Dan 9:4-27) to come embrace the Christ via the gospel work in his, and others, ministries.
Now if the above analysis is accurate, then how does verse 15 work into Paul's thought? That the truths of v.v. 13-14 and verse 15 are intimately connected is established by the “for” of verse 15. But what is it? According to the above “parallel” on v.v.11-12 and v.v.13-15, verse 15 is the assurance that God will grant life to those stirred up by jealousy to return to their God and Savior, Jesus Christ.
Second, verse 15 provides a conclusion to Paul's repetition of v.v.11-12, or, more precisely, v.v.11b-12. This is crucial, for in reality both v.v.11b-12 and 13-15 are answering the question of Paul in 11:11a, “have they stumbled that they should fall (e.g. irrevocably).” The single point to be made is that, with the repetition, we are sure that Paul's interest is in demonstrating the hope and future grace available to fallen Israelites.
Third, we must look to the phrase at the end of verse 15 - “life from the dead” - as an ending not just to verse 15 but to verse 12 as well. Indeed, the ending of verse 15 positively substantiates Paul's intent and movement of thought in verse 12 (and the detail of both).
In the first place, it seems clear that verse 15's “receiving” equals verse 12's “fullness.” This means we are speaking of redemption and, combined with “the fullness of them” in verse 12 and “the receiving of them” in verse 15, we know the issue is Jewish redemption.
Secondly, since: 1)”life from the dead” in verse 15 is the culminating truth of v.v.13-15 (as well to verse 12's “...fullness be”), and 2) both phrases are the end of the answer to the question in verse 11, then “life from the dead” is part of the answer to Paul's initial question. This, in turn, implies that the phrase “life from the dead” is a clause expressing the state of the of those apart of the “fullness” (v.12) or “receiving” (v.15). To clarify: if 1) the question is of Israel hope of gospel redemption (again, individual redemption), and if 2) “fullness” and “receiving” is in reference to Israelite turning to the gospel, then 3) “life from the dead” is the response/answer of assured grace and acceptance of God, and the life that doubtlessly results (i.e. eternal life).
v.15 - Key Words
In looking at verse 15, it is clear that word studies are not as important as general studies. In this case, to know, because of context and argument, that the word “casting away” (v.15) must be the same as “fall” and “diminishing” (v.12), “reconciliation” (v.12) the same as” riches” (v.15), and “receiving” (v.15) must basically be the same as “fullness” (v.12). For word studies, this is all the more important here, because the greek word translated “receiving” is found only 1 time in the New Testament!
v.15 - Cross References
Enough said about verse 15's relationship to verse 12.
v.15 - Summary
We are well on the way to grasping Paul's argument in 11:11-32. The temptations are varied and great to stray. Let me quote the great work of exposition and greek of 100+ years ago, W.G.T. Shedd (the complete note of verse 15). I was unaware of this note until my own notes were complete: “Ver 15 is a conclusion from 13,14, similar to that in verse 12 from verse 11. Apobole, the “rejection” of the Jews, spoken of in ix. 27, 29; x.21, xi.7. Katallage, the heathen, through faith in Christ, are reconciled to God, v.11. The Jewish reprobation is the occasional cause of the Gentile reconciliation. Prosleepsis is the contrary of apobole spiritual election and effectual calling is meant. Zoe ek nekros, compare vi.15, Lk xv.24. Not the resurrection of the body, which is to follow the conversion of the Jews, and the bringing in of the fullness of the Gentiles (Origen, Theodoret, Chrysost., Anselm, De Wette, Tholuck, Meyer); but spiritual life, and all the blessings of redemption (Calvin, Bengel. Philipi, Hodge). The argument is this: If the reprobation of the Jews, who as the outward called might naturally have been expected to be the inwardly called, results in such a blessing to the heathen world, then certainly the inward call itself must
result in the greatest possible blessing to the Jews themselves.” (close quote).
Although the last statement is not quite accurate, all in all Shedd is on target. The issue at hand is assurance to the Jew, and this gives us the understanding of the curious “fullness” of verse 12 and “life from the dead” in verse 15. Paul establishes, not any future Gentile (or church) blessing, but the sure blessing for Jew that comes to the same gospel as the Gentiles!
This was needed, for there was an apparent problem in the church at Rome. The Gentile saints were thinking it was either unlikely or impossible for Jews to be redeemed because of their initial rejection of Christ (by which these Gentile saints were saved). This is reflected in the terminology of 11:11ff, and this frame of mind surfaces in subsequent verses: “Boast not against the branches”(v.18), “Be not high-minded, but fear” (v.20), “lest He (God) spare not thee” (v.21), “toward thee, goodness, if thou continue.., otherwise thou shalt be cut off' (v.22), “lest you be wise in your own conceits” (v.25). This is the reason and purpose (apart from personal considerations) behind Paul's handling of the Romans 11:11 question, and the subsequent answer of 11:11-32.
16 For if the first fruit [be] holy, the lump [is] also [holy]: and if the root [be] holy, so [are] the branches.
v.16 - General Context
As Paul has done many a time, he uses “ei de" (best translated here as “now if') to introduce verse 16. This insures a continuation of ideas and thoughts from v.v. 11-15. Note also the end of verse 16. Just as sure as “ei de” at the outset of verse 16 connects us with what preceded, the use of “riza” (“root”) and “kladoi” (“branches”) at the conclusion of verse 16 introduces us to v.v.17-24. After verse 16, “root” will be used in v.v.17 and 18 (twice), while “branch[es]” will be used in v.v. 17,18,19, and 21. Thus verse 16 is something of a connection/transition verse in chapter 11 verses 11-24.
v.16 - Major Issues
As the above note makes clear, we must endeavor to understand verse 16 as both connected to verses 11-15 and introducing v.v. 17-24. If and only if our understanding does both can we lay claim to have understood Paul aright.
Verse 16 - connection with v.v.11-15
Paul had one interest in verses 11 through 15; that is, to justify his “may it never be” (God forbid, KJV) to the issue of whether fallen Israelites such as are described in verses 8-10 are in a hopeless spiritual state. Now if verse 15 is a concluding remark to prove that gospel hope stands sure even to those who once rejected the Savior sent to them, then verse 16 must somehow relate and even expand upon this truth.
Thus, if Paul basically declared “if God through Israel's fall brought grace to the world, grace must come if Israel returns,” then the logic of verse 16 (“if the first fruit is holy, so is the lump, and if the root is holy, so is [are] the branches”) must serve a similar or expanded purpose. Further, it is likely that we should concentrate on the first part of verse 16 (16a) to grasp verse 16's connection to v.v.11-15, for surely Paul wrote 16b, “if the root is holy so are the branches,” to; 1) emphasize and reiterate the truth of 16a, and 2) introduce words and themes that will be used in his argument of v.v. 17-24. Now there are two truths on the face of Paul's first fruit-and-lump illustration: 1) it is vocabulary reminiscent of the Old Testament and Israel, and 2) the first fruits and the lump share the same nature.
In the first place, the idea of “first fruits” is rooted in the Old Testament Torah, where half of all the uses are found. It is the first - and best - gleanings of a crop (wheat, corn), meat, labors etc. offered unto God. What is important for our study is that although the first fruits were the best, they were part of a whole. The first fruits wheat offering was part of the whole wheat crop, and the first fruits of corn were a gleaning from the whole crop grown by the individual. It is at this point that we touch Paul's reason for using “first fruit” in his argument.
Paul was concerned to make clear to the Roman Gentiles that although the Jews had turned from the Savior, this rejection was the means by which God saved the Gentiles (11:11b), and in turn this Gentile salvation would be used of God to provoke these very Jews to return to their God. A further question, in addition to this issue of whether a Jew who had once rejected Christ could still be the recipient of grace, was: what was the standing of such a person? The Gentiles had no such grievous sin. What was their standing in grace and in the assembly?
Paul had asked the question as to the possibility of grace for the Jew (11:1 la), and he had emphatically answered in the affirmative (11:11b-11:15). Now he takes a further step - one which will be established a second way by the illustration of the tree and its branches - in saying that if the “first fruits” are of a substance, the lump from which the first fruits are derived must share that same quality. He goes on to express the same truth another way by stating in verse 16b that if the root has a particular nature, it is shared by the branches.
This is Paul's concern in using the first fruit/lump and root/branches illustration. He is pressing forward the case for equality of standing, both regarding Jew/Jew (e.g. redeemed remnant Jew vs. redeemed Jew from v.v.8-10) and Jew/Gentile.
If one is redeemed, their standing before God is the same. They share the same promised redemption, forgiveness, adoption, inheritance; that is, if believing Gentiles are set apart to God, so are
all that are in Christ Jesus - Jew or Gentile, regardless of past.4
Verse 16 - connection with v.v.17-24
Just as the beginning of verse 16 relates us back to v.v.11-15, the end of verse 16 moves us on to v.v.17-24. But there is a curious switch. Whereas the “first fruit” of anything is a small part of the whole lump, in the same way the branches are a part of the root. In other words, we might have expected Paul to have written:
if the first fruit is holy, so is the lump
if the branches are holy, so is the root
These would be parallel; first fruit is to lump, as branch is to root!
We expect this because “first fruit” is a part of the whole (lump), and “branches” are a part of the whole (root). But Paul does not do this. I believe it is simply because the mentioning of “branches” at the end of verse 16 naturally leads into his tree/branch/grafting illustration. Thus, Paul did say the same thing twice for emphasis in verse 16, but in putting “branches” last, he made a excellent transition into his next subject (v.v.17- 24).
v.16 - Key Words
First fruits (aparkee) / lump (phurama) - Paul's goal in using this imagery is to instruct the Gentiles as to the standing of Jews who might come to the state of verse 15 - “life from the dead.” Are such redeemed Jews equal with those Gentiles who received the word with gladness (cf. Acts 13:48)? Does not the initial rejection by such Jews make them second rate citizens of the kingdom? No, because if one is united to Christ, then we share the same nature and privileges as any in Christ. The “lump” is the redeemed (possibly taking us back to Abel, Noah, and Abraham and all those of faith), and the “first fruits” are those who share in that heritage (not Jewish, but gospel). Paul's emphasis is shared gospel means shared grace, shared nature, shared inheritance, shared standing.5
Root (riza) / branches (kladoi) - The root/branches illustration has the same force as the first fruit/lump analogy. If the root is that of the rose, the branches must and will share that character. The problem that arises is in verse 17, where Paul states that some of these branches are “broken off.” Does this imply that the root is somehow to be understood as Israel and the promised redemption of the Old Testament (cf. Gen 12:1-3. This is, by the way, why verse 16 is connected by many to verse 28 and the promise to the Jewish fathers). This may be.6
In any event, Paul is going to speak of these branches as possibly being grafted in again (cf. 11 :23f), so we are sure of the apostles interest - even if his details and symbols elude us. The problem, we know, is Gentile pride and possibly disdain for Israel in light of their murder of the Savior. The objective, for Paul, is to nix this pride by showing God's purpose in Gentile grace - to make these very Jews jealous unto redemption (11:25)! And the grafting of these Jews back in is, for Paul, more natural than any grafting of Gentiles (11:24)!
v.16 - Cross References
It is of interest to this writer that a common cross reference of works commenting on Romans 11:16 - indeed about the only one - is 1 Corinthians 7:14, where children are said to be “holy/akios” because of a believing parent. But these two verses, although using a common word (holy/akios), are worlds apart. The context of 1 Corinthians is marriage, and in particular, mixed marriages (believer/unbeliever) and whether a saint is defiled by such marriages and therefore should separate and possibly divorce. The “holiness” of children probably relates to legitimacy of the children in light of the state of the marriage rather than any Old Testament-like “holiness” (i.e. holy, because a believer somehow “sanctifies” the house). This is quite a distance contextually from the “holiness” issue of Romans 11:16.
v.16 - Summary
Paul is adamant regarding the standing of those in Christ - even those who, like Paul himself, had initially rejected Christ (1 Tim 1:12ff). All who are redeemed are “in Christ,” and as such share with all the redeemed the same Father, Savior, Spirit, baptism, faith, etc. (Eph 4:4ff). The same root which has engrafted Gentiles can have engrafted Jews. Indeed, Paul will make the case that the latter group's engrafting is more natural than the former (11:24).
17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, were grafted 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.
v.v. 17,18 - General Context
If “root” is the promise that is found in the seed of Abraham - that is Jesus Christ the Lord - then all who turn in unbelief from the promised Messiah have no access to the fountain of grace (Zech 13:1) and are still in their sins. They are cut off from God and His covenant grace.
At this point, we should remind ourselves of why unbelief is so serious.
The purpose - the goal - of the Old Testament can be summarized well by quoting Galatians 3:24ff. Paul states, “So that the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith (v.24). But now that faith is come (that is, the object of faith [Christ] has been revealed), we are no longer under a tutor (i.e. law). For you are all sons of God by faith in Christ Jesus.” The law moves unequivocally toward a single end - the gospel, which is centered in Jesus Christ.
In the above context, note Luke 24:44 and John 5:39 respectively: “These things I spoke unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the Law of Moses, and in the prophets, and the Psalms, concerning Me,” and “You search the Scriptures, for you think in them you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of me.”
All of the Old Testament finds its purpose, it fulfillment, its reason, its purpose, in directing us to Christ, the Son of God, the revealer of the Father. As John 1:18 declares, “the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him (God)! The greek exeegesoto, translated “declared,” means “to lead out.” Our Lord brought out the truth, glory, power, love - indeed, He brought out all of the Father and declared Him to us. Our Lord echoes this astounding truth when He responded to Philip's “Lord, show us the Father and it sufficeth us” by stating, “he who has seen Me has seen the Father.”
If then all the Old Testament prepared us to receive Christ, and the Jewish nation rejected the very purpose for their existence (to prepare the world for the Redeemer and receive Him), it was the greatest of sins. God gave Israel covenants, services, types, promises, and glory to prepare them for their redeemer. Yet Israel still crucified God's dear Son.
v.v. 17,18 - Major Issues
1. The branches (unbelieving Jews) were broken off. The promises were there for millennia, but when the lamb of God was revealed, the Jews - desiring a political Messiah - had no need for the words of Christ, which are Spirit and life (Jn 6:63).
2. Gentile reception of the Gospel. The Gentiles have been brought in because, in going out into the fields with the gospel to compel God's Old Covenant people to come in, there was no response (cf. Lk 14:23). Thus, God said through Paul, “seeing... [you (Jews)] judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, we turn to the Gentiles,” (Acts 13:46).
3. The Romans Gentiles were boasting against the Jews in this redemption. Even though the promise of forgiveness came through Jewish Scriptures, and the good news had gone to the Gentiles because the Jews had rejected it, the Gentiles still found grounds to boast.
The generation of Jews that saw the fulfillment of all the Old Testament Messianic prophecies had rejected the promised Redeemer. As John wrote in His gospel, “He came unto His own, and His own did not receive Him,” (Jn 1:11). Thus, in Paul's illustration, the “tree” of promise was to bring forth many fruitful branches (Jewish believers), yet this is not what Christ found. In Matthew 21:19f and Mark 11:13f we have the story of this in the fig tree. Christ had come to Jerusalem in the day and abode in Bethany at night. “Now in the morning as He returned into the city [Jerusalem], He hungered. And when He saw a fig tree in the way He came unto it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered,” (Matt 21:18-19).
From then on in Matthew, we read: 1) of the parable of the Vinedresser who sent His Son believing the husbandman would receive Him, yet the Husbandman and those with him killed the Son (Matt 19:33ff); 2) in Matthew 22:1ff, we learn the parable of the wedding feast that would not be attended by those first bidden; 3) in Matthew 23 we have the series of “woes” to the Scribes and Pharisees (23:23ff), and 4) in 23:34-24:28 the desolation of the great city - Jerusalem.
We are told all this because of Israel's turning from their Messiah, and thus God is turning from them. And although God reaches out still again in Acts chapters 2,3,5 etc., Israel is still hardened toward the gospel. As a result, God sends the gospel to the Gentiles and Paul says these Gentiles through faith were “grafted in” (Rom 11:17) to the redemptive line of the proto- believer - Abraham (cf. Gal 3:29). In addition, these believing Gentiles partake of all the glorious concepts given in the Old Testament to those Jews who believed in the coming Savior - that is, those Jews who, like Abraham, “saw my [Christ's] day,” Jn 8:56 (e.g. seeing the sacrifice of Christ in the offering of Isaac/ram). This is Paul's thinking when he speaks of the Gentiles “partaking of the root and the fatness thereof..”
All of this caused the Gentiles of Rome to boast in their standing as opposed to the seed of Abraham after the flesh who had no part in God's ordained blessings in light of their unbelief. Again note how pervasive this attitude was among these Gentile saints; they boasted (v.18), they thought that God had broken the Jews off for their sake (v.19); they were high-minded (v.20); they were wise in their own concepts (v.25) etc. Note also the stern warnings as well: “fear” (v.20); “lest He also spare not thee” (v.21); “otherwise thou also shall be cut off' (v.22).
And all this was astounding to Paul, knowing that it was through the Jew that all that this grace and glory had come through the very people who the Roman Gentiles were now despising! The wonders of the gospel (the “root and the fatness” - v.17) were possessed by the Gentiles strictly by virtue of the Jew - or as Paul says in verse 18, “the root bears thee!” If any boasting was to come forth from these Gentiles, its content would be God's grace through Israel. Paul will reiterate this again and again as he continues in Romans 11.
v.v. 17,18 - Key Words
kladoi/branches egkentrizo/graft in ekklazo/break off
We now encounter Paul's section of Romans 11 (v.v. 17-24) where the above words will dominate the theme and style of ideas expounded. We will find “branch[es]” in verses 16b, 17, 18, 19, 21; “ingrafting” in verses 17, 19, 23 (twice), 24 (twice); “break off' in verses 17, 19, 20, 22, 24. Starting with the ending statement of verse 16 (“if the root is holy, so are the branches”), Paul will use the illustration of root and branch in verses 16b-24 to: 1) humble the Gentiles by expounding the truth as to the “why” of their redemption, and 2) establish the real gospel hope for the fallen Jews described in Romans 11:8-10, and the grace available to them from God in response to the inquiry of Romans 11:11 a - “have they stumbled that they should fall.”
v.v. 17,18 - Cross References
As early as Genesis 9:20, we read of Noah planting a vineyard. In Isaiah 5 and Ezekiel 17, the illustration of vine and branches appears again and of course the New Testament's use of the fig tree plant in Matthew 21 and Mark 11 gives us the impression that both the plant and its use as an image/illustration were readily recognizable and could be used to communicate a clear message regarding Israel.
v.v. 17,18 - Summary
Paul has envisioned the gospel promises and blessing going back to Abraham and Genesis 12:3 where God declares “in thee shall all the nations of the world shall be blessed” - a promise unfolded for us in Galatians 3:6-18 as “the gospel” (3:6-7) centered in Abraham's seed, Jesus Christ (3:16). The apostle uses the image of “root” for this, while using the image of “branches” for those who have 1) a vital, saving interest in the promises and forgiveness in Abraham's seed - Christ Jesus, or 2) were given the promise of that vital interest (e.g. Israel).
Paul's “grafting” and “breaking off' metaphor directs our thoughts to those outside the gospel who have come to the benefit of the treasures in Christ (“grafting”), while the latter term (“breaking off') relates to those Jews who, having been given the law with its many promises of a Savior, rejected the Messiah when He came.
In Rome, this led to a high-mindedness in the Gentile converts against Israelites and thus required Paul to rebuke such attitudes with his “Boast not!” Paul further states that if one was to glory in the free gift of grace from a human perspective (the Divine doxology coming in v.v.33-36), then the Gentile convert was to forever remember that it was the promises given to the Jewish nation - custodians of the good news of the coming Deliverer - that were the foundation and substance of the salvation the Gentiles received. Thus Paul says, “if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee,” (v.18).
Note: The Pauline argument will follow a clear and easily understandable line of thought from verse 17 to verse 24. And though there should be no disagreement as to what Paul's point is, we must note: 1) Paul takes extensive time to clarify and examine his ideas, and this should awake us to the subjects discussed, and 2) We should take careful note of Paul summery words of this section (v.v. 17-24) which are 11:23-24. What I mean to say is that Paul is not just “passing time” in this section until the more important or interesting issues arise. This section, although easier to understand than v.v. 11-15 or v.v. 25-29, is just as relevant to Paul's total argument in 11:11-32! The reason is not far to see. The section of v.v.17-24 connects both v.v. 11-15 and v.v. 25-32.
19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. 20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear 21 For if God spared not the natural branches, [take heed] lest he also spare not thee.
v.v. 19-21 - General Context
In 11:19-21, we are confronted with Paul's understanding of the heart attitude of these Roman converts. The “you will say” in verse 19 gives us Paul's mind regarding his readers. And their thoughts are not flattering. The Gentile Roman's seem to have the notion that their goodness in juxtaposition to the Israelite apostasy is the grounds for their personal engrafting and the Jewish “cutting off.” It is clear this whole attitude was regarded by Paul as “high-minded” (v.20).
The above impression is supported by the use of the emphatic “I” (greek, ego) in the statement of verse 19, “that I might be grafted in.” Paul is judicious regarding the use of the emphatic form of the greek “I,” and when Paul uses it he is calling special attention to the person. These Romans were lifting themselves up over against the apostate Israelites, and Paul says in verse 19 that this is what they were saying about themselves (e.g. “you will say...1”). It is this attitude that Paul is desirous of combating in v.v. 19-21.
v.v. 19-21- Major Issues
As we have seen, the pride of the redeemed Roman Gentiles is on Paul's mind as he writes 11:19-21. Many statements in this section lead us to see the zeal of Paul to negate this Gentile sinful pride. One of the more emphatic and instructive assertions is in verse 20, where Paul says to his readers, “you - by faith - stand.”
First, Paul uses the emphatic form of “you” in verse 20 (greek, “su”). Second, after getting their attention, he states “by faith (and not by anything in you) you stand.”7 Again, in verse 19 we saw the Roman Gentiles intimating that their goodness - over- against the apostate Jews - was the basis for their engrafting. Such thought in antithetical to the New Testament doctrine of grace. Paul says “You! By faith and not merit you stand in the gospel. Stop being high-minded!”
v.v. 19-21 - Key Words
ego / I - As we noticed above, Paul is cautious in his use of the emphatic form of “I” (ego). Whereas John uses the emphatic ego one out of every two times “I” occurs in his gospel, Paul's ratio in Romans is more 1:9.. Thus when Paul put the phrase “I (ego) might be grafted in” (v. 19), he is placing before us a Gentile mind full of self-centeredness and the worse type of pride.
apisteo,pisteuo / unbelief, faith - This faith is a personal, saving faith that Paul is dealing with here. A great problem in this passage (Romans 11) is the issue of “national” faith - and thus “national” unbelief - as a theme. Much has been written about the “national” blindness of Romans 11:25, as well as a “national” lifting of the same blindness.
But any “faith” or “unbelief' is demonstrably personal. Surely the “elect” who have it (11:7a) and the hardened who do not (11:7b-1O) are spoken of as individuals (although all are Israelites).
Pheiseetai / spare - Paul is using this word in the same way he used it in Romans 8:32 (the only other use in Romans). Paul is saying to “not spare” is to be “broken off, “v. 18 - that is, to be cut off from the life of God and the salvation promised in the proto- evangels of Genesis 3:15 and 12:3 (“seed”).
Special Note on 11:19-21 and “Eternal Security”
At this point in our analysis of “spare/graft/faith etc., it would seem needful to take up the issue of “eternal security,” for surely when Paul uses “spare not,” he is speaking of damnation and those God might not spare are the Roman saints if, like the Jews, they turn to unbelief..
We must face this in Romans 11:11ff. Paul is clearly warning the Romans saints that if through unbelief God did not spare (that is, He condemned) the hardened Jews, the same fate surely awaits unbelieving Gentile (“if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest He spare not thee,” v. 21). This is the basis of the exhortation to “fear,” v.20.
Hebrews 4:1,2 expresses the same truth, this time to wavering Jews of the first century: “Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise be left us of entering His rest (e.g. heaven), any of you should seem to come short of it. For unto us the gospel was the gospel preached, as well as unto them; but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith that heard it.” Such Hebrew warnings are everywhere in that book of warnings; “Give heed,” 2:1; “Beware,” 3:12; “do not refuse Him,” 12:25; “you have need of endurance,” 10:36. There are many more just in Hebrews. The danger is that these professing saints - in light of persecution - were considering casting off the faith of the gospel.
The Romans warnings such as 11:19-21 keep us theologically on the straight and narrow. The temptation in the warnings to Christians is to negate their strength of truth by stating that the warnings are not related to redemption but rather rewards, crowns, and the like. A cursory glance of the exhortations of Romans 11 will quickly dispel this. The subjects are Jews who have rejected the salvation of Christ, and Paul says God did not spare them (e.g. He cut them off). This cutting off seals their fate under His holy wrath. But Paul says emphatically, “if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest He spare not thee” (obviously, in the same sense He “spares not” the unbelieving Jew).
Now the recipients of this letter are identified as “beloved of God, ... called to be saints,” identifying God as their Father, Romans 1:7. That is, Christians! Thus, whatever our doctrine of eternal security, it must be a doctrine which understands honestly passages such as our Romans 11:19-21 passage (see also Matt 5:29 and similar warnings to Christians!).
v.v. 19-21 - Cross References
Romans 11:11-32 is unique in the New Testament in its treatment of the future of fallen Israelites. We shall see that the themes of Romans 11:11-32 are covered in 2 Corinthians 3:3-17 (see cross references, Romans 11:25). What is important in understanding 11:19-21 is to see that the themes covered in this section are repeated often in 11:11-32.
1. The idea of the broken off Israelites (v. 19) is echoed in the question of 11:11 as well as the answer of 11:1 lb and v. 12; the need for Israelite salvation implies their being broken off (v.14); Paul reiterates the “broken off” vocabulary of v. 12 (“fall” and “diminish”) in v. 15 with “casting away.” Further, Paul will speak of God's severity to Israelites (v. 22), the unbelief of Israelites (v.v. 23,30), the hardening of Israelites (v. 25), and the fact that unbelieving Israelites are “enemies” (v. 28).
2. The attitude of the Roman christians as reflected in Paul's portrayal of them as “high-minded” is reflected often in 11:11-32 as mentioned earlier. Note that Paul felt a need to speak to these Gentiles regarding God's purposes because of their attitudes: His personal ministry to these people had (he hoped) the result of saving his fellow countryman (v. 13,14); Paul expounded a great mystery because of Gentile conceit (v. 25); pity to the Gentiles was used to bring pity to the Jew (v.v. 30-31).
v.v. 19-21 - Summary
We begin to see in v.v. 19-21 as to why Paul ever was interested in dealing with the questions of 11:1 and 11:11. There was an arrogance in the demeanor of the Gentile converts which likely displayed itself in an sinful attitude toward those of the circumcision. Apparently the Roman Gentiles believed the Jews had sinned beyond God's grace in their crucifixion of the Lord Jesus. This thinking had manifest itself in a “high-mindedness” (and possibly a divisiveness in the church) which was a serious enough issue in Paul's mind to deal with at length.
Indeed, these Gentiles should be looking to themselves, lest their sinful spirit carry them to destruction (“be not high-minded, but fear...lest He spare not thee,” v.v.20-21). Paul will go on to confirm this exhortation with “behold the goodness and severity of God... upon thee goodness, if you abide in His goodness, otherwise you shall be cut off,” v. 22. Such powerful warnings never come forth from the apostle's pen without clear and serious rationale. Romans 11:19-21 tells us all the elements for such a rebuke resided in the Roman church.
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.
v.22 - General Context
With Paul's use of oun (“therefore”), the apostle is drawing an important conclusion to the section of 11:17-21. Remember Paul's concern regarding the “boasting” (v. 17)and “high-mindedness” (v. 20) of his Gentile readers. This is the Pauline burden of both his exposition of 11:17-21 and the summation of verse 22. Now Paul wants to focus their thinking in some particular spheres of application that necessarily arise from the truths of v.v. 17-21.
v.22 - Major Issues
Paul is of a mind in closing his exhortation of v.v. 17-21 to bring the truths of that section home with power. Verse 22 is meant to be a potent and persuasive conclusion to the issue of the prejudicial outlook of these Romans to the lost estate of the Israelites in juxtaposition to the redemption they (the Roman Gentiles) enjoyed by grace.
These last two words are the key - “by grace.” As the outset of verse 22 succinctly expresses it; “behold the goodness... of God.” It is the Lord's work alone that has given life eternal to these believers. Yet Paul seems to be in doubt as to the clarity and grasp of this truth in his readers minds in light of what he seems to know of them. And for Paul, the apostle of grace (1 Tim 1:13-15; 1 Cor 15:10), this perspective cannot continue. With verse 22, he will summarize with boldness and unabashed explicitness the truths of v.v. 17-21 and their implications for these Romans christians.
v.22 - Key Words
ide / behold - This is Paul's first word in verse 22. In all of his writings, he uses this “behold/look!” here, in Romans 2 and Galatians 5 (in contrast, the gospel of John has 15 uses). He surely desires the immediate and undivided attention of these Gentiles. Paul seems serious as to his message and its implications to these proud - and possibly smug - readers. Paul will write his conclusion and say to these people regarding his words “Look!,” as John the Baptist did so long ago with his “ide” / “Behold' the Lamb of God!”
su / you - Out of Paul's 25 uses of this emphatic form of “you,” five times in this section (v.v. 11-24) he will single his readers out with this word of great emphasis. He is saying, as it were, “You, yes you shall be cut off, if unbelief lays hold of you as it has the hardened Israelites!” It is almost as if these Gentiles might or would not believe in both God's goodness and severity when faith and unbelief were at stake in the gospel hearer. Paul is forever stating the truth of these Divine attributes and actions - towards them (su/you!). Paul has/will use “su” in v.v. 17,18,20 and 24.
v.22 - Cross References
I believe it is sufficient to say that in the finest book of Biblical cross-references available in print, this verse alone has 179 verses with themes similar to the themes of verse 22! As an example, this great cross-reference work (the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge) quotes Hebrews 10:35-39 as pertinent. It is as follows, and is sobering indeed: “Therefore, do not cast away your confidence, which has great reward. For you have need of patience in order that, having done the will of God, you may obtain the promise. For yet a little while, the one coming will come and shall not tarry. And the righteous one of mine shall live by faith, and if he draws back, My soul has no pleasure in him.
But we are not of those who draw back to destruction, but believe unto the saving/preserving of the soul.”
This is the very essence of Paul warning to these high- minded Gentiles. Not only has Paul been arguing for the redemption of the Jew who may have fallen, but he also claims that in their (Gentile) pride, unbelief can derail their faith resulting in dire consequences (“You shall be cut off!”).
Paul has laid a foundation for Israelite recovery to grace in v.v. 11b-16, and now in v.v. 17-22 he warns his readers that the fate of these Israelites they think so little of is not to be scoffed at. Indeed, if the Roman christians move into the same sphere of unbelief as the recalcitrant Jews, their end will be the same - destruction and damnation, or as Paul says, “severity!”
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
v.23 General Context
There is a clear change in v.v. 17-22 from “you/thou/thee” (10 uses, addressing Gentiles) to verse 23 and “they/them” (Israelites). It is now not just the feasibility of Israelites being saved or, as Paul continues his analogy, “grafted in.” Paul will broach the subject of their actual vital union with God by faith - that is, personal, gospel redemption.
The idea is this. Paul has emphasized the theme of the Gentiles humbly clinging to their faith and thus avoid pride and even unbelief. Now the apostle says, as it were, “not only are you Gentiles to remain in faith rather than turn in unbelief, but know this; these Jews are not irrevocably consigned to their present lost estate (via unbelief), but indeed if they turn now to Christ in faith, they shall be grafted in.” Paul not only has rebuked the Gentiles for their pride of faith compared to the unbelieving Israelites, but now he turns to say that these unbelieving Israelites need not remain in this unhappy estate, but rather turn to Christ in faith as these Roman Gentiles had, and thus giving them equal standing in Christ and His gospel!
v.23 - Major Issues
As is emphasized by “remain,” or as the greek implies, thoroughly or continuously remain (e.g. permanently remain), Paul's burden in verse 23-24 is the hope of Israelite gospel redemption - a burden he began to examine with his question of 11:11; “Have they (unbelieving Jews) stumbled (via this unbelief) that they should fall (permanently)?” The apostle will claim emphatically that the unbelieving Jew described in v.v. 8-10 and derided by these Gentile christians can - if they do not remain in unbelief - join these Gentile saints as children of God.
This will be Paul's interest in Romans 11:23-24. With logic and illustration he will prove beyond doubt that the fallen Israelites of Romans 9:32-33, 10:3,21, and 11:8-10 have a real hope in the gospel - a real assurance that if unbelief is abandoned for faith in Christ, these fallen Jews shall be reconciled to God through Christ (i.e. grafted in).
v.23 - Key Words
ekeinoi / these - This emphatic pronoun is used by Paul to clearly delineate this class of unbelieving, Christ-rejecting Jews. It is these - the very ones derided by the Romans - who can be grafted in; it is these who can be redeemed.
epimeinosin / remain - Paul uses the root word which means “to abide/remain,” and for emphasis adds a preposition to the root word to give us the resultant idea of “continuously remain” or “ceaselessly remain.” In other words, if these Jews do not persist in unbelief, their fate is not at all hopeless.
egkentristheesontai / shall be grafted - Paul has used the idea of “root” to express the gospel blessings as grounded in Christ. To quote again Romans 15:12, “And again, Isaiah says, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in Him shall the Gentiles trust.” The engrafting of these Jews who do not remain in unbelief means a translation out of their gospel darkness into the light of the kingdom of God's dear Son and its attending forgiveness and grace (cf. Col 1:13,14).
palin / again - The “again” implies these Jews, who have no gospel blessings/promises, were somehow previously related to God's promises. This relationship was expressed for us previously in Romans chapter 9 when Paul said that to the Jew belonged “the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises,” Romans 9:4.
They were severed from the partaking of gospel promises or, as expressed in Romans 11, they were “broken off.” The Jewish heritage guaranteed nothing but the promise and offer of blessings in union with Christ under the New Covenant. This is spelled out in Jeremiah's famous prophecy (Jer 31:31-34 cf. Heb 8:6-13) and reiterated in the aforementioned “covenants” and “promises” discussed by Paul in Romans 9:4.
v.23 - Cross References
See John 15:1ff.
Paul will say later in Romans 11:28,29 that the promises such as Isaiah's quoted in Romans 11:26b-27 are promises of grafting in Jews again. That is, God never recalls His offers of mercy (again, such as Is 55:1ff) for they are ametameleetos (without repentance/recall, v.29). Therefore, as Romans 11:23 notes, any Jew who previously had turned from Christ can turn back to Christ and be grafted in again - for God is able and willing!
v.23 - Summary
Paul has turned his attention back to the salvation of the Jews from his multiple rebukes of the Gentiles, a theme which was at the core of his thinking when he began in 11:11, and which continued in v.v. 12-15.
What must not be missed is that Paul is dealing with New Testament/gospel redemption throughout this section - and especially here in verse 23 with this “graft in.” There is no hint of interest in some type of national redemption of Israel. And since verse 24 clearly continues the arguments and themes begun in verse 23 (which argument/theme has continued since verse 11), we will have to see some clear Pauline reasoning and language to make the theme/argument of verses 25 and 26 national redemption - an all to common error.
THE NATION OF ISRAEL CANNOT BE GRAFTED IN, ONLY INDIVIDUAL ISRAELITES CAN ACCORDING TO PAUL'S ARGUMENT AND LOGIC.
24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural [branches], be grafted into their own olive tree?
v.24 - General Context
Verse 24 is putting the finishing touches to the Pauline argument in v.v. 17-24 of: 1) removing the pride of these Gentiles as to their standing in juxtaposition to the Jews, and 2) establishing the real possibility of the unbelieving Jews turning to Christ and becoming joint-heirs in the kingdom of God with these same Gentiles.
The apostle has stated in verse 23 that the Jews described in v.v. 8-10 may be grafted in if they remain not in unbelief, and verse 24 establishes the sensibility of the suppositions of verse 23. If verse 23 speaks of grafting formerly Christ-rejecting Jews, verse 24 tells - contrary to the prevailing Gentile theology - how much “easier” this is compared to the previous grafting of the Roman Gentiles. If what was differing in type was grafted in by the Lord to the original “stock” of God's redemptive purpose and blessedness, surely that which is of the same type can more easily be grafted in to the Divine “stock” of grace and mercy. This is verse 24 and the Pauline purpose.
v.24 - Major Issues
The major point of importance in the exposition of Romans 11:11-32 in general - and verse 24 in particular - is that Paul has not moved off the answering of the question in 11:11. The salvation (or grafting in) of the formerly unbelieving Jew was in the question of verse 11; the “fullness” of verse 12; the Pauline “ministry unto jealousy” of v.v. 13-14; the “life from the dead” in verse 15; here in verses 23-24; the promise from Isaiah in verses 26b-27; the enduring nature of such promises to the fathers in v.v. 28-29; and the summary of all in 30-32.
Again, this is absolutely crucial as we attempt to embark on the very difficult verse 25. Continuity of argument cannot be overemphasized. Paul is interested in the reintroduction of grace to the formerly apostate Jews. He wants to convince his readers of this because of its great practical bearing. These Gentiles have Jewish neighbors who do not believe the Jesus is the Messiah. Paul says emphatically in v.v. 23-24 that if they remain not in unbelief, they can be grafted in. And this was God's plan in saving these Gentile readers (11:11- 12;13-14;30-31)!
v.24 - Key Words
su, outoi / you, these - Using emphatic pronouns, Paul draws attention to the contrast and, at the same time, the similarity of Gentile/Jew gospel redemption. If God saved you (su) Gentiles who are foreigners to the promises of grace and has grafted you into the line of redemptive mercies, is it not more likely, more probable - in a word, easier - to graft the very guardians (outoi) of the promises of grace back into the line of grace? Paul clearly expects a yes answer, and thereby expects the Gentile Romans to see clearly that salvation can come to those Jews who turn in faith back to their God.
agrielaiou / wild - Eph 2:12; that is, the Gentiles were “aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, without God in the world.”
v.24 - Cross References
There is a direct parallel in both language and purpose in 11:12 and 11:24. Here is a copy of the “cross reference” note of 11:12:
Romans 11:24 is a second parallel to Romans 11:12. Both verses use poso mallon / “how much more” in their argument - 11:12 and “how much more their fullness,” whereas 11:24 states “how much more... shall these... be grafted.”
Further - and as important - is that both verses are arguing that if grace came to Gentiles, it will most assuredly come to the Israelite (cf. “shall be grafted” / “egkentristheesontai,” greek future tense implying a certain result under proper conditions [Gnomic future]). In the case of 11:12, grace will come to returning Israel because grace came to the Gentiles by virtue of departing Israel. In 11:24, returning Israelites, being natural branches, will surely be grafted back in because Gentiles - unnatural branches - were grafted in. The reasoning behind both 11:12 and 11:24 is: If God did the more difficult (brought good via evil), He will surely do the less difficult (bring good via good)].
Paul is using what might be called irrefutable logic. The Gentile christians at Rome tended to view the salvation of the Jew as impossible, seeing they had heard and rejected. But Paul counters by stating that if God has grafted in unnatural/wild branches (you!) to the stock of grace, then how much more sure is it that God can and will graft natural branches (Jew) into the stock of grace. The answer is inescapable.
v.24 - Summary
Verse 24 is the logical outworking of Paul's assertions in verse 23. If a Jew does not remain in unbelief, God is able to graft such a one back in (assertion, v. 23), and if one thinks through this proposition (v. 24), that assertion in inevitable.
The essential truth to take from verses 23 and 24 is that Paul's theme - derived from the question/inquiry of 11:11 - is the salvation of the individual Jew described in 11:8-10, not corporate salvation/redemption. This is key, because we may well desire to interpret the terminology in verses 25-26 as a type of national redemption. We must be clear prior to venturing in to this next section that individual, gospel redemption is the theme, not some kind of Old Testament, national redemption.
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 fullness of the Gentiles be come in. 26a And so all Israel shall be saved:
v.25-26a - General Context
Here we have arrived at the section of Romans 11:11-32 that has caused the most trouble and, with its difficulties, has brought an air of uncertainty as to both doctrine and application (v.v. 25- 26). Yet the historical heartaches brought on by this passage can be avoided if we remember: 1) Paul's interests and arguments previous to this point set the stage for what we read in v.v. 25-26; 2) what goes after this section (v.v.25-26a) is an outworking of the thoughts found in these verses, and 2) we look both at the detail of v.v. 25-26a and its parallels in other parts of Scripture. Great men of old have struggled with this section of God's word. Possibly there is light in a new direction.
v.25-26a - Major Issues
One might be surprised as to the key in understanding the whole of Romans 11:25-26a - the concept of “hardness” (porosis) in Israel. We will look at this concept first.
The “porosis”/ hardness of Israel in Romans 11:25
The typical modern understanding of v.v.25-26a is that God has blinded Israel to the light of the gospel until all the Gentiles He intends to save are brought to that salvation. At that point (the rapture?), God will lift the veil of blindness/hardness of the nation of Israel such that the “all/fullness” of that nation will come to know their Messiah (during the great tribulation?).This is their view of the message/doctrine of Romans 11:25ff.
The older writers (Spurgeon/Calvin/Edwards et. al.), without the tribulation/rapture doctrines of our day, still believed that in the latter days of the gospel era God would lift the porosis/veil of blindness, and cause a great ingathering of Israelites - an ingathering which would be the centerpiece of a great latter day revival prior to the second coming of Christ. This is their view of the message/doctrine of Romans 11:25ff (indeed, this “Israelite conversion” was, for the Puritans, the centerpiece of Puritan Postmillennialism).
In both cases we have what Herman Ridderbos calls an “apocalyptic miracle of conversion” in Romans 11 :25-26a. I think the adherents to either view would agree both as to the substance of what was stated above, as well as to Ridderbos's summery statement. Yet there are three major problems in the above views that cause (I believe) insurmountable barriers to the acceptance of either position/interpretation.
First, we have no hint of such a blindness followed by an “apocalyptic” doctrine of national conversion in the whole of Paul's argument to this point in Romans 11. Even Paul's “how much more their (Jews) fullness” in verse 12 is stated to secure the truth that assuredly if Gentiles who turn in faith are saved through Jewish unbelief “how much more” sure is Jewish acceptance guaranteed if they turn in faith. Indeed, one wonders how such theology as is expounded above regarding v.v. 25-26a combats the problems that prompted Paul to ask his question (which he is still answering) initially (v. 11): “Have they (the people described in 11:8-10) stumbled that they should fall (irrevocably)?” This troubling spiritual condition of the Israelites of his day described in v.v.8-10 - such a condition that Paul: 1) grieved over (9:2), 2) might wished to be cut off from Christ over (9:3), 3) directed his very heart's desire (10:1), and forced him to deal with the issue in verses 11:1 and 11:11 would hardly find a satisfactory answer in some far-off, latter-day conversion. Indeed, Paul seems in 11:13-14 to have hopes of conversions by his own ministry, and in his own day!
Second, and of this we will say more in the section on “cross-references,” 2 Corinthians 3:3-17, which has much in common with the terms and themes of this section of Romans 11 (esp. 2 Cor 3:12-17), has not so much as a word regarding a great future apocalyptic “unveiling” of Israel. If one reads 2 Corinthians 3 and the Pauline argument and his use of vocabulary, the great “unveiling” of the apocalyptic future would surely be in his discussion. Much to the contrary though, it was the turning to Christ that Paul associates with the unveiling (2 Cor 3:16), and this was seen by Paul as a present possibility, and conversion of the veiled Israelites was not placed in some far future scenario.
Third, and this is at the heart of Christ's' Olivet sermon and Paul's theology in all of Romans, Galatians, etc., let us examine - via a question / answer format - the concepts surrounding this hardness/ blindness/ porosis of Israel in v.25.
Mt 15:14: “Let them alone: they are blind leaders of the blind.”
Mk 4:1 if: “And He said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: That seeing they
may see, and not perceive: and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven them.”
Lk 8:10; “And He said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God; but to others in parables: that seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand.”
Jn 9:39: “And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.”
Jn 12:37bff: “...yet they believed not on Him: That the saying of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which He spoke, `Lord, who has believed our report? and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?' Therefore they could not believe, because that Isaiah has said again, `He has blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart: that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.'
Acts 28:24b-27 “...and some believed not...And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Isaiah the prophet unto our fathers, Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive: For the heart of this people has waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.”
Al: The Israelite blindness was a blindness in perceiving Christ as the Messiah sent by God, and promised in the Old Testament.
Q2. Who is blinding Israel?
Q3. Why was Israel blinded?
Lk 19:41-44: “And as He was come near, He beheld the city, and wept over it, Saying, If thou had known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee on every side, And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knew not the time of thy visitation.”
A3: God was judging them for rejecting Christ.
Q4. What is the justification/basis for God's blinding of Israel? That is, why Israel as a nation? Why national punishment/blinding/hardening?
A4: Surely the answer is in the fact that Israel alone had - as a nation - a covenant with God. Thus we read in Deut 29:1; “These are the words of the covenant, which the Lord commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel.” Included in the “words of the covenant” were the blessings for Israel upon national obedience (Deut 28:1-13), and the curses for Israel upon national disobedience (Deut 28:15-68). Included in the curses for disobedience we find, “The Lord shall smite thee with madness, and blindness, and astonishment of heart,” Deut 29:28.
In other words, the covenant that forms the basis for the rewards and punishments of Israel's national actions (the old/Mosaic covenant) has been made obsolete by the covenant of Christ. This means the punishment of blindness upon Israel for her sin is as antiquated as the covenant which under girds the punishment. This further means that national promises simply no longer exist, because the covenant upon which such promises would be based is, in a word, obsolete.
Therefore, the idea that national Israel has some type of future - redemptive or otherwise - cannot be theologically maintained. Romans 11:25-26a cannot be teaching a doctrine of a future, national conversion or “fullness.” Such promises do not exist. All promises are Ye and Amen exclusively in Christ and the new covenant ratified in His blood - a covenant made with individual sinners only.
Attendant Truths of Romans 11:25f and “porosis”/ hardness
Therefore, the views of Romans 11 :25-26a as a Pauline exposition of future “mass/all/fullness” conversion near the end of all time cannot be maintained from what we know of the rest of God's word. It just will not fit.
Yet, if we remind ourselves of what Paul's theology has been previous to this point in his exposition, we will find a surprisingly clear path to what his interests are in Romans 11:25- 26a. Indeed we will find Paul is, in verses 25-26a, repeating truths he has stated all along in 11:11-24!
We must remember that all that Paul will say in v.v. 25-26a regarding “blindness,” “fullness of the Gentiles,” “so all Israel shall be saved” etc., is based on his desire to keep the Roman Gentiles from being “wise in their own conceits.” We are told this is his reason for unfolding the “mystery” of v.v. 25-26a. We have seen previous to this point Paul's exhortations to “boast not,” v.18; “you stand [not by your own merit but] by faith,” v. 20; “be not high-minded, but fear,” v.20 - all of which are reasons for his exposition. Then why not apply those same principles to verses 25-26a?
Note: Remember, a crucial question that requires an answer is: In what way can we grasp verses Romans 11:25- 26a so as to see and discern the end for which Paul wrote it (the nullification of Gentile pride)? Or, to put it another way, “How do the details in the revelation of Paul's `mystery' combat and then negate this Gentile “conceit?”
All the above moves us in the direction of how “hardness upon Israel until the Gentiles be come in...” would be a deterrent to Gentile pride and high-mindedness. Paul drives his points regarding the hardness of Israel and subsequent themes home to us in two ways.
First, we read in 11:11; 11:13-14; 11:30-31 that: “through their (Israel's) fall, salvation has come to the Gentiles, to provoke them (Israel) to jealousy [and save some, DMT];” “I magnify my ministry, (as apostle to the Gentiles), if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh, and save some of them;” “For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their (Israel's) disobedience, even so these (Israel) also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they may also may obtain mercy.” Note in the above passages the fourfold linkage of: Jewish unbelief (1), causing Gentile redemption (2), followed by Israelite jealousy/conversion (3), all of which was revealed by Paul to negate Gentile pride (4). The repetition of (1)-(2)-(3)- resulting in negation of Gentile hubris (4) is well established in Romans 11:11- 32.
Secondly, ponder how the common issues in Paul's revelation of the mind of God with respect to Jew / Gentile salvation emphatically counteracts Gentile boasting, in that: 1) It was not the faith of the Gentiles which brought salvation to them but, much to the contrary, the unbelief of Israel that caused the gospel to come to the Gentiles, and 2) the salvation of the Gentiles was actually a means to a goal, and this goal was the redemption, via jealousy, of the same Jews whose unbelief caused the gospel to go to the Gentiles in the first place! Either way one looks at Gentile redemption, the cause and/or purpose finds its origins in Israel, not in anything regarding the Gentiles! This is the mechanism in Romans 11 Paul reveals so as to humble his Gentile readers!!
Now what should be an evident observation in our examination of the previous statements of Paul in Romans 11:11ff is to see he uses the combination of the above arguments - indeed the very pattern we have observed [e.g. (1)-(2)-(3)-(4)] - in Romans 11:25-26a! Note: “For I desire, brethren, that you should not be ignorant of this mystery, lest you be wise in your own conceits (4), that blindness in part has happened to Israel (1) until the fullness of the Gentiles has come (2), And so [so, greek/outos, `in this way/manner,' e.g. the means/manner of Gentile redemption] all Israel shall be saved” (3).
Romans 11:25 and “the fullness of the Gentiles”
If there is a universally accepted interpretation of any term in this verse full of difficult terms in Romans 11:25-26a, it is the understanding of “fullness of the Gentiles be come in.” Everyone this author has come into contact with - whether verbally or through literature - sees this phrase as being equal, more or less, to “when all the Gentiles have believed and come to the redemption which God has purposed.” No interpreter requires “fullness of the Gentiles” to mean every Gentile - in either an absolute sense (indeed, some were in hell when Paul penned the words), nor in the gospel/church age. There seems to be unanimity that “fullness of Gentiles” means the “full” or “complete” gathering of Gentiles in the context of the discussion/subject (most say this “fullness” in Romans 11:25 occurs just prior to the second coming, or the rapture). But let's look further.
First, the context and subject in which we find the phrase “fullness of Gentiles” is one of the blindness of Israel - a subject which carries with it the issue of judgment. Now Paul's purpose in discussing the “fullness of the Gentiles” is to bring to bear on the issue of Israelite judgment an concomitant subject - mercy to Israel, as Paul confirms five verses later in v.v. 30-31: “for as you (Gentiles) were once disobedient to God, but now have received mercy through their (Israel) disobedience, even so (greek, outos/english `in like manner') these (Israelites) also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you, they (Israel) may also obtain mercy.” In other words, for Paul, the themes of Israel's blindness, “Gentile fullness,” and mercy returning to Israel are inextricably linked.
If we may chart the idea here, as Israelite judgment came, Gentile salvation unfolded. Further, parallel to the “fullness of the Gentiles” is the mercy manifest to the blind nation of Israel (and this is why 11:25
is followed by 11:26a; “and thus [in this manner] all [the fullness of]
Israel shall be saved). The latter two themes are simultaneous and, along with the initial blindness / judgment of Israel in redemptive history, are
dependent upon one another. Thus we might illustrate Paul's thought as follows:
(A) / (B) / (C) are historically linked/related concepts for Paul (and, of course, us), and (B) & (C) are events that; 1) mutually spring from Israelite blindness/judgment, and 2) are inter-dependent. (A) is the cause, of which (B) & (C) are the inter-related, inter-dependent effects.
Secondly, as the blindness was the initial judgment upon Israel for their unbelief, the consummation of their national judgment/punishment was the destruction of the holy city, Jerusalem in A.D. 70. This issue was prophesied at length in Matt 24, Mk 13 and Lk 21, and is given emphasis in Matthew after the triumphal entry into the city by Christ in Matthew 21:1-11. After His entry into the holy city, He drives the moneychangers out (Matt 21:12ff), curses the fig tree (Matt 21:18ff), and begins to rebuke Israel for her hardheartedness.
But I would like to take a detailed view at Christ's' words in Matthew 22:1ff and the marriage parable (esp. v.v. 2-7): “The kingdom of God is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son, and sent out his servants to call those who invited to the wedding; and they were not willing to come. Again, he sent out other servants, saying, `Tell those who are invited, see, I have prepared my dinner; my ox and fatted cattle are killed, and all things are ready. Come to the wedding.' But thy made light of it and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his business. And the rest seized his servants, treated them spitefully, and killed them. And when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.”
The above is an echo of the destruction Christ prophesied regarding Jerusalem in Matt 24:1-3; Mk 13:1-2; Lk 21:5-6, as well as the Old Testament prophecy regarding the same in Daniel 9:24-27. Here are some segments from Daniel's famous prophecy: “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and thy holy city (v24)...the street shall be built in troublesome times (v25)... after 62 weeks Messiah shall be cut off (crucified)... and the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolation's are determined (v26)...And on the wing of abominations shall one be who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolate(v27).”
Indeed, in the prophetic statements of the Olivet discourse (Matt/Mark), a key, common element is that the days of this desolation / punishment are shortened (e.g. the judgment comes to an end / consummation!, Matt 24:22; Mk 13:20). In other words, with the destruction of the holy land / city God brought to a end / consummation His wrath against His nation which had rejected their Messiah and His gospel.
God's wrath against Israel had its initial manifestation in the blinding of the nation and was consummated by the annihilation of the people and their land. With this final act, God finished His work of judgment regarding Israel.
Now the doctrinal conclusions are the following: the bringing in of the Gentiles (e.g. their “fullness”) is an act of mercy by God in concert with Israel's blindness to the end that Israel might be provoked unto salvation. To say it another way, God's judgment upon Israel is not His only acts/workings toward them. He was also - as Paul was writing - saving Gentiles, and thereby holding out grace via the Gentiles to these same Israelites.
But there came a time when the blindness of Israel, which we saw as a judgment of God for their rejection of Christ, came to an end via the final, consummate judgment of Israel and her land/city - the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
This means that the “judgment” of blindness has ended, and with it the means of mercy which God ordained to deliver Israelites prior to their final judgment as a nation - that means being the “fullness of the Gentiles.” This “fullness” of Gentile salvation was directly related to the deliverance of the “fullness” of Israel through jealousy. But seeing God has finished His judgments of Israel, God is no longer “blinding” Israel, and thus the means to secure some of the blind Israelites the “fullness of the Gentiles” - is no longer a means of Israelite deliverance. Both the “blindness” of Israel and the “fullness” of Gentiles have been fulfilled, accomplishing their purposes in God's redemptive works in the context of God's covenant judgments/mercies.
Again, we may do well to see visually the doctrines expounded by Paul in Romans 11:25-26a.
Thus, the “fullness” of Israel, or “all Israel”  as v. 26a puts it (in juxtaposition to the “remnant” of Israel, 11:5) is gathered in through the “fullness of the Gentiles;” and the “fullness” of the Gentiles  is gathered in as a result of the judicial blindness upon Israel . All three are inter-related in the history and timing of God's redemptive purpose.
And just as when Christ who is a priest after the order of Melchizadek came (Heb 6:20-7:28), the Levitical priesthood was made obsolete; Just as when the “Lamb of God” came (Jn 1:29), He makes all other lambs and their sacrifices obsolete; so to, as God has finished the judgment upon Israel which He began with judicial blindness, He makes “national jealousy” obsolete - for His covenant people are no more, God has given the kingdom to a new nation, Matt 21:43.
There is no more need for the bringing in of Gentiles to make Israel jealous - hence their “fullness” has come in (that is, the full number of Gentiles prior to Israel's final judgment). Israel was spared for 40 years between their crimson sin of crucifying the Just and Holy one and the wrath of God being poured out for that sin8. Thus, in like manner to the Gentiles - and prior to their final annihilation - their (Israel's) fullness has come in (that is, prior to their final destruction, the remainder of redeemed Israelites, added to the “remnant,” equals their “fullness.”) A.D. 70 Israel's final Judgment
“and so9 all Israel shall be saved”
From the truths learned up until now regarding the first two important phrases; “blindness of Israel"10 and “fullness of the Gentiles,” the meaning of “and so Israel shall be saved” should be, more or less, transparent.
Paul is saying in verses 25c-26a; “blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in; and in this manner (i.e. the manner of Gentile jealousy/provocation enunciated in verses 11,12,13-14,and 30-31) all Israel shall be saved.” This “all Israel” is the ingathering of the “fullness” of Israel by the “mystery” of Gentile ingathering Paul explained to us, plus the Remnant mentioned in the earlier part of Romans 11. It is the “fullness” of verse 12; that is, the completion of Israelite redemption.
Now this does not imply (nor does Paul) that salvation for all or any who might have some slight or intimate genealogical relationship to Abraham/Moses/12 Tribes is hopelessly excluded from the gospel now (e.g. 1998). It simply means in redemptive history, God has ended the Mosaic Covenant, and with it all ethnic issues related to salvation, privilege, etc. All stand before God as “under sin,” Rom 3:9. Any privileges, promises, blessings - indeed all religious dogma stands in relationship to the “everlasting covenant” secured by the blood of Christ (Heb 13:20).
To conclude on “and so all Israel shall be saved,” Paul is thinking of the “all” or “fullness” of Israelites, not in some type of absolute sense, but; 1) Jews who turn from unbelief to faith in the Messiah (Rom 11:23-24), and 2) the ordained means of gathering this believing Jewish “all” or “fullness” - Gentile “fullness” - prior to the destruction of the Old Testament basis for this ethic division via the passing of the Mosaic Covenant and its great expression prophetically - the desolation of Jerusalem (Matt 24:15-21; cf. Luke 21:20-24; Daniel 9:25-27; Heb 8:7-13).
Let us paraphrase Romans 11:25-26a: “For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you be wise in your own opinion, that the judgment of hardness has happened to part of Israel such that the gospel has gone to the Gentiles, and this will continue until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this manner of Gentile salvation unto Israelite provocation - prior to God's final judgment upon Israel - all/fullness of Israel shall be saved.”
v.25-26a - Key Words
porosis / hardness/b1indness - Of the three uses of this noun, Mark 3:5 and Ephesians 4:17 speak of hearts that are hard, and therefore are blind. Our interest is in the fact that the verb form of this word is used in Romans 11:7, implying blindness. But even more important (and we will examine this in the “cross- reference” section), the verb form is found in 2 Corinthians 3:14 where the whole context (2 Cor 3:3-17) is dealing with our interests here - the Old Covenant vs. the New Covenant and the theology surrounding these doctrines. In a word, 2 Corinthians 3 will confirm the teachings of Romans 11:11-32!
outo(s) / so/thus - KJV translates “so,” verse 26a. As has been noted previously, the word outco; has been used in 11:5, and will be used again in 11:30. In all cases there is no temporal meaning (e.g. when something occurred), but always the idea of manner (e.g. how something occurred). The classic use is its first in the New Testament - Matthew 1:18 - “now the birth of Jesus Christ was outos / in this way.” Our temptation will be, because of Paul's use of “until” in verse 25c, to see the “so/outos” as equal to “then/'tote.” But Paul, in using the word outcoÁ, speaks to us regarding the “how” of Israel's fullness, not the “when.” That is, Paul means to say in 11:26a, “in this way - the way of Gentile fullness/salvation leading to jealousy - all Israel shall be saved.”
akris ou / until which - It is here that Paul deals with the issue of time and its function in the plan of God in saving hardened Israel (remember, this was Paul's original inquiry in 11:11a). This is also an important “mystery.” Israel's fullness will be established via Gentile fullness. To negate Gentile boasting, God will use them to gather Israel in, and this shall be true until the fullness of the Gentiles have come in. Now we have established that: 1) “blindness” was a judgment of God upon Israel for her unbelief, and 2) God's final judgment upon Israel was the vengeance of His wrath upon the people and their city - Jerusalem (Lk 21:20-24). This means that God's judgment was in effect up to the time He cut off all mercies to this nation.
pleeroma / fullness - As has been stated previously in verse 12 and “how much more their fullness,” the emphasis with this word is a gospel ingathering which is in addition to a previous salvation. In other words - and as in the parable of the wine and wine skins - “fullness” is the “topping off' or filling of the wineskins.
For Paul, he has spoken of a remnant (11:5). The “fullness” is the completion or addition of sinners to the body of saints (what we might call the “filling up” of the redeemed). It may emphasize addition, or the end of addition - that is, completion.
The fullness of the Gentiles here in verse 25 is the full measure of Gentiles brought to redemption parallel to the times of Israel's blindness. This is the key. It is gospel ingathering relative to the Jewish rejection (see verse 1 ib). This “fullness” is not absolute, but contextual.
pas / all - The “all” of “all Israel” in verse 26a seems clearly to be equivalent to the “fullness” of Israel in verse 12. It is possible Paul used “all” (instead of the expected “fullness”) to emphasize the universal nature of salvation available to these fallen Israelites. This is why Paul will quote from some Old Testament promises, starting with verse 26b. The expanse of both gospel promise and redemption is a necessary truth in the question/answer of verse 11:11 and 11:12-32.
v.25-26a - Cross References
2 Corinthians 3:3-17 - One can hardly underestimate the importance of this passage. Our word of interest in verse 25, “porosis/hardness,” is used in a related form in 2 Cor 3:14, translated “but their minds were hardened.” The subject of this section is the same as our subject in Romans 11 - the New covenant vs. the Old covenant and the spiritual condition of the Jews in relationship to these covenants.
The first section (v.v. 1-5) is general truths regarding Paul's New covenant ministry. Part II (v.v.6-11) establishes the superiority of the New over the Old covenant. Part III (v.v.12-18) is the practical reasons why Paul's kinsman, the Jews, do not see that the glory of the Old covenant has been completely superseded by the glory and truth of the New.
Paul proclaims frequently in this section that the glory of the Old covenant has a glory that has been nullified or rendered null. This is so important that Paul says it four times in just eight verses (v.v. 7,11,13,14)! The glory of the Old covenant - which is described as “glorious” (v.v. 7,9,11) - Paul says “has no glory by reason of the glory (of the New covenant) that excels.”
Now in this exposition, Paul speaks of his gospel and its rejection by the Jews. He says they are “blind” (v.14), and to his day a veil is upon their hearts so as to not see the gospel (v.14,15). Then he says in verse 16, “nevertheless, when it (Israelites) shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away.” Now for our studies in Romans 11:11ff, Paul seems to have no long term eschatological theme of conversion, but rather a genuine prospect of Jews turning to the Lord. And the veil of blindness which is such a part of 2 Corinthians 3:14-18 is seen as lifted, not in some far future, but rather when an Israelite turns to Christ, for Paul says the Old covenant is made clear in Him (see Luke 24:44). This turning was, for Paul, a reality in his day, and this “blindness” in 2 Corinthians 3 is the same as the Romans 11 “blindness” - indeed, it is a commentary on some of the Romans 11 themes.
It seems clear by the comparison of the Olivet Discourse of Matthew to Luke that the Great Tribulation was the seven year history leading up to the consummation in August A.D. 70 when the Roman armies crushed the Jews and both the city and the temple (comp. Mt 24:15, “when you see” with Lk 21:20, “when you... see.” This conclusion can hardly be avoided given the Matthian use of “great tribulation” in Matt 24:21 combined with the “desolation” caused by Rome in Lk 21:20,24.
Now Luke's phrase in Luke 21:24 “the times of the Gentiles” is the closest term to our “fullness of the Gentiles” in Romans 11:25, it is probable that they are referring to differing aspects of the same issue - the time and seasons of the final dissolution of Israel and their relationship/covenant with God. This is by far the easiest and most satisfying understanding of the phrase “fullness of the Gentiles.”
v.25-26a - Summary
If we again give an understanding of 11:25-26a through a paraphrase: “I would not have you ignorant of this mystery lest you be overly wise, that blindness to the gospel has come upon a part of Israel until which time the full measure of Gentiles be saved: and in this manner - the manner of Gentile salvation unto Jewish jealousy - the fullness of Israel shall be redeemed.”
Again let us remind ourselves of two truths: 1) Paul is still dealing with the question in verse 11 and the issue of the salvation of Paul's Jewish kinsman, their blindness to the gospel, and the possibility of their recovery spiritually, and 2) the blindness of Israel was a judgment - which judgment would come to its finish with A.D. 70 and the full and final judgment upon Israel for their rejection and murder of their Messiah.
26b as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
v.26b-27 - Summary
As is seen by the summery being the sum total of the Romans 11:26a-27 exposition. I want to propose that a detailed analysis of 26a-27 may, at best, confuse. Many expositors delve into the quote itself, looking at Paul's use of Isaiah 59:20-21 here in Romans 11:26 and 11:27. Much has been written regarding differences in the Old Testament statement and Paul's New Testament use here (an example being that whereas Isaiah 59:20ff reads Christ “coming unto Zion,” whereas Romans 11 reads “come out of Zion.”
Yet Paul's interest is not in the details, but rather that the verses quoted support his declaration. Let me give an example from 1 Tim 2:12-14. The verse reads; (v.12), “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over a man but to be in silence. (v.13) For Adam was first formed, then Eve. (v.14) And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.”
Now the application I would like to make is that, regardless of what verses 13 and 14 say in 1 Tim 2:12-14, it is clear Paul is using those truths in 13-14 to prove his assertion in verse 12. We need not understand culture, the times, or even have read Genesis to see Paul's flow of thought. And when we do come to interpret 1 Tim 2:13-14, our interpretation is only accurate to the extent our exposition gives strong support to the Pauline assertion in verse 12, “I suffer not a woman to teach...“etc.
The above truth of 1 Tim 2:12-14 is the same principle found in Romans 11:25-27. Paul has declared truth(s), and verses 26b-27 is quoted as support. We need to be clear at this point. We do not go back into the Old Testament and its context to decide whether we like Paul's reasoning! Paul has told us that his assertion in 11:25-26a is supported by Isaiah's words quoted in 11:26b-27.
Now Paul's interest in Romans 11, and 11:25ff, is to establish the possible and available salvation of those Israelites who have been hardened/blinded. Thus Paul's “as it is written,” followed by his quotation of Isaiah is meant to express the available promise of gospel forgiveness.
The question then arises: Is the promise a future promise of Israelite forgiveness - that is, future to the book of Romans (i.e. a promise of future glory and redemption when Christ “comes out of Zion”)?, or is Paul saying to the hardened Jews - in keeping with his burden in Romans 11:11ff - that the promise of forgiveness that is expressed in Isaiah and quoted by Paul in Romans (v.27, “I shall take away their sins”) is still a promise for them (Christ- rejecting Israelites).
In keeping with Romans 11 and in particular Romans 11:25ff, the answer is the latter. Again, regardless of any detailed understanding of the Old Testament quotes in v.v.26b-27, we know Paul uses the Word to establish his theme of available forgiveness to the “all Israel” of verse 26a. Anything else is secondary in Paul's flow of thought. Via the Isaiah quotes, Paul wants to establish the truth that grace offered through gospel promises is still held out to this stiff- necked and wayward nation - Israel. All else is secondary.
In short form, let us look at how expositors reason through 11:25-27. Romans 11:25-26a has always been seen as a promise of future ingathering just prior to the physical second coming of Christ our Savior. In such a case, verse 26b and following are promises of Christ, in the latter days, “coming out of Zion” to open the eyes of the blinded nation of Israel (v.25) and forgive their sins. This is, more or less, the common doctrinal position of modern expositors.
But this “doctrine” of a far future redemptive promise for Israel in 11:25-27 is neither Paul's interest nor line of thought, and it never has been. He has continually, since verse 11, argued for mercy being available to the Christ-rejecting Israelites even though they had initially turned from their Savior. Paul used Isaiah in Romans 11:26b-27 to say that a Deliverer (Christ) will come out of Zion (born of the line of Abraham) and forgive sins (the New Covenant promise), and that promise was a provision for all of Israel. This promise of forgiveness will be established by Paul as a promise that is irrevocable (11:29) and long standing (“beloved for the fathers sake”). That is, the promise given in Isaiah's day is still a promise in Paul's day.
In conclusion, Paul is establishing via the Isaiah quotation (v.v.26b-27) that the offer of mercy to Israelites and the nation of Israel has not been rescinded. On the contrary, the grace of God in the gospel and the benefits of that gospel are still full and free to all who come. And 2 Corinthians 3:16 is still true for this blinded people: “Nevertheless when it (Israel/Israelites) shall turn to the Lord, the veil (blindness) shall be taken away.”
28 As concerning the gospel, [they are] enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, [they are] beloved for the fathers' sakes.
v.28-29 - General Context
Right from the start of verse 28, we see the pattern of the sin of Israelites bringing gospel glory to the world; or, as verse 28 states it, “they (Israelites) are enemies of the gospel for your sake (i.e. they reject the gospel with a result that it came to you Gentiles). On the other hand, in light of God's love for Abraham and Abraham's seed - his covenant people Israel - the love and mercy of God displayed in many Old Testament passages is still held out to this wayward people. Because of the Jewish rejection of Christ, the Gentiles have the gospel; and because of God's loving nature, the promises of a merciful God - mercies which are new every morning - are still held out to Israel.
Again, this pattern of Romans 11:11-15 and 11:30-31 confronts us continually. Paul is again stating that the gospel is the Gentiles because of Jewish enmity, and in light of this gospel to the Gentiles, it redounds back to the Jews because of God's love and plan. Thus, verses 28-29 support the continual theme of an affirmative answer to the original question of verse 11 - the question of salvation and grace to a Christ-rejecting people.
Israel has an offer of gospel mercy even with their initial rejection of the Savior because Gentile redemption is intended to provoke Israel to salvation - a plan founded in God's love and mercy displayed long ago to Israel's fore-fathers. The promises of mercy for all Israelites who turn from their unbelief will be found to be sure and irrevocable mercies (v.29) even in light of the Israelites original rejection of her Messiah.
v.28-29 - Major Issues
We are at the point in Paul's argument (11:11-32) where he makes one final statement regarding the answer to his question of Romans 11:11; “Have they (the Israelites described in verses 8-10) stumbled that they should fall (permanently and hopelessly)? A short and final answer is given here in verses 28-29, with support for the answer given in verses 30-32.
Paul's first concern is to reiterate that seen from the history of Israel and the Messiah, the gospel was forsaken by God's Old covenant people. This truth leads naturally to the conclusion (indeed this was the Roman Gentiles conclusion) that Israel was permanently cast off. Paul called the Israelites “enemies,” and the Gentiles believed this was the whole of the story concerning Israel and the gospel. The summation of this enmity to the gospel caused the Gentiles to conclude that the nation of Israel (the non- remnant) was irretrievably excommunicated from grace.
But there was more to the story of God's covenant people. Although the sin of Israel had both cut them off from the grace and cast them away from God, there was still grace and mercy for this obstinate people. God changes not, and the multiple expressions of mercy do not change either. God's grace and lovingkindness stand forever - even to the chief of sinners.
The promises made to the Israelite fathers were still promises to the Jews centuries later - for “His compassion's fail not. They are new every morning; Great is thy faithfulness,” Lam 3:22-23. The grace offered to the rebellious Israelites of the Old Testament retains its gloriously free character to the Jews of Paul's day. For Paul, the reason for this was simple and basic: The gifts (of mercy, grace, etc.) and calling (offered mercy/grace) of God (because of His immutable nature) are without repentance (v.29).
v.28-29 - Key Words
karismata / gifts - Although this is the typical word for the Spirit's spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12:4,9,28,30,31), here Paul is using karismata in its more general form referring to grace and the gift of grace (Romans 5:15,16; 6:23). Thus Romans 11:29 is speaking of the gifts (of grace)... are without repentance.
kleesis / calling - This “calling” is the gracious invitation to grace and redemption with all the blessings of forgiveness. The Scripture speaks of “many are called,” (1 Cor 1:26); “the hope of His calling,” (Eph 1:18); “one hope of your calling,” (Eph 4:4); “partakers of the heavenly calling,” (Heb 3:1).
Combining the concepts of “gifts” and “calling” lead us in the direction of God's goodness, and the truth that this goodness, even in light of Israel's sin - had not been rescinded. Indeed, the call to receive grace and the available gift of mercy is the great encouragement of 11:28-29.
v.28-29 - Cross References
With regards to 11:28-29. the best help in terms of verse cross-references is within chapter 11 itself. Paul's interest since verse 11 has been the accessibility of Israel to the grace of forgiveness and redemption. Let us look at the differing ways Paul gives us the idea that Israel (by virtue of God's everlasting grace) has access to the same redemption as the Roman Gentiles - even in spite of their initial, national rebuff of Christ.
In Romans 11:11 and 11:14, they are provoked to jealousy unto salvation. In Romans 11:12, Paul sees a “fullness” or gospel ingathering as a possibility, and in 11:15 Paul speaks of “life from the dead” for repentant Israelites. Romans 11:17ff speaks of redemptive “grafting,” especially verse 24 and natural (Jewish) grafting into the olive tree. Verse 25-26a emphasizes that “all” or the fullness of Israel shall be saved through Gentile salvation (v. 25c).
Thus, combining this continuous theme in Romans 11:11ff prepares us for 11:28-29 and the doctrine of gospel grace towards Israel even though their enmity caused the gospel to come to the Gentiles.
v.28-29 - Summary
The truths implied by Paul's phrase “they are beloved for the Father's sake” in verse 28 are echoed in other passages of Scripture. Luke 1:54-55 states; “He has helped His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy; As He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham, and to His seed forever.” Micah 7:20 parallels this thought with; “Thou will perform the truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which thou has sworn to out fathers from the days of old.”
God's mercies are extended still to this stiff-necked people Israel. There is abundant mercy for the Jew who will return to the waters of life which are in Christ Jesus - for the gifts and calling of grace and mercy have not been annulled.
30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
v.30-32 - General Context
Paul has only to summarize and conclude his thoughts in finishing his answer to the question posed in Romans 11:11: “Have they stumbled that they should fall?” All of Paul's reasoning in 11:11b-11:32 is to establish the sure answer to that question (“mee genoito / May it never be!”), followed by a detailed argument as to why this is so.
Paul began by telling us that the fall of Israelites is not necessarily fixed. Indeed, in verse 11 after his strong retort, Paul enlightens us to the fact that the fall of these Israelites was used of God to take the gospel to the Gentiles, which God purposed in turn to provoke the Jews to turn and receive their Savior.
He further argued in verse 12 that if God brought grace out of Israel's rejection of Christ, will He not happily be gracious if Israel turns back. In other words, the fullness or acceptance of Israel is a logical necessity if by their apostasy grace was made available to the Gentiles. This was Paul's interest when he initially proposed the question in verse 11. Would God be gracious to a repentant Israel, particularly in light of their crime of crucifying the Savior and calling down His blood upon their heads
(Matt 27:25)? Paul states in so many words; “if grace came in light of Israel's sin, it will certainly come (to them) in light of their repentance.
Paul further expands this same point in 11:13-15 by: 1) declaring that he magnified the gospel of grace to the Gentiles, such that his kinsman according to the flesh might be stirred unto salvation (v.v.13-14). He then repeats his statements of verse 12 by declaring in verse 15; “if the casting away of them (Israel) be the reconciliation of the world (Gentiles), what shall the receiving of them (Israelites) be but life from the dead (reconciliation).”
Paul goes on to draw out these truths by using the analogy of the root and the branches, ending and reiterating his main point in verses 23-24; “And they also (Israelites), if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again. For if thou (Gentiles) were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these (Israelites), which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?”
In verses 25-26a Paul states that this blindness of Israel will continue to be used to bring in the fullness of the Gentiles, and in this manner of blindness/Gentile ingathering, the fullness (all) of the Israelites shall be saved. This grace and love to fallen Israelis always there as was seen in the Old Testament (based on God's words to Israel's fathers, 11:28), and it is an irrevocable grace (11:29).
Now Paul finishes by restating that just as Gentiles were rebellious and ignorant, yet received mercy via the fall of Israel, so to God has displayed grace to the Gentiles that the hardened and rebellious Israelites would see that grace and obtain the same mercy. Paul has come full circle in his answer to the same conclusion: Mercy is obtainable for Israel if they remain not in unbelief.
v.30-32 - Major Issues
The major issue not to be missed is to see that Paul has stayed on issue throughout 11:11-32. To miss this throws the entire section into chaos. Paul is establishing fully and finally the mercy open to the fallen Jews of verses 8-10. This final summary prior to Paul's doxology (v.v.33-36) confirms without doubt that the theme of 11:11-32 is redemption for fallen Israel despite their initial sin of rejecting Christ.
What should be noticed is Paul's use of “now” in verses 30- 31. Paul was not interested in some far future doctrine of redemption, but rather in salvation for the Jews of his day. The fact that he concludes his discourse in such a fashion should leave little doubt as to the overall purpose of his writings here.
Paul spoke of Israelite rejection followed by Gentile salvation and Jewish hope of grace repeatedly, and Romans 11:30- 32 ends on the same note: “For as you (Gentiles) in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: Even so (our word from verse 26, outos, “in like manner”) have these also now not believed, that through your mercy that may obtain mercy.”
v.30-32 - Key Words
nun / now - As has been mention previously, the contemporary nature of Paul's question/answer is most important. People often come to verses 25-26 and declare that Paul was speaking in Romans 11:11-32 of a great latter day ingathering of Jews to salvation. But this is rebuffed if only by the Pauline use of “nun”/ now. Paul uses his own ministry to prove his points, something that could not have been done if the doctrine he was expounding (grace to Israelites) was to occur centuries after his letter. If Paul's vocabulary is anything, it is contemporary because the problem and solution were contemporary.
v.30-32 - Cross References
I think it is most appropriate to cross-reference some ideas of Paul. It is clear from Paul's statements in Romans 9:2ff; “I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart, and Romans 10:1; “My heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.”
Paul had great desire and hope for his contemporary kinsman - the Jews. Even with the heinous act of murdering their Lord and Savior, Paul saw that God's mercy was even held out to them. He had his mind on the generation that had crucified the Son of God, and the wrath that was hanging over their heads. He desired that they flee to the refuge which was Christ.
But the question of Romans 11:11-32 was: Would there be grace for them. The Gentile Romans surly believed not. Paul spends twenty-one verses establishing that the waters of mercy still flowed through Zion. This is how Romans 11:11 begins and 11:30-32 ends - on the available love, mercy, and grace to Israel.
v.30-32 - Summary
God has proven all men are under sin (verse 32), and using their sinfulness God has turned evil to eternal grace. For the Gentiles steeped in unbelieving ignorance, the sin of Jewish rejection brought the light of the gospel, and a Savior, to them. For the Jews, the ingathering of Gentiles was meant to open the eyes of the chosen nation to their redeemer.
This latter issue was the brunt of Paul's discourse in 11:11 - 32. Could mercy come again to those of the nation of Israel who had turned from their Messiah? Paul's whole burden from beginning to end was to answer... yes. God's grace is irrevocable and immutable. Any and all who call upon the name of the Lord
shall be saved. For Paul, in light of God's purposes and immutable character, there was room at the cross for his brethren according to the flesh.
33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable [are] his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
1 One of the more difficult aspects of theology is right at this point: that is, where does the Old Covenant leave off and the New begin? A simple and clear example of this difficulty is the issue of spiritual salvation. If: 1) an “Old Testament” saint was redeemed by looking forward to the cross but was living during or soon after the work of our Lord, and 2) his/her faith was in the coming Messiah or in John's baptism, could such a believer be a true believer without faith in Christ? What was the state of such people as Apollos in Acts 18:23ff and the Ephesian brethren of Acts 19:1ff? Were they redeemed, seeing the Messiah had already come and died - unknown to him/her? This “inter-Messianic” period posses interesting questions - questions that impact Romans 11, for although redemption is only personal since Christ came into the world, corporate judgment for Israel's national rejection of Christ was still to occur 30+ years later in A.D. 70 (the book of Romans itself being written in approx. A.D. 57-60). I believe this is why in Romans 11 one finds both the personal nature of redemption (Rom 11:14, 23f, 30-32) and still a seemingly corporate issue such as Israel being blind in part as a people (11:25).
2When the idea of “future” arises, it means the future of Israelites in Paul's day. (cf. Rom 11:5, “at the present time;” 11:30, “now;” 11:31, “now.”
3 It is important to understand that the promise of Romans 11:11-32 is not that God has guaranteed a future turning in faith to Him, but that God has guaranteed grace to any and all Israelites who do turn in faith (cf. 11:23-24). This might seem to contradict Romans 11:26-29, but we shall attend to that issue in due time.
4 Many commentators have seen a parallel between this verse and verse 28, in that “for the father's sake” Israel is beloved and has promises available to them in light of this standing. This may be part of Paul's interest in writing verse 16.
5 It is quite possible that we should reverse the symbols and have the “lump” represent those Jews redeemed from slumber (11:8-10) and the “first fruits” either be the heritage of saints in faith as in Hebrews 11, or the first gospel gleanings either of Gentiles (cf. Rom 16:5; 1 Cor 16:15) or Jew (Jam 1:18). I would grant that any of these are possibly in Paul's mind. But in any case, his goal is the same in every scenario - to establish equality with the saints of old (or Gentile) and those Jews who might come to Christ through jealousy in Gentile salvation.
6 Romans 15:12, quoting Is 11:10, declares “there shall be a root of Jesse, and he shall rise to reign over the Gentiles, and in Him shall the Gentiles trust.” The idea of Paul is one of promise made to the Jews of a coming Redeemer (Rom 15:8). Christ confirmed the promises made to Israel (see Gen 12:3, cf. Gal 3:7), and was the hope of the Gentiles. If this is Paul's line of thought, the Roman Gentile Christians were arrogant, seeing the Jews were the custodians of the written promises of redemption that these Gentile Romans were now enjoying. Paul would say along with our Lord that “salvation is from the Jews” (John 4:22), and the Old Testament is replete with the promises made through the Jewish prophet Isaiah that the Savior would “bring forth judgment to the Gentiles” (i.e. take up their cause), Is 42:1, and be “a light to the Gentiles,” Is 42:6; cf. Is 60:3. This writer tends to think that is exactly what Paul had in mind by using “root.”
7 Romans 11:20's “by faith” is one of the clear Biblical declarations that faith is a grace from God rather than a work of man. As Ephesians 2:8-9 states; “by grace are you saved through faith; and that (grace/faith) is not of yourselves...”
8 In giving us the understanding of “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do,” (Lk 23:34), this is the view of some - that Jesus was asking for time for His killers to come to the grace He had secured on the cross before the wrath of God fell (cf. Acts 2:16-21)
9 The greek word here in 11:26a translated “so” or “thus,” outos, means “in this way/in this manner/in this fashion.” It is used elsewhere in Romans 11: in 11:5 we read, after Paul speaks of a remnant in Elijah's day in 11:4, Paul says “Even so (outos, in like manner)...there is at the present time;” and in 11:31, after speaking of the fall of Israel bringing the gospel to the Gentiles, “Even so (outos, in like manner)... these (Israelites)also have now not believed, that through the mercy shown you (Gentiles), they may also obtain mercy.” I say this because with Paul's use of “until the Gentiles be come in” in 11 :25c, we who read in English automatically see the word “then” in 11 :26a as following “until.” So, unconsciously, we read 11:25c-11:26a as follows: “until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in; and then all Israel shall be saved.” But the word translated in the KJV as “so” always means “in this manner”/”in this way” - never “then.” Indeed, there is a different and unique word the greek writers used for “then”/greek, “tote,” used 140+ times in the New Testament. More will be said in the section on “Key Words.”
10 This author did not include an exposition of the phrase “blindness of Israel in part” simply because all expositors see the “in part” cannot mean partial blindness of all individual Israelites, but rather part of Israel as a whole is blind; that is, some out of all the nation are blinded to the gospel.
What do YOU think ?
Email PreteristArchive.com's Sole Developer and Curator, Todd Dennis
(todd @ preteristarchive.com)
Opened in 1996