Chapter 11
1 I say then, has God
rejected his people? May it not be! For I myself am an Israelite, from the seed
of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin
Rejected is aposato,
which means “pushed aside.” Read in context of the previous argument of chapter
10. Paul’s point in asking this question, then affirming his own ethnic
heritage, is to identify the terms of the “remnant.” So then, can any ethnic
Jews be saved?
2 God has not
rejected his people which he foreknew. Or do you not know in Elijah what the
scripture says, that he pleaded to God on account of Israel?
Paul argues here to the precedent of God’s sparing a holy
remnant when Israel as a whole was lost. Foreknew is proegno.
3 Lord, they have killed
your prophets, they have destroyed your altars, and I alone am left and they
seek my life
Quotation is from 1 Kings 19.
4 But what did the
oracle say to him? I have kept to myself seven thousand men, which did not bow
a knee to Baal
Oracle is chrematismos.
5 In this way then even
in the present time there has become a remnant chosen by grace
Remnant is leimma,
chosen eklogen. “In this way” is houtos, which is vitally important to
how we understand v. 25. Here, as there, it functions as the conclusion of an
argument by demonstrating manner, not
time.
6 And if by grace,
neither by works, since grace would no longer by grace
The definition of grace precludes the possibility of
election by national privilege—works of Torah. Therefore the remnant is not
defined in this way, but rather by charitos
7 What then, what
Israel sought, this it did not obtain, and the chosen found it, but the rest
were hardened
Chosen is again ekloge.
As shown in 9:30-31, the unlikely according to birth have found that which
ethnic Israel thought it would claim for itself. Note here that what is being
“sought” must be covenant membership—dikaiosune;
not a personal deliverance from the guilt of sin. Otherwise the remnant
language makes no sense.
8 Even as it is
written God gave to them a sluggish spirit, eyes not to see, and ears not to
hear, until this very day
Echoing Deuteronomy, Isaiah, and of course, Jesus.
9 And David says Let
their table be to them unto snares and unto a trap and unto a stumbling block
and unto a retribution
Table is trapeza,
which would of course have the implication of a ceremonially clean table from
which Gentiles were excluded, for a Jew. Stumbling block is skandalon (cause for sin) again and antapodoma is retribution. (An
unfavorable ruling in the law court that must be exacted.) The reference is
from Ps. 69/35
10 Let their eyes be
darkened not to see and their backs bent forever
Ethnic Israel, called to be a light, is gone dark. Ethnic
Israel, which told its own story in terms of liberation and freedom, is by its
own sin bent under the yoke of slavery again. But the point of this is not to
show an absolute condemnation, but rather to define the terms of the remnant.
11 I say then, have
they stumbled that they might fall? May it not be! But by their stumble
salvation to the Gentiles is come unto their being made jealous
Here Paul makes his case for “some hope yet.” I think this
passage is clarified further in the terms of his practical purpose in writing
the letter. (Establishing Rome as a missionary base to Spain, as Antioch was to
him for Asia Minor.) The following passage is not, as some commentators, a
sudden extension of universal salvation back to the Jews after it was retracted
in chs. 9-10, but rather a personal note of hope on a deeply painful subject
despite the surprising and paradoxical way in which God has acted through the
Messiah. Paul doesn’t change his mind in the next 13 verses…rather, upholding
his argument throughout the book, he cautions the Roman church against the same
mistake by which the Jews excluded themselves. Stumble is eptaisan. Jealous is parazelosai.
12 And if their
stumble is riches of the world and their defeat riches of the gentiles, how
much more their inclusion
How much more wonderful should it be that a remnant of Jews
would be included in the covenant people! This must be told to the Roman church
especially in light of the expulsion of the Jews under Claudius, and the
retraction of the edict under the newly ascended Nero, which would have brought
the Jewish Christians back into an uneasy fellowship with the Gentile
Christians in Rome who apparently needed reminding that the gospel was “to the
Jew first, and also to the Gentile.”
13 And I speak now to
you, Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I myself am an apostle to the Gentiles, I
glorify my ministry
Here Paul makes his direct plea to the Gentile party The
second half of the sentence is a particularly convoluted bit of Greek. The
rhetorical force of the men…de relationship with v. 15 is lost in English, but
there should be a sense of “since v. 13B&14…then clearly v. 15.” In short,
Paul, as the apostle to the Gentiles,
somehow has a unique ministry to the exiled Jews as well by rousing their
jealousy at Gentile inclusion.
14 in order to make
my flesh (people) jealous and save some of them
Flesh is sarka,
“Israel-according-to-the flesh.” Save is soso.
Implication is that kai has a thereby
or “thus” effect.
15 For if their
rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what would their acceptance be
but life from the dead?
If by the rejection of the Messiah (and here you see a
reference to everything about the aggregation of sin/trespass in the argument
in ch. 7 referenced AND the idea of Jesus as the representative of Israel according to the flesh) is the means of reconciling
the world into God’s family, how much more would the resurrection of Israel
from their death in sin mean? The sense is, the re-inclusion of Israel must be
very desirable.
16 And if the
first-portion is holy, also the whole batch. And if the root is holy, also the
branches.
First-portion is aparche
again. The leavening yeast and
the branch-nourishing root are O.T. images of Israel that are carried into the
words and teachings of Jesus. It’s a side-note, but worth mentioning that this
verse ought to carry into the discussion of the question “to what extent was
Paul exposed to the written/oral traditions of Jesus?”
17 And if some of the
branches are broken off, and you being a wild olive are grafted in upon them
and made in fellowship of the rich olive root
If the Gentiles are grafted in replacing that which was of
the desirable olive by “the flesh”
18 Do not boast over
the branches. And if you boast do not bear yourselves over the branches, but
the root over you
…then they ought not to boast themselves on some sort of
privilege over and against those branches which have now been denied access to
the root. The proper thing to do is not to compare yourselves to one another,
but to recognize the “rich root.” There is no national privilege.
19 Then you would say
Branches were broken off that I should be grafted in
Paul acknowledges with a good (Kalos) that this dangerous statement is true.
20 Good. By their
faithlessness they were broken off, but you stand in faith. Do not think in
pride but in fear.
Faithlessness is apistia,
also possibly “disobedience.” Do not be minded (phronei) high, but of fear.
21 For if God did not
spare the branches according to nature, neither will he spare you
Paul’s analogy begins to cut across some traditional Protestant
thinking about “assurance of salvation,” but when we take his words as we find
them their meaning is sobering. God has
not and will not let anyone but
himself determine the terms for who his people are.
22 See then the
kindness and severity of God. On those falling the severity, but on you the
kindness of God, if you might remain in kindness, otherwise then you would be
cut off
Kindness is chrestoteta
and severity is apotomian.
23 And even these (of
Israel), if they might not remain in faithlessness, will be grafted in. For God
is able to graft them in again
Simply kakeinoi in
the beginning of the verse, but the contest implies “of Israel.” Though they
have been cut off in God’s severity, God is able (dunatos) to graft them in
again. N.B. The text does not say that God will
graft them in again. The rest of Paul’s argument about the terms of the
covenant people still stands.
24 For if you having
been cut off from what is according to nature a wild olive are grafted into a
cultivated olive, how much more would these according to nature be grafted onto
their own olive.
And how much easier would it be for those which were the
covenant people according to its flesh become members of the covenant according
to grace since their flesh knows that “sap.”
25 For I do not wish
you to be ignorant, brothers, of this mystery, that you might not be wiser
besides yourselves, since a hardening from part has come to Israel until when
the fullness of the Gentiles might enter in
Wiser beside yourselves is really “cleverer than you ought
to be.” This clearly belongs to the preceding argument: You Gentile Christians
ought not to vaunt yourselves over the Jews. The second half of the verse is
NOT a future prediction that Paul was suddenly struck with in contradiction to
the entire argument of the letter so far. Rather, it is a description of what
has already happened and been accomplished through Jesus. The mystery/marvel is
what Paul has been explaining. The Jews were hardened in part until the
justifying death of the Messiah, at which point the full number (pleroma) of the Gentiles was able to
come in. (as was promised to Abraham.)
26 And in this way
all Israel will be saved, even as it is written He saving will come from Sion,
he will turn ungodliness from Jacob
It is in this way—the
coming in of the Gentiles—that All Israel will be saved. What is Paul
saying? He is saying that Israel is not defined by the flesh, nor is it defined
by the observance of Torah. Rather, in fulfillment to the promises the Covenant
God made to Abraham, Israel, which was chosen by grace and justified by faith,
shall all be saved in the way that he has described throughout the letter to
the Romans. The Gentiles and the remnant are “Israel.” The whole process is
God’s way of saving his covenant people; that is the meaning of kai houtos pas Israel sothesetai.
27 And this will be
my covenant to them with me, when I take away their sins
The one saving is gone/come (there is no distinction is Gk.,
but the tense of the verb is undeniable) from Sion, and he has fulfilled the
covenant and dealt with sin. This is no apocalyptic prediction, but a
description of what Jesus has done.
28 According to the
gospel they are enemies to you, but according to election they are beloved on
account of their fathers
Paul now draws his conclusions for instructing the
Jew-Gentile relations in light of these truths. According to the gospel of
grace there is no room for the Jews, but we love them on account of the flesh
which they overprize.
29 For the gifts and
call of God are irrevocable
They will never lose the gift (charismata) or the call (klesis).
Note that klesis is an important
technical term in Paul’s “salvation process” as the first step before faith.
30 For just as you
once were disobedient to God, but now you have received mercy in their
disobedience
Apeitheia, not apistia. Keep in mind the argument of
9-10 throughout…God used Israel’s disobedience paradoxically to give mercy and
deal with sin.
31 In this way they
now have disobeyed that, by the mercy given to you, they also now might receive
mercy.
Another example of houtos,
always as demonstrative of manner, never temporal. The mercy which came through
Israel’s disobedience is not out of their reach. They might have it. (Not must)
32 For God has
imprisoned all unto disobedience that he might have mercy on all.
There are none that do not need God’s mercy. It is on the
terms of his mercy through Jesus that we will receive his dikaiosune.
33 O the depth of the
riches and the wisdom and the knowledge of God. How unfathomable are his
judgments and unsearchable are his ways
I’ll be treading much more lightly from here out. The rest
of the chapter is an epilogue to the section of 9-11, and then 12-16 is largely
practical advice in light of the letter’s theological argument.
34 For who has known
the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?
Is. 40, Job. 15, Jer. 23
35 Or who has given
to him even that it will be repaid to him?
Job 41. Note that Paul always denies man’s ability to demand
from God.
36 That from him and
through him and to him are all things. To him the glory unto eternity, amen.
In his rapture, Paul wrote a Greek sentence without a
subject or a verb! But amen, nonetheless!
No comments:
Post a Comment