Romans 11:1

The apostle proposes here a plausible objection, which might be urged against the divine conduct in casting off the Jewish nation (Rom 11:1): "Hath God cast away his people? Is the rejection total and final? Are they all abandoned to wrath and ruin, and that eternal? Is the extent of the sentence so large as to be without reserve, or the continuance of it so long as to be without repeal? Will he have no more a peculiar people to himself?" In opposition to this, he shows that there was a great deal of goodness and mercy expressed along with this seeming severity, particularly he insists upon three things: - 1. That, though some of the Jews were cast off, yet they were not all so. 2. That, though the body of the Jews were cast off, yet the Gentiles were taken in. And, 3. That, though the Jews were cast off at present, yet in God's due time they should be taken into his church again.

I. The Jews, it is true, were many of them cast off, but not all. The supposition of this he introduces with a God forbid. He will by no means endure such a suggestions. God had made a distinction between some of them and others.

1. There was a chosen remnant of believing Jews, that obtained righteousness and life by faith in Jesus Christ, Rom 11:1-7. These are said to be such as he foreknew (Rom 11:2), that is, had thoughts of love to, before the world was; for whom he thus foreknew he did predestinate. her lies the ground of the difference. They are called the election (Rom 11:7), that is, the elect, God's chosen ones, whom he calls the election, because that which first distinguished them from the dignified them above others was God's electing love. Believers are the election, all those and those only whom God hath chosen. Now,

(1.) He shows that he himself was one of them: For I also am an Israelite; as if he had said, "Should I say that all the Jews are rejected, I should cut off my own claims, and see myself abandoned." Paul was a chosen vessel (Act 9:15), and yet he was of the seed of Abraham, and particularly of the tribe of Benjamin, the least and youngest of all the tribes of Israel.

(2.) He suggests that as in Elias's time, so now, this chosen remnant was really more and greater than one would think it was, which intimates likewise that it is no new nor unusual thing for God's grace and favour to Israel to be limited and confined to a remnant of that people; for so it was in Elijah's time. The scripture saith it of Elias, en Hēlia - in the story of Elias, the great reformer of the Old Testament. Observe, [1.] His mistake concerning Israel; as if their apostasy in the days of Ahab was so general that he himself was the only faithful servant God had in the world. He refers to Kg1 19:14, where (it is here said) he maketh intercession to God against Israel. A strange kind of intercession: entunchanei tō Theō kata tou Israēl - He deals with God against Israel; so it may be read; so entunchanō is translated, Act 25:24. The Jews enetuchon moi - have dealt with me. In prayer we deal with God, commune with him, discourse with him: it is said of Elijah (Jam 5:17) that he prayed in praying. We are then likely to pray in praying, to make a business of that duty, when we pray as those that are dealing with God in the duty. Now Elijah in this prayer spoke as if there were one left faithful in Israel but himself. See to what a low ebb the profession of religion may sometimes be brought, and how much the face of it may be eclipsed, that the most wise and observing men may give it up for gone. So it was in Elijah's time. That which makes the show of a nation is the powers and the multitude. The powers of Israel were then persecuting powers: They have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars, and they seek my life. The multitude of Israel were then idolatrous: I am left alone. Thus those few that were faithful to God were not only lost in the crowd of idolaters, but crushed and driven into corners by the rage of persecutors. When the wicked rise, a man is hidden, Pro 28:12. - Digged down thine altars; not only neglected them, and let them go out of repair, but digged them down. When altars were set up for Baal, it is no wonder if God's altars were pulled down; they could not endure that standing testimony against their idolatry. This was his intercession against Israel; as if he had said, "Lord, is not this a people ripe for ruin, worthy to be cast off? What else canst thou do for thy great name?" It is a very sad thing for any person or people to have the prayers of God's people against them, especially of God's prophets, for God espouses, and sooner or later will visibly own, the cause of his praying people. [2.] The rectifying of this mistake by the answer of God (Rom 11:4): I have reserved. Note, First, Things are often much better with the church of God than wise and good men think they are. They are ready to conclude hardly, and to give up all for gone, when it is not so. Secondly, In times of general apostasy, there is usually a remnant that keep their integrity - some, though but a few; all do not go one way. Thirdly, That when there is a remnant who keep their integrity in times of general apostasy it is God that reserves to himself that remnant. If he had left them to themselves, they had gone down the stream with the rest. It is his free and almighty grace that makes the difference between them and others. - Seven thousand: a competent number to bear their testimony against the idolatry of Israel, and yet, compared with the many thousands of Israel, a very small number, one of a city, and two of a tribe, like the grape-gleanings of the vintage. Christ's flock is but a little flock; and yet, when they come all together at last, they will be a great and innumerable multitude, Rev 7:9. Now the description of this remnant is that they had not bowed the knee to the image of Baal, which was then the reigning sin of Israel. In court, city, and country, Baal had the ascendant; and the generality of people, more or less, paid their respect to Baal. The best evidence of integrity is a freedom from the present prevailing corruptions of the times and places that we live in, to swim against the stream when it is strong. Those God will own for his faithful witnesses that are bold in bearing their testimony to the present truth, Pe2 1:12. This is thank-worthy, not to bow to Baal when every body bows. Sober singularity is commonly the badge of true sincerity. [3.] The application of this instance to the case in hand: Even so at this present time, Rom 11:5-7. God's methods of dispensation towards his church are as they used to be. As it has been, so it is. In Elijah's time there was a remnant, and so there is now. If then there was a remnant left under the Old Testament, when the displays of grace were less clear and the pourings out of the Spirit less plentiful, much more now under the gospel, when the grace of God, which bringeth salvation, appears more illustrious. - A remnant, a few of many, a remnant of believing Jews when the rest were obstinate in their unbelief. This is called a remnant according to the election of grace; they are such as were chosen from eternity in the counsels of divine love to be vessels of grace and glory. Whom he did predestinate those he called. If the difference between them and others be made purely by the grace of God, as certainly it is (I have reserved them, saith he, to myself), then it must needs be according to the election; for we are sure that whatever God does he does it according to the counsel of his own will. Now concerning this remnant we may observe, First, Whence it takes its rise, from the free grace of God (Rom 11:6), that grace which excludes works. The eternal election, in which the difference between some and others is first founded, is purely of grace, free grace; not for the sake of works done or foreseen; if so, it would not be grace. Gratia non est ullo modo gratia, si non sit omni modo gratuita - It is not grace, properly so called, if it be not perfectly free. Election is purely according to the good pleasure of his will, Eph 1:5. Paul's heart was so full of the freeness of God's grace that in the midst of his discourse he turns aside, as it were, to make this remark, If of grace, then not of works. And some observe that faith itself, which in the matter of justification if opposed to works, is here included in them; for faith has a peculiar fitness to receive the free grace of God for our justification, but not to receive that grace for our election. Secondly, What it obtains: that which Israel, that is, the body of that people, in van sought for (Rom 11:7): Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for, that is, justification, and acceptance with God (see Rom 9:31), but the election have obtained it. In them the promise of God has its accomplishment, and God's ancient kindness for that people is remembered. He calls the remnant of believers, not the elect, but the election, to show that the sole foundation of all their hopes and happiness is laid in election. They were the persons whom God had in his eye in the counsels of his love; they are the election; they are God's choice. Such was the favour of God to the chosen remnant. But,

2. The rest were blinded, Rom 11:7. Some are chosen and called, and the call is made effectual. But others are left to perish in their unbelief; nay, they are made worse by that which should have made them better. The gospel, which to those that believed was the savour of life unto life, to the unbelieving was the savour of death unto death. The same sun softens wax and hardens clay. Good old Simeon foresaw that the child Jesus was set for the fall, as well as for the rising again, of many in Israel, Luk 2:34. - Were blinded; epōrōthēsan - they were hardened; so some. They were seared, and made brawny and insensible. They could neither see the light, nor feel the touch, of gospel grace. Blindness and hardness are expressive of the same senselessness and stupidity of spirit. They shut their eyes, and would not see; this was their sin: and then God, in a way of righteous judgment, blinded their eyes, that they could not see; this was their punishment. This seemed harsh doctrine: to qualify it, therefore, he vouches two witnesses out of the Old Testament, who speak of such a thing.

(1.) Isaiah, who spoke of such a judgment in his day, Isa 29:10; Isa 6:9. The spirit of slumber, that is, an indisposedness to mind either their duty or interest. They are under the power of a prevailing unconcernedness, like people that are slumbering and sleeping; not affected with any thing that is said or done. They were resolved to continue as they were, and would not stir. The following words explain what is meant by the spirit of slumber: Eyes, that they should not see, and ears, that they should not hear. They had the faculties, but in the things that belonged to their peace they had not the use of those faculties; they were quite infatuated, they saw Christ, but they did not believe in him; they heard his word, but they did not receive it; and so both their hearing and their seeing were in vain. It was all one as if they had neither seen nor heard. Of all judgments spiritual judgments are the sorest, and most to be dreaded, though they make the least noise. - Unto this day. Ever since Esaias prophesied, this hardening work has been in the doing; some among them have been blind and senseless. Or, rather, ever since the first preaching of the gospel: though they have had the most convincing evidences that could be of the truth of it, the most powerful preaching, the fairest offers, the clearest calls from Christ himself, and from his apostles, yet to this day they are blinded. It is still true concerning multitudes of them, even to this day in which we live; they are hardened and blinded, the obstinacy and unbelief go by succession from generation to generation, according to their own fearful imprecation, which entailed the curse: His blood be upon us and upon our children.

(2.) David (Rom 11:9, Rom 11:10), quoted from Psa 69:22, Psa 69:23, where David having in the Spirit foretold the sufferings of Christ from his own people the Jews, particularly that of their giving him vinegar to drink (Rom 11:21, which was literally fulfilled, Mat 27:48), an expression of the greatest contempt and malice that could be, in the next words, under the form of an imprecation, he foretels the dreadful judgments of God upon them for it: Let their table become a snare, which the apostle here applies to the present blindness of the Jews, and the offence they took at the gospel, which increased their hardness. This teaches us how to understand other prayers of David against his enemies; they are to be looked upon as prophetic of the judgments of God upon the public and obstinate enemies of Christ and his kingdom. His prayer that it might be so was a prophecy that it should be so, and not the private expression of his own angry resentments. It was likewise intended to justify God, and to clear his righteousness in such judgments. He speaks here, [1.] Of the ruin of their comforts: Let their table be made a snare, that is, as the psalmist explains it, Let that which should be for their welfare be a trap to them. The curse of God will turn meat into poison. It is a threatening like that in Mal 2:2, I will curse your blessings. Their table a snare, that is, an occasion of sin and an occasion of misery. Their very food, that should nourish them, shall choke them. [2.] Of the ruin of their powers and faculties (Rom 11:10), their eyes darkened, their backs bowed down, that they can neither find the right way, nor, if they could, are they able to walk in it. The Jews, after their national rejection of Christ and his gospel, became infatuated in their politics, so that their very counsels turned against them, and hastened their ruin by the Romans. They looked like a people designed for slavery and contempt, their backs bowed down, to be ridden and trampled upon by all the nations about them. Or, it may be understood spiritually; their backs are bowed down in carnality and worldly-mindedness. Curvae in terris animae - They mind earthly things. This is an exact description of the state and temper of the present remainder of that people, than whom, if the accounts we have of them be true, there is not a more worldly, wilful, blind, selfish, ill-natured, people in the world. They are manifestly to this day under the power of this curse. Divine curses will work long. It is a sign we have our eyes darkened if we are bowed down in worldly-mindedness.

II. Another thing which qualified this doctrine of the rejection of the Jews was that though they were cast off and unchurched, yet the Gentiles were taken in (Rom 11:11-14), which he applies by way of caution to the Gentiles, Rom 11:17-22.

1. The rejection of the Jews made room for the reception of the Gentiles. The Jews' leavings were a feast for the poor Gentiles (Rom 11:11): "Have they stumbled that they should fall? Had God no other end in forsaking and rejecting them than their destruction?" He startles at this, rejecting the thought with abhorrence, as usually he does when any thing is suggested which seems to reflect upon the wisdom, or righteousness, or goodness of God: God forbid! no, through their fall salvation is come to the Gentiles. Not but that salvation might have come to the Gentiles if they had stood; but by the divine appointment it was so ordered that the gospel should be preached to the Gentiles upon the Jews' refusal of it. Thus in the parable (Mat 22:8, Mat 22:9), Those that were first bidden were not worthy - Go ye therefore into the highways, Luk 14:21. And so it was in the history (Act 13:46): It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you; but, seeing you put it from you, lo, we turn to the Gentiles; so Act 18:6. God will have a church in the world, will have the wedding furnished with guests; and, if one will not come, another will, or why was the offer made? The Jews had the refusal, and so the tender came to the Gentiles. See how Infinite Wisdom brings light out of darkness, good out of evil, meat out of the eater, and sweetness out of the strong. To the same purport he says (Rom 11:12), The fall of them was the riches of the world, that is, it hastened the gospel so much the sooner into the Gentile world. The gospel is the greatest riches of the place where it is; it is better than thousands of gold and silver. Or, The riches of the Gentiles was the multitude of converts among them. True believers are God's jewels. To the same purport (Rom 11:15): The casting away of them is the reconciling of the world. God's displeasure towards them made way for his favour towards the Gentiles. God was in Christ reconciling the world, Co2 5:19. And therefore he took occasion from the unbelief of the Jews openly to disavow and disown them, though they had been his peculiar favourites, to show that in dispensing his favours he would now no longer act in such a way of peculiarity and restriction, but that in every nation he that feared God and wrought righteousness should be accepted of him, Act 10:34, Act 10:35.

2. The use that the apostle makes of this doctrine concerning the substitution of the Gentiles in the room of the Jews.

(1.) As a kinsman to the Jews, here is a word of excitement and exhortation to them, to stir them up to receive and embrace the gospel-offer. This God intended in his favour to the Gentiles, to provoke the Jews to jealousy (Rom 11:11), and Paul endeavours to enforce it accordingly (Rom 11:14): If by any means I might provoke to emulation those who are my flesh. "Shall the despised Gentiles run away with all the comforts and privileges of the gospel, and shall not we repent of our refusal, and now at last put in for a share? Shall not we believe and obey, and be pardoned and saved, as well as the Gentiles?" See an instance of such an emulation in Esau, Gen 28:6-9. There is a commendable emulation in the affairs of our souls: why should not we be as holy and happy as any of our neighbours? In this emulation there needs no suspicion, undermining or countermining; for the church has room enough, and the new covenant grace and comfort enough, for us all. The blessings are not lessened by the multitudes of the sharers. - And might save some of them. See what was Paul's business, to save souls; and yet the utmost he promises himself is but to save some. Though he was such a powerful preacher, spoke and wrote with such evidence and demonstration of the Spirit, yet of the many he dealt with he could but save some. Ministers must think their pains well bestowed if they can but be instrumental to save some.

(2.) As an apostle to the Gentiles, here is a word of caution for them: "I speak to you Gentiles. You believing Romans, you hear what riches of salvation are come to you by the fall of the Jews, but take heed lest you do any thing to forfeit it." Paul takes this, as other occasions, to apply his discourse to the Gentiles, because he was the apostle of the Gentiles, appointed for the service of their faith, to plant and water churches in the Gentile nations. This was the purport of his extraordinary mission, Act 22:21, I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles; compare Act 9:15. It was likewise the intention of his ordination, Gal 2:9. Compare Act 13:2. It ought to be our great and special care to do good to those that are under our charge: we must particularly mind that which is our own work. It was an instance of God's great love to the poor Gentiles that he appointed Paul, who in gifts and graces excelled all the apostles, to be the apostle of the Gentiles. The Gentile world was a wider province; and the work to be done in it required a very able, skilful, zealous, courageous workman: such a one was Paul. God calls those to special work whom he either sees or makes fit for it. - I magnify my office. There were those that vilified it, and him because of it. It was because he was the apostle of the Gentiles that the Jews were so outrageous against him (Act 22:21, Act 22:22), and yet he thought never the worse of it, though it set him up as the butt of all the Jewish rage and malice. It is a sign of true love to Jesus Christ to reckon that service and work for him truly honourable which the world looks upon with scorn, as mean and contemptible. The office of the ministry is an office to be magnified. Ministers are ambassadors for Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God, and for their work's sake are to be esteemed highly in love. - My office; tēn diakonian mou - my ministry, my service, not my lordship and dominion. It was not the dignity and power, but the duty and work, of an apostle, that Paul was so much in love with. Now two things he exhorts the Gentiles to, with reference to the rejected Jews: -

[1.] To have a respect for the Jews, notwithstanding, and to desire their conversion. This is intimated in the prospect he gives them of the advantage that would accrue to the church by their conversion, Rom 11:12, Rom 11:15. It would be as life from the dead; and therefore they must not insult and triumph over those poor Jews, but rather pity them, and desire their welfare, and long for the receiving of them in again.

[2.] To take heed to themselves, lest they should stumble and fall, as they Jews had done, Rom 11:17-22. Here observe,

First, The privilege which the Gentiles had by being taken into the church. They were grafted in (Rom 11:17), as a branch of a wild olive into a good olive, which is contrary to the way and custom of the husbandman, who grafts the good olive into the bad; but those that God grafts into the church he finds wild and barren, and good for nothing. Men graft to mend the tree; but God grafts to mend the branch. 1. The church of God is an olive-tree, flourishing and fruitful as an olive (Psa 52:8; Hos 14:6), the fruit useful for the honour both of God and man, Jdg 9:9. 2. Those that are out of the church are as wild olive-trees, not only useless, but what they do produce is sour and unsavoury: Wild by nature, Rom 11:24. This was the state of the poor Gentiles, that wanted church privileges, and in respect of real sanctification; and it is the natural state of every one of us, to be wild by nature. 3. Conversion is the grafting in of wild branches into the good olive. We must be cut off from the old stock, and be brought into union with a new root. 4. Those that are grafted into the good olive-tree partake of the root and fatness of the olive. It is applicable to a saving union with Christ; all that are by a lively faith grafted into Christ partake of him as the branches of the root - receive from his fulness. But it is here spoken of a visible church-membership, from which the Jews were as branches broken off; and so the Gentiles were grafted in, autois - among those that continued, or in the room of those that were broken off. The Gentiles, being grafted into the church, partake of the same privileges that the Jews did, the root and fatness. The olive-tree is the visible church (called so Jer 11:16); the root of this tree was Abraham, not the root of communication, so Christ only is the root, but the root of administration, he being the first with whom the covenant was so solemnly made. Now the believing Gentiles partake of this root: he also is a son of Abraham (Luk 19:9), the blessing of Abraham comes upon the Gentiles (Gal 3:14), the same fatness of the olive-tree, the same for substance, special protection, lively oracles, means of salvation, a standing ministry, instituted ordinances; and, among the rest, the visible church-membership of their infant seed, which was part of the fatness of the olive-tree that the Jews had, and cannot be imagined to be denied to the Gentiles.

Secondly, A caution not to abuse these privileges. 1. "Be not proud (Rom 11:18): Boast not against the branches. Do not therefore trample upon the Jews as a reprobate people, nor insult over those that are broken off, much less over those that do continue." Grace is given, not to make us proud, but to make us thankful. The law of faith excludes all boasting either of ourselves or against others. "Do not say (Rom 11:19): They were broken off that I might be grafted in; that is, do not think that thou didst merit more at the hand of God than they, or didst stand higher in his favour." "But remember, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. Though thou art grafted in, thou art still but a branch borne by the root; nay, and an engrafted branch, brought into the good olive contrary to nature (Rom 11:24), not free-born, but by an act of grace enfranchised and naturalized. Abraham, the root of the Jewish church, is not beholden to thee; but thou art greatly obliged to him, as the trustee of the covenant and the father of many nations. Therefore, if thou boast, know (this word must be supplied to clear the sense) thou bearest not the root but the root thee." 2. "Be not secure (Rom 11:20): Be not high-minded, but fear. Be not too confident of your own strength and standing." A holy fear is an excellent preservative against high-mindedness: happy is the man that thus feareth always. We need not fear but God will be true to his word; all the danger is lest we be false to ours. Let us therefore fear, Heb 4:1. The church of Rome now boasts of a patent of perpetual preservation; but the apostle here, in his epistle to that church when she was in her infancy and integrity, enters an express caveat against that boast, and all claims of that kind. - Fear what? "Why fear lest thou commit a forfeiture as they have done, lest thou lose the privileges thou now enjoyest, as they have lost theirs." The evils that befall others should be warnings to us. Go (saith God to Jerusalem Jer 7:12), and see what I did to Shiloh; so now, let all the churches of God go and see what he did to Jerusalem, and what is become of the day of their visitation, that we may hear and fear, and take heed of Jerusalem's sin. The patent which churches have of their privileges is not for a certain term, nor entailed upon them and their heirs; but it runs as long as they carry themselves well, and no longer. Consider, (1.) "How they were broken off. It was not undeservedly, by an act of absolute sovereignty and prerogative, but because of unbelief." It seems, then, it is possible for churches that have long stood by faith to fall into such a state of infidelity as may be their ruin. Their unbelief did not only provoke God to cut them off, but they did by this cut themselves off; it was not only the meritorious, but the formal cause of their separation. "Now, thou art liable to the same infirmity and corruption that they fell by." Further observe, They were natural branches (Rom 11:21), not only interested in Abraham's covenant, but descending from Abraham's loins, and so born upon the premises, and thence had a kind of tenant-right: yet, when they sunk into unbelief, God did not spare them. Prescription, long usage, the faithfulness of their ancestors, would not secure them. It was in vain to plead, though they insisted much upon it, that they were Abraham's seed, Mat 3:9; Joh 8:33. It is true they were the husbandmen to whom the vineyard was first let out; but, when they forfeited it, it was justly taken from them, Mat 21:41, Mat 21:43. This is called here severity, Rom 11:22. God laid righteousness to the line and judgment to the plummet, and dealt with them according to their sins. Severity is a word that sounds harshly; and I do not remember that it is any where else in scripture ascribed to God; and it is here applied to the unchurching of the Jews. God is most severe towards those that have been in profession nearest to him, if they rebel against him, Amo 3:2. Patience and privileges abused turn to the greatest wrath. Of all judgments, spiritual judgments are the sorest; for of these he is here speaking, Rom 11:8. (2.) "How thou standest, thou that art engrafted in." He speaks to the Gentile churches in general, though perhaps tacitly reflecting on some particular person, who might have expressed some such pride and triumph in the Jews' rejection. "Consider then," [1.] "By what means thou standest: By faith, which is a depending grace, and fetches in strength from heaven. Thou dost not stand in any strength of thy own, of which thou mightest be confident: thou art no more than the free grace of God makes thee, and his grace is his own, which he gives or withholds at pleasure. That which ruined them was unbelief, and by faith thou standest; therefore thou hast no faster hold than they had, thou standest on no firmer foundation than they did." [2.] "On what terms (Rom 11:22): Towards thee goodness, if thou continue in his goodness, that is, continue in a dependence upon and compliance with the free grace of God, the want of which it was that ruined the Jews - if thou be careful to keep up thine interest in the divine favour, by being continually careful to please God and fearful of offending him." The sum of our duty, the condition of our happiness, is to keep ourselves in the love of God. Fear the Lord and his goodness. Hos 3:5.

III. Another thing that qualified this doctrine of the Jews' rejection is that, though for the present they are cast off, yet the rejection is not final; but, when the fulness of time is come, they will be taken in again. They are not cast off for ever, but mercy is remembered in the midst of wrath. Let us observe,

1. How this conversion of the Jews is here described. (1.) It is said to be their fulness (Rom 11:12), that is, the addition of them to the church, the filling up again of that place which became vacant by their rejection. This would be the enriching of the world (that is, the church in the world) with a great deal of light and strength and beauty. (2.) It is called the receiving of them. The conversion of a soul is the receiving of that soul, so the conversion of a nation. They shall be received into favour, into the church, into the love of Christ, whose arms are stretched out for the receiving of all those that will come to him. And this will be as life from the dead - so strange and surprising, and yet withal so welcome and acceptable. The conversion of the Jews will bring great joy to the church. See Luk 15:32, He was dead, and is alive; and therefore it was meet we should make merry and be glad. (3.) It is called the grafting of them in again (Rom 11:23), into the church, from which they had been broken off. That which is grafted in receives sap and virtue from the root; so does a soul that is truly grafted into the church receive life, and strength, and grace from Christ the quickening root. They shall be grafted into their own olive-tree (Rom 11:24); that is, into the church of which they had formerly been the most eminent and conspicuous members, to retrieve those privileges of visible church-membership which they had so long enjoyed, but have now sinned away and forfeited by their unbelief. (4.) It is called the saving of all Israel, Rom 11:26. True conversion may well be called salvation; it is salvation begun. See Act 2:47. The adding of them to the church is the saving of them: tous sōzōmenous, in the present tense, are saved. When conversion-work goes on, salvation-work goes on.

2. What it is grounded upon, and what reason we have to look for it.

(1.) Because of the holiness of the first-fruits and the root, Rom 11:16. Some by the first-fruits understand those of the Jews that were already converted to the faith of Christ and received into the church, who were as the first-fruits dedicated to God, as earnests of a more plentiful and sanctified harvest. A good beginning promises a good ending. Why may we not suppose that others may be savingly wrought upon as well as those who are already brought in? Others by the first-fruits understand the same with the root, namely, the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, from whom the Jews descended, and with whom, as the prime trustees, the covenant was deposited: and so they were the root of the Jews, not only as a people, but as a church. Now, if they were holy, which is not meant so much of inherent as of federal holiness - if they were in the church and in the covenant - then we have reason to conclude that God hath a kindness for the lump - the body of that people; and for the branches - the particular members of it. The Jews are in a sense a holy nation (Exo 19:6), being descended from holy parents. Now it cannot be imagined that such a holy nation should be totally and finally cast off. This proves that the seed of believ

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

CHAPTER XI.

God has not universally nor finally rejected Israel; nor are

they all at present rejecters of the Gospel, for there is a

remnant of true believers now, as there was in the days of the

Prophet Elijah, 1-5.

These have embraced the Gospel, and are saved by grace, and not

by the works of the law, 6.

The body of the Israelites, having rejected this, are blinded,

according to the prophetic declaration of David, 7-10.

But they have not stumbled, so as to be finally rejected; but

through their fall, salvation is come to the Gentiles, 11-14.

There is hope of their restoration, and that the nation shall

yet become a holy people, 15, 16.

The converted Gentiles must not exult over the fallen Jews; the

latter having fallen by unbelief, the former stand by faith,

17-20.

The Jews, the natural branches, were broken off from the true

olive, and the Gentiles having been grafted in, in their place,

must walk uprightly, else they also shall be cut off, 21, 22.

The Jews, if they abide not in unbelief, shall be again grafted

in; and when the fulness of the Gentiles is come in, the great

Deliverer shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob, according to

the covenant of God, 23-27.

For the sake of their forefathers God loves them, and will again

call them, and communicate His gifts to them, 28, 29.

The Gospel shall he again sent to them, as it has now been sent

to the Gentiles, 30-32.

This procedure is according to the immensity of the wisdom,

knowledge, and unsearchable judgments of God, who is the

Creator, Preserver, and Governor of all things, and to whom all

adoration is due, 33-36.

NOTES ON CHAP. XI.

This chapter is of the prophetic kind. It was by the spirit of prophecy that the apostle foresaw the rejection of the Jews, which he supposes in the two preceding chapters; for when he wrote the epistle they were not in fact, rejected, seeing their polity and Church were then standing. But the event has proved that he was a true prophet; for we know that in about ten or eleven years after the writing of this letter the temple was destroyed, the Jewish polity overthrown, and the Jews expelled out of the promised land, which they have never been able to recover to the present day.

This, 1. confirms the arguments which the apostle had advanced to establish the calling of the Gentiles. For the Jews are, in fact, rejected; consequently, our calling is, in fact, not invalidated by any thing they suggested, relative to the perpetuity of the Mosaic dispensation. But that dispensation being wholly subverted, our title to the privileges of God's Church and people stands clear and strong; the Jewish constitution only could furnish objections against our claim; and the event has silenced every objection from that quarter.

2. The actual rejection of the Jews proves Paul to be a true apostle of Jesus Christ, and that he spoke by the Spirit of God; otherwise, he could not have argued so fully upon a case which was yet to come, and of which there was no appearance in the state of things when he wrote this epistle. And this very circumstance should induce us to pay great attention to this chapter, in which he discourses concerning the extent and duration of the rejection of his countrymen, to prevent their being insulted and despised by the Gentile Christians.

(1) As to the extent of this rejection, it is not absolutely universal; some of the Jews have embraced the Gospel, and are incorporated into the Christian Church with the believing Gentiles. Upon the case of these believing Jews he comments, Ro 11:1-7.

(2) As to the duration of it, it is not final and perpetual, for all Israel, or the nation of the Jews, which is now blinded, shall one day be saved or brought again into the kingdom or covenant of God. Upon the state of these blinded Jews he comments, Ro 11:7 to the end of the chapter. His design, in discoursing upon this subject, was not only to make the thing itself known, but partly to engage the attention of the unbelieving Jew; to conciliate his favour, and, if possible, to induce him to come into the Gospel scheme; and partly to dispose the Gentile Christians not to treat the Jews with contempt; (considering that they derived all their present blessings from the patriarchs, the ancestors of the Jewish nation, and were engrafted into the good olive tree, whence the Jews had been broken;) and to admonish them to take warning by the fall of the Jews; to make a good improvement of their religious privileges, lest, through unbelief, any of them should relapse into heathenism, or perish finally at the last day.

The thread of his discourse leads him into a general survey and comparison of the several dispensations of God towards the Gentiles and Jews; and he concludes this survey with adoration of the depths of the Divine knowledge and wisdom exercised in the various constitutions erected in the world, Ro 11:30-36.

Verse 1. I say then, hath God cast away his people?] Has he utterly and finally rejected them? for this is necessarily the apostle's meaning, and is the import of the Greek word απωσατο, which signifies to thrust or drive away, from απο, from, and ωθεω, to thrust or drive; has he thrust them off, and driven them eternally from him? God forbid-by no means. This rejection is neither universal nor final. For I also am an Israelite-I am a regular descendant from Abraham, through Israel or Jacob, and by his son Benjamin. And I stand in the Church of God, and in the peculiar covenant; for the rejection is only of the obstinate and disobedient; for those who believe on Christ, as I have done, are continued in the Church.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Ch. Rom_11:1-10. Meanwhile the rejection of Israel never was, nor is, total: a remnant believes, and so abides in covenant

1. I say then] I say therefore. Thus far St Paul has stated the adverse side of the case of Israel. He has shewn (1) that the Divine Promise never pledged eternal light and life to all Abraham’s descendants; (2) that God is sovereign in His grants of mercy; (3) that the true work of the elder Dispensation was to prepare for the later; (4) that both Gentile faith and Jewish unbelief were distinctly foretold in the Law and the Prophets. And now, true to his main purpose throughout this argument, he turns to state the happier side; and this in two main aspects. First he reiterates the truth of the Divine Election, but now in its positive aspect—the existence always of a believing Israel within the unbelieving mass. Secondly, he predicts a time when even in the mass Israel should turn to the true Messiah, be restored to the Church, and become thus an influence of vast good for the world.—“Therefore:”—i.e. as the practical result from my previous account of sin and judgment in the case of Israel. Q. d., “I have given that account in order the better to give an account of present and coming mercy; which therefore I now do.’

Hath God cast away] Lit. and better, Did God thrust away? i.e. when He welcomed the Gentiles into His covenant. (So too Rom_11:2)—For the expression cp. 2Sa_12:22; where LXX. uses the same verb and noun.

his people] Here, obviously, the bodily descendants of Jacob. St Paul asks whether all these as such were now excluded from the covenant. So immense was the apparent revolution of the admission of Gentiles as such to full covenant, that this fact (along with the fact of the unbelief of millions of Jews) might prompt the thought that the Gentiles were now the privileged and the Jews the aliens.

God forbid] See on Rom_3:4.—The phrase rejects with indignation the suggested thought. In this intense feeling are combined deep love for his kinsmen, jealousy for his own place in the covenant, and jealousy too for the great principle of the irreversibility of “gifts and calling.” See Rom_11:29.

For I also, &c.] Q. d., “I am a living proof to the contrary; an Israelite in the strongest and strictest sense of bodily descent; yet a Christian, a child of God, a messenger of His word.”

an Israelite] See on Rom_9:4.

Benjamin] Cp. Php_3:5, where St Paul, for a different purpose, dwells on his pedigree.—See Bp. Lightfoot’s interesting note on Php_3:5, for the historic dignity and pride of the tribe of Benjamin. (Here, however, such ideas are less clearly in question than there.)

The Olive Tree; the Root, Branches, and Graftings

1. The Olive Tree is the true Israel (cp. Jer_11:16,) as the Church, the People of God. Its Root is Abraham and the Patriarchs. Its Stem is the Church of the Old Testament, when in a certain sense (that of external privilege) the Church coincided with the Nation of Israel, and when at least the vast majority of true believers were also physically children of Abraham. Its branches (by a slight modification of metaphor) are potential believers, whether Jewish or Gentile. If Jewish, their faith in Jesus as Messiah is viewed as retaining them in the Church; if Gentile, their faith “grafts” them into the stem of the covenant-congregation. If, being Jews, they reject the offers of the Gospel, they are thereby “cut off” from the stem. If they repent and believe, their faith “grafts” them into it again; and this process, says St Paul, is, by the nature of the case, a more likely and natural one than the “grafting” of the alien branches—which yet is graciously effected.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

I say then - This expression is to be regarded as conveying the sense of an objection. Paul, in the previous chapters, had declared the doctrine that all the Jews were to be rejected. To this a Jew might naturally reply, Is it to be believed, that God would cast off his people whom he had once chosen; to whom pertained the adoption, and the promises, and the covenant, and the numerous blessings conferred on a favorite people? It was natural for a Jew to make such objections. And it was important for the apostle to show that his doctrine was consistent with all the promises which God had made to his people. The objection, as will be seen by the answer which Paul makes, is formed on the supposition that God had rejected “all his people,” or “cast them off entirely.” This objection he answers by showing,

That God had saved him, a Jew, and therefore that he could not mean that God had east off all Jews Rom 11:1; That now, as in former times of great declension, God had reserved a remnant Rom 11:2-5; That it accorded with the Scriptures that a part should be hardened Rom 11:6-10; That the design of the rejection was not final, but was to admit the Gentiles to the privileges of Christianity Rom 11:11-24; That the Jews should yet return to God, and be reinstated in his favor: so that it could not be objected that God had finally and totally cast off his people, or that he had violated his promises.

At the same time, however, the doctrine which Paul had maintained was true, that God had taken away their exclusive and special privileges, and had rejected a large part of the nation.

Cast away - Rejected, or put off. Has God so renounced them that they cannot be any longer his people.

His people - Those who have been long in the covenant relation to him: that is, the Jews.

God forbid - Literally, it may not or cannot be. This is an expression strongly denying that this could take place; and means that Paul did not intend to advance such a doctrine; Luk 20:16; Rom 3:4, Rom 3:6,Rom 3:31; Rom 6:2, Rom 6:15; Rom 7:7, Rom 7:13.

For I am also an Israelite - To show them that he did not mean to affirm that all Jews must of necessity be cast off, he adduces his own case. He was a Jew; and yet he looked for the favor of God, and for eternal life. That favor he hoped now to obtain by being a Christian; and if he might obtain it, others might also. “If I should say that all Jews must be excluded from the favor of God, then I also must be without hope of salvation, for I am a Jew.”

Of the seed of Abraham - Descended from Abraham. The apostle mentions this to show that he was a Jew in every respect; that he had a title to all the privileges of a Jew, and must be exposed to all their liabilities and dangers. If the seed of Abraham must of necessity be cut off, he must be himself rejected. The Jews valued themselves much on having been descended from so illustrious an ancestor as Abraham Mat 3:9; and Paul shows them that he was entitled to all the privileges of such a descent; compare Phi 3:4-5.

Of the tribe of Benjamin - This tribe was one that was originally located near Jerusalem. The temple was built on the line that divided the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. It is not improbable that it was regarded as a special honor to have belonged to one of those tribes. Paul mentions it here in accordance with their custom; for they regarded it as of great importance to preserve their genealogy, and to be able to state not only that they were Jews, but to designate the tribe and family to which they belonged.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Rom_11:1-10

God hath not cast away His people.

God hath not cast off His people

This is proved by--

I. The known facts of their history--Paul and his companions in the faith.

II. The secret operations of the Spirit of God--as exemplified in the case of Elias.

III. The results to be achieved in the national rejection of Israel.

1. The conversion of the Gentiles.

2. The consequent conversion of the Jews.

3. The completion of the redeeming purpose on earth.

IV. The ultimate purpose of Gods judgments--the demonstration of His own glory. (J. Lyth, D.D.)

The remnant, the admonition, and the hope

1. Distressed though the apostle was that anything should have caused the exclusion of his kinsmen from the benefits of Messiahs kingdom, yet the fact was patent that it was because of their unbelief, and that it had been predicted. Henceforth they should no longer be, as a people, the people of God. Even when admitted into the kingdom of God, which they still might be by the obedience of faith, they should have no pre-eminence over their believing Gentile brethren (Joh_10:16).

2. Now all this might well fill the heart of the patriotic Jew with thoughtful sadness. For he had been accustomed to give to the glowing predictions of Israels prospective glory an altogether national and literal interpretation. How sadly disappointing, then, to be now assured that the Israel there spoken of was, not Israel after the flesh, but after the spirit! He would ask, How am I to understand the matter? Hath God cast away His people? God forbid! exclaims the apostle. As a nation, and because that they have rejected the Lords Christ, He has rejected them, but this only so far, and so long, as they reject Him. Therefore--

I. He has not cast them away indiscriminately; they have not all been rejected; there is still a foreknown remnant.

1. Such a total rejection the apostle had never affirmed. Should any one assert that so he had taught, let him reflect that he also was an Israelite, etc. But he was not therefore excluded from the benefit of Christs salvation. No; not even though he had once been a blasphemer, etc. (1Ti_1:16).

2. Nor had the apostle alone from amongst the Jews obtained mercy (Act_21:20). Nor could he have anything like an adequate conception of the number of Jewish believers. These whom God had foreknown He had by no means cast away. Though perhaps unknown of men, they were known of God (Rev_7:1-8). Such secret ones the Lord has always had (Rom_11:2-5; cf. 1Ki_19:9-18; Isa_1:9; Isa_10:22).

3. This remnant had obtained that salvation (Rom_9:27), which the rest refused to accept on the stipulated terms; while that rest, because of their self-righteous and obstinate unbelief, had been judicially blinded and hardened (Deu_29:4; Psa_69:22-23). Thus it is that God always deals with incorrigible sinners. They persist in loving darkness, and hating light, and He blinds them. They reject the sure foundation, and it becomes a stone of stumbling. Thus He dealt with Pharaoh and his hosts, with the unbelieving Israelites in the times of Moses, David, Solomon, and Isaiah. And thus He deals with them still (Act_13:40-41; Hab_1:5). These unbelieving Jews are the cast away; but the believing Jews (a foreknown remnant) are elected and saved. But now--

II. With respect to those who have been cast away; have they stumbled to a hopeless fall? Had God ordained that it should be so? God forbid! is the vigorous reply.

1. God did not purpose less mercy for them, but He did intend more for the Gentiles. Indeed, it was this very opening the door of faith to the Gentiles that chiefly caused the offence of the Jews. But by this, which occasioned their fall, salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

2. And now the apostle turns to the Gentile Christians to admonish them against a spirit of exultation over the fallen and rejected Jews. The admonition was probably needed, the persecuting spirit of the Jews being calculated to provoke retaliation. It was still more needed in after times, when Christian rulers and Churches then acted towards that scattered people as though they had been deprived of all the rights of common humanity. But the God of Israel had given no right to any to add one stripe to their chastisement. His severity was intended not for destruction, but salvation; and how much more desirable the latter than the former result! (verses 12-15).

3. And that their salvation is even yet possible is further evident (verse 16). The firstling of the dough and the root of the tree--figures to designate the great progenitors of the whole Jewish nation--having believed in God, had obtained salvation, and had become holy to the Lord. Nay, Jehovah had so presented them to Himself that their descendants also were to be accounted a holy nation. True, this did not insure their unconditional salvation. It had not prevented great numbers from forsaking the God of Israel (Isa_1:4); but for their fathers sakes He would spare no pains to renew them again unto repentance, and to give them hearty welcome on their return (Isa_54:6-8). Many individual Jews had already believed and been saved. These, therefore, might be regarded as, in a secondary sense, the first-fruits unto God, and served to prove that, on like terms, all Israel might be saved.

4. Nay, further, the apostle maintains that the Jews occupied a position more favourable to their salvation. If the Church be symbolised by the olive-tree the Jews were the natural branches as related to Abraham, the father of the faithful, and, as by solemn covenant, separated to fire service of Jehovah. Compared with them, the heathen are indeed but branches of the wild and uncultured tree (Eph_2:11-12). And be it that some of the branches were broken off, and that many from the wild olive have been grafted into the true olive, let them remember that this has been effected contrary to nature, and therefore not exult over the off-broken branches: forasmuch as the state of neither the off-broken nor engrafted branches is irreversible. If the believing Gentile suffers the spirit of pride to displace that of humble trust in the Saviour, he, too, shall not be spared. And if the now reprobated Jew shall receive Him, then shall he also be re-engrafted into the ancient stock. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God (verses 22-24).

5. And not only so, but however improbable it might seem, the time would arrive when all Israel should acknowledge Christ as Lord, and be thereupon welcomed back into His fold (verses 25-27). In the meantime, and as far as concerns the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes. And that which has brought them into this position is the free grace of God, which resolved to include you also. But as touching the election the believing remnant, which continues from age to age (verses 5, 6), are beloved for the fathers sakes. For God Himself has given a sure word of promise that, whithersoever they may be dispersed, when they shall make confession of their iniquity, then will He remember His covenant (Lev_26:40-45). For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. All alike are by nature unbelieving and disobedient. To the consciousness of this fact it is that God shuts them up, and that in order that they may be induced to seek and to secure salvation. (W. Tyson.)

The rejection of Israel

I. Not absolute.

1. A remnant saved.

2. Exemplified in Paul and many known Jewish converts.

3. Confirmed by the history of Elijah.

4. This remnant is of grace (verse 6).

II. Not arbitrary.

1. The rest were blinded.

2. Because of their disobedience.

3. By the just visitation of God.

4. As announced beforehand by their own prophets. (J. Lyth, D.D.)

Gods people

I. Cannot fail on earth.

1. Individuals are still converted (verse 1).

2. The purpose of God is unchangeable (verse 2).

II. Is still small.

1. But not so small that we should be discouraged.

2. Great enough to occasion joy and gratitude.

III. Consists of all true believers who--

1. Repudiate all human merit.

2. Receive Gods mercy as a free gift.

3. Do not harden themselves against the truth. (J. Lyth, D.D.)

Gods Church wider than mans

I. The conspicuously good are the few--not the many. The many are the called; the few are the chosen who accept the call. God had not wholly cast away His people (verse 1). It was then as it had been in the time of Elijah (verse 4). And how is it now? Let us beware of uncharitable judgments. Nothing is easier than sweeping censures. God is tender in His judgments of men, often justifying many whom we in our severity should condemn. Still, would Christ acknowledge the majority in the churches, or would He have to turn to the minority? Certainly to only a small minority, whose faith is proved by their character and works. For, strip away from the profession of Christianity its accidental accompaniments, and what do you find? Nothing that is perfect, even in the loftiest; and nothing of unmixed evil in the meanest. But you will find in the few, in spite of great faults, a faith in Christ so genuine as to give a sure pledge that the goodness of the man will assuredly conquer the badness in the end. The man in whom the love of truth is a passion, in whom justice is a matter of greater concern than the falling of the heavens, and who burns with shame at the thought of an impure deed, and who has courage enough to suffer in the righteous cause like his Great Master;--why, that man forms part of Gods elect remnant, who put to shame the majority of those who cry aloud the name of Christ, but who do not His deeds.

II. Some of these few are not found within the boundaries of the recognised Church. They are in Christs Church, but not in mans. And that is a cause of jealousy and anger to many of us. When Paul told the Jews that God was founding a Church outside their own nation, he knew that he was wounding their prejudices to the quick. So strongly did he feel this that he had to fortify himself by an appeal to Moses (Rom_10:19). But though fact and prophecy supported his statement, they would not admit that God was working upon lines outside their own. And yet the apostle insists upon it as the great revealed mystery which was to crush their pride and to precipitate their fall (verse 25). And so now God is wider in His plans than our pride and prejudice think. We find it almost as hard to believe as the Jew did, that God has a Church outside the Church. And yet, are we not confronted by facts? I believe the Church is our right and natural place, and that it is its natural work to be foremost in doing whatever contributes to the highest welfare of men. But has it not been, and is it not so still, that God has other sheep which are not of this fold? Some of these have maintained an outward connection with the Church, though the Church has not identified itself with them. They have worked alongside the Church rather than with it. Wilberforce and Clarkson did not get the sympathy and support of the Church till their cause was triumphant. Who are the true prophets of this generation? For the most part men upon whom the Church looks askance. When we get to heaven we shall find men there whom we never expected to see, and miss others perhaps whom we expected to find in the foremost places.

III. This outer Church of the Gentiles was to provoke the Jews to jealousy and emulation. The Jews fell that the Gentiles might rise, and the Gentiles had risen that they might stimulate the Jews to rise too. The Church is evermore in need of this constant renewal and reconstruction. At the time of the Reformation Christian truth had to be rediscovered, and a new Church formed outside the lines of the old Church. But the fundamental principle of the Reformation did not long preserve its supremacy--the right of every man to exercise his own judgment--for the Protestants soon began to persecute men like the Catholics. There is a great cry in our day that religion is in danger, and that the churches are failing; such a cry as must have gone forth among the Jews when Paul first preached, but has the cry any greater warrant now than it had then? Was not religion then really rooting itself in a richer soil, and preparing to bring forth better fruit? The devout Catholic thought that the Reformers were devils, and prophesied the overthrow of all religion. But was it not rather a fresh ploughing and sowing of the human soul, and a new opening of the heavens? And as to the cry in our day, if the Christianity depended on the Roman Syllabus, the Thirty-Nine Articles, the Westminster Confession, then we might tremble, but God forbid that we should be overcome by such an ignoble fear. We believe in the religion of Christ, and we can see before it a nobler future. As the Jews had to learn from the Gentiles in order to their recovery, so we have some things to learn from the outer boundaries of Gods Church. (C. Short, M.A.)

God hath not cast away His people.

The glory which will redound to God from the conversion of the Jews

I. Their national preservation through so long a tract of time will furnish a wonderful illustration of the Divine power.

1. They can look back along a line of ancestry compared with which that of the Norman and the Saxon are but of yesterday. Nations which did not exist till long after the Jew had acquired a history, have long ago run their course; but he is unchanged.

2. Nor will any of the ordinary means of national preservation account for their continuance.

(1) They have not, like the Chinese, been stationary, and built in from the rest of the human family. From about B.C. 740, till the destruction of Jerusalem, they suffered as many dispersions, partial or entire, as there were centuries.

(2) Foreign alliances will not explain it. For, besides the fiercest commotions within, they have sustained a quick succession of the most sanguinary invasions from without.

(3) Arms, climate, genius, politics, equally fail to explain it. For they have been crumbled and scattered over the face of the earth; and yet they exist. Old empires which oppressed them have fallen; but the Jew has lived on amidst their ruins. Young nations have started into being, and he has been present to mingle with their elements, but never uniting. And, as if to complete the wonder, their number at this moment is very nearly the same as it was on their leaving Egypt.

3. Now, the only way to account for their preservation is the scriptural one, viz., to ascribe it to Divine power. I am God, I change not; therefore, ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. When, then, they shall be turned to the Lord, with what new emphasis and enlarged meaning will they have to sing Psa_124:1-8.

II. God shall be glorified when it shall be seen that this preservation has not been effected by mere power, but that, from first to last, that power was under the guidance of wisdom, or was exercised according to a plan. A new light is dawning on the mind of men respecting this plan.

1. Formerly the historian only recorded facts. But now it has occurred to him that all the facts of history are connected; that could the principles of this connection be traced history would form one organic whole; and hence, to trace and to expound these principles is now the highest office of the historian--the philosophy of history.

2. Every lover of the Bible, however, should remember that its histories were never written in any other way. It both states the facts, and the principles which unite them. True, after sketching the early history of the race, it confines its history to the Jews. But in that you have, in effect, a type of the whole. And more; in that, you frequently catch glimpses of the others at the most eventful moments of their existence. And more still; the Bible is prophetic as well as historic. Before Herodotus had begun to amass his materials, Isaiah had sung the glory of the latter day; and Daniel had foretold the kingdoms which would arise to the end of time.

3. The Bible never speaks of the course of human events but as conducted on a great plan. And with this peculiarity, that from the time of the promise to Abraham, the entire plan was regulated in relation to his posterity. Nay, ages earlier than that the plan began to evolve (Deu_32:7-8). The great principle on which the habitable part of the globe was mapped out was a principle of relation to the chosen people. And, as the great drama of Providence unfolded, the civilised world invariably found itself involved with that people. Read Psa_78:1-72 th, 105th, and 106th, and do you not hear Jehovah, as He leads them through the nations, saying, Touch not Mine anointed, and do My prophets no harm? Are they invaded and oppressed? Who delivered up Jacob to be a spoil, and Israel to the plunderers? Was it not Jehovah? Does the Assyrian afflict Israel? The Assyrian, saith God, is the rod of My hand. Does the Persian deliver Israel? God calls Cyrus by name. Did nations change hands in consequence of the Persian movement? I have given Egypt for thy ransom; Cush and Sheba for thee. Have the ancient persecutors of Israel perished? Their destruction was foretold! And when, at length, the time shall have come, yea, the set time to favour Zion, what ground will there be for saying, Ye know … that not one thing has failed of all that the Lord your God spake concerning you!

III. Gods glory shall be enhanced when it shall appear that the entire plan of His conduct towards israel has directly tended to promote their highest welfare by illustrating the great principles of His moral government.

1. The principle of mediation--of making the conduct or relationship of one a reason for blessing others. God hath not cast away His people. They are still beloved for the fathers sakes, and their conversion will, at length, establish this fact. It will show them that they have never been absolutely renounced, and why Abraham himself was beloved, and that there never was but one Mediator between God and man, the day of whose coming Abraham saw and was glad.

2. Justice (verse 22). Looking back on their history they will behold it covered with the memorials of the Divine displeasure against sin, and learn that every stroke of His fatherly chastisement was intended to bring them in penitence to His feet.

3. The bringing of good out of evil. It will be seen that God has made the mutual jealousy of the Jew and Gentile an occasion of good to each. The apostacy of the human race was the occasion of Israels election at the first. And when, after repeated apostacies, Israel was abandoned, that became the occasion of salvation to the Gentiles (verse 15). Their slavery in Egypt was a time of merciful visitation for that country. Their seventy years captivity in Babylon were calculated to enlighten and to bless the people of that empire. And at their conversion they will see with amazement that the very act which completed their guilt--the crucifixion of Christ--has become the means of their own salvation.

4. The timing and distribution of Gods judgments and mercies so as to make us feel our entire dependence on Him. Would you know, e.g., why it was that Israel, when brought out of Egypt, was not led straight to Canaan? (Deu_8:2-3). Would you know why it was that the coming of Christ was so long delayed; and why the conversion of the Jews did not take place at the commencement of the Christian dispensation? (verse 32). God waited for the Gentiles till they had proved that the world by wisdom would never know God. And He is now waiting for the Jews till it shall be evident that all ground for self-dependence has utterly perished.

IV. But what if this great system of discipline should leave them worse than it found them? Would not their conversion redound, to a degree inconceivable, to the glory of God? The strength of a mechanical power is estimated by the resistance which it overcomes. And the honour which will accrue to the grace of God in the conversion of the Jews is to be estimated partly by the amount and the duration of their previous resistance to that grace.

1. Viewed in this light their conversion will reflect transcendent honour on the power of the grace which effects it. For we are not now speaking of the conversion of a people who had never before enjoyed the light of revelation, but of a people who, in this sense, have never been in darkness. Nor are we speaking of a people who were merely indifferent to Christianity, but of a people who have ever been actively hostile to all spiritual religion. Nor are we speaking of this people as nominally converted merely, as many of the European nations were. To exchange the form of godliness for the power proclaims the presence of a Divine agent; but to worship the very Being on whom the heart had hitherto vented its bitterest execrations, implies a change so great that it might almost excuse unbelief for saying, If the Lord would open windows in heaven, might this thing be? But unbelief itself is silenced by the declaration, I will pour My Spirit upon thy seed, and My blessing upon thine offspring.

2. Associated with this display of omnipotent energy there will be the exercise of unlimited grace in forgiveness. When it is remembered that the Jews of that future day will be the descendants and approvers of those who shouted, Away with Him; crucify Him; His blood be upon us and upon our children! and that, by their persevering unbelief, generation after generation have virtually crucified the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame, how amazing appears that exercise of mercy which is to cancel such an accumulation of guilt! When they shall see that they owe their forgiveness to that blood which they invoked in guilty imprecations on their own heads, what all-subduing views will they obtain of the prevalence of His intercession, of the unchangeableness and riches of His grace!

3. This change will take place at such a period as shall still further redound to the glory of God. There is a fulness of time for it. As the coming of Christ took place at a crisis when the state of the world demonstrated the necessity for it, and displayed its grace, so doubtless will be His coming in the conversion of the Jews. Probably they will have reached the last stage of guilty unbelief; or they will be sorely pressed by evils from without; or, abandoning all expectation of ever beholding their Messiah, they will have given themselves up to despair; or all these forms of evil will have combined in one. This we know, that the design of the whole gospel constitution is that no flesh should glory in His presence; that the inscription on the topstone of the fabric will be, To the praise of the glory of His grace.

4. In harmony with the spiritual and Divine character of this event will be the means or manner of its accomplishment. Not that all means will be dispensed with. But these shall be of so humble a character, and their success shall so far exceed all human calculation as to furnish the most glorious exposition of the words, Not by might, nor by power, but by My Spirit, saith the Lord.

V. Another element of the glory which will redound to God will be found in the number of the converted. A few here and there will doubtless be renewed, from time to time, prior to that period. But then the change will be so general as to satisfy the large prediction that all Israel shall be saved. They shall come from the east and from the west, etc., to swear allegiance to the Cross of Christ. And what joy will seize the Gentile Church when it shall be announced, Then hath God also to the Jews granted repentance unto life! And if there is joy in heaven among the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth, who can conceive the rapture when it shall be there proclaimed, All Israel is saved!

VI. This reminds us of the further accession of glory to God from the conversion of the Jews, resulting from the effects of the event upon others.

1. For what an unsurpassable proof will it furnish of the Divinity of the whole scheme of revelation! As the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost was reserved by God for the crowning proof of the new economy, so the greater effusion of the same Spirit, upon the same people, is reserved to complete the proof of its claims as it draws towards a close.

2. What an unsurpassable proof will that event display of the all-sufficiency of the grace of God! At the opening of the Christian economy in the conversion of Saul Christ showed forth all long-suffering for a pattern, etc. In a similar manner God appears to be reserving the richest display of His saving grace till towards the last.

3. What an impulse, too, will be given to the piety of every part of the Christian Church l (verse 12). The newly-converted Jews will probably exhibit a measure of self-denying zeal for the glory of God, which the Church had come to consider absolutely impracticable, For he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them.

4. How eminently will this increase of the Church tend to the union of all its parts! That most ancient of all schisms between Jew and Gentile shall then be healed. Every minor distinction in the Church shall cease. And thus it will be seen that an important step has been gained towards the attainment of that which God hath purposed in Himself, that in the dispensation,, of the fulness of times He might gather together in one all things in Christ.

5. And will not--must not all this inconceivably augment the joy of the Church? (J. Harris, D.D.)

Gods remainder

1. We are living in a time when the reigning influences of society tempt or drive from integrity and purity; and some who were venerated shock the confidence reposed in them by grievous falls. There are dangers in such times that touch conscience and try faith. But God is not changed; moral virtue is not unreal; there are still men good and true. God hath not cast away His people. There are seven thousand reserved amid the general degeneracy.

2. Baal was the idea of prolific reproduction in nature. His was a popular worship ever, and set up its accursed altars in the Holy Land. Pouring light upon the faith of the new kingdom of redeeming grace from ancient history, as was his wont, Paul goes back to that dark spot. He is showing that no matter how many fall away faith lives on. The times are never so bad that they can corrupt utterly the immortal grace that lies hidden in the heart of the Church. Mammon may establish its worship, but there is still a holy place, and an ark of the covenant, sacraments and ministry, and heavenly grace. God does not cast away His people.

3. The apostle recalls the old prophet Elijah, and makes a strong case. Matters in Church and State had come to the worst. Two tottering thrones, on soil soaked with family blood, frowned at one another in anger, but upheld no just law and protected no personal rights. Over one of the fragments of the schism ruled a tyrant--Ahab--consistent in cruelty and persevering in appetite, with Jezebel, who made royalty contemptible and womanhood shameful. Ahab and Jezebel are names of vices almost as much as of persons, and have been for nearly three thousand years. After his victory at Carmel, Elijahs splendid dream of the reformation of Gods kingdom was broken. When men animated by great purposes fail, they seem smaller to themselves than ever. It was like the hiding of the face of God. But now there comes a magnificent revelation which shows that true greatness does not stand in great results that can be seen. Success does not lie in the numbers counted. Power is stored up in hidden places and in lonely consciences. Have done with measuring Gods power with your geometry, or estimating His army by arithmetic. Do the duty that lies nearest thee. It scatters doubt; overcomes opposition; breaks up despair. The Almighty takes care of His reserves. We want the inspiration of this better faith. Consider two facts--

I. The inroads of a subtle and popular worldly-mindedness, weakening the Church deplorably in its conscience and its heart. There is a power attacking Christianity from without, and corrupting it within. What are the foremost among the objects of the people in business and social life? Duty and righteousness? Do the young enter social life to carry there the influence of Christ? What spirit is in the ascendant in our populations? Is there not here the man of sin who is anti-Christ? Worldliness is a false god; lying, because it makes promises which are never kept; cruel, because it kills the better life; impious, because it defeats the glorious end for which God put His image in every man. This impious secularism creeps into the Church. It is charged that its converts do not come up to its standard, and that concessions are made of principle, and mercenary treacheries adopted to crowd its seats. Retribution cannot but follow if these things be true. But spiritual power is not to be judged by outward achievements. Granted that the world is as worldly, unbelief as prevalent, inconsistency as widespread, the Church as timid and supple as prophets fear or sceptics declare. What saith the answer of God? I have reserved, etc. This opens to us the opposite fact--

II. The immortal survival of the secret life of the Church and of personal piety, although it is in a minority, and cometh not with observation. God makes much out of little, and saves by a handful of heroes, calling up His reserves out of obscurity, and never letting His altar fires die out. Seven thousand a slight proportion. They were out of sight, scattered saints crouching in corners. Elijah was looking on things on their earthly side. Not so the All-seeing. There was an unreckoned hope in obscure men and women Elijah did not know. Always a light left burning in Switzerland, in Germany, in England, in Scotland. The gates of hell do not prevail.

III. Here is, then, a law for practical use. What God requires of us is personal fidelity, or the earnest training of private Christian character in each one by himself, irrespective of any visible results or any possible discouragements. For this there are the clearest grounds.

1. It follows straight on in the way of the beginnings of the Church under the hand of the Lord. Get one man brave enough to do right against any maxims of a majority; one woman brave enough to lift others into her own pathway of light, and you are working precisely in the line of Him who knows what is in man, and redeems the race.

2. The doctrine is strong in that it is practicable. Every individual has one realm all his own--his conscience. Disappointed, baffled, elsewhere, he can make that all Christian. Pagan pleasures may allure others. You may not know where others--helpers--are. But your own place is in the munitions of rocks. And the Master will always be there with you.

3. This sphere of personal Christian character touches others wonderfully, but never depends upon them so as to surrender to them if they go over to Baal. Your knees are your own to bend to whom you will. The apostles called no convention. Great reforms are in single souls before they are in parliaments, synods, or constitutions. Gods harvests spring from single, solitary seeds. It is not miracle but law. The patient power of the Lord reserves His remnant of faithful hearts. His work is done first by single, then by united hands. Character, steadfast, pure, holy, is at once its force and its fruit. (Bp. Huntington.)

Wot ye not what the Scripture saith of Elias?--

The Old Testament Scriptures

I. Are not superseded.

II. Ought to be carefully studied.

III. Illustrate the principles of the new. (J. Lyth, D.D.)

The prophets complaint and Gods answer

I. The complaint of the prophet.

1. Hasty.

2. Erring.

3. Desponding.

II. The answer of god.

1. Exact.

2. Reproving.

3. Inspiring. (J. Lyth, D.D.)

Mistakes concerning the number of the righteous

Sometimes we make them from--

I. The peculiar state of our own minds. This seems to have been the condition of Elijah. His language betrays--

1. Severity.

2. Petulance.

3. Despair.

II. Observing multiplied instances of false profession. The apostasy of one pretender excites more attention than the lives of solid, steady Christians.

III. The righteous themselves. Because of.--

1. The obscurity of their stations.

2. The diffidence of their dispositions.

3. The manner of their conversion.

4. The diversity of their opinions.

5. The imperfection of their character.

Application:

1. The use which the apostle makes of his subject.

2. Are you among the number of the saved?

3. Let all true Christians consider the Author and end of their salvation.

4. Remember also for whom you have been saved. (W. Jay.)

Despondency

I. Looks at the things which are seen.

II. Overlooks those which are unseen. (J. Lyth, D.D.)

But what saith the answer of God?--

The answer of God to Elijah

I. All doubts in matters of religion are to be decided by the Word of God (Joh_5:39; Mar_12:24). Elijah erred because he spake without his book. Remember this--

1. In all matters controverted. When it is questioned whether images are to be worshipped, angels and saints prayed to, etc., who shall resolve us? We are to take no mans word, not even the word of Elijah for a matter of faith. What saith the Scripture? Men may err, but the answer of God is according to truth.

2. In matters of practice. If it be questioned whether thou shalt break the Sabbath, deceive thy neighbour, etc. Thy companions, it may be, and thine own heart will entice thee to do such things, but what saith the Scripture? They which do such things shall be damned.

II. The Church of God shall never be brought to such an exigent in the most difficult times, but that there shall be many thousands which shall worship God in spirit and truth.

1. The best on earth do err, as Elijah who erred by a passion of anger and fear. Order your passions by the law of grace, for if they be ungoverned they blind the mind, and as unruly horses draw the chariot of our judgment into the bye-paths of error.

2. Elijah erred in his censure concerning true worshippers; be not, then, rash in censuring. It is rashness to censure particular men, much more whole Churches to be antichristian. How darest thou refuse communion with them who have communion with Christ?

3. Neither multitude nor visibility are certain notes of the true Church, for then there had been no Church in Elijahs time, for the multitude was with Ahab and Jezebel, and Elijah could not discern one beside himself. The Papists say the Church was always visible, but the creed confuteth them, for we believe in the holy Catholic Church. But holiness is invisible and so is Catholicity. We may grant that particular Churches are visible, and yet here some cautions are to be remembered. They may be invisible in respect--

(1) Of place. As the sun is always visible, but to us only when it ariseth in our hemisphere. So at Jerusalem the Church was not to be seen when it removed to Pella.

(2) Of the time, as in Elijahs and Queen Marys days. As the sun behind a cloud in some respect is invisible, so may it be said of a Church.

(3) Of persons which should discern it. A Church is sometimes invisible through the fault of mens eyes, which are either weak as of Elijah, or blind as of them which hate the Church.

III. Those who in dangerous times are preserved in grace are so preserved merely by the power and goodness of God (1Sa_25:39; 1Th_5:23; 2Ti_4:18; Jud_1:24).

1. Though Jezebel search every corner of the land, yet God reserveth seven thousand which bow not the knees to Baal. God can keep us from our enemies; let persecutors cease their malicious practices, and let us serve God without fear.

2. In regard to the preaching of the gospel these are golden days, but in regard of the overflowing of iniquity these are perilous times. Art thou preserved? glorify God. It is not thy goodness that thou dost not as others, but the goodness of God.

3. Be admonished of two things.

(1) Presume not of thine own strength. Peter bragged of his courage, and yet played the coward. Hazael thought great scorn ever to do as Elisha foretold to him, and yet afterwards he did such things.

(2) Be not secure and careless. God reserveth some, but those which use the means to persevere in well doing. (Elnathan Parr, B.D.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 11:1-3. I say then, &c. — As if he had said, We have just seen how the perverseness of the Jews and the calling of the Gentiles have been foretold; but do I say then that God hath entirely cast off his whole people, so as to have mercy on none of them? God forbid — In no wise; for I should then pronounce a sentence of reprobation upon myself; for I also am an Israelite — As it is well known; of the seed of Abraham, &c. — To whom, through the tribe of Benjamin, I can trace my genealogy; yet I am not cast off; I am still one of God’s people, by believing in Christ. God hath not cast off that part of his people whom he foreknew, as repenting and believing. The apostle speaks after the manner of men. For in fact, knowing and foreknowing are the same thing with God, who knows or sees all things at once, from everlasting to everlasting. Wot ye not — Know ye not, that in a parallel case, amid a general apostacy, when Elijah thought the whole nation was fallen into idolatry, God knew there was a remnant of true worshippers. How he maketh intercession — Or complaineth, as the verb ενυγχανει, here used, evidently signifies, Act 25:24, where Festus says, The Jews, ενετυχον μοι, complained to me concerning Paul; against Israel — The ten tribes, who had generally revolted to idolatry; saying, Lord, they have killed thy prophets — See note on 1Ki 19:10; 1Ki 19:14; and digged down thine altars — Built upon extraordinary occasions by special dispensation, and with the authority of the Lord’s prophets; altars which pious people attended who could not go up to Jerusalem, and would not worship the calves, nor Baal; these separate altars, though breaking in upon the unity of the church, yet being erected and attended by those that sincerely aimed at the glory of God, and served him faithfully, God was pleased to own for his altars, as well as that at Jerusalem; and the pulling of them down is mentioned and charged upon Israel by Elijah as a heinous sin. And I am left alone — Of all thy prophets who boldly and publicly plead thy cause; and they seek my life — Send murderers in pursuit of me from place to place.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Israel's Rejection not final. A Warning to the Gentiles

In this chapter St. Paul brings to an end his great exposition of God's dealings with the Jews. He has shown in Romans 9 that God is free to choose or reject individuals or nations as the instruments of His purpose; and, in Romans 10, that the Jews have deserved their rejection. Now he declares that, in spite of all this, God has not. cast off His ancient people. He has seen fit, in His mercy, to preserve a portion of them faithful to His will, and the remainder are still loved by Him. Their having fallen away for a time has given an opportunity for the conversion of the Gentiles. When the Gentiles have been gathered into His kingdom, the Jews will be stirred up by their example and return to God.

1-12. God did not utterly reject the Jews as a nation (Rom_11:1-2). Their failure is partial (Rom_11:2-10), and, as in former days, there is a faithful remnant; their failure is used by God for good, and is temporary (Rom_11:11-12).

Paraphrase. '(1) Does it follow that God has finally rejected those He made His own people? I, who am proud to be one of them, cannot believe it. (2) And it is impossible, for from all eternity He marked them to be His instruments, and He is unchanging. They are no more rejected than they were in Elijah's day, (3) when, although Israel was rebellious, (4) God preserved a faithful remnant. (5) So also now there is such a remnant, selected out of the mass by God's undeserved favour, (6) not for any merit of their own. (7) Thus, a select portion of Israel, having minds open to God's will and believing in Christ, has obtained acceptance, which the rest, by seeking it in self-righteousness, have lost, incurring instead that hardening which follows self-will, (8) that heavy deafness and blindness toward God which Isaiah perceived, (9) that ruin caused by misuse of blessings (10) of which David spoke. (11) But although the majority have stumbled, even they have not fallen for ever. Their refusal of Christ has occasioned an earlier preaching to the Gentiles, and so has been the means of bringing salvation to them, and this, in turn, is meant to stir the Jews up to accept Christ, and thus regain their old privilege. (12) Thus they still are used by God, for their failure has been a means of blessing to the world, and much greater blessing will result from their complete conversion.'

1. Cast away] cp. Psa_94:14; 1Sa_12:22. Benjamin] the tribe which, with Judah, followed the house of David, and in whose territory Jerusalem stood.

2. People] i.e. the nation as a whole. Foreknew] see on Rom_8:29 and Rom_11:29.

Wot] i.e. know. Of Elias] lit. 'in Elijah'; i.e. in the section of the Scriptures concerning Elijah: cp. Mar_12:26; (RV).

3. Lord, etc.] from 1Ki_19:10.

4. Reserved to] RV 'left for.' To the image of Baal] RV 'to Baal.'

6. But if it be of works, etc.] RV omits this latter half of the v.

7. Election] i.e. the chosen remnant who have believed in Christ. Blinded] RV 'hardened,' i.e. by God, in punishment: see next v. Those who will not, at last cannot.

8. From Deu_29:4; Isa_29:10. The spirit of slumber] RV 'a spirit of stupor.' Unto this day] part of the quotation from Deuteronomy.

9. From Psa_69:22.

10. Bow down their back] i.e. in weakness and dejection.

11. Stumbled] cp. Rom_9:32. Fall] i.e. so as not to rise again. Come unto the Gentiles] It was only when the Jews rejected the gospel that the Apostle turned to the Gentiles: cp. Act_13:45.; Act_28:28. A Church nationally Jewish would probably have been a hindrance to the complete evangelisation of the Gentiles.

12. Diminishing] RV 'loss.' As a defeated army suffers loss in battle, so the majority of the Jews had fallen away into unbelief. St. Paul anticipates great blessing to the world when the ' fulness,' i.e. the entire nation, of the Jews believes.

13-24. St. Paul now addresses the Gentiles. They should hope for the restoration of Israel, because of the blessing it will bring the world, and because Israel still bears God's name (Rom_11:13-16). They should not despise Israel (Rom_11:17-18), nor boast of preference (Rom_11:19-20), for, if unfaithful, they too will fall (Rom_11:21-22), whereas the Jews will be restored if they give up their unbelief (Rom_11:23-24).

Paraphrase. '(13) In this which I write, I am not disregarding my mission to you Gentiles. And you know my heart is in my work among you Gentiles. (14) If, then, I am always hoping that your conversion may stir up the Jews to yearn after their lost privileges, it is not only because I am a Jew, (15) but also because I am sure that as their rejection brought you to God, so their restoration will fill the nations of the earth with spiritual life. (16) And their restoration may certainly be expected, for the nation still retains the consecration it received in the patriarchs. (17) Again, although you have taken the place of some of them in God's kingdom, (18) do not think yourselves superior to them. Remember that you have been admitted into their kingdom, not they into yours. (19) If God rejected them for you, it was not because He preferred you. (20) Unbelief lost them their place, and faith alone preserves you. (21) The facts do not warrant self-satisfaction in you, but warn you against it. (22) Thus we see manifested both God's goodness and His severity. His goodness is upon you, but only so long as you are faithful. His severity is upon the Jews, (23) yet, if they give up their unbelief, He will receive them again. And their restoration is quite possible, (24) for they have more in common with the kingdom than you had as heathen.'

13. RV 'But I speak to you that are Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle of Gentiles, I glorify my ministry.' As the Jews have been spoken of in the third person, we infer that the Roman Christians were chiefly Gentiles.

14. Emulation] RV 'jealousy': cp. Rom_11:11, Rom_10:19.

15. Reconciling of the world] In the bringing in of the Gentiles, the world began to enjoy that reconciliation which Christ gained for it by dying for all mankind: cp. 2Co_5:19; Eph_2:13.

16. Firstfruit] metaphor from Num_15:19. The 'firstfruit' and 'root' represent the patriarchs: cp. Rom_11:28, Rom_9:5. Holy] i.e. separated as God's people for His purposes. No reference to the salvation of individuals: cp. Mat_3:9.

17. The Church of God, both before and after Christ, regarded by St. Paul as one and the same, is here likened to an olive tree: cp. Jer_11:16; Hos_14:6. Graffed in] The usual practice would be to graft the cultivated olive upon the wild stock. St. Paul reverses the process in his allegory, to enforce the lesson that the Jews were the original Church, and honourable.

18. Boast.. boast] RV 'glory.. gloriest.'

19. See on Rom_11:11-12, Rom_11:15.

24. How much more] We may see indications of the purpose of God for the Jews in the permanence of their race and in their devoted adherence to the God of their fathers.

25-36. That Israel will be converted has been directly revealed by God (Rom_11:25-27). God's purpose of favour to them has not changed (Rom_11:28-29). Their disobedience is reckoned with in God's plan of mercy for both Jew and Gentile (Rom_11:30-32). This view of God's dealings calls forth wonder and praise (Rom_11:33-36).

Paraphrase. '(25) Learn, then, in humble silence, God's revealed will. A partial and temporary hardening of Israel has been permitted. But when the Gentiles as a whole have entered the kingdom, (26) Israel, too, will accept the Messiah. So Isaiah foretold that the Redeemer would remove their ungodliness, (27) and that their sins would be forgiven, and thus God's covenant with them would be carried out. (28) Although they are shut out from the blessings of the gospel, that the gospel may come to you, yet they are still beloved by God for the sake of the patriarchs whom He chose, (29) for God, who granted them His favour, has not changed His mind, (30) but, having first used their disobedience as the means of bringing you from disobedience to mercy, (31) He intends them so to be stirred up by the mercy you have obtained, as to give up their disobedience and find mercy in their turn. (32) Thus one cannot boast over the other. By giving Gentile and Jew, respectively, the laws of conscience and of revelation, God compelled the sinful nature of both to show itself in disobedience, that both might receive His mercy as the sole cause of their salvation. (33) So we are forced to wonder at God's profound love and wisdom, and the mystery of His working. (34) Into His thoughts no one can enter, no one share the shaping of His plans. (35) His bounty is unmerited. (36) He is source and guide and goal of all things.'

25. Mystery] Among the Greeks, a'mystery' meant a secret of religion revealed only to the initiated. St. Paul uses the word to express a truth once hidden, but now revealed by God: cp. Rom_16:25; 1Co_2:7, 1Co_2:10; Eph_1:9; Eph_3:4. Blindness] RV 'a hardening': cp. Rom_11:7. In part] i.e. not affecting the 'remnant' who have accepted Christ.

Fulness] i.e. the full number: cp. Rom_11:12.

26. All Israel] i.e. the Jewish race will enter the Christian Church. There shall come, etc.] from Isa_59:20.

27. From Isa_27:9.

29. Calling] cp. Rom_1:6.; Rom_8:30. Without repentance] i.e. God's promises are changeless, because He could never do that for which afterwards He was sorry. He is sometimes said, in OT., to 'repent,' e.g. Gen_6:6; Joe_2:13. What is meant in such passages is, not that He changes His purposes or principles, but that, because His principles are changeless, therefore His action or methods alter as men alter. Such OT. language is figurative, belonging to the simplicity of less-developed religion. Because, with men, change of action is caused by change of mind, therefore, in OT., when God changes His action, He is said to change His mind.

30. Have not believed] RV 'were disobedient to.' Unbelief] RV 'disobedience.'

31. Not believed] RV 'been disobedient.' Your mercy] RV 'the mercy shewn to you.'

32. Concluded] RV 'shut up,' i.e. without power of escape: cp. Gal_3:22. In unbelief] RV 'unto disobedience': cp. Romans 2, 7. Upon all] i.e. who do not reject His mercy.

34. From Isa_40:13.

35. From Job_41:11.

36. To him] RV 'unto him'; i.e. all things are created to serve and praise God.

J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1. The Palliation amid Aggravation of Israel’s Present Condition, Rom_11:1-10.

1. Cast away—Wholly and irrecoverably? Not wholly, for there is an accepted minority. Not irrecoverably, for an entire future generation will be restored to Divine favour. Israel is, therefore, prospectively, as well as in the past, “his people.”

I—A very signal I. The stern proclaimer of Israel’s downfall is a living proof that the downfall is not absolute. The apostle’s own person is pledge of God’s continued mercy to Israel; and proof that it is not his mercy, but their faith, that has failed.

An Israelite—Not by proselytism, but by pure blood of Abraham; not of dubious relationship, but duly authenticated as to tribe; that tribe not born of Leah, or a bonds-woman, but of beloved Rachel—the tribe which with Judah formed the substantial stock of the Israel of Paul’s age.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL NOTES

Rom_11:1.—Μὴ ἀπώσατο ὸ θεὸς τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ; Did God cast off His own people? Observe the aorist. When God accepted a universal Church from all nations in Christ, did He by so doing cast off His own people the Jews? God forbid! God did not cast off the Jewish nation when He admitted all nations to His Church, for I, who address you in the name of Christ, am a Jew (Wordsworth). There may be a general falling away seemingly, and yet a large number remain faithful. Elijah did not see and know all. We may mistake.

Rom_11:4.—The reason why the Septuagint sometimes used the feminine, and why St. Paul adopts it here, appears to be because not only a heathen god but a goddess also was worshipped under the name of Baal, and because by this variety of gender the reader is reminded that there was no principle of unity in the heathen worship, and thus the vanity of the worship itself is declared (Wordsworth). ὁ χρηματισμός, a response from God, oracle.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Rom_11:1-5

The divine response to the human complaint.—St. Paul argues from the known to the unknown. A master of the deductive process. God has not cast away His people; for I am saved who “am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.” Here is definiteness which precludes the idea of forgery; here is an appeal to the national instinct. God has not cast away His people, for God’s act and word show that His love is unchangeable. Paul, an Israelite, is saved. Elias is comforted by the assurance that a remnant is always preserved by God.

I. A lonely man’s complaint.—Great men stand alone. By material means we may reach to physical heights; but we cannot climb to those heights where intellectual and moral giants dwell. We cannot always understand their lofty motives and moral purposes. Elijah was a man of the wilderness; he was lonely from necessity, and this loneliness rendered him despondent. What a mournful wail comes from the depths of his stern nature! “Lord, they have killed Thy prophets,” etc.

1. Spiritual workers have their times of trial. All workers have their difficulties; spiritual workers have their special difficulties. Elijah’s life seemed to be spent in battling with difficulties. His complaint was that his moral work did not succeed. Elijah, in the sorrow of his heart, in the depression that overtook him on account of seeming failure, claims our sympathies.

2. Spiritual workers have troubles of their own making. Elijah had ground for complaint; but things were not so bad as they appeared. Blessed are the hopeful! But do not let popular preachers rave against the unpopular and despondent Elijahs. Our helpful sympathies should go out towards the lonely souls weeping under the juniper trees and craving for death.

3. Spiritual workers must ask, “What saith the answer of God?” They must look to God and away from themselves. The wise man’s words are true: “He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool.” We are shortsighted; we take narrow views; we think things are going wrong if they are not moving according to our notions. God’s ways are above ours; His remnants are mightier and more glorious than human majorities.

II. A merciful God’s response.—The answer of God came sweetly to Elijah in the time of his trouble. The richness and sweetness of the divine voice are noted in times of trouble; the silence and darkness of trouble’s night are cheered by the eternal music which is lost to the soul in the bright day of prosperity. God speaks to the souls of His faithful ones in their despondency. The words give peace and encouragement; they teach right views of life. The answers of God should hush the complaints of men. The answer of God makes known:

1. The greatness of the divine reserve force. When God answers out of material nature, we are astonished at the greatness of the reserve force. Human blindness says not one is left: Omniscience shows seven thousand. Complainers say nature is being exhausted: God’s answer is the continued richness of nature and the opening out of fresh fields of supply. Complainers say monotheism is dead: God’s answer is the muster-roll of seven thousand. Complainers say Protestantism is dying, that semi-popish churches are most crowded: God’s answer is—I have a reserve force; the truth shall prevail, falsehood must work to its own unmasking, and the heart of civilisation is this day true to the eternal principles of right. Let us not wait under our juniper trees, but go forth and fight the prophets of Baal.

2. The faithful ones are hidden. These seven thousand men hidden from the gaze even of a good man like Elijah. God’s children are often as hidden ones. Their worth as well as their number is hidden—comparable to fine gold, but esteemed as earthen pitchers. Call to remembrance the former times when God’s children were hidden in deserts, in mountains, in dens and caves of the earth. Let us be thankful to God for our times; let us use our privileges; let us unfurl the banner of the truth; let us maintain our spiritual freedom.

3. The remnant which is to be considered. Elijah has his descendants. They are good mathematicians, but poor reckoners; they count easily; they are good at addition, subtraction, and multiplication. They do not reckon up the remnant; God would have us reckon up the remnant. Noah was a remnant, but from him came mighty peoples. The Jews were a remnant, but what influence they have exerted! The followers of the Crucified were only a remnant, but they soon overtopped the world’s majorities. Our reformers were only as a remnant, and yet they filled England with light. There may be a remnant still. We vote with majorities to-day; but it might be safer to side with the remnant left according to the election of grace. Reckon the remnant; measure its moral force; estimate its spiritual power; see if it is being impelled by divine ideas. Is it a remnant according to the election of grace? We for our part are not afraid of the remnants when they are on the side of the evil: the remnants on the side of the good must be omnipotent. If the remnant have in it a Paul and a Peter, it shall outlive all the majorities of time.

The practical question: If God were to tell some modern Elijah, “Yet I have reserved unto Myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal,” would God reckon us among the noble band? Do we bow the knee to our own images? Are we guilty of modern idolatry? Are we bowing to the images of the nineteenth-century Baals? Or are we bowing at the footstool of the Creator? Do we acknowledge His guidance in the affairs of life? Do we trust Him in all darknesses? Can we for Him stand alone against a multitude of false prophets?

Rom_11:3. Divine reservation.—The Mohammedan saying quoted by Tholuck is interesting, that “God never allows the world to be without a remainder of seventy righteous people, for whose sake He preserves it.” This thought is encouraging to all despondent Elijahs. We cannot see or know all. This may be a necessary discipline for our faith. Ignorance arises from our limitation, and in this state of limitation we must walk by faith and not by sight. And faith will lead us to lay hold of the wisdom, power, and love of God. Holding by these, we shall not be without light in the darkest night, not be without hope even in our moments of despondency; and in spite of despondency we shall continue in the pathway of faithful adhesion to duty. This is one of the pleasing and relieving features in Elijah’s character, that though despondent and almost despairing he was not recreant to the voice of duty. He stood alone against the prophets of Baal. Alone, yet not alone, for God was with him. Alone, yet not alone, for he was unknowingly supported, as we may well believe, by the prayers and sympathies of some, if not all, of the seven thousand who had not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. We may say that it would have looked better of them if they had come forth from their hiding-places and had rallied round Elijah in the day of battle. But we do not know all, and must not be too ready to blame. Perhaps after all they helped very effectually by their secret prayers, by their silent but forceful sympathies. Ah, we know not how far these may reach! How little true faith we have in the power of prayer and in the help of sympathy! If it be at all true that the world is preserved for the sake of the righteous people, then we may rightly suppose that the influence of the righteous is far-reaching. An invisible host helped Elijah in the day of conflict. Shall we not also believe that we are compassed about with a great cloud of witnesses? Let the thought of isolation be destroyed by the thought of God’s hosts in reserve. He has His purposes; let us believe that they are wise and good.

I. God’s reservations are perfect.—The number seven is the perfect number in the sacred writings, and may here be fittingly employed to indicate the perfection of the divine reservation. God has reserved to Himself seven thousand—a perfect host to set forth the perfection of the divine plan and the divine purposes. Whether the number stated be either a literal or an allegorical assertion, we may rightly make use of its allegorical teaching. It opens out before our minds the perfection of the divine reservations. If God be perfect in wisdom, power, and goodness, then we may rest assured that perfection marks and attends all the steps of His divine and mysterious processes. It is the glory of God to conceal a thing. The glory of His perfection is made known by His reservations as well as by His revelations. In fact, there cannot be perfection without concealment and reservation. The great mind cannot reveal itself to the shallow soul; yea, the great mind cannot reveal itself to kindred souls. The mind is greater than its own revelations. It agonises with mighty thoughts which it cannot express. And so the perfect God cannot reveal Himself to the imperfect creature. God has no limit in mastering His own thought movements; but surely there is no irreverence in saying that God is limited in this particular, that His perfection cannot be communicated to our imperfection. The perfection of His nature implies and indicates the perfection of His plan. His reserve forces speak of the perfection of His restraining power. Imperfect man does not indulge himself in reserve forces. He has no self-restraint. If he have seven thousand things or people at his disposal, he wishes to show them on his parade ground. Even when self-interest tells him not to make a display of his wealth, he breaks through all considerations of a prudential character, and lets the world into his secret. The child has no secrets; its mind is too small and open. The man-child, through the imperfection and vanity of his nature, is often hurrying to display his wealth. God is great and perfect, and His revelations are only the faint indications of the infinite nature of His resources. Elijah is shown, and he was in himself a host. But Elijah speaks to us of God’s seven thousand.

II. God’s reservations cannot be either seen or counted.—For aught we know to the contrary, Elijah was keen-eyed enough—certainly he possessed the vision of the seer. He could see into some of the mysteries of the infinite movements. He was one of the characters in the olden time who were before their age, and saw what other men did not see; and yet he had no knowledge of the seven thousand hidden away in the recesses of the divine keeping. What blindness of vision! Seven thousand righteous ones in that early period of the world’s history, when the population could not be very extensive, and yet Elijah had not the pleasure of their acquaintance. A man might be pardoned if he lived in London and did not know that there were seven thousand righteous amongst its teeming millions; and yet what shall be said of Elijah, who thought that he stood alone, and was ignorant of a mighty but unseen army? But we are often possessed of the Elijah-like blindness. How little we know! How blear-eyed is our vision! The microscope does not reveal to us the laws and methods by which the atom is ruled and guided. There are mysterious pathways far beyond the range of the best-constructed telescope. God’s reserve forces can be neither seen nor counted. We talk very glibly of seven thousand, but we fail to grasp the meaning. The numbers of God are not recorded in human mathematical treatises, and vast beyond the mathematician’s power of computation. Lo, these are part of the divine ways! How little is known of them! We see and hear the Elijahs. God’s seven thousand move in solemn and wondrous silence. Elijah’s name is written on the page of the world’s greatest book; Elijah’s fame and greatness are sounded in the world’s ear. We do not know the name of one of those seven thousand; they have no earthly fame. God is so great and has so much patience that He can keep in reserve the large number of seven thousand. What are we when God can hold back so many? Let us learn our littleness and God’s greatness; let us pray for divine light and help.

III. God’s reservations are for moral purposes.—He rescues seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. God permits the existence of the Baal worshippers; He looks after and promotes the existence of the righteous remnant. But how is it when the righteous are killed? How is it when the prophets of the Lord are killed by the wicked Jezebels? He has still a righteous remnant of a hundred prophets hidden away by fifty in a cave. The death of the other prophets will create mantles of greater consecration for the living prophets. God only permits a good man to die when that good man’s death will be more productive than his life. The slaughtered prophets speak from their tombs of truth and righteousness. Seven thousand righteous—a sweet, saving, wholesome remnant according to the election of grace. Seven thousand good men and women as seed corn to fill the world with the golden grain of divine truth! The seven thousand are gone, and have left no name behind; but their righteous testimony is not destroyed; their saving influence floats along the stream of time. They are not dead. A good man can never die. The voice of goodness is eternal. The helpful sympathy and influence of the seven thousand have cheered and strengthened many Elijahs sorrowing over the failure of their life-work. Failure? There is no failure with God; there can be no failure in God’s work. Selfishness speaks of failure. Benevolent faith says we cannot fail. God’s kingdom must be established in the earth.

Rom_11:6. The remnant saved owes all to divine grace.—The gospel is a way of salvation by free, unmerited favour, as opposed to all self-righteousness. It may be humiliating to be able to contribute nothing to our own salvation, but to have to accept it full and free from a risen Lord; yet salvation through humiliation is better, surely, than being lost. “Grace,” says Dr. R. W. Hamilton, “is free favour; it can be related to no right and contained in no law. It is extrajudicial: whenever bestowed, it depends upon the mere will of him who exercises it, or upon, what is the same thing, his voluntary pledge and agreement. If this latter be withdrawn, there may be a forfeiture of integrity and fidelity, but it is only so far unjust to those deprived of it that a claim arose out of it; but no injustice accrues to them, considered in their original circumstances. A simple test of grace is presented by the following inquiries: Ought it to be exercised? Can it be righteously withheld? If we affirm the one, if we deny the other, it may be obligation, debt, reason—it cannot be grace, for this principle never owes itself to its object; and in not showing it, the person still is just. If there be any necessity for it, save that of demerit and its misery, it “is no more grace.” By keeping the meaning of the term steadily in view, then, it will be seen that no injustice is done any who decline salvation by free grace and insist on some form of self-righteousness. For the latter is pure favouritism, and the former can alone be adopted by a God who is no respecter of persons.—R. M. E., in “Pulpit Commentary.”

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Rom_11:1-5

The words denote merely that Paul was a descendant of Abraham.—“For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.” Interpreters have conceived various reasons for the mention of the tribe to which the apostle belonged. But there seems to be no other reason for it but that it was customary with the Jews, in stating their descent from the patriarchs, to mention the tribe through which their descent was traced. The words denote merely that the apostle was a descendant of Abraham, entitled to all the privileges of an Israelite; and the inference which he means his countrymen to deduce from them is, that, by believing in Christ, he is a member of the Church of God as it now exists under the Christian dispensation. He is therefore an instance of the continued favour of God to all of His ancient people who believe the gospel, and an example to prove that all of them are not rejected. He then solemnly repeats his affirmation that God hath not totally rejected the Israelites. There is no reason to think that this is meant to represent the exact number of the faithful worshippers of God in Israel at that period. The number mentioned seems rather intended to denote an indefinite and very considerable number. This answer furnishes a warning against those gloomy views of human nature which lead some pious men to think that, because wickedness seems to them to abound, there are few sincere worshippers of God; and especially against that uncharitable spirit which leads the zealot to presume that none but those who concur in his views of religion can expect to enjoy the favour of Heaven.—Ritchie.

The Lord’s people a chosen remnant.—It is the part both of wisdom and of love to guard our statements against misconception. We are of necessity constrained sometimes to state truth in strong and general terms; but in all such cases it becomes us to anticipate and to remove, as much as in us lies, all occasion for misapprehension or mistake; we should make everything so clear that the ignorant should have nothing to ask, the captious nothing to object. St. Paul was ever alive to this duty; he foresaw and answered every objection that could be urged against the truths he maintained. He had in the preceding chapter spoken of the Gentiles as adopted into God’s family, whilst the Jews, for their obstinate disobedience, were cast off. Hence it might have been supposed that God had cast off His people altogether: but he tells them that this was not the case; for that he himself, though a Jew, was a partaker of all the blessings of salvation; and that as in the days of Elijah there were among the Jews more faithful servants of Jehovah than was supposed, so it was at that time—“there was a remnant,” and a considerable remnant too, “according to the election of grace.” We will—

I. Show that God’s people are a chosen remnant.—The Lord has at this day a remnant of chosen people. In every age of the world there have been some faithful worshippers of Jehovah. Even in the antediluvian world, when all flesh had so corrupted their way that God determined to destroy them utterly, there was one pious man who boldly protested against the reigning abominations, and with his family was saved from the universal deluge. Abraham, Melchizedek, and Lot were also rare instances of piety in a degenerate age, as were also Job and his little band of friends. In Israel too, even under the impious and tyrannic reign of Ahab, there was an Elijah who was a bold and faithful witness for his God. Thus at this day also there are some who serve their God with fidelity and zeal. Neither the example of the multitude nor the menaces of zealots can induce them to bow down to Baal, or to walk after the course of a corrupt world. They are not of the world, even as Christ was not of the world; nor will they conform to it in its spirit and conduct; they will have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but they will rather reprove them. To serve, to enjoy, to glorify, the Lord Jesus Christ is all their desire; and they “cleave unto Him with full purpose of heart.” They are, however, but a remnant. We are persuaded that there are many Nicodemuses and Nathanaels at present in the shade who yet in due time will come forth to light and be “burning and shining lights” in their day and generation. There may be at this day thousands in the world who in the sight of God are “faithful and beloved,” though they have not at present any name or place in the Church of Christ. Yet, after all, in comparison of the careless and ungodly world, they will be found “a small remnant,” “a little flock.” And for their distinguished privileges they are altogether indebted to the love of God. We should not state these things in a crude and rash way. We know they are deeply mysterious; and we are most anxious to—

II. Guard this doctine against abuse.—Much is this doctrine hated; much, too, is it abused; but however hated, or however abused, it is the truth of God, and therefore must be maintained. Let none, however, pervert it, or draw false conclusions from it. Let none say: If this doctrine be true, no blame attaches to me. If this doctrine be true, I may sit still till God shall come and help me. If this doctrine be true, I am in no danger whatever I may do. That no solid objection lies against this doctrine will appear whilst we—

III. Suggest the proper improvement of it.—It should encourage all to seek for mercy at God’s hands, it should fill all who are the subjects of it with the deepest humility, and it should stimulate them also to universal holiness.—Simeon.

ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 11

Rom_11:1-5. Brave the perils of ridicule.—“As the crackling of thorns under a pot, so is the laughter of a fool,” and he is a poor invertebrate creature who allows himself to be laughed down when he attempts to stick to his principles and tries to do what he believes to be right. “Learn from the earliest days,” says Sidney Smith, “to inure your principles against the perils of ridicule; you can no more exercise your reason if you live in the constant dread of laughter, than you can enjoy your life if you are in constant terror of death.” No coward is greater than he who dares not to be wise because fools will laugh at him. Elijah bore more than ridicule: he exposed himself to death.

Rom_11:4-5. Salvation by grace.—Some are all their days laying the foundation, and are never able to build upon it to any comfort to themselves or usefulness to others; and the reason is, because they will be mixing with the foundation-stones that are only fit for the building. They will be bringing their obedience, duties, mortification of sin, and the like unto the foundation. These are precious stones to build with, but unmeet to be first laid to bear upon them the whole weight of the building. The foundation is to be laid in mere grace, mercy, pardon in the blood of Christ; this the soul is to accept of and to rest in merely as it is grace, without the consideration of anything in itself, but that it is sinful and obnoxious to ruin. This it finds a difficulty in, and would gladly have something of its own to mix with it; it cannot tell how to fix these foundation-stones without some cement of its own endeavours and duty, and because these things will not mix they spend fruitless efforts about all their days. But if the foundation be of grace, it is not at all of works, otherwise grace is no more grace. If anything of our own be mixed with grace in this matter, it utterly destroys the nature of grace, which if it be not alone, it is not at all.—Biblical Museum.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

Third Section.—The final gracious solution of the enigma, or the overruling of judgment for the salvation of Israel. God’s judgment on Israel is not one of reprobation. God’s saving economy in His Providence over Jews and Gentiles, over the election and the great majority of Israel, and over the concatenation of judgment and salvation, by virtue of which all Israel shall finally attain to faith and salvation through the fulness of the Gentiles. The universality of judgment and mercy. Doxology

Rom_11:1-36

A

1I say then, Hath [Did] God cast away his people? God forbid. [Let it not be!] For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of 2Benjamin. God hath [did] not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot [Or know] ye not what the Scripture saith of Elias [ἐν Ἠλίᾳ, in the story of Elijah]? how he maketh intercession to [pleadeth with] God against Israel, 3saying [omit saying],1 Lord,2 they have killed thy prophets, and [omit and; insert they have]3 digged down thine altars; and I am left alone [the only one],4 and they seek my life. 4But what saith the answer of God [the divine response] unto him? I have reserved5 to myself seven thousand men, who have not [who never] bowed the knee to the image of [omit the image of] Baal. 5Even so then at [ἐν, in] this present time also there is a remnant according to6the election of grace. And [Now] if by grace, then is it no more [no longer] of works: otherwise6 grace is no more [no longer becomes] grace. But7 if it be of works, then Isaiah 8 it no more [longer] grace: otherwise work is no more [longer] work.9

B

7What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for [That which Israel seeketh for, he obtained not]; but the election hath [omit hath] obtained 8it, and the rest were blinded [hardened], ([omit parenthesis] According as it is written, God10 hath given [gave] them the [a] spirit of slumber [or, stupor], eyes11 that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto 9[not hear, unto] this day. And David saith,

Let12 their table be made [become] a snare, and a trap,

And a stumbling-block, and a recompense unto them:

10Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see

And bow down their back alway.13

C

11I say then, Have they stumbled that [Did they stumble in order that] they should fall? God forbid: [Let it not be!] but rather through [but by] their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke [in order to excite] them to jealousy [or, emulation]. 12Now if the fall of them [their fall] be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them [their diminishing] the riches 13of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness? For14 I speak [I am speaking] to you Gentiles [;], inasmuch [then]15 as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify [glorify] mine office: 14If by any means I may provoke [excite] to emulation them which are [omit them which are] my [own] flesh, and might save some of them. 15For if the casting away of them be the reconciling [reconciliation] of the world, what shall the receiving [reception] of them be, but life 16from the dead. For [Moreover] if the first-fruit be holy, the lump is also holy [so also is the lump]: and if the root be holy, so are the branches [also].

D

17And [But] if some of the branches be [were] broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed [grafted] in among them, and with them partakest [and made fellow-partaker] of the root and16 fatness of the olive tree; 18Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. 19Thou wilt say then, The17 branches were broken off, that Imight be graffed [grafted] in. 20Well; because of unbelief they were broke off, and thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded,18 but fear: 21For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed [fear] lest19 he also spare not thee. 22Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which [those who] fell, severity;20 but toward thee, goodness [God’s goodness],21 if thoucontinue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. 23And they also [moreover], if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed [grafted] in: forGod is able to graff [graft] them in again. 24For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed [grafted] contrary to nature into a good olive tree; how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed [grafted] into their own olive tree?

E

25For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits,22 that blindness [hardening] in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be [omit be] come in. 26And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written,23 There shall come out of Sion the 27Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant [the covenant from me, παὀ ἐμοῦ] unto them, when I shall take away their28sins. As concerning [touching]24 the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes:29but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the30gifts and calling of God are without repentance. For as25 ye in times past have not believed [were disobedient to]26 God, yet have now obtained mercythrough their unbelief [the disobedience of these]: 31Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy [i.e., mercy shown to you] they also mayobtain mercy. 32For God hath concluded them all [shut up27 all] in unbelief [disobedience], that [in order that] he might [may] have mercy upon all.33O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom [riches and wisdom] and knowledge of God! how unsearchable28 are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! 34For who hath29 known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his 35counsellor? Or30 who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? 36For of him, and through him, and to [unto] him, are all things: to whom [him] be glory for ever. Amen.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Summary.—A. Israel is not rejected; the kernel of it—the election—is saved; Rom_11:1-6. B. The great proportion of Israel, all except the essentially important remnant, the “rest,” are hardened, as was described by the Spirit in the Old Testament beforehand; but its hardness has become a condition for the conversion of the Gentiles; Rom_11:7 to Rom_11:31 C. Yet, on the other hand, the conversion of the Gentiles is in turn a means for the conversion of Israel, and thereby for the revivification of the world. The saving effect of their rejection gives ground for expecting a still more saving effect of their reception. The significance of the first-fruits and of the root; Rom_11:12-16. D. The very fact that the Gentiles believe, and the Jews do not believe, is largely conditional. Gentiles, as individuals, can become unbelievers; and Jews, as individuals, can become believers. For: a. The Gentiles are grafted on the stem of the Jewish theocracy among believing Jews. b. They can just as readily be cut off by unbelief, as the Jews can be grafted in by faith, because the latter have a greater historical relationship with the kingdom of God; Rom_11:17-24. E. The last word, or the mystery of Divine Providence in the economy of salvation. Every thing will redound to the glory of God. God’s saving economy for the world: The unbelieving Gentiles have been converted by believing Israel; unbelieving Israel shall be converted by believing Gentiles. The judgment on all, that mercy might be shown to all. Praise offered to God for His plan of salvation, for its execution, for its end, and for its ground; Rom_11:25-36. [Dr. Hodge divides the chapter into two parts: Rom_11:1-36. (1) The rejection of the Jews was not total. A remnant (and a larger one than many might suppose) remained, though the mass was rejected. (2) This rejection is not final. The restoration of the Jews is a desirable and probable event; Rom_11:11-24. It is one which God has determined to bring about; Rom_11:25-32. A sublime declaration of the unsearchable wisdom of God, manifested in all His dealings with men; Rom_11:33-36. So Forbes.—R.]

Rom_11:1-6 : Israel is not rejected. The real kernel of it is already saved.

Rom_11:1. I say then [Αέγω οῦ̓ν]. The οῦ̓ν may appear to be merely an inference from what was said last: All day long God stretched forth His hand. But as, in Rom_11:11, he makes a further assertion, designed to forestall a false conclusion, it has here the same meaning, in antithesis to the strong judgment pronounced on Israel at the conclusion of the previous chapter. Meyer maintains a more definite reference to the λέγω in Rom_11:10; Rom_11:18-19.

[Did God cast away his people? μὴ ἀπώσατο ὁ θεὸς τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ; When Reiche remarks the absence of an ἅπαντα from λαὸν, and Semler an omnino from ἀπώσατο, they both fail to appreciate the emphasis of the expressions. The people and his people are different ones, just as an economic giving over to judgment and an eonic casting away (Psa_94:14; Psa_95:7). Bengel: Ipsa populi ejus appellatio rationem negandi continet. The Apostle repels such a thought with religious horror: μὴ γένοιτο.

For I also [καὶ γὰρ ἐγώ]. According to the usual acceptation, he adduces his own call as an example; but Meyer, with De Wette and Baumgarten-Crusius, on the contrary, hold that Paul, on account of his patriotic sense as a true Israelite, could not concede that casting away.32 But it was just this inference from a feeling of national patriotism that was the standpoint of his opponents. A single example, it is said, can prove nothing. But by Paul’s using the καί, he refers to the other examples which were numerously represented by the Jewish Christians among his readers.

Am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin [Ἰσραηλίτης εἰμί, ἐκ σπέρματος Ἀβραάμ, φυλῆς Βενιαμείν. The spelling Βενιαμίν (LXX., Rec.) is poorly supported here and in Php_3:5.] As a true scion of Abraham and Benjamin—the tribe which., together with Judah, constituted the real substance of the people which returned from the captivity—he is conscious that he does not belong to the election as a mere proselyte; if he would speak of a casting away of God’s people, he must therefore deny himself and his faith (Php_3:5). [Alford distinguishes between the popular view, and another which implies, “that if such a hypothesis were to be conceded, it would exclude from God’s kingdom the writer himself, as an Israelite.” This agrees, apparently, with Lange’s view, but implies also that “his people” is used in the national sense, not of the spiritual Israel. See below.—R.]

Rom_11:2. God did not cast away [οὐκ ἀπώσατο ὁ θεὸς]. He follows with a solemn declaration founded upon the testimony of his own conscientiousness and of examples.

His people [τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ]. He is as definite in characterizing His people, ὅν προέγνω, as he is grand in his declaration of the not casting away. On the idea of προγινώσκειν, see Rom_8:29. Two explanations here come in conflict with each other:

1. The spiritual people of God are spoken of, the Ἰσραὴλ θεοῦ; Rom_9:6; Gal_6:16 (Origen, Augustine, Luther, Calvin [Hodge], &c.).

2. Meyer says, on the contrary: The subject of the whole chapter is not the spiritual Israel, but the fate of the nation in regard to the salvation effected by the Messiah. Tholuck and Philippi [De Wette, Stuart, Alford], are of the same view. But the idea of “people” which the Apostle presents is so very dynamical, that it might be said: to him the election is the people, and God’s true people is an election. This is evidently the thought in chap. 9, and also in Rom_11:4-5 of the present chapter. But if we emphasize properly the idea of casting away, the idea of election does not any more stand in antithesis to it; that is, it is not thereby settled that there is an election. But as the defenders of view (1) mistake the full import of the further elaboration, especially Rom_11:26, so do the defenders of (2) pass too lightly over the gradations made by the Apostle. [Against the interpretation: spiritual people, it may well be urged, that all along the Apostle has been speaking of the nation; that this very chapter treats of the final salvation of Israel as a nation, and Paul says he is an Israelite, &c., of this historical (not spiritual) people. Besides, the Scriptures have suffered very much from assumptions respecting spiritual references. The only argument in favor of this meaning is the phrase: “Whom he foreknew.” It is held that this defines the people as those referred to in Rom_8:29 ff.; but may there not be a foreknowledge of a nation resulting in national privileges, such as the Jews enjoyed, as really as foreknowledge of an individual and consequent blessing? The whole current of thought in the chapter—in fact, in chaps. 9–11—is against any such interpretation as shall make “His people” = His spiritual Israel, over against Israel as a nation. If any limitation be made, it should be thus expressed: the real people of God among the Jewish people, recognizing them as the pith and kernel of the nation, not as isolated individuals from out the mass. This seems to be Dr. Lange’s view, and is probably that of many who are quoted in favor of (I). We thus retain the weight of the Apostle’s proof: For I also am an Israelite, and avoid weakening the main thought of the chapter, which undoubtedly is: the ultimate national restoration of the Jews. Were it not this, the whole argument of chaps. 9–11 ends with a non sequitur. Comp. Alford, in loco.—R.]

What is meant by God casting away His people? 1. There is an election of believers, and it is far greater than one of little faith may think. (How many Jews themselves, of all periods, would like to have been friends of Jesus!) 2. The call of the Gentiles is even designed indirectly for the conversion of Israel, and individuals can always be gained. 3. The whole Divine disposition is designed for the final salvation of all Israel. Here, therefore, the thought of the mercy controlling this whole economy, comes in contrast with the thought of the great economical judgment of hardening. If, however, the expression all Israel be urged, and there be found in individuals of it an assurance of the salvation of the empirical totality, we would have to be indifferent to the idea of election with reference to Israel as a people, and let it consist in the idea of an absolute restoration.

Which he foreknew [ὃν προέγνω]. This limits the meaning, in so far as the empirical mass of the people is not meant; but, on the other hand, the small empirical number of believing Jews is also not meant, but the people in their whole regal idea and nature. In this eternal destination of Israel, God cannot contradict himself. [Alford (so Tholuck, De Wette, Meyer) thus paraphrases: “which, in His own eternal decree before the world, He selected as the chosen nation, to be His own, the depositary of His law, the vehicle of the theocracy, from its first revelation to Moses, to its completion in Christ’s future kingdom.” Toward this national reference later commentators generally incline. See Hodge, on the other side.—R.]

Or know ye not, &c. [Ἤ οὐκ οἴδατε ἐν Ἠλίᾳ, κ.τ.λ. Ἤ introduces a new objection to the matter impugned (Alford). Comp. Rom_9:21; Rom_6:3.—R.] Tholuck: “Ἐν Ἠλίᾳ, quotation of the section treating of Elijah, as Mar_12:26 : ἐπὶ τῆς βάτου. Examples from the classics in Fritzsche, to which may be added Thucydides i.9, and proofs from Philo, in Grossmann,” &c. (see 1Ki_19:10; 1Ki_19:14). Incorrect view: ἐν Ἠλίᾳ, of Elijah (Erasmus, Luther [E. V.], and others). [Upon this point all modern commentators and translators agree, though they differ about the proper word to be supplied, whether section, history, or story; the last is simplest.—R.]

Rom_11:3. Lord, they have killed thy prophets, &c. [Κύριε, τοὐς προφήτας σου ἀπέκτειναν, κ.τ.λ. See Textual Note2.] The Apostle has quoted freely the real meaning of the words of the text. It makes no difference in the thing itself that, in the complaint which Elijah makes, he understands by the μόνος33 the only remaining prophet, while the present passage understands the only worshipper of God. For the prophet, in his state of mind, was not inclined to acknowledge dumb or absconding worshippers of God as God’s true worshippers. But Paul, in conformity with his view, has transposed the words meaning altars and prophets. Meyer pays attention to the plural, the altars, “as the temple at Jerusalem was the only place exclusively designed for service.” But even in the temple at Jerusalem there were two altars. Yet the question here is concerning the kingdom of Israel, and therefore the remark of Estius is almost superfluous, that it was even blasphemy to throw down God’s altars on the high places.34

Rom_11:4. But what saith the Divine response unto him? ἀλλὰ τί λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ κρηματισμός; On κρηματισμός, see the Lexicons. [The substantive occurs only here in the New Testament. The cognate verb is used in Mat_2:12; Mat_2:22; Act_10:22; Heb_8:5; Heb_11:7, in the sense: to be warned of God, as the E. V. expresses it. The obvious meaning here: Divine response, seems to have been thus derived: the word first meant business, then formal audience given to an ambassador, and then an oracular response, though this was not the classical sense. See 2Ma_2:4; 2Ma_11:17.—R.]

I have reserved to myself [Κατέλιπον ἐμαυτῷ. See Textual Note.5To myself, as my possession and for my service, over against the apostasy into idolatrous service (Meyer).—R.] The original expression: “I will leave me,” has been changed by the Apostle into the past tense, without thereby altering the sense, as has been done by the LXX.

Seven thousand men [ἑπτακιζχιλίους ἄνδρας]. It is sufficient to regard the number seven as the sacred number in relation to the services, and the number thousand as a designation of a popular assembly. Tholuck, after Kurtz (p. 591), considers the number seven as the perfect and covenant number. There are different ideas of perfection, according to which the Numbers 3, 4, 7, 10, , 12, may be together regarded as numbers denoting perfection.35 The Mohammedan saying, quoted by Tholuck, is interesting: that “God never allows the world to be without a remainder of seventy righteous people, for whose sake He preserves it.”

[Who never bowed, οἵτινες οὐκ ἔκαμψαν. Alford remarks on οἵτινες, which is a variation from the original, that it gives “the sense of the saying, as far as regards the present purpose, viz., to show that all these were faithful men; in the original text and LXX., it is implied that these were all the faithful men.”—R.]

To Baal. The feminine τῇ Βάαλ has given occasion for much discussion. In the LXX. the name has sometimes the masculine and sometimes the feminine article. Why does it have the latter? As the LXX. of this passage has τῷ Βάαλ, Meyer has admitted a mistake of Paul’s memory; Fritzsche holds that the codex which Paul read, contained a different reading. According to Olshausen, Philippi, Meyer [Stuart, Hodge], and others, the feminine form may be explained by the fact that Baal was regarded as an androgynous deity; but this is not sufficiently proved. According to Gesenius, the feminine form was understood as a contemptuous expression of idols; which view is also favored by Tholuck. The elder critics (Erasmus, Beza, Grotius) understood the word as applying to the statue of Baal. [So E. V.] Tholuck replies to this, by saying: without analogy. But the idol is the contemptible image or statue of the false god. Yet, if we hold that Baal had no reality as god to the Jews, but merely as an idol, the whole series of feminine forms used in designating Baal becomes clear at once (1Sa_7:4; Zep_1:4; Hos_2:8). Meyer is of the opinion that, in that case, it would have to read τῇ τοῦ Βάαλ; but this would fully destroy the probably designed effect of the feminine form. Tholuck observes: “In the Gothic language, Guth, as masculine, means God; but gud, as neuter, means idols;” and by this means he again approaches the explanation which, in passing, he has rejected. He does the same thing in his preceding remark: “In the rabbinical writings, idols are contemptuously called הֶאֶלוֹת.” On Baal,36 comp. Winer, das Wörterbuch für das christliche Volk, and the Hebrew Antiquities, by De Wette, Ewald, and Keil.

Rom_11:5. Even so then in this present time [οὕτως οῦ̓ν καὶ ἐν τῷ νῦν καιρῶ. Alford suggests: “even in the present time, sc., of Israel’s national rejection.—R.] God, according to that example, secures for himself a certain remnant [λεῖμμα] of the elect, according to His constant law of election—that is, according to the election of grace [κατ’ ἐκλογὴν καριτος. Comp. Rom_9:11. Stuart: “an election, not on the ground of merit, but of mercy.—R.]

Ver 6. Now if by grace [εἰ δὲ κάριτι. Δέ logical, now.—R.] Namely, that a λεῖμμα existed, and always continues to exist. Grace, or the gift of grace, cannot be divided and supplemented by, or confounded with, a merit of works. Augustine: Gratia, nisi gratis sit, gratia non est.

[Then it is no longer of works: otherwise grace no longer becomes grace, οὐκ ἔτι ἐξ ἔργων, ἐπεὶ ἡ καρις οὐκ ἔτι γίνεται χάρις.—But if it be of works, then it is no longer grace: otherwise work is no longer work, εἰ δὲ ἐξ ἔργων, οὐκ ἔτι χάρις, ἐπεὶ τὸ ἔργον οὐκ ἔτι ἐστὶν ἔργον. The critical questions respecting the second clause are discussed in Textual Notes7, 8, 9, and at some length below. The discussion requires us to insert the verse in full.—R.] We may now ask how we must understand the parallel clauses? The usual explanation places the following in antithesis to each other: Now if it is by grace (that remnant, or its causality, the election), then it is simply not by the merit of works, otherwise grace is no more grace.—But if it be by works, then is it no more grace, otherwise work would be no true work, but mercenary work. In connection with this antithesis, clear and significant in itself, there arise, however, three questions: 1. Why does the Apostle enlarge the first proposition by the second, since the latter seems to be quite self-evident from the former? 2. What should the γίνεται (χάρις) mean, where ἐστι should be so positively expected that the Vulgate [E. V.], and other versions, have even substituted ?Esther 3. Why is χάρις used instead of ἐκ χάριτος [to correspond with ἐξ ἔργων] in the second sentence?

As far as the first point is concerned, Tholuck says: “The genuineness of the antithesis ‘εἰ δὲ ἐξ ἔργων,’ &c., is more than doubtful. Its oldest authorities are Cod. B., Peshito, Chrysostom, Theodoret (in the text). On the contrary, it is wanting in A. C. D. F. G., Origen (according to Rufinus), Vulgate, the Coptic Translation, and others. Yet Fritzsche has undertaken to defend this reading, and lately Reiche also, in the Comm. Crit., p. 67; Tischendorf has preserved it in the text,” &c. According to Tholuck, the addition has the character of a glossarial reflection. This appearance of such a self-evident amplification could, however, have also occasioned the omission.37

The γίνεται in the first sentence means, according to Tholuck: to result, to come out as. This explanation is just as doubtful as that of Meyer: “in its concrete appearance it ceases to be what it is by nature.” [So De. Wette, Alford, Philippi. The distinction between γίνεται and ἐστίν is ignored by many commentators.—R.] The χάρις, in the second sentence, must be understood, according to the current explanation, as the effect of the χάρις in the first sentence. In addition to this, we have the question: What is the meaning of “work is no more work?” Does the Apostle regard only mercenary work as a true work? We attempt the following explanation: If it is of grace, then it is no more of works; for grace does not first exist, or is not first in process of existence by works. Grace, according to its very nature, must be complete before works. But if of works, then no further grace exists,38 because the work is not yet complete, and never will be complete as meritorious work. Works, considered as meritorious, are always an incomplete infinitude. But if grace should first be the result of works, it would not be present until the boundless future. If we accept this view, the literal expression is saved; and to the first declaration, that grace and the merit of works preclude each other, there is gained a second: Grace is naturally a prepared ground before the existing work, &c. (see also the continuation in Rom_11:7). The reading of Cod. B.: εἰ δὲ ἐξ ἔργων, οὐκέτι χάρις, ἐπεὶ τὸ ἔργον οὐκέτι ἐστὶ χάρις, seems also to be a special attempt at an explanation. The real purpose of the antithesis is, that the Apostle proves that the election of the people could only consist of those who establish themselves on grace, but not in the party which establishes itself on works. If the matter were as those who rely on the righteousness of works desire, there would not be any grace; and grace would never be accomplished, because the righteousness of works is never accomplished, just as little as the tower of Babel was ever finished.39

Rom_11:7-11. The great body of unbelievers who have not been able to obtain grace by works, are not the real substance of the people. They are essentially an apostate remnant of hardened ones. Yet their stumbling was not designed for their ruin, but for the salvation of the Gentiles.

Rom_11:7. What then. Τί οῦ̓ν. This inference, as well as the ἐπιζητεῖ, becomes quite definite, if we refer to the conclusion of the previous verse.—That which Israel seeketh for, he obtained not [ὃ ἐπιζητεῖ σραήλ, τοῦτο οὐκ ἐπέτυχεν. The latter verb is usually followed by the genitive; rarely, in the classics, by the accusative, as here. Hence we find, in Rec. (no MSS.), τούτου. See Meyer for the authorities for this use of the accusative. The meaning is not: to find, but to attain to, to obtain.—R.] Israel did not obtain that which it sought to obtain by works—grace, as the end of the finished work. Like a phantom beyond the ever unfinished work, grace had to recede ever further in the distance. The ἐπιζητεῖν can, at all events, also mean zealous striving [Fritzsche, Philippi, Hodge]; but it is clear that this idea would not be in place here. [Meyer says it indicates the direction.—R.] The present properly denotes “the permanence of the effort”—the permanence of the effort to find the city of grace at the end of the long road of self-righteousness.

But the election obtained it [ἡδὲ ἐκλογὴ ἐπέτυχεν. The election for the elect, as the circumcision for those circumcised. Vivacious expression.—R.] Meyer says: “For they were subjects of Divine grace.” Paul has already said, in other words: For the elect are distinguished by having received God’s grace in faith.

And the rest were hardened [οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ἐπωρώθησαν. The verb is rendered blinded in the E. V., here, and 2Co_3:14; in other places, hardened, which is decidedly preferable.—R.] Israel is divided into two parts. One part is the ἐκλογή, although it is the minority; the other is the λοιποί, the τινές, although they are the majority. Meyer says, they were hardened by God. [So Hodge, Stuart, Philippi (with a reservation), and Tholuck, in later editions; comp. Rom_9:18. The passive certainly, includes this thought.—R.] Paul says, they have been hardened by a reciprocal process between their unbelief and God’s judgments. The sense undoubtedly is, that those who remain for the incalculable periods of judgment have become, “in understanding and will, insusceptible of the appropriation of salvation in Christ” (Meyer), and insusceptible, above all, in their heart and spirit; because the last sparks of the spiritual life in them, which alone can understand the gospel of the Spirit, have expired; just as a sapless plant is no more supported by the sunshine, but is reduced to a dried-up stalk.

Rom_11:8. According as it is written. [Stuart is disposed to find in καθὼς (א. B., Tregelles: καθάπερ) γέγραπται a declaration of analogy, rather than a citation of prophecy. So Tholuck; but Fritzsche, Meyer, and others, hold the latter view. “The perspective of prophecy, in stating such cases, embraces all the analogous ones, especially that great one, in which the words are most prominently fulfilled” (Alford). See below, note on Rom_11:10. On the free citation, see Textual Notes9, 10.—R.] The citation is freely collated from Isa_29:10; Isa_6:9; Deu_29:4. Meyer denies that Isa_6:9 is taken into consideration; but if we compare the two other passages, they do not suffice for Paul’s citation, since the assertion in Deu_29:4 contains merely negations.

God gave them. By no means a mere permission (Chrysostom), but likewise not simply activity, without something further. The ground of the judgment of a spirit of slumber [πνεῦμακα τανύξεως], or of deep sleep (רוּחַ תַּרְדֵּמָה), on Israel, is definitely declared, in Isa_29:10, to be the guilt of the people; Rom_11:13 ff.—But the passage in Isa_6:9 ff., which constitutes the principal part of the present quotation, is explained immediately afterward in the conduct of Ahaz, in chap. 7. The third passage from Deuteronomy brings out more definitely the negative element in this hardening process: “Yet the Lord hath not given you a heart to perceive,” &c. On the meaning and interpretations of κατάνυξις, see Meyer, p. 420; Tholuck, p. 596.40—[Unto this day; to be joined with what immediately precedes, since they are substantially from Deu_29:4. So modern editors and commentators generally.—R.]

Rom_11:9. And David saith. The second passage is taken freely from Psa_69:22 (LXX.). Meyer says: “David is not the author of this Psalm (against Hengstenberg), which must be judged analogously to the expression in Mat_22:43.” Comp. on that passage the Commentary on Matthew, p. 404. First of all, it is quite easy to prove that the sufferings of the people in exile could not have been in mind in writing either the lamentations of Psalms 19., or the “imprecations” on enemies. First, the theocratic exiles did not say that they had to suffer for the Lord’s sake (Rom_11:7), and for zeal for His house (Rom_11:9). But they said just the contrary (see Psalms 106; Isaiah 64; Daniel 9.). And though the exile could also invoke God’s wrath on the heathen, and wish them evil (Psa_79:6; Psa_137:9), the prophetic imprecations are very different, for they portray the judgments of blindness that are invoked on the spiritual adversaries of the theocratic faith, and of the house and name of the Lord, who proved their enmity by persecuting God’s servant. Comp., in this respect, Psalms 59; Psalms 64; Psa_69:22-28; Psalms 109. In such Psalms, either the personal, collective, or ideal41 David chiefly speaks, because David has become the type of God’s suffering servant. We therefore hold, with Luther, Rosenmüller, and others, that the concluding words (from Rom_11:32) are a later addition.42

The imprecations themselves are a propheticoethical view, clad in the sombre drapery of the Old Testament. [Dr. J. Add. Alexander remarks, on this verse of Psalms 69 : “The imprecations in this verse, and those following it, are revolting only when considered as the expression of malignant selfishness. If uttered by God, they shock no reader’s sensibilities; nor should they, when considered as the language of an ideal person, representing the whole class of righteous sufferers, and particularly Him who, though He prayed for His murderers while dying (Luk_23:34), had before applied the words of this very passage to the unbelieving Jews (Mat_23:38), as Paul did afterwards.”—R.]

Let their table become a snare [Γενηθήτω ἡ τράπεζα αὐτῶν εἰς παγίδα]. Philippi, with Origen, Tholuck, and others, has referred the table to the law and its works. But when Melanchthon says: doctrina ipsorum, the latter must be very carefully distinguished from the law itself. Chrysostom: their enjoyments; Michaelis, and others: the Jewish passover meal, at which the Jews were besieged, and which was followed by the destruction of Jerusalem; Grotius: the altar in the temple itself. The point of the figure becomes blunted, if we hold, with Tholuck, that table is mentioned, because it is at the table that surprise by an enemy is most dangerous. Rather, the table, or the enjoyment of life by the ungodly, becomes itself their snare, &c. Now this table can be something different at different times; generally, it is the symbol of comfortable banqueting in wicked security over the ungodly enjoyment of life (see Mat_24:38). With the Jews of the Apostle’s day, this table was their statutes, and, above all, their illusion that the earthly glory of the kingdom of Israel would be manifested by triumph over the Romans. It is a fact that the table, the ungodly enjoyment of life, becomes a snare for the ruin of the adversaries of the Holy One; just as the pious man’s table becomes a sign of blessing and victory (Psalms 23.). While they think they are consuming the spoils of their earthly sense, they become themselves a spoil to every form of retribution; just as the bird is led into the snare, and the deer is hunted, or perishes by a stumbling-block—that is, a trap.

[And a trap, and a stumbling-block, and a recompense unto them, καὶ εἰς θήραν καὶ εἰς σκάνδαλον καὶ ἀνταπόδομα αὐτοῖς. See Textual Note11.—R.] Paul has freely elaborated the original forms still further, by inserting καὶ εἰς θήραν. Likewise σκάνδαλον follows ἀνταπόδοσις in the LXX. The Vulgate interprets θήρα by captio; Fritzsche and Meyer adopt the same, while Tholuck and Philippi prefer the instrument [Ewald, Alford: net] of hunting, which applies to both the other means of capture, and not merely as a “hunting-spear.” Meyer is incorrect in saying that this ruin is explained in what follows. For the following words describe the inward relations of the judgment of the ungodly, in antithesis to the judgment in the outward relations of life, which have been described by the foregoing words.

Rom_11:10. Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see [ακοτισθήτωσαν οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ αὐτῶν τοῦ μὴ βλέπειν]. Spiritual blindness is one form of the inward judgment, and total despondency of spirit is the other.

And bow down their back alway [καὶ τὸν νῶτον αὐτῶν διὰ π.αντὸς σύγκαμψον. See Textual Note12.—R.] The LXX. has translated the words of the original text, “and make their loins continually to shake,” by: “make their backs crooked always;” a change to which the Apostle adheres, probably because it gives the expression of permanent dejection a somewhat more general character.—By bowed-down backs, Meyer understands spiritual slavery, while the early expositors understood Roman slavery. Yet this would be an important deviation from the original text. But, in reality, the bowed-down backs should mean the same thing as shaking or tottering loins.

Tholuck and Philippi have correctly observed, against Fritzsche, and others, that in Rom_11:8 (and the same thing applies also to Rom_11:9) the question is not the citation of a prophecy, according to which the unbelief of the Jews at the time of Christ must be a necessary result. Yet this remark does not suffice to show that the quotation takes place as in the citations in Mat_13:14; Joh_12:40; Act_28:26; which “refer, vi analogiœ, to the classical passage for the unbelieving conduct of Israel toward God, in Isaiah 6.” The most direct practical purpose of these citations in the New Testament is to prove to the Jews, from their own Holy Scriptures and history, that there was always in Israel an inclination to apostasy; and that it is therefore not contrary to faith in prophecy to charge the present Israel with apostasy (see the defence of Stephen). But then a really typical prophecy also underlies this purpose; yet it is not a fatalistic prophecy, but the idea of the consequence of ruin even to its historical consummation (see Mat_23:32 ff.).

Rom_11:11. I say then, Did they stumble in order that they should fall? [λέγω οὖν, μὴ ἔπταισαν ἵνα πέσωσιν;] A qualification to guard against a false conclusion. They have certainly stumbled and fallen; but the purpose of their guilty stumbling and falling under the previously described judgment of hardness was not that they should fall, in the absolute sense, into the ruin of the ἀπώλεια. Their falling is economically limited, and economically turned and applied, to the salvation of the Gentiles (see Rom_9:17; Rom_9:23). The stumbling of the λοιποί took place against the stone of offence (Rom_9:32-33; Rom_10:11). The ἵνα denotes the final purpose of the Divine judicial government, and is not merely ἐκβατικῶς, as Chrysostom, Augustine, and others, would have it.43 Tholuck makes the noteworthy remark, that πταίειν, to stumble (which must not be referred, with De Wette, and others, to the σκάνδαλον mentioned in Rom_11:9, but rather to the λίθος προςκόμματος in Rom_9:33), has the sense of moral stumbling; Jam_2:10; Jam_3:2; and that πίπτειν, on the contrary, has this ethically figurative sense neither in the Hebrew, nor Greek, nor Latin, but only the sense of yielding to, sinking under.

But by their fall [ἀλλὰ τῷ αὐτῶν παραπτώματι. On παράπτωμα, see p. 184, Dr. Schaff’s note.—R.] Meyer has no ground for not finding in παραπτ. the meaning of falling, but only the delictum (Vulgate) [so Alford], for they have really fallen, yet that was not the object (see also Tholuck, p. 600). Tholuck properly opposes, also, the view that here the principal thought is, that Israel should be restored, although an intimation of the restitution of Israel is included in the words. It is evident that the conversion of the Gentiles is primarily designated as the final object of Israel’s fall; with this final object there is, indeed, again associated the final object of the preliminarily isolated and of the finally total conversion of Israel. The παραπτ. here can as little mean a mere “passing away,” as a mere infortunium, which Reiche and Rückert, with others, would render it.44

Salvation is come. Ἡ σωτηρία. Γέγονεν must be supplied, according to the connection. The Apostle cannot have regarded this tragical condition as an absolute necessity; but he may very well have considered it an historical one. Israel, having been placed in its existing condition by its own guilt, did not desire the Gentiles, under the most favorable circumstances, to participate in the messianic salvation, except as proselytes of the Jews; and still more did it indulge the thought of vengeance on, and dominion over, the Gentiles; but it was impossible for Christianity, as Jewish Christianity, to become universal in the Gentile world. In addition to this came the experience of the Apostle, that he was always driven more decidedly to missionary labors among the Gentiles by the unbelief of the Jews; Mat_21:43; Act_13:46; Act_28:28. The negative condition of this transition was apostolic preaching, and especially that of Paul.

In order to excite them to jealousy [εἰς τὸ παραζηλῶσαι αὐτούς. Instead of jealousy, we may substitute emulation, as the word is not used in a bad sense (Hodge). The clause is telic; the purpose was not the total fall, but that their moral fall might be used to further the salvation of the Gentiles, and this, in turn, bring about their own salvation as a nation.—R.] This purpose was associated from the outset, and the mention of it is here in place for the removal of the fatalistic thought, that their fall was decreed for their ruin.

Rom_11:12-16. As the unbelief of the Jews has been the means of effecting the conversion of the Gentiles, so shall the conversion of the Gentiles be still more not only the means of effecting the belief of the Jews, but, with this return of Israel, still greater things shall occur.

Now if their fall … and their diminishing the riches of the Gentiles [εἰ δὲ τὸ παράπτωμα αὐτῶν ... τὸ ἥττημα αὐτῶν πλοῦτος ἐθνῶν. In order to explain this difficult verse, we must start with the ἥττημα in Isa_31:8, which does not occur in classical language, but is there represented by ἧττα [Attic for ἧσσα, a defeat], the contrary of νίκη. In the passage cited, ἥττημα means not merely the being overcome, but the military diminution which is the result of defeat. At all events, it is to be taken here as diminution in captivity, according to the original text, for menial servitude. Likewise, in 1Co_6:7, the word means a moral loss, a diminution of the power of believers in opposition to the world. We therefore hold that the expression ἥττημα places the two other ideas in a more definite light, and that the whole expression alludes to the scene of a routed army. Even in military affairs, the dynamical antithesis of broken power and of the full sense of power is connected with the ideas of numerical diminution and numerical fulness; as, in the present instance, the weakening is connected with the loss of men, and full power with the complete number. Tholuck bases his explanation on the meaning of πλήρωμα in Rom_11:25.

Explanations of the ἥττημα: diminutio (Vulgate); minority, defectus (Chrysostom, and most commentators); injury, loss, fall (De Wette, and others). De Wette brings this explanation in exclusive antithesis to the first, with reference to 2Co_12:13. Fritzsche: Diminution of messianic salvation. Philippi: The damage to God’s kingdom by their falling away. But Meyer remarks, with good reason, that the thrice-repeated αὐτῶν is in the same relation, the subjective genitive. Tholuck: Reduced state.45 According to Tholuck, Meyer’s explanation is: the minority; but Meyer himself pronounces against this explanation, and understands the word to mean, sinking and ruin. Ulfilas has interpreted the word, which means at the same time the loss of men and the weakening, by the deficiency. There is a real difference made by the reference to the believing Jews as the minority of believers (paucitas Judœorum credentium; Grotius), and the antithetical body of unbelievers, the moral field of the dead, or the captured, those subjected to slavery. But here, too, both parts cannot be separated. The αὐτοί are the whole people; the believers are the sound remainder of the army; while the unbelievers, the same as the fallen, or captives, are its ἥττημα.

How much more their fulness [πόσῳ μᾶλλον τὸ πλήρωμα αὐτῶν]. The πλήρωμα. Explanations: The whole body (Tholuck); the full number (Meyer); the restoration of Israel to its proper position (Rückert, Köllner); [Hodge: their full restoration or blessedness; Alford: their replenishment.—R.] Philippi: the filling up of the gap caused in God’s kingdom by their unbelief. The latter view, which was first set forth by Origen, is discussed at length by Tholuck, p. 606 ff. But this view confounds in a twofold way: 1. The idea of the full number of God’s eternal community in general, and the idea of material fulness (πλήρωμα), the whole number of the Jewish people; 2. The idea of the economic completeness in the present passage, and that of eonic completeness.46

Tholuck very properly calls attention to the apparent tautology in πλοῦτος κόσμου, πλοῦτος ἐθνῶν, which has been very much neglected by expositors. In κόσμος, he says, there seems to be comprised the idea of the whole extent of humanity; and in πλοῦτ. ἐθν. there appears the more concrete designation: “The reduction of the chosen people turned to an enrichment of the profane nations.” The former definition regards the qualitative, intensive, and teleological relation in an altogether universal sense: The fall of the historical Israel redounded to the advantage of the world, even including the ideal Israel. The latter definition describes the quantitative and extensive character of the historical course. Jewish tribes, or Jewish communities, drop out of the people, while, on the other hand, whole heathen nations are gained. But if their fall has thus been a gain to the world, how much more their fulness—that is, a believing Israel!

Rom_11:13. For I am speaking to you Gentiles [ὑμῖν δὲ λέγω τοῖς ἔθνεσιν. The sense is the same whether we read γάρ or δέ. A colon should follow this clause; the pointing of the E. V. obscures the proper connection.—R.] The declared prospect of the full conversion of Israel leads him to the further explanation, that he regards even the conversion of the Gentiles, though an object in itself, as a means for accomplishing the object of Israel’s conversion. [According to Alford, this verse answers the question: “Why make it appear as if the treatment of God’s chosen people were regulated not by a consideration of them, but of the less favored Gentiles?”—R.]—You Gentiles; that is, Gentile Christians.—[Inasmuch then ἐφ̓ ὅσον μὲν οὖν. See Textual Note14. The corresponding δέ is wanting, as often in the Apostle’s writings.—R.] Ἐφ̓ ὅσον, not quamdiu (Origen, Vulgate, Luther).

I glorify mine office [τὴν διακονίαν μου δοξάζω]. Not: I praise my office (Luther, Grotius, and Reiche); but: I strive to glorify my office by its faithful discharge (De Wette, Meyer, and others); in which, indeed, he also says, that he esteems his office as a glorious one.47

Rom_11:14. My own flesh [μου τήν σάρκα. On μου in this peculiar position, see Meyer. D. F. put it after the noun. It is sufficiently emphatic to justify the emendation, my own flesh.—R.] An expression of inward participation with Israel in natural descent. Theodoret: The word leads us to understand the denial of spiritual participation. Rom_11:28 proves that this antithesis is not very remote; yet the inward attachment to his people here appears in the foreground.

Rom_11:15. For if the casting away of them [εἰ γὰρ ἀποβολὴ αὐτῶν]. Ἀποβολή, throwing away, an antithesis to πρόσλημψις; see Rom_11:17. Therefore not their diminution (Vulgate, Luther). [So Bengel, Philippi, who find here also an allusion to the loss in numbers sustained by the kingdom of God.—R.] Tholuck alludes to the use of language in the LXX., and the Church (ἀποβολή, expulsion).

Be the reconciliation of the world [καταλλαγή κόσμου]. Not as causality, but as condition, without which the word of reconciliation did not reach the Gentiles without obstruction. [It is perhaps to express this shade of thought that the E. V. renders: reconciling; but reconciliation is more literal, and shows how important Paul deemed the fact in question, which could thus be characterized.—R.] In this free use of language Paul also says σώσω, in Rom_11:14, because he is the herald of σωτηρία.

What shall the reception of them be [τίς ἡ πρόζλημψις]. Reception to salvation, and to participation in salvation by their conversion.

But life from the dead? [εἰ μὴ ζωὴ ἐκ νεκρῶν;] It is clear that the Apostle awaits a boundless effect of blessing on the world from the future conversion of the Jews. We ask, What is it? We must first look at the antithesis: Their casting away became the reconciling of the world; that is, only conditionally, therefore as if, and indirectly. Thus, we continue, the conversion of the whole people of Israel will also be conditionally, as if, and indirectly, a life from the dead. With the appropriated καταλλαγή, there now begins, first, the spiritual resurrection, which is succeeded, second, by the future bodily resurrection. Hence different explanations:

1. Figurative expression of the new spiritual life (Augustine, Calvin, and others) of the Gentile world, or of the world in general, but not of the Jews (as Cocceius, Bengel, and others, explain), since the new life of the latter is regarded as an antecedent means. But this new life is also regarded in different senses: The further extension of God’s kingdom, and the new subjective vivification (Philippi, and others), increase, and advance of piety (Bucer, Bengel). “A new life in the higher charismatic fulness of the Spirit shall extend from God’s people to the nations of the world, compared with which the previous life of the nations must be considered dead;” Auberlen (calculated to mislead, and over-drawn, so far as the Christian life of the previous world is meant). Other modifications: Highest joy [Grotius, Hodge apparently], highest blessedness. [Stuart: something great, wonderful, surprising, like to what a general resurrection of the dead would be. He thinks it probable Paul had in mind Ezekiel’s vision of the dry bones.—R.]

2. The literal view: The resurrection of the dead is meant—the oldest ecclesiastical explanation (Origen, Chrysostom, Rückert, Tholuck, Meyer, De Wette, &c.). Tholuck says that the meaning of this view is, that the conversion of Israel is regarded as the final act in the world’s drama; but then he makes the objection, that ζωὴ ἐκ νεκρ. nowhere stands in the New Testament for the ἀνάστασις, and thus the expositor finds himself compelled to prefer the metaphorical exposition.

But it has not been sufficiently considered how very conditional the first proposition in the comparison is: for if the casting away of them be the reconciliation of the world. As this is a fact which is realized first up to and in the conversion of the Pleroma of the Gentiles, and then of the Jews, so is the consequence of their reacceptance a fact which is continued from the higher spiritual new life of the world to its consummation, particularly in the first resurrection. To the Apostle, the ideas of spiritual resurrection and bodily resurrection do not lie so far apart (see Rom_8:11) as to our expositors; therefore Olshausen is right in applying the word to a spiritual resurrection, which takes place in the bodily resurrection. [Alford also combines the two views: “Standing as it does, it must be qualitative, implying some further blessed state of the reconciled world, over and above the mere reconciliation. This might well be designated ‘life from the dead,’ and in it may be implied the glories of the first resurrection, and deliverance from the bondage of corruption, without supposing the words to be = the resurrection from the dead.”—R.]

Rom_11:16. Moreover, if the first-fruit be holy, so also is the lump [εἰ δὲ ἡ ἀπαρχὴ ἁγία, καὶ τὸ φύραμα. Lange: das Earstlingsbrod, the bread of the first-fruits—i. e., the portion of the dough taken as a heave-offering.—R.]. After the Apostle has disclosed his prospect of the glorious results of Israel’s conversion, he returns to the grounds for the hope of this conversion itself. He uses two similes. The first is taken from the significance of the bread of the first-fruit (Num_15:19-21). Ἀπαρχή can, indeed, denote the first-fruit, as well as the bread of the first-fruit; but it receives this meaning from the corresponding idea of the harvest; while, on the other hand, the baking of the first-fruit must correspond to the φύραμα, the kneaded dough. Therefore the expression here can neither mean first-fruit (Estius, Olshausen, and others), nor the grain for the bread of the first-fruit (Grotius). But the ὰπαρχή in general denotes the representative offering by which the whole, mass, to which ὰπαρχή belongs, is consecrated to God. Thus is the consecration of the first-born to the priesthood (with which Levi was charged), the consecration of the people; the consecration of the first-fruit is the consecration of the harvest; and the consecration of the bread of the first-fruit is the consecration of the whole lump, which was afterwards prepared. [So Stuart, Hodge, Alford, De Wette, Tholuck, Meyer, Ἀπαρχή is necessarily defined by its correlative term φύραμα, the mass of dough for baking.—R.]

And if the root be holy, so are the branches also [καὶ εἰ ἡ ῥίζα ἁγία, καὶ οἱ κλάδοι]. This second simile is clear in itself: The branches correspond to the root (anomalous exceptions to this agreement, which may be found in nature, do not here come into consideration). The general fundamental thought of both figures is, undoubtedly, as Reiche holds, that the whole people is designated as good by its first-fruits as well as by its root. Interpretation of the particular parts:

1. Both figures mean the same thing. The ἀπαρχή are the patriarchs (Abraham, &c.); τὸ φύραμα, is the whole body of the people. The same relation applies to root and branches (the Greek fathers, Erasmus, Calvin, Tholuck, Meyer [Stuart, Hodge, Alford], &c.).

2. The figures are different. The second figure undoubtedly applies to the patriarchs and their posterity; but the first, by ἀπαρχή, describes the believing Jews, and, by φύραμα, the rest (Toletus, Cramer, and others. [So Wordsworth, who understands, by φύραμα, the whole mass of the world which is to be converted.—R.] Also, in reference to the first figure, Ambrosius, and others). Modifications: According to Origen and Theodoret. ἀπαρχή means Christ himself, and φύραμα, Christians. Meyer has two objections to the different rendering of the figures. First, it is contrary to the parallelism of the two passages. But apart from the fact that Paul’s prose is not subject to the rules of the poetical parallelism of the Old Testament, this reasoning betrays a defective idea of the Old Testament parallelism itself. His second reason, that the Apostle elaborates the second figure only, is of just as little force; for, with the further resumption of the second figure, there is presented a perfectly new thought. The most untenable explanation is, that ῥίζα means the original Christian Church, and κλάδοι are the individual believing Jews.

We hold that the antithesis is very decided. From what follows, it is clear that the ideal theocracy, though represented by the patriarchs, yet not identical with them (see Isa_11:1; Isa_11:10; Rev_5:5; Rev_22:16), must be regarded as the roof of Israel. In fact, from the foregoing citations, the same Christ is certainly the root of the old theocracy, as He is the ἀρκή in the ἀπαρκή of the new Jewish believing Church, and the causa efficiens of the sanctification of both. But according to the antithesis here presented, ῥίζα is the patriarchal foundation of the theocracy as the natural disposition consecrated to God; while the ἀπαρκή, on the contrary, is the first Jewish body of believers prepared by God as the bread of the first-fruit for the first harvest festival of the time of fulfilment, the Christian Pentecost. The present passage is related to Rom_9:5, the fathers being regarded as the root, and Christ as the miraculous fruit of the branches.

[It is evident, from Dr. Lange’s note, how difficult it is to support the twofold sense of the verse. As Tholuck remarks, the ἁγιότης is the point of comparison. Holy here means not only as consecrated to God, but as actually pure. If a distinction must be made between the two figures, it seems natural to find these two ideas of holiness given prominence in each respectively. Those certainly miss the point of both figures, and the argument of the Apostle as well, who do not find here, in “lump” and “branches,” a reference to Israel, considered as the people of God. Alford: “As Abraham himself had an outer and an inner life, so have the branches. They have an outer life, derived from Abraham by physical descent. Of this no cutting off can deprive them. But they have, while they remain in the tree, an inner life, nourished by the circulating sap, by virtue of which they are constituted living parts of the tree. It is of this life that their severance from the tree deprives them; it is this life which they will reacquire if grafted in again.” This obviates some difficulties, and is, on the whole, the simplest explanation.—R.]

Rom_11:17-24. The conditionality of the new antithesis of believing Gentiles and unbelieving Jews. The figure of the wild and the good olive tree. Warning for the Gentiles, and hope for the Jews.

Rom_11:17. But if some of the branches were broken off [εἰ δέ τινες τῶν κλάδων ἐξεκλάσθησαν. The E. V. is too conditional in its form.—R.] Although there were many of them, they were nevertheless a small minority, compared with the incorruptible tree of God’s kingdom. With this fact, the heathen should also prize the value of the theocratic institution itself.

And thou being a wild olive tree [σὺ δὲ ἀγριέλαιος ὤν]. As the expression ἀγριέλαιοςὤν can mean, as a substantive, the wild olive tree itself, but, as an adjective, the belonging to the wild olive tree, we prefer, with Fritzsche and Meyer, this latter view to the former, which is defended by Luther, Philippi, and Tholuck, with this explanation: The address, “thou being a wild olive tree,” views the individual Gentiles as a collective person.48 Meyer objects to this, by saying, that “not whole trees, and also not quite young ones (against De Wette), are grafted in.” Against this we may remark: 1. That the wild olive tree of the Gentile world is destined to be transferred, in all its branches, to the good olive tree; 2. This has already taken place incipiently by Paul’s mission to the Gentiles. Meanwhile, the Apostle was as far from supposing a total apostasy of the Gentile Church, as from admitting the possibility of a total apostasy of the Jews. Likewise, he speaks of a being grafted in having already occurred, with reference to the probable boasting of Gentile Christians over Jewish Christians. Besides, the Apostle considers the wild olive tree to be converted in all its branches just as little as in the case of the good olive tree. Likewise, Rom_11:24 must be kept in mind, where the same subject is not the wild olive tree itself, but only one branch of it. On the wild olive tree, or oleaster, comp. Natural History of the Bible, and the Dictionaries. Pareus: oleaster habet quidem formam oleœ, sed caret succo generoso et fructibus.

On the Oriental custom of strengthening olive trees that had become weak by grafting them, with the wild olive, comp. the citations in Tholuck, p. 617; in Meyer, p. 343. Now, if this custom were frequent, and occurred in various ways, there would be apparently an incongruity in the figure, in so far as the cuttings of the wild olive are designed to strengthen the olive tree; but the question here is a communication of the sap of the good olive tree to the branch of the wild olive. Therefore Tholuck remarks: “Paul was either not acquainted with the arboricultural relation of the matter, or—which is more probable, when we look at the triviality of this notice—he designed to say, that has here taken place by grace, which otherwise is contrary to nature.”49 But, in our opinion, this does not settle the question. First, the tertium comparationis does not lie in the breaking off and grafting in of the branches. In relation to this point, the figure is of perfect application. Secondly, though the branches of the wild olive tree communicate to the good olive tree a new and fresher life, and a vegetative vital nourishment (such as, for example, the Germans, at the time of the Reformation, gave to the Christian Church), this does not preclude the necessity of their receiving from the root and stem of the olive tree the good sap and productive power which produce the olive fruit.

Wert grafted in among them [ἐνεκεντρίθης ἐν αὐτοῖς]. The ἐν αὐτοῖς is differently rendered. The most simple rendering is: among them. [So Meyer, Alford, and most. Stuart, De Wette, Olshausen: in place of them. The former is preferable on account of συγκοινωνός.—R.]

And made fellow-partaker of the root and fatness [καὶ συγκοινωνὸς τῆς ῥίζης καὶ τῆς πιότητος. See Textual Note15.—R.] Not ἕν διὰ δυοῖν (Grotius, and others). The communication with the root secures participation in the good sap.

Rom_11:18. Boast not against the branches [μὴ κατακαυχῶ τῶν κλάδων]. The Jews in general were the branches of the olive tree; thus Jewish Christians are as much meant as the unbelieving Jews; not the latter alone (according to Chrysostom [Alford, Stuart, De Wette], and others), but rather the former principally, as is indicated by the ἐν αὐτοῖς. [Meyer: the Jews in general. He rightly adds, that not all Jews, who were not converts as yet, were to be regarded as broken off; only those who had rejected Christ.—R.]

But if thou boast [εἰ δὲ κατακαυχᾶσαι. The verb, occurring twice in this verse, is unusual.—R.] Meyer: Triumphest against them. According to the assumed figure of the wild olive tree, they could be tempted to boast that the members of the Jewish believing Church had received new life through heathenism, just as the boast has been made that Germanism, and especially Lutheranism, has reformed Christianity itself; while Christianity, operating from its very foundation, has reformed, and still reforms, its phenomenal forms. [Mutatis mutandis, of special application everywhere.—R.]

Thou bearest not the root [οὐ σὺ τὴν ῥίζαν βαστάζεις. Supply: know that, or, let this humble thee, that. See Winer, p. 575.—R.] Thou, as a grafted branch, standest in no more favorable relation to the root than those which are broken off and remain standing. Thou remainest thoroughly conditioned by an inward fellowship with the root, which must be confirmed in the humble knowledge of this dependence, and in inward union with the natural branches. The brief explanation is strengthened by the fact that it forms an immediate conclusion. Tholuck remarks: Such a presumption toward the branches could not be without presumption toward the root.

Rom_11:19. Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, &c. [ἐρεῖς οὖν Ἐξεκλάσθησαν [οἱ] κλάδοι, κ.τ.λ. See Textual Note16.] The genuineness of the article οἱ is rendered very probable by the intention of the Gentile speaking. After this religious warning, he will appeal to a religious decree, to a fait accompli of predestination. He accordingly abuses the truth which the Apostle himself has taught, by saying, negatively: the fate of the branches is irrevocably settled—there is no more salvation for the Jewish people; but he also abuses it, positively, by believing that he himself stands firm through the privilege which he presumes he has acquired. Here, then, we clearly see how the Apostle dismisses such a predestinarian presumption.

Rom_11:20. Well [καλῶς]. Ironical, as if he would say: a fine application of the doctrine of Divine predestination, by overleaping the ethical elements brought into the account by it! [With Stuart, Hodge, Meyer, Alford, and others, it must be held that the Apostle here admits the purpose in the breaking off, as stated in Rom_11:19; but he admits it only to protest against the wrong use made of it.—R.]

Because of unbelief they were broken off [τῇ ἀπιστίᾳ ἐξεκλάσθησαν. On the dative, see Tholuck and Alford in loco. The latter suggests their unbelief, thy faith (so Amer. Bible Union), but it seems better to take the nouns as abstract.—R.] The earnest declaration. That is, because of unbelief, expressed in strengthened form by the dative. That, therefore, is the decisive cause of their hurt, the real hindrance to their salvation.

[And thou standest by faith, σὺ δὲ τῇ πίστει ἕστηκας.] And thus thou also standest and endurest only by50 faith. The standing means here the being grafted in, and not, standing in the absolute sense, as Meyer correctly observes, against Tholuck, and others. For the opposite of it is not falling, but the being cut off. Essentially, the idea certainly coincides with standing and falling.

[Be not high-minded, μὴ ὑψηλοφρόνει. See Textual Note17.—R.] Be not therefore proud of an imaginary privilege, but fear [ἀλλὰ φοβοῦ]; that is, be all the more afraid of falling, because thou art inclined to boast. Bengel: timor opponitur non fiduciœ, sed supercilio et securitati.

Rom_11:21. For if God spared not the natural branches[εἰγὰρ ὁ Θεὸς τῶν κατὰ φύσιν κλάδων οὐκ ἐφείσατο]. Nature here evidently denotes the elevated, consecrated, and ennobled nature of the Abrahamic race.—Lest he also spare not thee [μήπως οὐδὲ σοῦ φείσεται. See Textual Note18. Supply fear, or, it is to be feared. See Winer, pp. 442, 470, 556. On the future, Buttmann, N. T. Gram., p. 303.—R.] Thou at least hast no claim to this genealogical nobility of Israel. Meyer: “The future is more definite and certain than the conjunctive.”

Rom_11:22. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God[ἴδε οὖν χρηστότητα καὶ ὰποτομίαν Θεοῦ]. The usual predestinarian system would say: The grace and justice of God. Paul says something quite different. The period [E. V., colon] gives grammatical support to the reading ἀποτομία, &c., accepted by Lachmann.

On those. Ἐπὶ μὲν τούς. The goodness, as well as the severity or sharpness of God in continual movement, corresponds to human conduct.—[Severity, ἀποτομία. See Textual Note19.—R.]

[But toward thee, God’s goodness,ἐπὶ δὲ σὲ κρηστότης θεοῦ. See Textual Note20. The nominatives give an elliptical construction: there is severity, there is the goodness of God.—R.]—If thou continue in his goodness [ἐὰν ἐπιμείνης τῇ χρηστότητι. That goodness. Alford: If thou abide by.—R.] On the living ground of God’s free grace and mercy. Meyer: Wilt have continued. Should the goodness have first begun then?—Otherwise thou also shalt be [ἐπεὶ καὶ σὺ ἐκκοπήσῃ. Comp. Rom_11:6. The E. V. conveys the correct meaning of ἐπεί.—R.] Meyer very appropriately calls attention to the stronger expression: ἐκκοπήσῃ.

Rom_11:23. [And they moreover, κἀκ εῖ νοιδέ. This is the reading adopted by Griesbach, Scholz, Lachmann, Tischendorf, and critical editors generally, on the authority of א. A. B. C. D. F. The rendering is that of Alford, who is unusually happy in expressing the exact force of δέ.—R.]—For God is able to graft them in again [δυνατὸς γάρ ἐστιν, κ.τ.λ.]. He will not apply His power to compel unbelievers to believe; but if they only do not continue in unbelief, He will graft them in again. He is not wanting in power, and certainly He will not be wanting in the application of it. The becoming strong for faith, and in faith, as well as the being planted in again, is exercised by the power of Divine grace.51

Rom_11:24. For if thou wert cut out. The γάρ serves to establish the δυνατὸς γάρ (Meyer). Likewise the stronger expression here: ἐξεχόπης.—Of the olive tree which is wild by nature. This is the idea of the oleaster, or wild olive.—And wert grafted contrary to nature [καὶ παρὰφύσιν ἐνεκεντρίσθης]. We doubt the propriety of translating παρὰ φύσιν exactly by against nature (contra naturam; Vulgate). Comp. Rom_1:26, p. 87. There exists no absolute opposition between the oleaster and the good olive tree; otherwise the grafting in would have no result. The application is clear.52

How much more. Nevertheless, a greater natural relation exists between the branches which are cut out of the good olive tree, and this olive tree as peculiar to them; so that they, after all, can be grafted more easily into them than the branches of the wild olive are grafted into it. The difficulty which arises from the consideration that the (Jewish) obduratio is more difficult to be overcome than the (Gentile) ignorantia, is removed by Tholuck, when he says that he regards the γάρ of the present verse as coördinate with the δυνατὸς γάρ, so that it would relate to the ἐγκεντρισθήσονται (Rom_11:23). But this changes the matter very little; the Apostle’s supposition is, that the economy of God’s government will accomplish the dissolution of the Jewish obduratio.

[Alford clearly defines the meaning: In the case of the Gentile, the Apostle sets the fact of natural growth over against that of engrafted growth; here, the fact of congruity of nature (τῇ ἰδίᾳ ἐλαίᾳ) is set against incongruity, as making the reingrafting more probable. Hodge: “The simple meaning of this verse is, that the future restoration of the Jews is, in itself, a more probable event than the introduction of the Gentiles into the Church of God.”—R.]

Rom_11:25-36. The last word, or the mystery of the Divine government.

Rom_11:25. For I would not, brethren. The γάρ confirms the previous πόσῳ μᾶλλον; according to Tholuck, the address, “brethren,” is directed this time to the Gentile Christians. But why not to all? Οὐ ... ἀγνοεῖν, Rom_1:13 [p. 70], &c. An announcement of an important communication.

Of this mystery. Τὸ μυστήριον τοῦτο. [See Tholuck and Alford in loco on the word mystery.—R.] On the basis of the general mystery of the Christian εὐσεβεία, 1Ti_3:16, revealed to Christians by their becoming believers, there are displayed the individual mysteries which concern the development of Christian life in the world, particularly the universal development of Christianity. In regard to these, the Apostles are illuminated in advance by revelation, in order to communicate them to the Church. Thus Paul communicates, in many ways, to believers, the mystery that the Gentiles shall be joint-heirs of life, without legal conditions, Eph_3:6; also the mystery that, in the last times, the transformation of persons still living will take place, 1Co_15:51; and so here he communicates the mystery of the Divine economy in relation to the results of the conversion of Jews and Gentiles, and especially of the final, universal conversion of Israel.

Lest ye should be wise in your own conceits[ἱ̓να μὴ ἦτε ἐν ἑαυτοῖς φρόνιμοι. See Textual Note21.—R.] Meyer: According to your own judgment. The Apostle foresees that, in the Gentile Christian Church, there will arise respecting Israel’s future contemptuous decisions of the unilluminated and self-sufficient judgment. [Calvin, Beza, Stuart, refer it to pride in their own position; but Meyer, De Wette, Hodge, and most, agree, with Dr. Lange, in applying it to a wrong view of the exclusion of the Jews.—R.]

That hardening in part is happened to Israel[ὅτι πώρωσις ἀπὸ μέρους τῶ Ἰσραήλ γέγονεν. On πώρωσις, see Rom_11:7.—R.]Ἀπὸ μέρους; according to Calvin, qualitative, quodammodo, and not total hardening; yet it evidently refers to the unbelieving portion of Israel. [De Wette, Meyer, Hodge, join it with γέγονεν, not with πώρωσις or τῷ Ἰσραήλ (Estius, Fritzsche): Hardening has happened in part. Most commentators now adopt the extensive, rather than the intensive signification.—R.] This hardening of a part has befallen all Israel.

Until the fulness of the Gentiles [ἄκρις οὗ τὸ πλήρωμα τῶν ἐθνῶν]. For then the hardening shall cease. Meyer: “Calvin’s ita ut is alleged, in spite of the language, to remove the thought of a final object; on which account Calovius, and most, elaborate here a good deal, in order to bring out the sense that partial blindness, and therefore partial conversion, will last until the end of the world.” [With Tholuck, Hodge, Alford, and others, we must insist that a terminus ad quem is here affirmed.—R.]

The fulness of the Gentiles. Interpretations: 1. The completion of the Israelitish people of God by believing Gentiles (Michaelis, Olshausen, and others); 2. The great majority of the Gentiles (Fritzsche) [Stuart, Hodge: the multitude of the Gentiles.—R.]; 3. Meyer, strikingly: “The filling up of the Gentiles—that is, that by which the body of the Gentiles (only a part of whom have as yet been converted) is full—the fulness of the Gentiles.” [So De Wette. This makes it = πλήρωσις.—R.] As the Apostle could not have meant an indefinite mass of Gentiles, nor yet all the Gentiles down to the last man, he evidently had in view an organically dynamic totality of the heathen world, in which he unquestionably bethought himself of the conversion of the Gentile world. [Alford: The totality of the Gentiles, as nations, not as individuals. This is substantially the view of Lange, and differs but little from that of Meyer. “The idea of an elect number, however true in itself, does not seem to belong to this passage.” Wordsworth is not likely to favor a predestinarian view, and yet he finds in πλὴρωμα the notion of the complement of a ship’s crew—i. e., of the Church, the Ark of Salvation!—R.]

Come in [εἰσελθῃ. Shall have come in (Noyes)]. In the absolute sense; therefore, into the kingdom of God (Mat_7:13, &c.). Meyer says, oddly enough: “The kingdom of the Messiah, the establishment of which is later, is not yet in question.” [Meyer refers to the personal reign of the Messiah, beginning with the Second Advent. This period, on which he lays great stress in his commentary, will come in, he thinks, after the event here predicted.—R.]

Rom_11:26. And so. Οὕτως, in this order and succession, and in this mode of accomplishment; after the conversion of the Gentiles, and by means of it.

All Israel [πᾶς Ἰσραήλ]. This is not spoken of all Israel in isolated examples, nor of the “totality” without exception. The former supposition, for example, that only the elect part, the true λεῖμμα, is meant (Bengel, Olshausen, and others), or only the greater number and mass (Rückert and Fritzsche), does not arrive at the idea of the nation, which here, in its totality, as all Israel, comes just in antithesis to the mere λεῖμμα. The latter supposition (Gennadius, Meyer, and others) transcends the idea of the Pleroma, which will suffice here in the case of the Jews as in that of the Gentiles.

This simple apostolic prophecy, pronounced directly in the future, has been much criticized, and much fanaticism has played about it.

Definitions narrowing the meaning: (1) The spiritual Israel of the elect, from Jews and Gentiles (Augustine, Theodoret, Calvin, Bengel, Olshausen [Wordsworth], &c.); (2) An election from Israel will be saved in the millennial kingdom (Baldwin, Bengel). “The one hundred and forty-four thousand of Rev_7:4, in which the number is literally interpreted as the principal citizens of the city of Jerusalem;” (3) Israel will be able to be saved (Episcopius, Semler, and others); (4) The prophecy has already been fulfilled by the myriads of Jews, of whom Eusebius speaks, 3:35 (Wetstein, and others); (5) Luther, as Jerome before him, has fallen into glaring contradictions in relation to this question (see Tholuck, pp. 629, 630, and the quotation in Meyer, note, on p. 439); and on this point Melanchthon has proved, by his vacillations, his fear of Luther’s decisive declarations on the hopelessness of the Jews (Tholuck, p. 630). On the further shape which Lutheran exegesis has taken on this point, see the same. With Spener there came a change.

In opposition to all these, there are definitions exaggerating the meaning: (1) The πᾶς must be so much emphasized, as to lead us to suppose that Israel, dying in unbelief, will be raised from the dead for the realization of this hope (Petersen, Mystische Posaune; see Tholuck, p. 628). (2) We do not include here the idea of a return of the main part of the Israelites, as a nation, to Palestine, but the ideas that a special Jewish Church will again arise—that a temple will be built in Jerusalem, in which a sort of restitution of the Israelitish worship will take place, and that then the Jewish people will stand as the preferred priestly and noble people in the midst of the believing Gentile world (comp. Tholuck’s quotations, p. 625, in addition to which many others might be easily collected).

These fanatical apologists for Judaism should not forget that Israel has fallen so deeply, just because of such aristocratic and priestly claims to the messianic sphere of salvation, and that the only help for it is to acquiesce modestly in the glory of the New Testament spirit of Christ, and to take its place among the Gentile Christian nations as a fully authorized Christian nation, without legal privileges, but full of an humble sense of its long apostasy, yet in the power and demonstration of the Spirit, which will then be imparted to it according to its gift—that is, according to its great natural state transformed by grace. The scholastics Abelard, Thomas Aquinas, and others, had in view the proper mean, a conversion of the collective tribes, or tribal fragment, of the nation, but not the conversion of each individual, which is qualified as such by free self-determination. The hope of Israel’s conversion has been warmly defended in the Reformed Church; first by Beza. See Tholuck, p. 629 ff.53

The question of the source from which Paul drew this μυστήριον has engaged much attention. Tholuck, following in the wake of others, properly calls attention to the fact that the Apostle’s quotations from the prophets were given by him as a warrant of his hope, but not as its ground; p. 625 ff. Paul, as an Apostle, was also a prophet, apart from the consideration that he could already find the germs of this prophecy in the gospel tradition (see Mat_23:39; Joh_12:32). However, we take for granted that he could have drawn his warrants from the Old Testament as freely as he desired, though Tholuck raises the question why he did not do this, but contented himself with citing two passages not belonging to that class, and of doubtful relevancy (the declarations cited by Auberlen, p. 625). We must here refer to biblical theology, as well as to the writings which have treated especially on this eschatological part of the theology of the Old Testament.54

There shall come out of Zion, &c. [Ἥξει ἐκ Σιών, κ.τ.λ. Forbes makes the four lines of the quotations correspond alternately: covenant-promise—removal of sin.—R.] The two connected quotations are from Isa_59:20; Isa_27:9; not (according to Calvin [Stuart], and others) from Jer_31:33, although there is a kindred sense.55 They are freely treated, and joined together (from the LXX.). Yet, in reality, they perfectly answer to their application. We must not forget that the armor of deliverance which the Lord puts on, according to Isa_59:17 ff., is a further enlargement of the armor of the Messiah in Isa_11:5 ff. Now, if we adhere to the position that prophecy makes no retrograde movement—that therefore Jehovah, instead of the Messiah, must denote a progress—the passage cannot be understood merely to denote the first appearance of the Messiah, as Isaiah 11, but, in any case, the eschatological appearance of Jehovah is also conjoined in the Messiah. This is favored by the grand expression in Rom_11:19. The Apostle, with his usual masterly skill, therefore makes use of the proper passage here, similarly to the exegesis of Christ, which has also been a subject of surprise to many expositors.

The original text (Isa_59:20-21) reads: “And the God (Redeemer) shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression (פֶשַׁצ) in Jacob, saith the Lord. As for me (on my side), this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord: My Spirit,” &c. The Septuagint: καὶ ἥξωι ἕνεκεν Ζιὼν ὁ ῥυόμενος, καὶ ἀποστρέψει ἀσεβείας ἀπὸ Ἰακώβ, ειπεν χύριος. Καὶ αὕτη αὐτοῖς ἡ παρ’ ἐμοῦ διαθήκη, εἶπεν κύριος, τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἐμόν, κ.τ.λ. Chap. 27. also treats of the restoration of Israel. Rom_11:6 gives the more definite starting-point. The sense of Rom_11:8 is: God punishes Israel with moderation. The form of this punishment is hardening, and being carried off as by an east-wind storm. Then we read: “Therefore (by this means) shall the iniquity of Jacob be purged; and this is all the fruit (the use) to take away his sin.” The LXX.: Αιὰ τοῦτο ἀφαιρεθήσεται ἡ ἀνομία Ἰαχώβ, καὶ τοῦτό ἐστιν ἡ εὐλογία αὐτοῦ, ὅταν ἀφέλωμαι αὐτου τὴν ἁμαρτίαν. Paul took into consideration three modifications: (1) From Zion, instead of for Zion, in which we must not forget that also in Isaiah Jehovah must come from Zion for Zion; (2) The original text assumes conversion at the announced redemption; with the Apostle it was self-evident that the redemption precedes the conversion; (3) The Apostle describes the new covenant with Israel, by inserting the passage from Isaiah 29; that is, he here describes the purging and taking away of Jacob’s sin as the essential part of the covenant, instead of the promise of the impartation of the Spirit, in Isaiah 59, because he knows that both are indissolubly connected. Yet these modifications of form do not prevent the citation from being a proof, as Tholuck supposes. See, on the further exposition of this passage, Tholuck, p. 631.

[Tholuck: “How came the Apostle, if he wished only to express the general thought that the Messiah was come for Israel, to choose just this citation, consisting of two combined passages, when the same is expressed more directly in other passages of the Old Testament? I believe that the ἥξει gave occasion for the quotation: if he did not refer this directly to the second coming of the Messiah, yet it admitted of being indirectly applied to it.”—R.]

Rom_11:28. As touching the gospel, they are enemies [κατὰ μὲν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐχθροί]. As enemies, they are said, by Meyer and Tholuck, to be hostilely treated by God [Alford, Hodge] (Tholuck: invisi deo). But it is difficult to establish the antithesis, that they can be simultaneously odious to, and beloved by, God, except in different relations. See the Exeg. Notes on Rom_5:10 [p. 165]. Other explanations: regarded by Paul as enemies (Grotius, Luther); enemies of God (Thomas Aquinas, Bengel). According to the gospel—that is, according to the relation of the gospel to believers and unbelievers—they are enemies; this means not merely that they are adversaries of the gospel (Chrysostom, and others), but that, as adversaries of the gospel, they are regarded by God as adversaries, and then by His messengers also—for your sakes [δι’ ὑμᾶς]: from the ground of the saving economy already set forth.

But as touching the election, they are beloved [κατὰ δὲ τὴν ἐκλογὴν ἀγαπητοί]. We would here also protest against the favorite division: beloved of God, or of the Apostle, or of Christians. They are enemies in their falling out with the gospel, yet they are favorites according to the election, but simply for the sake of their connection with the fathers.—For the fathers’ sakes [διὰ τοὺς πατέρας]. Meyer says: in favor of the patriarchs; the sense is, because they are included in general in the election of the fathers; according to Rom_11:28, are made partakers in the gifts of the fathers, in the call of Israel.56

Rom_11:29. Without repentance [ἀμεταμέλητα. The reference here is evidently national, not individual, though the proposition is general in its form and force.—R.]. Unrepented. Irrevocable in the sense of a Divine, ethical, and self-conditional result (see 2Co_7:10).

Rom_11:30. For as ye, &c. [ὥσπερ γὰρὑμεῖς. See Textual Notes24, 25.] The Gentiles.—Formerly disobedient. The ἀπιστία is ἀπείθεια toward God’s word, which was promulgated to the Gentiles by the creation (Rom_1:21). [Forbes finds, in Rom_11:30-32, a six-lined stanza, two lines in each verse, with the alternating thoughts: Disobedience—mercy, recurring three times.—R.]

Rom_11:31. That through the mercy shown to you they also may obtain mercy [τῷ ὑμετέρῳ ἐλέει ἵνα καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐλεηθῶσιν. We accept (with E. V., Hodge, Meyer, De Wette, Alford, and most) a trajection of the ἵνα.—R.] Meyer would join τῷ ὑμετέρῳ ἐλέει to what follows: “In order that, by the mercy manifested to you (which mercy provokes them to jealousy of your faith; Rom_11:11), mercy might be shown to you.” This construction must be rejected outright, because by it the Apostle would say to the Gentiles what is both ill-bred and untruthful, namely, that their conversion was merely a means for the purpose of the further conversion of the Jews.57 The opposite construction: non crediderunt in vestram misericordiam (Vulgate), emphasizes the conversion of the Gentiles as an end in itself, and then makes the further purpose of the conversion of the Jews, thereby brought about, to follow.

Rom_11:32. For God hath shut up all under disobedience [συνέκλεισεν γὰρ ὁ θεὸς τοὑς πά ντας εἰς ἀπείθειαν. On the verb, comp. Gal_3:22-23, Textual Note26, and below.—R.] That is, the Jews as well as the Gentiles. According to Meyer, all and every Gentile and Jew are meant, and not merely the masses of both (according to Tholuck, and others). True, the masses are, in a certain sense, the all-concluding; yet, strictly emphasized, all and every one cannot be spoken of, because the question is not simply the fall of man, but the generic consequences of the fall (Vulgate and Luther have the neuter). [The neuter is probably borrowed from Gal_3:22. The sense is the same, whether we accept the view of Meyer or that of Tholuck; but by pressing the former in the second clause, a conclusion might be inserted, which Meyer himself does not accept, viz., the actual exercise of saving mercy in the case of every individual.—R.]

But what does shut up mean? Meyer would explain it, according to the peculiarity of the later Greek: to give over to, or under, the effective power, but not merely a declarative (Chrysostom, and others), or permissive power (Origen, and others). [Meyer, Alford, and others, remark that the συν in composition strengthens the simple verb, without, however, introducing the idea of shutting up together.—R.] The real explanation of the expression is contained in Rom_5:12 and Gal_3:22. The state of the totality of men (their being shut up under disobedience) is based on the organic (generic, social, political, and sympathetical) connection. By the organic connection, all men are shut up in the consequences of the fall. Then, by the organic connection, the Gentiles are first shut up in the process of unbelief (see chap. 1); and in the same way are the Jews also shut up by means of this organic connection (chap. 2). In the collective character of the history of the world, this makes a collective conclusion [Zusammengeschlossenheit]. Thus the Jews, by their organic connection (according to Gal_3:22), were shut up under the law, as it were, in a prison or place of custody58 (ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκεκλεισμένοι); although, after the confinement was abolished, it turned out that they consisted of two parts, the children of the bondwoman and the children of the freewoman. Thus it could only come to pass, by the fearful power of the connection of the universal currents, that sin should be consummated in unbelief under God’s judgment, in order that sinners might become receptive of Divine mercy (Rom_5:20; Rom_7:13).

In order that he may have mercy upon all[ἵνα τοὐς πάντας ἐλεήσῃ]. The purpose of this authoritative judgment of God (that is, of this Divine hardening, which was carried constantly further by the reciprocal action with human guilt) was, first, that fulfilment in the ancient time, when the heathen world was ripe for mercy, and will be hereafter the fulfilment of the New Testament time, when Israel shall be ripe for mercy.

[Alford remarks on τούς πάντας in the two clauses: “Are they the same? And, if so, is any support given to the notion of an ἀποκατάστασις of all men? Certainly they are identical, and signify all men, without limitation. But the ultimate difference between the all men who are shut up under disobedience, and the all men upon whom the mercy is shown, is, that by all men this mercy is not accepted, and so men become self-excluded from the salvation of God. God’s act remains the same, equally gracious, equally universal, whether men accept His mercy or not. This contingency is here not in view, but simply God’s act itself. We can hardly understand the οἱ πάντες nationally. The marked universality of the expression recalls the beginning of the Epistle, and makes it a solemn conclusion to the argumentative portion, after which the Apostle, overpowered with the view of the Divine mercy and wisdom, breaks forth into the sublimest apostrophe existing even in the pages of Inspiration itself.” Comp. Doctr. Note 21.—R.]

Rom_11:33. Oh the depth of the riches, and Wisdom, &c.[ὦ βάθος πλούτου καὶ σοφίας, κ.τ.λ. In the English, that interpretation has been followed which regards the three genitives, πλούτο υ, σοφία ς, γνώσεως, as coördinate. Θεοῦ is joined with all three.—R.] Constructions:

A. What a depth: 1. Of riches; 2. Of Wisdom 3. Of knowledge (Chrysostom, Grotius, Olshausen, Philippi [Hodge, Alford, De Wette], &c.

B. What a depth of riches: 1. Of Wisdom 2. Of knowledge (Luther, Calvin, Reiche).59 Meyer says, in favor of the first construction: “As Rom_11:33-34 portray the σοφία and γνῶσις, but Rom_11:35-36 the πλοῦτος θεοῦ, the former construction is preferable.” Besides, the depth of the riches would be, in a certain measure, tautological. But βάθος can also not (according to the same writer) mean “the great fulness and superabundance,” because there would merely result such a tautology. The depth, whose outward figure is the ocean, is also a spiritual depth (see the quotations in Meyer). There is also another sort of fulness, as a rich and fruitful plain. Here God’s miracles are obscured by a holy darkness. But the riches of God are not merely God’s riches of grace in the special sense, for the fulness of creation and the treasures of redemption constitute a more general unity in the all-sufficiency of God. This is the entire ontological and soteriological foundation of God’s kingdom. If, now, σοφία be defined as the exercise of God’s designing attribute, the idea also usually includes the knowledge and choice of means; here, however (according to Meyer, for example), γνῶσις denotes the knowledge of means. Proof: αἱ ὁδοὶ αὐτοῦ, His measures, must be referred to the latter. But the ways have just as decided a relation to the starting-points as to the final points, and we would here also hold to the distinction: γνῶσις relates chiefly to the ἀρχαί and its consequences, and σοφία chiefly to τέλη and their premises.60

How unsearchable, &c. [ὡς ἀνεξεραύνησα, κ.τ.λ. See Textual Note27. Meyer refers αἱ ὁδοὶ αὐτοῦ to γνῶσις, τὰ χρίματα αὐτοῦ to σοφία; the former in the sense of His modes of dealing, His economies, the latter, His judicial decisions (as Rom_11:32). So Tholuck, but the distinctions are very subtle. See below.—R.] The most unsearchable character of God’s judgments consists in His causing redeeming acts to arise from them (Genesis 3 : the flood; the Egyptian plagues; the Babylonian captivity; the cross of Christ); and the peculiarity of His ways as past finding out, consists in His leading the minds which He has created through byways, circuitous paths, apparently contrary roads, and even impassable roads, safely to their object (see Job_5:9; Job_9:10; Job_34:24).

Rom_11:34. For who hath known the mind of the Lord? &c. [τίς γὰρ ἔγνω νοῦν κυρίου; κ.τ.λ.] Isa_40:13, “almost exactly” from the LXX. The mind took knowledge of the object; the counsel took knowledge of the ways. Or, the former word applies to the γνῶσις, the latter to the σοφία (Theodoret, and others). In wisdom He is exalted even above the understanding of man (“My thoughts are not your thoughts”), with respect to His counsel, above the necessity of man’s being a counsellor with Him; finally, with respect to His riches, no one has enriched Him or given to Him so that He had to recompense unto him again; He is the absolute source of all good things.

Rom_11:35. Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? [ἣ τίς προέδωκεν αὐτῷ καὶ ἀνταποδοθήσεται αὐτῷ; See Textual Note29, for the text of the Hebrew and LXX.—R.] From the original text of Job_41:11. No gift must be regarded as a recompensing of God.

Rom_11:36. For of him, and through him [ὅτι ἐξ αὐτοῦ καὶ δἰ αὐτοῦ]. The negation of the previous proposition is carried out positively in the completion of the doxology. All things are of Him. He is the original fountain, original ground and author.—Through Him. Preservation, government, redemption.

And unto him [καὶ εἰς αὐτόν]. Toward Him as end. That He may become all in all (1Co_15:28); He is glorified in all, and all is glorified in Him. Meyer says: “In so far as every thing serves God’s purposes (not merely God’s honor, as many would have it).” But every thing always serves God’s purpose. Yet the final, absolute glorification of God cannot be separated from the purpose of the revelation of His δόξα in Christ, and by Him in His children, His inheritance.

Ambrose, Hilary, Olshausen, Philippi, and others, have regarded this passage as an expression of the relation of Father, Son, and Spirit.61 Meyer opposes this, by urging that neither Chrysostom, Œcumenius, Theophylact, Calvin, nor Beza, have referred to the Trinity in their expositions. The context speaks simply of God the Father. Yet it cannot be doubted, if we take into consideration other passages of the Apostle (for example, 1 Corinthians 15; Colossians 1), that Paul here had in mind at least the difference of the revelations of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is certain that the view of God’s absolute unity predominates here, but not therefore in the exclusive, doctrinal definiteness of God the Father. The Trinitarian relation lies beyond subordinationism.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. While the whole of Paul’s Epistle to the Romans has been called a “christological philosophy of the history of the world and of salvation,” the term applies more specially to the section chap. 9–11, and preëminently to chap. 11.

2. God has not cast away His people: Proofs: (1) The public history of Israel: Paul and his Jewish companions in faith; (2) Israel’s concealed history, disclosed by God’s declaration to Elijah; (3) The teleology of the partial blindness of Israel: a. a condition for the conversion of the Gentiles; b. then this a condition for the conversion of the Jews; c. then this, finally, a condition for the completion of God’s saving work on earth; (4) God’s exercise of judgment on all humanity has always a merciful purpose—that is, deliverance and restoration. The history of proselytes proves that the attraction of the Jews to faith is constantly fulfilled in the individual.

3. The history of the seven thousand hidden worshippers of God at the time of Elijah, a type of similar cases in all ages. Not merely the heroic witnesses for God’s honor are His people, but all who do not bow the knee to idols. The kingdom of God has not merely its lions, but also its doves. The mildness of the Divine judgment on the remnant of piety on earth, in antithesis to the severity and indignation of the human zeal of the well-meaning servants of God.

4. God preserves at all periods, even in the worst, a λεῖμμα κατ̓ ἐκλογὴν χάριτος. When the enemies of the gospel think that Christianity will soon decline, they miscalculate, especially on two or three points: (1) They do not observe that the blight of division is unavoidable in their own camp; (2) That a new Divine seed of Divinely chosen children, of sincere adversaries converted and led by God, and of courageous witnesses for God, are in His plan; (3) That every direction which apostasy takes, leads to a dispersion and taint like that of the Jews, while the deep current of the world’s history takes its course with God’s kingdom. This confidence is resplendent even throughout the Old Testament, and especially in the prophets.

5. Rom_11:6-7. The unanswerable syllogism of the evangelical Church against the decree of the Council of Trent (see Exeg. Notes). To seek grace beyond works is an ἐπιζητεῖν, comprising in itself a self-contradiction.

6. Rom_11:8-11. The twofold judgment of blindness: a. By external, seeming happiness (see Rom_2:4); b. By inward disobedience, whose fundamental characteristics are presumptuous blindness and inconsolable, cowardly despondency in relation to the highest good.—On the process of hardening as a continual reciprocity between human offence and God’s sovereign judgment, see Exeg. Notes on chap. 9. On Jelaledin Rumi’s doctrine of predestination, see Tholuck, p. 595.

7. From the fact that judgments on unbelievers are remedial judgments, which are the means of producing faith in the elect, there follows the expectation that the judgments are not of an eonic, but of an economic nature. God always seeks, through the believers, indirectly to reach again the unbelievers. Therefore the messengers of salvation must shake the dust from their feet when they are not received. That is, they must go farther and farther! The gospel went from Mesopotamia to Jerusalem, from Jerusalem to Rome, from Rome to Wittenberg and Geneva; and in roundabout ways and circles it again goes from New York to Jerusalem and Mesopotamia. Nearness and farness in God’s kingdom are not determined by geographical and national proximity and remoteness, but by the relations of spiritual life.

8. The idea of the temporary filling up of the breaches made by the unbelief of the Jews by means of the heathen, has penetrated, though in obscure form, even the Talmud (see Tholuck, p. 600).

9. On the reflection of the truth of the historical character of the Acts of the Apostles, in Rom_11:11, see Tholuck, against Baur, p. 602. See the same, p. 606, for Origen’s view that the number of saints is definite; which, indeed, only has an incidental importance for the question before us (see Exeg. Notes).

10. The tragical fate of the Jews. Their fall the riches of the world, notwithstanding they number among them the richest people; their casting away the reconciling of the world. This latter thought refers to the crucifixion of Christ. Such a tragical judicial fate is such a profound enigma of Divine sovereignty, that not only the whole course of the world, but also the future world and eternity, belong to its full glorification in the light of Divine mercy.

11. As the wild olive tree enters into a relation of exchange with the good olive tree by giving to it earthly nutriment, or nutriment for development and for strengthening the stock, while, on its part, its branches are made good, so have the nations brought new organs to Christianity, in order to receive from it the Divine spirit of life. Germany may exult, in a special sense, in having done this, but nothing further. If we arrogantly identify German Christianity with Lutheranism,62 the boast has a German Catholic sound; it is a boast of the branches—of only the grafted branches against those branches previously standing—yea, against the root itself.

12. The figure of the relation between the root and the branches condemns that entire theory of the development of Christianity, which the school of Baur has colored according to the Hegelian principles of history.

13. Rom_11:20-21. Tholuck: The predestinarian view here becomes involved in difficulty, in so far as it traces not only faith, but also unbelief, to the Divine causality. Evidently, the exclusion of the Jews is here designated as the result of their own guilt, &c.

14. On the possibility of falling from grace, see Meyer, p. 435, on Rom_11:23. Sealed believers are not here specially spoken of, but, in a general way, the called, the awakened.

15. There subsists not only an antithesis and a relation of degree between the wild olive tree and the good olive tree, but also a natural affinity, which, as well as the heterogeneousness, comes into consideration in the application of the figure.

16. On the discussions of recent theology respecting the relation of the Old Testament to the prophecy of the Apostle about the restoration of Israel, see Tholuck, p. 625.

17. In spite of the Apostle’s warning, the grafted branches have in many ways boasted against the natural branches. Under this head belong the conduct of Christians toward the Jews, the judgments passed upon the capability of the Jews for conversion, and, finally, the opinion pronounced on converted Jews. Here belong also the predestinarian appeals to God’s decree, under a disregard of the ethical conditions.

18. The mystery. Tholuck: “According to the ecclesiastical definition, res captum humanœ rationis tum regenitœ quum irregenitœ transcendens (Quenstedt, 1:44). According to the later expositors, on the contrary, it means, at least in Paul, unknown truths, hitherto concealed from humanity, and only known by revelation (Rückert, Fritzsche, Meyer, and Philippi).” The latter, or formal idea of the mystery, underlies the former, the material one. This is proved by 1Ti_3:16. But it is clear, from Rom_11:33, that a mystery, in the material sense, is so called because it is of unfathomable depth; not because it merely extends beyond the human understanding in the abstract sense—or, in other words, because it is not attainable by the understanding—but only by the believing intellectual perception, because it ever reveals itself, in its Divine depth, in infinitum, but not because it should remain in infinitum an unsolved enigma.

19. Meyer acknowledges that the conversion of all Israel has not yet taken place; but he adds, that it lies in a very distant time, although the Apostle has regarded the matter as already near at hand; p. 442. This is the usual misconception arising from the failure to distinguish between the religious and chronological idea of the nearness and remoteness of time!

20. On the different renderings of χάρισμα and κλῆσις, see Tholuck, p. 633. A series of insufficient explanations of the συνέκλεισεν in Rom_11:32, is on p. 635; and discussions on the meaning of τοὺς τάντας, on p. 637.

21. It is worthy of note, that the usual doctrine of predestination, as well as the doctrine of restoration, has been connected with the present chapter, particularly with Rom_11:33. This contradiction is adjusted, if, with Schleiermacher, we regard predestination as economical, and restoration as eonic. True, even in that case, the consequence of the former idea is strongly affected by the reference to faith and unbelief as ethical motives for the Divine sovereignty. Against the latter idea, viz., the usual doctrine of the ἀποκατάστασις, Meyer observes, that the universality of the Divine intention does not preclude the partially finite non-realization of it through the guilt of human individuals. But this observation applies also to yesterday and to-day. Important weight rests upon the fact that the συνέκλεισεν, which is similar to fate in the organic connection of men (for example, a Jewish child, born in a Jewish alley, &c.), should be removed by God’s sovereign grace; yea, that the currents of unbelief should give place to a current of faith. Judas has proved that a false individual can, at all events, swim against the stream of salvation. The eons of God and the freedom of man tower above the usual ideas of the apocatastasis, as well as above the usual ideas of eternal = endless condemnation.63

22. The anthology of distinctions between σοφία and γνῶσις, see Tholuck, p. 641. The former (Abelard) constitutes just the reverse of ours: sapientia quantum ad prœscientiam ipsius scientia quantum ad ipsius operis effectum, &c. Tholuck defines the σοφία, according to Proverbs, as the economic and architectural wisdom of God, and the γνῶσις as the knowledge of the nature of the universe. He, in opposition to Meyer, refers the κρίματα to the γνῶσις, and the ὁδοί to the σοφία. On the latter point, we must coincide with Meyer. The ideas: κρίματα and the essence of things, and ὁδοί and architectural dispositions, do not fit very well together. The κρίματα refer to final points; the ὁδοί are at least connected with starting-points. See Exeg. Notes. We must also refer, in reference to Rom_11:36, to Tholuck’s instructive statements.

23. Rom_11:36; comp. 1Co_8:6; Col_1:16; Heb_2:10; also the doxologies in the New Testament, and especially those in Revelation. [Stuart: “Such is the conclusion of the doctrinal part of our Epistle; a powerful expression of profound wonder, reverence, and adoration, in regard to the unsearchable ways of God in His dealings with men; and an assertion of the highest intensity respecting His sovereign right to control all things so as to accomplish His own designs. A doctrine truly humbling to the proud and towering hopes and claims of self-justifying men; a stumbling-block to haughty Jews, and foolishness to unhumbled Greeks. I scarcely know of any thing in the whole Bible which strikes deeper at the root of human pride than Rom_11:33-36.—But sovereignty in God does not imply what is arbitrary, nor that He does any thing without the best of reasons. It only implies that those reasons are unknown to us.—And if our hearts are ever tempted to rise up against the distinctions which God has made, either in a temporal or spiritual respect, in the bestowment of His favors, let us bow them down to the dust, as well as silence and satisfy them, with the humbling, consoling, animating, glorious truth, that ‘of God, and through Him, and for Him, are all things.’ To Him, then, be the glory forever and ever! Amen.”—R.]

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

A. Rom_11:1-6. Has God cast away His people? God forbid! 1. The thought is intolerable to the Apostle as a true Israelite. 2. He repudiates the fact in the most positive manner; because, a. God has provided for His people beforehand; b. In times of great apostasy He has preserved His remnant of seven thousand who did not bow the knee to Baal; c. He will deal likewise with those who have been reserved through grace.—Paul, as a model of truly national feeling. 1. He was a Christian with all his heart; 2. But he was also an Israelite with all his heart (Rom_11:1-2).—The example of the Apostle Paul shows how Christianity and national feeling not only do not preclude each other, but agree very well together.—I also am an Israelite! An expression: 1. Full of manly power; 2. Full of Christian love (Rom_11:1-2).—The example of Elijah. 1. His complaint against Israel; 2. God’s answer for Israel (Rom_11:2-4).—God still has His seven thousand who have not bowed their knee to Baal (Rom_11:4-6).—Let the apostasy be never so great, God never wholly casts away His people (Rom_11:4-6).

Luther: Not all are God’s people who are called God’s people; therefore not all will be cast away, though the greater portion be cast away.

Starke: God’s children often make unnecessary complaints, and if the Lord should answer them, He would not reply in any other way than: “Ye know not what ye should pray for as ye ought” (Rom_11:2).—God can permit no such confusion of ideas, as that we are to be saved partly through grace and partly through merit; Rom_3:28 (Rom_11:6).—Hedinger: God has more saints in the world than we often imagine. Much of the good seed lies under the ground; in the Spring, when the right time comes, it germinates. Be comforted by this truth, ye faithful teachers; Isa_49:1; 1 Kings 19:48 (1Ki_11:1-3).—Nova Bibl. Tüb.: God does not cast us away, if we have not previously cast Him away (Rom_11:1).—You regard that church and congregation as the best one to which the most belong, which the great men in the world honor, and which, therefore, has the most splendor, show, and consideration. Oh, no; it is the small and insignificant number which God has preserved for salvation according to the election. “Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom” (Rom_11:5).—Spener: God looks with other eyes than men’s, and perceives those who were imperceptible to others. Yet such persons did not exist by their own strength, but the Lord has reserved them (Rom_11:4).

Lisco: The fall of Israel is neither altogether universal nor perpetual. The Gentiles’ becoming God’s people, and participants in His kingdom, is a fulfilment of Gen_9:27, that Japheth shall dwell in the tents of Shem.—As surely as unbelief, according to chap. 10, is an offence, so sure is the better disposition of these better ones among the people not any work of theirs, but a work of Divine grace (Rom_11:5-6).

Heubner: There is a divine casting away, the most terrible penal judgment of God, in which He takes His Holy Spirit from man, and quenches the spark of good within him, so that he morally dies out, is without the feeling and power for good, and, shut out from heaven, must bear misery and torment.—This is what pious people since the fall have been anxiously praying God to ward off; Psalms 51 (Rom_11:1).—Elijah believed that he was the only one left. How often does many a pious person believe himself alone! This is a divine trial; but in such hours there also comes equal consolation (Rom_11:3).—There is a seed of good people which never dies out. (Indefectibilitas ecclesiœ.)

B. Rom_11:7-10. The judgment of hardening on the Israelites not belonging to the election. 1. Why is this judgment inflicted upon them? a. Not because it was determined from eternity against them; but, b. Because they, according to Rom_9:30 ff., sought righteousness by works and not by faith, and, accordingly, became guilty themselves. 2. In what does this judgment consist? God fulfils in them what He, a. Has said by Isaiah; b. By David.

Nova Bibl. Tüb.: The terrible judgment of hardening! They have hell, who are smitten and do not feel it; who have eyes, and do not see; who have ears, and do not hear; who have poison and death instead of the bread of life; who have ruin, punishment, and condemnation, instead of strength, joy, and comfort; who have darkness instead of light, and earth instead of heaven.—Cramer: O God, Thou beautiful and clear light, Thou wouldst blind no one; and Thou only dost it as a righteous Judge after one has blinded himself in the power of the devil; 2Co_4:4 (Rom_11:10).—Roos: When the table (where they concoct mischievous devices), where they usually sit unconcernedly and eat good things, becomes a rope, a trap, ruin, and a recompense for the unfaithfulness and violence which they have exercised against others, it is a symbol of all the means by which men unexpectedly become involved in dangers by their words, or, by their deception or power, are led into the hands of their enemies, and sustain real injury (Rom_11:9).

Lisco: The burdens of age—dim-sightedness and crookedness—are likewise a symbol of ruin (Rom_11:10).

Heubner: God has given them such a spirit; that is, He has permitted it to visit them as a necessary consequence, as a righteous punishment, because they made such resistance to the strivings of the Divine Spirit (Rom_11:8). Comp. Act_2:37; Act_7:51.—Man, both the individual and the people, declines into wretched slavery by apostasy from God (Rom_11:10).

C. Rom_11:11-12. The fall of the Jews is the salvation of the Gentiles. 1. No dark fatality rules here; but, 2. The loving providence of God, which continually turns every thing evil to a good purpose.—Nothing is so bad that God cannot make it serve a good purpose.—Providential sovereignty: 1. It is mysterious, in so far as we often cannot understand why it permits evil; 2. It is clear and plain, in so far as it always causes good to come from evil. Comp. Gen_1:20.

Starke, Hedinger: What a great Artificer is God! He makes good out of evil, medicine out of poison, and something out of nothing.—Roos: Has God brought nothing good out of this evil? God forbid! From their fall there has taken place the salvation of the nations, to which the gospel was directed after it had been scorned by the Jews (Mat_21:43; Act_13:46-48; Act_22:18-21; Act_28:27-28), that the latter might be provoked to jealousy by the former.

Gerlach, Calvin: “As a wife who has been cast away from her husband because of her guilt is so inflamed by jealousy that she feels herself impelled by it to become reconciled again to her husband, so shall it now come to pass that the Jews, having seen the Gentiles taking their place, and being pained by their being cast away, shall strive after reconciliation with God;” comp. Eph_5:25-33.

Lisco: God’s wisdom brings good out of Israel’s perversity. Paul does not say that the individual unbelieving Israelite cannot be lost; but there is quite a difference between the individual and the people (Rom_11:11).

D. Rom_11:13-28. How does Paul wish to be regarded by the Gentiles? 1. By all means as their Apostle, who magnifies this his office; 2. But yet, at the same time, as a true friend of his lineal kindred, who wishes to be the means of saving some of them, because they are destined for life (Rom_11:13-16).—The rich mercy shown to Israel; perceptible, 1. From its rejection, which is the reconciling of the world; 2. From its reception, which is life from the dead (Rom_11:13-15).—The figure of the first-fruits as related to the justification of infant baptism; comp. 1Co_7:14 (Rom_11:16).—Likewise the figure of the root and the branches. (Comp. also the Zurich Catechism, Question 73, b.) The figure of the olive tree. 1. The Apostle warns the Gentile Christians against pernicious presumption (Rom_11:17-18); 2. He takes away the strength from such a possible and proud objection on their part (Rom_11:19-21); 3. He exhorts them to behold God’s goodness and severity (Rom_11:22); 4. He also declares to them his joyous hope of the future conversion of Israel (Rom_11:23-24).—The branches do not bear the root, but the root bears the branches. Application: 1. To the relation of children and parents; 2. To the unconfirmed and the Church (Rom_11:18).—Do you stand by faith? Then do not be proud, but fear (Rom_11:20).—God’s goodness and severity (Rom_11:22).—God can graft them in again; as this was the Apostle’s hope for the children of Israel, so is it ours (Rom_11:24).—The future conversion of all Israel. 1. When will it take place? When the fulness of the Gentiles is come into the kingdom of God, and the time of the blindness in part of Israel is past. 2. Why will it take place? a. Because God has promised it by the prophets; b. Because God has once chosen His people; c. Because He does not repent His gifts and call (Rom_11:25-29).—The future conversion of Israel is a mystery, in the sense of Mat_13:11; 1Co_15:51.—The entrance of the fulness of the Gentiles into God’s kingdom. 1. It will be effected by the preaching of the gospel among them; 2. It will take place amid praise and thanksgiving (Rom_11:25).

Starke: It is part of a teacher’s wisdom to address himself especially to every class of men in an assembly (Rom_11:13).—One often falls, and yet by his fall another rises; oh, wonderful and yet holy government of God (Rom_11:15)!—A whole church, a whole ministry, a whole community, and a whole generation, must not be rejected on account of a few fools (Rom_11:16).—The living of the Jews among us in a dispersed way can be of use to us, for the frequent sight of a Jew, and his intercourse with us, remind us frequently of this Pauline admonition (Rom_11:21).—Why should you trouble yourself if you are not remembered in any earthly will as an inheritor of corruptible goods? If you stand in God’s covenant of grace, you are more than rich (Rom_11:27).—Cramer: Let no one forget his origin, for that will teach him to be humble (Rom_11:17).—The human heart is guilty of two sins: it is deceitful, and desperately wicked; Jer_17:9. Therefore God must oppose it by goodness and righteousness (Rom_11:22).—Hedinger: Do not cast away so soon what does not please you. Many sin by doing this. God has many ways to souls. Your neighbor is guilty, and so are you. Shall the Lord cast both away? Bear and forbear. Time produces roses even from thorn-bushes (Rom_11:17).—Oh, how I wish that no one would sin against the poor Jews! Are they not Abraham’s seed, and the lineal kindred of the Church? O God, take compassion on these hardened ones, and remember thy covenant!—The Jews, you say, only steal and cheat; they are a frivolous people! Are you better than they? Cannot God convert them? They hear the word, and so do you; neither you nor they are pious. Which has the greater condemnation—you, or these who are under a judgment? The same blindness will come over you, if you do not turn to Christ (Rom_11:23).—If it is a mystery, who would be so daring as to desire to fathom it? If it is a revealed mystery, who will deny the conversion of the Jews? Though you cannot imagine how it will come to pass, neither can I imagine how those who were formerly Gentiles and servants of the devil, shall now be God’s children and the temple of His Spirit (Rom_11:25).—Nova Bibl. Tüb.: Every thing which God does must be regarded as for our improvement; His judgments to lead us to it, and His mercy and grace to keep us to it, even to the end. Because thy loving-kindness is better than life, my lips shall praise thee; Psa_63:3 (Rom_11:22).—Quesnel: Let no sinner despair! There is no abyss of sin from which God cannot rescue him. He who returns to Him with faith and confidence, will find His bosom open to him (Rom_11:23).

Spener, on Rom_11:23 : We have here the clear testimony that the poor castaway people shall hereafter be received to grace, and be converted to their Saviour; and the promises once given them repeatedly in the prophets, shall be fulfilled in them. From the beginning of the Christian Church down to the present time, this has been taught and believed by its dearest teachers, from many passages of the Old and New Testament Scriptures; and we, too, have no ground of departing from it, or looking more at the hardness of those hearts which appear impossible to be converted, than at God’s promise. Yet the time and manner of God’s effecting the work we should as well commit to Divine wisdom, as rejoice with thanksgiving for Divine grace because of the thing itself; and when such a result is effected, we hope for all the more blessed condition of the Church, but meanwhile heartily pray for the fulfilment of such hope.

Gerlach, on Rom_11:16 : The first figure says, the part has the nature of the whole; the second, the derived has the nature of its origin. The Apostle lays greatest stress upon the latter figure, for he dwells upon it afterward, and portrays it in clearer colors.—The Apostle purposely uses here a very striking figure, from a transaction which did not in reality occur—the grafting of the branch of a wild olive tree on a good stock—in order to show that the Gentiles, in a higher sense than the Jews, are called to salvation “contrary to nature” (Rom_11:24)—that is, by supernatural grace overcoming their nature; comp. Luk_12:37 (Rom_11:18).—Paul calls every thing mystery which man cannot know of himself, and can only perceive by Divine revelation. Previously it was the call of the Gentiles (Rom_16:25; Eph_3:3), but now it is that of the Jews. Comp. Col_2:2; 1Co_15:51 (Rom_11:25).—The continued existence of the Israelites among all the remaining nations—this perfectly isolated phenomenon in history—is therefore designed by God to glorify hereafter His covenant faithfulness by a future total conversion of the people (Rom_11:26).

Lisco: Under what conditions we become and remain participants of God’s grace (Rom_11:22-24).

Heubner, on Rom_11:16 : Honorable forefathers an earnest admonition to their posterity (Rom_11:16).—Nothing more clearly proves the strict righteousness of God, than His judgment on the fallen angels and the unbelieving people of Israel. This should inspire every one with awe, and with solicitude for himself (Rom_11:21).—It is very necessary to bear in mind both God’s severity and goodness; His severity, in order to be preserved from indulgence, false security, and backsliding; and His goodness, in order to be encouraged, and to hope for forgiveness and improvement. God has revealed both. Without the two together there would be no training of men (Rom_11:22).—Israel is without God, because it is without Christ; God has disappeared from the synagogue. He who would find God, must be converted to Christ (Rom_11:26).—The true deliverance of Israel does not take place by civil, but by spiritual, emancipation—the mercy of God. Mercy is the object of the reception of the Jews into the Christian Church (Rom_11:27).—God’s friendship with the patriarchs endures eternally (Rom_11:28).

Besser: It is with Mary, with the shepherds, with Simeon, with the first-called disciples, with the Galilean women, with the Apostles, and with the pentecostal Church of Jerusalem, and not without or separated from them, that thou, Gentile, hast a share in the root and sap of the olive tree. “Paul loves the little word ‘with,’’ says Bengel, in speaking of the Gentiles; Rom_15:10; Eph_2:19; Eph_2:22; Eph_3:6 (Rom_11:17-18).—See that you are not led into the folly of planting the top of the tree in the earth, and imagining that you bear the root, and that first from you, German blood, the good sap of the olive tree has really received strength and impulse (Rom_11:18).

Deichert (Rom_11:11-21): What serves for the fall of some, must serve for the support of others. 1. Corroboration of this experience generally and particularly; 2. For what should it serve both the fallen and the raised?

E. Rom_11:29-36. God’s general compassion on all. 1. On the Gentiles, who formerly did not believe, but now believe; 2. On the Jews, who do not believe, but shall hereafter believe (Rom_11:29-32).—All concluded in unbelief. 1. How far? 2. To what end? (Rom_11:32.)—The universality of Divine grace (Rom_11:32).—An apostolical song of praise: 1. For God’s fulness of grace; 2. For His Wisdom 3. For His knowledge (Rom_11:33-36).—Every thing is of, through, and in (to) God (Rom_11:36).—To God alone be the honor (Rom_11:36)!

Luther, on Rom_11:32 : Observe this principal declaration, which condemns all righteousness of man and of works, and praises only God’s compassion in our obtaining it by faith.—Starke: God must be the beginning, the middle, and the end of all things (Rom_11:36).—Hedinger: How audacious not only to look upon God’s council-chamber, but to become master of it! Men do not allow their political follies to be known; should we blind ones, then—we who are of yesterday and know nothing—invade God’s wisdom? Job_8:9. O man, be acute with the Scriptures, but not on and beside the Scriptures. Hypercritics mount high, and fall low; and it all amounts to nothing with the Divine Being (Rom_11:33).

Spener: The loftiness of the divine Majesty (Rom_11:33-36).—Roos: What Paul has called the election, he immediately afterward divides into two ideas, gifts and calling, and says that God does not repent them. God has chosen Israel, and remains firm to it. He has from the beginning shown great mercy to this people; and He does not repent of all this. Single branches can, indeed, be cut off, and individual Jews can be lost in great numbers; but the whole tree will not be cut off, the whole people cannot be cast away (Rom_11:29).

Gerlach: God’s purposes for Israel will continue uninterruptedly until the end of the present course of the world; as the fulfilment of all the promises, there is yet to take place a great popular conversion, and a mighty activity within the Church itself. But from all this we cannot conclude that there will be an external restoration of the Jews to a people in the political sense, and their return to the land of Canaan (Rom_11:29).—The survey of the wonderfully glorious saving purpose of God, as He gradually unfolded it in the foregoing verses to the eyes of the Apostle, leads the latter to make, from the bottom of his heart, this exclamation of amazed and adoring wonder. The wisdom of God comprehended the purpose which His love had prompted; and God’s knowledge marked out the way, defined the measure, and ordered the course for its execution. His judgments even on His own children, when they wish to set up their own righteousness, and the ways in which He draws the most remote Gentiles and most hardened Pharisees to himself, are unsearchable; but they are not absolutely and eternally concealed, but the light of revelation is disclosed to man by the Spirit, which searcheth after the deep things of God, and reveals them to those who love God (Rom_11:33-36).

Schleiermacher: The contemplation of the order of salvation, that God has concluded all in unbelief, is also necessary to us for wonder at Divine Wisdom 1. God’s concluding all in unbelief, constitutes the nature of this Divine order of salvation and of redemption through Christ. 2. In this, Divine wisdom is most to be perceived and admired (Rom_11:32-33).—Schweizer: The unfathomable depth of God’s Wisdom 1. We represent this unfathomable depth to ourselves in humility; 2. We lift ourselves up in faith, since therein the ways of Divine wisdom are concealed (Rom_11:33).

The Pericope for the Sunday after Trinity (Rom_11:33-36).—Wolf: How our reflection should be directed to the unsearchable purposes of God. We see, 1. From whence it should proceed; and, 2. To what it must lead.—Ranke: How one can learn to submit to God’s incomprehensible ways: 1. By being humble; 2. By being confident.—Petri: How should we act in regard to the incomprehensibility of God? 1. We should be discreet in our opinions; 2. We should be humble in our disposition: 3. We should be faithful in our work.—Kapff: The Holy Trinity: 1. An unfathomable depth; 2. But an inexhaustible fountain of life.—Florey: Our inability to comprehend God is a reminder that should lead us to a careful reflection. It is: 1. A reminder of the narrowness of our mind, that we should be warned by it against useless subtleties; 2. A reminder respecting the Scriptures, that we should be moved thereby to hold fast to God’s revealed word; 3. A reminder of eternity, that we should thereby think of the perfect knowledge which awaits us in the future world.—Schultz: The Lord’s ways: 1. How God glorifies them before our eyes; 2. To what end God’s glory, which is declared in His ways, summons us.

[Bishop Hall: On Divine severity. With how envious eyes did the Jews look upon those first heralds of the gospel, who carried the glad tidings of salvation to the despised Gentiles! What cruel storms of persecution did they raise against those blessed messengers, whose feet deserved to be beautiful! wherein their obstinate unbelief turned to our advantage; for, after they had made themselves unworthy of that gospel of peace, that blessing was instantly derived upon us Gentiles, and we happily changed conditions with them.—The Jews were once the children, and we the dogs under the table: the crumbs were our lot, the bread was theirs. Now is the case, through their wilful incredulity, altered: they are the dogs, and we the children; we sit at a full table, while their hunger is not satisfied with scraps.—On the necessity of a living faith in Christ. If ever, therefore, we look for any consolation in Christ, or to have any part in this beautiful union, it must be the main care of our hearts to make sure of a lively faith in the Lord Jesus; to lay fast hold upon Him; to clasp Him close to us; yea, to receive Him inwardly into our bosoms, and so to make Him ours, and ourselves His, that we may be joined to Him as our Head, espoused to Him as our Husband, incorporated into Him as our Nourishment, engrafted in Him as our Stock, and laid upon Him as a sure Foundation.—On the incomprehensibility of Divine wisdom. It is unfitting for the vulgar mind to attempt with profane foot to ascend the highest pinnacles of heaven, and there to scrutinize with presumptuous eyes the holy innermost places of God, and to pronounce an opinion on the most profound secrets of the Divine wisdom!—Shall we dare to measure the depths of the Divine law with the diminutive standard of our intellect? Shall we trample on things which even the angels gaze on with awe? But in this respect I do not so much blame the people as the teachers themselves, who have so inopportunely supplied the ears and minds of the multitude with these subjects.

[Farindon: What better spectacle for the Church than the synagogue, in whose ruins and desolation she may read the dangerous effects of spiritual pride and haughtiness of mind, and thence learn not to insult, but tremble?—Take virtue in its own shape, and it seems to call for fear and trembling, and to bespeak us to be careful and watchful that we forfeit not so fair an estate for false riches; but take it, as from the devil’s forge, and then, contrary to its own nature, it helps to blind and hoodwink us, that we see not the danger we are in, how that not only the way, but our feet, are slippery. It unfortunately occasions its own ruin, whilst we, with Nero in Tacitus, spend riotously upon presumption of treasure.—Leighton: Our only way to know that our names are not in that black line, and to be persuaded that He hath chosen us to be saved by His Son, is this, to find that we have chosen Him, and are built on Him by faith, which is the fruit of His love who first chooseth us, and which we may read in our esteem of Him.

[Charnock: On regeneration. The increasing the perfection of one species, can never mount the thing so increased, to the perfection of another species. If you could vastly increase the heat of fire, you could never make it ascend to the perfection of a star. If you could increase mere moral works to the highest pitch they are capable of, they can never make you gracious, because grace is another species, and the nature of them must be changed to make them of another kind. All the moral actions in the world will never make our hearts of themselves of another kind than moral. Works make not the heart good, but a good heart makes the works good. It is not our walking in God’s statutes materially, which procures us a new heart, but a new heart is necessary before walking in God’s statutes.—On the misery of unbelief. Some humbled souls think God is not so merciful as He declares; He swears to expel their doubts. Presumptuous persons think God is not so just; He swears to expel their vain conceits. This sin ties up, as it were, the hands of an omnipotent mercy from saving such a one.

[Tillotson: We are apt to attribute all things to the next and immediate agent, and to look no higher than second causes; not considering that all the motions of natural causes are directly subordinate to the first cause, and all the actions of free creatures are under the government of God’s wise providence, so that nothing happens to us besides the design and intention of God.—If God be the last end of all, let us make Him our last end, and refer all our actions to His glory. This is that which is due to Him, as He is the first cause, and therefore He does most reasonably require it of us.

[Hopkins: Fear God, lest at any time, through any neglect or miscarriage of yours, He should be provoked to suspend His influence, and withdraw His grace from you, and to leave you to your own weakness and impotency, upon whose influence all your obedience doth depend.

[Henry: The best evidence of integrity is a freedom from the present prevailing corruptions of the times and places that we live in;

to swim against the stream when it is strong. Those God will own for His faithful witnesses that are bold in bearing their testimony to the present truth. This is thankworthy: not to bow to Baal when every body bows. Sober singularity is commonly the badge of true sincerity.

[J. Wesley: God always reserved a seed for himself; a few that worshipped Him in spirit and in truth. I have often doubted whether these were not the very persons whom the rich and honorable Christians, who will always have number as well as power on their side, did not stigmatize, from time to time, with the title of heretics. Perhaps it was chiefly by this artifice of the devil and his children, that the good which was in them being evil spoken of, they were prevented from being so extensively useful as otherwise they might have been. Nay, I have doubted whether that arch-heretic, Montanus, was not one of the holiest men in the second century.

[Clarke: The designs are the offspring of infinite wisdom, and therefore they are all right; the means are the most proper, as being the choice of an infinite knowledge that cannot err: we may safely credit the goodness of the design, founded in infinite wisdom; we may rely on the due accomplishment of the end, because the means are chosen and applied by infinite knowledge and skill.

[Barnes, on Rom_11:14 : We may see here, 1. That it is the earnest wish of the ministry to save the souls of men; 2. That they should urge every argument and appeal with reference to this; 3. That even the most awful and humbling truths may have this tendency; 4. It is right to use all the means in our power, not absolutely wicked, to save men. Paul was full of devices; and much of the success of the ministry will depend on a wise use of plans, that may, by the Divine blessing, arrest and save the souls of men.—J. F. H.]

Footnotes:

[1]Rom_11:2.—[The Rec. inserts λέγων; supported by א1. L. It is omitted in א3. A. B. C. D. F., versions and fathers. The probability of an interpolation is so great, that modern editors unhesitatingly reject it.—Some MSS. insert ὃν προέγνω (from the first clause of Rom_11:2) in the first clause of Rom_11:2. The similarity of the clauses readily explains this.

[2]Rom_11:3.—[A free citation from the LXX., 3 (1) 1Ki_19:10 (1Ki_11:14 is almost a repetition of 1Ki_11:10): τὰ θυσιαστήριά σου κατέσκαψαν (Rom_11:14 : καθεῖλαν), καὶ τοὺς προφήτας σου ἀπέκτειναν ἐν ρ̀ομφαιᾳ, καὶ ὑπολέλειμμαι ἐγὼ μονώτατος, καὶ ζητοῦσι τὴν ψυχήν μου λαβεῖν σὐτήν. The Apostle has omitted a few unimportant words, transposed the clauses, substituted μόνος for μονώτατος, and the aorist ὑπελείφθην for the perfect. The LXX. follows the Hebrew closely.

[3]Rom_11:3.—[Καί (Rec א3. D. L.) is omitted in א1. A. B. C. F., by recent editors. The vivacious form of the Greek is restored by the above emendation. So Noyes, Alford, Five Ang. Clergymen, and Dr. Lange in his German text. “Lord, they have killed thy prophets, they have digged down thine altars.”

[4]Rom_11:3.—[Five Ang. Clergymen: I only am left. The above emendation is more strictly literal, although it would answer still better to the μονώτατος of the LXX.

[5]Rom_11:4.—[From 1Ki_19:18, but varying from both the Hebrew and the LXX.; not materially, however. The LXX. reads: καὶ καταλείψεις (complut. ed., καταλείψω) ἐν ̓Ισραὴλ έπτὰ χιλιάδας ἀνδρῶν, πάντα γονατα ἂ οὐκῶκλασαν γόνυ τῷ Βάαλ. Alford: “The Apostle here corrects a mistake of the LXX., who have, for κατέλιπο ν, καταλείψεις. He has added to the Hebrew, הִשְׁאִרְחִי.—‘I have left,’ ‘kept as a remainder,’—ἐμαυτῷ, a simple and obvious filling up of the sense.—Onτῇ ̀Βάαλ, instead of τῷ, see Exeg. Notes. “The italicized words of the E. V. are omitted, although defended to some extent by Dr. Lange, who supplies, in his German text: [der Säule.—מַצֵּכָה—des]. It seems unnecessary to insert a comment of such doubtful correctness.

[6]Rom_11:6.—[Otherwise is sufficiently correct, although ἐπεί, literally, means: since in that case.—Γίνεται, which has been altered in one MS., and taken as = ἐστί, in most versions, is to be rendered exactly. On the meaning, see Exeg. Notes. The simplest view is: ceaseth to be; but Dr. Lange finds more in the expression.

[7]Rom_11:6.—[The whole clause: εί δὲ ἐξ ἒργων. … ἐστὶν ἒργον, is omitted in א1. A. C. D. F., versions and fathers; it is rejected by Erasmus, Grotius, Wetstein, Griesbach, Scholz, Lachmann, Meyer, Tregelles; bracketted by Alford, and in version of Amer. Bible Union (rejected by Five Ang. Clergymen). On the other hand, it is found (with some variations noticed in the following notes) in א3. B. L., the older versions, in Chrysostom and Theodoret (text, not commentary). It is retained by Beza, Bengel, Rinck, Fritzsche, Reiche, Tholuck, by Tischendorf in later editions, Wordsworth, Hodge, Lange. It is difficult to decide, but the critical ground for retaining it is very strong. See Exeg. Notes.

[8]Rom_11:6.—[Rec.: ἐστί, on very slight authority.

[9]Rom_11:6.—[B. has χάρις for ἒργον; either a mistake of the transcriber, or an attempt at explanation. See Exeg. Notes.

[10]Rom_11:8.—[The first clause is a free citation from Isa_29:10. LXX: ὂτι πεπότικεν ὑμᾶς κύριος πνεύματικατανύξεως. Hebrew: כִּי־נָסַךְ עֲלֵיכם יְהוָֹה יוּחַ תַּרְדֵּמָה.

[11]Rom_11:8.—[It is much disputed whether these words are borrowed from Deu_29:4, or from Isa_6:9. The former passage reads thus (LXX.): καὶ οὐκ ἒδωκε...καὶ ὀφθαλμοὐς βλέπειν, καὶ ῶτα ἀκούειν ἒως τῆς ἡμέρας ταύτης. The latter contains the same idea, but still further removed in form from Paul’s language. Dr. Lange thinks both were in mind. In that case, as well as if Deuteronomy is cited, the parentheses must be omitted, so as to join “unto this day” with the rest of the verse. Noyes tones down the telic force thus: “eyes that were not to see, and ears that were not to hear.”

[12]Rom_11:9.—[From Psa_69:23 (E. V., 22). The LXX. is followed more closely than the Hebrew text. The latter is literally: “Let their table before them be for a snare, and to those secure (לִשְלומים), a trap.” (The E. V. in loco, gives an unnecessarily forced and circuitous rendering.) The LXX. renders: γενηθήτω ὴ τράπεζα αὐτῶν ἐνώπιον αὐτῶν εἰς παγίδα, καὶ εὶς ἀνταπόδοσιν, καὶ εὶς σκάνδαλον. The Apostle follows the first clause quite closely, then inserts εὶς θήπαν, and putting σκάνδαλον next, substitutes ἀνταπόδομα for the LXX. equivalent. The main difficulty is with the expression last named. The Hebrew word, according to the present pointing (given above), does not mean requitals, recompense; “although this sense may be deduced from the verbal root (שָׁלַם), and belongs to several collateral derivatives, it has no existence in the usage of the one before us” (J. A. Alexander). The usual explanation is, that the LXX. pointed the word thus, לְשִלּוּמים; for retributions, and the Apostle, finding this meaning in keeping with the spirit of the original, adopted it in the varied form of the text.

[13]Rom_11:10.—[The LXX. version of Psa_69:24 (23) is followed with great exactness. But it varies from the Hebrew text (מָתְנֵיהֶם הַמְצַי, make their loins to waver, or tremble) in the last clause. The meaning is preserved, however. See Exeg. Notes.

[14]Rom_11:13.—[The Rec. D. F. L., fathers, read γάρ א, A. B., versions, δέ. Lange adopts the former, mainly on exegetical grounds; Lachmann, Alford, Tregelles, the latter. C. has οὐν; hence Meyer thinks it impossible to decide which is the genuine particle; nor is it of importance.

[15]Rom_11:13.—[In Rec., L., some versions and fathers, οὐν is omitted; in D. F., μἐν οὐν; both are found in א. A. B. C. De Wette and Tholuck reject both, on exegetical grounds; most critical editors retain μέν, and Meyer accounts for οὐν as inserted because the corresponding δέ was wanting. On the whole, it is safest to retain both, with Lachmann and Alford. Tregelles brackets οὖν.

[16]Rom_11:17.—[The καί (Rec.) is omitted in א1. B. C., but found in א3. A. L. Still another reading in D1. F. Alford rejects, Tregelles brackets, but most editors retain it. If retained, the note of Dr. Lange in loco is correct.—The E. V. has paraphrased συνκοινωνός: with them partakest. The above emendation is more literal.

[17]Rom_11:19.—[The article οί before κλάδοι is omitted in א. A. C. D3. L.; rejected by Scholz, Lachmann, Meyer, Wordsworth (who incorrectly cites B. as omitting it), Tregelles; bracketted by Alford. It is found in B. D1.; retained by Tischendorf, De Wette, Tholuck, Lange. Meyer thinks it is a mechanical repetition from Rom_11:17-18; while De Wette thinks it was omitted on account of the euphony: ὲξεκλάσθησαν κλάδοι. In any case, the reference is to the branches broken off.

[18]Rom_11:20.—[Instead of ὑψηλοφρόνει (Rec., C. D. F. G.), Lachmann and Tregelles adopt ὐψηλὰ φρόνει, on the authority of א. A. B. The first word is so unusual that it was likely to be changed. Most editors follow the Rec.

[19]Rom_11:21.—[The uncial authority is against μήπως. It is omitted in א. A. B. C., but found in D. F. L. It is rejected by Lachmann and Tregelles, bracketted by Alford. But the probability of an omission, because of the future (φείσεται) which follows, is so great, that most critical editors retain it. To obviate the same difficulty, the subj. φείσηται is substituted in Rec., but with no uncial support.

[20]Rom_11:22.—[Instead of the accusative ἀπρτομίαν (Rec., D. F. L.) most editors adopt the nominative, on the authority of א1. A. B. C. The punctuation favors the latter, as the former would be governed by ἲδε, which is separated from it by a colon. The absence of a predicate for the nominatives led to the change. So Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Alford, De Wette, Tregelles, Lange. The same remarks apply to χρηστότης.

[21]Rom_11:22.—[Instead of χρηστότητα (Rec., D3. F. L.), χρηστότης on the authority of A. B. C. D1. א. has χρηστότητος.—Rec., D2 3. F. L. omit θεοῦ, which is found in א. A. B. C. D1. The critical editors generally adopt it, on the ground that it was likely to have been omitted as unnecessary. The later revisions retain and render as above, except Amer. Bible Union, which follows the E. V.

[22]Rom_11:25.—[Rec., with א. C. D, L., reads παῤ ἑαυτοῖς. A. B. have ἐν. The preposition is omitted in F. and some cursives. Lachmann, Tischendorf, Alford, Hodge, Tregelles, adopt ἐν; but the sense is much the same, whichever preposition be adopted. The phrase παῤ ἑαυτοῖς is found in Rom_12:16, and Pro_3:7 (LXX.); hence the probability of an alteration to correspond.

[23]Rom_11:26.—[According to the view of most of the best expositors, the citation is from Isa_59:20-21 (from Ἣξει to διαθήκη, Rom_11:27); the last clause of Rom_11:27 is from Isa_27:9. The text of the LXX., and the more important variations from the Hebrew, will be found in the Exeg. Notes.

[24]Rom_11:28.—[Κατά, according to, as respects, &c. The version of Five Ang. Clergymen adopts as touching, in both clauses; Amer. Bible Union: as concerning. If a choice must be made between the two, the former is preferable, although neither is altogether exact.

[25]Rom_11:30.—[The Rec. inserts καί, on the authority of א3. L., and some versions. It is omitted in א corr.1 A. B. C. D1., versions and fathers; rejected by modern editors generally. Scholz retains it.

[26]Rom_11:30.—[The E. V. confounds here the nearly related ideas of unbelief and disobedience. Later revisions correct the rendering of both verb and noun. Dr. Hodge claims that the E. V. is correct; but it is only inferentially so. These remarks apply also to άπείθειαν (Rom_11:32).

[27]Rom_11:32.—[Concluded, was once a literal rendering of συνέκλεισεν; included (Amer. Bible Union), while it expresses a part of the meaning, is not strong enough; delivered up (Noyes), is an interpretation rather than a translation. It seems best, then, to substitute the simple, literal Saxon: shut up. So E. V., Gal_3:23, though concluded is found in Rom_11:22.—Instead of the masculine τοὺς πάντας, we find τὰ πάντα, and παντα (so Vulg.), but very weakly supported.

[28]Rom_11:33.—[Both ἀνεξεραύνητα and ἀνεξερευνητα are found. The former is supported by א. A. B1.; adopted by Alford, Tregelles (Meyer, De Wette, adopt the latter).

[29]Rom_11:34.—[The aorists of Rom_11:34-35 are rendered by simple past tenses in the Amer. Bible Union, at the expense both of rhythm and strict adherence to the sense of the Hebrew at least.—The LXX. (Isa_40:13) is followed very closely.

[30]Rom_11:36.—[“From Job_41:3 ( Job_41:11, E. V.), where the LXX. (Job_41:2) have τίς ἀντιστήσεταί μοι, κ. ὑπομενεῖ; But the Hebrew is מִי הִקְדִּימַנִי וִאֲשַׁלֶּם, ‘who hath anticipated (i. e., by the context, conferred a benefit) on me, that I may repay him?’ And to this the Apostle alludes, using the third person” (Alford).—R.]

[31][Dr. Lange divides the text so as to include only Rom_11:7-10 in this paragraph, which is the usual division; but here, and in the exegesis, he adds Rom_11:11.—R.]

[32][Wordsworth supposes that he is speaking as an Apostle: “Do not imagine (he says to the Jews) that God cast off His ancient people when He admitted the Gentiles to the Church. No; I, who am His chosen instrument for admitting them, am a Jew.” But this is an inference rather than an interpretation. He also explains “of the tribe of Benjamin:” “the son of Israel by his beloved wife Rachel, not by Leah, or by one of their handmaids 1”—R.]

[33][See Textual Note4: “I am left the only one.”—R.]

[34][Still with Estius, Philippi, Hodge, De Wette, and others, it must be noted that, although the erection of the altars on the high places was originally forbidden in the kingdom of Israel (where Elijah lived), they had become the only places of true worship; and neglect of these would be really neglect of Jehovah.—R.]

[35][The simplest explanation is that which takes this as a definite expression for an indefinite number (Stuart, Hodge, and others), without attaching any special significance to the number seven.—R.]

[36][Wordsworth combines all the explanations: “The reason why the Septuagint sometimes used the feminine, why St. Paul adopts it here, appears to be, because not only a heathen God, but a goddess also (Astarté), was worshipped under the name of Baal, and because, by this variety of gender, the reader is reminded that there was no principle of unity in this heathen worship; and thus the vanity of the worship itself is declared.” The fact that the LXX. uses both, seems to render the italics of the E. V. unnecessary, and to render the interpretation thus assumed very doubtful.—R.]

[37][Alford well remarks: “The object being precision, it is much more probable that the Apostle should have written both clauses in their present formal parallelism, and that the second should have been early omitted from its seeming superfluity, than that it should have been inserted from the margin.” The want of exact correspondence is also against the probability of an interpolation, as Fritzsche has remarked: χάριτι—ἐξ ἒργων; γίνεται χάρις—ἐστὶν ἒργον; ἒργον at the close, where ἒργα might have been expected.—R.]

[38][So Wordsworth, who accepts the very weakly-supported ἐστί of the Rec., and accenting it thus: ἒστι, renders: “there is no longer any place for the existence of grace.” But this is very doubtful.—R.]

[39][The following paraphrase (abridged from Alford) may give a clearer view: “But if (the selection has been made) by grace, it is no longer (we exclude its being) of works (as its source); for (in that case) grace no longer becomes (loses its efficacy as) grace (the freedom of the act is lost, it having been prompted from without): but if of works (as the cause and source of the selection), no longer is it (the act of selection) grace; for (in that case) work is no longer work (work being ‘that which earns reward,’ its character is contradicted).” The same author remarks, that this point is stated so fully just here, because the Apostle was to enter upon such an exposition of the Divine dealings as rendered it necessary to show that their severity did not contradict their general character of grace and love.—R.]

[40][Fritzsche has an Excursus on this word, pp. 588 ff. He makes it = stupor, numbness, as from stupefying wine. Only here, and not in the classics. Incorrect, according to this view; Calvin: spiritus compunctionis; Luther: einen erbitterten Geist.—R.]

[41][Philippi (following Keil) says that the subject in this Psalm is “not the ideal, but the concrete person of the righteous.” Hengstenberg (so J. A. Alexander) adopts the other view.—R.]

[42][The Psalm purports to be written by David. Dr. Lange’s remarks are in support of this view of the authorship, though he finds it necessary, in order to sustain it by internal evidence, to admit the later addition of the concluding verses. The question of authorship does not, indeed, affect the question of the propriety of the phrase: David saith; but when it is so likely that David did write the Psalm, inventing theories to prove that he did not, seems to be useless ingenuity.—R.]

[43][Although ἲνα is telic, as is now held by most commentators, the emphasis does not rest upon it, as though only the purpose were denied, and the fact admitted. Taking οἱ λοιποί as representatives of the whole nation, the Apostle admits the stumbling, and denies the final fall, intimating by his use of ἲνα, that another purpose was involved, viz., the salvation of the Gentiles.—R.]

[44][The fall here must be taken as a less strong expression than the verb which precedes, if the view be adopted that denies the fact of a final fall. We must, then, hold that the national fall into utter ruin is denied throughout, while the stumbling and the moral fall of the individuals are admitted. So Alford.—R.]

[45][So Hodge, Alford: their impoverishment. The numerical idea is quite objectionable, although Dr. Lange seems to think it is included also. The whole verse, according to this view, means: “If their unbelief (i. e., of one part of them) is the world’s wealth, and their small number (i. e., of believers, the other part of them) the wealth of the Gentiles, how much more their full (restored) number?” This arbitrarily changes the reference of αὐτῶν, puts a forced meaning on ἢττημα, and really weakens the force of the argument, which is: if their sin has done so much, how much more their conversion?—R.]

[46][The numerical idea is lexically admissible in πλήρωμα, whence it has been transferred to ἢττημα, but even here it is not the prominent one. It is, however, to be understood, that the spiritual fulness will necessarily include the conversion of the nation as a whole.—R.]

[47][Meyer thus paraphrases: “I seek, indeed, inasmuch as I am he, who has the apostolic mission to the Gentiles (notice the emphatic ἒγώ), to do honor to mine office, but purpose therewith to excite my kinsmen,” &c. This brings out the force of μέν, and the connection of thought.—R.]

[48][There is a lexical objection to taking ἀγρ. ὢν as an adjective, since, when thus used, it means: made out of the wood of the olive (Alford). The reason for adopting this view is to escape from the thought that the whole. Gentile world, as such, was grafted in. This is done quite as properly by supposing the whole tree here put for a branch of it. The tree, moreover, is introduced to recognize the fact of a distinctively Gentile life existing as a whole.—R.]

[49][This last view is that of the majority of the best commentators, and is so natural and obvious, that nothing is gained by departing from it. Meyer intimates that the Apostle’s illustration must be taken in accordance with the fact—i. e., the fact respecting the coming in of the Gentiles—which was undoubtedly the grafting of wild branches on a good tree, to partake of the life and bear the fruit of that good tree. Furthermore, as a fact, there was no new and fresher life imparted by the Gentiles at that time, as Dr. Lange intimates. The Roman and Greek civilization, continually decaying, was only preserved so long by the new religious life from the patriarchal root.—R.]

[50][Both datives are rendered: durch, by Dr. Lange. The E. V., however, varies from because of to by. Alford has the following discriminating note: “ ‘Through’ indicates better the prompting cause of a definite act—‘by ‘ the sustaining condition of a continued state. Thus we should always say that we are justified through, not by, faith; but that we stand by, not through, faith.” Hence the propriety of the rendering of this verse in the E. V.—R.]

[51][As Stuart well remarks, this verse speaks of what can be done; the next, of what will be done. It is greatly to be doubted whether the verse has any bearing on the questions of perseverance, conversio resistibilis, &c., which Meyer, and others, find involved here.—R.]

[52][There seems no good ground for departing from the common rendering. Dr. Lange’s idea about real fresh life in the branches is not admissible. For, although fresh physical and intellectual life has again and again come into the Church from new races, it has always been, for a time, at the expense of spiritual vigor. Not until the new spiritual life, contrary to nature, had been felt, was there any gain by such grafting.—R.]

[53][The view now generally adopted, and supported by Beza, Estius, Koppe, Reiche, Köllner, Meyer, Tholuck, De Wette, Hodge, Stuart, Alford, and a host of others, is: that the ancient people of God (so marvellously preserved in their distinctive life, as if in earnest of this) shall be restored, as a nation, to God’s favor. With all the modifications of this view from other passages, we have not to do. Thus much ought to be admitted by all fair rules of exegesis.—R.]

[54][The Literature on this subject is very extensive. The passages bearing on this particular point are grouped by Demarest and Gordon, Christocracy, pp. 234 ff. Comp. Meyer, pp. 442 f.—R.]

[55][So Tholuck, De Wette, Meyer, Alford. Dr. Hodge thinks it probable “that here, as elsewhere, he does not intend to refer exclusively to any one prediction, but to give the general sense of many specific declarations of the ancient prophets.” The objections urged throughout against such a view of the Apostle’s citations are applicable here.—Philippi remarks that these citations support the affirmation: “so all Israel shall be saved,” not the continuance of the hardening “until the fulness of the Gentiles come in.”—R.]

[56][The obvious meaning is, that the election of Israel as the people of God involves such a hope of blessing to the children of Abraham, that the mercy will at last coins, even after “thousands of generations.” If the Abrahamie covenant is abrogated, the Apostle’s words have little force.—R.]

[57][Notwithstanding this very strong assertion of Dr. Lange, on the ground of the parallelism, as well as on account of the general thought of the whole passage, the construction of Meyer is to be preferred. The trajection gives emphasis to τῷ ὑμ. ἐλ. The other views are: They are disobedient through the mercy, &c. (Calvin, and others); they have not believed on the mercy shown to you, &c. (Luther, Estius, Lange). But to these there is the same grammatical objection. Tholuck says: with the same mercy; which obviates Dr. Lange’s difficulty, but is against the parallelism.—R.]

[58][Comp. Lange’s Comm. Galatians, p. 85 ff.—R.]

[59]Reiche’s arguments, and the answers given by Tholuck, will be found in Alford in loco.—R.]

[60][Bengel: Sapientia dirigit omnia ad finem optimum: cognitio novit finem illum et exitum. See Doctr. Note22.—R.]

[61][Alford, who is unusually happy in his comments on this chapter, remarks: “If this be rightly understood—not of a formal allusion to the three Persons in the Holy Trinity, but of an implicit reference (as Tholuck) to the three attributes of Jehovah, respectively manifested to us by the three coequal and coeternal Persons—there can hardly be a doubt of its correctness.” “Only those who are dogmatically prejudiced can miss seeing that, though St. Paul has never definitively expressed the doctrine of the Holy Trinity in a definite formula, yet he was conscious of it as a living reality.”—R.]

[62][Lutherthum; Lutherism, rather than Lutheranism. There is no thought of the Lutheran Church, as such, but of that spirit which traces all evangelical Christianity to the great reformer and his associates. If the figure of the Apostle has any special application now, it is against that illogical ultra-Protestantism, which, on the one hand, boasts itself against the mediæval Christianity, and, on the other, denies that any advance can be made beyond the theological thought of the seventeenth century.—R.]

[63][A comparison of Rom_11:32 with Gal_3:22 will assist us in arriving at a correct explanation of its meaning. It expresses a bold, genial, and comprehensive thought, and contains the key to the understanding of the fall, as well as of the whole history of the world. The profound mystery of sin is here solved in the lustre of the Divine wisdom and love. The temporary abasement and neglect of countless individuals, of whole races and nations, is here subordinated to a more profound and exalted plan for general blessing. The Apostle, here and in Gal_3:22, teaches a universality of sin and disobedience, and a universality of Divine grace (so also Rom_5:12 ff.; 1Co_15:21-22), and so places them in bold contrast, that the former must subserve the latter. This universality of grace refers: (1) To the internal power and capability; (2) To the purpose and design; (3) To the proffering of the opportunity, or the calling. God can and will have mercy upon all men, and gives to all (at some period) this opportunity. But further than this we cannot go. Paul does not teach a universalism of actual redemption to all men. The acceptance or rejection of grace is made dependent on belief or unbelief. Hence, in Gal_3:22, he does not say, in the second clause: that the promise might be given to all, but to believers. For redemption is no natural process, no work of necessity, but a free act of God in Christ, and must be apprehended and appropriated in a free moral manner by each individual subject.—P. S.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

cast

That Israel has not been forever set aside is the theme of this chapter.

(1) The salvation of Paul proves that there is still a remnant (Rom 11:1)

(2) The doctrine of the remnant proves it (Rom 11:2-6).

(3) The present national unbelief was foreseen (Rom 11:7-10).

(4) Israel’s unbelief is the Gentile opportunity (Rom 11:11-25).

(5) Israel is judicially broken off from the good olive tree, Christ (Rom 11:17-22).

(6) They are to be grafted in again (Rom 11:23; Rom 11:24).

(7) The promised Deliverer will come out of Zion and the nation will be saved (Rom 11:25-29). That the Christian now inherits the distinctive Jewish promises is not taught in Scripture. The Christian is of the heavenly seed of Abraham; Gen 15:5; Gen 15:6; Gal 3:29 and partakes of the spiritual blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant.

(See Scofield "Gen 15:18") but Israel as a nation always has it own place, and is yet to have its greatest exaltation as the earthly people of God. See "Israel" Gen 12:2; Rom 11:26 "Kingdom"; Gen 1:26-28; Zec 12:8.

For Another Point of View: See Topic 301242

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Israel’s Restoration.

CHAPTER 11

(“The Jewish Question”, by A. C. G., gives a complete exposition of this great chapter.)

1. God Hath not Cast Away His People. (Rom 11:1.)

2. Israel’s Apostasy not Complete; a Remnant Saved. (Rom 11:2-6.)

3. Israel’s Blindness for a Season. (Rom 11:7-10.)

4. To Provoke Them to Jealousy. (Rom 11:11.)

5. Their Fulness and Reception Life from the Dead. (Rom 11:12-15.)

6. The Parable of the Two Olive Trees. (Rom 11:16-24.)

7. A Mystery Made Known. All Israel Saved. (Rom 11:25-32. )

8. The Doxology. (Rom 11:33-36.)

Rom 11:1

In view of the preceding chapter on Israel’s rejection, the question is asked “Hath God cast away His People?” Is there nothing more in store for national Israel? God forbid. If it were so, God’s gifts and calling would be subject to repentance and He would not be the faithful, covenant-keeping God. He foreknew His people Israel and that foreknowledge embraced all their sad history of failure and apostasy. The Apostle Paul speaks of himself as an Israelite of the seed of Abraham. He demonstrates in his own experience the fact that God hath not cast away His people. Hating Christ, having zeal for God without knowledge, a persecutor of the church, he had obtained mercy that in him Jesus Christ might show forth all long-suffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on Him (1Ti 1:16). His unique conversion must be looked upon as a prophetic type of the conversion of the remnant of Israel, when the Lord comes. As Saul of Tarsus saw Him in the glory-light, so the Israel living in the day of the second Coming of Christ will behold Him (Zec 12:10; Rev 1:7). This vision will result in their national conversion.

Rom 11:2-6

The time of Elias was one of the darkest Periods of their history. it seemed as if the whole nation had apostatized from God. Elias had this conception when he complained in his despondency. “They have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.” The Lord told him then that there were seven thousand men who had not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. The apostasy of Israel was not a complete apostasy. The Lord had preserved a faithful remnant. Even so at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. In the beginning of this present age there was in existence a distinctive Jewish remnant. This Jewish-Christian remnant in the beginning of the dispensation was an evidence that God had not cast away His people. A similar remnant of believing Jews will be called for a definite work and testimony during the end of the age. And throughout this Christian dispensation it has been abundantly demonstrated that God has not cast away His ancient people, for thousands of them have been saved by grace and have become members of the body of Christ.

Rom 11:7-10

When the apostle speaks here of the election he has in view the believing part of the nation at all times, the remnant past, the future remnant and all those who believe in Christ now. When he speaks of the rest being blinded he means the unbelieving part of the nation. Judicial blindness has come upon them for their unbelief. Three quotations are given from the Old Testament showing that the Lord foreknew their unbelief and predicted the judgment which was to come upon the nation (Deu 29:4; Isa 29:10 and Psa 69:22-24). A careful study of these chapters will show that the threatened judgments and the judicial blindness are not permanent. All the Prophets and many of the prophetic Psalms reveal the fact that the judgments which have come upon the people are for a season only and that there is glory and blessing in store for them. The curses pronounced upon them have found their literal fulfillment; the unfulfilled promises of blessing and glory will also be literally fulfilled and Israel will be saved and restored to their land.

Rom 11:11

The setting aside of Israel is not final; their present blindness is not their permanent condition. But have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid. They stumbled over Him in whom they saw no beauty and whom they did not desire. They received Him not, who had come to His own. But this did not result in their complete fall. God in His infinite wisdom and all-wise purpose brought by their fall salvation to the Gentiles to provoke them to jealousy. In this statement we see again that God has not cast away His people Israel. If He had cast them away, why should He wish to provoke them to jealousy? And this provoking to jealousy is with the intent that some of them might be saved (Rom 11:14).

Rom 11:12-15

And now the Apostle of the Gentiles addresses us Gentiles. “I speak to you Gentiles.” It is a message of much importance. The fall of Israel was the riches of the world, the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles (Rom 11:13); the casting away was the reconciling of the world. Thus blessing, great blessing came to the Gentiles by Israel’s unbelief and fall. But this is not all. All this is far from accomplishing the promise made to the father of the nation, when God said to Abraham “In thy seed all the nations of the earth shall be blest.” Israel’s fall, the means in God’s purpose to bring salvation to the Gentiles, is not the final thing, and the blessings the Gentiles received by their fall is not the fullest blessing which God has in store for the world. Much more is in store for the world in blessing through Israel’s restoration. To Israel is promised in the Old Testament a time of fulness, a time when they shall be taken back. Their time of fulness comes when Christ returns in power and in glory. If then God brought blessing to the Gentiles by their fall, how far greater will be the blessings for the world, when their time of fulness has come. It will be life from the dead. Israel is now nationally and spiritually dead. They will be nationally and spiritually made alive (see Eze 37:1-17; Eze 39:25-29; Hos 5:15; Hos 6:1-5). And the whole world comes in for blessing then. The nations will be converted and the kingdom will be set up on earth (see Zec 2:10-13).

Rom 11:16-24

The parable of the two olive trees illustrates great dispensational facts and contains solemn warnings for Christendom. The good olive tree typifies Israel in covenant relation with God in the Abrahamic covenant. The olive tree is evergreen; and so is the covenant, unchangeable. Israel’s faithlessness and disobedience cannot annul it. The root is Abraham, who was holy, separated unto God. On account of unbelief some of the branches were broken off. They are now separated from the good olive tree and are withered. The wild olive tree is a picture of the Gentiles. The branches of this wild olive tree are grafted among the branches of the good olive tree to partake of the root and fatness of the good olive tree. The wild olive tree branches grafted upon the good olive tree do not represent the true church. The Gentiles are meant by it, who are, after Israel’s unbelief, put upon the ground of responsibility which Israel had, to partake now of the promised covenant blessings. The grafted in branches represent the Christian profession, Christendom, as we call it. The grafted in branches are solemnly warned. They are not to boast, not to be high-minded; they must abide in goodness. If the warning is unheeded they will not be spared but cut off. And when that happens God will graft in again the natural branches into their own olive tree if they no longer abide in unbelief. God is able to do this. He can and will put back Israel into their former relation. It is prophetic. Christendom is exactly that which is here warned against--boasting, high-minded, not abiding in goodness, in one word, apostate. The unbelief and failure of professing Christendom is as great, if not greater than the unbelief and failure of Israel. The time will come when God will not spare, but execute judgment upon Christendom. He will spew Laodicea out of His mouth (Rev 3:16). Then the hour of Israel’s restoration has come.

Rom 11:25-32

A mystery is made known. Blindness in part has happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. The fulness of the Gentiles means, the full number of the saved, gathered out from among the Gentiles, who constitute the church, the body of Christ. And when the body is joined to the Head in glory, the time of the coming of the Lord for His Saints (1Th 4:17), the Lord will turn again to Israel. All Israel, that is, the all Israel living in the day will be saved, when the Deliverer comes out of Zion (Isa 59:20; Psa 14:7). It is the second, visible, personal and glorious coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob and take away their sins. Between the coming of the Lord for the Saints, who will meet Him in the air, and His coming in great power and glory, are the days of Jacob’s trouble, when the nation will have to pass through the fires of tribulation and the wicked among Israel will be cut off. And after He has come and has taken away their sins, all the great prophecies of Israel’s earthly glory will be fulfilled. Rom 11:33-36.--A doxology closes this dispensational section of the epistle. What depths of riches, both of wisdom and knowledge of God, in His merciful dealings with the Gentiles and the Jews! How unsearchable His judgments! How untraceable His ways! For of Him, and through Him and to Him are all things to whom be glory forever. Amen.

Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Subdivision 3. (Rom 11:1-36.)

How Israel’s portion will be made good to them.

We are now to see how Israel’s portion is yet to be made good to them. We have seen already, that, in fact, the promises of God must be fulfilled. They are not, if we think of those to Abraham, conditioned upon any response on man’s part. God alone is the Speaker in them, and as the apostle tells us in the next epistle (Galatians) the law which was 430 years after could not be added, as a condition to what God had already unconditionally declared. Israel’s portion is then, yet to be made good to them; but this involves another thing. If the special place and privileges of the nation are to be restored, the church subsists only by the breaking down of these very distinctions. In it there is neither Jew nor Gentile, but it is composed of both, united by one Spirit in the body of Christ. Thus, then, the Church must have passed away from the earth before Israel’s promises can be fulfilled. The two could not exist together at the same time, and so it is stated in this chapter; as concerning the gospel, with regard to that, Israel, although always beloved for the fathers’ sakes, is yet treated nationally as an enemy, and it is not, therefore, by the gospel as it goes out at present, that Israel as a whole can be brought back to God.

1. The apostle dwells first of all upon the fact of this present election of grace as declaring God’s unchanged favor towards them. "God," he says, "hath not cast off His people whom He foreknew." That foreknowledge embraced, assuredly, all the history of the people of His choice. He at least could not be disappointed, nor could the evil in them work change in Him. He could certainly never be deceived. The heart of man, which man indeed is incompetent to fathom, He Himself claims to know perfectly. If there is a remnant preserved among them at all, it is an election of grace, and therefore independent of works, as the apostle says here, -of works of any kind. Grace, he adds, becomes grace no longer if works are mingled with it. Through all their history, even at the time of most complete national apostasy, still, as he reminds us here, there was ever a remnant. Elias, even, could make intercession to God, alas, against Israel. "Lord," he says, "they have killed Thy prophets and digged down Thine altars, and I am left alone, and they seek my life"; but it was a mistake in every way. God had still reserved to Himself, as He says, 7,000 men who had not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. That was His work, and therefore no power of the enemy could overthrow it. The remnant in Israel is, according to the prophet, the sap of the tree, which, though the tree be cut down, shows nevertheless that there is life in it. If there were no sap, there would be no life; but as long, therefore, as there is a remnant according to the election of grace, Israel still in that sense lives before God.

2. Blindness in part, however, has happened to them. That which Israel sought for, they have not obtained. We have already seen that the most zealous seekers were apparently those farthest from fulfilling the conditions of successful search. "The election hath obtained it," says the apostle, "and the rest were blinded." They have fallen under the judicial sentence of God, as again their prophets witnessed. God had given them such eyes as did not see, and such ears as did not hear.

3. They had stumbled confessedly over the Stumbling Stone. They had not eyes for Christ. They saw "no beauty in Him, that they should desire Him." They had stumbled, but not that they might utterly fall, as is plain from the fact that the salvation of the Gentiles was in order to provoke them to jealousy. God still then was expecting from them what His own grace alone could produce. But then, if such consequences and blessings were the result of their fall, would not their fulness, when it should take place, be for still greater blessing to men at large? If their casting away nationally resulted in the message of reconciliation going out to the world, will not their being received back again be life from the dead? This, as we know, in fact, has been abundantly promised. There is no blessing for the earth apart from the blessing of Israel. There could be no fulfilment of the prophecies of that time of the earth’s blessing without Israel being in the centre of it, as every picture shows Of course, if, for Israel in the prophet we are content to read the Church, then everything will be changed indeed, but God’s word, read in the simplicity of its ample statement, cannot possibly allow of this.

4. The present mercy to the Gentiles is, however, (and that of necessity,) the testing of these also. The witness of what man is must surely go on throughout the ages as man himself goes through them. Solemn it is to realize this in the case of Christianity, with all its fulness of blessing. Men are willing enough to forget what Scripture, however, so thoroughly assures us of. In Paul’s day, the mystery of iniquity was at work; and this was to go on to its end in an apostasy out of which the man of sin, to be destroyed at the coming of Christ Himself, will arise. Grace indeed reigns in the gospel; but if we argue that this means that it is to conquer the world, this is directly denied by Scripture itself. "Let favor (or grace) be shown to the wicked," says Isaiah, "yet will he not learn uprightness." "When Thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness." It is that which we find in Judges with regard to Israel, the King must come. Nothing will do but the coming of the King; and this not because of the power of the enemy simply, for the power of God is with His people and there can be no failure there, but because of the wickedness and failure of God’s people themselves.

The apostle in the type of the olive ignores all that is distinctive of Christianity and speaks of the Gentiles as simply grafted into the place of Israel’s broken off branches. These parables from nature are never pictures of grace in its fulness. In the tree, we have ever considered the responsibility for fruit; so with the vine, whether we look back to the prophet’s application of this to Israel herself, or in the Lord’s application of it to Christian profession now. The vine above all, perhaps, speaks of the necessity of fruit; it is of no use except for fruit; but here we find that there are branches also which are broken off, and in the Old Testament prophet, the vine itself is laid waste and trampled down.

The fig-tree planted in the vineyard now desolate as such, refers to the remnant returned from Babylon in Ezra’s and Nehemiah’s time; but here again the Lord takes up that figure, in order to show God’s expectation of fruit from it, and how, when Christ Himself came, there was still none. Sentence was ready to go forth: "Cut it down, why cumbereth it the ground?" Still His own intercession causes it to be spared for a while yet. It is digged about and dunged; and now, if it will bring forth fruit, well; but, as we know, this was fulfilled when the Spirit of God came down amongst men at Pentecost, and still there was no answer from the people of that day.

The olive again speaks naturally of that in which the Spirit is found, for the oil, as we know, is the type of the Spirit; but the same element of responsibility is found in it. What is looked for may not be there in fact. The branches are broken off for lack of a faith which they never had, and one may partake of the fatness of the olive-tree and yet not have this. The Spirit’s work, in a sense, is implied, but not, as we see, of necessity, any inward work. If the apostle speaks of the lump being holy as the firstfruit was, he is referring to Abraham as set apart to God, and Israel had the same setting apart, but it was not necessarily more than external. The branches and the root are similar.

The root again was Abraham, and it is clear that in Abraham you have, in fact, the first separation to God out of the world that history furnishes. The nations had now gone off into idolatry, gone fully away from God, although we might find exceptionally a Melchisedec amongst them. Out of that general corruption, God separates Abraham to Himself, and thus begins a new principle upon the earth. Israel manifest still God’s principle, however little they realize the spiritual character of it in His thought; however little they might be indeed separate from the mass of the nations round about them.

God acting indeed in His grace in this way has made Israel to be, as it were, the very tree itself into which the Gentiles have now been grafted. Here the New Testament speaks with the Old. As the vessel of the Spirit, who can deny Israel’s special place? Paul himself, the very apostle of the Gentiles, was, nevertheless, not a Gentile, as he puts it here, in the sense in which he is speaking. The Gentile is a wild graft, which, therefore, if grafted into the olive is "contrary to nature." It is, as we know, contrary to nature to graft that which is wild upon the good. Faith is required now, and the branches are broken off, therefore, because they do not answer to this. They are not competent to meet the claim which Christianity makes upon them, and they are broken off from their own olive-tree. Thus, if God be pleased to graft Israel back again, we need not be surprised. The Gentile cannot possibly claim, according to this, to have any necessary right in it, much less to be the whole thing, as he is apt to claim. Israel is only blinded in part until the fulness of the Gentiles is come in.

5. There is a limit to the present blinding; there is a limit to the time of blinding altogether. When, in God’s mind, the complete number of the Gentiles is brought in, Israel will, as a whole, be saved; not, as the apostle says here, by the gospel, but by the Deliverer coming, not now out of Bethlehem, as once He came, to be rejected; but out of Zion. He does not come as the Babe born to the nation any more, but as the King and Conqueror, and then it is when "Every eye" sees Him. "They also who pierced Him" shall see him, and the outburst of confession on the part of the people will be the beginning of their national blessing. Enemies indeed they now are, that is, treated by God as enemies; which does not, of course, refer simply to the enmity in their heart, but that God treats them for what they are, enemies, as to the gospel, -while it goes out, though still the gifts and calling of God abide for them unchangeable.

For us there is a solemn consideration here. How fully that which is characteristically Gentile Christianity has come in the minds of the vast number to be considered the whole thing, scarcely needs to be insisted on. Israel are to be saved, no doubt, but simply by the extension of the blessings of the gospel to them. Christians are that spiritual Israel, which is to bud and blossom, and fill the face of the earth with fruit. Thus the Gentiles have become, in spite of the apostle’s warning against it, "wise in their own conceits." They have indeed thought that they bore the root, rather than the root them, and ignored the conditional footing upon which we, in common with Israel, as the professing people of God, stand. But the apostle brings it out fully here. "Behold, then," he says, "the goodness and severity of God: upon those that fell, severity, but toward thee goodness, if thou continue in His goodness, otherwise thou also shalt be cut off." Now have we -could we venture to say we have -continued in God’s goodness? Who will say so? Why then do we hear so much of revival, and the need of revival, except because of the constant tendency to decline? But is it a tendency only? What does the very Reformation, which we rejoice over so much, bear witness as to the general condition of Christendom at the time in which this took place? What was that of the Romanism out of which the Protestant churches through the mercy of God emerged? Out of Rome, what could we say of the Greek and eastern churches, which God allowed to be smitten with the rod of Mohammedanism for their idolatrous abominations? To come closer home, what shall we say of the condition of the Protestant churches themselves since God broke the papal chain, and set them free? What of Unitarianism, Rationalism, and the hundreds of sects and heresies, which are the unanswerable reproach and witness against them? What are we sliding into now, which allows Romanism today to boast herself, however foolishly and falsely, as being the preserver of Scripture? Alas, we have not continued in God’s goodness; and thus the sentence of excision is clearly upon us, "thou also shalt be cut off."

Thus when, according to Isaiah, the light shall arise again upon Israel, it will not be merely to add new splendor to a day already bathing with its brightness the nations of the earth, but on the contrary, as he -most unaccountably according to the dreams men are indulging in -most plainly says, when "darkness shall cover the earth, gross darkness the nations" (Isa 60:1-3). The Gentile church is become apostate, as Paul elsewhere shows (2Th 2:3-12), the true saints having been removed to heaven. How important to realize the times in which we are, and what is before us, that we do not go with the mass in the smooth ways in which they are prophesying to themselves peace, but walk in separation to God from all that is bringing in the end in judgment!

6. But the victory over sin is thus, after all, God’s alone. Israel’s unbelief has been the occasion of His mercy to the Gentiles in this very way; through the impossibility of any claim on their part any more to the privileges that were theirs, they become objects of mercy merely. They had refused God’s mercy when it went out to the Gentiles. They are to be blessed finally as themselves mere Gentiles, having no claim beyond that. Thus, they are brought upon the common ground in which alone blessing can be found for any man. God could not bless them in self-righteousness it is clear; and He must in all His ways show that man throughout is a debtor to mercy alone. This is the occasion for the apostle’s adoring recognition of the "riches, both of the wisdom and knowledge of God." The plan is clearly His; man could never have thought it out in this way. Naturally, he would never put himself in the position in which, nevertheless, divine grace finds him. He has not even "known the mind of the Lord," much less "been His counselor." "Of God and through God and to God are all things, to whom be glory for ever!"

The Epistle to the Romans.

F. W. Grant, The Numerical Bible (4th ed., 1903) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter 22

ISRAEL, HOWEVER, NOT FORSAKEN

Rom_11:1-10

"A PEOPLE disobeying and contradicting." So the Lord of Israel, through the Prophet, had described the nation. Let us remember as we pass on what a large feature in the prophecies, and indeed in the whole Old Testament, such accusations and exposures are. From Moses to Malachi, in histories, and songs, and, instructions, we find everywhere this tone of stern truth telling, this unsparing detection and description of Israelite sin. And we reflect that every one of these utterances, humanly speaking, was the voice of an Israelite; and that whatever reception it met with at the moment-it was sometimes a scornful or angry reception, oftener a reverent one-it was ultimately treasured, venerated, almost worshipped, by the Church of this same rebuked and humiliated Israel. We ask ourselves what this has to say about the true origin of these utterances, and the true nature of the environment into which, they fell. Do they not bear witness to the supernatural in both? It was not "human nature" which, in a race quite as prone, at least, as any other, to assert itself, produced these intense and persistent rebukes from within, and secured for them a profound and lasting veneration. The Hebrew Scriptures, in this as in other things, are a literature which mere man, mere Israelite man, "could not have written if he would, and would not have written if he could." Somehow, the Prophets not only spoke with an authority more than human, but they were known to speak with it. There was a national consciousness of divine privilege: and it was inextricably bound up with a national conviction that the Lord of the privileges had an eternal right to reprove His privileged ones, and that He had, as a fact, His accredited messengers of reproof, whose voice was not theirs but His; not the mere outcry of patriotic zealots, but the Oracle of God. Yea, an awful privilege was involved in the reception of such reproofs: "You only have I known; therefore will I punish you". {Amo_3:2}

But this is a recollectlon by the way. St. Paul, so we saw in our last study, has quoted Isaiahs stern message, only now to stay his troubled heart on the fact that the unbelief of Israel in his day was, if we may dare to put it so, no surprise to the Lord, and therefore no shock to the servants faith. But is he to stop there, and sit down, and say, "This must be so"? No; there is more to follow, in this discourse on Israel and God. He has "good words, and comfortable words," {Zec_1:13} after the woes of the last two chapters, and after those earlier passages of the Epistle where the Jew is seen only in his hypocrisy, and rebellion, and pride. He has to speak of a faithful Remnant, now as always present, who make as it were the golden unbroken link between the nation and the promises. And then he has to lift the curtain, at least a corner of the curtain, from the future, and to indicate how there lies waiting there a mighty blessing for Israel, and through Israel for the world. Even now the mysterious "People" was serving a spiritual purpose in their very unbelief; they were occasioning a vast transition of blessing to the Gentiles, by their own refusal of blessing. And hereafter they were to serve a purpose of still more illustrious mercy. They were yet, in their multitudes, to return to their rejected Christ. And their return was to be used as the means of a crisis of blessing for the world.

We seem to see the look and hear the voice of the Apostle, once the mighty Rabbi, the persecuting patriot, as he begins now to dictate again. His eyes brighten, and his brow clears, and a happier emphasis comes into his utterance, and he sets himself to speak of his peoples good, and to remind his Gentile brethren how, in Gods plan of redemption, all their blessing, all they know of salvation, all they possess of life eternal, has come to them through Israel. Israel is the Stem, drawing truth and life from the unfathomable soil of the covenant of promise. They are the grafted Branches, rich in every blessing-because they are the mystical seed of Abraham, in Christ.

I say therefore, did God ever thrust away His people? Away with the thought! For I am an Israelite, of Abrahams seed, Benjamins tribe; full member of the theocratic race and of its first royal and always loyal tribe; in my own person, therefore, I am an instance of Israel still in covenant. God never thrust away His people, whom He foreknew with the foreknowledge of eternal choice and purpose. That foreknowledge was "not according to their works," or according to their power; and so it holds its sovereign way across and above their long unworthiness. Or do you not know, in Elijah, in his story, in the pages marked with his name, what the Scripture says? How he intercedes before God, on Gods own behalf, against Israel, saying, {1Ki_19:10} "Lord, Thy prophets they killed, and Thy altars they dug up; and I was left solitary, and they seek my life"? But what says the oracular answer to him? "I have left for Myself seven thousand men, men who bowed never knee to Baal". {1Ki_19:18} So therefore, at the present season also, there proves to be a remnant, "a leaving" left by the Lord for Himself, on the principle of election of grace; their persons and their number following a choice and gift whose reasons lie in God alone. And then follows one of those characteristic "footnotes" of which we saw an instance above: {Rom_10:17} But if by grace, no longer of works; "no longer," in the sense of a logical succession and exclusion: since the grace proves, on the other principle, no longer grace. But if of works, it is no longer grace; since the work is no longer work. That is to say, when once the grace principle is admitted, as it is here assumed to be, "the work" of the man who is its subject is "no longer work" in the sense which makes an antithesis to grace; it is no longer so much toil done in order to so much pay to be given. In other words, the two supposed principles of the divine Choice are in their nature mutually exclusive. Admit the one as the condition of the "election," and the other ceases; you cannot combine them into an amalgam. If the election is of grace, no meritorious antecedent to it is possible in the subject of it. If it is according to meritorious antecedent, no sovereign freedom is possible in the divine action, such freedom as to bring the saved man, the saved remnant, to an adoring confession of unspeakable and mysterious mercy.

This is the point, here in this passing "footnote," as in the longer kindred statements above (chap. 9), of the emphasised allusion to "choice" and "grace." He writes thus that he may bring the believer, Gentile or Jew, to his knees, in humiliation, wonder, gratitude, and trust. "Why did I, the self-ruined wanderer, the self-hardened rebel, come to the Shepherd who sought me, surrender my sword to the King who reclaimed me? Did I reason myself into harmony with Him? Did I lift myself, hopelessly maimed, into His arms? No; it was the gift of God, first, last, and in the midst. And if so, it was the choice of God." That point of light is surrounded by a cloud world of mystery, though within those surrounding clouds there lurks, as to God, only rightness and love. But the point of light is there, immovable, for all the clouds; where fallen man chooses God, it is thanks to God who has chosen fallen man. Where a race is not "thrust away," it is because "God foreknew." Where some thousands of members of that race, while others fall away, are found faithful to God, it is because He has "left them for Himself, on the principle of choice of grace." Where, amidst a widespread rejection of Gods Son Incarnate, a Saul of Tarsus, an Aquila, a Barnabas, behold in Him their Redeemer, their King, their Life, their All, it is on that same principle. Let the man thus beholding and believing give the whole thanks for his salvation in the quarter where it is all due. Let him not confuse one truth by another. Let not this truth disturb for a moment his certainty of personal moral freedom, and of its responsibility. Let it not for a moment turn him into a fatalist. But let him abase himself, and give thanks, and humbly trust Him who has thus laid hold of him for blessing. As he does so, in simplicity, not speculating but worshipping, he will need no subtle logic to assure him that he is to pray, and to work, without reserve, for the salvation of all men. It will be more than enough for him that his Sovereign bids him do it, and tells him that it is according to His heart.

To return a little on our steps, in the matter of the Apostles doctrine of the divine Choice: the reference in this paragraph to the seven thousand faithful in Elijahs day suggests a special reflection. To us, it seems to say distinctly that the "election" intended all along by St. Paul cannot possibly be explained adequately by making it either an election (to whatever benefits) of mere masses of men, as for instance of a nation, considered apart from its individuals; or an election merely to privilege, to opportunity, which may or may not be used by the receiver. As regards national election, it is undoubtedly present and even prominent in the passage, and in this whole section of the Epistle. For ourselves, we incline to see it quite simply in ver. 2 {Rom. 11:2} above; "His people, whom He foreknew." We read there, what we find so often in the Old Testament, a sovereign choice of a nation to stand in special relation to God; of a nation taken, so to speak, in the abstract, viewed not as the mere total of so many individuals, but as a quasi-personality. But we maintain that the idea of election takes another line when we come to the "seven thousand." Here we are thrown at once on the thought of individual experiences, and the ultimate secret of them, found only in the divine Will affecting the individual. The "seven thousand" had no aggregate life, so to speak. They formed, as the seven thousand, no organism or quasi-personality. They were "left" not as a mass, but as units; so isolated, so little grouped together, that even Elijah did not know of their existence. They were just so many individual men, each one of whom found power, by faith, to stand personally firm against the Baalism of that dark time, with the same individual faith which in later days, against other terrors, and other solicitations, upheld a Polycarp, an Athanasius, a Huss, a Luther, a Tyndale, a De Seso, a St. Cyran. And the Apostle quotes them as an instance and illustration of the Lords way and will with the believing of all time. In their case, then, he both passes as it were through national election to individual election, as a permanent spiritual mystery; and he shows that he means by this an election not only to opportunity but to holiness. The Lords "leaving them for Himself" lay behind their not bowing their knees to Baal. Each resolute confessor was individually enabled, by a sovereign and special grace. He was a true human personality, freely acting, freely choosing not to yield in that terrible storm. But behind his freedom was the higher freedom of the Will of God, saving him from himself that he might be free to confess and suffer. To our mind, no part of the Epistle more clearly than this passage affirms this individual aspect of the great mystery. Ah, it is a mystery indeed; we have owned this at every step. And it is never for a moment to be treated therefore as if we knew all about it. And it is never therefore to be used to confuse the believers thought about other sides of truth. But it is there, as a truth among truths; to be received with abasement by the creature before the Creator, and with humble hope by the simple believer.

He goes on with his argument, taking up the thread broken by the "footnote" upon grace and works: What therefore? What Israel, the nation, the character, seeks after, righteousness in the court of God, this it lighted not upon as one who seeks a buried treasure in the wrong field "lights not upon" it; but the election, the chosen ones, the "seven thousand" of the Gospel era, did light upon it. But the rest were hardened, (not as if God had created their hardness, or injected it; but He gave it to be its own penalty;) as it stands written, {Isa_29:10, and Deu_29:4} "God gave them a spirit of slumber, eyes not to see, and ears not to hear, even to this day." A persistent ("unto this day") unbelief was the sin of Israel in the Prophets times, and it was the same in those of the Apostles. And the condition was the same; God "gave" sin to be its own way of retribution. And David says, {Psa_69:22} in a Psalm full of Messiah, and of the awful retribution justly ordained to come on His impenitent enemies, "Let their table turn into a trap, and into toils, and into a stumbling block; and into a requital to them; darkened be their eyes, not to see, and their back ever bow Thou together."

The words are awful, in their connection here, and in themselves, and as a specimen of a class. Their purpose here is to enforce the thought that there is such a thing as positive divine action in the self-ruin of the impenitent; a fiat from the throne which "gives" a coma to the soul, and beclouds its eyes, and turns its blessings into a curse. Not one word implies the thought that He who so acts meets a soul tending upward and turns it downward; that He ignores or rejects even the faintest inquiry after Himself; that He is Author of one particle of the sin of man. But we do learn that the adversaries of God and Christ may be, and, where the Eternal so sees it good, are, sentenced to go their own way, even to its issues in destruction. The context of every citation here, as it stands in the Old Testament, shows abundantly that those so sentenced are no helpless victims of an adverse fate, but sinners of their own will, in a sense most definite and personal. Only, a sentence of judgment is concerned also in the case; "Fill ye up then the measure". {Mat_13:32}

But then also in themselves and, as a specimen of a class, the words are a dark shadow in the Scripture sky. It is only by the way that we can note this here, but it must not be quite omitted in our study. This sixty-ninth Psalm is a leading instance of the several Psalms where the Prophet appears calling for the sternest retribution on his enemies. What thoughtful heart has not felt the painful mystery so presented? Read in the hush of secret devotion, or sung perhaps to some majestic chant beneath the minster roof, they still tend to affront the soul with the question, Can this possibly be after the mind of Christ? And there rises before us the form of One who is in the act of Crucifixion, and who just then articulates the prayer, "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do." Can these "imprecations" have His sanction? Can He pass them, endorse them, as His Word?

The question is full of pressing pain. And no answer can be given, surely, which shall relieve all that pain; certainly nothing which shall turn the clouds of such passages into rays of the sun. They are clouds; but let us be sure that they belong to the cloud land which gathers round the Throne, and which only conceals, not wrecks, its luminous and immovable righteousness and love. Let us remark, for one point, that this same dark Psalm is, by the witness of the Apostles, as taught by their Master, a Psalm full of Messiah. It was undoubtedly claimed as his own mystic utterance by the Lamb of the Passion. He speaks in these dread words who also says, in the same utterance (ver. 9) {Rom. 11:9}, "The zeal of Thine house hath eaten me up." So the Lord Jesus did endorse this Psalm. He more than endorsed it; He adopted it as His own. Let this remind us further that the utterer of these denunciations, even the first and non-mystical utterer, -David, let us say, - appears in the Psalm not merely as a private person crying out about hisviolated personal rights, but as an ally and vassal of God, one whose life and cause is identified with His. Just in proportion as this is so, the violation of his life and peace, by enemies described as quite consciously and deliberately malicious, is a violation of the whole sanctuary of divine righteousness. If so, is it incredible that even the darkest words of such a Psalm are to be read as a true echo from the depths of man to the Voice which announces "indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, to every soul of man that doeth evil"? Perhaps even the most watchful assertor of the divine character of Scripture is not bound to assert that no human frailty in the least moved the spirit of a David when he, in the sphere of his own personality, thought and said these things. But we have no right to assert, as a known or necessary thing, that it was so. And we have right to say that in themselves these utterances are but a sternly true response to the avenging indignation of the Holy One.

In any case, do not let us talk with a loose facility about their incompatibility with "the spirit of the New Testament." From one side, the New Testament is an even sterner book than the Old; as it must be of course, when it brings sin and holiness "out into the light" of the Cross of Christ. It is in the New Testament that "the souls" of saints at rest are heard saying, {Rev_6:10} "How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost Thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?" It is in the New Testament that an Apostle writes, {2Th_1:6} "It is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them which trouble you." It is the Lord of the New Testament, the Offerer of the Prayer of the Cross, who said {Mat_23:32-35} "Fill ye up the measure of your fathers. I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes, and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth."

His eyes must have rested, often and again, upon the denunciations of the Psalms. He saw in them that which struck no real discord, in the ultimate spiritual depth, with His own blessed compassions. Let us not resent what He has countersigned. It is His, not ours, to know all the conditions of those mysterious outbursts from the Psalmists consciousness. It is ours to recognise in them the intensest expression of what rebellious evil merits, and will find, as its reward.

But we have digressed from what is the proper matter before us. Here, in the Epistle, the sixty-ninth Psalm is cited only to affirm with the authority of Scripture the mystery of Gods action in sentencing the impenitent adversaries of His Christ to more blindness and more ruin. Through this dark and narrow door the Apostle is about to lead us now into "a large room" of hope and blessing, and to unveil to us a wonderful future for the now disgraced and seemingly rejected Israel.

William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.

Rom 11:1. Μὴ ἀπώσατο) hath He cast away entirely? So Gideon, expostulating in faith, says νῦν ἀπώσατο ἡμᾶς, now He has forsaken us (cast us away, Jdg 6:13). But οὐκ ἀπώσεται Κύριος τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ, but the Lord will not cast away His people, Psalms 94 (93):14. Has He cast them away, says Paul, so that they are no longer the people of God? In ch. 10 after he so impressively exhibited the grace [which God exercised] towards the Gentiles, and the rebellion of the Jews, this objection might be made. He therefore answers, far be it from us to say, that God has rejected His people, when the very appellation, His people contains a reason for denying it. The negative assertion, far be it, [God forbid], is made distinctly, (1.) concerning the present time of the offending people; both that there are now some, [believers among them]; comp. Act 21:20, note; and that in the successively increasing admission of Gentiles, there will be very many of Israel, who shall believe. These are called the remnant and the election Rom 11:5; Rom 11:7. (2.) As to the future; that the people themselves, will at last be converted Rom 11:24, note.—ἐγὼ, I) Paul would rather draw a favourable conclusion from the individual [believing Israelites, as himself] to the genus, [the whole nation,] than one, on the unfavourable side, from the genus [the unbelieving nation] to the species [the individual];—I, formerly a persecutor, deserved to be cast away. The genus is the whole Jewish people: the species is believers among the Jews (of whom Paul was one as an individual) or such of that people as should hereafter believe.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_11:1. Λέγω οὖν] corresponds to the twofold ἀλλὰ λέγω, Rom_10:18-19, but so, that now this third interrogative λέγω is introduced in an inferential form. In consequence, namely, of what had just been clearly laid down in Rom_10:18 ff., as to the guilt of resistant Israel in its exclusion from salvation in Christover-against the Gentiles acceptance of itthe difficult question might arise: Surely God has not cast off His people? Surely it is not so tragic a fate, that we must infer it from that conduct of the people? Paul states this question, earnestly negatives it, and then sets forth the real state of the matter. The opinion of Hofmann, that the apostle starts this question because the scriptural passages Rom_10:18 ff. show that it is to be negatived, is the consequence of his incorrect interpretation of those scriptural sayings, and is confuted by the fact that the negation is first given and supported in what follows, not drawn from what precedes, but made good by a quite different scriptural proof, Rom_11:2.

μὴ ἀπώσατο κ.τ.λ.] Comp. Psa_94:14; Psa_95:3; 1Sa_12:22; on the form, see Winer, p. 86 [E. T. 111]. Reiche thinks, but erroneously, that the question is not expressed sharply enough, and that ἅπαντα is to be supplied. Ἀπώσατο has in truth the emphasis, and is placed first on that account; so that Pauls simple idea is, that the casting off of Gods people, exclusion from the divine decree of the bestowal of salvation, recall of this destination to salvation, may not be inferred from what has gone before. Rightly, too, Bengel remarks: Ipsa populi ejus appellatio rationem negandi continet. This ratio negandi is then, in Rom_11:2, additionally strengthened by ὃν προέγνω.

The μὴ γένοιτο expresses horror at the ἀπώσατο, not at the λέγω (van Hengel), as though Paul had written simply ἀπώσατο without μή.

καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ κ.τ.λ.] For I also, etc., expresses the motive for μὴ γένοιτο! For Paul, as a true Israelite of patriotic feeling, cannot, in virtue of his theocratic self-esteem, admit that ἀπώσατο, but can only repel the suggestion with abhorrence. Comp. de Wette and Baumgarten-Crusius. A peculiar proof of the οὐκ ἀπώσατο was yet to follow. Usually it is thought that Paul proves the negation by his own example, since he in truth was not cast off. So also Philippi. But apart from the consideration, that the example of a single elected one, however highly favoured, would be far from convincing, we see no reason why Paul should have added ἘΚ ΣΠΈΡΜ. ἈΒΡ., ΦΥΛ. ΒΕΝΙΑΜ.; moreover, it appears from Rom_11:2, where he defines the negation, emphatically reiterates it, and then confirms it from Scripture, that he did not intend till Rom_11:2 to adduce the argument against the ἈΠΏΣΑΤΟ, which he had only provisionally rejected in Rom_11:1. Without the least indication from the text, Hofmann introduces into κ. ἐγώ the reference: Even I, the apostle entrusted with the calling of the Gentile world (which is supposed to imply a sealing of the sacred historical call of Israel); even I, as once upon a time a persecutor, deserving of rejection.

ἐκ σπέρμ. Ἀβρ., φυλ. Βενιαμ.] added, in order to exhibit the just and genuine privileges of his birth. Comp. Php_3:5; Act_13:21; Test. XII. Patr. p. 746 f. The tribe of Benjamin was in truth, along with that of Judah, the theocratic core of the nation after the exile. Ezr_4:1; Ezr_10:3.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 11:1-10 . λέγω οὖν : the οὖν intimates that it is with the conclusion reached in chap. 10 before his mind that Paul puts the following question: the unbelief of Israel naturally suggested it. μὴ ἀπώσατο ὁ θεὸς τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ ; For the words, cf. Psa 94:14 (93 LXX), 1Sa 12:22 . In both places the promise is given οὐκ ἀπώσεται ὁ Κ . τ . λ . αὐτοῦ , and the familiar words give the effect of asking, Has God broken His express and repeated promise? μὴ suggests the negative answer, which is expressed more passionately in μὴ γένοιτο . Cf. Rom 3:6 , Rom 9:14 . Israel may be faithless to Him, but He abides faithful. καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ Ἰσραηλίτης εἰμί : This is often read as if it were an argument in favour of the negative answer; as if Paul meant, God has not cast off His people, I myself am a living proof to the contrary. But this is hardly conciliatory, to say the least; and it is better to take the words as explaining why Paul puts the question with μή (suggesting the negative answer), and why he then gives the denial with such vehemence. “I, too, am an Israelite, to whom the very idea of God’s rejection of His people is an impious and incredible idea, to be repelled with horror.” ἐκ σπέρ . Ἀβραάμ : no proselyte. φυλῆς Βενιαμείν : the one tribe which with Judah mainly represented the post-exilic theocratic people.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chap.

11:1-10.] Yet God has not cast off His people, but there is a remnant according to the election of grace (1-6),—the rest being hardened (7-10).

1.] I say then (a false inference from ch. 10:19-21,—made in order to be refuted), Did (μή, it cannot surely be, that) God cast off His people (as would almost appear from the severe words just adduced)? Be it not so: for I also am an Israelite (ἐκ γένους Ἰσρ., Php 3:5), of the seed of Abraham (mentioned probably for solemnity’s sake, as bringing to mind all the promises made to Abraham), of the tribe of Benjamin (so Php 3:5). There is some question with what intent the Apostle here brings forward himself. Three ways are open to us: either (1) it is as a case in point, as an example of an Israelite who has not been rejected but is still one of God’s people: so almost all the Commentators—but this is hardly probable,—for in this case (α) he would not surely bring one only example to prove his point, when thousands might have been alleged—(β) it would be hardly consistent with the humble mind of Paul to put himself alone in such a place,—and (γ) μὴ γένοιτο does not go simply to deny a hypothetical fact, but applies to some deprecated consequence of that which is hypothetically put:—or (2) as De Wette, al., he implies, ‘How can I say such a thing, who am myself an Israelite, &c.?’ ‘Does not my very nationality furnish a security against my entertaining such an idea?’—or (3) which I believe to be the right view, but which I have found only in the commentary of Mr. Ewbank,—as implying that if such a hypothesis were to be conceded, it would exclude from God’s kingdom the writer himself, as an Israelite. This seems better to agree with μὴ γένοιτο, as deprecating the consequence of such an assertion.

But a question even more important arises, not unconnected with that just discussed: viz. who are ὁ λαὸς αὐτοῦ? In order for the sentence καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ κ.τ.λ. to bear the meaning just assigned to it, it is obvious that ὁ λαὸς αὐτ. must mean the people of God nationally considered. If Paul deprecated such a proposition as the rejection of God’s people, because he himself would thus be as an Israelite cut off from God’s favour, the rejection assumed in the hypothesis must be a national rejection. It is against this that he puts in his strong protest. It is this which he disproves by a cogent historical parallel from Scripture, shewing that there is a remnant καὶ ἐν τῷ νῦν καιρῷ according to the election of grace: and not only so, but that that part of Israel (considered as having continuity of national existence) which is for a time hardened, shall ultimately come in, and so all Israel (nationally considered again, Israel as a nation) shall be saved. Thus the covenant of God with Israel, having been national, shall ultimately be fulfilled to them as a nation: not by the gathering in merely of individual Jews, or of all the Jews individually, into the Christian church,—but by the national restoration of the Jews, not in unbelief, but as a Christian believing nation, to all that can, under the gospel, represent their ancient pre-eminence, and to the fulness of those promises which have never yet in their plain sense been accomplished to them. I have entered on this matter here, because a clear understanding of it underlies all intelligent appreciation of the argument of the chapter. Those who hold no national restoration of the Jews to pre-eminence, must necessarily confound the ἐν τῷ νῦν καιρῷ remnant according to the election of grace, with the οἱ λοιποί, who nationally shall be grafted in again. See this more fully illustrated where that image occurs, ver. 17 ff.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

THE REJECTION OF ISRAEL NOT COMPLETE

11:1-10. Israel then has refused to accept the salvation offered it; is it therefore rejected? No. At any rate the rejection is not complete. Now as always in the history of Israel, although the mass of the people may be condemned to disbelief, there is a remnant that shall be saved.

1 The conclusion of the preceding argument is this. It is through their own fault that Israel has rejected a salvation which was fully and freely offered. Now what does this imply? Does it mean that God has rejected His chosen people? Heaven forbid that I should say this! I who like them am an Israelite, an Israelite by birth and not a proselyte, a lineal descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe that with Judah formed the restored Israel after the exile. 2 No, God has not rejected His people. He chose them for His own before all time and nothing can make Him change His purpose. If you say He has rejected them, it only shows that you have not clearly grasped the teaching of Scripture concerning the Remnant. Elijah on Mt. Horeb brought just such an accusation against his countrymen. 3 He complained that they had forsaken the covenant, that they had overthrown God’s altars, that they had slain His Prophets; just as the Jews at the present day have slain the Messiah and persecuted His messengers. Elijah only was left, and his life they sought. The whole people, God’s chosen people, had been rejected. 4 So he thought; but the Divine response came to him, that there were seven thousand men left in Israel who had not bowed the knee to Baal. There was a kernel of the nation that remained loyal. 5 Exactly the same circumstances exist now as then. Now as then the mass of the people are unfaithful, but there is a remnant of loyal adherents to the Divine message:—a remnant, be it remembered, chosen by God by an act of free favour: 6 that is to say those whom God has in His good pleasure selected for that position, who have in no way earned it by any works they have done, or any merit of their own. If that were possible Grace would lose all its meaning: there would be no occasion for God to show free favour to mankind.

7 It is necessary then at any rate to modify the broad statement that has been made. Israel, it is true, has failed to obtain the righteousness which it sought; but, although this is true of the nation as a whole, there is a Remnant of which it is not true. Those whom God selected have attained it. But what of the rest? Their hearts have been hardened. Here again we find the same conditions prevailing throughout Israel’s history. 8Isaiah declared (29:10; 6:9, 10) how God had thrown the people into a state of spiritual torpor. He had given them eyes which could not see, and ears which could not hear. All through their history the mass of the people has been destitute of spiritual insight. 9 And again in the book of Psalms, David (69:23, 24) declares the Divine wrath against the unfaithful of the nation: ‘May their table be their snare.’ It is just their position as God’s chosen people, it is the Law and the Scriptures, which are their boast, that are to be the cause of their ruin. They are to be punished by being allowed to cleave fast to that to which they have perversely adhered. 10 ‘Let their eyes be blinded, so that they cannot see light when it shines upon them: let their back be ever bent under the burden to which they have so obstinately clung.’ This was God’s judgement then on Israel for their faithlessness, and it is God’s judgement on them now.

1-36. St. Paul has now shown (1) (9:6-29) that God was perfectly free, whether as regards promise or His right as Creator, to reject Israel; (2) (9:30-10:21) that Israel on their side by neglecting the Divine method of salvation offered them have deserved this rejection. He now comes to the original question from which he started, but which he never expressed, and asks, Has God, as might be thought from the drift of the argument so far, really cast away His people? To this he gives a negative answer, which he proceeds to justify by showing (1) that this rejection is only partial (11:1-10), (2) only temporary (11:11-25), and (3) that in all this Divine action there has been a purpose deeper and wiser than man can altogether understand (11:26-36).

1. λέγω οὖν. This somewhat emphatic phrase occurring here and in ver. 11 seems to mark a stage in the argument, the οὖν as so often summing up the result so far arrived at. The change of particle shows that we have not here a third question parallel to the ἀλλὰ λέγω of 10:18, 19.

μὴ ἀπώσατο ὁ Θεὸς τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ; ‘Is it possible that God has cast away His people?’ The form of the question implies necessarily a negative answer and suggests an argument against it. (1) By the juxtaposition of ὁ Θεός and τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ. Israel is God’s people and so He cannot reject them. Ipsa populi eius appellatio rationem negandi continet. Beng. (2) By the use made of the language of the O. T. Three times in the O. T. (1Sa 12:22; 93 [94], 14; 94 [95], 4) the promise οὐκ ἀπώσεται Κύριος τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ occurs. By using words which must be so well known St. Paul reminds his readers of the promise, and thus again implies an answer to the question.

This very clear instance of the merely literary use of the language of the O. T. makes it more probable that St. Paul should have adopted a similar method elsewhere, as in 10:6 ff., 18.

μὴ γένοιτο. St. Paul repudiates the thought with horror. All his feelings as an Israelite make it disloyal in him to hold it.

καὶ γὰρ κ.τ.λ. These words have been taken in two ways. (1) As a proof of the incorrectness of the suggestion. St. Paul was an Israelite, and he had been saved; therefore the people as a whole could not have been rejected. So the majority of commentators (Go. Va. Oltr. Weiss). But the answer to the question does not occur until St. Paul gives it in a solemn form at the beginning of the next verse; he would not therefore have previously given a reason for its incorrectness. Moreover it would be inconsistent with St. Paul’s tact and character to put himself forward so prominently.

(2) It is therefore better to take it as giving ‘the motive for his deprecation, not a proof of his denial’ (Mey. Gif. Lips.). Throughout this passage, St. Paul partly influenced by the reality of his own sympathy, partly by a desire to put his argument in a form as little offensive as possible, has more than once emphasized his own kinship with Israel (9:1-3; 10:1). Here for the first time, just when he is going to disprove it, he makes the statement which has really been the subject of the two previous passages, and at once, in order if possible to disarm criticism, reminds his readers that he is an Israelite, and that therefore to him, as much as to them, the supposition seems almost blasphemous.

Ἰσραηλίτης κ.τ.λ. Cf. 2Co 11:22; Php 3:5.

ὃν προέγνω, which is added by Lachmann after τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ, has the support of A D Chrys. and other authorities, but clearly came in from ver. 2.

1. What is the place occupied by the words ὑμῖν δὲ λέγω κ.τ.λ. in the argument? (i) Some (Hort, WH. Lips.) place here the beginning of a new paragraph, so Dr. Hort writes: ‘after a passage on the rejection of unbelieving Israel, and on God`s ultimate purpose involved in it, St. Paul turns swiftly round.’ But an examination of the context will show that there is really no break in the ideas. The thought raised by the question in ver. 11 runs through the whole paragraph to ver. 24, in fact really to ver. 32, and the reference to the Gentiles in ver. 17 ff. is clearly incidental. Again ver. 15 returns directly to ver. 12, repeating the same idea, but in a way to justify also ver. 13. (ii) These verses in their appeal to the Gentiles are therefore incidental, almost parenthetic, and are introduced to show that this argument has an application to Gentiles as well as Jews.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vv. 1-10.

The partial character of the rejection of God’s people is proved, first by the conversion of St. Paul himself (Rom 11:1); then by the existence of a whole Judeo-Christian church (Rom 11:2-6). And if this church does not contain the entire Jewish people, it is the effect of a judgment of a partial hardening rendered necessary by the moral state of the people (Rom 11:7-10).

Vv. 1. “I say, then, Hath God cast away His people? Let it not be! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.”

From all that preceded, chaps. 9 and 10, the reader might have concluded that God had completely and finally broken with all that bore the name of Israel; hence the then.

The form of the question is such (μή) that only a negative answer can be expected. This is likewise indicated by the pronoun αὐτοῦ, his, which of itself implies the moral impossibility of such a measure.

The expression His people does not refer, as some have thought, to the elect part of the people only, but, as the expression itself shows, to the nation as a whole. It is evident, indeed, that the rest of the chapter treats not of the lot of the Israelites who have believed in Jesus, but of the lot of the nation in its entirety. Thus then, this question of Rom 11:1 is the theme of the whole chapter.

The apostle takes a first answer, by way of preface, from his own case. Is not he, a Jew of well-approved Israelitish descent, by the call which he has received from above, a living proof that God has not cast away en masse and without distinction the totality of His ancient people? De Wette and Meyer give a wholly different meaning to this answer. According to them, Paul would say: “I am too good an Israelite, too zealous a patriot, to be capable of affirming a thing so contrary to the interests of my people.” As if the interests of truth were not supreme, in Paul’s view, over national affections! And what in this case would be meant by the epithets descendant of Abraham and of Benjamin, which Meyer alleges against our explanation? May not one, with his civil status as an Israelite perfectly unquestionable, comport himself as a bad patriot? What Paul means by them is this: “It is nothing my being an Israelite of the purest blood; God has nevertheless made of me such as you see me, a true believer.” Meyer still urges the objection of the exceptional position of a man like Paul; but the apostle does not confine himself to pleading this personal fact; he adds to it immediately, from Rom 11:2 onward, the patent fact of the whole Judeo-Christian portion of the church.

Weizsäcker makes the important remark on this Rom 11:1 : “Paul could not possibly take his proof from his own person, if the mass of the Christians of Rome were Judeo-Christian, and so themselves the best refutation of the objection raised.”

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter XI

Contents

This chapter consists of two parts, Rom_11:1-10, and 11-36. In the former the apostle teaches that the rejection of the jews was not total. There was a remnant, and perhaps a much larger remnant than many might suppose, excepted, although the mass of the nation, agreeably to the predictions of the prophets, was cast off, Rom_11:1-10. In the latter, he shows that this rejection is not final. In the first place, the restoration of the jews is a desirable and probable event, Rom_11:11-24. In the second, it is one which god has determined to bring to pass, Rom_11:25-32. The chapter closes with a sublime declaration of the unsearchable wisdom of god, manifested in all his dealings with men, Rom_11:33-36. In the consideration of the great doctrinal truths taught in this chapter, paul intersperses many practical remarks, designed to give these truths their proper influence both on the jews and gentiles, especially the latter.

Rom_11:1-10

Analysis

The rejection of the Jews is not total, as is sufficiently manifest from the example of the apostle himself, to say nothing of others, Rom_11:1. God had reserved a remnant faithful to himself as was the case in the times of Elias, Rom_11:2-4. That this remnant is saved, is a matter entirely of grace, Rom_11:5, Rom_11:6. The real truth of the case is, that Israel, as a nation, is excluded from the kingdom of Christ, but the chosen ones are admitted to its blessings, Rom_11:7. This rejection of the greater part of the Jews, their own Scriptures had predicted, Rom_11:8-10.

Commentary

Rom_11:1

I say, then, λέγω οὖν, I ask, then, i.e. Is it to be inferred from what I have said, that God hath rejected his people? When we consider how many promises are made to the Jewish nation, as Gods peculiar people; and how often it is said, as in Psa_94:14, The Lord will not cast off his people, it is not surprising that the doctrine of the rejection of the Jews, as taught in the preceding chapters, was regarded as inconsistent with the word of God. Paul removes this difficulty, first by showing that the rejection of the Jews was neither total nor final; and secondly, by proving that the promises in question had reference, not to the Jewish nation as such, but to the elect, or, the spiritual Israel. The word ἀπώσατο stands at the beginning of the sentence, to show that it is emphatic. Has God utterly, (i.e., totally and finally) rejected his people? This Paul denies. He had not asserted any thing of the kind. The rejection of the Jews as a nation, was consistent with all that God had promised to their fathers. Those promises did not secure the salvation of all Jews, or of the Jews as a nation. And the doctrine which he had inculcated did not involve the rejection of all Jews. In proof, he adds, For I also am an Israelite. Paul had not taught his own rejection. The fact that he claimed for himself, and for all who with him believed on Christ, a part in the Messiahs kingdom, made it clear that he did not teach the rejection of all Israel. De Wette, and Meyer, in opposition to almost common consent, give a different view of the apostles language. They understand him as repudiating the idea of the universal rejection of the Jews, as inconsistent with his patriotic feeling. For I also am an Israelite. How can a Jew believe that God has cast off his people? But the context is clearly in favor of the common interpretation. The apostle goes on to show that a general apostasy did not involve an entire rejection. The nation, as a nation, had before turned to idols, and yet a remnant had remained faithful. And so it was now. Of the seed of Abraham, and of the tribe of Benjamin, see Phi_3:5. Paul was a Jew by descent from Abraham, and not merely a proselyte; and he was of one of the most favored tribes. Judah and Benjamin, especially after the exile, were the chief representatives of the theoeratieal people.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Now the Apostle showeth how this doctrine is to be applied to others, abiding still in his propounded cause. Therefore he teacheth us that all the Jews in particular are not cast away, and therefore we ought not to pronounce rashly of private persons, whether they be of the number of the elect or not.

The first proof, I am a Jew, and yet elected, therefore we may and ought fully to resolve upon our election, as hath been before said: but of another man’s we cannot be so certainly resolved, and yet ours may cause us to hope well of others.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

1. I say then, etc. What he has hitherto said of the blindness and obstinacy of the Jews, might seem to import that Christ at his coming had transferred elsewhere the promises of God, and deprived the Jews of every hope of salvation. This objection is what he anticipates in this passage, and he so modifies what he had previously said respecting the repudiation of the Jews, that no one might think that the covenant formerly made with Abraham is now abrogated, or that God had so forgotten it that the Jews were now so entirely alienated from his kingdom, as the Gentiles were before the coming of Christ. All this he denies, and he will presently show that it is altogether false. But the question is not whether God had justly or unjustly rejected the people; for it was proved in the last chapter that when the people, through false zeal, had rejected the righteousness of God, they suffered a just punishment for their presumption, were deservedly blinded, and were at last cut off from the covenant.

The reason then for their rejection is not now under consideration; but the dispute is concerning another thing, which is this, That though they deserved such a punishment from God, whether yet the covenant which God made formerly with the fathers was abolished. That it should fail through any perfidiousness of men, was wholly unreasonable; for Paul holds this as a fixed principle, that since adoption is gratuitous and based on God alone and not on men, it stands firm and inviolable, howsoever great the unfaithfulness of men may be, which may tend to abolish it. It was necessary that this knot should be untied, lest the truth and election of God should be thought to be dependent on the worthiness of men.

For I am also an Israelite, etc. Before he proceeds to the subject, he proves, in passing, by his own example, how unreasonable it was to think that the nation was utterly forsaken by God; for he himself was in his origin an Israelite, not a proselyte, or one lately introduced into the commonwealth of Israel. As then he was justly deemed to be one of God’s special servants, it was an evidence that God’s favor rested on Israel. He then assumes the conclusion as proved, which yet he will hereafter explain in a satisfactory manner.

That in addition to the title of an Israelite, he called himself the seed of Abraham, and mentioned also his own tribe; this he did that he might be counted a genuine Israelite, and he did the same in his Epistle to the Philippians, Philippians 3:4. But what some think, that it was done to commend God’s mercy, inasmuch as Paul sprung from that tribe which had been almost destroyed, seems forced and far-fetched.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(1) I say then.—Are we to infer from the language of Isaiah just quoted that God has cast away his people? Far be the thought. The Apostle is himself too closely identified with his countrymen to look upon it with anything but horror.

I also.—This appeal to his own descent from Abraham seems to be called forth by the Apostle’s patriotic sympathy with his people, and not merely by the thought that he would be included in their rejection. This last explanation, which is that usually given, is less accordant with the generous chivalry of his nature, and does not agree so well with Rom_9:3.

Of the tribe of Benjamin.—And therefore of the purest blood, because the tribes of Judah and Benjamin alone kept up the theocratic continuity of the race after the Exile. (Comp. Php_3:5.)

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

I say then, hath God cast away his people?.... The Alexandrian, copy adds here, "whom he foreknew", as in Rom 11:2, upon the citation of the above passages out of Moses and Isaiah, relating to the calling of the Gentiles, and the rejection of the Jews, the apostle saw an objection would arise, which he here takes up from the mouth of an adversary, and proposes it; in which is suggested, that God has cast away all his people the Jews, according to this count; and if so, where is his covenant with Abraham? what is become of his promises? and how is his faithfulness to be accounted for? and what hope can any Israelite have of ever obtaining salvation? than which, nothing can be thought more injurious to God, and absurd in itself. This was an old prejudice of the Jewish nation, and still continues, that God never would, nor has he cast them away, even in their present condition; it is one of the articles of their creed, received by the Karaites (o), a sect among them, that

"the blessed God , "hath not cast away the men of the captivity", though they are under the chastisements of God; but it is fit that they should every day obtain salvation by the hands of Messiah, the Son of David.''

Now to this objection the apostle makes answer; "first", in his usual way,

God forbid, when anything was objected which was displeasing to him, abhorred by him, which was not agreeable to the perfections of God, to the truth of his word, and promises, and could by no means be admitted of; and next by observing his own case, which was a standing instance to the contrary; for God had chosen him unto eternal salvation, Christ had redeemed him by his blood, and he was effectually called by grace; and as to his eternal state, he had no doubt or scruple about it; and besides, the Lord had made him a minister of the Gospel, had greatly qualified him for that work, had raised him to the high office of an apostle, and had made him very useful to the souls of many, both Jews and Gentiles; and yet he was one of the nation of the Jews, and therefore God had not cast them all away, as the objection insinuates:

for I also am an Israelite; according to the flesh, by lineal descent from Jacob or Israel; see Co2 11:22; as well as in a spiritual sense:

of the seed of Abraham; "the grandfather of Israel"; the head of the Jewish nation he was, both of his natural and of his spiritual seed, who is the father of us all:

of the tribe of Benjamin; a very little tribe, which in the time of the Judges was near being destroyed, and, upon the return from the captivity of Babylon, was very small, as it was at this time; and yet God had not cast away this, much less all the tribes of Israel.

(o) Apud Trigland. de Sect. Karaeorum, c. 10. p. 151.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

Ver. 1. I say then, Hath God, &c.] As I may seem to have said, Rom 10:1-21 Ministers must do their utmost to prevent mistakes. Zuinglius, when in his sermons he had terrified the wicked, was wont to shut up with Bone vir, hoc nihil ad te, Thou good man, I mean not thee.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

St. Paul in this chapter endeavours to comfort the Jews, though the greatest part of them were rejected for their blindness; and to admonish the Gentiles, not to boast for being called and converted, but to persevere with humility, and the fear of God. --- God hath not cast away his people. That is, not all of them, nor hath he cast off those whom he foreknew, and decreed to save. --- The Scripture saith of Elias. He brings the example of Elias living among the ten tribes of Israel, when all the people were forbidden to go and adore in the temple of Jerusalem, when the altars of the true God were destroyed, and almost all in these tribes were fallen into idolatry, and worshipped Baal: he complains as if he were left alone in the worship of the true God. But the divine answer shewed him his mistake. I have reserved to myself seven thousand man, &c. Some take notice that seven is divers times put for a great number, as three and a half for a small number: however, besides these seven thousand, all in the kingdom of Juda remained firm in the worship of the true God. In like manner, a remnant is now saved by the election of grace, by God’s free and liberal gift of divine grace. Some pretended reformers of the faith of the Church bring this as an argument, that the Church of God may fail, and fall into errors. It is sufficient to answer, that there is a wide difference betwixt the Jewish synagogue, which brought nothing to perfection, and the Church of Christ, which he built upon a rock, with which he has promised to be to the end of the world, and guide them by the Spirit of Truth. (Witham) --- This is very ill alleged by some against the perpetual visibility of the Church of Christ: the more, because however the number of the faithful might be abridged by the persecution of Jezebel in the kingdom of the ten tribes; the Church was at the same time in a most flourishing condition (under Asa and Josaphat) in the kingdom of Juda. (Challoner) -- Our separated brethren add to this text, as in Acts xix. 35. the word image. They also cite it in proof of an invisible Church; but with no just grounds: for in Jerusalem the faith and worship were public to the whole world. Besides, the Christian Church rests on better promises than the synagogue. (Bristow) --- The Jews obtain not the justice they sought after, because they did not seek it as they ought; they expected to obtain it by their works, whereas it can only be had from grace. (Estius)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

The apostle having shown, in the end of the foregoing chapter, that the Jews were for their obstinacy rejected, and the Gentiles called, he here prevents or answers an objection. Some might be ready to say: If this be so, then God hath cast away his covenant people, which he hath promised not to do; see Psa 94:14. To this he answers, first, by his accustomed form of denial: God forbid; and then he proceeds to show, that the rejection of the Jews was neither total nor final. That it was not total, he proves, first, by a particular instance in the following words.

I also am an Israelite; i.e. I am a Jew by descent, of the seed of Abraham according to the flesh, and yet am not cast off by God.

Of the tribe of Benjamin: some think this is added to intimate, that he was born of an honourable tribe, out of which king Saul sprang, 1Sa 9:1, and Esther the queen, Est 2:5. Others think this is added for a contrary reason; lest his calling should be ascribed to the dignity of his tribe, he says, he was of Benjamin, the last and least of all the tribes. And others rather think, that this particular recital of his genealogy is only to show, that he was a Jew by nature and nation, and not a proselyte converted to the faith: see Phi 3:5.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Vers. 1-36. (4) The Jews are not finally rejected, but, through the calling of the Gentiles, will be brought into the Church at last. St. Paul, painfully recognizing the fact of the present exclusion of Israel as a nation from the inheritance of the promises made to their fathers, and having in Ro 9 and Ro 10 accounted for and justified such exclusion, proceeds now to the question But is Israel as a nation finally rejected after all? He answers No; impossible! God"s ancient covenant with his people stands; the remnant of believers even now is a sign of his continued favour to his ancient people, as was, in the time of Elijah, the remnant that had not bowed the knee to Baal; nor does the fact of its being a remnant only imply now, any more than then, that the nation as such is cast off; and further, the calling of the Gentiles, far from being intended to exclude God"s ancient people, will be the means eventually of bringing it wholly in. Such is the apostle"s prophetic vision of the future, in view of which he bursts at the end of the chapter into glowing admiration of the inscrutable ways of God. In the course of it also (vers. 17-25) he introduces a warning to Gentile believers not to pride themselves against the Jews because of present preference to them, or to regard their own position of privilege as indefeasible. It must still be borne in mind that it is the position before God of Israel as a nation that is all along in view.

Vers. 1-6. I say then, Hath God east away his people! God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not east away his people which he foreknew. (or, predetermined. See the same word, Rom_8:29) Wot ye not what the Scripture saith of (rather, in; i.e. in the passage concerning) Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel saying, Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what faith the answer of God (o crhmatismov , denoting a Divine communication to man; in this case by the "still small voice." Only here in the New Testament; but cf. Mat_2:12, Crhmatisyentev kat onar ; also Luk_2:26 Act_10:22 Heb_8:5 Heb_11:7) unto him? I have left to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to Baal. Even so at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. The usual interpretation of this whole passage, and notably that of the ancients, has been to take the proof of God not having cast off his people as beginning in ver. 1, with "for I also," etc., and all the rest to be in sequence. Chrysostom"s explanation of the argument is to the following effect: God has not rejected his ancient people; for I myself am eminently of it; and I have been selected as a chief proclaimer and expounder of the gospel to the world; this would not have been the case if the nation had been cast off. But it may be said to me," You are only one of the ancient people; you are not the people." Nay, but I do not stand alone; there are thousands of Israelite believers as well as myself; and these are God"s true people, the people whom he foreknew. And of them there may be more than we are aware of; it is as it was in the days of Elias; he had supposed himself to be left alone; but he was told that there were seven thousand with him who were God"s true people still. And so now, there is a faithful remnant, the number of which is known to God alone, which is his people still, according to the election of grace. The same Father further understands the citation of the whole of the passage from 1Ki_19:14, though not required for the apostle"s proof, to be intended as significant. It would have sufficed, he says, to cite only what was said about a remnant being left; but the whole complaint of Elias is cited, so as to show by the way that the present rejection of Christ and persecution of the Church by the majority of the Jews had also its counterpart in ancient times; and thus the apostle, he says, lanyanontwv than (i.e. of the unbelieving Jews) auxei . It is to be observed that the above interpretation of the passage, which in its main points has been most generally adopted, goes on two suppositions; vie. that "for I also," in ver. 1, is the first part of the proof that Israel is not cast off; and that "which he foreknew," in ver. 2, is intended as a limitation of the meaning of "his people." According to another view, decidedly upheld by Meyer, "for I also" is not part of the proof, but connected with mh geroito : "I must needs say, God forbid! being myself a Hebrew of the Hebrews" Then, according to this view, comes the positive statement that God has not east off his people in the same general sense as before, after which the proof begins; the addition of o proegnw not being a limitation of to , but intended to enforce the idea of the impossibility of the final rejection of the race of Israel. (cf. ver. 29; also Psa_94:14 and 1Sa_12:22) The fact that, throughout the chapter, it is Israel as a nation that is in view, and that the coming of the whole nation into the kingdom of Christ is contemplated in the end, adds decided probability to this view of the significance of on proegnw , though kai ga , etc., in ver. 1, may still be regarded as possibly part of the proof. St. Paul"s designation of himself as "of the seed of Abraham" seems meant to express that he was an Israelite of pure descent, not a proselyte or descended from proselytes. In Php_3:5, as well as here, he specifies his tribe as that of Benjamin, the tribe that with Judah had clung to the house of David, and had shared the privileges of Judah. The quotation from 1Ki 19 is given freely from the LXX, varying a little, but not so as to affect the meaning. One variation is in the feminine, instead of masculine, article before Baal , which has been explained by supposing eikoni understood (so in the Authorized Version, "the image of Baal"), or by there having been a female Baal, or by the god having been supposed androgynous, or by the feminine being used of idols in contempt. St. Paul may possibly have found this reading in his copy of the LXX The variation is of no importance with regard to the drift of the passage. "According to the election of grace," at the end of ver. 5, does not seem to be directly suggested by the passage cited, but added by St. Paul so as to make plain his position maintained throughout the Epistle, and about to be pressed in this chapter on the consideration of Gentile Christians that the calling of all, whether Jews or Gentiles, is "of grace," and not claimable as of right by any on the ground of the merit of their own works. And in order to enforce this position, he adds, And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace; i.e. the word "grace" loses its essential meaning. But if of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work The preponderance of ancient authorities is against the retention of the clause within brackets, which does not seem required. It is the same as in Rom_4:4.

HOMILIES BY C.H. IRWIN. Vers. 1-10. Israel not utterly rejected.

Here the apostle, reflecting on the disobedience of the great majority of the Jewish people, and their consequent rejection, returns to the thought already expressed, (Rom_9:27) that "a remnant shall be saved." He himself is a living proof, he says, that God hath not utterly cast away his people. "For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin" (ver. 1). But those who have been rejected have suffered the just and natural punishment of their own unbelief. Two practical lessons are here taught.

I A WARNING TO THE UNCHARITABLE. Even in the most corrupt Churches there may be true believers. This lesson is practically illustrated by Elijah"s mistaken or exaggerated view of the state of Israel in his time. "Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal" (vers. 3, 4). How little Elijah knew of the true state of affairs! There is always a great danger, even amongst those who are most zealous for the truth, of depreciating or under-estimating the good that is in others. Want of charity to others may sometimes be found even in good men. Their very zeal leads them to depreciate others. If others do not come up to our standard of Christian doctrine, or Christian character, or Christian work, we are apt to imagine that they are not Christians at all. No doubt these other seven thousand servants of God were to blame for not having declared themselves more openly on the Lord"s side. Had they taken their proper place, and done their duty, they would have encouraged Elijah"s heart and sustained his hands; they would have made him feel that he was not alone in his efforts for the true and right; and they might even have prevented his flight. But there was no excuse for Elijah"s wholesale condemnation of every one in Israel except himself. "Man looketh on the outward appearance, but God looketh on the heart." Especially in these latter days, when there are so many divisions amongst Christians, we need to cultivate that charity "which thinketh no evil," which "beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

II A WARNING TO THE CARELESS. One of the great dangers of our time is indifference. Many who regularly attend our churches do so as a mere matter of custom or respectability. They hear the Word of God, but it has no power on their hearts, no influence upon their lives. The fate of rejected Israel is a solemn warning to the careless and indifferent (vers. 7-10). If we do not use our privileges, they will one day be taken from us. The neglect of talents or opportunities is as much a sin as the abuse of them. Men very soon become gospel-hardened. Hence the "more convenient season" to which they look forward never comes. They cease to think seriously about their souls; they cease to have any desire for salvation. The spirit of slumber comes upon them that fatal sleep of spiritual indifference. Their eyes are darkened, and they do not see how fast they are hurrying to their own destruction. Oh, how it becomes us to urge upon men the present acceptance of the present offer of salvation, the present performance of the duties that lie at their door! C.H.I.

HOMILIES BY T.F. LOCKYER Vers. 1-10. Grace and unbelief.

The apostle has shown (Rom_9:1-29) that God has the right, in his governance of human affairs, to take an instrument or lay it aside as he will; and (Rom_9:30-33; Rom_10:1-21) that, in using this right, he acts, not arbitrarily, but according to reasons which approve themselves to his infinite wisdom. He will now show that even the unbelief of the elect people, and their consequent rejection by God, shall be made to contribute to the consummation of his purposes in the salvation of the Gentiles and the final salvation of the Jews themselves. But are the Jews even now wholly rejected? No, in truth, but only partially. As a people they are, though this only for the present, but not indiscriminately and totally. For the apostle himself is an Israelite; there is also a remnant of Christian Jews, as in the ancient days a remnant were true to God; and as for the majority, they are blinded in their unbelief, and hence self-excluded from the election of grace.

I THE ELECTION OF GRACE.

1. There had been times of national reprobation in the past, but in the darkest day there had been gleams of light. For example, the times of Ahab: Elijah"s despair, and the seven thousand. So at intervals, more or less, throughout their history, from Moses onwards. And yet in the worst times some were true to God.

2. So it was even now. Truly the Jewish people had forfeited the privilege of its election, viz. its mission to the Gentiles as heralding the gospel of Christ. But while the people was "cast off," as it might seem, in its collective capacity, it was not reprobated in its totality as consisting of individuals. Still there was the remnant. And in these latter days of Christian history have not individual Israelites played a distinguished part? e.g. Neander.

3. Yea, even the apostle of the Gentiles himself was an Israelite, of the purest blood; and the very fact that he, an Israelite, was "a chosen vessel" was sufficient to show that God had not "cast off" his people. And in him the Jewish people might almost be said to be fulfilling its office of heralding to the Gentiles the gospel of Christ. He did their work, and right well.

II THE REPROBATION OF UNBELIEF. While the election, then, was very true, and never withheld from Israelites as such how could God deal so with them? yet there was a very terrible reprobation of Israelites alongside the election.

1. Had it not been so in the past? The wilderness-history; the monarchy; the captivities. Yes, truly, reprobation was no new thing.

2. And now: priests, people. Yes, alas! "He came unto his own, and his own received him not." But this gives us the secret of the reprobation; it was their unbelief. It had been so from the beginning: "An evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God". (Heb_3:12) And this unbelief had blinded them, and hardened them; it had been as a stupor. And the very things in which they boasted themselves, their spiritual privileges, these had been to them a snare. "Now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

Let us remember that we may frustrate by our unbelief God"s best purposes concerning us. And also that we do not merely lose the blessing which our privileges are designed to give, but they themselves are perverted to our blindness and spiritual ruin. Our "table" is "made a snare, and a trap. T.F.L.

HOMILIES BY R.M. EDGAR Vers. 1-10. The election of grace.

We saw in last chapter how the Jews, absorbed in the task of working out their own self-righteousness, had not as a nation submitted themselves to the righteousness which is of God. The Gentiles were accordingly appealed to, and their reception of the gospel is being used to provoke the Jews to jealousy, and lead them ultimately to a better mind. In the chapter now before us the apostle pursues the argument, and exhibits more in detail the Divine plan in Israel"s rejection. The section now to be considered emphasizes the fact that, notwithstanding the general Jewish rejection of the gospel, there is an election of grace. And

I PAUL IS HIMSELF AN EXCEPTION TO THE GENERAL REJECTION OF THE GOSPEL ON THE PART OF THE JEWS. (Ver. 1) To the question which in the Revised Version is put, "Did God cast off his people?" the apostle virtually answers, "By no means; I am myself a proof to the contrary." Paul had, like his compatriots, gone about to establish his own righteousness; for years he had been taking that "roundabout way;" but he had been led by his interview with his risen Lord to see in the crucified Nazarene the Messiah of promise, and he had accepted salvation from his holy hands. No arrangement of God prevented any Jew from entering the charmed circle of Christ"s fellowship and identifying himself with the Christian Church. The once-despised Messiah was waiting to receive all that cared to call upon him for his help. It was, of course, a salvation all of grace. Self-righteousness was sacrificed in the process; but it was in consequence the more thoroughly Divine. Consequently, it was the Jews who kept themselves out of the promise and the blessing, and no preventive ordinance of God.

II THE SAVED EXCEPTIONS ARE ALWAYS MORE NUMEROUS THAN WE IN OUR DOWNCAST CONDITION IMAGINE. (Vers. 2-5) The apostle goes back for comfort to the case of Elijah. In his days religion was in a desperate condition. One by one had Jezebel cut off God"s prophets, so that Elijah, as he looked over the doomed land, fancied he was the only witness left. The whole nation, in his judgment, had conformed to the idolatry of the court, and his were the only knees which had not bowed to Baal. It was this view of things which Elijah laid before the Lord. But to his surprise he is informed that God has still seven thousand worshippers who have not bowed to Baal nor kissed the idol. Matters were better than Elijah imagined. There was a larger remnant, according to the election of grace, than he could have anticipated. The same lesson is to be learned at a later period in Hebrew history, in connection with the restoration of the exiles to Canaan. In the restored remnant God had a larger proportion of faithful witnesses than to the outward eye was apparent; and they became a seed of blessing in the promised land. It is so, let us believe, always. We cannot see all the good which has been accomplished through the gospel. We must let God "write up the people," and make out his own statistics. Our reckoning, like Elijah"s, will usually be astray. God has "hidden ones," unknown to most, and his cause is not the hopeless one which pessimists suggest.

III THE REMNANT SAVED OWES ALL TO DIVINE GRACE. (Ver. 6) For the gospel is a way of salvation by free, unmerited favour, as opposed to all self-righteousness. It may be humiliating to be able to contribute nothing to our own salvation, but to have to accept it full and free from a risen Lord; yet salvation through humiliation is better, surely, than being lost. "Grace," says Dr. R. W. Hamilton, "is free favour; it can be related to no right, and contained in no law. It is extra-judicial: whenever bestowed, it depends upon the mere will of him who exercises it, or, upon what is the same thing, his voluntary pledge and agreement. If this latter be withdrawn, there may be a forfeiture of integrity and fidelity, but it is only so far unjust to those deprived of it, that a claim arose out of it; but no injustice accrues to them, considered in their original circumstances. A simple test of grace is presented by the following inquiries: Ought it to be exercised? Can it be righteously withheld? If we affirm the one, if we deny the other, it may be obligation, debt, reason, it cannot be grace, for this principle never owes itself to its object; and in not showing it, the person still is just. If there is any necessity for it, save that of demerit and its misery, "it is no more grace. By keeping the meaning of the term steadily in view, then, it will be seen that no injustice is done any who decline salvation by free grace and insist on some form of self-righteousness. For the latter is pure favouritism, and the former can alone be adopted by a God who is no respecter of persons.

IV THE REJECTED JEWS WERE JUDICIALLY BLINDED. (Vers. 7-10) Now, when we consider what the Jews generally were seeking after, we can see justice in their rejection. Their idea was essentially ambitious; they wanted a military and worldly Messiah to put them at the head of the nations of the earth. This vaulting ambition overleaped itself and fell on the other side. They obtained not what they were seeking for. But the election, the humble-minded who were ready to be saved by grace, got their salvation and their place in Messiah"s spiritual kingdom. A spiritual Messiah satisfied their longings, while the proud, self-righteous worldlings were sent empty away. Now, what the apostle here notices is that their worldly spirit led to spiritual blindness. They were so engrossed with the table of self-righteousness and ambition that they could not see the offers and education of God"s Mace. This blindness comes in the very order of nature, and is judicial. Engrossed with purely worldly ideas, they get unable to see the gracious opportunities or to appreciate them. And so they experience a fate which they richly deserve. May God preserve us all from judicial blindness! R.M.E.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Hath God rejected his whole people - All Israel? In no wise. Now there is "a remnant" who believe, ver. 5; and hereafter "all Israel will be saved," ver. 26.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

A Remnant of Israel Saved.

Meeting a further objection:

v. 1. I say, then, Hath God cast away His people? God forbid! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

v. 2. God hath not cast away His people which he foreknew.

The apostle here in his own words states a false conclusion which some of his readers might draw from his previous presentation. Is it to be inferred that God has rejected His own people, those who are in truth His own? Note the emphasis on the pronoun "His. " There is a vast difference between the people of the Jews and His people Israel. Considering that fact: Is the doctrine of Paul inconsistent with the Word of God? Paul answers with great emphasis: By no means! God would be contradicting Himself were He to reject His own people. And to substantiate his words, Paul refers to his own case. He himself was an Israelite according to the flesh, the blood of the patriarchs of old flowing in his veins. He was a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin, the youngest son of Jacob, or Israel. The fact that Paul claimed for himself a part in the kingdom of the Messiah showed that he did not teach the rejection of the true Israel.

The apostle repeats his assertion in v. 2: Not did God reject His people whom He foreknew. The true Israel, the spiritual Israel, the real children of God, stood before the eyes of God from eternity as His own people, as those whom He had selected for His own, whom He, according to His eternal counsel, chose for His own. That fact makes the later rejection of the people an impossibility.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 11:36

God’s Creative and Providential Government.

I. All things are of God. All the good is of God by authorship, all the evil is of God by permission. In the great things of redemption all things are emphatically of God. For there is no spiritual life in the soul of a fallen man. If it ever lives it is through the vivifying energy of God’s Holy Spirit. He excites the prayer and the desire to pray; He gives the ability to pray; His mercies yearned over us; so that He sent His well-beloved Son to die for transgressors. And His justice accepted a vicarious offering, and His faithfulness is pledged to cast out none who come unto Him through Christ.

II. All things are through God. We consider the first fact as referring to creation; the second merely to the providence of God. Elevated as God is above all that is human, why should we imagine that the scale on which we estimate proportions is that on which He estimates them, so that what we count great or small is similarly accounted by God? We believe of God’s providence that it extends itself into every household, throws itself round every individual, takes part in every business, and is concerned with every sorrow and accessory to every joy. All things are through God as well as of God.

III. All things are to God—they conduce in one way or another to God’s glory. Though to our dim reason many things seem rather from God, yet the day of judgment will discover that tribute is rendered faithfully and the very uttermost farthing is exacted, as well from sin which has scorned, as from guilt which has sought forgiveness through, the Redeemer’s blood

H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 1914.

References: Rom 11:36—G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines, p. 37; Spurgeon, Morning by Morning, p. 322.

The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Our apostle having shown, in the end of the foregoing chapter, that the Jews would be rejected, and the Gentiles called, begins this chapter by answering a great and popular objection. Some hereupon might be ready to say, "If this be so, then God has cast away his covenant people, violated his covenant promise, forgot the seed of Abraham his friend." He answers by his accustomed form of denial, God forbid: and then proceeds to show, that the rejection of the Jews was not total: God did not reject them all, but the unbelieving part of them only. And this he proves by producing himself as an instance in the case; I myself, says he, am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

As if he had said, "I am myself a Jew by nature and nation; not a proselyte converted to the Jewish faith, but a Jew by lineal descent, of the seed of Abraham, according to the flesh; yet am not I cast off by God; therefore God has not cast away all his people."

Learn hence, How many unbelievers soever God rejects, he will not cast away one soul that sincerely believes in his Son. and gives up himself to the obedience of the gospel. Believers are God’s jewels; he will not cast them away. They are his children, his portion, his inheritance; he will never cast them off. They are united to him by the bond of the Holy Spirit, and he has engaged himself to them by the bond of an everlasting covenant. Believers love God and his truth for ever, and the God of truth will love them for ever. God has not cast away his people.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

GOD’S COVENANT WITH THE JEWS INFALLIBLE

1. “Therefore I can say, Whither did God cast away his people? It could not be so; for truly I am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham of the tribe of Benjamin.” Here Paul utterly annihilates the popular dogma that Jesus has cast away the Jews. It is utterly untrue; his covenant still abides with the faithful remnant of which Paul himself was a member.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

[In the tenth chapter Paul's argument for gospel universality only required him to show by Scripture that the Gentiles were to be received independently; i. e., without first becoming Jews. But the Scripture which best established this fact also proved a larger, greater fact; viz., that the reception of the Gentiles would so move the Jews to anger and jealousy that they would, as a people, reject the gospel, and thereby cease to be a covenant people, and become a cast-off, rejected nation. This fact is so clearly and emphatically proved that it might be thought that, as Tholuck puts it, "the whole nation, conjointly and severally, had, by some special judgment of God, been shut out from the Messiah's kingdom." The denial of this false inference is the burden of the section now before us. In this section he will show that the casting off of Israel is not total, but partial: in the next section he will show that it is not final, but temporary.] XI. I say then Again, as in [verses 18 and 19 of the previous chapter, Paul, for the benefit of the Jewish objector, draws a false inference from what has been said, that he may face it and correct it], Did God cast off his people? [Apparently, yes; but really, no. He had only rejected the unbelieving who first rejected him. True, these constituted almost the entire nation; but it was not God's act that rejected them; it was what they themselves did in rejecting God in the person of his Son that fixed their fate. Israel as believing was as welcome and acceptable as ever. So God has not rejected them. "The very title his people," says Bengel, "contains the reason for denying it." Comp. 1Sa_12:22 ) God had promised not to forsake his people ( Psa_94:14 ). He kept the promise with those who did not utterly forsake him, but as to the rest, the majority, Jesus foretold that the kingdom should be taken from them ( Mat_21:41-43 ). Comp. Mat_22:7 ; Luk_21:24 ] God forbid . [A formal denial to be followed by double proof.] For I also am an Israelite [De Wette, Meyer and Gifford construe this as equal to: I am too good a Jew, too patriotic, to say such a thing. As if Scripture were warped and twisted to suit the whims and to avoid offending the political prejudices of its writers! If Paul was governed by his personal feelings, he ceased to be a true prophet. Had he followed his feelings, instead of revealed truth, he would have avoided the necessity for writing the sad lines at Rom_9:1-3 . The true meaning is this: God has not cast away en masse, and without discrimination or distinction, the totality of his ancient people, for I myself am a living denial of such a conclusion; or, as Eubank interprets it, such a concession would exclude the writer himself (as to whose Christianity no Jew has ever had any doubts). "Had it been," says Chrysostom, "God's intention to reject that nation, he never would have selected from it the individual [Paul] to whom he was about to entrust [had already entrusted] the entire work of preaching and the concerns of the whole globe, and all the mysteries and the whole economy of the church"], of the seed of Abraham ["A Jew by nurture and nation" (Burkitt). Not a proselyte, nor the son of a proselyte, but a lineal descendant from Abraham. Compare his words at Act_22:28 ], of the tribe of Benjamin . [Comp. Phi_3:5 . Though the apostle had reason to be proud of his tribe as furnishing the first king in Saul ( 1Sa_9:16 ) and the last Biblical queen in Esther ( Est_2:17 ), yet that is not the reason for mentioning Benjamin here. He is showing that God had not cast off the Theocracy, and he mentions himself as of Benjamin, which was second only to Judah in theocratic honor. On the revolt of the ten tribes it constituted with Judah the surviving Theocracy ( 1Ki_12:21 ), and after the captivity it returned with Judah and again helped to form the core or kernel of the Jewish nation ( Ezr_4:1 ; Ezr_10:9 ). The apostle was no Jew by mere family tradition ( Ezr_2:61-63 ; Neh_7:63-65 ), nor was he of the ten tribes of outcasts, but he was duly registered as of the inner circle, and therefore his acceptance proved the point desired.]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Romans Chapter 11

Hereupon the question is immediately raised, has God then rejected His people? To this chapter 11 is the answer. The apostle gives three proofs that it is by no means the case. Firstly, he is himself an Israelite; there is a remnant whom God has reserved, as in the days of Elias-a proof of the constant favour of the Lord, of the interest He takes in His people, even when they are unfaithful; so that when the prophet, the most faithful and energetic among them, knew not where to find one who was true to God besides himself, God had His eyes upon the remnant who had not bowed the knee to Baal. Secondly, the call of the Gentiles, and their substitution for Israel, was not the definitive rejection of the latter in the counsels of God; for God had done it to provoke Israel to jealousy. It was not, then, for their rejection. Thirdly, the Lord would come forth out of Sion. and turn away the iniquities of Jacob.

That which the apostle, or rather which the Holy Ghost, says on this point requires to be looked at in more detail.

The apostle, in quoting the case of Elias, shews that when Israel was in such a state that even Elias pleaded against them, yet God had not rejected them, He had reserved for Himself seven thousand men. This was the election of sovereign grace. It was the same thing now. But it was by grace, and not by works. The election then, has obtained the blessing, and the rest was blinded. Even as it was written, “God hath given them the spirit of slumber,” etc.

Had they then stumbled that they should fall? No! But through their fall salvation is come to the Gentiles to provoke Israel to jealousy-a second proof that it was not for their rejection. But if their diminishing and fall was a blessing to the Gentiles, what should not the fruit be of their restoration? If the first-fruits are holy, so is the lump; if the root, the tree also. Now, as to the continued chain of those who enjoy the promises in this world, Abraham was the root, and not the Gentiles; Israel, the natural stock and branches. And here is that which happened in the good olive-tree of promise in this world, of which Abraham was the root (God Himself the source of leaf and fruit), and Israel the stem and the tree. There had been some bad branches, and they had been cut off; and others from the Gentiles grafted in, in their place, who thus enjoyed the richness natural to the tree of promise. But it was on the principle of faith that they, being of the wild olive-tree, had been grafted in. Many of the Israelite branches, the natural heirs of the promises, had been cut off because of their unbelief; for when the fulfilment of the promises was offered them, they rejected it. They rested on their own righteousness, and despised the goodness of God. Thus the Gentiles, made partakers of the promises, stood on the principle of faith. But if they abandoned this principle, they should lose their place in the tree of promise, even as the unbelieving Jews had lost theirs. Goodness was to be their portion in this dispensation of God’s government, with regard to those who had part in the enjoyment of His promises, if they continued in this goodness; if not, cutting off. This had happened to the Jews; it should be the same with the Gentiles if they did not continue in that goodness. Such is the government of God, with regard to that which stood as His tree on the earth. But there was a positive counsel of God accomplished in that which took place, namely, the partial blinding of Israel (for they were not rejected) until all the Gentiles who were to have part in the blessing of these days should have come in. After this Israel should be saved as a whole; it should not be individuals spared and added to the assembly, in which Israel had no longer any place as a nation; they should be saved as a whole, as Israel. Christ shall come forth from Sion as the seat of His power, and shall turn away iniquity from Jacob, God pardoning them all transgressions.

This is the third proof that Israel was not rejected. For while enemies, as concerning the gospel at the present time, they are still beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For that which God has once chosen and called He never casts off. He does not repent of His counsels, nor of the call which gives them effect. But if the counsel of God remains unchangeable, the way in which it is accomplished brings out the marvellous wisdom of God. The Gentiles had long continued in the disobedience of unbelief. God comes in in grace. The Jews opposed themselves to the actings of grace. They lose all right to the promises through this unbelief, so that they must receive the effect of the promise on the footing of pure mercy and the sovereign grace of God, [52] in the same way as the poor Gentile. For He had shut them all up in unbelief, that it might be pure mercy to all. Therefore it is that the apostle exclaims, O depth of wisdom and knowledge! The promises are fulfilled, and the pretension to human righteousness annihilated; the Jews who have lost everything receive all on the true ground of the goodness of God. Their apparent loss of all is but the means of their receiving all from sovereign grace, instead of having it by virtue of human righteousness, or an unforfeited promise. All is grace: yet God is ever faithful, and that in spite of man’s unfaithfulness. Man is blessed; the Jew receives the effect of the promise; but both the one and the other have to attribute it to the pure mercy of God. There is nothing about the assembly here: it is the tree of promise, and those who in virtue of their position have part successively in the enjoyment of the promises of earth. The unbelieving Jews were never cut off from the church, they were never in it. They had been in the position of natural heirs of the right to the promises. The assembly is not the Jews’ own olive-tree according to nature, so that they should be grafted into it again. Nothing can be plainer: the chain of those who had a right to the promises from Abraham was Israel; some of the branches were then cut off. The tree of promise remains on the earth: the Gentiles are grafted into it in place of the Jews, they also become unfaithful (that is to say, the case is supposed), and they would in their turn be cut off, and the Jews be reinstated in the old olive-tree, according to the promises and in order to enjoy them; but it is in pure mercy. It is clearly not by the gospel they get the blessing; for, as touching the gospel, they are enemies for the Gentiles’ sake; as touching election, beloved for the fathers’ sake.

Remark further here an important principle: the enjoyment of privileges by position makes us responsible for them, without saying the individual was born again. The Jewish branch was in the tree of promise and broken off: so the Gentiles. There was nothing vital or real; but they were in the place of blessing, “partakers of the root and fatness of the olive tree,” by being grafted in.

These communications of the mind of God end this portion of the book, namely, that in which the apostle reconciles sovereign grace shewn to sinners (putting all on a level in the common ruin of sin) with the especial privileges of the people of Israel, founded on the faithfulness of God. They had lost everything as to right. God would fulfil His promises in grace and by mercy.

Footnotes for Romans Chapter 11

52:Rom 11:31 should be translated, “Even so these [the Jews] have now been unbelieving with regard to your mercy, in order that they should receive mercy” (or that they should be the objects of mercy)-”your mercy,” that is to say, the grace in Christ which extended to the Gentiles. Thus the Jews were the objects of mercy, having forfeited all right to enjoy the effect of the promise. God would not fail to fulfil it. He bestows it on them in mercy at the end, when He has brought in the fulness of the Gentiles.

John Nelson Darby — Synopsis of the Books of the Bible: the New Testament (c. 1857–1862) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1–4. Hath God cast away his people? In chapter 10 Paul has shown that the Gentiles were to come into God's favor, and the Jews, the chosen people, to be rejected. He now asks whether the Jews were finally cast off. He shows that the rejection was not total, but partial, many Jews being saved; and secondly, that it was not eternal, but finally all Israel would come to Christ. I also am an Israelite. Hence all Israel is not cast off, since he, an Israelite, is an apostle of Christ. He shows that he is of approved Jewish descent.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

Connecting Statement:

Though Israel as a nation has rejected God, God wants them to understand salvation comes by grace without works.

I say then

"I, Paul, say then"

did God reject his people?

Paul asks this question so that he can answer the questions of other Jews who are upset that God has included the Gentiles among his people, while the hearts of the Jewish people have been hardened. (See: Rhetorical Question)

May it never be

"That is not possible!" or "Certainly not!" This expression strongly denies that this could happen. You may have a similar expression in your language that you could use here. See how you translated this in Romans 9:14.

tribe of Benjamin

This refers to the tribe descended from Benjamin, one of the 12 tribes into which God divided the people of Israel.

whom he foreknew

"whom he knew ahead of time"

Do you not know what the scripture says about Elijah, how he pleaded with God against Israel?

You can translate this in an active form. AT: "Surely you know what the Scriptures record about when Elijah pleaded with God against Israel" (See: Rhetorical Question)

what the scripture says

Paul is referring to the Scriptures as if they were able to speak. (See: Personification)

they have killed

"They" refers to the people of Israel.

I alone am left

The pronoun "I" here refers to Elijah.

seeking my life

"desiring to kill me"

translationWords

God

people of God

Israel

descend

Abraham

tribe

Benjamin

foreknew

word of God

Elijah

Israel

lord

prophet

altar

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

E. Rom 9:1 to Rom 11:36. THE REJECTION OF THE GOSPEL BY ISRAEL

The theme of Rom 1:16-17 has been worked out; it has been shown that the Gospel is a power of GOD unto salvation for them that believe, a power needed by Gentile and Jew alike, guaranteed on condition of faith and in response to faith by the love of GOD, and adequate to man’s needs as shown in history and in individual experience; and a brief description has been given of the actual state of the Christian in Christ and of the certainty and splendour of his hope, resting upon the love of GOD. Naturally at this point the question of the Jews arises: they were the typical instance of a people brought into close and peculiar relation to GOD, and they therefore afford a crucial case of GOD’S dealings with such. How then did it come to pass that they rejected the Gospel? What is their present state? their future destiny? and how does this affect Christians? The answer is found in the conditions under which GOD selects men for the execution of His purposes. It is important to bear in mind that the selection throughout is regarded as having reference not to the final salvation of persons but to the execution of the purpose of GOD. Underlying the whole section is the special object of S. Paul to justify himself in preaching the Gospel to the Gentiles.

1–12. The failure of Israel does not even now constitute a rejection by GOD. As in former times of apostasy there is a faithful remnant in whom the faithfulness and graciousness of GOD is still seen. And in this remnant lies the hope of restoration.

1. λέγω οὖν κ.τ.λ. picks up the thought of Rom 9:6. The reference to Psa 114:1-4, 1Sa 12:22, enforces a negative answer.

μὴ ἀπώσατο κ.τ.λ. The form of the question involves a negative answer.

καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ κ.τ.λ. explains the vehemence of μὴ γένοιτο; in such a rejection he himself would be involved and his whole position, that the Gospel is the climax and fulfilment of the earlier dispensation in its true spirituality, undermined.

Ἰσραηλείτης κ.τ.λ. Cf. 2Co 11:22; Php 3:5.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

I say then [λεγω ουν] . Then introduces the question as an inference from the whole previous discussion, especially vers. 19 - 21.

Hath God cast away [μη απωσατο ο θεος] . A negative answer required. "Surely God has not, has He?" The aorist tense points to a definite act. Hence Rev., better, did God cast off. The verb means literally to thrust or shove. Thus Homer, of Sisyphus pushing his stone before him (" Odyssey, "11, 596). Oedipus says :" I charge you that no one shelter or speak to that murderer, but that all thrust him [ωθειν] from their homes "(" Oedipus Tyrannus," 241).

People [λαον] . See on 1Pe 2:9; Act 13:17.

An Israelite, etc. See on Phi 3:5. Paul adduces his own case first, to show that God has not rejected His people en masse. An Israelite of pure descent, he is, nevertheless a true believer.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.