Romans 11:2

11:2 chose from the very beginning: Before the people of Israel could do anything to earn their status, God selected them to be his people based on his grace alone. • Elijah the prophet: In 1 Kgs 19:1-18, the apostate King Ahab had slaughtered many of the Lord’s prophets, and Ahab’s wife Jezebel threatened Elijah with the same fate. Elijah fled to the wilderness, where he bemoaned his fate. God responded with the assurance that many faithful people remained. Paul found the present situation to be somewhat parallel. While many Jews did not believe, and some were even hostile, God was (and is) still working to preserve a believing remnant.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Rom 11:2. Προέγνω) foreknew, as a people peculiar to Himself, Rom 11:29.—ἐν Ἡλίᾳ, in Elias) in the history of Elias, who was in the greatest straits, and thought himself to be alone; when Israel had become fewer than at any time before or since, [1Ki 20:15].—ἐντυγχάνει, Hesychius, ἐντυγχάνει, προσέρχεται; comp. Act 25:24; 1Ma 8:32.

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

Rom_11:2. Ὃν προέγνω] An element which renders the impossibility of ἀπώσατο at once palpable; comp. Rom_11:29. Others take it as a limiting definition, τὸν λ. αὐτοῦ ὃν πρ. being understood of the spiritual people of God destined to the Christian salvation (Origen, Augustine, Chrysostom, Luther, Calvin, and others, including Heumann, Semler, Rosenmüller, Flatt, Glöckler). But against this view it is decisive that τ. λαὸν αὐτ. in Rom_11:1, without any limitation, denotes the Jewish nation, and consequently Paul himself would now completely disarrange the point in question; the whole chapter has for its subject, not the spiritual Israel, but the fate of the nation in respect to the salvation of Messiah. Hence, too, we are not to supply, with Philippi, p. 554, after ὃν προέγνω the limitation: as seminary of the spiritual σπέρμα.

The sense of προέγνω has been understood as variously as in Rom_8:29, but is to be taken just as there: God knew His people as such beforehand, before it actually existed; that is to say, it was to Him, to whom the whole future development of sacred history was present in His pretemporal counsel and plan, known and certain: Israel is my peculiar people! And consequently God cannot have afterwards rejected Israel; for this would in truth presuppose that which is inconceivable with God (comp. Act_15:18), and irreconcilable with the ἀμετάθετον τῆς βουλῆς αὐτοῦ (Heb_6:17), namely, that He had been deceived in His προέγνω; comp. Rom_11:30 ff. To suppose the qualitas mala of the people as that which God foreknew (van Hengel) is inadmissible, for the reason that πρόγνωσις must be the premiss of the προορίζειν of the people of God (comp. Rom_8:29); hence, too, it is not to be objected, with Hofmann, against our view, that God would surely have been able to foresee the fact that, and the time when, His people would cease to be His people.

Ἢ ΟὐΚ ΟἼΔΑΤΕ Κ.Τ.Λ., down to Rom_11:4, adduces a proof for ΟὐΚ ἈΠΏΣΑΤΟ from an historical example of Scripture, according to which a case analogous to the present of the resistance of the people to God had once occurred, but God has made the declaration that He had (not indeed cast off His people, but) reserved to Himself, in the midst of the depravity of the mass, a number of faithful ones. So (Rom_11:5) too now there has taken place, not a rejection of the people, but rather a gracious election out of the people.

ἘΝ ἨΛΊᾼ] belongs to ΤΊ ΛΈΓΕΙ, but is not: de Elia (Erasmus, Luther, Beza, Calvin, Piscator, Castalio, Calovius, and others), which would be linguistically erroneous, but: in the passage treating of Elias. Comp. Thuc. i. 9. 3, where ἐν τοῦ σκήπτρου ἅμα τῇ παραδόσει εἴρηκεν means: at the passage, where he (Homer) treats of the yielding of the sceptre, he has said, etc. Very prevalent is this mode of quotation in Philo, and also in the Rabbinical writings (Surenhusius, καταλλ. p. 493). Comp. also Mar_12:26; Luk_20:37, but not Heb_4:7.

Ὡς ἘΝΤΥΓΧ. Τ. Θ. ΚΑΤᾺ Τ. ἸΣΡΑΉΛ] dependent on ΟὐΚ ΟἼΔΑΤΕ, as a more precisely defining parallel of ἘΝ ἨΛ. ΤΊ ΛΈΓΕΙ Ἡ ΓΡ. Comp. Luk_6:4; Luk_22:61; Act_11:16; Act_20:20, et al.; Göller and Krüger on Thuc. i. 1. 1. On ἐντυγχάνειν (Rom_8:27; Rom_8:34; Heb_7:25), with dative of the person concerned (frequently in Plutarch, Polyb., Lucian, etc.), comp. Act_25:24; Wis_8:21; Wis_16:28. On ΚΑΤΆ (accusing), comp. 1Ma_8:32; 2Ma_4:36.

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 11:2 f. οὐκ ἀπώσατο : formal denial of what the heart has indignantly protested against in Rom 11:1 . ὃν προέγνω must contain a reason which makes the rejection incredible or impossible. This excludes the interpretation of Weiss, who thinks that Paul means to say that God knew what Israel was before He chose it, and therefore cannot cast it off as if its unbelief had disappointed Him; He knew from the first what it would be. To plead thus for God is too paltry. We must take προέγνω as in Rom 8:29 : the meaning is, Israel stood before God’s eyes from eternity as His people, and in the immutableness of the sovereign love with which He made it His lies the impossibility of its rejection. The idea is the same as in Rom 11:29 below. ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε : this is the alternative. He who says, God has cast off Israel, must be ignorant of what Scripture says ἐν Ἠλίᾳ in the passage which gives the history of Elijah. The sections of the Bible were designated, not as now by chapter and verse, but by some descriptive phrase: cf ἐπὶ τῆς βάτου , Mar 12:26 : and in Philo ἐν ταῖς ἀραῖς = Gen 3:15 . Many references are made in this form by Hebrew writers. For ἐντυγχάνειν κατὰ cf. 1Ma 8:32 : it means to plead (not intercede) with God against Israel. τὰ θυσιαστήρια is one of the indications that in Elijah’s time there was no law requiring only one altar for Jehovah. The words are quoted from 1Ki 19 Rom 11:10 or 14. In Elijah’s mood, Paul might have said something similar of his own time, for their circumstances were not alike. The Apostle, like the prophet, was lonely and persecuted, and Israel as a whole seemed to have abandoned God or been abandoned by Him. But he understands God’s way (and His faithfulness) better.

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

Vv. 2, 3. “God hath not cast away His people which He foreknew. Or wot ye not what the Scripture saith in the passage about Elijah; how he maketh intercession to God against Israel:Lord, they have killed Thy prophets, they have digged down Thine altars, and I am left alone, and they seek my life.”

The formal denial which begins Rom 11:2 is intended to introduce the more general proof, the exposition of which begins with the words: Or wot ye not? Several commentators (Or., Aug., Chrys., Luth., Calv., etc.) have explained the words: whom He foreknew, as a restriction narrowing the general notion of the people of Israel: “He could undoubtedly cast away the mass of the people, but not the foreknown elect who form, strictly speaking, His people.” This meaning is inadmissible; for, as we have already seen in Rom 11:1, the matter in question here is not the lot of this elect portion, but that of the people as a whole. Is it not of the entire people that the apostle speaks when, in Rom 11:28-29, he says: “As touching the election, they are loved for the Father’s sake; for the gifts and calling of God are without repentance?” These words are the authentic explanation of the expression in Rom 11:2 : His people whom He foreknow. Of all the peoples of the carth one only was chosen and known beforehand, by an act of divine foreknowledge and love, as the people whose history would be identified with the realization of salvation. In all others salvation is the affair of individuals, but here the notion of salvation is attached to the nation itself; not that the liberty of individuals is in the least compromised by this collective destination. The Israelites contemporary with Jesus might reject Him; an indefinite series of generations may for ages perpetuate this fact of national unbelief. God is under no pressure; time can stretch out as long as He pleases. He will add, if need be, ages to ages, until there come at length the generation disposed to open their eyes and freely welcome their Messiah. God foreknew this nation as believing and saved, and sooner or later they cannot fail to be both.

As usual, the form: or know ye not, signifies: “Or if ye allege the contrary, do ye forget”...

The expression ἐν ᾿Ηλίᾳ, literally, in Elias, is a form of quotation frequent in the N. T. (Mar 12:26; Luk 20:37) and in the Rabbins to denote: “in the passage of the Scriptures which contains the history of Elias.”

The preposition κατά can signify nothing else here than against. To intercede against is a strange expression, but fitted to bring out the abnormal state of the people in regard to whom the prophet could only pray thus, that is to say, protesting before God against their conduct. Comp. 1Ki 19:10; 1Ki 19:14; 1Ki 19:18.

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.

Rom_11:2

God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. This verse admits of two interpretations. The words his people may be understood, as in the preceding verse, as meaning the Jewish nation and the clause which he foreknew, as, by implication, assigning the reason for the declaration that God had not cast them off. The clause, according to this view, is little more than a repetition of the sentiment of the preceding verse. It is not to be inferred from what I have said of the rejection of the Jews, that God has cast away all his chosen people. Multitudes are excepted now, as in the days of Elias. The second interpretation requires more stress to be laid upon the words which he foreknew, as qualifying and distinguishing the preceding phrase, his people. God has indeed rejected his external people, the Jewish nation as such, but he has not cast away his people whom he foreknew. According to this view, his people means the elect, his spiritual people, or the true Israel. This interpretation seems decidedly preferable,

1. Because it is precisely the distinction which Paul had made, and made for the same purpose, in Rom_9:6-8, The rejection of the external Israel does not invalidate the promises of God, because those promises did not contemplate the natural seed as such, but the spiritual Israel. So, now, when I say that the external Israel is rejected, it does not imply that the true chosen Israel, to whom the promises pertained, is cast away.

2. Because this is apparently Pauls own explanation in the sequel. The mass of the nation were cast away, but a remnant, according to the election of grace, were reserved, Rom_11:5. Israel, as such, Paul says in Rom_11:7, failed of admission to the Messiahs kingdom, but the election hath obtained it. It is, therefore, evident that the people which God foreknew, and which were not cast off, is the remnant spoken of in Rom_11:5, and the election mentioned in Rom_11:7.

3. Because the illustration borrowed from the Old Testament best suits this interpretation. In the days of Elias, God rejected the great body of the people; but reserved to himself a remnant, chosen in sovereign grace. The distinction, therefore, in both cases, is between the external and the chosen people.

Which he foreknew. On the different senses of the word rendered he foreknew, see Rom_8:29. Compare Rom_7:15; 2Ti_2:19; 1Co_8:3; Gal_4:9; Pro_12:10; Psa_101:4; 1Th_5:12; Mat_7:23. In foreknowledge, as thus used, is involved something more than simple prescience, of which all persons and all events are the objects. The people whom God foreknew, were a people distinguished by that foreknowledge from all other people. All are not Israel who are of Israel. God knows those who are his, and in the midst of general apostasy, preserves and saves those whom he thus foreknows as his own. Even Luther gives this view of the passage. Es ist nicht alles Gottes volk, was Gottes volk heisset; darum wird nicht alles verstossen, ob der mehere Theil auch verstossen wird. And Olshausen says, Vom sichtbaren geht er aber weiter, auf den unsichtbaren Kern des volkes Gottes über … Offenbar kann Paulus hier nicht von bloss die zur Kirche übergetretenen Juden meinen, die waren kenntlich, sondern die jedem menschlichen Auge unbekannten, die den verborgenen Schatz der Treue und Aufrichtigkeit ihnen selbst unbewusst im Herzen trugen. Diese verhalten sich zur Masse des Volks, wie im Individuum die Reste des göttlichen. Ebenbildes zum alten Menschen; oder wie im wiedergebornen der unentwickelte, oft von der Sünde zurückgedrängte neue Mensch zu dem ihm umgebenden sündlichen Menschen. Wie dieser sterben muss, damit jener herrsche, so muss auch das λεῖμμα frei gemacht werden von der fremden Schale, in der er wohnt, um sich ausbreiten zu können. Immer ist es das eigentliche Volk (9, 6 ff.) auf das alle Verheissungen gehen, wie der unscheinbare neue Mensch in dem ungeschlachtigen alten Menschen allein der wahre Mensch ist.

Wot ye not what the Scripture saith of Elias? ἐν Ηλίᾳ, in Elias, i.e. in the section which treats of Elias, or which is designated by his name. Another example of this method of referring to Scripture is found in Mar_12:26, In the bush God spake unto him; i.e. in the section which treats of the burning bush. This method of quotation is common with the Rabbins, Surenh. p. 493, and occurs in the classic writers. How he maketh intercession to God against Israel; ἐντυγξάνειν means to approach or draw near to any one, either ὑπέρ, in behalf of, or κατά, against. The latter form occurs here and in 1 Macc. 10:60.

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

Which he loved and chose from everlasting.

The second proof: Because that God is faithful in his league or Covenant, although men be unfaithful: So then seeing that God hath said, that he will be the God of his unto a thousand generations, we must take heed, that we think not that the whole race and offspring is cast off, by reason of the unbelief of a few, but rather, that we hope well of every member of the Church, because of God’s league and Covenant.

The third proof, taken from the answer that was made to Elijah: even then also, when there appeared openly to the face of the world no elect, yet God knew his elect and chosen, and of them also good store and number. Whereupon this also is concluded, that we ought not rashly to pronounce of any man as of a reprobate, seeing that the Church is oftentimes brought to that state, that even the most watchful and sharp-sighted pastors think it to be clean extinct and put out.

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

God hath--"did"

not cast away his people--that is, wholly

which he foreknew--On the word "foreknew," see on Rom 8:29.

Wot--that is, "Know"

ye not that the scripture saith of--literally, "in," that is, in the section which relates to

Elias? how he maketh intercession--"pleadeth"

against Israel--(The word "saying," which follows, as also the particle "and" before "digged down," should be omitted, as without manuscript authority).

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 2. God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew.] God has not finally and irrecoverably rejected a people whom he has loved (or approved) so long, ον προεγνω, for this is evidently the meaning of the word in this place, as we have already seen, Ro 8:29, and is a very general meaning of the original verb ידע yada in Hebrew and γινωσκω in Greek; as I have had often occasion to notice in different parts of this work, and what none will deny who consults the original. See Schleusner, Parkhust, c.

Wot ye not what the Scripture saith] ουκ οιδατε, Do ye not know what the Scripture saith? The reference is to 1Kgs 19:10; 1Kgs 19:14. And the apostle's answer to the objecting Jew is to the following effect: God hath not universally thrust away his people, for whom in the promise to Abraham he intended, and to whom decreed, to grant his special favour and blessing but the case is now much as it was in the days of Elijah: that prophet, in his addresses to God, made his complaint against Israel thus:-

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

2. God has not cast away, etc. This is a negative answer, accompanied with a qualifying clause; for had the Apostle unreservedly denied that the people were rejected, he would have been inconsistent with himself; but by adding a modification, he shows it to be such a rejection, as that God’s promise is not thereby made void. So the answer may be divided into two parts, — that God has by no means cast away the whole race of Abraham, contrary to the tenor of his own covenant, — and that yet the fruit of adoption does not exist in all the children of the flesh, for secret election precedes. Thus general rejection could not have caused that no seed should be saved; for the visible body of the people was in such a manner rejected, that no member of the spiritual body of Christ was cut off.

If any one asks, “Was not circumcision a common symbol of God’s favor to all the Jews, so that they ought to have been all counted his people?” To this the obvious answer is, — That as outward calling is of itself ineffectual without faith, the honor which the unbelieving refuse when offered, is justly taken from them. Thus a special people remain, in whom God exhibits an evidence of his faithfulness; and Paul derives the origin of constancy from secret election. For it is not said here that God regards faith, but that he stands to his own purpose, so as not to reject the people whom he has foreknown.

And here again must be noticed what I have before reminded you of, — that by the verb foreknow, is not to be understood a foresight, I know not what, by which God foresees what sort of being any one will be, but that good pleasure, according to which he has chosen those as sons to himself, who, being not yet born, could not have procured for themselves his favor. So he says to the Galatians, that they had been known by God, (Galatians 4:9); for he had anticipated them with his favor, so as to call them to the knowledge of Christ. We now perceive, that though universal calling may not bring forth fruit, yet the faithfulness of God does not fail, inasmuch as he always preserves a Church, as long as there are elect remaining; for though God invites all people indiscriminately to himself, yet he does not inwardly draw any but those whom he knows to be his people, and whom he has given to his Son, and of whom also he will be the faithful keeper to the end.

Know ye not, etc. As there were so few of the Jews who had believed in Christ, hardly another conclusion could have been drawn from this small number, but that the whole race of Abraham had been rejected; and creep in might this thought, — that in so vast a ruin no sign of God’s favor appeared: for since adoption was the sacred bond by which the children of Abraham were kept collected under the protection of God, it was by no means probable, unless that had ceased, that the people should be miserably and wretchedly dispersed. To remove this offense, Paul adopts a most suitable example; for he relates, that in the time of Elias there was such a desolation, that there remained no appearance of a Church, and yet, that when no vestige of God’s favor appeared, the Church of God was, as it were, hid in the grave, and was thus wonderfully preserved.

It hence follows, that they egregiously mistake who form an opinion of the Church according to their own perceptions. And surely if that celebrated Prophet, who was endued with so enlightened a mind, was so deceived, when he attempted by his own judgment to form an estimate of God’s people, what shall be the case with us, whose highest perspicuity, when compared with his, is mere dullness? Let us not then determine any thing rashly on this point; but rather let this truth remain fixed in our hearts — that the Church, though it may not appear to our eyes, is sustained by the secret providence of God. Let it also be remembered by us, that they are foolish and presumptuous who calculate the number of the elect according to the extent of their own perception: for God has a way, easy to himself, hidden from us, by which he wonderfully preserves his elect, even when all things seem to us past all remedy.

And let readers observe this, — that Paul distinctly compares here, and elsewhere, the state of things in his time with the ancient condition of the Church, and that it serves in no small degree to confirm our faith, when we bear in mind, that nothing happens to us, at this day, which the holy Fathers had not formerly experienced: for novelty, we know, is a grievous engine to torment weak minds.

As to the words, In Elias, I have retained the expression of Paul; for it may mean either in the history or in the business of Elias; though it seems to me more probable, that Paul has followed the Hebrew mode of speaking; for ב, beth, which is rendered in the Greek by ἐν, in, is often taken in Hebrew for of

How he appeals to God, etc It was certainly a proof how much Elias honored the Lord, that for the glory of his name he hesitated not to make himself an enemy to his own nation, and to pray for their utter ruin, because he thought that the religion and worship of God had perished among them: but he was mistaken in charging the whole nation, himself alone excepted, with that impiety, for which he wished them to be severely visited. There is however in this passage, which Paul quotes, no imprecation, but a complaint only: but as he complains in such a way as to despair of the whole people, there is no doubt but that he gave them up to destruction. Let us then especially notice what is said of Elias, which was this, — that when impiety had everywhere prevailed, and overspread almost the whole land, he thought that he was left alone.

I have reserved for myself seven thousand, etc. Though you may take this finite for an indefinite number, it was yet the Lord’s design to specify a large multitude. Since then the grace of God prevails so much in an extreme state of things, let us not lightly give over to the devil all those whose piety does not openly appear to us. It also ought to be fully imprinted on our minds, — that however impiety may everywhere prevail, and dreadful confusion spread on every side, yet the salvation of many remains secured under the seal of God. But that no one may under this error indulge his own sloth, as many seek hiding-places for their vices in the hidden providences of God, it is right to observe again, — that they only are said to be saved who continue sound and unpolluted in the faith of God. This circumstance in the case ought also to be noticed, — that those only remained safe who did not prostitute their body, no, not even by an external act of dissimulation, to the worship of idols; for he not only ascribes to them a purity of mind, but that they had also kept their body from being polluted by any filthiness of superstition.

So then also at this time, etc. He applies the example to his own age; and to make all things alike, he calls God’s people a remnant, that is, in comparison with the vast number in whom impiety prevailed: and alluding at the same time to the prophecy he had quoted from Isaiah, he shows, that in the midst of a miserable and confused desolation the faithfulness of God yet shone forth, for there was still some remnant: and in order more fully to confirm this, he expressly calls them a remnant that survived through the grace of God: and thus he bore witness that God’s election is unchangeable, according to what the Lord said to Elias, — that where the whole people had fallen away to idolatry, he had reserved for himself seven thousand: and hence we conclude, that through his kindness they were delivered from destruction. Nor does he simply speak of grace; but he now calls our attention also to election, that we may learn reverently to rely on the hidden purpose of God.

One thing then that is laid down is, — that few are saved in comparison with the vast number of those who assume the name of being God’s people; the other is, — that those are saved by God’s power whom he has chosen with no regard to any merit. The election of grace is a Hebrew idiom for gratuitous election.

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.

(2) Which he foreknew.—This must not be pressed too far, as implying an absolute indefectibility of the divine favour. God, having in His eternal counsels set His choice upon Israel as His peculiar people, will not readily disown them. Nor is their case really so bad as it may seem. Now, as in the days of Elijah, there are a select few who have not shared in the general depravity.

Of Elias.—Literally, in Elias—i.e., in the section which contains the history of Elias. So in Mar_12:26; Luk_20:37; “in the bush” and “at the bush,” mean, in the paragraph relating to the bush.

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

2. God hath not cast away his people] Lit. did not cast, &c. These words are verbatim (save only the change of tense) with LXX. of Psalms 93 (Heb., 94.):14.

which he foreknew] See on Rom_8:29.—Two interpretations are possible here. The “foreknowledge,” or sovereign antecedent decision of the Eternal Mind, may be (a) that which designated the nation for privilege, or (b) that which designated individuals of it for final glory. The words of Rom_11:3-5 favour the latter view; and thus St Paul would say “God never thrust Israel out of the covenant; for He always had among them a foreknown ‘Israel of God’.”—The former sense (national designation) would be perfectly legitimate in itself; but it is less in accord with the immediate context, and with the closely kindred reasonings of ch. 9. The question in view here is “Was the nation ever so rejected as that members of it, as such, were rejected?” This St Paul negatives by pointing to the “nation within the nation;” the elect faithful.

of Elias] Lit. in Elias; i.e. in the narrative of Elijah’s life.

intercession] On behalf of the Divine Truth and Worship.

2. The whole Olive Tree—its root, branches, and all—is the Church Universal, in which there is “neither Greek nor Jew;” i.e. in which every real part of the organism, every true believer, shares the sap and life of grace in equal reality. But the special imagery is framed to emphasize not this truth, but another truth in harmony with it; viz. that “salvation is of the Jews;”—that with the Hebrew Patriarch began—after a distinct break of continuity—the more definite life and history of the Church; that for ages the saints were all (practically) found among his sons; and that the universal Saviour was of the seed of David.

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.

God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew,.... The apostle goes on with his answer to the objection, by distinguishing and explaining who he meant by the people God had not cast away, namely, which were "foreknown" by him; for all mankind are in a sense his people, being made, maintained, and supported in their beings by him, yet they are not all foreknown; for were they, they would be all predestinated, called, conformed to the image of Christ, justified and glorified; but some of them will be cast away, being bad and wicked, and will be sent into everlasting punishment: and though the people of the Jews in general were the people of God, being in a sense chose, known, and distinguished by him from the rest of the world, yet they were not all a "foreknown" people, in the sense the apostle uses the word; wherefore a great number of them were cast away, of which afterwards the apostle speaks largely in this chapter: but then there were a people among them, that were the people of God in a more special sense; they were chosen by him from everlasting to be his people; they were taken into the covenant of his grace as such; they were given to Christ as his people, and were redeemed and saved by him on that account; and were, or were to be called, with an holy calling, when they are openly declared to be the people of God, whom he foreknew: he not merely knew them before, by his general prescience and foreknowledge, which extends to all persons and things; or foresaw their faith, holiness, and good works, and so chose them for himself; for faith, holiness, and good works, are fruits and effects of electing grace; but he so knew them before, even from all eternity, as that he approved of them, liked them, loved them, and took delight and complacency in them: now these his people he never did, nor never will cast away. Their numbers may be but very small in some periods of time, yet none of them are cast away; God may not immediately arise to their help and assistance in time of distress, or so soon as they desire and expect; he may withdraw his presence, hide himself, and stand at a distance from them; he may afflict them in a fatherly way, when they may think he has cast them off, or cast them away; whereas he never casts any of them away, nor out of his heart's love, nor out of his sight, nor out of the covenant of his grace, nor out of the hands of his Son, nor out of his family, or so as that any of them shall perish eternally; so far from it, that he takes the utmost delight in them, grants them the greatest nearness to himself, bears the strongest affection for them, and takes the most diligent care of them; whoever casts them out of their affection and company, he will not; the reasons are, because his love to them is unchangeable, his purpose concerning their salvation stands firm and sure, his word and oath are unalterable, his gifts and calling are without repentance; and they are his jewels, portion, and inheritance; they are as the apple of his eye, and continually held by his right hand. The apostle next replies to this objection, by putting them in mind of the case and state of the church of God, in the times of Elijah; and what judgment that prophet formed of it, and in which he appeared to be mistaken:

wot ye not what the Scripture saith of Elias? do ye not know? ye cannot be ignorant who have, and read the Scripture, what it says of Elias, or "in Elias"; that is, as the Arabic version renders it, "in the history of Elias"; in the account it gives of his life and times:

how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying: that is, how he spoke to God in prayer concerning Israel; and instead of praying for them, as the prophets were wont to do, he was obliged to bring a complaint against them for their idolatry, contempt of the worship of God, and violent persecution of his true followers. The apostle chose to mention this instance because there was some likeness between his case and Elijah's; and the state of the people of Israel at the then present time, and as in the times of Elijah; for as the Jews in his time killed and persecuted the prophets of the Lord, so in the present time they had killed the Lord Jesus Christ, and persecuted his apostles; and as Elijah, though one of their own prophets, was obliged to make intercession against them, so the apostle, though one of their own countrymen, could not but speak against them, and of their just rejection by God: and this he observes, to soften their resentments against him, when so great a prophet had done so before him: and this the Jews themselves own (p), for they say that Elijah , "brought an accusation against Israel": and it is observed by another (q) that

"coals are said of Isaiah and Elijah, because they delivered an accusation against Israel: one called them a people of unclean lips, and the other said, for they have forsaken thy covenant:''

which is the apostle's sense.

(p) Laniado in 1 Kings xix. 14. (q) Jarchi in Isa. vi. 6.

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

2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,

Ver. 2. Saith of Elias] A man of such transcendent zeal, that to heighten the expression thereof some have legended of him, that when he drew his mother’s breasts, he was seen to suck in fire.

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.

God hath set cast away - This is an explicit denial of the objection.

Which he foreknew - The word “foreknew” is expressive not merely of foreseeing a thing, but implies in this place a previous purpose or plan; see the note at Rom 8:29. The meaning of the passage is simply, God has not cast off those whom he had before purposed or designed to be his people. It is the declaration of a great principle of divine government that God is not changeable: and that he would not reject those whom he had purposed should be his people. Though the mass of the nation, therefore, should be cast off, yet it would not follow that God had violated any promise or compact; or that he had rejected any whom he had foreknown as his true people. God makes no covenant of salvation with those who are in their sins; and if the unbelieving and the wicked, however many external privileges they may have enjoyed, are rejected, it does not follow that he has been unfaithful to one whom he had foreknown or designated as an heir of salvation. It follows from this, also, that it is one principle of the divine government that God will not reject those who are foreknown or designated as his friends. It is a part of the plan, therefore, that those who are truly renewed shall persevere, and obtain eternal life.

Wot ye not - Know ye not.

What the Scripture saith? - The passage here quoted is found in 1Ki 19:10-18.

Of Elias - Of Elijah. Greek, “Elijah” ἐν Ἡλιᾳ en Hēlia. This does not mean that it was said about Elijah, or concerning him; but the reference is to the usual manner of quoting the Scriptures among the Jews. The division into chapters and verses was to them unknown. (See the Introduction to the notes on Matthew.) Hence, the Old Testament was divided into portions designated by subjects. Thus, Luk 20:37; Mar 12:26, “At the bush,” means the passage which contains the account of the burning bush; (see the notes on those places.) Here it means, in that passage or portion of Scripture which gives an account of Elijah.

He maketh intercession to God against Israel - The word translated “maketh intercession” ἐντυγχάνει entungchanei means properly to come to the aid of anyone; to transact the business of anyone; especially to discharge the function of an advocate, or to plead one’s cause in a court of justice. In a sense similar to this it is applied to Christ in his function of making intercession for us in heaven; Heb 7:25; Isa 53:12. In the English language, the word is constantly used in a good sense, to plead for one; never, to plead against one; but the Greek word may imply either. It expresses the function of one who manages the business of another; and hence, one who manages the business of the state against a criminal; and when followed by the preposition for, means to intercede or plead for a person; when followed by against κατά kata, it means to accuse or arraign. This is its meaning here. He accuses or arraigns the nation of the Jews before God; he charges them with crime; the crime is specified immediately.

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

God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew: here he makes a further answer to the forementioned objection: by way of distinction, he distinguishs the people of God into such as are foreknown, and such as are not foreknown: and as for the former of these, he says, they are not rejected of God. By such as are foreknown of God, he means those that are elected and predestinated to eternal life, Rom 8:29; a foreknowledge with approbation is implied and intended, Joh 10:14; 2Ti 2:19.

Wot ye not what the Scripture saith of Elias? Here is a third answer to the objection in Rom 11:1, and it is taken from an instance in Elias, which the Jews were well acquainted with. He cites or brings a book case for it. And he the rather brings this instance, lest the Jews should accuse him of insolency, for that he had spoken before only of himself; and therefore he gives them to understand, that there were many other believing Israelites, as well as himself, though possibly they were unknown to them. You know (saith he) what the Scripture saith of Elias, 1Ki 19:1-21.

How he maketh intercession to God against Israel. i.e. against the ten tribes, who were generally revolted from God, and fallen to idolatry: against those he complained, or those he impeached, ripping up their impieties, as in the following words.

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

2. His people… foreknew—By the same prescience with which God first foreknew and predicted the faithfulness of Abraham, (see note on Rom_9:13,) he foreknows that in the future Israel will survive the dark ages of his history and ultimately join the fulness of the Gentiles gathered into Christ. (On foreknowledge see note on Rom_8:29.)

Of Elias—Rather, in Elias, (Elijah,) that is, in that section of the Old Testament in which the history of Elijah is given, (1Ki_19:10.) The division into chapters and verses is of modern origin. The ancient mode was to designate the section by its topic.

Intercession—Appeal. Under the terrible reign of Ahab and Jezebel it seemed as if the worship of Jehovah had been extinct in his own chosen land, and idolatry was completely and forever the established religion. The great defender of the faith, Elijah, awoke to find himself alone, and complained to Jehovah that even his life was sought. Of this now present and parallel dark crisis in Israel’s history the Elijah is St. Paul. Israel has not indeed now abolished Jehovah and established Baal. The age of the world is too advanced for that stupidity. But he rejects the incarnate Jehovah of the New Testament, authenticated by the oracles of the Old. The ancient Elijah bewailed that no worshipper of Jehovah remained; but the modern Elijah well knows and prizes the chosen remnant. The darkest view of our own age, too often taken by the nervous man, jealous for God, is not always the wisest. God’s secret elect may be more numerous than his fears suggest, and from that very fewness may spring the future abundance.

2. Yet what would have been the condition of the human race if continued without the Redeemer is a very theoretical question. It would apparently have been in a state of spiritual death, without power of self-recovery, which, if perpetuated by a natural immortality, would have become a necessary, eternal, living death. The whole, being imposed despotically upon the race, would have been irreconcilable with the benevolence and justice of God; and it is for this very reason that we may hold that the race would not have been thus perpetuated. The condemnation (Rom_5:18) of the race, theoretically viewed, would have consisted in the absence of the Divine Spirit, the want of all those moral qualifications which Divine Holiness could approve, and the natural impossibility of any true happiness or blessedness. But the whole, being necessitated, could not amount to a real desert of judicial penalty from a just God.

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

God hath not rejected that part of his people whom he foreknew - Speaking 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. Know ye not - That in a parallel case, amidst a general apostasy, when Elijah thought the whole nation was fallen into idolatry, God "knew" there was "a remnant" of true worshippers.

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

An example from history:

v. 2. Wot ye not what the Scripture saith of Elias, how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,

v. 3. Lord, they have killed Thy prophets, and digged down Thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life?

v. 4. But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.

v. 5. Even so, then, at this present time also, there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

v. 6. And if by grace, then is it no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace; otherwise work is no more work.

v. 7. What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for.

St. Paul quotes a Scripture-passage from Elijah, from the section of the Old Testament which treats mainly of the life and deeds of Elijah, in confirmation of his contention. Even in the darkest days of Israel there was ever a remnant, a small number of such as remained true to the Lord and were saved. The Prophet Elijah at that time had addressed himself to the Lord in a word of pleading against Israel, a form of accusation, stating in brief that the children of Israel had killed the Lord’s prophets, that they had utterly destroyed His altars, and that he, the prophet, had been left as the only one of the true believers, and even his life was in constant danger on account of their enmity and hatred, 1Ki 19:10. King Ahab and his adulterous wife Jezebel were especially active in their efforts to extirpate the true religion in Israel. And therefore Elijah was totally discouraged, believing that the worship of the true God was practically abandoned, and that no true worshiper of God remained. But the divine oracle, or answer, showed that the situation was altogether different from his conception of it. For the Lord had left for Himself, had retained for His own, seven thousand men that had not bowed their knee to Baal, in the cult of the Phoenician goddess Baaltis, or Astarte. In the midst of general apostasy and persecution the Lord had reserved for Himself these faithful few. And thus at the present time also, so St. Paul argues in conformity with Old Testament experience, there is a remnant according to the election of grace. The people of Israel in general have spurned the grace of the Lord and have been in turn rejected by Him; but a few of the nation have proved themselves true Israelites; they have accepted the Savior, they have entered the Church of Christ. And this they have done because of the election of grace, because God, in His wonderful grace and mercy, chose them to that end. Out of the mass of the children of Israel, all of them redeemed by the blood of Christ, God has selected them to become partakers of His salvation.

And the fact that this election is made on the basis of God’s grace only is brought out in its full strength by the apostle: But if out of grace, then no more out of works, since otherwise grace is no more grace. Grace ceases to be grace just as soon as the work and conduct of man is mingled with it in any nay whatsoever. The terms "grace" and "works" are mutually exclusive. If the thoughts, acts, and conduct of men influenced God in His election of grace, then this election ceases to be one of grace, and the doctrine no longer belongs to the Gospel, but to the Law. If out of works, then there is no more grace, otherwise work is no more work. If one wants to speak of works and of grace also, at the same time and in the same connection, there is again a contradiction in itself, because a work that does not actually obtain its object in the form of a reward no longer has merit, cannot be considered a performance which has intrinsic value. What, then, is the conclusion of the entire argument, if the assumption of v. 1. cannot stand, if it cannot be true that God has rejected His own people? The situation is this: Israel, the nation as such, has not obtained that after which it strove so earnestly. The people as a whole, the nation as such, was determined to merit eternal salvation by works; but since this method is not God’s way, and since they refused to accept the method which He held out to them in the Gospel, salvation was lost to them on account of their own perverseness; their rejection is their own fault, just as it is that of all such as place their trust in their own work and self-chosen way to heaven.

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

Here we have a second argument to prove that God would not wholly cast off the Jewish church and people; namely, because he had foreknown them; that is, had chosen the body of them to be a special and peculiar people to himself, above and before all the people of the earth; and had also foreknown, that is, foreseen, that many of them would, through the assistance of his Holy Spirt, savingly believe on the promised Messias. God never did, never will cast away such, either among Jews or Gentiles.

Another instance is here produced, to prove that God had not suffered all the Jews to apostatize and fall away through unbelief; and that is, the instance of Elias, in whose days there was such a general revolt among the Jews from the worship of the true God to Jeroboam’s idolatry, that he thought himself alone. But God assures him, there was not such a dearth of saints as he feared, he having reserved to himself seven thousand true and faithful worshippers of himself, who had never bowed the knee to the image of Baal.

Learn hence, That even in times of universal apostacy and epidemical degeneracy, God has a number to stand up for, and witness to, his name and truth, and that the number of them is more than we either imagine or believe. God has ever had, and always will have, a seed to serve him, which shall be accounted to him for a generation; and although the number of revolters be great, yet the number of the righteous is not small.

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

2. “God did not cast away his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah when he communed with God against Israel?

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

God did not cast off his people which he foreknew . [Here is the second proof that God did not cast off his people. It is in the nature of an axiom, a statement which is so palpably true that it needs no corroboration. God's foreknowledge can not fail, therefore that nation which in the eternity before the world he knew to be his own nation, can not ultimately fail to become his nation. "Of all the peoples of the earth," says Godet, "one only was [published and openly designated as] chosen and known beforehand, by an act of divine foreknowledge and love, as the people whose history would be identified with the realization of salvation. In all others salvation is the affair of individuals, but here the notion of salvation is attached to the nation itself; not that the liberty of individuals is in the least compromised by the collective designation. The Israelites contemporary with Jesus might reject him; an indefinite series of generations may for ages perpetuate this fact of national unbelief. God is under no pressure; time can stretch out as long as he pleases. He will add, if need be, ages to ages, until there come at length the generation disposed to open their eyes and freely welcome their Messiah. God foreknew this nation as believing and saved, and sooner or later they can not fail to be both." Comp. Act_15:15-18 ; Isa_45:17 ; Isa_59:20 ; Jer_31:31 ; Jer_31:34 ; Eze_34:22 ; Eze_37:23 ; Eze_39:25 ; Rom_11:26 ] Or know ye not what the scripture saith of Elijah? [Literally, in Elijah. Anciently Scripture and other writings were not divided into chapters and verses, but into sections. These among the Jews were called Parashah. Instead of being numbered, they had titles to them, describing the contents. Thus it came to pass that any one wishing to refer to a passage of Scripture would quote enough of the Parashah's title to identify it. So Paul here quotes words found "in [the Parashah about] Elijah"; viz., 1Ki_19:10-18 . Comp. Mar_12:26 ; Luk_20:37 ] how he pleadeth with God against Israel :

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.

2. God hath not cast away his people whom he foreknew. Israel was the people foreknown, “the chosen people.” In verse 1, “his people” refers to the nation; here it must mean the same, not individuals. The nation foreknown and chosen is not totally and eternally cast off. This is what Paul means, and what he devotes the rest of the chapter to proving. He first shows that a portion of Israel is saved. Know ye not what the Scripture saith of Elias? The passage referred to is found in 1 Kings 19:10. Elijah, a fugitive for his life, in his appeal to God, assumes that all Israel had fallen into the idol worship of Ahab and Jezebel. But there were true worshipers left, although the nation seemed to have fallen away. In what seemed a general apostasy, there were seven thousand left. So, argues the apostle, there are faithful ones left now in Israel.

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.

2. προέγνω. Cf. Rom 8:29 n.

ἤ οὐκ οἴδατε κ.τ.λ. The point is that in a notorious case of a great apostasy there was no rejection by GOD, but a preservation of a remnant. So it is now.

ἐν Ἠλείᾳ “in the section which deals with Elijah,” S. H. q.v.

ἐντυγχάνει—κατὰ. Cf. Act 25:24 περί, 1 Mace. Rom 11:25 κατὰ; lit. approaches, and petitions, GOD against.…

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.

2.] God did not cast off his people which he foreknew (προέγνω as in reff.: ‘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.’ It is plain that this must here be the sense, and that the words must not be limited, with , , Chrys., Calv., al., to the elect Christian people of God from among the Jews, with Paul as their representative: see on ver. 1. On this explanation, the question of ver. 1 would be self-contradictory, and this negation a truism. It would be inconceivable, that God should cast off His elect).

Or (see ch. 9:21 al.:—introduces a new objection to the matter impugned) know ye not what the Scripture saith in (the history of) Elias (better thus than ‘with regard to,’ as Luth., Erasm., Calv., Beza, al. Tholuck gives examples: from Pausan. viii. 37. 3,—ἔστιν ἐν Ἥρας ὅρκῳ τὰ ἔπη,—i.e. in that part of the Iliad (ξ. 278) where Hera swears by the Titans: from Thucyd. i. 9,—καὶ ἐν τοῦ σκήπτρου ἅμα τῇ παραδόσει εἴρηκεν αὐτὸν πολλῇσι νήσοισι κ. Ἄργεϊ παντὶ ἀνάσσειν, i.e. in that part of the Iliad (β. 108) where the transmission of the sceptre is related)? how (depends on οὐκ οἴδατε) he pleads with see reff.—and note, ch. 8:26) God against Israel, &c. The citation is a free one from the LXX. The clauses τοὺς προφ., and τὰ θυσιαστ. are inverted, ἐν ῥομφαίᾳ is omitted, and κἀγὼ ὑπελείφθ. μόνος is put for καὶ ὑπολέλειμμαι ἐγὼ μονώτατος. The altars, as De W. observes, were those on the high places, dedicated to God.

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

2. οὐκ ἀπώσατο. St. Paul gives expressly and formally a negative answer to the question he has just asked, adding emphasis by repeating the very words he has used.

ὃν προέγνω. The addition of these words gives a reason for the emphatic denial of which they form a part. Israel was the race which God in His Divine foreknowledge had elected and chosen, and therefore He could not cast it off. The reference in this chapter is throughout to the election of the nation as a whole, and therefore the words cannot have a limiting sense (Orig. Chrys. Aug.), ‘that people whom He foreknew,’ i.e. those of His people whom He foreknew; nor again can they possibly refer to the spiritual Israel, as that would oblige a meaning to be given to λαός different from that in ver. 1. The word προέγνω may be taken, (1) as used in the Hebrew sense, to mean ‘whom He has known or chosen beforehand.’ So γινώσκειν in the LXX. Amo 3:2 ὑμᾶς ἔγνων ἐκ πασῶν τῶν φυλω1͂ν τῆς γῆς. And in St. Paul 1Co 8:3 εἰ δέ τις ἀγαπᾷ τὸν Θεόν, οὗτος ἔγνωσται ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ. Gal 4:9 νῦν δὲ γνόντες Θεόν, μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ Θεοῦ. 2Ti 2:19 ἔγνω Κύριος τοὺς ὄντας αὐτοῦ. Although there is no evidence for this use of προγινώσκειν it represents probably the idea which St. Paul had in his mind (see on 8:29). (2) But an alternative interpretation taking the word in its natural meaning of foreknowledge, must not be lost sight of, ‘that people of whose history and future destiny God had full foreknowledge.’ This seems to be the meaning with which the word is generally used (Wisd. 6:13; 8:8; 18:6; Just. Mart. Apol. i. 28; Dial. 42. p. 261 B.); so too πρόγνωσις is used definitely and almost technically of the Divine foreknowledge (Act 2:23), and in this chapter St. Paul ends with vindicating the Divine wisdom which had prepared for Israel and the world a destiny which exceeds human comprehension.

ἤ οὐκ οἴδατε: cf. 2:4; 6:3; 7:1; 9:21. ‘You must admit this or be ignorant of what the Scripture says.’ The point of the quotation lies not in the words which immediately follow, but in the contrast between the two passages; a contrast which represented the distinction between the apparent and the real situation at the time when the Apostle wrote.

ἐν Ἠλίᾳ: ‘in the section of Scripture which narrates the story of Elijah.’ The O. T. Scriptures were divided into paragraphs to which were given titles derived from their subject-matter; and these came to be very commonly used in quotations as references. Many instances are quoted from the Talmud and from Hebrew commentators: Berachoth, fol. 2Ch_1, fol. 4.Col_2 id quod scriptum est apud Michäel, referring to Isa 6:6. So Taanijoth, ii. 1; Aboth de-Rabbi Nathan, c. 9; Shir hashirim rabbai. 6, where a phrase similar to that used here, ‘In Elijah,’ occurs, and the same passage is quoted, ‘I have been very jealous for the Lord, the God of Hosts.’ So also Philo, De Agricultura, p. 203 (i. 317 Mang.) λέγει γὰρ ἐν ταῖς ἀραῖς, referring to Gen 3:15. The phrase ἐπὶ τῆς βάτου Mar 12:26; Luk 20:37; Clem. Hom. xvi. 14; Apost. Const. v. 20, is often explained in a similar manner, but very probably incorrectly, the ἐπί being perhaps purely local. The usage exactly corresponds to the method used in quoting the Homeric poems. As the Rabbis divided the O. T. into sections so the Rhapsodists divided Homer, and these sections were quoted by their subjects, ἐν Ἔκτορος ἀναιρέσει, ἐν νεκυίᾳ. (See Fri. Delitzsch ad loc., Surenhusius, Βίβλος καταλλαγῆς, p. 31.)

ἐντυγχάνει: ‘he accuses Israel before God.’ The verb ἐντυγχάνειν means, (1) ‘to meet with,’ (2) ‘to meet with for the purposes of conversation,’ ‘have an interview with,’ Act 25:24; hence (3) ‘to converse with,’ ‘plead with,’ Wisdom 8:21, either on behalf of some one (ὑπέρ τινος) Rom 8:27, Rom 8:34; Heb 7:25; or against some one (κατά τινος), and so (4) definitely ‘to accuse’ as here and 1 Macc. 11:25 καὶ ἐνετύγχανον κατʼ αὐτοῦ τινες ἄνομοι τῶν ἐκ τοῦ ἔθνους: 8:32; 10:61, 63.

The TR. adds λέγων at the end of this verse with א*L al. pler., it is omitted by אc A B C D E F G P min. pauc., Vulg. Sah. Boh., and most Fathers.

2. But what is the meaning of μὲν οὖν (that this is the correct reading see below)? It is usual to take οὖν in its ordinary sense of therefore, and then to explain μέν by supposing an anacoluthon. or by finding the contrast in some words that follow. So Gif. ‘St. Paul, with his usual delicate courtesy and perfect mastery of Greek, implies that this is but one part (μέν) of his ministry, chosen as he was to bear Christ’s name “before Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel.” Winer and others find the antithesis in εἴ πως παραζηλώσω. But against these views may be urged two reasons, (i) the meaning of μὲν οὖν. The usage at any rate in the N. T. is clearly laid down by Evans on 1Co 6:3 (Speaker’s Comm. p. 285), ‘the οὖν may signify then or therefore only when the μέν falls back upon the preceding word, because it is expectant of a coming δέ or ἀτάρ, ’ otherwise, as is pointed out, the μέν must coalesce with the οὖν, and the idea is either ‘corrective and substitutive of a new thought, or confirmative of what has been stated and addititious.’ Now if there is this second use of μὲν οὖν possible, unless the δέ is clearly expressed the mind naturally would suggest it, especially in St. Paul’s writings where μὲν οὖν is generally so used: and as a matter of fact no instance is quoted in the N. T. where οὖν in μὲν οὖν has its natural force in a case where it is not followed by δέ (Heb 9:1 quoted by Winer does not apply, see Westcott ad loc.). But (ii) further οὖν is not the particle required here. What St. Paul requires is not an apology for referring to the Gentiles, but an apology to the Gentiles for devoting so much attention to the Jews.

If these two points are admitted the argument becomes much clearer. St. Paul remembers that the majority of his readers are Gentiles; he has come to a point where what he has to say touches them nearly; he therefore shows parenthetically how his love for his countrymen, and his zeal in carrying out his mission to the Gentiles, combine towards producing the same end. ‘Do not think that what I am saying has nothing to do with you Gentiles. It makes me even more zealous in my work for you. That ministry of mine to the Gentiles I do honour to and exalt, seeking in this way if perchance I may be able to move my countrymen to jealousy.’ Then in ver. 15 he shows how this again reacts upon the general scheme of his ministry. ‘And this I do, because their return to the Church will bring on that final consummation for which we all look forward.’

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

Foreknew. See on ch. Rom 8:29.

Or [η] . Compare ch. 6 3; Rom 7:1. Confirming what precedes by presenting the only alternative in the cave. Or is omitted in the A. V.

Wot ye not [ουκ οιδατε] . Why should the Revisers have retained the obsolete wot here, when they have rendered elsewhere, know ye not? See Rom 6:16; 1Co 3:16; 1Co 5:6, 1Co 6:2, etc. The phrase indicates that this cannot be thought of as true.

Of Elias [εν ηλια] Wrong; though Rev. has retained it : of Elijah, with in in margin; probably in order to avoid the awkward circumlocution in the passage treating of Elijah, or the ambiguous in Elijah. See on in the bush, Mr 12:26. Thucydides (1. 9) says : "Homer, in 'The handing down of the sceptre, ' said," etc.; i e., in the passage describing the transmission of the sceptre in the second book of the Iliad. A common form of quotation in the rabbinical writings. The passage cited is 1Ki 19:10, 14. He maketh intercession [εντυγχανει] . See on ch. Rom 8:26. Rev., pleadeth.

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