Romans: God's Righteousness Vindicated (6)
Chapter 9 -11
Paul's defence of the Torah may be plausible but hard facts say that
the physical Jew has been abandoned. So while Paul may be able to talk
his way around objections to his view of the Torah, he can't talk his
way around the fact that so many physical Jews to whom the promises were
made (9:1-5) are unblessed and unsaved. Paul's gospel surely means God
is faithless.
Paul insists that the physical Jews had all the promises made to them
and the covenants, Torah, the Shekinah, and even the Messiah belonged
to Israel. According to Paul's gospel (which was his version of God's
faithfulness) the bulk of the Jewish nation was jettisoned. If the
promises and all the rest were given to Israel and the bulk of Israel
has missed them what happened to God's faithfulness?--the promises
failed. Paul says the promises didn't fail because not all who descended
from Israel (Jacob) is Israel and not all Abraham's descendants are his
children (9:6-7). So, did God "move the goal posts"? Is this "gospel"
to be defended by now saying that Israel isn't Israel? Paul insists that
the elective principle is not new to the gospel. In fact the gospel
takes the selecting work of God seriously. Israel is glad that God
excluded Abraham's son Ishmael. They were glad God excluded Isaac's son
Esau. Paul claims their acceptance of that electing work of God stopped
too soon because God didn't see all Israelites as Israelites. The
patriarchal narratives made that clear.
As early as Deuteronomy 18:17-19 God made it clear that mere fleshly
descent from Abraham and Jacob wasn't enough if they were to enjoy his
favour. Those who did not submit in love to the prophet(s) God raised up
would be dealt with severely. Peter (Acts 3:23) renders the passage in
the strongest possible terms. Whoever doesn't listen to the prophet(s)
will be "cut off from among the people" (strong verb and the definite
article is there). In this rendering of the Deuteronomy text, to reject
Jesus or his commissioned prophets is to be cut off from Israel. Flesh
isn't enough!
This is seen in Isaiah and Hosea (Romans 9:25-29) where Israel is
said to be "not my people" and then later (when they turned to God) they
were called his people. This Pauline teaching wasn't brand new; it
wasn't special pleading to save his case. The true "Israel" was those
who had Abraham's flesh and faith (see Romans 2:28-29 which is speaking
of physical Jews). This is seen also in Elijah's day (11:1-6) when God claimed only
7,000 as his own. Paul says it's that kind of truth he was telling now
(11:4-5). What the nation as a whole sought (the Messiah and messianic
blessings) they missed and only the elect got it (11:7) when they got
Jesus Christ. Had God then jettisoned Abraham's physical descendants? Had he
changed his mind about the promises he made to them? God forbid! Though
God did cause them to stumble (11:7-10) it was not to be done with them,
it was to open the door for the world (11:11-12,30-32). It was also to
open the door for Israel if by trust in God they'd receive it (11:14,
23-24). God had not changed his mind about his gifts and calling
(11:28-29).
Because the mass of Jews (at least the mass of Diaspora Jews who had
heard--see Acts 21:20) had rejected Jesus Christ and were outside his
blessings, some Gentiles were tempted to think God was done with them;
had cast off the people he had originally called (11:1, 17-24). But Paul
insists this was never true. God had not been faithless to a single
Israelite. Nor would he ever be. All Israel would be saved (11:26, see
9:6 and the previous paragraphs). God did not prove faithless to Israel
in order to do Gentiles a favour. In fact, the reason Paul worked so
hard among the Gentiles was to bring a wake up call to his own beloved
people (11:14, 30-31). And the reason God concluded all men under sin
was so that he could show mercy to all (11:32). It was wrong for Jews to
be arrogant and exclusive but it was equally wrong for Gentiles to be
like that (11:17-24; 15:27).
So what are they to conclude? That Gentiles who didn't pursue a right
relationship with God found it and that Israel who sought an
(eschatalogical) "torah of righteousness" missed it (9:30-31)? Yes. They
missed it because they sought it within the limits of fleshly Israel,
because they sought it within the limits of a Torah given exclusively to
Israel and which therefore could not embrace the world (all nations, as
per the Abrahamic covenant). That covenant Torah could not be the means
of showing God's faithfulness to the entire human race since it was
confined strictly to those to whom it was given (Leviticus 18:5; Romans
10:5). Israel wanted to establish its own (national) righteousness
(10:3) and didn't see (didn't want to see--compare Isaiah 65:1-2 and
Romans 10:16-21) God's righteousness (faithfulness) which isn't
sectarian or national. Their blindness wasn't new, it was characteristic
of them (10:16-21). For all their zeal when the Messiah came they were
blind to the truth that he was the goal to which the Torah led and he
was the termination of the Torah as a marker of righteousness. The
children of Abraham, the elect, were now redefined (in keeping with
Torah truth). No more could (even a righteous) Jew appeal to the Torah
from Sinai as the mark of election. God's saving purpose was for the
entire world and the Torah (which, in any case, stood in judgment over
Israel and brought her under curse for apostasy as per Deuteronomy
27:26) was nationalistic and exclusive (compare Ephesians 2:11-22). To
seek the eschatalogical "torah of righteousness" (9:31) in the Torah as a
strictly Jewish covenant marker was to make the Torah an end in itself.
This meant they missed the eschatalogical righteousness of God in Jesus
Christ (for the entire world) it was also to judge the Torah "after the
flesh" and miss its real significance and prostitute it. So Israel's
problem was twofold. They violated the Torah by not living it out before
God and they missed its place in God's scheme of redemption.
What complicated things was Paul's claim that it was
through the hardening of Israel and their rejection of the Messiah that
salvation came to the whole world. If that was true then Israel was only
doing the will of God when they rejected the Messiah. Why then should
they be cast off for doing God's will? See 3:3-8 and 9:14-21. Paul
assures them that Israel's doing God's will was not a holy and obedient
move on their part--it was rebellion for which they were responsible. It
wasn't to their credit that God used their sinfulness to gain generous
and holy ends. But God hardened the apostate part of Israel
(11:7-10,25) in order to bless the world (11:32) including those he had
hardened. No wonder Paul rolls his eyes in pleasure and awe in 11:33-36.
©2004 Jim McGuiggan. All materials are free to be copied and used as long as money is not being made.
Many thanks to brother Ed Healy, for allowing me to post from his website, the abiding word.com.