Chapter # 11 Paragraph # 2 Study # 1
December 30, 2018
Humble, Texas
(Download Audio)
<097>
Thesis: The purpose of God in allowing the development of grievous evil in "Israel" was to present salvation to the Gentiles.
Introduction: Thus far in our studies of Romans 11 we have seen that Paul's "major" concern is whether his readers will draw the false conclusion that God has "rejected" His people, called "Israel", because of their persistent, and grave, wilfulness in disbelief coupled to a contentious/argumentative spirit in the face of His all-day-long appeal to them to turn to Him. To understand Paul, I think that there is a major concept regarding "Israel" that needs to be "in place" in our thinking. That major concept is presented in imagery in both Matthew 3:12 and Luke 3:17 by John the Baptizer. The imagery is this: there is a great pile of grain gathered upon the threshing floor and the Harvester is waving His purging fan over it as it is sifted so that the chaff will be blown away from the seed. In this imagery, the entire pile is considered "grain" even though it contains both seed and chaff. In the same way, Paul, in Romans 11, presents "Israel" as the "pile of grain on the threshing floor" in that his argument is that there is an element of "Israel" that is "Elect Seed" which has its destiny decided by Grace, and there is "Hardened Chaff" which has its destiny decided by "Law".
In Romans 9:6 and following Paul has already made this point: there is an "Israel" within "Israel". There is the Hardened Seed of Israel who are identified as "the children of the flesh", and there is the Elect Seed of Israel who are identified as "the children of promise". Additionally, at the end of Romans 10 Paul has introduced the concept of God's methodology of bringing "Israel" to salvation by making them jealous by turning His attention to the Gentiles. And there is Paul's declaration of the final outcome in 11:26 where "all Israel" shall be saved. There is a lot of theology wrapped up in these concepts, but the large picture is that the Great Tribulation will function as the "winnowing fan" that drives the chaff of Israel away from the seed so that the outcome is that the "seed" is gathered into the barn.
For our study this evening, we are going to focus upon Paul's return to his original thesis in 11:1. The question there and here (11:11) is the same: Is God's reaction to "Israel's" wilful disbelief and persistent argumentative spirit a rejection of "Israel"?
- I. Paul's Question.
- A. Concerns what he is really saying.
- 1. The words and structure of 11:1 and 11:11 are initially the same: "Therefore am I saying...?".
- a. He is questioning his readers' grasp of what he is actually saying as a doctrinal truth that is to be embraced.
- b. He is positing a possible "truth" that is actually the opposite of what he is actually saying: "...Did not God reject His people?" (in 11:1) and "...Did they not stumble so as to fall?" (in 11:11).
- c. His denial is absolute: "Absolutely not".
- 2. In 11:11 the absolute denial is followed by the strong contrastive "But...".
- B. Concerns the question of the ultimate outcome of "Israel's" failure.
- 1. The "failure" is cast in the form of a question of "stumbling".
- a. There is a concept of Israel "stumbling over a stumblingblock" in 9:32-33 where the picture is of God placing a "rock of offense" before Israel in Zion and Israel "stumbles" over it.
- b. But, in our text, the word translated "stumble" is a totally different word and it is used in a different way.
- 1) The word contains the concept of "tripping", but, as James 2:10 and 3:2 both indicate, the idea is not of someone "tripping" over some difficult truth, but of someone "tripping" over some demand for righteousness to transcend other interests or desires.
- a) This "tripping over a demand to do what is right" is called, in the next part of the verse a "transgression" (a deliberate violation of the demand).
- b) The context, set by David's expressed desire for eternal destruction upon his enemies, argues that this "transgression" is the rejection of the Messiah and His crucifixion by reason of "Israel's" demand.
- 2) The sense in our text is, thus, "Has Israel created such a grievous 'offense' that they should fall under divine condemnation?"
- 3) In other words, the question is whether it is God's reaction to Israel's grave offensiveness to condemn them to a permanent condition of rejection by Him.
- 2. The consequence is presented as "falling", but the immediate context defines that as "fall" as "coming under God's severe condemnation" (11:22).
- C. Concerns the underlying reason for misunderstanding.
- 1. Those who would think that God would respond to "tripping" with condemnation are "legal" in their thinking: this is "Justice" and it is expressed toward the "hardened".
- 2. But Paul is the apostle of "Grace" so that the "legal" outcome is not the point; rather, the "Grace" outcome is the point and it is expressed toward "The Elect".
- II. Paul's Answer.
- A. In a short form: Absolutely not.
- B. But in a longer form: God has another intention.
- 1. Their "permitted" transgression was to validate the divine turn to the Gentiles so that they might be included in the salvation of the Jews (John 4:22 and Acts 28:28).
- 2. And, the turn to the Gentiles was to "provoke" Israel to jealousy so that those true Israelites among the larger group called "Israel" might be turned back to God (11:14).