Chapter # 11 Paragraph # 4 Study # 5
February 24, 2019
Humble, Texas
(112)
1769 Translation:
19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, [
take heed] lest he also spare not thee.
22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in [
his] goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural [
branches], be graffed into their own olive tree?
1901 ASV Translation:
19 Thou wilt say then, Branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
20 Well; by their unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by thy faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 for if God spared not the natural branches, neither will he spare thee.
22 Behold then the goodness and severity of God: toward them that fell, severity; but toward thee, God's goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they continue not in their unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
24 For if thou wast cut out of that which is by nature a wild olive tree, and wast grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree; how much more shall these, which are the natural [
branches], be grafted into their own olive tree?
- I. The Real and Terrible Danger.
- A. The roots of the danger: the notion that "I" support the root rather than the root supporting me.
- 1. This is the bottom line in "salvation by works".
- 2. It includes anything that can be used as a basis for "boasting".
- B. The persistence in the dangerous reality.
- 1. "Therefore, you will say...".
- a. Paul, because he assumes that the motivation to "boast" is extremely potent, pursues the warning as though his readers are not inclined to heed his warning.
- 1) This "assumption" is in clear harmony with reality; few are willing to give up their desire to be regarded as superior.
- 2) This "assumption" is in clear harmony with 10:21. In other words, it is not only "Israel" that is persistently "unpersuaded" (translated "disobedient" in the Authorized Version) and "argumentative" (translated "gainsaying" in the Authorized Version).
- 3) The stunning reality is that the "elect remnant" and the "non-elect" vessels of wrath are, essentially, no different in terms of basic character [Look, again, at Deuteronomy 9:6].
- 4) This is the essential foundation for the insistence that "boasting" not be a part of the attitude of "branches" in the "tree" known as "the People of God". We often glibly say, "There, but for the grace of God, go I", but how often is it said out of genuine understanding?
- b. Paul puts forth another argument against "boasting".
- 2. The retrenchment (The Sage says, "...to prolong the defense") of the objector.
- a. Paul pulled the first rug out from under the boastful by declaring that he/she does not sustain the Root; the Root sustains him/her.
- b. Thus, the "retreat" to the second line of defense.
- 1) "Branches were broken off in order that I (emphatic) might be grafted in."
- a) In the first place, what makes it "necessary" for a branch to be broken off so that a different branch might be ingrafted? Is the tree so unsubstantial that it can only sustain a limited number of branches so that for every one to be grafted in, one must be broken off? What logic, or doctrine, is this?
- b) The declaration is something along this line: because I have been grafted into the tree, and others have been broken off, something must be different about me.
- i. But, though true enough in essence, there must, of necessity be a definition of that "something" before it can lead to "boasting".
- ii. What, really, is that "difference"?
- iii. Clearly, from what Paul is doing, that "difference" cannot be, at any level, a basis for "boasting" [Note, again, Romans 3:27].
- 2) The point: Paul's reader is determined to find "something" in which to "boast".
- c. The loss of the second "rug".
- 1) Paul does not deny that there is, indeed, a "difference" between the branches that have been broken off and the "Gentile" branches that have been grafted in.
- 2) Paul clarifies exactly what that difference is. His focus is upon the "human side" of the Gospel, exactly where his readers want it to be (what I did to reveal my superiority).
- a) The "divine side" is "an election of grace before anyone had done anything good or evil for the purpose of creating vessels of mercy to reveal the grace/mercy aspect of the divine character."
- b) But there is a "human side".
- i. The branches were broken off because of their "unbelief" ("a" (prefix of negation) plus "pistia" (faith)).
- ii. The Gentile branches were grafted in because of their "faith" (pistis).
- 3) So, does this "faith" qualify the Gentiles to "boast"?
- a) Clearly not: Romans 3:27.
- i. This text absolutely demolishes the basis for "boasting".
- i) According to Paul, "faith" demolishes "boasting".
- ii) Likewise "boasting" demolishes "faith".
- iii) Everyone who does not "get" this simply does not understand what Paul calls the "law of faith".
- ii. What is the logic?
- i) The truth believed is that all are equally sinful (3:23 on the heels of 3:10-18) and, in this regard, "there is no difference" (3:22).
- ii) The truth expressed is that, though "faith" is the defined "difference", it does not constitute a basis for "boasting" so that any who "boast" are showing their "unbelief" in the truth that eliminates "boasting".
- iii) But, if this difference exists, to whom do we give the "credit" for its existence, without undermining its ability to destroy "boasting"? The only answer to this is Paul's question in 1 Corinthians 4:7: "Who makes you to differ? And what do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive, why do you boast as if you had not received?" Paul's whole point here is that if the thing that makes you to "differ" was a gift received, how can you turn it into an obligated wage that was due you because you somehow "earned" it by labor?
- iii. Now, those who are especially persistent in their effort to maintain a basis for "boasting" might well say, "Well Paul does acknowledge that I did receive" as if it is the "receiving" that makes one to differ. It is not; it is the gift that makes one to differ, not the willingness to "receive" because both the gift and the willingness are "of God". This is established by Philippians 2:13, and anyone who continues to maintain his/her superiority is usurping God as the One who makes us to differ.
- b) Clearly not: to go there is to reveal one's lack of understanding and one's intent to maintain one's "superiority" which, combined together, only demonstrate that the one so intent has not "believed", nor been grafted into the tree.
- C. The "Faith" by which the danger is averted.
- 1. Clearly, it is "unbelief" that results in branches being broken off of the tree.
- 2. Just as clearly, it is "faith" that results in branches being grafted into the tree.
- a. The verb Paul uses is one which he uses in Romans to indicate "being established in some reality" (3:31; 5:2; 10:3; 11:20; and 14:4). It is in the Perfect Tense, indicating something accomplished in history in the past time.
- b. This debate over "superiority" receives its denouement in 14:4 where Paul explicitly says that God is the One Who makes His servants to 'stand'.
- 3. As long as the "debate" is over "the human side" of the issue (the divine side is "I have kept for Myself...an election of grace"), there will be a degree of insecurity if that "human side" is used as a way of self-aggrandizement. Since no one has a copy of the list of the "elect vessels of mercy", there will always be an element of "insecurity" if there is an element of "high-mindedness".