Loquat...
Loquat, this part of Alexander's article that I copied down below from this article:
http://www.allbygrace.com/puritanillusionpt1.html
is such a good explanation. I am seeing more and more, as I've been studying all this, that many Finalists do make the very mistakes Alexander talks about with Romans 11. I had trouble with it myself, but now it's very clear. So just wanted to let you know that. Thanks! :)
"We now proceed to expound anew the disputed text, Romans 11: 25-26:
“For I would not brethren that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits: that blindness in part is happened to Israel until the fullness of the gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.”
Paul is consistent with himself. He makes it clear in Romans 4 that the promises to Abraham are gospel promises in which the distinction between Jew and gentile is obliterated. (See Romans 4: 9-18:)
“....that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised it is of faith that it might be by grace to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed, not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all that he might become the father of many nations according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be ...” etc.
We remind our readers that Abram received his new name, Abraham ‘the father of many nations’ to denote in advance that his seed was the mystic nation to be gathered out of all peoples. The promise, Paul teaches, takes precedence over the earthly nation and the Law. The nation was constituted as a temporary expedient under the Law, ‘until the seed should come to whom the promise was made.’
(See Galatians 3: 16-19).
A NATION BORN IN A DAY
The elect are one nation, one people, and to this is related the prophecy of a nation being ‘born in a day’. Isaiah writes, “Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed she brought forth her children.” This prophecy was fulfilled at Pentecost when the new nation, the true seed of Abraham, came to being in one day, in place of the earthly people. Even Mr. Murray makes the elementary mistake of using this text to describe the future restoration of Israel (p.78).
The principle enunciated in Rom. 4 is thoroughly carried out by Paul in Galatians where there can be no dispute that the seed of Abraham is Christ and His Church, without distinction of Jew and gentile.
(See our booklet, “Moses or Christ”, Serial Number 031).
Coming closer to the Eleventh of Romans, it is clear from the argument of Romans 9 that Paul is accustomed to use the word “Israel” in a twofold sense. As touching the flesh, Israel denotes the twelve tribes. As touching the gospel, Israel denotes the Church. Romans 9, verse 6, is a classic example of Paul’s use of “Israel” twice in one verse, with a contrary meaning – “they are not all Israel which arc of Israel” - (compare verse 8 – “That is, they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted for the seed”).
Therefore, to allege that the “Israel” of Romans 11, verse 25, must needs be the “Israel” of verse 26 because otherwise “too violent a transition would be involved”, is overstating the case.
EXEGESIS OR FANTASY?
Mr. Murray, in his attempt to expound Romans 11, takes the line adopted by the moderate chiliasm of those who have followed the “Puritan Hope” in former times. Israel has been temporarily suspended from her former privileges and from national participation in the gospel promises. The gentiles were moved into the vacancy and will remain there till the time comes for the national conversion of Jewry. When this takes place, the gentiles will not suffer any loss, but in fact will experience greater blessing then ever before through the agency of converted Jews.
The limiting words in the favourite text of this school: “Blindness in part is happened to Israel till the fullness of the gentiles be come in” does not daunt them. Aware of the fate of their theory if they take the words in their obvious meaning, they teach that “the fullness of the gentiles” does not mean the completed number of the gentile elect. There will be more gentiles converted after the conversion of the Jewish people than ever before. There will be another “fullness” after the fullness of the gentiles is already “come in”.
Mr. Murray heads this section of his book with a quotation from his friend Mr. John Murray, to this effect – “There awaits the gentiles, in their distinctive identity as such gospel blessing far surpassing anything experienced during the period of Israel’s apostasy, and this unprecedented enrichment will be occasioned by the conversion of Israel on a scale commensurate with that of their earlier disobedience”.
Now the text says nothing of the sort. It is quite plain that “the fullness of the gentiles” is the complete number of Christ’s elect among the nations of the world. There cannot be another “fullness” afterward. To assert on the basis of this text that the blessing of the gentiles after the elect number has been completed will far surpass anything experienced during the time of gentile privilege (now nearly 2,000 years in duration) is not exegesis, but fantasy.
To do our friends justice they have already determined, on the basis of an earlier verse in Romans 11, that there is a distinct assurance of this unsurpassed enrichment of the gentiles during the coming Jewish restoration, and to make this theory valid: they naturally must find a way through or around that fatal -verse 25. It does not seem to occur to them that the argument works both ways and that the clear statement that Jewish restoration (if any) cannot begin until the period of gentile blessing is ended, must be the governing factor.
In fact, we do not need to press this matter in order to overthrow the illusion, for we contend, that the advocates of “the Puritan Hope” are wrong in both instances. What we are doing is endeavouring to expose, from the writings of our opponents, their own inconsistency and thus to draw attention to the real weakness of the theory that it is not based on exegesis at all; that it makes Paul contradict Paul; and that it avoids a full and regular exposition of the text from Isaiah which Paul uses to crown the whole of his great argument (Isaiah 59:20, 21).
“LIFE FROM THE DEAD”
Before we turn to our own exposition of that text, we must first attempt to expose the false exegesis of Romans 11:15:
“If the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?”
It is held by our opponents that as the fall of Israel from the favour of God resulted in the blessing of the gentiles (through the gospel being transferred to them from defaulting Israel), the blessing which will come to the gentiles through the restoration of Israel will be so great that it could be described as “life from the dead”.
Now we have no hesitation in saying that this is exegetical nonsense. The text says nothing of the kind. It is a sheer imposition to use the last four words as applying to gentiles. “Life from the dead” applies of course to the salvation of the elect, among the Jewish people. What Paul is saying is that not all Jewry is cast off. There remains to this hour a remnant according to the election of grace. From the carcass of the rejected nation, the grace of God calls forth, in every generation, a remnant of Jews to salvation and this is indeed “life from the dead”. To say it is anything else, is to subject the text to a preconceived theory, the ground of which must be found elsewhere. There is no such ground and our opponents make no attempt to establish any. In the absence of exegetical proof, their theory must go by default.
That the interpretation advanced above is the correct one, is proven by the preceding verse (14) – “if by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them”. Paul is not speaking of a future salvation for the nation of Israel, but of the contemporary success of the gospel in his own day (and by inference, of course, in all generations of the Church) in saving elect individuals out of the rejected nation.
A further proof that. Paul is speaking of the conversion of individuals, not of nations is furnished in the allegory of “The Olive Tree” with which Paul reinforces his doctrine.To make “the receiving of them” (verse 15) mean a national restoration to divine favour, would, in the terms of the allegory require a national regrafting of Israel into the olive tree (the symbol of the Covenant Church of God in Old and New Testaments). But this cannot be sustained unless it can be proved first of all that the gentile nations were already grafted in (See verse 17: “And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive, tree, wert grafted in among them and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree…”
Now the verse teaches, otherwise. Only individual gentiles are in view. No gentile nation has ever been grafted into the covenant of God and therefore no gentile nations can be broken off. Not even all Jews were broken off from the olive tree, for Paul speaks of “some of the branches” only, which were so broken off - a sentence which presents such difficulty to the Puritan Hope, that there is seldom any serious attempt to explain it. So far as we can see, Mr. Murray does not make the attempt though he leads us right up to verse 16.
To sum up this portion of the argument:
The casting away of the Jewish nation meant the opening of the door of mercy to all the world (as contrasted with that very small portion of the world which Israel represents). The return of some Jews in repentance to Christ is therefore regarded by Paul as life from the dead.
The Puritan Hope however, sees this ‘life from the dead’ as a millennial benefit from the conversion of Israel to the outside world! Here is a prime example of an interpretation being governed and dictated by a theory, without any attempt at thorough exposition.
To make this verse to mean a national regrafting of Israel, would require first of all that the gentile nations as such were already grafted in. But no gentile nation has ever been grafted into the covenant of God. Only individuals are so treated, and it is only as individuals that they can be broken off. The gentiles were never (as the Jewish nation), a theocratic community entirely governed by divine regulation so that their very name became synonymous with their religion. No gentile nation ever, stood in that relation to God nor ever can, therefore no gentile nation can be broken off from that stem into which they were never grafted. Individuals only are in view, and these are warned not to boast of their security and privilege as against the Jew, but to remember that faith alone puts us into the covenant and unbelief can put us out, even as Jewish persons, if they remain not still in unbelief, will be grafted again into the gospel stock.
Much play is made on the words of verse 12: “If the fall of them (the Jews) be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles, how much More their fullness?” The Puritan Hope (and more besides these), would have us understand here that as the fall of Israel meant that the gentiles were enriched with salvation, what benefits might not flow to the gentiles when Israel is restored? But ‘their fullness’ only means the complete number of natural Israelites saved in all generations beginning with the apostles. The consequent benefit to the rest of the world by this constant stream of Jewish believers being added to the Church is evident by the example of Paul himself whose conversion has enriched the world beyond all measure.
This ‘receiving’ of repentant Jews into the kingdom of Christ is later described by Paul as ‘life from the dead’ as indeed it is, but it is altogether beyond reason for the Puritan Hope to interpret this, in its enthusiasm, as life for the gentile world!
THE "MYSTERY" OF VERSE 25
We come to verse 25: “For I would not brethren that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits: that blindness in part is happened unto Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.”
Our friends desire us to understand by this, that the national salvation of Israel is the mystery, and that it awaits the end of the gentile era of salvation, designated by the phrase, ‘the fullness of the gentiles’.
But why should the salvation of Israel be said to be a mystery, when our friends are prepared to quote almost if not every OT prophecy as proving this destiny of Israel? It could only be a mystery, surely, if they were hard put to it to find any text of that nature, as though it suddenly sprang to light out of nothingness when Paul wrote the epistle to the Romans. Mr. Murray quotes the early Puritan, Elnathan Parr as saying, “Paul saith that he would not have the gentiles ignorant; of what? That all the elect would be saved? Whoever doubted it? But of the calling of the Jews there was a doubt. He calls it a secret or mystery; but that all the elect shall be saved is no secret.”
Elnathan Parr, however, is fighting with shadows. He is no longer with us to be interrogated or we might have pointed out to him that his objection is altogether irrelevant. No-one indeed ever doubted that the elect would be saved, but the alternative is NOT, as Brother Parr suggests, and as Mr. Murray approves, the national salvation of the Jew in the future.
The term “mystery” is a favourite one with the apostle Paul who uses it no less than 13 times in his epistles. The fount whence Paul derived this wondrous word is the word of Christ in Matthew 13, where “the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven” are proclaimed in parable. These “mysteries”, understood only by the children of the kingdom, disclose the nature of Christ’s kingdom, the Church, the manner of its inauguration and propagation, its growth, principles and final fulfillment.
It was withheld from Jewry whose hearts were hardened, and whose eyes were blinded, and their ears stopped from hearing, by the judicial judgment of God (Matthew 13: 13-15). The nation of the Jews was therein given over to unbelief (as we see to this day), the kingdom of God being taken from them and given to “a nation brining forth the fruit thereof”.
This is the mystery of which the writings of Paul are so replete. In this same epistle to the Romans (chap. 16: 25-26) he writes: “NOW to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret since the world began, but now is made manifest and by the scriptures of the prophets made known to all nations for the obedience of faith”.
Brother Parr (and his disciple, Mr. Murray) tells us that the mystery of Romans 11: 25 is the restoration of the Jew to divine favour. Is that then another mystery which Paul describes in Romans 16?
Would Brother Parr say that what Paul was talking about in Romans 16 was the “Latter Day Glory” of the Jewish people? But Paul says it was no such thing. It is in fact the Gospel, “made known to all nations for the obedience of faith”.
In the Ephesian epistle Paul refers no fewer than six times to this mystery and always (including Chap. 5:32 where the human marriage mystery is stated to be the pattern of Christ’s union with the Church) it refers to the gospel mystery of the union in Christ of Jew and gentile in one body, without distinction of nationality, as the last, final and full disclosure of the eternal purpose of God (see Ephesians 3: verses 3, 4 and 9).
Will Brother Parr tell us that this mystery is that God, is going to re-establish the Jew if not to Palestine, at least to the most significant place in the divine favour, as against the period of gentile predominance? Or is Paul talking about several “mysteries” all independent of each other? Mystery of mysteries this!
The mystery of Ephesian 1:9 and of those verses in Ephesians 3, together with the mystery of Colossians 4:3, and the mystery of Romans 16:25, are all one mystery, namely the gospel union of Jew and gentile in one mystical body united to Christ in eternal and covenant marriage bonds, inseparable from Him and from one another, all distinctions of nationality abolished for ever, one nation and one people born in a day (Isaiah 66: 8). This mystery is presented as the eternal purpose and counsel of God, the consummation of His wisdom and the realisation of all the movement of His great life through eternity and through time. (We beg our readers at this point to read all the texts specified at the beginning of this paragraph).
We refuse to admit that Paul had any other mystery to talk about in one verse wrenched from his writings to hand over to the disinherited Jew as the greatest thing that Christ ever did on earth. We protest against the derogatory argument meted out by the Puritan Illusion to the previous Church of Christ in her sufferings for 2,000 years past, and to the colossal achievements won by Christ’s sword and bow through the devoted testimony of His Church.
We do not know by what yardstick our author measures the temple of God, but we suspect it is one which measures multitudes and crowds. David’s great and final sin was the numbering of Israel. Food for thought there.
Nay, brethren, Paul’s “mystery” in Romans 11 is not that of Brother Farr and his disciples but is the mystery of Christ’s true and spiritual Israel, one whole and entire and worldwide nation, the true seed of Abraham, the children of the promise.
A mystery this, indeed, beside which Brother Parr’s mystery pales into insignificance. In order to bring about the salvation of the gentiles as the legitimate inheritors of the promises made to Abraham, so that they could be lawfully regarded as the very seed of Abraham, grafted into the very stock of the covenant nation, it was necessary that the Jews as a nation should be disinherited and cast out, hence to be received again only as they came in the category of repentant sinners, individually grafted into a new order in which all racial distinction is obliterated.
In other words, the mystery is not the regathering of Israel, but their rejection as a nation to make way for a new nation, a new Israel, composed indifferently as to ancestral origins. Upon the understanding of this mystery depends the peace and the stability of gentile believers. That they needed to be instructed in the mystery, the case of the Galatians only too strongly demonstrates. The Church of Galatia was well nigh destroyed by the error that gentiles had to be grafted into earthly Israel, instead of the reverse, that Jews required to be grafted into New Covenant stock on the same terms as gentiles.
Now we see what Paul meant by saying, “lest ye should be wise in your own conceits”, for the Roman believers (at least that part of them which was gentile) needed to be warned that it was by grace alone they were saved, and that neither Jew nor gentile had any room for boasting. Let them remember that the blindness which had fallen upon Israel as a nation, was not total: it was blindness in part; that is, not all the nation was blinded. There were at that time in the world probably more converted Jews in proportion to their number as a nation, than any proportion of gentiles. The gospel came to the Jew first, and was well established in the synagogue long before the days of separate gentile assemblies. Later, when Gentile believers were multiplying fast; there was danger that the importance of Jewish salvation would be belittled. Paul keeps the balance for both sides, in days which lasted until AD.73, the year of the fall of Jerusalem, the destruction of the temple and the scattering of the Jewish survivors. Paul did not live to see that day, but he legislated in advance for it.
He tells us that this blindness in part was an enduring condition, “Until the fullness of the gentiles should be brought in.” That is, until the second advent of Christ and the end of the world, the gentiles must expect to be joined from time to time by believing Jews, as is the case today."