Thursday, June 29, 2006

The Mystery of Israel

For many years and from many teachers I'd been told that the phrase in Romans 11:26a "And so all Israel will be saved" meant that prior to the 2nd Coming of Jesus Christ remaining national Israelites will be converted to Christianity. In light of the context, what was Paul communicating with this phrase?

I think of Romans 9-11 as a unified argument against anti-semitism in the Church at Rome. Paul's passion for his biological brothers is impossible to ignore. He wants them to be saved, but he recognizes that being 'in Israel' is meaningless unless one is 'in' the true 'Israelite', namely, Jesus Christ. And so he re-defines Israel. He says not everyone from one of the 12 tribes is an Israelite (9:6). He says it's not by natural means that we are considered God's children (9:8). In other words, it's not about genetics. Now, then, Paul is working with 2 definitions for the term 'Israel' (national Israel & spiritual Israel).

He uses these definitions side by side throughout the argument. For instance, in 9:27 he says not all the Israelites will be saved, but only the remnant. The first group must be national Israel since part of it is saved and part of it is unsaved. The latter 'remnant' must refer to spiritual Israel since it is a completely saved entity.

Paul builds on his argument, arguing that there is really no difference between Jew and Gentile when it comes to salvation (10:12). Not all Israelites (must be national) accepted the good news, just like not all gentiles accepted the good news (10:16). Paul's hope is that, by his ministry to the gentiles, he will arouse national Israel to envy and see 'some' of them be saved (11:14). The 'some' of course, would be spiritual Israel. His point is that any national Israelite can become a spiritual Israelite 'if they do not persist in unbelief' (11:23).

That brings us to Romans 11:25-26a and the great 'mystery' of history:
I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved
Paul is dealing, it seems, with arrogant (or, at least, potentially arrogant) believers. The arrogance is directed against the Jews (anti-semitism). So what is the mystery that will keep them from being arrogant? I am persuaded that we should read Israel as 'national Israel'. Part of national Israel was hardened against the Gospel (the other part, ie Paul (11:1), believed). National Israel will be partly hardened all throughout the time that gentiles are being saved.

So what of 'so all Israel' in 11:26a? Each word is important.

First, the word 'so' is not the same as the word 'then'. Paul isn't saying that after the fulness of the gentiles comes in, all national Israelites will finally believe in Christ. He's saying that the 'part' of national Israel that is un-hardened and all the gentiles who believe, together, make up spiritual Israel. The 'result' of the remnant Jews and the believing Gentiles is the collective people of God. Second, the word 'all' means just that. It can't refer to national Israel because Paul just quoted Isaiah in order to echo his prophecy that only the remnant of national Israel would be saved. Whoever 'Israel' is in verse 26a, it can't be national Israel. Third, the word 'Israel' is key and should be read as 'spiritual Israel'. If Paul is not talking about national Israel here, he must be talking about his new definition of the term, spiritual Israel. Can 'all' of spiritual Israel be saved? Yes, by definition they are all saved.

How does this teaching mesh with the other passages in Scripture that discuss the 'mystery' of the Gospel? Perfectly! In Ephesians Paul describes the 'mystery' as being that which brings all things together under one head, Christ (1:10). He says bluntly that 'this mystery is that through the Gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus' (Eph. 3:6). The only difference between Paul's description of the mystery in Romans and Ephesians is that in the former letter he's speaking against conceited believers and in the latter letter he's speaking to discouraged believers. The former needed to hear that Jews were still welcome in, the latter needed to hear that they, themselves, were full members along with believing Jews!

In other words, there are no second class citizens of the kingdom. There are not 2 groups in the people of God. God's purpose was to take believing Jews and belieiving gentiles and not only make them loving brothers, but to actually make them 1 new man (Eph. 1:15)!

The 'Mystery of Israel', then, is the beautiful truth that salvation knows nothing of geography or race. We don't need to travel to Jerusalem to be saved or be circumcised. Likewise, being in Jerusalem and being circumcised won't prevent us from being saved. The mystery of the gospel, most deeply communicated by Paul in Colossians, is that Christ (the true Israelite) lives in us! That is our hope of glory (Col. 1:27). And anyone who is 'in Christ' (notice, not 'in Israel') can take part in this wonderful hope and all the wonderful promises (Gal. 3:29).

4 comments:

Aaron Perry said...

great post, matt! careful where you say it, though! ;)

another thing to mention is the change that Paul puts in 11:26, quoting from Is and Jer. the Isaiah 59 passage says that the deliverer will come TO Zion; Paul says FROM Zion. This he follows up with a partial quotation from Jer. where the covenant is about writing hte law on hte hearts of the people...creating, like you aptly point out from Ephesians, a new people.

i am less convinced that he is attacked anti-semitism as much as he is establishing a sense of gratitude to Israel. so, he's not dealing with a negative, as establishing a positive attitude to Israel. the reason? The Jerusalem believers are in need of finances (15:26-27). but this is a small point.

matthew said...

yes, i think he's establishing a sense of gratitude as well. maybe it is a both/and, not an either/or. He does speak against them being 'conceited'

lazergold said...

Hi, Matthew. I received this post of yours, word for word, as an e-mail from Allyn Morton (israelmybeloved@hotmail.com). One of you must be plagiarizing the other unless you're both the same person. A lot of truth in what you say, but also some error imho. Please see: http://www.ariel.org/ffruit.htm#top

matthew said...

hey, allyn asked permission to use my article. care to share your disagreements in particulars?

God bless