The Aaron Papers  www.the-aaron-papers.net 

 PART FOUR

AN EXPOSITION OF THE ESCHATOLOGY OF ROMANS

THE ISRAEL OF GOD

*-Section 7 - GOD'S SOVEREIGN ELECTION INCLUDES A REMNANT OF JEWS AND GENTILES COMBINED - THE ELECT FROM ISRAEL AND THE ELECT FROM THE CHURCH AGE - TOGETHER THEY BECOME THE ISRAEL OF GOD

“I say then, did God cast off His people?  God forbid! For I am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.  God did not cast off His people which He foreknew. Or know you not what the Scriptures say of Elijah, how he pleaded with God against Israel?  Lord, they have killed Your prophets, and (pulled) down Your alters, and I am left alone and they seek my life.  But what does the answer of God say to Elijah? I have left for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal. Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant  according to the election of grace; But if it is by grace, it is no (longer) of works: Otherwise grace is no (longer) grace. (But if it is of works, it is no longer grace, otherwise works is no longer works.)

What then?  That which Israel seeks after, that he obtained not, but the election obtained it, and the rest were hardened: According as it is written: God gave them a spirit of stupor; Eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear, unto this very day.  And David has said: Let their table be made a snare and a trap, and a stumblingblock and a recompense, unto them: Let their eyes be darkened that they may not see, and they bow down their backs always.” (Rom.11:1-10)

aaron-The apostle Paul, through this series of questions and answers, is attempting to explain a very complex and difficult issue: 27} Did God cast off His people?  Paul's answer to this question is a resounding NO—absolutely not!  To clarify this important matter, the apostle Paul presents himself along with his heritage and his salvation as the evidence that God did not intend to cast off His first peoples.  This question also enlightens us on the present state of visible Israel, as this question is also followed by a detailed explanation of how God continues to work in them during this dispensation.  Under direct questioning, the absolute fact that must be considered here in its declarative sense, emerges as the simple fact that God never intended to cast off His first people Israel.  This is true, because what is happening is the scriptural fulfillment of the this Old Testament prophecy: Ps.94:14 states: "The Lord will not cast off His people."  Which makes the proposition of Israel being cast off unthinkable and totally unsupportable.  What may appear to the casual observer as God casting off His first peoples Israel is in reality the fulfillment of the prophetic Word.  This is seen in the explanation that follows: 1 Ki.19:10 and 18 : "The children of Israel have forsaken Your covenant, torn down Your alters, and killed Your prophets with the sword.  I alone am left; and they seek to take my life."  (The Lord spoke to Elijah and said:) "Yet I have reserved seven thousand in Israel, all whose knees have not bowed to Baal."(Ref.Isa.1:9)  This explanation is a clear confirmation for the manifestation and explanation of God's elective sovereignty.  Then this is also pointing to this fact, that God's original intent was always to save only a remnant of visible Israel into His invisible Kingdom—the hidden Israel of God. 

But it is the general failure of most religious scholars to see and to understand this absolute state of hardness where God has intentionally placed the rest of Israel.  Actions that, as harsh as they might seem, were absolutely essential for the successful advancement of the gospel and His Kingdom. Rom.11:7-10; 9:30-33; Mat.13:13-17; 1Pe.1:1-13  Necessary actions that also manifested the coexistence of Israel the greater and Israel the lesser.

This absolute is stated in Paul's next question: 28} What then?  That which Israel seeks after, that he obtained not, but the election obtained it, and the rest were hardened.  Which is confirmed by Isa.29:10 ”For Jehovah has poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and has closed your eyes, the prophets; and your heads, the seers, has he covered.” Ref.Ps.69:22.   What we have actually seen happening here in these passages, is only the confusion caused by the appearance of the casting off of visible Israel.  This confusion was the consequence of God expanding His program of reconciliation with the resulting complex identification manifestations that were plainly noted in chapters two and nine of Romans.

Calvin writes on chapter eleven:

1. I say then, has God cast away His people?  God forbid.  For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

"But the question is not whether God had justly or unjustly rejected the people; for it was proved in the last chapter that when the people, through false zeal, had rejected the righteousness of God, they suffered a just punishment for their presumption, were deservedly (?) blinded, and were at last cut off from the covenant."

aaron-But then immediately, Calvin seems to contradict his last statement concerning Israel’s being cut off.

"Before he proceeds to the subject, he proves, in passing, by his own ($$) example, how unreasonable it was to think that the nation was utterly forsaken by God; for he himself was in his origin an Israelite, not a proselyte, or one lately introduced into the commonwealth of Israel."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - pp.408, 409

2. God has not cast away His people which He foreknew.  Wot you not what the Scripture saith of Elias?  how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,

(!)  "So the answer may be divided into two parts, - that God has by no    

(1) means cast away the whole race of Abraham, contrary to the tenor of His own covenant,

(2) -and that yet the fruit of adoption does not exist in all the children of the flesh, for secret ELECTION precedes. 

Thus (Y$) GENERAL REJECTION COULD NOT HAVE CAUSED THAT NO SEED SHOULD BE SAVED; (?)  for the visible body of the people was in such a manner rejected, that no member of the spiritual (aaron-invisible) body of Christ was cut off."

aaron-Here is a real Brain Twister—The visible collective body (Israel the lesser) was /and is, in a very limited and controlled sense, blinded, hardened, and cast off, but this is only with respect to the invisible elect body (Israel the greater).  But then the invisible elect body of God's peoples (Israel the greater), Historic Israel—the hidden Israel of God, is presently visible to some extent individually insofar as they remain a member part of the visible institutions of Israel and the Christian Church.  Then the Christian component, justly or unjustly, is commonly identified by most as the invisible Church of Jesus Christ, and must be seen as an inclusive participant in the Historic Congregation of God (Israel the greater)—the hidden Israel of God.  Nevertheless, the visible institution of Israel, like the visible Christian Church was not completely rejected by God! The rest of Israel, along with its counterpart in the visible Christian Church, by God’s prophetic design, is temporally allocated to some spiritual blindness, stumbling, and hardness during the successful promulgation of the Gospel!  Yet they all (as the sheep), in spite of their difficult relational circumstances, are all to be saved in the end of days. Ref.Mat.25 <*>

"If any one asks, `Was not circumcision a common symbol of God's favor to all Jews so that they ought to have been all counted His people? 

To this the obvious answer is, -That as outward calling is of itself ineffectual without faith, the honour which the unbelieving refuse when offered, is justly taken from them.  Thus a special people remain, in whom God exhibits an evidence of His faithfulness; and Paul derives the origin of constancy FROM SECRET ELECTION. 

For it is not said here that God regards faith, but that He stands to His own purpose, so as not to reject the people whom He has foreknown."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.410    

aaron-I believe that John Calvin clearly sees that God's “SECRET ELECTION” is the only determining factor in establishing “a special people”—the hidden Kingdom of God.  But I believe he has mistakenly rejected God’s called visible peoples in more of an absolute sense than the Scriptures themselves might intend.

aaron-It is observed that John Calvin, as well as many other commentators presently within the Reformed /Presbyterian Church, approach many of these passages exclusively in an historic context.  To do this type of exegesis is to limit ones conclusions to only those conclusions one might reach through their own observations or through the recorded observations of others.  This type of exegesis, although having some historical value, tends to tilt one’s conclusions toward the visible and is totally dependent upon the accuracy that one might find in history itself.  This is exactly what I see happening in these next few comments made by John Calvin:

"As there were so few of the Jews who had believed in Christ, hardly another conclusion could have been drawn from this small number, but that the whole race of Abraham had been rejected;"

aaron-The problem that we are first encountering here, is the fact that these immediate conclusions from Calvin, though I am sure they may have a hint of accuracy at some given point in time, are somewhat deficient of any description or correlation with God's master plan—the larger picture of God’s Universal Reconciliation.  That is, understanding that what the apostle Paul is explaining here, is the details of how God is successfully fulfilling His promises that He previously made to father Abraham.  Overall, it is the manifestation and explanation of the many intricate details associated with the fulfillment of His Abrahamic Covenant of Grace—more clearly manifesting His original gospel message.  Then this transitional confusion is rightly the reason for the apostle Paul's extensive dialog along with his detailed explanations within the book of Romans: His detailed explanations concerning the complex identification of God’s peoples.

"As there were so few of the Jews who had believed in Christ, hardly another conclusion could have been drawn from this small number, but that the whole race of Abraham had been rejected; and creep in might this thought, -that in so vast a ruin no sign of God's favor appeared: for since adoption was the sacred bond by which the children of Abraham were kept collected under the protection of God, it was by no means probable, unless that had ceased, that the people should be miserably and wretchedly dispersed.  To remove this offence, Paul adopts a most suitable example; for he relates, that in the time of Elias there was such a desolation, that there remained no appearance of a Church, and yet, that when no vestige of God's favor (??) appeared, the Church of God was, as it were, hid in the grave, and thus wonderfully preserved." Let us not then determine any thing rashly on this point; but rather let this truth remain fixed in our heart—that the Church, though it may not appear to our eyes, is sustained by the secret providence of God.  

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - pp.411, 412

aaron-Church?  It is obvious that John Calvin is looking at these passages from only a Christian perspective, where there existed but a single organism.  We should remember that the original Church of Jesus Christ—that was built upon the Eternal Rock and the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, was almost entirely Jewish in its beginning.  (??) To simplify our understanding, this probably should read "Congregation" rather than “Church”.  Then it is obvious that John Calvin recognized the invisible realm as “the secret providence of God”.  So the problem as I see it, is that of understanding how the visible and the invisible always coexist side by side throughout the entirety of God’s reconciliation.

aaron-Does John Calvin believe in a future restoration for the Jews?  I am not sure that John Calvin saw the absolute identity of the members of what we have come to identify as the invisible Church of Jesus Christ as an integral part of the JEWS—those Jews hidden in God.  Yes, it might be said that Calvin sees the members of the invisible Church as spiritual Jews, but I am still uncertain whether of not he saw the members of the invisible Church as the absolute continuance of God's historic people (Israel the greater): the Jews who were Jews on the inside, the Circumcision that is the hidden Circumcision of the heart, and Israel (Israel the greater) that is the hidden Historic Israel of God.  It would more than seem that John Calvin, like most of Christendom, sees only a single viable organism.

aaron-Examine the existence of the Church in the time of the Old Testament. What would be the effect on the Scriptures if we accept the existence of the Church in the Old Testament?  If the Church existed in the Old Testament, Jesus could not have made this statement to Peter: "On this Rock I will build My Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it."  This statement is in the present to future tense, not in the past tense.

Old Testament saints would need to be identified as Christians.  Which would not be possible because the term Christian is a New Testament term and because of the precise time when the term Christian was first used—Ref. Acts.11:26 "the disciples were called Christians FIRST in Antioch."  To remove much of the confusion, the terms Church and CHRISTIAN should be reserved for use within to the New Testament dispensation only.

aaron-The reason for this attempt by the reformation theologians to associate the Old Testament saints with the Christian Church, is the result of their failure to properly determine the complex identify of God’s  peoples.  The same basic reasoning that motivates me to spend all of this time trying to explain this complex issue of identification.  Yet the obstacles that are in the way of this explanation are gigantic.  They saw some of the same things that I see.  They saw the intertwining of the Old Testament peoples of God with the New Testament peoples of God.  So much so, that they, in many instances, called the congregation or gathering of the Old Testament saints the Church.  Which, unfortunately, has been the cause for considerable confusion within the various denominations of today’s Church.  The identification of God's peoples must be viewed only in a forward direction, never backwards. 

The New Testament elect saints and their discrete identification is where this confusion rests.  So to move past this confusion, the invisible elect must be identified by their proper names—Jew, Circumcision, and Israel, and collectively as the continuation and the consummation of the hidden historic peoples of God, rather than trying to identify the Old Testament saints as Christians and making them a part of the Christian Church. <*>

Only the institution of visible Israel is visible Israel it self, just as only the institution of the visible Christian Church is the visible Christian Church it self.  Then the invisible component of the former, Israel, the Circumcision, and the Jews (Israel the greater)—the hidden historic Israel of God, is that single continuous hereditary thread that runs on through and binds together the whole of God’s reconciliation.  This is an evident principle that represents one of the most important points of understanding here in this study. <**>

aaron-So the immediate problem comes from their effort to identify the historic peoples of God (Israel the greater) as the “Church”. That is, many within today’s Christian Church promote the idea that the “Church” itself is to represent the true peoples of God (Israel the greater).  Even though the Christian Church contains an incalculable number of the historic peoples of God that are hidden within the invisible realm of the supernatural, the Christian Church, like their predecessor—visible Israel (Israel the lesser), does not and cannot collectively represent the historic people of God (Israel the greater). The larger problem for most of those who claim the lineage of Abraham—Israel or the Christian Church, comes from the fact that the peoples of God have always had a complex definition. Meaning, the identifying names for the first peoples of God—Jew, Circumcision, and Israel, all have multiple definitions: Each of these names has a visible definition and an invisible definition.

The peoples of God can be characteristically identified as a Jew or as a Christian when we are observing the visible institutions, but the historic peoples of God (Israel the greater) are always invisible and are always identified as Israel, the Circumcision, and as Jews. 

aaron-To better understand the absolute sovereignty of God and the principles of election, we must make a detailed analysis of this next portion of Calvin's Commentary.

3. Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine alters; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.

"How he appeals to God, &c.  It was certainly a proof how much Elias honoured the Lord, that for the glory of His name he hesitated not to make himself a enemy to his own nation, and to pray for their utter ruin, because he thought that the religion and worship of God had perished among them: but he was mistaken in charging the whole nation, himself alone excepted, with that impiety, for which he wished them to be severely visited.  There is however in this passage, which Paul quotes, no imprecation (no curse), but a complaint only: but as he complains in such a way as to despair of the whole people, there is no doubt but that he gave them up to destruction. Let us then especially notice what is said of Elias, which was this, - that when impiety had everywhere prevailed, and overspread almost the whole land, he thought, that he was left alone."

aaron-This must be the same opinion that many of today’s theologians presently have.  Piety is a lonely place.

“4. But what saith the answer of God to him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.         

"I have reserved for myself seven thousand, &c.  Though you may take this finite for an indefinite number, it was yet the Lord's design to specify a large multitude.  Since then the grace of God prevails so   ($$$) much in an extreme state of things, let us not lightly give over to the devil all those whose piety does not openly appear to us.  (aaron-Amen!)  It also ought to be fully imprinted on our minds, - that however impiety may everywhere prevail, and dreadful confusion spread on every side, yet the salvation of many remains secured under the seal of God.  (aaron-Amen! Just a little dose of Eternal Security!)  But that no one may under this error indulge his own sloth, as many seek hiding-places for their vices in the hidden providences of God, it is right to observe again, (??)-that they only are said to be saved who continue sound and unpolluted in the faith of God.  This circumstance in the case ought also to be noticed, - that those only remained safe who did not prostitute their body, no, not even by an external act of dissimulation (hypocrisy), to the worship of idols; for he not only ascribes to them a purity of mind, but that they had also kept their body from being polluted by any filthiness of superstition."

5. Even so then at this present time also there is a REMNANT according to the election of grace.

"So then also at this time, &c.  He applies the example to his own age; and to make all things alike, he calls God's people a remnant, that is in comparison with the vast number in whom impiety prevailed: and alluding at the same time to the prophecy he had quoted from Isaiah, he shows, that in the midst of a miserable and confused desolation the faithfulness of God yet shone forth, for there was still some remnant: and in order to more fully to confirm this, he expressly calls them a remnant that survived through the grace of God: and thus ($$) he bore witness that GOD'S ELECTION IS UNCHANGEABLE, according to what the Lord said to Elias, - that where the whole people had fallen away to idolatry, he had reserved for himself seven thousand: and hence we conclude, that through his kindness they were delivered from destruction.  Nor does he simply speak of grace; but he now calls our attention also to election, that we may learn reverently to rely on the hidden purpose of God. (**) One thing then that is laid down is, - that few are saved in comparison with the vast number of those who assume the name of being God's people; the other is, - that those are saved by God's power whom he has chosen with no regard to any merit.  The election of grace is a Hebrew idiom for gratuitous election."

aaron-It is here that our minds have a difficult time keeping all things in perspective. Calvin writes—“One thing then that is laid down is, - that few are saved in comparison with the vast number of those who assume the name of being God's people;” This statement is, in all reality, sort of like comparing apples and oranges.  Calvin’s problem here, is in the fact that he is taking a somewhat simplistic approach to a very complex situation.  When He says “that few are saved in comparison with the vast number of those who assume the name of being God's people”, he, like many others within the Christian institution, is making the mistaken assumption that only the invisible ELECT are ultimately saved.  It would appear that they have absolutely no comprehension of the vast numbers that are secure within the broader characteristic of Abraham’s Covenants with God.  That is, “the vast number of those who assume the name of being God's people” are probably the called institutional corporate peoples of God who are destined to inherit the new earth Kingdom in the resurrection of the dead—the sheep of Mat.25.  Presently, we have the same complex structure within the visible Christian Church—Ekklesolia en Ekklesia: The little elect group within the larger corporate group.

Calvin also wrote—“the other is, - that those are saved by God's power whom he has chosen with no regard to any merit”.  This is absolutely true with respect to the many who are called as well as to the few who are chosen out from the called ones.  All salvation throughout time and eternity is by God’s grace alone through Christ’s finished propitiatory work upon the cross.  It would appear that Calvin has forgotten our total depravity.

6. And if by grace, then it is no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace.  But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

7. What then?  Israel has not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the ELECTION has obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

"What then?  What Israel seeks, &c.  As he is here engaged on a difficult subject, he asks a question, as though he was in doubt.  He intended, however, by expressing this doubt, to render the answer, which immediately follows, more evident; for he intimates, that no other can be given; and the answer is, - that Israel in vain laboured to seek salvation, because his attempt was absurd.  Though he mentions here no cause, yet as he had expressed it before, he certainly meant it to be understood in this place.  For his words are the same, as though he had said, - that it ought not to seem strange, that Israel gained nothing in striving after righteousness.  And hence is proved what he presently subjoins concerning election, - For if Israel has obtained nothing by merit, what have others obtained whose case or condition was not better?  Whence has come so much difference between equals?  Who does not here see that it is election alone which makes the difference? Now the meaning of the word election here is doubtful; for to some it seems that it ought to be taken in a collective sense, for the elect themselves, that there may be a correspondence between the two clauses. Of this opinion I do not disapprove, provided it be allowed that there is something more in the word than if he had said, the elect, even this, - that he intimates that there was no other reason for obtaining their election, as though he said, - "They are not those who strive by relying on merit, but those whose salvation depends on the gratuitous election of God." For he distinctly compares with the whole of Israel, or body of the people, the remnant which was to be saved by God's grace.  It hence follows, that the cause of salvation exists not in men, but depends on the good pleasure of God alone."

aaron-The mistake that is being made here by John Calvin, is in concluding that God’s ELECTION of the remnant in this case is synonymous with grace in general and the only salvation available for Israel.  This ELECTION of the remnant that is being manifested here, is directed first towards the manifestation and explanation of God’s invisible Messianic Covenant line—His hidden priestly line. There is no doubt that the REMNANT is saved, but we must not conclude that only the REMNANT of Israel is to be saved while the REST of Israel is lost forever.  That erroneous conclusion is soundly refuted by following God’s patient dealings with His first peoples throughout the entire book of Romans, and then receiving Rom.11:26 at face value—that “all Israel shall be saved” in the end.

8. (According as it is written, God has given them a spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.

9. And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompense unto them:

10. Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back always.

aaron- These last passages are simply describing the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy concerning the predicted present state for visible Israel (Israel the lesser) in contrast to that of invisible Israel (Israel the greater)—the hidden Israel of God.  This predicted state has allowed for the full promulgation of the Gospel. 

GOD'S SOVEREIGN ELECTION-I cont.

To eliminate some of the confusion to what appeared as Israel’s being cast away and John Calvin’s conclusion that the larger majority was lost forever, the apostle Paul now presses the issue even further:

“I say then, did they stumble that they might fall?  God forbid! But by their fall, salvation is come to the Gentiles to provoke them to jealousy.  Now their fall is the riches of the world, and their loss the riches of the Gentiles, but how much more their fullness?  But I speak to you that are Gentiles; inasmuch then, as I am an apostle of the Gentiles, I glorify my ministry. (But) if by any means, I may provoke to jealousy them that are my flesh, and may save some of them.”

“For if the casting away of them is the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? 

And if the Firstfruits is Holy, so is the lump: And if the Root is Holy, so are the branches. 

But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being wild olive (branches), was grafted in among them, and did become partaker with them of the Root and of the fatness of the Olive Tree: Glory not over the branches: But if you glory, it is not you that bears the Root, but the Root (bears) you.  You will say then: The branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.  Well, (because) of their unbelief they were broken off, and you are standing by faith.  Be not high minded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, neither will He spare you. 

Behold then, the goodness and severity of God: Toward them that fell, severity, but toward you, God's goodness, if you continue in His goodness: Otherwise, you also shall be cut off.  And they also, if they continue not in their unbelief, shall be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.  For if you were cut out of that which is by nature a wild olive tree, and was 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?” (Rom.11:11-24)

aaron- Look again at Question & Answer 29} Did they stumble that they might fall?  God forbid, no!  The apostle Paul is giving us the reasoning behind this apparent condition.  Paul is telling us that, by what might appear to the untrained observer as Israel's fall, was prerequisite for God’s reconciliation of the Nations.  Paul also tells us that their apparent fall is the riches of the world and their present loss the riches of the Gentiles, but how much more will their ultimate fullness be in the end.  The difficulty for us in these lines, is the result of the multiple subjects.  As an example, "by their fall, salvation is come to the Gentiles to provoke them to jealousy."  Three things are specifically discussed by Paul in this passage: 1. The apparent fall of Israel.  2. Salvation coming to the Gentiles.  and 3. Israel being provoked to jealousy by the Gentile’s inclusion.

1. Now we know from the answer given by the apostle Paul to his question presented in verse eleven, that, as a matter of recorded fact, Israel did not fall in any definitive way.  Yet, as we progress on in this complicated passage, it would appear by Paul's language "by their fall" that Israel did fall:

a. They did not fall. 

b. They did fall.  Which is it?  Both! 

a. Some of Israel did not fall. 

b. Some of Israel did fall into a state of blindness and harness.

2. For salvation to come to the Gentiles, some major changes had to be made concerning visible Israel’s position and the Old Testament economy.

a. The primary thing that happened was JESUS the RECONCILER—the SEED, who came to redeem that which was lost.  We discover that a new and wonderful way was finally being manifested for all peoples (Jews and non-Jews alike) to come to God.  Israel, through their covenant relationship with God and the institutional power they possessed, physically stood in the way of the Gentile's salvation.  From their perspective, all must be initiated into their religion to be included.  Consequently, it was a simple matter of POWER and Israel’s unwillingness to relinquish that power.  And at the very same time, Israel was unable to get into God’s favor because their nature was too much like that of the Gentiles.

b. For salvation to come to the Nations, visible Israel had to be moved out of the way.  When God opened the door of salvation to all the peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations of the earth, visible Israel was removed from their former place of preeminence and placed on a level with the Nations.  And now, all peoples, Jews and non-Jews alike, have become equal recipients of God’s free and unmerited grace through Christ’s finished propitiatory work upon the cross.  The New Testament Christian Church that is institutionally spread out around the world today, is a visible demonstration of the matchless grace of God.  Though God’s grace began to be manifested back in the Abrahamic Covenant, we now understand that grace has been the only means of salvation throughout God’s entire reconciliation.  Yet, the majority of Abraham’s first children are presently blinded to this blessed gift of grace from God.  Then one could even conclude that there are many Christians who are also in this same situational deficit of knowledge.

This Scripture becomes a contradiction in terms according to some interpretations.  It would become a contradiction only if we settled on the idea that God did cast away His first peoples Israel, or that the peoples of God did stumble that they might fall.  These subjects are being discussed here in Romans, because of the real appearance of Israel being casting away or the real appearance of Israel’s stumbling or falling.

"Their fullness" in one case might be speaking of the fullness of some of Paul's brethren whom he desired to provoke to jealousy, that they might be saved. (Ref. Rom.10:1 and 11:14) 

But then in another case, this fulness could be referring to the prophetic fullness of the “sheep” when they come together to inherit God’s Kingdom upon the new earth. Ref.Mat.25 

Yet in another case, this fullness could be referring to the fullness of historic Israel—the hidden Israel of God when they are collectively caught up into the clouds to meet their Lord in the air and their subsequent transport into heaven. Ref.1Cor.15

The apparent casting away, stumbling, or blinding of the REST of Israel was an absolute prerequisite to the reconciling of the world.  But then in the end, we are also told that the receiving of any from visible Israel is life from the dead—their resurrection from the place of the dead.  This is generally speaking about physical Israel and confirms Rom.4:17.  But "their fullness" here, is more specifically referring to the bodily resurrection of corporate visible Israel /the visible Christian Church as the collective sheep in the final resurrection and judgment that is pictured in Mat.25:31-46—when in literal fulfillment of the Scriptures, “all Israel shall be saved” comes to its complete fruition. Ref.Rom.11:25-27

We must remember, that the partial casting off, the partial stumbling, and the partial hardening of visible Israel, was the necessary consequences of the full manifestation of God’s universal reconciliation. 

And now within God's present reconciliation, we see that there is only one Olive Tree in view—Israel's Olive Tree.  And without any evident distinction, all of the invisible elect Jews and all of the invisible elect non-Jews must be grafted in together.  The wild olive branches (which represent all the invisible elect peoples who are not ethnically part of physical Israel—(those who were not) are grafted in among the invisible natural branches (which represent those who are elected out from visible Israel). 

We see that the wild olive branches are grafted in by faith, and that the rest of the natural branches were broken off because of unbelief (lack of faith).  And we have also learn, that if the natural branches do not continue on in their unbelief, they can be grafted in once again.  By definition, this engrafting and excising would represent the goodness and severity of God.  It is God who does the breaking off and it is God who does the grafting in.  It must become evident to all that the positional state of a Jewish or a non-Jewish believer can potentially change: Change from being included in the small inner circle of God’s hidden elect priesthood (Ekklesolia) to being included in the large outer circle of God’s visible corporate peoples (Ekklesia), and vice-versa.  I know of no writings from the religious academia that fully explains this difficult principal! <*>

Calvin continues:

11. I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall?  God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation has come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

"Here he justly denies that the salvation of the Jews was to be despaired of, or that they so rejected by God, that there was to be no future restoration, or that the covenant of grace, which He had once made with them, was entirely abolished, since there had ever remained in that nation the seed of blessing.  That we are so to understand His meaning is evident from this, - that having before connected a sure (?) ruin with blindness, He now gives a hope of rising again; which two things are wholly different.  They then, who perversely stumbled at (*) Christ, fell and fell into destruction; yet the nation itself had not ($) fallen, so that he who is a Jew must necessarily perish or be alienated from God."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.421

aaron-John Calvin, echoing the apostle Paul, rightly says that Historic Israel has not fallen!  I repeat—we must recognize the fact that what appeared to be Israel's casting away, stumbling, and falling, is a necessary condition that was intended to have only a temporary affect on those we have identified as THE REST.  These same conditions that presently affect, in similar ways, a very large portion of those being called out from the Nations.  That is, that a very large number of those that have been called into the institution of the visible Church, are also subject to being conditionally cast away, stumbling, and falling: Those that we would most likely identify as backsliders or prodigals.  The apostle Paul asked these questions in order to remove some of the present confusion over these complexities that always confront the Christian Church.  He then answers each and every question here with a very strong negative response.  What is seen here, are the natural consequences that are involved in the incorporation of the Nations.  All peoples, Jews and non-Jews alike, are now placed on the same plane when they take-up residency in Abraham’s Covenant with God.  Then you can only understand the latter by observing the former.

aaron-This present confusion is the natural consequence of Paul’s introduction to the invisible characteristics of God’s revealed dispositions. This clarification concerns the complex identification of His peoples: the complex definition of a Jew—as a Jew and a Jew, the complex definition of the Circumcision—as the Circumcision and the Circumcision, and the complex definition of Israel—as, Israel and Israel.

12. Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fullness?

13. For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:

14. If by any means I may provoke to emulation (JEALOUSY) them which are my flesh, AND MIGHT SAVE SOME OF THEM.

15. For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

"This passage, which many deem obscure, and some awfully pervert, ought, in my view, to be understood as another argument, derived from a comparison of the less with the greater, according to this import, (?) `Since the rejection of the Jews has availed so much as to occasion the reconciling of the Gentiles, how much more effectual will be their ($*) resumption?  ($$)Will it not be to raise them even from the dead?” 

aaron-Yes!!!  This “life from the dead” is the ultimate promise that God has given to His first peoples—visible Israel. Ref.Rom.11:25-27  Then additionally, as Israel being that visible example and type for God’s established New Testament institution—the visible Christian Church with its inclusive invisible component.

“For Paul ever insist on this, that the Gentiles have no cause for envy, (?) as though the restoration of the Jews to favor were to render their condition worse.  Since then God has wonderfully drawn forth life from death and light from darkness, how much more ought we to hope, he reasons, that the resurrection of a people, as it were dead, will bring life to the Gentiles.  It is no objection what some allege, that (?) reconciliation differs not from resurrection, as we do indeed understand resurrection in the present instance, that is, to be that by (??) which we are translated from the kingdom of death to the kingdom of life, for though the thing is the same, yet there is more force in the expression, and this a sufficient answer."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - pp.424, 425

  "Some view the last words, `life from the dead,' as understood of the (Y$) Jews and not the Gentiles."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.425 footnote 1                             

aaron-?? It would appear that some would define reconciliation and resurrection the same, having an eye toward the general application of regeneration.  I am not sure that this idea can be fully supported when we use all of the Scriptures.  Although this theory would be supportive of the view toward the resurrected souls of the invisible saints of this dispensation when we consider their state from the perspective give in Rev.20:6 Ref.Jn.5:25: their partaking in this first resurrection—the resurrection of Christ: And I could accept that interpretation, but only on that particular basis.

aaron-Israel was rendered as dead in their relationship with God.  The Gentiles were, in reality, non-existent—they had no previous relationship with God.  Visible Israel, during this dispensation of grace, and especially at its conclusion, receive, as it were, their promised life from the dead.  Although this “life from the dead” could be serviceable to the resurrection to life (Mk.13, Mat.24, 1Cor.15, 1Thes.4), it is especially well suited to the resurrection of the dead (Mat.25, Rev.11)—the sheep.  Then those who were elected out from the Nations, who were not, have now become as if they always were, a part of God's covenant family.  Ref.Rom.4:17

16. For if the first-fruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.

“By comparing the worthiness of the Jews and of the Gentiles, he now takes away pride from the one and pacifies the other, as far as he could; for he shows that the Gentiles, if they pretended any prerogative of honor of their own, did in no respect excel the Jews, nay, that if they came to a contest, they should be left far behind. Let us remember that in this comparison man is not compared with man, (??) but nation with nation. 

If then a comparison be made between them, they shall be found equal in this respect, that they are both equally the children of Adam; the only difference is that the Jews had been separated from the Gentiles, that they might be a peculiar people to the Lord.”                                                              

aaron-As John Calvin has just concluded, that should a comparison be made  between them both, they shall be found equally the children of Adam: which is certainly true.  And that the only difference is that the Jews had been separated from the Gentiles, that they might be a peculiar people to the Lord.  This is the precise area that needs to be examined with some additional dialogue as well.  We need to come to a more detailed understanding concerning the reasoning behind Israel's initial separation.  What we should first see, is visible Israel as a visible example and a type of what was to come.  The certainty of why John Calvin preferred to interpret the above as nations rather than individuals is still unclear to me.  It could be associated with their interpretation of the “first-fruit” as the saved ones of visible Israel rather than seeing “Christ the firstfruits”.

aaron-Yes, the Jews were separated from the Gentiles that they might be a peculiar people to the Lord, but we have also learned that they were separated for two very special and particular reasons. 

In the first place, they were separated from the Gentiles as a visible example of the relationship that God desired to ultimately have with His whole creation. 

In the second place, and even more importantly, Israel was this peculiar people who struggled greatly in their relationship with the invisible Creator God.  We then find their vast experiences were precisely detailed in the Scriptures, so that we might even understand some of the many pit-falls that we, through our own faulted nature, might also experience.  Until we are able to understand how their relationship experiences with God typifies our own relationship with God, we cannot take full advantage of these many exhortations that God has so graciously given us. (Ref.1Cor.10:1-11) 

aaron-Looking at 1Cor.15:23 for a proper interpretation of "Christ the firstfruits", would appear to differ greatly from the interpretation that we shall see below: The interpretation held by John Calvin and others.  This 1Cor.15:23 interpretation is also consistent with the Rom.4:18 and Gal.3:16 description of Abraham's posterity.  But when speaking about Abraham's seed, the Scripture in Gal.3 clearly points to Christ—"Thy seed, which is Christ."  Rom.4:16-18 speaks of Abraham's combined or universal posterity—not those of the law only, but also to that of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all: Which clearly extends far beyond the visible nations of Israel to incorporate all peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations; Jews and non-Jews alike.  So let us closely consider these things as we continue looking at some additional excerpts from Calvin's Commentary on Romans.

"There were two kinds of first-fruits: the sheaf, being the first ripe fruit, Lev.23:10; and dough, the first kneaded cake, Num.15:20. It is to the last that the reference is here made. The first-fruits are considered by some, such as MEAD and CHALMERS, to have been the first Jewish converts to Christianity - the apostles and disciples; but this is not consistent with the usual manner of the apostles, which is to express the same thing in two ways, or by two metaphors.  Besides, the whole context refers to the first adoption of the Jewish nation, or to the covenant made with Abraham and confirmed to the patriarchs."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.426 footnote 1

"They were then sanctified by the holy covenant, and adorned with peculiar honor, with which God had not at that time favored the Gentiles; but as the efficacy of the covenant appeared then but small, ($$) he bids us to look back to Abraham and the patriarchs, in whom the blessing of God was not indeed either empty or void.  He hence concludes, that from them an hereditary holiness had passed to all their posterity.  But this conclusion would not have been right had he (??) spoken of persons, or rather had he not regarded the promise; for when the father is just, he cannot yet transmit his own uprightness to his son: but as the Lord had sanctified Abraham for Himself for this end, that his seed might also be holy, and as he thus conferred holiness not (??) only on his person but also on his whole race, the Apostle does not unsuitably draw this conclusion, that all the Jews were sanctified in their father Abraham."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.426

aaron-These next comments will show how easy it is to be drawn toward the narrow view (the manifested invisible characteristic) of the Abrahamic Covenant of Grace; The hidden Messianic Covenant line.  That is, to unjustly limit God’s Abrahamic Covenant of Grace to just the invisible elect.

aaron-A brief sidebar please—There is much uncertainty as to the legitimacy of this whole conversation.  It would appear at times that these interpreters loose site of the absolute depraved nature of man.  Yet, because of the obvious language barrier, John Calvin could have a view toward the interpretation and the identification of the invisible Jews and the invisible Israel.  Interpretations that constitute only the invisible ELECT of God, and will ultimately be inclusive of the invisible Church of Jesus Christ as well.  However, we must keep in mind the true identity and continuum of this Holy Race.  It is this inability on our part to distinguish between the two components and to segregate the symbol from that which is being symbolized /between the visible and the invisible.  Which is precisely the same confusion that creates this present problem in properly discerning the complex characteristics when identifying God peoples.

"That the holiness here mentioned is external and relative, and not (*) personal and inward, is evident from the whole context.  The children of Israel were denominated holy in all their wickedness and disobedience, because they had been consecrated to God, adopted as His people, and set apart for His service, and they enjoyed all the external privileges of the covenant which God had made with their fathers."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.426 footnote 2 

aaron-Calvin is essentially defining the intrinsic holiness of corporate Israel in these comments. Perhaps Calvin was recalling the fact that the Jews were not sinners as were the Gentiles. Ref.Gal.2:15

But do we actually have two separate categories of holiness under consideration?  Yes! 

The one is institutional that is conveyed through the covenant parents to the child. Ref.1Cor.7:14  Just as this paragraph tells us allot about Israel’s institutional position within the Covenant.  Their obedience to the command of God to circumcise all of their eight-day-old male children brought them into good standing in Abraham’s Covenants with God.  Then similarly, baptism does also convey God’s covenant holiness to all children in the institution of the New Testament Christian Church.  These would be inclusive within the visible corporate peoples of God.

The second holiness is invisibly hidden on the inside of all of the elect children of God throughout both the Old and the New Testament dispensations.  The very same Jews—the hidden Jews, that would ultimately be elected out from Abraham's immediate and extended families—inclusive of the elect from all the nations of the earth.

We must understand that the first qualification for the conveyance of this Holy identification to any individual, is for that individual to be chosen by God to be engrafted into the Holy Root.  So whether you are of the natural olive or of the wild olive, to obtain this Holiness you must be selectively grafted into this Royal Root. 

Then only this Royal Root is the Historic Israel—the invisible Israel that is the hidden Israel of God: Which was and is inclusive of all the elect Jews and all the elect non-Jews alike.  Then in its final state, this hidden Israel of God is comprised of only the Jews and the Circumcision. <*>

For any of us to fully comprehend this hidden absolute concerning Historic Israel, we must be able to follow this continuous hereditary thread that runs unbroken throughout the entire history of the world—past, present, and future. 

"Then to confirm this view, he adduces two similitude’s: the one taken from the ceremonies of the law, and the other borrowed from nature. The first-fruits which were offered sanctified the whole lump, in like manner the goodness of the juice diffuses itself from the root to the branches; and posterity hold the same connection with their parents from whom they proceed as the lump has with the first-fruits, and the branches with the tree.  It is not then a strange thing that the Jews were sanctified in their father. There is here no difficulty if you UNDERSTAND BY HOLINESS THE ($$) SPIRITUAL NOBILITY OF THE NATION, and that indeed not belonging to nature, but what proceeds from the covenant.  It may be truly said, I allow, that the Jews were naturally holy, for their adoption was hereditary; but I now speak of our first nature, according to which we are all, as we know, accursed in Adam.  Therefore the dignity of an (!$) ELECT people, to speak correctly, is a SUPERNATURAL privilege."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.427

aaron-YES!  To be Holy, you must be made Holy by God Himself—“a SUPERNATURAL privilege”!  But here in this Holy Root, it must be considered more with respect to just God’s invisible dispositions.

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 partakers of the root and fatness of the olive tree;

"He now refers to the present dignity of the Gentiles, which is no other than to be of the branches; which, being taken from another, are set in some NOBLE TREE: for the origin of the Gentiles was as it were from some wild and unfruitful olive, as nothing but a curse was to be found in their whole race. Whatever glory then they had was from their new (position), not from their old stock. There was then no reason for the Gentiles to glory in their own dignity in comparison with the Jews.  We may also add, that Paul wisely mitigates the severity of the case, by not saying that the whole top of the tree was cut off, but ($$) that SOME of the branches were broken, and also that God took SOME here and there from among the Gentiles, whom He set in THE HOLY AND BLESSED TRUNK."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - pp.427, 428

"CALVIN'S version is - "thou hast been engrafted for them," or in their stead, the same as that of BEZA, PAREUS, and MACKNIGHT.  GROTIUS has - "between them," that is, the remaining branches."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.428 footnote 1

aaron-* One can sense from the tenor of this passage, the separate consideration that is being given with respect to the excising of the natural branches and to the engrafting of the wild branches.  Then it would appears at times, that the complex understanding of the universal character of God’s reconciliation may not have been fully realized in this commentary.  This conclusion has been reached, because of these commentators continued press toward the separate identification of Israel with respect to the Gentile believers within their new engrafted existence.

When the engrafting into this blessed trunk was complete, one could no longer observe any distinction within the branches.  All of the engrafted branches within this blessed trunk, whether their origin was of a wild olive or of a natural olive, would looked exactly alike—natural and holy. Ref.Gal.3:28  In order to reside in this hidden Holy Olive Tree, all of the branches, without exception, must appear as the holy peoples of God—as Jews, as a part of the Circumcision, and a part of Israel—the hidden Israel of God.  This is the absolute bottom line of this exposition.  Remember that visible Israel was principally established as a visible type of the invisible Israel—the hidden Israel of God.  When that which is real is fully manifested, then that which was only the figure must by necessity be move into its proper subordinate role. <**>

18. Boast not against the branches.  But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.

"The Gentiles could not contend with the Jews respecting the excellency of their race without contending with Abraham himself; which (?) would have been extremely unbecoming, since he was like a root by which (*) they were born and nourished.  As unreasonable as it would be for the branches to boast against the root, so unreasonable would it have been for the Gentiles to glory against the Jews, that is, with respect to the excellency of their race; for Paul would have them ever to consider whence was the origin of their salvation.  And we know that after Christ by His coming has pulled down the partition-walls, the whole (YY) world partook of the favor which God had previously conferred on the (*!) CHOSEN PEOPLE.  It hence follows, that the calling of the Gentiles was like an engrafting, and that they did not otherwise grow up as God's people than as they were grafted in the stock of Abraham."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.428

          aaron-It would seem that the interpreters of this verse have placed an unwarranted qualification upon Abraham's progeny.  To state that Abraham's direct offspring is limited to the physical nations of Israel would be inaccurate at best.  According to Gen.12:3, 17:4, 22:18, 26:4, Acts.3:25, Gal.3:8 and Rom.4:17a, it was through Abraham seed that a blessing was to come upon all the nations.  And this Seed through whom this blessing was to flow to the nations, was in fact none other than our Lord Jesus Christ. Ref. Gal.3:14a  It would be nice to know exactly what John Calvin was trying to communicate here in this passage. 

In the first place, when he stated, "we know that after Christ by His coming has pulled down the partition-walls, the whole world partook of the favor which God had previously conferred on the CHOSEN PEOPLE", he has stated a very profound truth concerning our present state.  It shows the absolute universality in God’s reconciliation that is presently being manifested in and through this final dispensation—the fulfillment of God’s Abrahamic Covenant of Grace. 

But in the second place, Calvin, in his next stated point, “It hence follows, that the calling of the Gentiles was like an engrafting, and that they did not otherwise grow up as God's people than as they were grafted in the stock of Abraham", seems to imply that the calling of the Gentiles differed in some degree from that of the calling of the Jews.  "That they (the Gentiles) did not otherwise grow up as God's people than as they were grafted in the stock of Abraham."  This could imply that some distinction might yet exist between the two.  Which, in the collective sense of the visible and the invisible examples, is not the case at all.  We must see both visible Israel and the visible Christian Church as God’s established visible institutions, through which, by the use of God’s commanded initiatory rites (Circumcision and Baptism), God’s visible creation has access to their invisible Creator.  Then it was through these institutions that God’s call went out to all the world’s populations.  This confusion is once again the result of viewing the invisible dispositions of God, which are surly being manifested and explained throughout this entire New Testament dispensation, from the perspective of only God’s visible dispositions—or the careless amalgamation of the two.  I am convinced that the greater advantage in particular for Abraham's natural progeny, lies in their basic knowledge of the existence of the invisible Creator God—Ref.Rom.9:3-8, and their Covenant relationship with that same invisible God through the Circumcised Flesh Covenant—the Covenant of Bondage Ref.Gal.4:21-26: A necessary visible example part of the more Complex Abrahamic Covenant of Grace. 

19. Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.

"In the person of the Gentiles he brings forward what they might have pleaded for themselves; but that was of such a nature as ought not to have filled them with pride, but, on the contrary, to have made them (*) humble.  For if the cutting off of the Jews was through unbelief, and the engrafting of the Gentiles was by faith, what was their duty but to acknowledge the favor of God, and also to cherish modesty and humbleness of mind?  For it is the nature of faith, and what properly belongs to it, to generate humility and fear.  But by fear understand that which is in no way inconsistent with the assurance of faith; for Paul would not have our faith to vacillate or to alternate with doubt, much less would he have us to be frightened or to quake with fear."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - pp.428, 429

aaron-* I am uncertain why Calvin inserted "the cutting off of the Jews", in the place of some of the branches being “broken off”.  Then by his insertion of "the cutting off of the Jews", I believe his definition would imply something more than the partial number or limited duration that is intended here in this passage. 

The real message is found in the fact that an evident equity has emerged when considering the Jews, the Gentiles, and God’s elective sovereignty that is always building up His hidden Kingdom.  The case for the inclusion of each is exactly the same, as faith and belief (pistis) have the same basic Greek definitions. 

The criterion for any one to be sustained within this Holy Tree, is nothing other than their God given monergistic BELIEVING FAITH in conjunction with their active synergistic ABIDING FAITH. 

Consequently, all those Jews and non-Jews who were grafted into this Blessed Tree were all grafted in on the basis of faith alone. 

Then similarly, the deficiency of faith or belief for either of these people groups would always result in that individual’s excision from this Holy Olive Tree.

This is where the principal difficulty rests.  It is when we attempt to identify two separate people groups within God’s Abrahamic Covenant of Grace that the confusion begins to grow.  Our problem stems from the fact that we have mistakenly come to recognize only the engrafted branches (the REMNANT) as being eternally saved.  Determining that all of visible Israel (the REST) and all of the visible Christian Church are forever lost.  Consequently, I believe this to be a huge mistake in their exegesis of these important Scriptures.

          But a very important thing for us to remember here, is the fact that both the engrafted “natural olive branches” and the engrafted “wild olive branches” can subsequently be excised from their special place in this Royal Tree.  But then in the same respect, we must also remember that at some future point in space and time, and with the right circumstances in place, these same excised branches can once again be grafted back into this Blessed Trunk.  Sadly, the majority of religious academia does not commonly understand this complicated information: As we can easily see in these following comments from John Calvin. <*>

"Some have deduced from what Paul says here the uncertainty of faith, and its possible failure.  This has been done through an entire misapprehension of the subject handled by the apostle.  He speaks not  (**) of individuals, but of the Gentile world, not of living faith but of professed faith, not of inward change, but of outward privileges, not of the union of the soul to Christ, but of the union with His Church.  The two things are wholly different; and to draw an argument from the one to the other is altogether illegitimate; that is to say, that as professed faith may be lost, therefore living faith may be lost."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.429 footnote 2 

aaron-This is an excellent example of the problem that we presently have in understanding, or our lack there of, concerning the complex characteristics when identifying God’s peoples.  John Calvin sees the Christian Church as a singularity so to speak—including only those “of living faith”, “ of inward change”, and “of the union of the soul to Christ”.  These quotes from Calvin are factually defining just the hidden Israel of God.  Calvin’s total depreciation of God’s visible dispositions—“of professed faith”, “of outward privileges”, and “of the union with His Church” is a total disregard for the efficacy for the visible characteristic that are always present within God’s Abrahamic Covenant of Grace.  His attempt to assign the subject “you” of these passages to the “Gentile world” rather than to individuals is just too much of a reach.  His exegesis does not allow for this newly identified group, God’s invisible priesthood—the hidden Israel of God, to be recognized as a distinct group from both visible Israel and the visible Christian Church, yet coexistent with both of these institutions. <*>

 ** I do not believe that this Scripture is speaking about the Gentile world, but about individuals—[individual branches as individual believers].  Because, when grafted into this Blessed Trunk, we are grafted in among them and become partakers with them (The them = the original occupants of this Blessed Tree—the hidden Israel of God). 

Calvin’s concern about eternal security is quite another issue: That this Scripture, when speaking about the breaking off of some of these branches, would seem to Calvin, at least on the surface, to be almost challenging this doctrine.  But that is not the case at all.  This “cutting off” is not the loss of salvation, but simply the loss of a privileged position and status—their priestly status in God’s hidden Kingdom.

The problem I have with this discourse is with its misdirected point.  This Scripture is discussing God's leveling of His playing field and the process of incorporation as the main topic, not eternal security.  It would seem that whenever we encounter any Scripture that would appear to challenge one of our doctrinal understandings, we do not hesitate to stop in the midst of everything and explain that Scripture so it does not contradict our own accepted interpretation.

John Calvin wrote—“He speaks…not of living faith but of professed faith, not of inward change, but of outward privileges, not of the union of the soul to Christ, but of the union with His Church”.  Once again, this misunderstanding is the precise problem that presently confronts the entire Christian Church!  Having now glimpsed the supernatural realm of the invisible—of the living faith and the inward change, the Christian Church has chosen to assign little or no efficacy to the visible attributes associated with our initiation—our “professed faith” and our institutional “union with the Church”.  SADLY, no efficacy what soever is to be found by them in our “professed faith”.  SADLY, no efficacy what soever is to be found by them in our “outward privileges”.  SADLY, no efficacy what soever is found by them in our “union with the Church”.  It is a SAD fact that they give no efficacy what so ever to the essential visible dispositions of God’s covenants.  Instead, as to what is efficacious, they have their eyes firmly fixed on only the revealed invisible dispositions of God.  I would encourage all of these scholars to rethink their exclusionary approach when interpreting God’s visible dispositions.  By assigning efficacy only to the invisible—the smaller narrower characteristic of God’s reconciliation, you have blinded yourselves to the efficacy of the visible—the larger broader characteristic of God’s reconciliation. 

The following added comments will confirm this very point: Even though Eternal Security might seem to be challenged in these passages, this only occurs because of our limited understanding concerning the grafting in and the breaking off of these natural and wild olive branches. Question-Does the breaking off of a branch indicate an end in eternal damnation? No!!!  It only represents a change in the status of an individual.  This is absolutely proved by the potential excision and re-grafting in of the severed natural and wild olive branches. Ref.Rom.11:22-23

"AUGUSTINE, in commenting on Jer.32:40, says, `God promised perseverance when He said, `I will put fear in their heart, that they may not depart from Me.' What else does it mean but this, `Such and so great will my fear be, which I shall put in their heart, that they shall perseveringly cleave to Me.'

"As those," says PAREUS, "who believe for a time never had true faith, though they seem to have had it, and hence fall away and do not persevere: so they who possess true faith never fail, but continue steadfast, for God infallibly sustains them and secures their perseverance."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.429 footnote 2

          aaron-It would seem that these scholars who are attuned to God, supposedly have the capacity to determine who has “true faith” and who does not.  This is that very slippery slope that they are traveling on when they decide to play the part of our gracious God.

20. Well, because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith.  Be not high minded, but fear:

"Of what kind then is this fear?  As the Lord bids us to take into our consideration two things, so two kinds of feeling must thereby be produced. 

For he would have us ever to bear in mind the miserable condition of our nature; and this can produce nothing but dread, weariness, anxiety, and despair; and it is indeed expedient that we should thus be thoroughly laid prostrate and broken down, that we may at length groan to Him; but this dread, derived from the knowledge of ourselves, keeps not our minds while relying on His goodness, from continuing calm; this weariness hinders us not from enjoying full consolation in Him; this anxiety, this despair, does not prevent us from obtaining in Him real joy and hope. 

Hence the fear, of which he speaks, is set up as an antidote to proud contempt; for as every one claims for himself more than what is right, and becomes too secure and at length insolent towards others, we ought then so far to fear, that our heart may not swell with pride and elate itself. But it seems that he throws in a doubt as to salvation, since he reminds them to beware lest they also should not be spared.

aaron-This warning that all those of faith should “beware lest they also should not be spared”, is directly associated with their position in God’s hidden Kingdom and the possibility of a change in station that exists for all of God’s negligent peoples.  This being “broken off” must not be viewed as loosing one’s eternal salvation, but as one’s loss of their honored place in God’s invisible Kingdom.  They are simply being moved out from God’s chosen inner circle—God’s invisible holy priesthood, and being moved back into God’s called outer circle that contains all of His visible corporate peoples.  Remember, many are called but few are chosen. Ref.Mat.22:14

Calvin continues—“To this I answer, -that as this exhortation refers to the subduing of the flesh, which is ever insolent even in the children of God, he (takes away) nothing from the certainty of faith.  And we must especially notice and remember what I have said before, - that Paul's address is not SO MUCH (?) INDIVIDUALS as to the whole body of Gentiles, among whom there might have been many, who were vainly inflated, professing rather than having faith.  On account of these Paul threatens the Gentiles, not without reason, with excision, as we shall hereafter find again."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - pp.429, 430

          aaron-What John Calvin misread here, was the universal character of these passages.  That is, these warnings of excision are directed towards both the Jews and the Gentiles—both the individual natural olive branches and the individual wild olive branches:   

21. For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.

"This is a most powerful reason to beat down all self-confidence: (??) for the rejection of the Jews should never come across our minds without striking and shaking us with dread.  For what ruined them, but that through supine dependency on the dignity which they had obtained, they despised what God had appointed? 

They were not spared, though they were natural branches; what then shall be done to us, who are (??) the wild olive and ALIENS, if we become beyond measure arrogant? 

But this thought, as it leads us to distrust ourselves, so it tends to make us to cleave more firmly and steadfastly to the goodness of God.

And here again it appears more evident, that the discourse is addressed generally to the body of the Gentiles, for the excision, of which he speaks, could not apply to individuals, whose ELECTION is unchangeable, based on the eternal purpose of God.”

aaron-Once again John Calvin is being strongly influenced by their understanding of Eternal Security.  This sort of doctrinal diversion tends to mask the real message from Paul in these passages.  I would also suggest that these passages have nothing whatsoever to do with Eternal Security.

“Paul therefore declares to the Gentiles, that if they exulted over the Jews, a reward for their pride would be prepared for them; for God will again ($$) reconcile to Himself the first people whom He has divorced."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.430

aaron-It would appear that the interpretation given here by Calvin, again deals with the expectation of a future disposition for visible Israel: Stating that "God will again reconcile to Himself the first people whom He has divorced".  Though Paul is generally speaking about God’s invisible dispositions, this interpretation from Calvin would be viewing God’s Covenant of Grace from only its broad perspective: The collective visible peoples of God.  It suggests that God will collectively bring visible Israel back into good graces at some future time.  Which is not totally out of the question with respect to the last days, but this subject is not really applicable in this instance. 

This exposition also exposes the lack of any clear understanding concerning this absolute revelation and explanation of the discrete identification of the historic peoples of God. That is, distinctively recognizing these newly manifested invisible characteristics of God’s dispositions, which is necessary for properly understanding the precise composition of the invisible Messianic Covenant line.  Which must be understood as the narrow view of God’s reconciliation—or visualized as the smaller invisible inner circle within God’s larger visible circle that collectively contains Abraham’s Covenants with God.  We should then understand this present dispensation, the Christian era, as the unbroken continuation of God's invisible historic peoples Israel in and through the visible New Testament Christian Church.  We must understand that God's peoples Israel has a visible characteristic and definition—visible Jew, visible Circumcision, and visible Israel, and a coexistent invisible characteristic and definition—Jew—a Jews on the inside, the Circumcision—the Circumcision of the heart, and Israel—the hidden Israel of God.

Then by using the coexistent visible and invisible Israel as our God given example, the visible and invisible Christian Church must then be seen as an institutional continuation of both visible corporate Israel and invisible historic Israel, but not a replacement of either. Then what we have identified as the invisible historic Israel, with its unchangeable characteristics—Israel, the Circumcision, and the Jew, is always hidden in God.

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.

"By laying the case before their eyes he more clearly and fully confirms the fact, -that the Gentiles had no reason to be proud.  They saw in the Jews an EXAMPLE of God's severity, which ought to have terrified them; while in themselves they had an evidence of His grace and goodness, by which they ought to have been stimulated to thankfulness only, and to exalt the Lord and not themselves. The words import the same, as though he had said, -`If thou exultest over their calamity, think first what thou hast been; for the same severity of God would have impended over thee, hadst thou not been delivered by His gratuitous favor: then consider what thou art even now; for salvation shall not continue to thee, except thou humbly recognizest the mercy of God; for if thou forgettest thyself and arrogantly exultest, (?) the ruin, into which they have fallen, awaits thee: it is not indeed enough for thee to have once embraced the favor of God, except thou followest (!) His call through the whole course of thy life.' 

They indeed who have been illuminated by the Lord ought always to think of perseverance; for they continue not in the goodness of God, who having for a time responded to the call of God, do at length begin to loathe the kingdom of heaven, and thus by their ingratitude justly deserve to be blinded again." 

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - pp.431

aaron-To conclude that to be grafted in is equivalent to gaining one's salvation and that being broken off is equivalent to loosing one's salvation may not be completely accurate within the careful exegesis of these passages and surly leans towards Armenianism. Those who are grafted in become a part of the invisible holy priesthood of God.  This holy band includes the combined REMNANT from Israel and the REMNANT from the Christian Church—the collective historic Israel that is comprised of the Jews and non-Jews alike, and are identified as Jews and the Circumcision.  Then when they are broken off because of their unfaithfulness to this high calling, they would simply return to their former estate and rejoin the REST of the visible corporate peoples of God.  From the Judeo-Christian perspective, the visible corporate peoples of God is a compilation of visible Israel and the visible Christian Church.  But I believe that John Calvin is strongly suggesting that most, if not all of Israel, were broken off or divorced: Stating “the ruin, into which they have fallen, awaits thee”.

Then they “deserve to be blinded again” is also an interesting analogy for being “broken off”.  I believe that it correctly shows that these conditions into which Israel was placed are in fact only temporary.

John Calvin continues—"But he addresses not each of the godly apart, as we have already said, but he makes a comparison between the Gentiles and the Jews.  It is indeed true that EACH INDIVIDUAL among the Jews received the reward ($) due to his own unbelief, when they were BANISHED from the kingdom of ($$) God, and that ALL who from among the Gentiles were called, were vessels of God's mercy; but yet the particular design of Paul must be borne in mind. For he would have the Gentiles to depend on the ETERNAL COVENANT ($$) of God, so as to connect their own with the salvation of the ELECT (??) people, and then, lest the rejection of the Jews should produce (??) offence, as though their ancient adoption were void, he would have them (??) to be terrified by this example of punishment, so as reverently to regard the judgment of God.  For whence comes so great licentiousness on curious questions, except that we almost neglect to consider those things which ought to have duly taught us humility? (*) But as he speaks not of the ELECT individually, but of the whole (??) body, a condition is added, If they continued in His kindness.”

aaron-To see these events that are pictured here in Romans 11 as the “rejection” and “Punishment” of the Jews is, I believe, totally missing the point of Paul’s exhortations throughout the entire book of Romans.

“I indeed allow, that as soon as ANY ONE abuses God's goodness, HE deserves to be deprived of the offered favor; but it would be improper to say of ANY ONE of the godly particularly, that God had mercy on HIM, when he chose HIM, provided HE would continue in His mercy; for the perseverance of faith, which completes in us the effect of God's grace, (?) flows from ELECTION itself.  Paul then teaches us, that the Gentiles were admitted into the hope of ETERNAL LIFE on the condition, that they (??) by their gratitude retained possession of it.  And dreadful indeed was (??) the defection of the whole world, which afterwards happened; and this clearly proves, that this exhortation was not (unnecessary); for when God had almost in a moment watered it with His grace, (?) so that religion flourished everywhere, soon after the truth of (??) the gospel vanished, and the treasure of salvation was taken away. And whence came so sudden a change, except that the Gentiles had (??) fallen away from their calling?”

aaron *It is yet unclear why John Calvin chose to interpret the ELECT BODY instead of the ELECT INDIVIDUAL: That is, between the Gentile body and the Jewish body instead of individuals.  This interpretation, I still believe, is driven by their doctrine on eternal security.  Which now, speaking of eternal security as it applies to the Church, needs no proof indeed: because the proof for ETERNAL SECURITY resides in each regenerated individuals heart as the Holy Spirit witnesses within our hearts to this elevated state.  I know!  Some believe it is necessary because of those denominations who promote Armenianism.  But we must remember that our ASSURANCE of ETERNAL SECURITY comes only from the hand of God Himself—as the Holy Spirit witnesses this to our spirits. 

The sad thing about all of this, is the fact that this diversion to eternal security is extremely disruptive to our efforts to understand these complex issues.  What we are attempting to explain here is this complex definition of precisely who the peoples of God are.  At the very same time, we are attempting to explain the dispensational transitions concerning God's expanded salvation program that is now set in place.  We must not lose site of these very important factors.

“We now understand in what sense Paul threatens them with (removal), whom he has already allowed to have been grafted into the hope of life (1) through God's ELECTION.  For, first, though this cannot happen to the ELECT, they have yet need of such warning, in order to subdue the pride of the flesh; which being really opposed to their salvation, ought (**) justly to be terrified with the dread of perdition.  As far then as Christians are illuminated by faith, they hear, for their assurance, that the calling of God is without repentance; but as far as they carry about them the flesh, which wantonly resist the grace of God, they are taught humility by this warning, `Take heed lest thou be cut off.'”

aaron-Paul is principally explaining the potential variations within the stations of the visible and the invisible dispositions of God.  He is stating that the potential always exists for one to be grafted in, excised out, and then that same one can potentially be grafted in again.  Once again, this is not referring to one’s salvation unless you happen to believe in Armenianism, but to one’s selection into /or out of /or back into, God’s hidden royal priesthood.

aaron-** Can the flesh really be terrified with the dread of perdition?  I think not.  The flesh, as we all should know, is allied with the world and with the devil.  Those individuals who practice habits that can potentially destroy their own bodies absolutely prove this lack of dread: Those habits that can ultimately lead to their own death.

“(2) Secondly, we must bear in mind the solution which I have before mentioned, - that Paul speaks not here of the special ELECTION of (??)  individuals, but sets the Gentiles and Jews in opposition the one to  (***) the other; and that therefore the ELECT are not so much addressed in these words, as those who falsely gloried that they had obtained the place of the Jews: nay, he speaks to the Gentiles generally, and addresses the whole body in common, among whom there were many who were faithful, and those who were members of Christ in name only.”

aaron-*** How do you distinguish the “many who were faithful”, from “those who were members of Christ in name only”?  Tell me, precisely how would you know the faithful from those who are members of Christ in name only?  It is unclear who "those who falsely gloried that they had obtained the place of the Jews" are—accept looking back to the early Gentile Church, who charged the Jewish Christians with being heretics.  Neither do I believe that the apostle Paul ever sets the Gentiles and the Jews in opposition the one to the other.

aaron-* I would divert this discussion for a brief moment to clarify this matter.  I believe that the parable of the sower gives us four different potential states in which those collective INDIVIDUALS who have been called by God might find themselves.  This is best defined in Mk.4:3-8 "Harken: Behold, the sower went