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 BOTH 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 forth to sow: and it came to pass, as he sowed,

[1] some seed fell by the way side, and the birds came and devoured it.

[2] And other fell on the rocky ground, where it had not much earth; and straightway it sprang up, because it had no deepness of earth: and when the sun was risen, it was scorched; and because it had no root, it withered away.

[3] And other seed fell among the thorns, and the thorns grew up, and choked it, and it yielded no fruit.

[4] And others fell into the good ground, and yielded fruit, growing up and increasing;"...

“But if it be asked respecting individuals, "How any one could be cut off from the grafting, and how, after excision, he could be grafted (*) again," - bear in mind, that there are three modes of incision (1)  (Position), and two modes of excision. 

For instance, the children of the faithful are engrafted, to whom the promise belongs according to the covenant made with the fathers;

engrafted are also they who indeed (2) receive the seed of the gospel, but it strikes no root, or it is choked before it brings any fruit;

and thirdly, the ELECT are engrafted, who (3) are illuminated unto eternal life according to the immutable purpose (1) of God. 

The first are cut off, when they refuse the promise given to their fathers, or do not receive it on account of their ingratitude;

(2) the second are cut off, when the seed is withered and destroyed; and as the danger of this impends over all, with regard to their own nature, it must be allowed that this warning which Paul gives belongs in a certain way to the faithful, lest they indulge themselves in the sloth of the flesh. But with regard to the present passage, it is enough for us to know, that the vengeance which God had executed on the Jews, is pronounced on the Gentiles, in case they become like them."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - pp.432-434

aaron-The Gentiles are already like them, speaking of the Jews.  And the Jews are already like them: that is, speaking of the Gentiles.  Remember, the playing field has now become level.  For there is no distinction between the Jews and the Gentiles when it comes to God’s Abrahamic Covenant of Grace—for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.  But then we also know that God is rich unto all them that call upon His name.  This applies to every aspect of God's determinations. Because in justification and in condemnation, every one is now equal. 

One could conclude that we are all as broken branches, waiting for the engrafting touch of God. 

Some interpretations appear to be in contrast to the teaching of the partial  hardening, falling, or stumbling of Israel. The word partial was specifically used so we would know that the projected condition was not to effect the entire body of Israel, but only some for a temporary period of time.

23. And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.

"Frigid would this argument be to the profane; for however they may concede power to God, yet as they view it at a distance, shut up as it were in heaven, they do for the most part rob it of its effect. But as the faithful, whenever they hear God's power named, look on it as in present operation, he thought that this reason was sufficient to strike their minds.  We may add, that he assumes this as an acknowledged axiom, - that God had so punished the unbelief of His people as not to forget His mercy; according to what He had done before, having (**) often restored the Jews, after He had apparently banished them from His kingdom.  And He shows at the same time by the comparison, how much more easy it would be to reverse the present state of things than to (??) have introduced it; that is, how much easier it would be for the natural branches, if they were again put in the place from which they had been cut off, to draw substance from their own root, than for the wild and the unfruitful, from a foreign stock: for such is the comparison made between the Jews and the Gentiles."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.434

          aaron-As we move throughout this entire study, it is absolutely essential that we distinguish between the INSTITUTION and the KINGDOM, as the two are not the same.  The INSTITUTION is always visible in the form of visible Israel and the visible Christian Church, while the KINGDOM, being invisible, is always hidden in God throughout His entire reconciliation.  The KINGDOM will remain hidden in God until it is manifested upon the new earth as the promised inheritance for God’s resurrected corporate peoples. Ref.Mat.25:34 <*>

aaron- Paul is making no comparison between the Jews and the Gentiles here in these passages.  Again, Paul is only explaining the leveling process that was necessary in the progress of God's universal reconciliation.  For the cross of Christ to be completely successful—as Jesus came to us as the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world, ALL must receive the benefits of that same cross in exactly the same way—By God’s grace, grace, wonderful grace.  Now this ALL is inclusive of Jews and non-Jews alike.  So we must see that the Jews and the Gentiles must come into God's reconciliation in exactly the same way—by God’s free and unmerited grace through Christ’s finished propitiatory work upon the cross.  That is, because of Christ's finished propitiatory work upon the cross, God's grace can freely flow out to whomever God wills.  This is exclusive of any and all individual participation. 

24.For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? 

aaron-It must be noted that BOTH THE NATURAL BRANCHES AND WILD BRANCHES MUST BE GRAFTED INTO THIS TREE! And we know that they are both being grafted in by God’s gratuitous election.

aaron-There is one additional reason for the apostle Paul's clear description of the re-grafting in of the natural branches.  In it, I believe the apostle is describing the absolute equality that must exist in the engrafting process, as well as the universality of the collective membership.  That is, to become part of God's hidden family, both those who are elected from the Jews and those who are elected from the Gentiles must be individually grafted into God's Holy Olive Tree.

1. The Jews did not totally fall away: Because, through God's elective sovereignty, those Jews, the hidden remnant whom God has chosen, are being grafted into His Holy Olive Tree throughout the whole of history.

2. In the same respect as with our visible example of Israel’s REMNANT and the REST, we also know that the collective called Gentiles were not ALL to be grafted into God's Holy Olive Tree.  Like the Jews, only a REMNANT of the Gentiles was chosen by God's elective sovereignty to be grafted into God’s hidden priestly line, and the REST remain in a viable institution identified as the visible Christian Church.

3. When considering Romans 11:17-24, we must keep Romans chapters one through four and chapters nine through eleven in the forefront of our minds.  God, through these chapters, has been explaining His absolute sovereignty with respect to His universal reconciliation and His elective process. 

In review:

a. To properly understand the book of Romans, we must be able to see the physical Jews, the physical Circumcision, and physical Israel as visible examples of the relationship that the invisible Creator God desired to establish with His visible creation.

b. To properly understand the book of Romans is to understand that God's initial intent, when establishing His Covenant of Grace with father Abraham, was to also include all of the nations in Abraham’s Covenants with God.

c. To understand the book of Romans is to see God moving through the leveling process as He opened wide the door of salvation to all peoples, tribes, tongues, and Nations.

d. To understand the book of Romans is to understand the difference between the visible and the invisible: To see the absolute need for this transition of our understandings from that which was symbolic to that which was symbolized.  That is, to see that the visible Jews, the visible Circumcision, and visible Israel were symbolic representations of the invisible Jew, the invisible Circumcision, and the invisible Israel.

e. To understand the book of Romans is to understand that some of the invisible peoples of God always existed, even within the institution of the first visible peoples of God.  That is to say, though the physical Jews, the physical Circumcision, and the physical Israel, were the symbolic peoples of God, all of the invisible children of God existed throughout the ages, hidden within this symbolic group and hidden in God.  This is proven through the examples of Cain/Able, Isaac/Ishmael, and Jacob/Esau: Which also manifests the activity of God’s elective sovereignty throughout the whole history of time.  Although all of those named above were a part of God’s visible covenant peoples and inclusive members of Abraham’s Covenants with God, only God’s special election would form His hidden priesthood and ultimately His invisible Covenant of Promise.

f. To understand the book of Romans is to understand how God has given this clearer definition to the essence of who His invisible peoples are.  That is, to have a correct understanding of what constitutes a Jew—a Jew on the inside, and what constitutes the Circumcision—the Circumcision of the heart, and then to understand precisely what constitutes the make-up of Israel—the hidden Israel of God.

g. To understand the book of Romans is to understand that throughout time and eternity, God has, through His Covenant of Grace that he formally manifested to Abraham, established institutions and gathered the called from all the nations of the world.  Then from these called out ones that form His institutions, God has, through His elective sovereignty, personally elevated each and every elect person into His hidden priestly Kingdom. <*>

h. To understand the book of Romans and particularly Rom.11:17-24, is to understand the absolute sovereignty of God in the matters of excision and engrafting.  It is God who does the breaking off, and it is God alone who does the grafting in.  All glory be to our God!

GOD'S SOVEREIGN ELECTION-II cont.

"For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant of this mystery, unless you become wise in your own conceits: That a (partial hardening) has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles be completed, and so all Israel shall be saved: Even as it has been written: There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer.  He shall turn away the ungodliness from Jacob: And this is My Covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. 

As touching the gospel, they are enemies for your sake, but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers sake.”  “For the gifts and the calling of God are not repented of.  For as you in time past were disobedient to God, but now (you) have obtained mercy by their disobedience.  Even so have these also now been disobedient, that by the mercy shown to you, `they also may now obtain mercy'.  `For God has shut up all unto disobedience, that He might have mercy upon all'." (Rom.11:25-32)

aaron-Here again, from the perspective of God’s Kingdom, the visible Jews were, in a limited sense, hardened.  That is, "For God has shut up ALL unto disobedience, that He might have mercy upon ALL" in preparation for the fulfillment of His universal reconciliation and to complete His selective engrafting of His Holy Priesthood.  For the fulfilled universal character of God’s Abrahamic Covenant of Grace, this hidden priesthood was to be all inclusive of the Jews and the non-Jews alike.  Then it is only here at this supernatural level that all distinction is truly removed—where “There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female”. Ref.Gal.3:28  This is a level of pure Spiritual experience!

aaron-Following the complete "fulness of the Gentiles", or the end of this dispensation of grace—the year of Jehovah's favor, then and only then will all of God's first peoples Israel be saved in the resurrection of the last day—Their salvation is based solely on God’s grace simply because they are God’s peoples. By the plain language used here, this is surely referring to the occasion of the final resurrection—the resurrection of the dead. Ref.Mat.25:31-46

"There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer."- aaron-This is, of course, referring to the return of Christ from the heavenly Zion. When, in the final resurrection and judgment, "He shall turn away the ungodliness from Jacob: And this is My Covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins."-This is speaking about the future hope for the totality of God's first peoples Israel. Ref. Ezekiel chapters 34, 36, and 37  

aaron- Because of the tremendous controversy that surrounds this chapter from Romans, we must, at this juncture, consider what is generally meant by the term "mystery".

We read in Rom.16:25 that the gospel message is "according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept in silence through time eternal." (Hidden!)

The apostle Paul writes in Eph.1:9 : "Having made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Himself, that in the dispensation of the fullness of times He might gather together in one all things in Christ." (This is a picture of God’s universal reconciliation!)

Eph.3:3 and 4 again tell us: "By revelation He made known to me the mystery [as I wrote before in few words, by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ], which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets: that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel." (The Seed!)

Col.1:25-27 adds: “The glory of the mystery - is Christ in you.”

By these Scriptures, the word mystery would be defined as the manifested dispensational change in God's salvation program—the gospel: Where the door of salvation has been opened to all the peoples, tribes, tongues, and Nations of the entire earth.  The gospel message is the glorious fact that God has eternally removed all distinction in peoples that formerly established the separation and enmity: which makes the family of God universally inclusive of all.

aaron-We must keep in mind that the "good news" or "the gospel" is completely dependent on the propitiatory work of Messiah. The sin debit for God's whole creation has been fully paid-allowing God's grace to freely flow wherever God wills.

The book of Romans is devoted entirely to the explanation of this very complicated issue—the removal of all distinction of peoples in fulfillment of God’s universal reconciliation—God’s Abrahamic Covenant of Grace.  Then the additional bringing together of the Jews and the Gentiles, the Circumcision and the Uncircumcision, into one unified indistinguishable body—God’s hidden priestly Kingdom that is within the invisible Covenant of Promise. 

AN ABSOLUTE CHANGE IN THE ESSENCE OF THE INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE BY INCLUDING THE ADDED INSTITUTIONAL CALLING IN OF THE GENTILES, YET STILL RETAINING ITS ORIGINAL CONTENT AND SEMBLANCE IN ITS HIDDEN SUB-STRUCTURE. <*>

aaron-For additional clarification, this first portion- "AN ABSOLUTE CHANGE IN THE ESSENCE OF THE INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE" is referring to going from one to two distinct visible institutions that God has now established—first, visible Israel and second, the visible Christian Church. Then this last part- "YET RETAINING ITS ORIGINAL CONTENT AND SEMBLANCE IN ITS HIDDEN SUB-STRUCTURE" is referring only to that which is always hidden in God.  That is, the invisible Israel of God is that unchanging “HIDDEN SUB-STRUCTURE” that is collectively chosen out from the corporate peoples—the called Jews and the called Gentiles: Who, once they are grafted into God’s Holy Tree, are all indistinguishably identified as Jews, the Circumcision, and Israel. Then understanding that "the hidden Israel of God" has always existed throughout time and eternity within the secret dominion of God. <**>

Col.2:2 tells us : The mystery of God contains all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

Eph.3:9 and 10a adds: To make all people see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ: to the intent that now the manifold wisdom of God might be made known by the Church.

Then looking specifically at God’s invisible dispositions—“For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bone... This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the Church.”  Eph.5:30 and 32

THE MYSTERY IS THE GOOD NEWS - THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST (YAHSHUA MESSIAH) 

THE Israel we are seeking to understand can be seen more clearly in Paul's letter to the Galatians: "For in Christ Jesus neither Circumcision nor Uncircumcision avails anything but A NEW CREATION. 

And as many as walk according to this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, (even) upon THE ISRAEL OF GOD." (Gal.6:15 and 16)  "THE NEW CREATION" spoken of here, is identified as "THE ISRAEL OF GOD".  So the remnant of Israel—those who are elected out from visible Israel, along with the remnant of Gentile Christians—those elected out from the Gentile Christian Church, will all be combined into a single organism.  Remembering that God's invisible peoples /or priests are, at this point in time, just as they also were under the old economy, all identified internally as Jews, the Circumcision, and Israel—the Israel of God:  

Then secondly, "AND SO ALL ISRAEL WILL BE SAVED" would represent the visible institutional called corporate peoples of God from both the institution of visible Israel and the institution of the visible Christian Church who are to be resurrected bodily at the close of the last day.  These are the identified sheep of Mat.25 that are to inherit their prepared kingdom upon the new earth.

The “Israel” of Rom.11:26 would represent the generic term for the visible corporate Congregation of God.  When Christ said “I will build My Church”—referring to His New Testament Church, the Greek word used for “Church” is Ekklesia /or Congregation—a calling out.  There is no doubt that there are some obvious distinctions between the Old Testament institutional Congregation and the New Testament institutional Congregation—simply based on their established initiatory rites of Circumcision and Baptism.  But if we are able to consider the distinct differences between these visible institutions within the construct of God’s invisible dispositions in the make-up of the hidden Israel of God, we just might find that necessary commonality there as well. <*>

To continue Calvin's commentary on Romans chapter eleven:

25. For I would not, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.

"Here he rouses his hearers to a greater attention, while he avows that he is going to declare something that is secret.  Nor did he do this without reason; for he wished to conclude, by a brief or a plain sentence, a very perplexed question; and yet he declares what no one could have expected.  But the words, LEST YOU SHOULD BE PROUD IN YOURSELVES, show what was his designed object; and that was, to check the arrogance of the Gentiles, lest they should exult over the Jews. This admonition was also necessary, lest the defection of that people should immoderately disturb the minds of the weak, as though the salvation of them all was to be for ever despaired of.  The same is still not less useful to us at this day, so that we may know, that the (?) salvation of the REMNANT, whom the Lord will at length gather to Himself, is hid, sealed as it were by His signet.  And whenever a long delay tempts us to despair, let us remember this word `mystery'; by (??) which Paul clearly reminds us, that the mode of their conversion will neither be common nor usual; and hence they act absurdly who attempt to measure it by their own judgment; for what can be more unreasonable than to regard that as incredible which is far removed from our view? It is called a mystery, because it will be incomprehensible until the (*) time of its revelation."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.435    

aaron-* How can one be considered ignorant of a thing that had not yet been revealed?  A proper understanding of the Scriptures, especially here in the book of Romans, clearly explains the details of this mystery. 

Once again I would offer this definition: The word mystery represents the dispensational manifestation of the way in which God is presently dealing with humanity.  The revealed Mystery is the GOOD NEWS—THE GOSPEL.  God has opened wide the door of salvation to all peoples, tribes, and tongues, of every Nation.  Additionally, God has also opened our minds to understand the Spirituality of His hidden mysteries—the invisible dispositions of God.

aaron-Remember, Christ's propitiatory work upon the cross completely satisfies all of God's demands upon the sins of the world.  Consequently, God’s grace can now freely flow to whomsoever God will.

"The mystery is accounted for in rather a singular way.  The most ($) obvious meaning is, that the mystery was the fact of the RESTORATION, and not the manner of it.  No doubt the word sometimes means what is obscure, sublime, or profound, as `great is the mystery of godliness,' 1Tim.3:16 : but here THE MYSTERY IS MADE KNOWN, in the same manner as Paul mentions a fact respecting the resurrection, 1Cor.15:51, and also the call of the Gentiles, Rom.16:25."  

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - pp.435, 436 footnote 2

aaron-Define RESTORATION? How about RECONCILIATION!               

"It is, however, made known to us, as it was to the Romans, that our faith may be content with the word, and support us with hope, (**) until the event itself come to light."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - pp.435, 436   

aaron-** What is the event itself?  The event here in Romans is the GOSPEL; the GOOD NEWS: The manifestation of the universal character of God’s reconciliation, which incorporate all peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations into His complex Abrahamic Covenant of Grace.  It is the complex characteristics of God’s Abrahamic Covenant of Grace that most commentators have failed to discern from these writings.  These complex elements that show the elective process that is involved in the incorporation of the Jews and the non-Jews alike into God’s hidden family.

"`In part,' I think, refers not simply to time, nor to the number, but means, in a manner, or in a measure; by which expression he intended, as it seems to me, only to qualify a declaration which in itself was severe.  `Until' does not specify the progress of order of time, but signifies the same thing, as though he had said, `That the fullness of the Gentiles,' The meaning then is, - That God had in a (?)  manner so blinded Israel, that while they refused the light of the gospel, it might be transferred to the Gentiles, and that these might (?) occupy, as it were, the vacated possession.  And so this blindness served the providence of God in furthering the salvation of the (!$) Gentiles, which he had DESIGNED. And the fullness of the Gentiles is to be taken for a great number: (*) for it was not to be, as before, when a few proselytes connected themselves with the Jews; but such was to be the change, that the Gentiles would form almost the entire body of the Church."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.436

aaron-First, I believe that "THE FULLNESS OF THE NATIONS" means only that God's elective work within the Nations will be finished.  I also believe that we tend to use the word GENTILES in almost a singular way.  Our minds might broaden this definition, if we were to use the word NATIONS instead: Because that term is probably closer to what is intended here.  *We must also escape this trap of Jew /Gentile comparison.  The casting away of them was the reconciling of the world, not the reconciling of the Gentiles!  This reconciled world that God has in view here, consists of Jews and non-Jews alike.  God is factually able to finish the work of His “reconciling of the world” because of Christ’s finished propitiatory work upon the cross.

"The explanation of this verse is by no means satisfactory.  It does not correspond at all with what the Apostle has already declared in (***) verses 11, 12, and 15; where the restoration of the Jews to the faith ($) is most clearly set forth.  Besides, by making Israel, in the next verse, to mean generally the people of God, the contrast, observable through the whole argument, is completely destroyed."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.436 footnote 1

aaron-*** verse 12 uses an interesting word, diminishing, when speaking about the dispensational position of Israel.  Ed observes, in verse 15, the complete destruction of the contrast between Jews and Gentiles.  We must remember God's plan—that on the newly leveled playing field of His universal reconciliation, all distinction within His invisible peoples—the hidden Israel of God, has been eternally removed.

"The word for `blindness' is hardness, callousness, and hence contumacy.  `In part,' is generally regarded as having referenced both (*) to extent and duration; the hardness did not extend to all the Jews, and it was not to endure, but to CONTINUE FOR A TIME; and the time is mentioned, `until the fullness of the Gentiles come in.' 

This is (**) obviously the meaning, and confirmed by the whole context. The attempt of GROTIUS and HAMMOND, and for some of the fathers, to confine what is said to the Apostolic times, is wholly irreconcilable with the drift of the whole passage and with facts."

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.436 footnote 1

aaron-* It is observed, that many interpreters have failed to remember that "in part" applies primarily to extent.  By believing that the Jews will again obtain the first place in the physical realm (Premillennialism) is basically missing these important teachings from the book of Romans.  Missing first, these wonderful teachings concerning the universal character of God’s reconciliation.  But then to prove that this is speaking about extent, the Apostle tells us that only a REMNANT of visible Israel was to be elected into God’s invisible Kingdom and not all of visible Israel—as the REST were to remain in a semi-blinded state.  We should then understand, that this elect remnant of Israel along with the elect remnant of the Nations, would be brought in together, and collectively become the sum of God’s invisible Messianic Kingdom—the Israel of God.  All of these things will be brought to a full end, only through God’s eternal elective activities at the conclusion of this dispensation of grace. 

"Much has been written on the words, `until the fullness of the nations come in.' That the event was future in the Apostle's time (and future still as history proves) is evident, especially from the following verse, `and so all Israel shall be saved.'  The plain construction of the passage is, `until the fullness of the Gentiles shall come.' What this `fullness' is to be has been much controverted.  But by taking a view of the whole context, without regard to any hypothesis, we shall, with no great difficulty, ascertain its meaning. The `fullness' of the Jews in verse 12, is determined by verse 26; it (*) includes the whole nation.  Then the `fullness of the Gentiles' must mean the same thing, the introduction of all nations into the Church. (**)The grafting more particularly signifies profession.  It then follows that all nations shall be brought publicly to profess the gospel prior to the removal of the hardness from the whole nation of the Jews. There may be isolated cases of conversion before this event, for `in part' as to extent the hardness is to be: but all shall not be brought to the faith, until the faith spread through the whole world: and the effect of their restoration will faith be a great revival of vital religion among the professing Gentiles, according to what is said in verse 15.  This is clearly the view presented to us in this extraordinary passage, when all its parts are compared with each other.”

aaron-We seem to generally view situations just from the perspective of our own Christian understanding of salvation. That is, seeing the restoration of the Jews as "It then follows that all nations shall be brought publicly to profess the gospel prior to the removal of the hardness from the whole nation of the Jews.” “but all shall not be brought to the faith, until the faith spread through the whole world:” The bringing in of the Jews in their corporate restoration, is accomplished only in the resurrection of the dead that we see pictured in the Mat.25 sheep—not a revival in the literal sense.

          (**)Calvin wrote—“The grafting more particularly signifies profession”.  If he is referring to a “profession” of faith as the qualification for being “grafted” into the Olive Tree, I would disagree.  Election and subsequent engrafting is not handed out at the door, but comes only from the inner prompting of the Holy Spirit.  If I am wrong in my assessment of Calvin’s meaning, I sincerely apologize.

($) “HAMMOND tells us, that many of the Fathers wholly denied the future restoration of the Jews; and we are told by PAREUS, who mentions some of the same Fathers, that they maintained it.  But it appears from the quotations made by the first, that the restoration disallowed was that to their own land, and that the restoration referred to by the latter was restoration to the faith; two things wholly distinct.  That "Israel" means exclusively the Jewish nation, was almost the unanimous opinion of the Fathers, according to ESTIUS; and that their future restoration to the faith is here foretold was the sentiment held by ($$) BEZA, PAREUS, WILLET, MEAD, and others, and is generally held by modern divines."  

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.436, 437 footnote 1

aaron-As one reads the opinions of these notable Church fathers, the largest stumbling block is still their inability to recognize the complex characteristics that are associated with the identification of God’s peoples.

aaron- To gain a better understanding of this present problem, we should annotate these writings from William Hendriksen as an example of a modern divine.  These brief examples taken from Hendriksen's writings, allow us the opportunity to evaluate the differing eschatological discussions that are disseminated on this portion of Paul’s letter to the Romans. 

From William Hendriksen's ROMANS - New Testament Commentary  pp.379-380

Considering "And so all Israel will be saved".

Three interpretations:

A. The most popular theory

"All Israel" indicates the mass of Jews living on earth in the end-time.  The full number of elect Gentiles will be gathered in. After that the mass of Jews - Israel on a large scale - will be saved.  This will happen just previous to, or at the very moment of, Christ's return. For the names of some of the advocates of this theory see p.307.  (C.E.B. Cranfield, J. Murray, C. Hodge, and G. Vos)

EVALUATION

a. The Greek word "ontos" does not mean "then" or "after that'. The rendering "Then all Israel will be saved" is wrong.  In none of the other occurrences of this word in Romans, or anywhere else in the New Testament, does this word have that meaning.  It means "so", "in this manner, thus".

b. This theory also fails to do justice to the word "all" in "all Israel".  Does not "all Israel" sound very strange as a description of the (comparatively) tiny fraction of Jews who will still be living on earth just before, or at the moment of, Christ's return?

c. The context clearly indicates that in writing about the salvation of Israelites and Gentiles Paul is not limiting his thoughts to what will take place in the future.  He very definitely includes what is happening now.  See especially verses 30, 31.

d. Would it not be strange for God to single out for a very special favor - nothing less than salvation full and free - exactly that generation of Jews which will have hardened its heart against the testimony of the longest train of Christian witnesses, a train extending all the way from the days of Christ's sojourn on earth - in fact, in a sense, all the way from Abraham - to the close of the new dispensation?

e. The reader has not been prepared for the idea of a mass conversion of Israelites.  All along Paul stresses the very opposite, namely, the salvation, in any age (past, present, future) of A REMNANT.  See the passages listed under 11:5, p.363.  If Rom.11:26 actually teaches a mass conversion of Jews, would it not seem as if Paul is saying, "Forget what I told you previously"?

f. If Paul is here predicting such a future mass conversion of Jews, is he not contradicting, if not the letter, at least the spirit, of his earlier statement found in 1Thes.2:14b-16: "...The Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, and do not please God, and are hostile to all men, in that they try to prevent us from speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved, so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But upon them the wrath [of God] has come to the uttermost"?

g. The immediately following context (11:26b, 27) refers to a coming of "the Deliverer" who will turn away godlessness and remove sin from Jacob.  Was not that the purpose of Christ's FIRST coming? But the popular interpretation of Rom.11:26 predicts a mass conversion of Jews in connection with Christ's SECOND coming. That theory is, accordingly, not in harmony with the context.

aaron-Christ’s First Coming made propitiation for the sins of the world—Jn.3:16, which allowed for the complete fulfillment of Abraham’s Covenants with God.  Christ, at His Second Coming as the King and the Judge of all, will fully pardoned the sin debit for the REST of hardened Israel as He graciously “remove sin from Jacob”.  This event is to include a gracious pardon for all of the visible institutional peoples of God—Jews and non-Jews alike.

                ----------------------------------

For these several reasons Interpretation A. should be rejected.              

a. The definition of the Greek word "ontos" as "so", "in this manner, thus", I believe better fits my interpretation.  It is the end process of the fullness of the Nations that all Israel is saved.

b. My interpretation does more justice to the word "all".  The "all Israel" in my interpretation consists of all the elect of God; the combined numbers of Jews and non-Jews saved during this dispensation.

c. I believe my interpretation is in complete agreement with the overall writings of the apostle Paul, especially in the book of Romans.

d. This evaluation would also be in complete agreement with my interpretation.  God established this dispensation, and then He sent His only begotten Son to seek and to save that which was lost.  Anything less than total and complete success in this present dispensation, diminishes and undermines the total work of Christ.

B. John Calvin's theory

"All Israel" refers to the total number of the elect throughout history, all those who are ultimately saved, both Jews and Gentiles. In his Commentary on this passage Calvin expresses himself as follows: I extend the word ISRAEL to all the people of God, according to this meaning: when the Gentiles shall come in, the Jews also will return from their defection to the obedience of faith, and thus will be completed the salvation of the whole Israel of God, which must be gathered from both..."

The same view is defended by J.A.C. Van Leeuwen and D.Jacobs, op. cit., p.227; and, in a sense, by Karl Barth, Der Romerbrief, Zurich, 1954, p.401; English tr., p.416.

EVALUATION

In as far as Calvin interprets the term Israel spiritually - "Israel" refers to the elect - his theory must be considered correct.  Cf. Rom.9:6.  Also his claim that the section, verses 25-32 (considered as a unit), describes THE ONE PEOPLE OF GOD cannot be successfully refuted.  On the other hand, Calvin's application of the term "Israel," in verse 26, to all the people of God, both Jews and Gentiles is wrong.  In the preceding context of the word Israel, Israelite(s) occur no less than eleven times: 9:4; 9:6; 10:19; 10:21; 11:1; 11:2; 11:7; and 11:25.  In each case the reference is clearly to Jews, never to Gentiles. (page 380)

aaron-"But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect.  For they are not all ISRAEL who are of ISRAEL."  The first ISRAEL presented in this passage must be defined as the Invisible Israel /Historical Israel /the Spiritual or Supernatural Israel /the Israel of God Gal.6:16, and the second use of Israel must be defined as making reference to visible corporate Israel/ or national Israel who were the original peoples that were formed to serve God as an example and a type of the relationship that the invisible Creator desired to have with His visible creation. 

By using Mister Hendriksen's interpretation that Israel always references to Jews, we would have to say that "they are not all Jews who are Jews".  This would take us back to Rom.2:28 "For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, and not in the letter": Which, in all of these cases: that of the word ISRAEL, that of the word CIRCUMCISION, and that of the word JEW, we see that the same words definitely have different contextual meanings /or these formal names—Jew, Circumcision, and Israel all have complex definitions /or each of these words—Israel, Circumcision, and Jew has a dual meaning.  So Calvin's interpretation of Israel, which they would say is only a spiritual interpretation, is in fact the interpretation that partially fits the overall tenor and grammar of Romans—at least the invisible half of this complex equation is defined in Calvin’s interpretation of the elect.  The “all Israel” of verse 27 is referring, not to the invisible Israel of God as Calvin supposes, but, according to the text and context of verse 26, the all Israel here is referring to the same group that was blinded: To the visible corporate institutional peoples of God—Jews and non-Jews alike.

C. A Third Theory

The term "All Israel" means THE TOTAL NUMBER OF ELECT JEWS, THE SUM OF ALL ISRAEL'S "REMNANTS."  "All Israel" parallels "the fullness of the Gentiles."  Verses 25, 26 make it very clear that God is dealing with both groups, has been saving them, is saving them, and is going to save them.  And if "All Israel" indicates, as it does, that not a single elect Israelite will be lacking "when the roll is called up yonder," then "the fullness of the Gentiles" similarly shows that when the attendance is checked every elect Gentile will answer "Present."

For the meaning of "will be saved" see on 1:16, p.60.  For Jew and Gentile the way of salvation is the same.  In fact, their paths run side by side.  Opportunity to be saved will have ended for both when Christ returns.  As indicated previously, the two - "THE FULLNESS OF THE GENTILES" and "All ISRAEL" - CONSTITUTES ONE ORGANISM, SYMBOLIZED BY A SINGLE OLIVE TREE. 

It should be clear that if, in the present connection, FULLNESS must be interpreted in its unlimited sense, the same holds for ALL in "All Israel."

aaron-The basic difference between theory "B" and theory "C" that is being presented here by Mister Hendriksen, results only in one of semantics: one of meaningless words. 

Let us look at the individual points that Mister Hendriksen makes here for theory "C":

1. "For Jews and Gentiles the way of salvation is the same."

This is absolutely true—Throughout all time, all are saved through Christ’s finished propitiatory work upon the cross.

2. "Their paths run side by side."

True.

3. "Opportunity to be saved will have ended for both when Christ returns."

True.

4. "THE FULLNESS OF THE GENTILES" and "ALL ISRAEL" - CONSTITUTES ONE ORGANISM SYMBOLIZED BY A SINGLE OLIVE TREE."

Wrong.

This is exactly what John Calvin is stating in his theory "B".  Right?  "`All Israel' refers to the total number of the elect throughout history, all those who are ultimately saved, both Jews and Gentiles."

There is only one real difference between theories "B" and "C", and that difference is one of identification.  Where John Calvin in theory "B" openly identifies all the peoples of God as Israel, Hendriksen, in theory "C", because of their mistaken interpretation of the term Israel, attempts to segregate the Jews and the Gentiles.  But in the end, Hendriksen, along with other theory "C" supporters, is forced by the Scriptures to recognize the absolute unity of these two groups by their mutual presence in this One Holy Olive Tree. 

Now as we view this picture, what we see within this Blessed Trunk is the non-distinct character of all the elect peoples throughout the entirety of God’s reconciliation.

aaron-During my studies, God has given me added insight into the complex identification associated with the peoples of God and with the complex characteristics of Abraham’s Covenants with God.  The most important aspect to be gleaned, is in the unfortunate fact that “all Israel” and the single “Olive Tree” do not constitute the same people group.  This is true because the “all Israel” of Rom.11:26, must be contextually defined as the exact same people group that are pictured in Rom.11:25—“that a blindness /or hardening in part had befallen Israel”.  This is precisely the same Israel that must also be identified from Rom.11:7—as that majority from national Israel that must be identified as “the REST were hardened”.  And this identification of “the REST” is according to God’s master plan.  What I am saying here, is that this “all Israel” of Rom.11:26 is referring only to the visible institutional corporate peoples of God.  Which, because of the necessary similitude within God’s visible dispositions and invisible dispositions, this people group must include the whole visible institutional corporate peoples of God—Jews and non-Jews alike.  These are the Sheep of Mat.25.

aaron-Even though I have concluded that theory "C" is basically the same as theory "B", I will continue on with Mister Hendriksen's formulation:

The words "And so" are explained by Paul himself.  They indicate, "In such a marvelous manner," a manner no one could have guessed. If God had not revealed this "mystery" to Paul, he would not have known it.  It was, in fact, astonishing.  The very rejection of the MAJORITY of Israelites, throughout history recurring again and again, was, is, and will be, a link in the effectuation of Israel's salvation.  For details, see above, p.366, 367, 377, 378 (Rom.11:11, 12, 25).

Although, to be sure, this interpretation is not nearly as popular as is theory A, among its defenders are men of recognized scholarship (as holds also, of course, for theories A and B).  Let me mention but a few.

One of the propositions successfully defended by S. Volbeda, when he received his summa cum laude doctor of theology degree from the Free University of Amsterdam was: "The term `all Israel' in Rom.11:26a must be understood as indicating the collective elect out of Israel.

aaron- This proposition made by Mister Volbeda concerning the definition of “all Israel” as the ELECT is not correct.

As was noted earlier, in the first instance of Israel’s complex definition, the “all Israel” of Rom.11:26 must be representative of the visible institutional corporate peoples of God, and the second instance of Israel’s complex definition can be found in “the Israel of God” of Gal.6:16, which must represent just the invisible elect priesthood of God—consisting of both the elect Jews and the elect Gentiles grafted together into God’s Holy Olive Tree. <*>

          H. Bavinck, author of the four-volume work GEREFORMEERDE DOGMATIEK [Reformed dogmatics], states, "`All Israel' in 11:26, is not the people of Israel, destined to be converted collectively, neither is it the Church consisting of united Jews and Gentiles; but it is the full number which during the course of the centuries is gathered out of Israel.  Cf. H. Hoeksema, God's Eternal Good Pleasure, Grand Rapids, 1950, p.465.

aaron-

1. I would agree with Mister Bavinck that `All Israel' is not the people of Israel destined to be converted collectively.  But they would represent the “REST of Israel”—which includes those of visible corporate Israel—the REST who were not a part of the invisible “REMNANT”.

2. I would disagree with mister Bavinck on his second point: As I also stated in my earlier comments concerning Mister Volbeda `All Israel' is in fact represented by the visible institutions of Israel and the Christian Church; consisting of united Jews and Gentiles—the fullness of both the Jews and the Gentiles in the final resurrection of the dead.

3. I would also disagree with Mister Bavinck on his third point - identifying the "All Israel" as "the full number which, during the course of the centuries, is gathered out of Israel."  Mister Bavinck, as well as many other prominent theologians, has apparently failed to recognize the absolute manifested identifications that are involved in the complex definition of Israel itself.

This understanding is also wrong because it fails to properly identify “the rest” of visible Israel. Rom.11:7  That is, “the rest” of visible Israel must be distinguished form the invisible “Remnant” of Israel. It is only when we understand this complex definition of the “Jew”, the “Circumcision” and “Israel”, that we will correctly understand the required complex definition for God’s peoples and God’s Covenants with Abraham.

The identification that I believe Mister Herman Ridderbos was very close to understanding: looking again at pp.333, 334 of "PAUL - An Outline of His Theology” "Section 56. THE NEW COVENANT. UNIVERSAL AND PARTICULAR

"The significance of the Church - which has repeatedly come to light in the foregoing - as THE CONTINUATION OF ISRAEL, AS THE ELECT, CALLED, HOLY PEOPLE OF GOD, ought now to be defined further according to its content and essence.  We have already seen in the analysis of these various designations that this "CONTINUATION" is no simple matter.

(1) On the one hand, in a positive sense it presupposes that the Church springs from, is born out of Israel;

aaron-Yes! I believe this statement is correct.

(2?) on the other hand, the Church takes the place of Israel as the historical people of God.

aaron-No! This statement is not correct.  Keep in mind that visible Israel is visible Israel and the visible Christian Church is the visible Christian Church.

This means a new definition of the people of God, and likewise a new concept of Israel.

aaron-Yes!—BUT ONLY BY OUR RECOGNIZING THE COEXISTENT CHARACTERISTICS—VISIBLE ISRAEL AND INVISIBLE ISRAEL!

But this “new definition of the peoples of God” must be seen as having a more detailed definition. The complex definition of Israel must be seen in its simplest terms as having a visible characteristic as well as an invisible characteristic that are distinctively different yet always coexistent. <*>

DEFINING ISRAEL AS THE REMNANT AND THE REST

RIDDERBOS continues—The question is how one is conceived of this redemptive-historical transition,

(1) on the one hand with regard to the historical Israel of the Old Testament that God has chosen to Himself and to which He has given His promise,

aaron-THAT THIS SAME “HISTORICAL ISRAEL” MUST, BY NECESSITY, BE IDENTIFIED AS THE REMNANT!

(2) on the other hand with regard to unbelieving Israel that has rejected Christ and thus placed itself outside the fulfillment of the divine promises to Abraham and his descendants."

aaron-THEN THIS SECOND GROUP MUST BE IDENTIFIED AS THE REST!

aaron-Mister Ridderbos, in the above comments, has clearly defined ISRAEL AS HAVING TWO SEPARATE AND DISTINCT CHARACTERISTICS.  These are the same two Israels that the apostle Paul initially defines in Romans 2:28-29 and 9:6-8, and is most clearly understood from the analogy of “THE REMNANT” and “THE REST” that is given in Rom.11

1. The historical Israel of the Old Testament, chosen by God; Now identified as the Invisible Israel that the Invisible Christian Church is most assuredly a participating continuation of: And is in fact identified as such—The Israel of God.

aaron-Yes, this is the invisible elect group that must be identified as inclusive of THE ELECT REMNANT OF ISRAEL AND THE ELECT REMNANT OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

2. Unbelieving Israel; the Israel outside of God's promises; the Israel that is Israel only in the visible sense.

aaron-Then this second group must be identified as “THE REST OF ISRAEL”.  I do not believe that “unbelieving Israel” is a correct description of this group. The Israel who was called but not chosen might better describe this group that is identified here as THE REST.  Since Israel was established as an example and a type of the relationship that we in the Christian Church might now have, it only makes sense that the Christian Church also have a similar make-up to that of Israel’s REMNANT AND THE REST.

And L. Berkhof states, "`All Israel' is to be understood as a designation not of the whole nation but of the whole number of the elect out of the ancient covenant people... and the adverb "ontos" cannot mean `after that,' but only `in this manner.' For a similar interpretation see H. Ridderbos, op. cit.,p.263.

aaron-As I have just sighted in the comments above: From my studies of "PAUL - An Outline of His Theology" by Herman Ridderbos, I do not believe that Professor Ridderbos would support this interpretation (C. A third theory) as this author suggests. Ref.p.264

Not only scholars of Reformed persuasion and Dutch nationality or lineage have adopted this interpretation, but so have many others, as is clear from a glance at Lenski's commentary on Romans, pp.714, 726, 727.  See also O. Palmer Robertson, "Is There a Distinctive Future for Ethnic Israel in Romans 11?," in PERSPECTIVES ON EVANGELICAL THEOLOGY, Grand Rapids, 1979, pp.81-94.  These interpreters are convinced that this is the only interpretation that suits the text and context.

Objections Stated and Refuted:

Objection No.1.  This interpretation destroys the contrast between the REMNANT mentioned in 11:5, on the one hand, and THE MASS OF ISRAEL, on the other.

aaron-Who would be identified as THE REST.

Answer.  Our interpretation does not destroy a contrast but defines it more accurately.  The real contrast is that between single remnant (see, for example, 11:5), on the one hand, and "all Israel," that is, THE SUM OF ALL THE REMNANTS THROUGHOUT HISTORY (verse 26), on the other.

aaron-This assumption concerning "all Israel," that is, “THE SUM OF ALL THE REMNANTS THROUGHOUT HISTORY (verse 26)” is an inaccurate interpretation of this verse and fails to contextually recognize the complex characteristics of the word Israel.

Objection No.2  According to this interpretation the "mystery" mentioned by Paul amounts to no more than that all Israel's elect will be saved.  But that is a truth so obvious that it fails to do justice to the implications of the term "mystery."

Answer.  Not so!  The mystery of which Paul speaks has reference to the marvelous chain of events that results in Israel's salvation. It points to seemingly contradictory factors which in God's loving and overruling providence are so directed that ultimate salvation for "all Israel" is effected.

aaron-It is in this specific area of interpretation that some wrong turns have obviously been made.  The interpretation of the word "mystery" must be considered in the context of its most common use as was established in our earlier comments—the Gospel.

aaron-The above statement is true—Israel means exclusively the Jewish nation.  But what most commentators lack in their commentaries, is the precise understanding of what presently constitutes the specific complex identifying characteristics of the Jews who make up this "Jewish nation".  Is it visible or is it invisible?  FACT—IT IS BOTH!!!  Separate yet coexistent!!!

Calvin continues in Romans 11—"26. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:"

* "Many understand this of the Jewish people, as though Paul had said, that religion would again be restored among them as before: but I extend the word Israel to all the people of God, according to this meaning, -`When the Gentiles shall come in, the Jews also shall return from their defection to the obedience of faith; and thus shall be completed the salvation of the whole Israel of God, which must be ** gathered from both; and yet in such a way that the Jews shall obtain the first place, being as it were the first-born in God's family.'"

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.437

* aaron-What John Calvin is saying here: That "When the REMNANT of Gentiles shall come in, the REMNANT of Jews also shall return from their defection to the obedience of faith; and thus shall be completed the salvation of the whole Israel of God, which must be gathered from both;" MUST BE CATEGORICALLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS ELECT GROUP WOULD REPRESENT ONLY THE INVISIBLE ISRAEL OF GOD.  This is speaking about the invisible Messianic Kingdom.  That is, those who are to be gathered into this hidden Kingdom constitute the invisible priestly line gathered throughout both the Old and New Testament dispensations.  But the “all Israel” of Rom.11:26, being consistent with the definition of Israel in Rom.11:25, is referring to all of the visible institutional corporate peoples of God—Jews and non-Jews alike.

** aaron-Calvin recognizes the need to gather the ELECT from both the Jews and the non-Jews alike, but since we have learned early on that the collective branches of God’s Holy Olive Tree are indistinguishable, it would be difficult to establish the Jews back into the “first place”.

"This interpretation seems to me the most suitable, because Paul intended here to set forth the completion of the kingdom of Christ, which is by no means to be confined to the Jews, but is to include the whole world.  The same manner of speaking is found in Gal.6:16.  The Israel of God is what he calls the Church, gathered alike from Jews and Gentiles; and he sets the people, thus collected from their DISPERSION in OPPOSITION to the carnal children of Abraham, who had departed from His faith.

Calvin's Commentary - Romans - p.437

aaron-THESE CARNAL CHILDREN WOULD REPRESENT “THE REST”—THE VISIBLE ISRAEL WHOM GOD HAD ASSIGNED TO WALK IN A STATE OF BLINDNESS.

aaron-John Calvin and Herman Ridderbos would be in complete agreement on the interpretation of Gal.6:16—"The Israel of God is what he calls the Church (the ELECT Congregation), gathered alike from Jews and Gentiles". 

They also see two distinct Israels pictured here in the Scriptures:

1. Invisible Israel—those of Israel who were collected from the dispersion: It is made up of combined Jews and Gentiles—The Israel of God.

2. Visible Israel—the carnal children of Abraham who had departed from the faith. 

John Calvin sees the first Israel, the Invisible Israel, as being in opposition to the second Israel—visible Israel: In opposition to the visible children of Abraham.  To fully understand that there are two separate and distinctly different people groups when we consider Israel, who are always coexistent within God’s reconciliation, would require us to fully understand that there are also two distinctly different groups when we consider either the Jews or the Circumcision:                 

1a. The Invisible Jews—those who were collected from the dispersion: Being made up of Jews and Gentiles alike, they entirely make up The hidden Israel of God.       

2a. The visible Jews are identified by Calvin as the carnal children of Abraham who have departed from the faith.

Also included in this definition is the term Circumcision:

1b. The Invisible Circumcision—Those who were collected from the dispersion: Collected from the Jews and non-Jews alike—they have all received the true Circumcision from God Himself—the hidden Circumcision of the Heart: And these elect ones entirely make up The Israel of God.        

2b. The visible Circumcision—which is the circumcision of the flesh /without the Circumcision of the Heart: They are, according to Calvin, the carnal children of Abraham who have departed from the faith.

aaron-THE “ISRAEL OF GOD”, who are being collected out from the visible Jews and non-Jews alike, IS IN FACT IDENTIFIED AS INVISIBLE /OR SPIRITUAL ISRAEL—WHICH IS SYNONYMOUS WITH “THE REMNANT” OF ISRAEL.  THEN THE “ALL ISRAEL” IS MADE-UP OF THE VISIBLE INSTITUTIONAL CORPORATE ISRAEL—WHICH IS SYNONYMOUS WITH “THE REST”—THEN IN ITS FINAL STATE, A COLLECTION OF VISIBLE JEWS AND VISIBLE NON-JEWS ALIKE. <**>

aaron-Our concentration must be more sharply focused on these critical differences, if we are to properly receive these transitional understandings.  We must thoroughly understand that God, within His Covenants with Abraham, has established two distinctly different dispositions. 

One would be GOD’S VISIBLE DISPOSITIONS (Gen.17:7; Gal.4:21-25)—which we would apply to THE REST of National Israel as our visible example and type of the Covenant of Bondage.

The second would be GOD’S INVISIBLE DISPOSITIONS (Gen.17:15-19; Gal.4:28)—which we would apply to THE REMNANT of national Israel as our manifested invisible example and type of the hidden Covenant of Promise. 

And then lastly, we must also understand that the second may be characterized as an extension /or an appendage of the first (Gen.21:4; Lu.2:25-32)—as they are always coexistent.

GOD’S VISIBLE DISPOSITIONS DEFINED-THE REST

First, we must recognize that God’s visible dispositions would generally apply to the visible institutional peoples of God as our first example and type: A visible covenant relationship that is established with peoples and their families—their offspring.  Those who occupy this station must be seen as being within the broader concept of God’s Abrahamic Covenant of Grace: Where their presence within the Abrahamic Covenant of Grace is based solely on the Visible Circumcision of the Flesh Covenant (Water Baptism for the New Testament Christian era) that God first established with father Abraham and his offspring (their Gen.17:1-14, 18, 20, 23-37; Acts.2:38, 39 experience).  The institutional basis for this covenant relationship is only God’s efficacious grace that is flowing out through Christ’s finished propitiatory work upon the cross, and is freely received from God through their obedient performance in the application of His commanded initiatory rites. 

To be included in this broader concept of God’s Abrahamic Covenant of Grace, one is only required to be a family participant having received God’s visible institutional initiatory rites.  Under the Old Testament economy, those who were a part of these Visible Circumcision Covenant families were identified as visible Jews, the visible Circumcision, and visible Israel. 

Though all of these established identifications serve as visible examples of both the visible peoples of God and the invisible peoples of God, they are especially seen today as visible examples of God’s invisible dispositions. 

It is evident that these visible examples are the beginning point for any tangible insight into, and the world’s populations coming to understand, this invisible Creator God.  If God had not established this tiny nation of Israel as a visible example relationship, we would have no tangible understanding of God at all.  This Visible Circumcision Covenant (N.T. visible water Baptism); the Flesh Covenant, because its primarily application involves the visible flesh, might also be defined as the Covenant of Bondage (Gal.4:23-25). 

We then see that the eternal promise for all those who are a part of the visible institutional corporate peoples of God, is based solely on the efficacy of God’s promises that are connected to His own calling and His commanded visible initiatory rites:

(1) That at the time of their death, they would go to the place of the dead; A place of rest; To Abraham’s bosom (Their Lu.16:22 experience). 

(2) Following the final resurrection and judgment and their inheriting the Kingdom (Their Jn.5:28, 29; Mat.25:31-46; Rev.20:11-15 experience), they are to be established in their own land upon the new earth (Their Isa.65:-66:; Gen.17:8; 48:4; Ezek.40:-48: experience.)

GOD’S INVISIBLE DISPOSITIONS DEFINED-THE REMNANT

Second, we must recognize God’s invisible dispositions as having primary application to His invisible priestly line; The Messianic Covenant line; The Covenant of Promise that was to come only through the progeny of Isaac. 

This invisible priestly line is seen within the narrow concept of God’s Abrahamic Covenant of Grace.  Where their presence in the Abrahamic Covenant of Grace is first facilitated by their participation in God’s visible institutions—receiving God’s mandatory visible initiatory rites that He specifically gave to His peoples and their families. 

Additionally, their presence in this narrow concept of the Abrahamic Covenant of Grace is based solely on God’s elective invisible dispositions.  That is, the only basis for any participation in this narrow concept of the Abrahamic Covenant of Grace is the efficacy of God’s grace through His own calling and elective sovereignty. 

To be numbered among God’s high priestly line, one must be regenerated by God Himself; one must be born again; one must be born of the Holy Spirit.  This is the only process where God’s invisible dispositions are applied to each and every one of His individual priests. 

Every one who is elected into God’s mystical line:

(1) Must become a Jew—a Jew on the inside. 

(2) Must become a part of the Circumcision—The Circumcision not made with hands—the Circumcision of Christ (Col.2:11); Which is the Circumcision of the heart (Rom.2:28, 29). 

(3) And must also become a part of Israel—the hidden Israel of God (Gal.6:16; Rom.9:6-8). 

The narrow concept of the Covenant of Grace is the Covenant of Promise: Through which, the Messiah and the Messianic Covenant line would be fulfilled (Gal.3:16).

These elect ones also have some very special promises that God has given just for them:

(1) God has promised them that, throughout this entire dispensation of grace, whether they are alive (Their Jn.5:25 experience) or dead (Their 2Cor.5:8; Phil.1:23; Rev.20:4 experience), all of these elect ones have been promised a continuous life existence with their Lord. 

Then after death, these elect ones go immediately into Heaven to appear before the judgment-bar of Christ (Their Rev.4:2-4; 20:4 experience). 

(2) That this elected priestly line constitutes the developing Kingdom here on earth (their 1Pe.2:5, 9; Rev.5:9, 10 experience). 

Then at the end of this year of Jehovah’s favor; this year of the Lord; this dispensation of grace (Rev.11:15), when Christ will return to gather up His elect priests to Himself (Their Mat.24:31; Mk.13:27; 1Thes.4:13-17 experience), all of these living and dead elect priests who are collectively gathered up into the clouds (the resurrection of the living), constitute the completed Kingdom (Their 1Cor.15:23, 24 experience).  Their destination is clearly stated to be Heaven itself: Where they are to be delivered up to their God and Father. 

(3) This completed Kingdom is the full manifestation of the first resurrection (Rev.20:); the manifest body of Christ. 

These elect priests are collectively in Heaven for their marriage to the Lamb (Rev.19:7). 

Then these priests, adorned with their white robes, become the armies of Heaven who will accompany their Lord into the battle of Armageddon (Rev.19:11-16; 16:13-16). 

Then lastly, the resurrection of the dead and the final judgment must occur (Rev.20:11-15; Mat.25:31-46). 

(4) Following these last events, when God fashions the new heavens and a new earth (Rev.21:1-8), the collective body of Christ; the completed Kingdom; the bride, the wife of the Lamb; the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descends out of Heaven from God (Rev.21:9-22:5).

-JEHOVAH-SHAMMAH-                                                      Amen.

SUMMARY

AARON- Any exegesis of the Holy Scriptures that fails to receive and to understand these following truths from the book of Romans-

1. The truths concerning the manifestation of the dispensational transition within God’s universal reconciliation.

2. The truths concerning the present manifestation of the specific make-up of the Israel of God: That the Israel of God continues to be a Spiritual body that is always hidden in God.

3. The manifested truths concerning the multiple definitions of what constitutes a Jew, the Circumcision, and Israel: Understanding that each of these individual identifications has a complex definition—having both a visible characteristic and an invisible characteristic.

4. The correct understanding of the absolute identification of those who constitute the membership of what we have identified as the invisible Church of God—the hidden Israel of God.  All who participate in this special group must be identified as Jews, as the Circumcision, and as a part of Israel—the hidden Israel of God.

-would be largely beside the point.  

aaron-As I have said in other places, this finite point that I am trying to make is most allusive to us all.  When I say that this whole discussion is about identification, what I really mean is this, that a proper interpretation of the complex characteristics of Abraham’s Covenants with God and the complex identification of God’s first peoples are prerequisite to any proper understanding of the Scriptures themselves.  Recalling how God first impressed the absolute simplicity of these difficult understandings, as they can most easily be discerned by our being able to discriminate between the VISIBLE and the INVISIBLE.  Then recognizing that this simplicity is achievable only when we take our understandings to the deepest possible level—the Supernatural level.  And then there at that Spiritual level, discovering that the identification of God’s Covenants and God’s peoples is simply a matter of observing the VISIBLE characteristics in distinction to the INVISIBLE characteristics of God’s Covenants and God’s peoples. 

My friends, this is the bottom line of this whole study.  We must understand this simple fact—that God is Spirit, and that God inhabits the invisible realm called ETERNITY.  What I am trying to say here, is that the true essence of God's elect peoples, past, present, and future, just as the Apostle Paul has demonstrated so clearly in the book of Romans, is entirely supernatural—INVISIBLE.  Yes, the living members of visible Israel and the visible Church are individually and institutionally visible.  But the true essence of God’s elect peoples is only reflected with the mark of God’s sovereign election on the inside.  Though they could be a visible Jew or a visible Christian, as the invisible elect they are all identified as Jews, the Circumcision, and a part of the hidden Israel, and the essence that made them a part of the elect is always completely INVISIBLE to the natural eye.