Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ELEVEN (Lesson XII)

John Calvin offers his advice on understanding what Paul says here about there still being hope for his fellow unbelieving Jews to accept Jesus as the Messiah and be saved. He feels that the Romans might be hindered in understanding this argument unless they made note that sometimes he speaks of the whole nation of the Jews, and sometimes of single individuals. That’s why on the one hand he talks about the Jewish nation being banished from the kingdom of God and cut off from the tree of life which will hasten their destruction. But on the other hand, he denies that they had fallen from grace. On the contrary, they continued in the possession of the covenant and still had a place in the kingdom of God. In other words, Israel may no longer be the chosen children of God as a nation, but there are many among them who will be called into the fellowship of God’s children as Christians.¹

Calvin goes on to say that while the Jews, for the most part, rejected Christ which allowed such thinking to pervade the whole nation, yet there were many who did accept Jesus as the Messiah. This was enough to conclude that while the Jewish nation had stumbled, it still was not finished for them universally with no hope of repentance. Calvin says that we should derive the following conclusion from all that Paul has said so far: Although they brought on their own ruin with spiritual blindness, he now gives hope of their rising again. These two things are totally different. The nation of Israel foolishly stumbled over Jesus being the Messiah and fell into destruction. Yet, every individual Jew was not automatically included so that even those who believed would perish or be alienated from God.² In the words of a song we used to hear sung many years ago that said, “There is still room at the cross for one.”³

John Taylor is quick to point out that the fall of the Jews was not, in itself, the cause or reason for the calling of the Gentiles into the family of God. Whether or not the Jews had rejected Jesus as the Messiah it was already part of God’s original purpose to bring the Gentiles into the church under the final covenant. This was not decided when Paul was called as the Apostle to the Gentiles but was in God’s covenant with Abraham. For how could the unbelief of the Jews give the Gentiles any reason to believe? If it were not yet part of the divine plan to save the whole world, then Jesus would have had to return to the cross after his resurrection and die again, this time for the Gentiles. God’s grace would not be hindered from reaching every sinner on earth regardless of what the Jews did. So their rejecting Jesus as their Messiah and Savior was exclusive to them. The call going out to the Gentiles had been scheduled before the creation of mankind. In fact, it was the realization that the Gentiles were now included in the family of God that was supposed to make the Jews jealous and fight to keep their place at the banquet table with Abraham.⁴

Adam Clarke makes the same point that the fall of the Jews was not in itself the cause or reason for the calling of the Gentiles. Whether the Jews stood or fell, embraced or rejected the Gospel, it was the original purpose of God to take the Gentiles into the Church. This was clearly implied in the covenant made with Abraham, and it was by the goodness of God in that covenant that the Gentiles were now called, not just because of the Jews’ unbelief.

Simply put, the Jews, in the most obstinate and unprincipled manner, rejected Jesus Christ as God’s Savior which He offered to them in His name. That’s why the Apostles then turned to the Gentiles with the Gospel message, and they heard and believed. The Jews then perceived that the Gentiles would be given possession of similar privileges which they once enjoyed as the peculiar people of God. This they could not bear or even imagine to be possible. So they rallied all their strength in opposition and persecution against it.⁵

Robert Haldane comments on why he thinks God used jealousy to bring the Jews to a fuller understanding of their fallen state. It was meant to open the eyes of their when they saw how God was pouring out mercy and favor on the Gentiles, and that this would cause them to reflect on their own fallen condition, and desire to possess the same advantages. So when the Jews could no longer hide the fact that the God of their forefathers is now with the nations whom they once abhorred, they would be led to reconsider their disobedient ways and brought again into the fold of Israel. This is according to the prophecy already quoted by the Apostle Paul in the 19th verse of the preceding chapter.

Haldane believes that it was in this manner that God purposed to finally bring the Jewish nation to their knees in submission to Him in order be under His Shekinah cloud of blessings again. That’s why by His sovereign will, the fall and ruin of so many Jews would lead to the salvation of even more Gentiles. His dreadful judgments against the shameless transgressors of His laws should warn those who see it to flee from the wrath to come. On the other hand, the conversion of heathens who had been notorious sinners should excite some of the Jews to seek salvation from Christ. After all, who could have calculated how extensive, permanent, and glorious the effects of God’s redemption plan would be throughout all creation, and into the eternal ages, from the fall of angels and mankind for the Church and the whole world?⁶ We ought to remember that the Lord has very wise and gracious motives for His most severe and frightening decisions. We can see this in how the fall of the Jews became an occasion for the Gentiles to be enriched with the inexhaustible grace, love, and mercy that is in Christ so that the justice, the wisdom, and the faithfulness of God can be glorified even in the worst of times.⁷

Charles Hodge sums up what appears to be the accepted understanding of most Bible scholars. Since the rejection of the Jews was not total, neither was it final. They have not fallen so deep as to be hopelessly unable to rise again. First, it was not God’s design to get rid of His people entirely, but, by their rejection to facilitate the progress of the Gospel among the Gentiles. This, in turn, would make the conversion of the Gentiles the means of converting the Jews.⁸ Then Hodge notes that the Jews, even those who were professors of Christianity, were, in the first place, very slow to allow the Gospel to be preached to the Gentiles; and in the second place, they appear almost uniformly to have desired to clog the Gospel with the ceremonial observances of the Law. This was one of the greatest hindrances to the progress of the cause of Christ during the apostolic age, which would, in all probability, have been a thousand-fold greater, had the Jews, as a nation, embraced the Christian faith. On both these accounts, the rejection of the Jews became a means of facilitating the progress of the Gospel.⁹

Frédéric Godet also comments on the apparent blessing that came to the Gentiles and will come to the Jews, because of their rejection of Jesus at His first coming. As he sees it, we can call this a wonderful result in that Israel, having been unwilling to concur with God in saving the Gentiles, will still, in the end, be responsible for themselves being saved through the salvation of the Gentiles. It is undoubtedly a humiliation for them to be the last to enter where they should have introduced all others to God’s kingdom. But on God’s part, it is the height of mercy.

There is perhaps a more remote reason for which the conversion of the Gentiles becomes a means for the salvation of the Jews. Paul indicates this in words borrowed from the passage of Moses quoted by later in verse 19. Seeing all the blessings of God’s kingdom such as pardon, justification, the Holy Spirit, and adoption showed in abundance on the Gentile nations through faith in the One they rejected, how can they still keep endlessly keep saying, “These blessings are ours?” And how can they not open their eyes and recognize that Jesus is the Messiah since in Him the works prophesied were accomplished? How can the elder son, seeing his younger brother seated and celebrating the feast at his father’s table, not ask that he may re-enter the paternal home and come to sit down side by side with his brother? Such is the spectacle of which Paul gives us a glimpse in the words: “to make the Jews jealous.” The sin of the Jews could modify the execution of God’s plan, but by no means prevent it.¹⁰

Preacher Charles Spurgeon shares his thoughts. He puts it this way: There will be a day when those who have for so long refused to acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah, will finally recognize the purpose of His mission and will mourn the fact that they stabbed Him in the side. When the nation of Israel finally shows sorrow for their sin with holy sincerity, there has never been a time of grieving that will match it. Once they discover that their nation rejected the Son of God when they crucified Jesus of Nazareth, their deeply religious spirit will be filled with the utmost remorse as they repent in tears of regret. Each man and each woman will cry out for pardon to the Lord of mercy. Then suddenly their weeping will turn to joy as they feel His forgiveness sweep over them. All their sins of ages past will be washed away in one moment. They will then perceive that the very side which they pierced has yielded a fountain to cleanse them from all their unrighteousness. They will look up and with great joy behold the cross on Calvary upon which was sacrificed the Lamb of God that brought them redemption and healing. They will see the sin-offering slain on their behalf. What a blessed day that will be when “all Israel shall be saved.” O that you and I might live to see that happy scene when all the Jewish race will behold their Messiah. For then shall Israel be joined with Gentiles believers in sweet communion forever and ever.¹¹

H. A. Ironside comments about the Jews, then and today, and their relationship with God. He notes that many Christians have taken for granted that God is through with them as a nation forever. This, the Apostle now shows, is far from the truth. Did they stumble so many times that they finally fell? And did their fall result in removing any hope or possibility of Israel recovering? The answer again, “By no means.” God has used their present defection to make known His riches of grace toward the Gentiles, and this, in turn, will be used eventually to provoke Israel to become so jealous that they will turn back to the God of their fathers and to the Christ whom they have rejected. This recovery will be a means of untold blessing to that part of the world which has not yet come to a saving knowledge of the Gospel.¹² It has been some seventy years since Dr. Ironside taught this lesson, and Israel is no closer to accepting Jesus as the Messiah now than then. But is God any closer to opening that door for them to see the truth and acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord of all? I’m sure He is. Oh, what a day that will be so that all heaven can rejoice.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ELEVEN (Lesson XI)

Adam Clarke sees what Paul is saying here as a direct message to the unbelieving Jews. He is not asking questions, he is telling them what he thinks about those who’ve become comfortable in their self-righteousness arrogance and have grown lax in their dedication to God’s Word. Paul is telling them that their proverbial good life will end up being their downfall. As a result of their always closing their eyes against the truth, they will become blind to even the slightest glimmer of light. Not only that but as they continue to sit around drinking and dining on God’s goodness with no signs of gratitude, they will grow so spiritually weak they will not be able to walk without stumbling and falling. So instead of their becoming a great and powerful nation, they will continue to be a persecuted minority. In that case, they will end up worse off than the Gentiles. This will go on until they acknowledge Jesus as the promised Messiah, and submit to God’s plan of grace in receiving redemption through His blood.¹

But it can also be seen as a warning to the Gentiles, should they too stray away from the true Gospel preached to them and begin to interpret Scripture to support their own teachings and dogmas. In such cases, the communion table could easily become a snare, a trap, and a stumbling-block, causing them to suffer because of misbelief and begin to grow weary and burdened down as they pile more and more rites and rituals upon the shoulders of their followers.

Robert Haldane has his thoughts on interpreting Paul’s use of Psalm 69. For anyone to represent this passage other than as a prediction of the coming Messiah, our Lord Jesus Christ, gives a false view of this blessed hymn. God is announcing through David the coming condemnation connected with Jewish backsliding. Those described here by Paul as quoted from the 9th and 10th verses of the Psalm, immediately follow the prophetical description, also in the Psalm, of their treatment of the Messiah. It should also be observed, that during the whole period of the First Covenant, God employed the most powerful external means to bring them back to Himself, so that if they failed to do so they would be entirely without excuse.

Haldane then goes on to explain further that Psalm 69 consists of three parts. The first involves the violent persecutions which the Lord Jesus Christ experienced from His enemies and the Jews. It introduces the prophetical characters of the Psalm as representative of the extraordinary sufferings of Him of whom it speaks, and of the reproaches against Him — sufferings and persecutions which would be both exaggerated were they limited to those persecutions which David endured at the hand of His enemies. The second part is a prediction of the fearful judgments of the Lord, especially upon the traitor Judas. We also find the cause of His sufferings is ascribed to His love of God. “For your sake I suffer insults, shame covers my face. I am estranged from my brothers, an alien to my mother’s children, because zeal for your house is eating me up, and on me are falling the insults of those insulting you.” Now, we do not read that David was ever persecuted on account of his religion, nor that he suffered because of His love for God.² The third part regards the exaltation of Jesus Christ to eternal glory, and the success of the Gospel. Only the words, “They put a sedative in my food; in my thirst, they gave me vinegar to drink.”³ may be understood figuratively of David, but they cannot be literally applied to him, only to Jesus Christ.⁴

Albert Barnes offers his insights on these two verses in a way that might allow us to draw this picture of a person who was invited to a table where they expected to enjoy good healthy nourishment and refreshment, only to find out that what they were fed was poisonous to their system. Like a trap and snare, they were decoyed into it by walking carelessly and not paying attention. While they were not anticipating any danger or had any fear about what they going to be fed, it could well turn out to be their spiritual ruin. The Psalmist said: “Oh, taste and see that the Lord is good!”⁵ Every believer should become so familiar with God’s Word that when something is purported to be Scripture, it doesn’t taste like it.

Charles Hodge believes that doctrinally we can take away from these verses that when people are forsaken by God, all their powers as God’s children are useless and all their blessings become curses. Although they have eyes, yet they can’t see that their obsession with the good life has become a trap.⁶ Hodge then goes on to remark that people are commonly ruined by things in which they put their trust or take the most delight in doing. The whole Mosaic system, with its rites and ceremonies, was the ground of confidence and boasting to the Jews, and it ended up being the cause of their destruction. So, in our day, those who take refuge in some ecclesiastical organization instead of Christ, will find what they expected to get out of this would prove their salvation to be real, will only be to their ruin. The same is true of all improvements made by mankind to God’s plan of Salvation and blessings. In the end, they become the worst thing that can happen to a believer.⁷

Frédéric Godet has similar thoughts. He interprets the term “table” used in the Psalmist’s words as an emblem of the material pleasures which the ungodly enjoy. Their life of immoral enjoyments will become to them the same as those traps people set to catch birds and animals. It is difficult to avoid thinking that the Apostle is applying this figure of speech in a spiritual sense. The punishment which he has in view is of a spiritual nature; it is a moral hardening of the heart against the truth. So the cause of such entrapment must, therefore, be something more than simple worldly pleasure. For Paul, it is, as we have seen, the proud confidence of Israel in their ceremonial works. The table is, therefore, in Paul’s sense the emblem of presumptuous eternal security founded on their faithfulness to keeping their rites, rituals, ceremonies, feasts, and Holy Days. These acts of devotion, by which they expect to be saved, are precisely what is blinding them to any real opportunity for salvation they may be given.⁸

Verse 11: In that case, when the Jews stumbled, did their fall mean they were forever lost? Heavens no! In fact, their mistake brought salvation to those who are not Jews. The purpose of this was to make the Jews jealous.⁹

After having made clear all the evidence incriminating the unbelieving Jews for bringing on their own despair and punishment, Paul is quick to add that God still did not give up on them so that they lost all hope of being saved. This effort by a compassionate God was expressed by Isaiah when He told the prophet: “‘Am I pleased with the death of a sinful man?’ says the Lord God. ‘No, instead I would like him to turn from his sinful ways and live… For I am not pleased with the death of anyone who dies,” says the Lord God. So be sorry for your sins and turn away from them, and live.’”¹⁰ However, some of those who heard the Gospel preached by Paul were unmoved and so he had no other choice but to take the Good News to those who would listen.

That’s what happened when Paul and Barnabas reached Antioch in the country of Pisidia.¹¹ It also occurred when Paul was in Athens. Paul went into the synagogue to preach the Good News, but Luke tells us: “They [the Jews] worked against Paul and said bad things about him. He shook his clothes and said, ‘Whatever happens to you is your own doing. I am free from your guilt. From now on I will go to the people who are not Jews.’”¹² So any blame for their not becoming part of the believing family of God was on their own shoulders.

Origen takes note of Israel’s condition and how Paul distinguishes between stumbling and sinning on the one hand and falling on the other. As Paul sees it, he is offering the cure for stumbling and sinning, but not for falling. This is why he denies that Israel has fallen. For the Israelites, although they rejected their redeemer and stoned and persecuted those who were sent to them, nevertheless, there still remains a remnant within them of true believers. For they still have the law to guide them even if they do not understand it all. This is the doorway through which they will be led to Christ.¹³

Preacher Chrysostom, however has a different interpretation. After showing that the Jews were guilty of sins without number, Paul offers something that can be used as extenuating causes. Note, he accuses them on the basis of what the prophets have said but modifies the condemnation by his own words. For nobody will deny that they have sinned greatly and fallen out of favor with God. But let us see if the fall is such that it proves to be incurable. The answer is, “No, it is not!” Paul believes that God has not given up all hope for their salvation, so neither should he.¹⁴

Then Augustine finds a middle ground. For him Paul is saying that the Jews have not fallen in vain, since it led to the salvation of the Gentiles. The Jews did not sin only to fall as a punishment but so that their fall might serve a greater purpose. Paul even begins to praise the Jewish people for this fall of unbelief, in order that the Gentiles should not become proud, seeing that the fall of the Jews was so important for their own salvation. On the contrary, the Gentiles ought to be all the more careful, lest they too should grow proud and fall also.¹⁵

Pelagius sees Paul attempting to explain to the Jew their real position with God. In Paul’s mind, they have not fallen completely away beyond hope. So while they are struggling to believe, God reached out to the Gentiles and called them to salvation. It was Paul’s hope that when the Jews saw that the Gentiles were being allowed into the kingdom of God, they might perhaps repent more quickly.¹⁶ And Bishop Cyril sees Paul artfully crafting the words announcing a divine dispensation. By asserting that the Gentiles were called not because the Israelites had lost all hope of salvation, but because Christ had become a stumbling stone but rather to the Jews, Paul hoped that they would imitate those who were so unexpectedly accepted by God and recognize where their wickedness really was. And in so doing, they would come to a better understanding of God’s plan of salvation and accept Jesus Christ the Redeemer as their Lord and Savior.¹⁷

Ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus, who lived in Ephesus around 500 B.C., once made this statement: “The soul is dyed the color of its thoughts. Think only on those things that are in line with your principles and can bear the light of day. The content of your character is your choice. Day by day, what you choose, what you think, and what you do is who you become. Your integrity is your destiny – it is the light that guides your way.”¹

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. made this same line even more famous in a speech in Washington D.C., in 1963, when he said, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” But character is not something we are born with, it is something we develop. As Heraclitus said, its content is based on what we choose to build it with.

Whether these quotes were part of his inspiration or not, character was also an essential part of what Thomas D. Willhite, founder of PSI World,² a nonprofit service organization and PSI Seminars, taught as a motivational speaker who traveled around the world. In his speeches, he always emphasized the importance of choosing what we want to build our character and future upon. In one of his manuscripts we read, “People get what they want in life when they reach the point at which they can see themselves having what they seek.³

There is one thing we know about Good Character, we recognize it when we see it. Maybe more importantly, we know when it is missing. Every day headlines tell us about individuals lacking character. The main stories feature more than the common criminals, it includes politicians and business leaders, who make the front page with incidents of bad character. Bad character knows no boundaries.

The good news is that good character knows no boundaries either. Good character is exemplified every day and too often goes unnoticed. Media attention gets attracted to stories of bad behavior too often. But character is more than visual. Character is engraved on our hearts. The engraving isn’t something we dream about, but something we’ve accomplished. The word “character” comes from the Greek kharakter that means “engraved mark.” In other words, it just doesn’t show up, it has to be placed there on purpose to identify its source.

The Bible is very vocal on the subject of character. Solomon once said, “The person who is right in their walk is sure in their steps, but the person who goes the wrong way will be exposed.”⁴ And again Solomon wrote: “A good name is to be chosen instead of many riches. Favor is better than silver and gold.”⁵ But what God said to Samuel is so insightful when he went to anoint a new king for Israel: Don’t choose someone by the way they look on the outside or how tall they are, that’s not what I’m looking for. As the Lord, I don’t look at the things the way a human does. Human’s look at the outside of a person, but I, the Lord, I look at their heart.⁶

In short, don’t try to fool people by putting on a persona or disguise. Be your true self by developing the character you want people to recognize you. Take the time to study, pray, and seek advice to build the person God wants you to be. Jesus gave us a great outline in his Sermon on the Mount.⁷ And to this, you can add the Apostle Paul’s famous list of character traits.⁸ Not only will you be received well down here on earth, but you’ll be more than welcomed up above. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

A LESSON IN COMMUNICATING

When I first read this anecdote, it struck me as being quite simple but very powerful. So I thought I’d share it with you. I hope it sends the right message to your heart and life.

A blind boy sat on the steps of a building with a hat by his feet. He had a sign which read: “I am blind. Please Help.” There were only a few coins in the hat. When a man came walking by, he took a few coins from his pocket and dropped them into the hat. Then he took the sign, turned it around, and wrote some words on the back. He put the sign back where it was so that everyone who walked by would see the new words.

Soon the hat began to fill up. A lot more people were giving money to the blind boy.

That afternoon the man who had changed the sign came to see how things were going. The boy recognized his footsteps and asked, “Weren’t you the one who changed my sign this morning? What did you write?” The man said, “I only wrote the truth. I said what you were trying to say but in a different way. I wrote: ‘Today is a beautiful day, but I cannot see it.'”

Both signs told people the same thing… that the boy was blind. But the first sign simply said, in a negative way, it was unfortunate that the boy was blind. The second sign told people, in a positive way, that they were extremely fortunate that they were not blind. Should we be surprised that the second sign was more effective?

Moral of the Story:

Be thankful for what you have.

Be creative. Be innovative. Think differently and positively. When life gives you a reason to cry, show life that you have 100 reasons to smile. Face your past without regret because you can’t change it anyway. Handle your present with confidence. Prepare for the future without fear.

Keep the faith and drop the fear… just remember God is Near!

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ELEVEN (Lesson X)

Verses 9-10: And David said: “Let the dining table they recline next to become a snare for them; when they feel satisfied enough to relax, let it become a trap; let their eyes become so cloudy they cannot see, and it causes them to stumble whenever they try to walk.¹”

Paul has one more witness to call on in proving that what he is saying about the Jews not accepting the Messiah when He came is true. Consequently, they must understand that what they may perceive as punishment from God, is, in fact, a dilemma of their own creation.² To understand what David was referring to, we go back to the message given to Israel through Moses before they went into the Promised Land. First, they were instructed to love the LORD their God with all their heart, soul, and strength, while keeping all the instructions they had received sealed in their hearts. Not only that, but teach them to their children. If they followed these guidelines, God promised them: “Houses will be full of good things which you did not fill. There will be pools for keeping water which you did not dig, and grapevines and olive trees which you did not plant. You will eat and be filled.”³

But they have not given their full dedication to God and followed all His instructions, because had they done so they would have recognized the Messiah when He came. So Paul is saying that all the good things they were given to eat and drink had become a snare to them, taking their eyes off the One who was so gracious to them. Therefore, they had become a persecuted people scattered around the world. Now it was time to reassemble around the cross of Jesus Christ and become united again through His sacrifice, grace, and mercy. But the worse was yet to come. Everything they had been given would soon be taken away from them because of their rejection of the Messiah.

Jewish historian Josephus gives us a graphic and disturbing picture of those living in Jerusalem when this happened during the siege by Roman General Titus in 70 A.D. “Now the number of those that were carried captive during this whole war was estimated to be 97,000, and counting the number of those that perished during the whole siege it amounted to 1,100,000 souls. The greater part of who were exiled were all Israelites, although not all of them were residents of Jerusalem. Most of them had made their pilgrimage from all over the country to attend the feast of unleavened bread in Jerusalem.”

Josephus continues, “They were all of a sudden shut up in the city by the Roman army. It wasn’t long before a destructive epidemic caused great sickness and suffering among them. That was followed closely by the lack of food which resulted in a famine. This killed many of them in a short time. And that this city could contain so many people in it, is proven by the number that was counted during the campaign of Cestius Gallus, who was anxious to inform Emperor Nero of the city’s influence. So he requested that the high priests, if it were possible, to count the number of the whole multitude who came. So these high priests, at the start of that feast which is called the Passover, when they slay their sacrifices, from the ninth hour till the eleventh. With the rule of not less than ten were to be fed by sacrificed lamb, (for it is not lawful for them to feast singly by themselves,) there were so many they were forced to feed up to twenty on one sacrifice.”⁴

Early church scholar Origen shares some interesting details about the research that was made on this quote by Paul from David. After examining the source of the quote, he informed his readers that the snare and trap mentioned here by Paul when quoting David is not mentioned either in the Hebrew Text or in the Greek Septuagint.⁵ He said that he and his students had examined these things in the Hebrew, following the text from right to left, and the accuracy of other researchers consulted in order to show by these details that the authority of the Apostle does not rely on the texts of the Hebrews nor does it always retain the words of the translators, but rather it expounds the meaning of the Scriptures in whatever words are most suitable.⁶

Those of you who may have access to the Hebrew text of the Psalms or the Greek Septuagint version will find that both words are indeed mentioned there in verse 22. Perhaps that’s why Bishop Theodore sees things from a different angle. He tells us that while Paul is not using these words as a prophecy, it is a quote from the Scriptures which backs up what he has already said about the Jews, and at the same time he shows that there is nothing new under the sun.⁷

Then Augustine makes clear his humanistic thinking (something Martin Luther accused him of) more clearly here when he comments on the subject of mercy and judgment. He says that mercy on the elect reflects their having obtained the righteousness of God, but judgment upon the others who have been blinded. And yet the former have believed because they wanted to do so, while the latter have not believed because they have not wanted to do so. Hence mercy and judgment were executed based on their own willingness or unwillingness to believe.⁸ So it is clear that Augustine did not ascribe to the idea that man has absolutely nothing to do in attaining a right standing with God. Instead of God willing it and a person accepting it, it appears to him that a person wills it and God grants it because they want it. This was very much in line with the humanistic philosophy of the Greeks.

Martin Luther has much to say about the quote from David that Paul uses here and assesses it as to what was going on during his time when he suspected that the Roman Catholic church was misusing Holy Scripture to support certain doctrines and practices. As far as Luther is concerned, the Scriptures had become the biggest snare to many scholars in the church because the version or translation they were reading (he was speaking of the Latin Vulgate) was corrupt because of sloppy translation. This then found its way into their schools and ended up deceiving many of the lesser educated. Those sitting at the same study table can read the same passage of Scripture, and one will come away with an understanding that leads to spiritual death and the other to spiritual life.

To put it another way, Luther says that one draws out honey and the other poison. That’s why nothing else must be treated with more reverence and so little haughtiness as the Word of God. To the proud, the Scripture can easily end up offending them and trapping them in their lies and deceit, even though they may not be aware of it because it was so fascinatingly and beautifully disguised. This is not the Word’s fault, but that of human pride, which causes some to arrogantly lift their nose in the air to show they know more than what the Scriptures say.⁹

Luther goes on to clarify what he meant by saying the “snare” was when Scripture was used for false teaching. And that if one becomes ensnared, it is because they mistakenly draw the wrong conclusion from what the Scripture is saying. Not only that, but once they codify their false belief, they hang on to it because it says what they want it to say. So without realizing it, they have permitted themselves to be ensnared willingly. Yet, when their error is pointed out to them they take offence because they don’t want to let go. But it gets worse. They become defensive and distort the Scripture even more and then deny that it can be understood any other way. In so doing, they cover their eyes and do not allow themselves to be enlightened. In the meantime, others who do see the light and do accept that they were wrong are raised up to a new level of understanding while those who continue to reject any enlightenment remain perverted in their understanding. No doubt this is what led Luther to nail his ninety-five thesis to the castle door in Wittenberg.

Daniel Whitby validates what others have been saying about this Psalm Paul quoted as pointing to the future. He notes that anyone who is skilled in Hebrew knows that these words are easily understood as pointing to what was yet to come. Even the seventy Hebrew scholars in 250 B.C., translated it into Greek with an imperative mood and tense. Furthermore, since the Jews know what it meant to be in bondage and slavery because of their ancestor’s experience in Egypt, they would certainly understand what Paul was trying to tell them. This was especially true of the Jews living in Rome, who after the fall of Jerusalem would never be allowed back into their homeland again. This signifies that once a person has fallen from grace it is impossible for them to regain their position in Christ without a miracle from God.¹⁰

John Bengel sees a real picture form when we look at this sequence of words in David’s psalm: snare, trap, stumbling-block, and results. Bengel sees this as follows, the snare is a noose tied to a trap, so that the noose catches the foot of its prey and the trap then lifts it off the ground and holds it so it cannot get loose. As such, the noose was like a stumbling-block and the result of walking into the trap.¹¹ This is no doubt why Jesus told His disciples that they were not to go out to win the world through preaching the gospel before they were endowed with power from on high by God through the infilling of the Holy Spirit. This was to fulfill what Jesus had earlier promised: “The Counselor is the Holy Spirit. The Father will send Him in My place. He will teach you everything and help you remember everything I have told you.”¹²

John Taylor sees Paul’s use of this Psalm in a different light. He does not believe that Paul was trying to show that the blindness and stubbornness of the Jews in his day was being predicted by David. Rather, that it was the plight of those who would follow David’s time and end up in Babylonian captivity because they were unfaithful to God who had redeemed them from Egyptian bondage. For Taylor, the point Paul is trying to make here are the consequences of unfaithfulness, hardheartedness, and miserableness that would come as a result of their rejection of the Gospel and Jesus the Messiah. Paul hoped that they would see the malignant cause and dire effects of their continued unbelief.¹³

And none of this should be dismissed as part of the past and no longer relevant for believers today. Think of it this way: poison ivy that caused a burning rash back in Noah’s day, causes the same rash today. Likewise, unbelief and misuse of the Scriptures that plunged the Medieval church into darkness will do the same thing today if left to spread its poison without lifting the banner of truth for all to see.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ELEVEN (Lesson IX)

While growing up in the 1940s and 50s, both in the United States and Germany, whenever there was an evangelistic crusade or church revival, sometimes only a few people came forward for salvation. I used to hear evangelists call those who did not respond as being “Gospel-hardened.” This meant, they had heard so much preaching that they became immune to the power of the Word. And instead of it waking them up to their need for a Savior, it put them to sleep with the numbing effect of indifference.

Adam Clarke addresses this same idea in his comments on this verse. Israel had so willfully closed their eyes to the light, and their ears against the sound of God’s message, that He gave them up to the spirit of slumber. The very word and revelation of God, which should have awakened their consciences, and opened their eyes and ears, had a very different effect. And because they did not, thereby, receive the truth of God’s love that would have been the sweet savor of life unto everlasting life, it became the bitter taste of death unto eternal death. This same phenomenon continues to the present day.¹ In other words, God’s Spirit stopped waking them up so they could respond to the alarm and left them to suffer the consequences of their indifference.

Robert Haldane also addresses God’s process of election or choosing, those to be saved. As he sees it, the election of a sinful creature is an act of the free and sovereign will of God. However, that does not make His punishment a sovereign or arbitrary act of rejected Divine authority. God does not punish without the accused having been found guilty. Condemnation presupposes positive criminality. Humans are in themselves sinful and commit sin voluntarily. So their punishment ends up being that they are hardened and finally perish in their sins. Therefore, their destruction is the execution of a just sentence of God against unforgiven sin. Their sins, which are the cause of their destruction, are their own; the salvation of those whom God chooses and calls to Himself is His gift.

God knows what people abandoned to their own inclinations will do. As to those who are finally condemned, He reluctantly must let them suffer the consequences of their depraved inclinations, and this further hardens them in their rebellion against Him. But as to His determination, by grace, to cause the sinner to believe, to will, and to obey, it requires a positive intervention of Divine power — a power which creates anew, which no person merits or deserves, and which God allows or withholds according to the counsel of His own will. In accord with this, we see throughout the Scriptures, that when people are saved, they are saved by the sovereign grace of God, and when they perish, it is by their own foolish and senseless rejection of God’s amazing grace.²

Charles Hodge also has an interesting commentary on the blinding and hardening of the hearts of the Jews who refused to listen to the truth. Hodge points out that the Greek verb pōroō rendered “were blinded” (KJV), literally means: “to cover with thick skin, to cover with a callus, to grow hard and to render insensible.” That infers that they became insensitive to the truth and life-changing power of the Gospel, and, therefore, disregarded its offers and its claims. This affected their understanding as well as their heart. It was both blindness and resoluteness. The passive form of blindness used here may simply express the idea that they became hardened to the Gospel. It is another way of saying that God abandoned them to the hardness of their own hearts.³

Charles Spurgeon makes the point that when people say that they have no interest in listening to the Gospel, if you should ask them if they wouldn’t mind listening to its simple message again, their answer will probably be, “No, I’ve heard enough!” They are just tired of hearing the same thing over and over. They may offer the excuse that the Gospel is too difficult to understand. So when you offer them an easy-to-read translation of the Gospels and ask them if they would try reading it again in that version, most likely they will tell you that it’s too much trouble and they just don’t have the time.⁴

No doubt Spurgeon would agree, that if you told someone you had a Will from a recently deceased wealthy uncle and that it was hard to understand with all its legal jargon, but could read it they thought it might include them as a beneficiary, they would grab it out of your hand and read it with a magnifying glass if necessary. It is a case of an individual wanting to get something without doing anything in return. So they must not blame anybody if they remain in ignorance. Even so, those who decline to hear what the Gospel has to say should not wonder why they still have such unrest in their soul and such confusion in their mind.

Frédéric Godet says that once the elect are accepted, it follows that all the rest who were not chosen are then eliminated, and this is done in the most regrettable manner. It was their decision to harden their resolve to remain as they are even after God visited them. Godet explains that the Greek verb pōroō, “to harden,”⁵ signifies in the strict physical sense: to deprive an organ of its natural sensibility. But in a moral sense: to take away from the heart the faculty of being touched by what is good or godly, and from the mind the faculty of discerning between the true and the untrue, the good and the bad. What Paul will go on to say helps explain how it is possible for such an effect to be ascribed to a divine decision.⁶

Charles Ellicott has a good explanation of the term, “the spirit of slumber” (KJV) in verse 8. He tells us that this phrase has a curious history. Etymologically, the Greek noun katanyxis translated ”slumber” would seem to agree better with the marginal rendering, “remorse,” since it comes from a root meaning “to prick or cut with a sharp instrument.” In other words, they have become insensitive to even a jab of the skin. There happens to be another root word somewhat similar, but certainly not connected, which means “drowsiness.”

Then we find out that the Greek word in the text has also been used to render the Hebrew word nuwm for “slumber.” It has been thought that there was a confusion between the two. It appears, however, from the Greek Septuagint Version, that the sense of “slumber” had certainly come to be attached to the word as used by Paul. So we can see that from the notion of a sharp wound or blow came the idea that it caused bewilderment or grogginess, and subsequently, it came to signify being in a stupor.⁷

F. F. Bruce helps us understand why the KJV would translate the Greek verb pōroō as “blind” rather than “harden.” He shares that it means “make hard” or “render insensitive” (cf. the noun pōrōsis, “hardening,” in verse 25). In modern English, such moral “blindness” is commonly used to denote spiritual insensitivity. They were made blind to the truth. If we were to ask by whom they were “hardened,” verse 8 seems to provide the answer. It is not the first time in this epistle such inward insensitivity is divinely permitted as a judicial penalty for refusal to heed the word of God⁸.⁹

Theologian Karl Barth gives us a very intellectual explanation of what he finds here. No doubt there were many who saw the ones God selected to be part of His chosen remnant, but how pitiful that Paul tells us, “The rest became as hard as rocks.” The Apostle John echoes this same sentiment with the words, “The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it!” Hopelessness remains hopelessness, and death remains death. There is no continuity between the bearers of hope and those to whom hope is brought. There is no infection of the one by the other, no influence of the one upon the other. Nothing is transferred. Only God has the power to make a change in these things. Only from God can they obtain that which, if they do not receive it from Him, they cannot find anywhere else.

In Barth’s mind, God’s elect can be for others in this world no more than messengers of His kingdom. They cannot be a spiritual beginning or seed or kernel for others. According to the synoptic narrative of the Gospels, Jesus sent out His disciples to proclaim the Kingdom,¹⁰ not to establish it. Moreover, the disciples, as is expressly mentioned in Matthew 10:28, are in grave and mortal danger of leaving God out of the Gospel equation and projecting themselves “outside” of Christ and thus being hardened and hermetically sealed against the promised blessings for being His servants.

So it is clear, therefore, that the Church needs to appreciate hope, to understand that there is no hope for this world unless God somehow works a miracle. And the miracle of God is the message of the elect. In fact, the only observable truth which the Church can proclaim – and it ought to be inscribed on every church door, to be written on the first page of every hymnal, and to form the title of every religious book – is this truth: hardening of the heart removes all hope. Where God is not recognized and revered, such who do so will forever be part of the unchosen. And they all became so because of their rejection of Him.¹¹

Jewish scholar David Stern believes that what Paul is saying here, in using the words of the Torah, about those who were chosen and the rest who became hardened, can be seen today with the Jews who have accepted Jesus as their Messiah and those who have not. He says, “The Messianic Jews have obtained it through trusting in the atonement God has provided in Yeshua, but the rest have been made stone-like by their rejection of Him.” Stein also makes note of the Greek verb pôroô as found here and in other Scriptures.¹² He then tells us that the related Greek noun, pôrôsis is used in verse 25 below.¹³ In most versions, the verb is rendered “hardened” or “blinded.”

The Complete Jewish Bible’s literal translation points up the allusion to Ezekiel 36:26, where God, speaking of what He will do for Israel in the Latter Days, and says, “I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh.” As here in Romans 10:14–21 Paul does not give a tough answer without Scriptural support. Three of Israel’s major religious figures writing in the three main sections of the Tanakh¹⁴ (Moses in the Torah; Isaiah in the Prophets; David in the Writings) are shown to bear witness to Israel’s dullness, blindness and deafness to God, and consequent bondage. Paul, who might otherwise be accused of arrogance or antisemitism, is seen instead to be in the tradition of the great prophets of our people, on whom he is relying.¹⁵

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ELEVEN (Lesson VIII) 

You can sense the disappointment and ache in the Lord’s heart as the people He saved from endless slavery drifted away from His love when He said to the prophet Isaiah, “These people approach Me with empty words, and the honor they bestow on Me is mere lip-service; while in fact, they have distanced their hearts from Me, their worship of Me is worth nothing. They follow the doctrines made by humans.”¹ Anyone reading this without knowing that it came from the quill of Isaiah some 2,800 years ago, could think that God was describing some churches today. But praise God that He was not finished with them yet because He then tells Isaiah: “But look, I will once again do great things with these people, great and wonderful things.”² Perhaps it was this promise that Paul had in mind for the revival of his fellow Jews and their acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah. But Paul is not through, he has more condemnation for those who continued to reject the Messiahship of Jesus of Nazareth.

One early church scholar clearly puts the blame squarely on the Jews for any failure in God’s efforts to bring them salvation through grace. After all, the promises were made to the Jews that Christ would come to save them from their sins, but since He came and they did not believe, Paul says that the fact Israel failed to obtain salvation is their own fault.³ Then Pelagius adds his insights to this loss of God’s promise. He contends that Israel as a whole did not acquire righteousness because it did not seek it by faith but thought that justification came solely by works demanded by the Law. That is why our Savior said that in their efforts to keep from being contaminated by immoral deeds, they were straining out mistakes as small as a gnat while swallowing sins as big as a camel⁴.⁵ And another early church scholar from Egypt observes that while many in Israel mistakenly tried to obtain righteousness by using the Law, there were others who were elected and sealed did receive it on account of their belief, being justified by their faith. The rest were blinded, being hardened and rebellious.⁶

On Paul’s quote from the writings in the First Covenant, early church scholar Origen confesses that he had never been able to find the source of this quotation. So he asks that if someone who consults holy Scripture more thoroughly than he had done and finds it, let him know.⁷ I’m willing to believe that after reading this, some good friend contacted Origen and told him that it was a combined paraphrase of Deuteronomy 29:4 and Isaiah 29:10. This is why a cross-reference Bible is so valuable to a student of God’s Word. Obviously, there were none available in 200 AD.

But when it came to the purpose for which Paul made this quote, Ambrosiaster believes that these are the carnal Israelites who thought they were justified by the law and did not realize that they were actually justified by faith in Christ. In fact, their justification through the law still left them all guilty. The problem was, they blinded and unable to see the way of truth because they had rejected the Gospel which made their coming to salvation by grace impossible.

The examples taken from the prophets reveal that there are two kinds of blind people. The first type consists of those who are blinded forever, who will never be saved. These people are so closed-minded that they keep saying back to God and His prophets, “I don’t know what you’re talking about.” The second type involves those who, although they try to live according to the law, do not accept what Christ did on the cross as necessary for their being right with God. These people are not doing this by virtue of a stubborn will, but by imitating a tradition of righteousness by works started by their ancestors. They have, therefore, become blind to the great works of Christ which cannot be ignored. They have decided to follow human opinion instead of instruction from God.⁸

Martin Luther does not take Paul’s quote here from Deuteronomy: “God has given them a spirit of dullness — eyes that do not see and ears that do not hear,”⁹ to mean that God created or infused a spirit that was placed in people’s minds. Rather, that the hardness of their mind and resistance of their will are being described this way.¹⁰ In other words, because they would not listen and would not consider what God was saying, there rose a spirit of obstinance within them against God’s message because it was impossible to think that intelligent human beings could not live and act that way on their own strength and wisdom.

John Calvin sees Paul laboring here to prove that the blindness caused by their wickedness that made them deserving of being rejected was an accident. God knew of this rejection before the foundation of the world. Calvin says there is a way we can solve the following riddle: how did the origin of mankind’s self-righteousness, which provokes God’s displeasure, become the unruliness of human nature when forsaken by God. Paul, therefore, while speaking of eternal rejection, has not, without reason, referred to those things which carry on from it, as fruit from a tree or a river from a spring.

For Calvin, the ungodly are indeed bound to incur God’s judgment of spiritual blindness. But if we go back to the source of what caused their ruin, we will discover this: their staying away from God can only lead to all their good deeds, rites, rituals, and ceremonies earning them nothing but eternal torment. Yet the cause of eternal rejection is so hidden from us, that nothing remains for us to do but stand in awe of God’s incomprehensible purpose for His creation. But there are some who come up with the absurd idea that, in spite of being told about the ultimate end, we should still attempt to present evidence that nothing can be done about this because it has been God’s plan from the beginning. In fact, God had already decided what He was going to do with the whole human race before the fall of Adam. Their sin did not catch Him off guard.¹¹

To put what Calvin is saying here in another light, look at it this way: A gardener puts insecticides and pesticides in his garden knowing that if the insects or pests eat the poison instead of the fruit they will surely die. In other words, their predestined death was determined before they ate the poison, not after. Yet, the area where the gardener placed the poison required the insects and pests to actively go in search of it. This is what happened in the Garden of Eden, and as a result of Adam and Eve’s sin, all future generations of mankind were under the curse of death. And since so many died of sin’s poison, God sent a Messenger into the world to make everyone aware that there was a cure for the poison that causes sin. This was made possible by His dying on the cross so that His blood would contain the antidote for sin. But even though this Gospel is preached, there are many who still shut their eyes and close their hearts to the light and are thus blinded and numbed to the truth. So it must be concluded that while such blind obstinance is indeed due to an act of God, it is mankind’s fault for not receiving the cure for what is killing them.

John Locke’s paraphrase of these two verses helps us see what he saw. I have toned down some of the old English to make it more understandable. He wrote, “How is this possible? Although many of the Jews failed to find what they were looking for, yet some were chosen to become part of God’s Elect. So why is it that the rest of them remained blind to what was going on? The fact is, they lost interest in what God was doing and fell asleep. So with their eyes closed, they couldn’t see, and with their ears shut they couldn’t hear, and they have remained that way to this day.” He notes that the righteousness which the Jews were seeking is explained back in chapter 9, verse 31. This meant that anyone who had been chosen to be a part of this remnant was to consider it a privilege, not a right. Likewise, the Gentiles who would be joined with them into one body of believers must recognize that they are all now the possession of the One True God and part of one kingdom setup under His Son. Therefore, they owed it all to their having been elected by God’s grace.¹²

John Bengel has an interesting concept here of how those who heard the Word ended up slumbering through the message because of their sinful stupor. He points to Peter’s message on the Day of Pentecost and his plea with those who heard him to accept what was being said and be baptized for the forgiveness of their sin. “Change your hearts and lives!” Peter called out.¹³ Luke tells us: “He [Peter] pressed his case with many other arguments and kept pleading with them, ‘Save yourselves from this perverse generation!’”¹⁴ Yet, in spite of his pleading, not everyone who heard his message responded to receive salvation. Says Bengel that the word “slumber” used here, “Denotes suffering from frequent pricking, which terminates in a stupor.”¹⁵ Referencing back to Acts 2:37, where the Complete Jewish Bible renders it: “On hearing this, they were stung in their hearts,” Bengel then points to where Paul used it the same concept when he said: “What is more, their minds were made stone-like; for to this day the same veil remains over them when they read the Old Covenant.”¹⁶

John Taylor says that Paul has his eye on the remnant of the Jews who embraced the Gospel that he just mentioned in Verse 5. So Paul now interjects this verse to show that their standing in the Church had no relationship to, or dependence upon, their past status as Jews or on their observance of the Law. Their standing in the Church and Covenant was according to the election of grace received by faith. That was the only ground upon which they could now build their lives as believers and children of God through Christ. Taylor is insistent that no one should ever suppose that this was some special grace that God created just for the remnant. It was and is the same grace by which all of His children would be chosen. If thought of as something special for each group, then Jesus would have had to die once for the Jews, and then again for the Gentiles.¹⁷

That would be like saying today that if a person who has been raised in the world is reached by the Good News and chosen, that this is a different form of grace than that which is given to people raised in the church. No, it takes the same grace for all. There is only one Savior, who died on one cross, and shed one type of blood as the remedy for all sin and all sinners. So just because a person is raised in a Christian and knows all about the Bible, prayer, and worship, that does not mean they only need half-cleansing. Whether you get sick laying in a hospital or laying on a dump heap, you need the same medicine for the same sickness.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ELEVEN (Lesson VII)

Charles Hodge adds his insights on verse 6 to those of the others. He accepts this verse as an exegetical comment on the last clause of the preceding one. If the election spoken of is by grace, it is not founded then on works, for the two things are incompatible. This was no doubt the Apostle’s desire to keep the unmerited gift of the election of individuals by grace in clear view. This, in turn, would also keep the enjoyment of the blessings of the Messiah’s kingdom right before our eyes. Paul would not otherwise have stopped in the middle of his discourse to insist that we prioritize this idea.

This verse also serves to illustrate several declarations of the Apostle in chapter nine. For example, in Romans 9:11 people are said to be chosen in a sovereign manner, not according to their good deeds, the same as it is said here in verse 6. It is obvious that any charitable deeds a person might do in the future were excluded as all others. Any choice founded upon what may happen in the future may then include anything a person may speculate will happen. Consequently, it would not be accredited to grace, in the sense asserted by the Apostle here. In the second place, the choice which is here declared to be so entirely gratuitous is being chosen to become part of the kingdom of Christ. This is evident from the whole context, and especially from verse 7. It was from this kingdom and all its spiritual and eternal blessings that the Jews, as a body, were eliminated, and to which “the remnant according to the election by grace” was admitted.¹

Frédéric Godet shared his thoughts on verse 6 by saying that the Apostle wished to express the idea, that if Israel possesses this privilege of always preserving within their bosom a faithful remnant, it is not because of any particular merit they have acquired by their good deeds; it is purely a matter of grace on the part of Him who chose them. The moment the idea that a person could merit consideration for being elected by God through good deeds us accepted, it immediately threatens to take away from grace its character of freeness. Why add such an idea to God’s plan? It proved to be a matter of grace by which the loyalty of the remnant was maintained that forced God to reject the masses that did not believe. That’s why such rejection cannot be seen as injustice. If there were, on the part of Israel as a nation, the slightest hint of their good deeds being considered as merit for their election, then the whole idea of the remnant being reserved based on grace would have lost its validity.²

Charles Ellicott takes issue with the KJV rendering of verse six. In the Authorized Version, it reads: “And if by grace, then is it 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.” However, in the Greek, it is rendered: “And since it is through God’s kindness, then it is not by their good works. For, in that case, God’s grace would not be what it really is – free and undeserved.”³ As Ellicott sees it, the preservation of the remnant cannot be due to grace and works at the same time; it must be due to one or the other.⁴ And since it is impossible by works, then only grace remains.

John Stott believes we must keep in mind that grace is God’s merciful kindness to the undeserving, so that if His election is by grace, then it has nothing to do with good deeds according to the Law. If it were, grace would no longer require gratitude. It is refreshing, in our era of relativistic fog, to see Paul’s resolve in maintaining the purity of verbal meanings. His objective is to insist that grace excludes works, that is, God’s initiative excludes ours. If you confuse such opposites as faith and works being equal in strength and value, then words will simply lose their meaning.⁵

Douglas Moo adds his support of this concept by saying that for him grace means that works have no role to play in God choosing and blessing whomever He pleases. Such an act is entirely free and it is God’s prerogative to elect His choice to receive His favor by grace. If those blessings were, in fact, possible by our works, God would not be granting His blessings freely, and grace would no longer be grace. Rather, it would become blessings that God would begrudgingly have to give due to merit.⁶

And Jewish scholar David Stern joins in by noting that in verse 6 Paul reiterates what he said about legalistic works apart from trust in God, and how they are incompatible with grace. This requires no effort or prior deeds, only trust. But here the emphasis is on the relationship between good works and being chosen: works that please God must follow selection by Him, not precede it.⁷ So by now everyone in Rome should have a clear understanding that salvation is God’s choice, not theirs; that God’s choice is made possible by His grace, not by how good a person may claim to be; and God’s decision cannot be swayed one way or the other because He already decided before the world began.

Verses 7-8: So this is what happened: The people of Israel did not obtain the blessings they were striving for. Rather, the ones God selected got His blessings, but the rest became as hard as rocks. As the Scriptures say, “God caused the people to fall asleep. God closed their eyes so that they could not see, and He closed their ears so that they could not hear. This continues until now.⁸”

At this point, we must ask the question: What prompts God to send His Spirit to pick out someone He wants led to Christ for salvation? God gave a clue by what He said through His prophets. Moses, for instance, said to the children if Israel just before they entered the Promised Land: “From there you shall seek Yahweh your God, and you shall find Him, when you search after Him with all your heart and with all your soul.”⁹ Then David told his son Solomon: “If you seek Him, He will be found by you, but if you forsake Him, He will cast you off forever.”¹⁰ And through Jeremiah God told all those who would listen: “Then you will call to Me. You will come and pray to Me, and I will hear you. When you look for Me, you will find Me. When you wholeheartedly seek Me, I will let you find Me, declares the LORD.”¹¹ In other words, all that mankind sees above them and all around them is God’s invitation for them to come and get to know Him better. It is then from these that God makes a selection as to who will be His and who will not.

Paul points out to his readers in Rome that this is what happened to many Jews. Through Abraham’s calling, they were invited to be part of God’s elect. But many of them did not find what they were looking for because they took the wrong road. That’s why the Holy Spirit inspired Solomon to say to those who rejected the truth when it was presented to them: “They will call on Me, but I will not answer. They will look for Me, but they will not find Me. Because they hated much learning and did not choose the fear of the Lord. They would not listen when I told them what they should do. They laughed at all My warnings.”¹²

As Jesus made His way to Jerusalem preaching and teaching about the Kingdom of God, many came up to Him and asked how many would be saved from the punishment of sin. Jesus told them that it won’t be easy, and many will try to get in on their own but they won’t make it.¹³ Then the writer of Hebrews uses Jacob and Esau as examples of those who are part of Abraham’s promise. Jacob was renamed Israel as he wrestled with the angel and went on to become the father of all Israelites. But Esau gave up his birthright for a bowl of porridge. Says the writer: “He did not get it even when he asked for it with tears. It was too late to make right the wrong he had done.”¹⁴

So, Paul says, those that God has chosen to be part of the kingdom, were chosen by grace not by any works that they did to deserve it. Paul made this clear to the Thessalonians: “Christian brothers, the Lord loves you… It is because God has chosen you from the beginning to save you from the punishment of sin. He chose to make you holy by the Holy Spirit and to give you faith to believe the truth.”¹⁵ In other words, when Paul came preaching the truth of the Gospel, they saw the light. Some turned to the light as they heard God’s call while others turned from the light and rejected the call.

In fact, it is as though they were blinded by the light or had their eyes covered so they couldn’t see the light and understand what it meant.¹⁶ But in reality, they closed their eyes to the light. That’s why Jesus quoted Isaiah when He said to His disciples who couldn’t understand why so many turned away from the truth: “I speak to them in picture-stories. They have eyes but they do not see. They have ears but they do not hear and they do not understand.”¹⁷ And Paul confessed to the Corinthians that many of the Jews who came out to hear him preach walked away unfazed. He said: “Their minds were not able to understand… They do not see that Christ is the only One Who can take the covering away… But whenever a man turns to the Lord, the covering is taken away. The heart is free where the Spirit of the Lord is.”¹⁸ And to the Thessalonians Paul had this warning about those who turn away from the light: “Those who are lost in sin will be fooled by the things he can do. They are lost in sin because they did not love the truth that would save them. For this reason, God will allow them to follow false teaching so they will believe a lie. They will all be guilty as they stand before God because they wanted to do what was wrong.”¹⁹

The quote from Isaiah that Paul uses here to make his point, comes from an interesting situation. Conditions in Jerusalem had reached such a point that she faced defeat and possible extinction from not only the fury of nature but also the force of her enemies. Isaiah referred to Jerusalem by her symbolic name “Ariel,” which means “victorious with God.” Spiritually speaking, the Jews had become drunk with the wine of the world, and it appeared that there was no way for salvation to come through His neglected Word. Isaiah describes this frustrating situation with an illustration. He writes: “For you this whole prophetic vision has become like the message in a sealed-up scroll. When one gives it to someone who can read and says, ‘Please read this,’ he answers, ‘I can’t, because it’s sealed.’ If the scroll is given to someone else…with the request, ‘Please read this,’ and he says, ‘ But I can’t read.’”²⁰

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ELEVEN (Lesson VI)

German Lutheran scholar John Bengel states that when it comes to salvation, the decree of God is absolute. In other words, nothing mankind does can infringe on the sovereignty of God’s choices. Says Bengel: Nature demands works; faith accepts grace. So in his view, in the first part of verse 6 works are excluded because nature is not being satisfied, and in the second part grace is established because the supernatural is being filled. The first states the conditions under which grace is needed, and the last part announces the conclusion of grace applied.¹

John Taylor believes that in order to understand what Paul is saying here about works and grace, we must keep in mind that he was talking about the Jews’ dependence on the Law to save them. His point to them is this: Your obedience to the Law by doing good works is not part of God’s gift of salvation through Jesus the Messiah. This is only possible by God’s grace and your faith in Christ, who did the work for you, meeting in harmony. Therefore, salvation is not a privilege bestowed on those who qualify based on their own merit or self-worth. It can come only as a gift from a gracious God for reasons known only to Him.² Puritan preacher Jonathan Edwards implied that if you especially want to see some invincible proof of the doctrine of election, you’ll find it here in Romans 5:11.³

Adam Clarke follows the same line of thinking. He understands that Paul is making the point that when he speaks of the “election by grace,” he is referring to those being saved in his day as examples of those who were to be saved in the future. They are chosen by God’s grace, not on account of any worth or excellence in themselves. Only through His goodness are they chosen to have a place in His Christ’s Church and continue to be God’s people, entitled to all the privileges provided in the Last Covenant.

The election by grace simply signifies God‘s benevolent design in sending the Christian message into the world, and through it saving all those who believe in Christ Jesus, and nothing else. Thus the believers in Christ are chosen to inherit the blessings of the Gospel, while those who seek justification by the works of the Law will never qualify.⁴ This is another way of saying: No credit for my salvation goes to me, not even my confession and sinner’s prayer. All credit goes to God’s grace for selecting me for such an honor, so all praise and glory goes to Him.

Clarke goes on to say that it is important that we understand what election by grace really means. It is not arbitrary nor done at random, it is God’s rule for choosing any person He desired to be His child based solely on His free grace, and that includes everyone who willingly believes in His Son Jesus as their Lord and Savior. Some Jewish people did believe. Therefore, those believing Jews are a remnant according to the election of grace. They are saved in a way by which God alone will save those who believe. And if by grace – then let these same Jews remember, that their election and inclusion in the covenant of God has no connection with their old legal works.

If it turns out that they had been chosen by according to their humanitarian deeds, then grace would lose its divine nature, and cease to be what it really is – a free undeserved gift from God. Clarke concludes that we may observe farther, that since this is not the case, they, as well as the others, have been excluded by remaining in unbelief as others did. The intent of this election of grace sent individually to all Jews, notwithstanding that they were all sinners, was to provide the opportunity for them to receive it by faith. In doing so, Christ, then, would be the only reason why any of them were chosen. This is the true essence of the election of grace. It is not a case of our selecting Yahweh to be our God, but Yahweh electing us to be His children.⁵

Robert Haldane then gives his understanding of election by grace. As we know, the opponents of the doctrine of election maintained that people were chosen on account of their good works, some done in the past, and some to be completed in the future. But here the Apostle Paul expressly declares that it is not on account of works at all, whether past, present or future. What, then, is the source of election by grace? It is an act of grace done with love, kindness, and mercy as part of God’s selection process. It has nothing to do with good deeds of any kind, but purely at God’s favor. Grace and works are here stated as diametrically opposite and totally irreconcilable. If, however, election is somehow understood to include works, that would imply a stark contradiction. Grace would not then be grace. Here we have the guarantee of Scripture for asserting that any discrepancy reveals an untruth and that no authority is sufficient to establish two propositions which actually clash with each other.⁶

Albert Barnes also makes several important points here. He saw it as being similar to what happened to Elijah back in his day. God had reserved for Himself all that turned away from idolatry, so now in Paul’s day, it was by the same gracious sovereignty that God had a remnant that was saved from rejecting the Messiah, Yeshua of Nazareth. The Apostle here does not specify the number, but there can be no doubt that a multitude of Jews had become believing Christians, though compared with the multitude who rejected the Messiah, it was but a remnant. The Apostle shows that neither were all the ancient people of God cast away nor that any yet to come would He outright reject. Those who were rejected were done so because of stubbornness and unbelief. Yet still, there were some who were steadfast in their faith and thus found favor with God. That’s why the Jews in Paul’s day should not think that somehow this was a new or remarkable idea. The story of the remnant selected in Elijah’s day was recorded in their own Scriptures for their own benefit.⁷

Barnes concludes, that if the fact that any remnant had been reserved by grace, then it cannot be that they were chosen upon merit. That’s why Paul uses that occasion to combat the universal notion of the Jews, that they were justified by obedience to the Law. He reminds them that in the time of Elijah it was because God had reserved them; the same was the case now; therefore, their doctrine of merit could not be true.⁸ Again, if people are justified by their works, it could not be a matter of favor, but would be seen as a debt God owed them. If it could be that the doctrine of justification by grace could be accepted and yet the doctrine of merit allowed to be included, then it would follow that grace had undergone a change and was different from what the word properly signifies.

The idea of being saved by merit contradicts the very idea of grace. If a person owes a debt and pays it, it cannot then be said that it was canceled by favor, or by grace. The person to whom they owed the debt had a claim against them, so when they paid that debt, they were not doing the person to whom they owed the debt a favor, they were obligated to pay it.⁹ Why would, or how could, anyone be bold enough to think that God owed them anything? There were some among the Jews who believed that because God allowed the sin of Adam to jeopardize their place in the kingdom-to-come, God owed them some type of reparation. Also, there were those who held that if they took the time and put in the effort to abide by every law and do things according to the very letter of the Law, then certainly God should give them preferential treatment. But this must all be rejected because the doctrine of grace does not allow any thought of God owing the sinner any special favors.

H. A. Ironside makes the point that the great thing for Israel to understand is this: if they are saved at all, they are saved exactly as Gentiles were saved, and that is by grace. Grace, as we have seen, is unmerited favor. In fact, we may put it even stronger: it is favor over merit. This precludes any thought of getting what you’ve worked for. If merit of any sort is taken into consideration, then grace is weakened. If it could be that salvation can be had through works, this leaves no place whatsoever for grace because it would be overshadowed by a meritorious character built on good works and, therefore, not needed. The two principles: salvation by grace, and salvation by works, are diametrically opposed, to one another. There can be no commixture of law and grace; they are mutually incompatible principles.¹⁰

Preacher Octavius Winslow focuses on the term, “grace,” here in verse 6. He turns our attention to a similar passage which declares that the salvation of the sinner is by an act of mere GRACE. The reader must keep in mind one simple definition of grace: it means God’s unmerited favor to sinners. It leaves no room for a person with a sterling character to qualify based on their own merits. This is the glory of the Gospel: “By grace are you saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast.”¹¹ “Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.”¹² “Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace.”¹³ “And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it is by works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.”¹⁴

Winslow goes on to ask how the doctrine of grace and the free gift of atonement could be made any clearer or more conclusive than the verses just quoted? You can see the true force of the Apostle’s argument. It stands boldly upon this principle: If there be anything of merit in the individual; if the works of any sinner are the grounds; even partially, on which salvation is bestowed, then the reward, or the blessing, is not a free gift, but the discharge of a debt – a debt, let it be kept in mind, due from God to the sinner! And as a consequence of their merit, and as a result of their works, pardon and justification are then handed over to the sinner as a deserved reward. What doctrine can be more horrendous than this? what idea can be more opposed to God’s Word?

And yet the distorted doctrine that teaches us that we may present ourselves before a Holy God with some self-made fitness of our own, holding some trophy in our hand designed to merit God’s forgiveness, this is what those people are saying that preach this doctrine of salvation by good deeds. Look again at the Apostle’s argument: if there be anything of merit in the individual, if it be so much as the raising of their hand, salvation then is not of grace, the Atonement is not free; and God, we tremble while we write it – God becomes the sinner’s debtor!¹⁵

French experimental biologist and philosopher Jean Rostand (1894-1977) once wrote, “Nothing leads the scientist so astray as a premature truth.”¹ This is another way of saying, you never know if you are right by “Jumping to conclusions.” This results when someone judges or decides something without having all the facts. We have other ways of defining such individuals as being ill-advised, impetuous, immature, indiscreet, reckless, and so on. Neurologist Robert Burton stated, sometimes our brain will reward us with the thrill of finishing whenever we complete a pattern of thought by filling in the gaps with whatever else comes to our mind in order to reach a conclusion.

Many times we may feel forced to come to a quick decision because of the feelings that lie beneath our response. Emotions like anger go hand-in-hand with other experiences, like vulnerability, shame, guilt, and so on. When we can name those underlying feelings, we can better address them. And, when we become willing to accept the fact that sometimes we just don’t know the answer, that, then, can become our new certainty.

Another factor that leads to this opening our mouths before we put our brains in gear is caused by fear and panic. When this happens, most often it results in negative thinking. We think of the worst outcome. It is often a case of what psychologist’s call cognitive distortions. A more natural way to put it is that a person feels all mixed up. They can’t think of what to do at the moment, so they often incriminate others or blame themselves.

I like the way The Message Version renders one of Solomon’s proverbs. It reads: “Don’t jump to conclusions – there may be a perfectly good explanation for what you just saw [or heard].”² This same thinking was behind our Lord Jesus’ caution that we should not be quick to wrongly judge a situation, so that we will not be misjudged as rapidly. Don’t suddenly denounce something as wrong without thinking so we not be thought of as a person who can’t think straight.³ Remember you can give someone or something the benefit of the doubt before assuming that it is wrong. What you thought you saw or heard may not be factual once all the facts are known.

If you want to read a Bible story about a person who jumped to the wrong conclusion but found out later how wrong they were, just read the story in the Bible of the Syrian General Naaman. What he thought was an effort to embarrass him turned out to be the exact thing he needed for healing.⁴ There is no reason to live life thinking that everything and everyone is against you. Remember, the Scriptures tell us that if God is for us, who else in this world could be on your side, that’s any better God? – Dr. Robert R Seyda