Chapter # 11 Paragraph # 4 Study # 1
January 27, 2019
Humble, Texas
(106)
1769 Translation:
17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, [
take heed] lest he also spare not thee.
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.
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural [
branches], be graffed into their own olive tree?
1901 ASV Translation:
17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and thou, being a wild olive, wast grafted in among them, and didst become partaker with them
of the root of the fatness of the olive tree;
18 glory not over the branches: but if thou gloriest, it is not thou that bearest the root, but the root thee.
19 Thou wilt say then, Branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
20 Well; by their unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by thy faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 for if God spared not the natural branches, neither will he spare thee.
22 Behold then the goodness and severity of God: toward them that fell, severity; but toward thee, God's goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they continue not in their unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
24 For if thou wast cut out of that which is by nature a wild olive tree, and wast 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?
- I. Paul's Warning of a Grave Danger.
- A. Given the facts of the previous argument (God's turn to the nations in this time in history was rooted in Israel's determined resistance and God's more determined pursuit), there is a serious likelihood that the "nations" will misconstrue God's willingness to extend reconciliation to them and, perhaps, create a scenario that will result in their own experience of being "cut off" (11:22).
- 1. Critical to this discussion is the identity of the "holy firstfruits" and the downline "lump" as well as the identity of the "holy root" and the downline "branches".
- a. The bottom line here is the fact that God revealed to Moses that He was going to "insert" some from among the nations into that category of humanity that is declared to be "My people"; a fact to which Paul appealed in our larger context in Romans 9:24-26.
- 1) This "fact" set forth the category of those called "My people" by God, and that group is defined in 9:23-24 in two critical ways: "vessels of mercy...afore prepared unto glory"; and, "...us whom He called...".
- 2) Then, just so there is no misunderstanding, he went on to say that "us whom He called" were "...not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles (Nations)...". In other words, the "firstfruit", when tied to the "faith" principle of Romans 9:8-9, was "Isaac", the original "son of promise" as one who pointed backwards to Genesis 3:15 and forwards to "...the seed which is Christ..." in Galatians 3:16. As "Isaac", the firstfruit was not, primarily, a "Jew", but a "child of promise", who was a forerunner to both "the nation" and "the nations" as those entities consisted of both "children of flesh" and "children of promise". All of these "children of promise" are the "foreknown people of God", though they actually participate in distinctly different "nations" which developed from "children of flesh".
- b. Thus, in both "firstfruit" and "root", the dominant issue is "people of God" who are made "people of God" by the deliberate action of God of "calling", without regard for "national" identity issues. This makes the consequent "tree" a group of those "called of God" to be "vessels of mercy" whether Jew or Gentile. On that "tree", however, grow many "branches", not all of which actually "belong" there. Those who "belong" are "vessels of mercy who are "foreknown" (11:2) and "afore prepared unto glory (9:23) and"called of God". Those who do not "belong" are like unto "the angel of the church in Sardis" who was "reputed" ("...you have a name that you live...") to be a "believer", but the reputation is a lie ("...you are dead...") and the danger is that his name will be blotted out of the book of life, or, in harmony with our current text and its analogies of "firstfruit" and "root", he, as a branch, will be broken off from the "tree".
- 2. Therefore, "some" of the branches (mentioned in 11:16) have to be "broken off" so that they do not continue to be connected to the tree.
- a. It is a mistake, easily made, to define the "tree" as "Israel" rather than "the people of God", a category already declared by Paul to be a group of both "Jews" and "Gentiles" who share the "vessels of mercy" label and have been "called of God".
- 1) The reason the mistake is so easily made is the fact that, in Paul's day, especially prior to his effective ministry to Gentiles, the "tree" was predominantly Jewish.
- 2) This predominant makeup at this point in history, however, does not define the "tree": its definition has already been given: "vessels of mercy...called of God...of both Jews and Gentiles".
- b. This "some" is actually, in the first-century generation of "branches", a significant majority of the tree's branches. This is in keeping with the "though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved" (Romans 9:27) and the "except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma and been made like unto Gomorrha" (Romans 9:29). It does not matter that a great majority were on the "disbelief" side of the coin (as the "For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?" of Romans 3:3 says). What matters is that God made certain promises to certain patriarchs that they "believed" and, because they believed, those promises will be fulfilled by the God of Integrity. Even if only one out of millions "believed" a promise that God had made, God would still fulfill it for the one who believed. If God has to cast billions into the Eternal Lake of Fire because they are intransigent, that action will have no effect, in terms of any diminishing of the promise, upon those whom He brings to faith and loyal obedience. In fact, if our context is of any significance at all, that casting of the intransigent into Eternal Death will actually prove to enhance the experience of the promise(s) for those who believe ("salvation", "riches", "reconciliation", and "life from the dead" were all "outcomes" of the behavior and attitude of the intransigent).
- b. This "breaking off" exists in spite of Paul's prior claim in the preceding verse that "if the root is holy, so are the branches". Since both statements come from the same man in the same context, we must understand what he means. Clearly, not all of the branches are "holy" enough to be kept on the tree when the pruning process was going on. This compels us to be clear on what Paul meant in 11:16.
- 1) The argument of the context is that God has not "pushed His 'foreknown' people away" (11:1), but He has "cast off" the portion of Israel that he has identified as "The Hardened" (11:15). In "national Israel" terms, God did "push His people away" so that the Romans were able to destroy both city and sanctuary and disperse "national" Israel among the nations. But in "technical Israel" terms (Romans 9:6-8), God did not "push His people away". Instead, He turned them into the "firstfruits of the Church" which would, over time, become a fully harvested crop wherein the majority are "non-Israel" (in the beginning of the Church, Jews were the initial converts to the Gospel; but at the prophesied end of the Church Age there will be far more "gentile" converts than Jewish ones). In other words, after The Sin of Jesus' crucifixion by "His own", "national Israel" was demolished for a season (what Jesus called "the time of the Gentiles") and those who were "technical Israel" became the foundation of The Church which was not designed to be a "nation" in this world. Those who were "technical Israel" ceased to be "national Israel" as they became the Church of Jesus Christ.
- 2) This all means, then, that those branches that were "technical Israel" were fruitful branches and were "holy", but those that were only "national Israel" were unfruitful and could not be considered "sufficiently holy as to remain attached to the root". The reality that needs to be kept in mind is this: the "tree" continues to exist even though a vast multitude of "branches" are broken off. The existence of the "tree" is critical to the integrity of God as His promise consists of the existence of the "tree", but the existence of "all" of the branches is not critical to the promise. Just as, in the period of the Judges of Israel, Israel was often overrun and did not function as a "nation", and as the captivity of both the northern kingdom (Israel/Assyria) and the southern kingdom (Judah/Babylon) had periods of time in which the "national function issues" were suspended under the disciplining hand of God, so also after The Sin of the Crucifixion, Israel's "national" identity was suspended for a season (long though it was in history -- from A. D. 70 to 1948). But, it must be kept in mind that the promise (i.e., "the tree") had two major elements: "I will make of thee a great nation" (Genesis 12:2) and "Thou shalt be a father of many nations" (Genesis 17:4-5). That God also intended to add another, unrevealed, element to the promise ("the tree") in terms of the New Testament Church does not corrupt the issues involved at all; it merely expands the principles into a new, uncharted direction (the building of The Church and making It the Bride of the Son).