Author Topic: Romans (38) Has Israel Forfeited Its Future? (Pt 3) The Remnant Teaching of Paul  (Read 364 times)

Rebbe

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2448
PAUL'S LETTER TO THE ROMAN CHRISTIANS (38)
Analytical Commentary on Romans

Has Israel Forfeited Its Future? (Part Three)

ELECTION: Is the Remnant Teaching of Paul Directed at Gentiles?
Romans 9-11

The Audio MP3 of this lecture is available via this link: http://www.bripodcasts.com/Romans/Lecture38.MP3


Copyright © BRI 2017 All Rights Reserved Worldwide by Les Aron Gosling,
Messianic Lecturer (BRI/IMCF)
CAUTION: BRI Yeshiva notes are not available to the general public. They are not for distribution. They are not for reproduction. The notes may also bear little or no resemblance to the actual audio or video recorded BRI Yeshiva lecture.

"Faith is believing in something when commonsense tells you not to" - from the movie Miracle on 34th Street

"Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase" - Martin Luther King Jnr

"Pray and let God worry" - Martin Luther

"Dare, dream, dance, smile and sing loudly! And have faith that love is an unstoppable force!" - Suzanne Brockmann, fiction author

"Come, my Light and illuminate my Darkness. Come my Life, and revive me from Death. Come, my Physician, and heal my Wounds. Come, Flame of Divine Love, and burn up the thorns of my sins, kindling my heart with the Flame of thy Love. Come, my King, and sit upon the throne of my heart, and reign there. For thou alone art my King and my Lord" - St Dimitrii of Rostov, 17th century Russian Orthodox Bishop

I would like to begin this lecture by sharing a story. Firstly, a question: What do we mean when we use words like faith and belief? Author Dale Ratzlaff shares an insight.

"The story is told of a tight-rope walker who a number of years ago strung a cable across Niagara Falls. The newspapers carried the story that he was going to walk across this dangerous place on a given day. That day hundreds gathered to watch this man perform his risky skill. Shortly before he was to go out on the cable this tight-rope walker made his way into the crowd. He would approach people and ask them if they believed he could make it across without falling to his death? Most said he could.

He came up to a young man and said, "Do you believe I can safely walk across this cable above the falls?"

"Yes," answered the young man. "You are a tight-rope walker and have the necessary skills to do it."

"Do you really believe I can do it?" asked the tight-rope walker.

"Yes, I really believe you can do it!" answered the young man.

"Good," said the tight-rope walker. "You are just the person I am looking for. I want to push this wheelbarrow across the falls and I want you to sit in it!"

NEW COVENANT IS NOT GRACE
Today I will be sharing with our national and international student membership, on our audio recording, some excerpts from our last lecture (37) due to the fact that we spent almost the entirety of the allotted period to answering questions related to essentials of the full Gospel. Hence, some of that which is included in the previous posted written lecture (on the BRI/IMCF Educational Board) is absent from the last Yeshiva audio lecture. There are students who never read the written lecture but are content to just listen to the audio recording, which is fine by me. There can be issues however, because in the audio I often deviate from my notes and go off onto very important tangents. On the other hand there may be things included in the written lecture which never get a mention by me as I actually teach as recorded on the audio. Six of one and half a dozen of the other.

Of course, questions are vitally important and especially is this the case when many believers are living in a deceived state having inherited sometimes modified doctrinal positions of the church that birthed their particular denomination " I am speaking primarily of the Roman Catholic Church which gave rise to the many Protestant bodies in the world today. Protestantism never fully rid itself of their Mother Church's positions on some issues. It's like the old saying, "Like mother, like daughter." The Protestants never entirely threw off their mother's DNA. The Reformers restored some biblical foundations, and failed to surrender other factors which really meant that they did not complete the Protestant Reformation! This has led to confusion doctrinally. It has also given rise to over 50,000 differing, bickering churches, denominations, sects, cults and schismatic heterodox groupings. Strange thing is they all claim to be representative of the "Truth." They all claim to possess the "Truth." Is Christ divided?

There are Christian academics who proclaim that at least Romanism was (and still is) logical in many of its positions, but Protestants are largely contradictory and illogical in their own selective doctrinal schemes. I could not agree more with this assessment. Especially is this the case when we find, as a prime issue and example of what I am discussing here, that Protestants largely mix up the New Covenant with God's Grace.

Listen! A covenant is nothing more than a contract! A contract exists because of man's inability to trust another (or others) with whom they have entered into an agreement of whatever sort. Where it used to be a matter of a simple honest "yes" and/or "no" as articulated by human beings, and followed through with a mere but firm handshake, these days its entirely a matter of needing to draw up a legal contract because of character deficiencies. The existence of SIN is the reason a legal contract must be drawn up to protect each others' rights in relation to that in which all parties are to be engaged in a mutually beneficial accomplishment. In other words, of necessity two or more parties who enter into an agreement must personally commit to ensure that each individual fulfills their end of the bargain/agreement (whatever that may be). In the New Covenant there were intentions that involved commitments on all sides of the contract that was entered into. Under the terms and conditions of the new Covenant, God would place His laws, rules, regulations etc IN the hearts of men, and they in return would make a firm resolve to act in accordance with God's expectations of them.

As a prime instance, in the disciple's prayer -- a significant model prayer based on the propositions of New Covenant relationship which is located in Mt 6.9-13 -- Yeshua speaks of our need to ask God "to forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors" (verse 12) and which Christ goes on to amplify a few verses on when he qualifies, "For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, but if you forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your heavenly Father forgive you your trespasses" (Mt 6.14,15 cf Lk 11.4).

Who among us can honestly claim to be able to sincerely, without resentment or hesitations, achieve such a thing? Even with the holy Spirit residing inwardly, it is almost an absolute impossibility to accomplish perpetually " invariably and without variation and infractions " God's expectation of us. This is why God revealed through the apostle Paul (Rav Shaul) a better STATE of existence. This is why God accommodated to us in this matter. That it may be ALL of Grace.

But Grace is not, and never was, and never ever will be, a CONTRACT. Further, the New Covenant is racially oriented. It was never intended to be made with Gentiles. It was only ever to be made by God with Israel and Judah (Jer 31.31-34; Heb 8.8; 10.16,17). Gentiles had to align themselves to the people of Israel, in order to enter into a New Covenant with them as their Gentile allies -- in order to cease being alienated from "the national life of Israel" (Eph 2.12). But they were, and they remain, Gentiles -- as I have adequately established in previous lectures -- even though they become the seed of Abraham. For those who would argue against this proposition please recall that Abraham has a number of Gentile nations and religions which trace their origins back to the sons of Abraham by his concubine (his sensual sex toy) Keturah.

Understand this about GRACE.

Grace is the unmerited and undeserved favour of God. Whereas an act of mercy can be repaid in like manner by us, God's Grace can never be repaid. Grace is an English word which is translated from the equivalent Greek word charis. Paul chose a Greek word -- for there were no words in Hebrew that could reveal the depth of the heart of God in this matter of God's Nature, in His dealings with sinners, believe it or not -- to demonstrate the deep inner character and Salvific RIGHTEOUSNESS [justice] of God toward His beloved creations.  

Intriguingly, Charis was the personal name of a minor goddess in Greek mythology " one of the Charites, " charis basically means "grace, kindness, beauty, creativity, fertility and life" " ALL in ONE. The educated Paul is always full of surprises. Here he does not hesitate to borrow from the Greeks a personal proper noun and applies it to the essential Nature and integral Salvific feature of God the FatherMother of us all in whom dwells grace, kindness, beauty, creativity, fertility and Life.

God freely declares us righteous. "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Being justified freely by his Grace through the redemption that is in Messiah Yeshua" (Romans 3.23,24).  

Mercy can be repaid in thankful, appreciative obedience and in a life of good works. Grace can never be repaid. "Blessed are the merciful," said Our Lord, under the terms of the New Covenant, "for they shall obtain mercy."

As the Messianic Movement progressed into a profound spiritual maturity Yeshua called Paul to grant a BETTER revelation " God always utilises progressive revelation " concerning His Grace. Paul tells us plainly, under inspiration of the Ruach HaKodesh: "Having predetermined us unto the Sonship of children by Yeshua the Messiah to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his Grace, WHEREIN [IN HIS GRACE] HE HAS MADE US ACCEPTED in the beloved, in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his Grace" (Eph 1.5-7).

Yes, we have gone beyond the New Covenant, into God's GRACE. This does not mean that the New Covenant no longer applies to us as God's children. By no means is this the case! Rather, we in the flesh (ie., according to our humanity) recognize our obligations under the New Covenant terms and conditions, but as far as our salvation is concerned, in the Spirit we recognize and appreciate that the forgiveness of our sins is by Grace, not our ability to forgive other people for causing us grief. Our forgiveness is as a consequence of Messiah's shed blood and not on our ability to forgive others.

I am sure that some Messianic believers will be contentious toward me over this matter. They will possibly argue that this imperative about forgiving others in order to be forgiven is according to Sinai Covenant understanding. But I disagree. It is entirely New Covenant teaching. But this teaching, even though given originally by Yeshua himself prior to the cross, is superseded by GRACE. According to the riches of God's Grace we are forgiven, and not by our ability or non-ability to forgive others. Again,

"In Him we have redemption THROUGH HIS BLOOD, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His Grace" (Eph 1.7).

The Grace of God openly exhibited and evidenced through the shed blood of Yeshua the Messiah enables all forgiveness to abound toward us. Our forgiveness from God the Father is not dependent on our good and liberal nature of peace and tranquility and loving harmony toward others. B'ruch HaShem! I would be doomed, if salvation was contingent on my ability to forgive others, and so would we all.

I repeat! It is expressed clearly enough in Paul's introductory remarks but most miss its significance. Paul writes: "To the praise of the glory of his Grace WHEREIN He has made us accepted IN the beloved [Mashiach]" (Eph 1.6).

We are not accepted IN the New Covenant or its expectations of us regarding our forgiveness of others. We are accepted IN Grace. ONLY. It is written: "By Grace are you saved," not "by the New Covenant are you saved." There is a difference brethren, and the difference is monumental.

As a matter of fact, as far as Paul's new revelation of Grace is concerned it is Messiah's behaviour, not ours, that matters. Understand! Our salvation is according to God the Father's SALVIFIC WILL, not our intentions, good or bad, real or imagined. The holy Spirit made this abundantly clear in Titus 3.5.

"He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to his mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the holy Spirit."

Further, "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law" (Rom 3.28).

Moreover, "You have been severed from Messiah, you who are seeking to be justified by the law, for you have fallen from Grace" (Gal 5.4).

Only by this method, or Way, can we ever be granted an acceptance by God the Father IN Yeshua His Son (examine again Eph 1.6 and THIMK about what it is you are reading).

In this series of lectures on Paul's Letter to the Roman Christians we have been repeatedly faced with the question often insinuated and surfacing in the subtext of his writing, "If our good behaviour will not entitle us to the abundant spiritual blessings that come from Grace, what will?" Both Our Lord Yeshua and Paul answer:

Yeshua: "They therefore said to him: What shall we do that we may work the works of God? Yeshua responded to them, This is the Work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent" (Jn 6.29).

Paul: "... that is the word of faith which we are preaching, that if you confess with your mouth Yeshua as Lord, and believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved; for with the heart man believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. For the Scriptures says, Whoever believes in him will not be disappointed" (Rom 10.8-11 cf Isa 49.23; 28.16).

THE REMNANT TEACHING OF THE APOSTLE PAUL
"Whoever believes in him will not be disappointed." That is what the sacred Word tells us. But I know a lot of people who have been very disappointed because they have read the Bible texts somewhat differently to certain church interpretations of what Paul spoke about in Romans 9,10,11 " and they have been left with the quandary of believing (on the one hand) what all the prophets of God have foretold about the future of the nation of Israel, and yet are stunned into silence by being told authoritatively by their ministers that they have been misreading the Scripture concerning Israel's future. They have not understood, say these elders of the church, that when the prophets speak of Israel in the latter days, they really are referring to the Christian Faith. They have been told that if they continue to believe what the biblical revelation seems to say to their minds and hearts then they will need to leave their church. These church leaders major on the teaching of Paul in those same chapters of Romans relating to what he calls a "remnant."

Paul did speak about a remnant. There IS a "remnant teaching" that appears in Romans 9,10,11. The remnant teaching also appears in the prophets of the Hebrew Scriptures. God has always had a remnant that he spoke of as being His true people.

But Gentile church leaders " particularly those associated with groups of Christians that believe they are a "remnant church" of God " ought to STOP applying what Jews were inspired to write by the Ruach HaKodesh and applying those texts that refer specifically to the nation of Israel... to Gentiles! I admit, Israel as a nation has never fully been replete and as ONE in their obedience to God and in their belief in God. Apostates have always abounded in Israel. But we need to know what Paul was really teaching when he spoke of a remnant. After all, Paul asserts in Romans 9.6 " in discussing why Israel rejected Messiah " "For not everyone from Israel is truly part of Israel."

As I pointed out in my previous lecture, Yeshua was in fact finally acknowledged to be the Messiah by Kayafa the High Priest during the trial of Yeshua before the political Sanhedrin and they participated in his Messianic destiny in dying for the people (as the Messiah was expected to do). This becomes apparent after a careful reading of the event as recorded in John's Gospel and also of the prophecy uttered by Kayafa in respect of Yeshua fulfilling his Messianic destiny. BUT, and this is intriguing, immediately AFTER the resurrection of Christ the Sanhedrin found it impossible to continue believing in his manifest destiny because Yeshua failed to live up to the apparent obligations anticipated by the leaders of the Sanhedrin to be fulfilled by him, viz.,

1. Yeshua did not rise up, calling on his 12 legions of angels " over 80,000 of them " to deliver the Jewish State out of the hands of the Roman troops garrisoned in the holy Land.

2. Yeshua did not exterminate the Roman State and capitol of the world exalting Israel in God's Government over the earth as the prophets all said he would.

3. Yeshua failed to return the lost tribes of Israel and the Jews of the Diaspora to the holy Land.

On this basis the Sanhedrin which had finally acknowledged Yeshua as Mashiach, then " after the resurrection " rejected him completely without publicly recognising what they all knew to be true " that Yeshua had risen from the dead after three days in the tomb. According to the Christian account, they began to circulate the rumour that his disciples had stolen his body. This was an absolute nonsense and hardly believable for it implied an accusation in relation to the Roman tetradion presence. (A tetradion was a body of four Roman soldiers guarding the grave for each of the four watches throughout the period of three days. Thus they were changed every three hours. See Acts 12.4 where this procedure is spelt out in respect of the imprisonment of Peter. Cf Mt 27.65,66.)

Many tens of thousands of the Jews nevertheless accepted Yeshua as the promised Messiah by the time God called Paul and he met up with James (Acts 21.20). Yeshua's brother Yaakov (James/Jacob) became the alternative high priest of the Jewish nation, a post he held until he was assassinated by the Sadducees in 72 CE.

Arnold Fruchtenbaum speaks about the Pauline doctrine of the remnant in his Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology: "The doctrine of the remnant means that, within the Jewish nation as a whole, there are always some who believe and all those who believe among Israel comprise the Remnant of Israel. The remnant at any point of history may be large or small but there is never a time when it is non-existent. Only believers comprise the remnant, but not all believers are part of the remnant for the remnant is a Jewish remnant and is, therefore, comprised of Jewish believers. Furthermore, the remnant is always part of the nation as a whole and not detached from the nation as a separate entity. The remnant is distinct, but distinct within the nation" (1989, 601).

Of course! When the prophets major on the believing remnant, that remnant is never Gentile! That remnant is never some "church" -- Christians are so paganistic these days that they not only follow pagan customs (Sunday services and as a substitute for the fourth commandment, Xmas, Easter, New Year's, Halloween, Valentines Day, etc) but they also name the Christian or Messianic Community by the appellation "church" which cannot be Anglicised from the Greek, for "church" bears no similarity to anything associated with Christianity in the Greek language. "Church" rather finds its origin in the pagan goddess of sorcery, Circe the daughter of the sun god Helios, from which we get the terms circumference, circle, and circus. As to the latter mention of circus perhaps we can make a connection to church. The remnant is ALWAYS a remnant of Israel.

Gentile churches that proclaim themselves to be God's special "remnant people" and yet at the same time "do away" with (eliminate, destroy, annihilate) the Jewish people and nation as having no further use by God make an utter mockery of the Word of God. You see, the believing remnant "kept" Israel alive and functioning as the Chosen People. The  Abrahamic promise involved blessing upon those who blessed Israel, and withheld blessing from those who cursed Israel (Gen 12.3). The remnant of Israel " the believing remnant of God " ASSURED Israel's continuation and perpetuation in the intent, plans, and purposes of God. The "remnant" does not get rid of unbelieving Israel nor does it replace Israel but rather it GUARANTEES Israel's non-destruction. Israel carries the distinction of being called and elected by God as a nation among nations (Deut 7.6-8; 10.15-17; Num 23.9) " a fact that is "without repentance" (Rom 11.27-29). Of course, this does not negate a spiritual calling for the Jewish people which is essential for Israel to enter into the fulfillment of her promises (Acts 3.19-21 Greek).  

Australian New Testament scholar Leon Morris shares with us his insights into this issue. "Not all those who are of Israel, these are Israel. His compatriots were in error in holding that the promise of God applied to the whole of physical Israel. Paul is denying that it was ever intended to apply in this fashion. If descent from Abraham was what mattered, then the Ishmaelites and Edom were in the same position as Israel. But Israel was not ethnic Israel. Whatever might happen to ethnic Israel, the promise to Israel stood; the falling away of some, who were not true Israelites, had no bearing on the issue... This was clear in Old Testament days, with the emergence of the concept of the remnant; it had long been obvious that the nation as a whole was not responding to God's leading. It was a smaller group within the nation that was really God's people. It was stupid to think that, since the whole nation had not entered the blessing, the promise of God had failed. The promise had not been made to the whole nation and had never been intended to apply to the whole nation" (Leon Morris, The Epistle to the Romans, 1988, 352,353).

Again: Gentiles beware! As American biblical scholar and professor of systematic theology Robert L. Saucy states in his The Church in God's Program, "Physical descent alone is not sufficient to reap God's blessings. This was already true of Israel in the Old Testament. There has always been a true Israel within national Israel, but this true Israel is a part of the nation. This interpretation allows for the natural understanding of the Old Testament prophecies portraying a future for Israel as a nation. It is also consistent with the New Testament teaching of the church as distinct from Israel and yet sharing in God's salvation program" (The Church in God's Program, 1972, The Moody Bible Institute, 70). Saucy adds a foot note. "Compare the concept of the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah, where in many places the Servant is identified merely with Israel (e.g., 41:8; 43:10; 44:21), but in other instances it is clear that only the true Israel is involved (51:1,7)."

Indeed, the entire context of Romans 9 reveals candidly and clearly that Paul when speaking of "They are not all Israel which are of Israel" (verse 6) is noting only a division within Israel. Moreover, in vv.3,4 Paul has introduced the subject constellating around "Israelites" who are his "brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh."

FINAL PROOF THE REMNANT OF PAUL IS WITHIN ISRAEL
Most Messianic believers in Yeshua, Jew and Gentile, would realise the meaning of challah which is commonly recognised as bread which is traditional dedicated (blessed) to be eaten on Shabbat. Challah is a Hebrew word associated with ritual and meaning "dough offering." A batch of dough (raw) is prepared by a "holy woman" for the baking of bread for the Sabbath meals. The woman takes from the raw batch a small piece of this dough (the act itself is termed challah) and burns it in fire as a sacrifice to God. This is accomplished prior to the actual baking of the bread.

Most believers are completely ignorant of the fact that the apostle Paul significantly spoke of this challah in his reference to "the first handful of dough" in Romans 11.16.

"Now if the hallah offered as firstfruits is holy, so is the whole loaf" (Sterns' Complete Jewish Bible).

"The first handful of dough that is offered is holy. This makes all of the dough holy" (New International Readers Version).

"If part of a batch of dough is made holy by being offered to God, then all of the dough is holy" (Contemporary English Version).

"If the first piece of bread is holy, so is all the rest which came from the same bread mix" (Worldwide English New Testament).

"If the first handful of dough is holy, the whole batch of dough is holy" (Names of God Version).

"If the terumah haissa (portion, offering of the dough) that is reshit (first) is kodesh (holy), so is the whole" (Orthodox Jewish Bible).

IF, as some Christians believe and promulgate, this teaching of the remnant applies to Gentile Christians then let me say this on the authority of the various textual versions above: it is the Gentiles who derive their holiness from the people of Israel and decidedly not the other way around. For,

"Even if you think yourselves superior [comparing yourselves to the Jews] remember THAT YOU DO NOT SUPPORT THE [JEWISH] ROOT: it is the [Jewish] root that supports you" (Rom 11.18,19).

Yeshua made it plain to the Samaritan woman at the well: "You do not know what you worship! We [Jews] know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews!" (Jn 4.22).

Essentially, the doctrine of God's original election of Israel, and Paul's introduction of the idea of a Jewish remnant (based on the many prophecies concerning the remnant of Israel in the Hebrew Scriptures) came about as a direct consequence of the fact that, as McClain saw, "if the Jewish nation will not accept Jesus as Messiah, then the unbelieving Jew would say that there are two possible conclusions to be drawn. Either the Gospel that Paul is preaching is not true, or else, if it is true, then the promises of God to Israel have failed, because the Messiah and blessing to Israel were connected inseparably. The Jew would say in essence that, either Jesus Christ is not the true Messiah or the Word of God has proven false. That is the problem, and it is a tremendous one! It is still a problem today, with which men are trying to cope...A great many people set aside the Jew entirely. They say the promises have failed as far as the Jews are concerned" (Alva McClain, Romans: The Gospel of God's Grace, 1973, 173).

In our next lecture we shall pursue Paul's arguments concerning the continuing role of the Jewish people and nation in the state of God's spiritual economy.

THIS CONCLUDES LECTURE 38


Have you been spiritually edified with this lecture? Would you like to know more about the biblical revelation from such a unique perspective? Our private BRI/IMCF International Internet Yeshiva Members Forum has hundreds of in-depth lectures available for those who subscribe to the IMCF. Membership is entirely by donation and Messianic Enterprises has provided a PIN PAYMENT icon for your convenience which you can access on the front page of the public BRI/IMCF site at:

http://www.biblicalresearchinstitute.com.au/

Just depress the Pay Now icon and within days your request for International Messianic Community of Faith (IMCF) membership will be acknowledged.

Thank you for becoming supportive of this growing unique Work of God and for allowing us to serve you in this manner.