All Israel Shall Be Saved?

any
sincere Bible students have been deceived by the tactics of the Rapture
Cult on many different fronts. One of the most notorious efforts
is found in Romans 11 where a casual reading of a single verse,
taken out of context, can be twisted to make it appear that at some
future point God will miraculously convert all Jewish people to
Christianity. This teaching is an abomination as that particular lie
is deeply rooted in the Antichrist system we identify as the Rapture
Cult. The following work is a thorough look at the verse in
question (Romans 11:26), and the entirety of Romans chapter 11.

For
openers, the primary difficulty in this understanding the truth of
this verse is the Apostle Paul's seemingly abrupt shift in focal
points in and around verse 26 - "And so all Israel shall be
saved�." A close analysis will indicate that what he actually
does is make a concluding point to his prior statements in the
chapter. It was because of this contextual fluidity that I kept moving
further and further back in the chapter in order to reconstruct the
flow of his thoughts - thus, a lengthy piece on the subject seemed
in order.

Several
things can help in understanding this passage. First, recognize
you're reading a letter that has ALREADY addressed who Israel
is several pages (chapters) previously. Paul has ALREADY elaborated
extensively on, and identified the "seed" of Abraham as
being fulfilled in the promised Messiah (1:3, 9:8). 

Paul
has ALREADY elaborated on the fact that "Neither, because they are
the seed of Abraham, are they all children�" (9:7). Paul has
already stated that the "promise" to the SEED of Abraham [which is
Christ], "that he should be heir of the world," was not through
the law [a phenomena that was peculiar to Israel] but by faith.

Paul
has ALREADY clearly stated that "they which are the children of the
flesh, these are not the children of God: but the
children of the promise are counted for the seed." (9:8)

One
may suppose, since Paul has repeatedly instructed the churches in each
city to read the epistles written to the other churches (Col 4:16, I
Thess 5:27) that the Romans had read the Galatian
epistle written several years previously. Thus, Paul has ALREADY
stated that "if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and
heirs according to the promise." (Gal 3:29)

Thus,
by the time we get to chapter 11 of Romans, it has already been
established there are two Israels - "For they are not all
Israel, which are of Israel" (Rom 9:6). In a similar vein, it has
already been established there are two groups of Jews - "He
is not a Jew, which is one outwardly�But he is a Jew which is one
inwardly�.in the spirit" (Rom 2:28).

All
these statements have preceded the statement that "all Israel shall
be saved". Had Paul said "and so, all Jews shall be saved,"
there would probably be no question he was speaking of the
"inward" Jews, but because he used the collective term
"Israel" immediately after having referred to what could be
distinguished as 'natural' Israel, there is some difficulty in
recognizing WHICH Israel he is referring to in which "ALL" are
saved.

A
good question would be, is it consistent to think that Paul has spent
chapter upon chapter repeatedly articulating how Israel "stumbled"
because they did not embrace the Messiah by FAITH as the seed
of Abraham, then abruptly say 'Oh well, they're all going to be
saved anyway?' Or another variation would be, 'it won't matter in
the long run, because no matter what they do, all Israel shall be
saved.'

This
'predestined irresistible grace' is the proposition being put forth
by the Dispensationalists. It runs counter to the overwhelming
body of Scripture, and the central theme of the New Testament.

The
claim that God must save all of physical Israel is usually
based on a perceived irrevocable promise to that particular family -
but a carrying over into the modern era of a perceived promise to
"remember" Israel ignores the fact that the promise to
"remember" Israel was already fulfilled in the Messiah's
arrival. Furthermore, the "remnant" that is prophesied to be saved
among the "lost sheep of the house of Israel" are specified to
exist in the early Christian church.

Because
Paul has already repeatedly stated there is such a thing as a
"remnant" of Israel (11:4,5) and there are two "Israels" with
an unbelieving Israel that is not "the Israel of
God" (Gal 3:29) - it is consistent for him to be referring to the
'saved' Israel when he writes "all Israel shall be saved."

Conversely,
it is not consistent with the preponderance of New Testament doctrine
to think he is saying all the Jews will be saved, when there is no
such promise, prophecy, or explicit statement anywhere in Scripture.
The lack of Scripture promising that "all" of physical Israel will
be saved doesn't even account for the last two thousand years of
history - to say nothing of the fact that every indication we have
is that the modern Israeli nation is up to their eyeballs in the
present apostasy.

Now,
let's follow the flow of Romans 11 on a verse by verse basis: 

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

He
says, of course God has not cast away his people, i.e.
'I'm evidence of that fact because I'm saved, and I "also am an
Israelite."

2.
God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what
the scripture saith of Elias? How he maketh intercession to God
against Israel, saying,

He
again notes how what has happened is not to be perceived as a
"casting away" of Israel, and compares the present circumstance to
Elijah's prior prayer "against Israel."

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

He
quotes I King 19:10 which is the textual support for the prior
statement that Elijah, who was then recognized as the key
prophet of Israel, had spoken against Israel. In that passage, Elijah
said to the LORD "�the children of Israel have forsaken thy
covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the
sword; and I, even I only, am left, and they seek my life, to take it
away."

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

Paul
notes that God corrected Elijah and informed him that he was not the
only servant of God left in Israel, but that God said "I have
reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to
the image of Baal" - a recitation of I Kings 19:18.

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

Paul
compares this episode to "this present time [when] also there is a remnant
according to the election of grace." Because there are not multiple
prophecies dealing with multiple eras in which God will constantly
save a "remnant," we have no Scripture indicating there will be
yet another significant remnant of the Jews brought into
salvation in the end times.

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

He
elaborates on how the grace that saved the remnant was
not rooted in works, but is the free gift of God.

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

A
key verse, Paul uses the term "Israel" here referencing the lost
"part" of Israel (see verse 25). He rather diplomatically says
"Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for�" rather
than a more pointed conclusion that the Israel He is speaking of has
rejected the only salvation that is available to them. In the 2nd
portion of the verse, we have a clear statement that the "elect"
is composed of the Christians. Indeed, verse 7 is the smoking gun
for those that erroneously claim the Jews are the elect in Matthew
24's post-tribulational return. Note also how "the rest" -
anyone but the elect - "were blinded."

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

The
Apostle quotes a prophecy of Isaiah that natural Israel's
rebellious nature has resulted in blindness. God has closed their eyes
"forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with
their lips do honor me, but ohave removed their heart far from
me�." (Isaiah 29:13 - 3 verses after Paul's citation)

9. And David saith,
Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling block,
and a recompence unto them
:

He
now cites from David with an imprecatory prayer against natural Israel
- not dissimilar to Elijah's earlier pronouncement. Since all
Israel is not Israel and there is a remnant of Israel, one would have
to recognize that David's prophetic curse against "Israel" is
not against the remnant of Israel - but against the
"part" of Israel that abides in unbelief.

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

A
continuation of David's curse on Israel - a quote from Psalm
69:23. With these citations from Elijah, Isaiah, and David, Paul has
shown that Israel has been turning away from the LORD for a very long
time.

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

Here
Paul says "Have they stumbled that they should fall?" and answers
himself "God forbid." Yet Israel has clearly fallen at the time
of the Roman writing. Paul then continues his thought that the
'silver lining' in this tragedy is the fact that the door was opened
to the Gentiles "to provoke them to jealousy." This is a reference
to Deuteronomy where God is furious at Israel because "they
have provoked me�.I will move them to jealousy with those who are
not a people; I will provoke them to anger." (Deut 21:21).

It's
important to see there is nothing in this passage (or any other for
that matter) claiming the tactic will result in backsliding Israel
responding favorably. In fact, the LORD goes on to say "a fire is
kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lower hell�.They
shall be burnt with hunger, and devoured with burning heat and with
bitter destructions�.The sword without, and terror within�"
(Deut 21:22, 24,25). If "all Israel" is prophetically scheduled to
repent and be saved, the prediction of that theoretical event is
certainly not in the text in conjunction with the LORD's effort to
arouse them to jealousy. 

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

Paul
begins to justify why it would be desirable for natural Israel to be
accepted again if they change course. He poetically states how the
world became richer through their fall, and since the
"diminishing" of natural Israel's standing benefited the
Gentiles, how much more beneficial it would be IF they were to achieve
a "fullness" in Christ. Note also how, in the first part of the
verse, he acknowledges Israel has fallen ("their fall") whereas he
seemingly denied their stumbling meant they had fallen earlier.

This
demonstrates that back in verse 11, his use of the word "fall"
connoted being abandoned or cast away. It could be paraphrased as 'Did
they stumble so they could be cast away? God forbid.' God did not
cast them away, God reached down to offer them salvation and they
rejected it.

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

Here
he specifies that the reasoning he is utilizing is directed to the
Gentiles, and seeks to "magnify" his Apostolic standing in the
hope that they will receive his perspective. This is very revealing
for it means he is addressing the very subject of natural or
"stumbled" Israel because years earlier, Paul has already told
these same "Gentiles" in Christ that there is "neither Jew nor
Greek (Gentile)�in Christ Jesus."

Thus,
he is now addressing those Christians in the Roman church that were
Gentiles. This further demonstrates he was qualifying his statements
as not applying to Christians that were formerly Jews - yet another
indicator he expected Christians that were formerly Jews might also be
reading this letter.

14.
If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh,
and might save some of them.

A
hugely important verse. He again alludes to the Deuteronomic statement
where God seeks to "provoke" Israel to jealousy. Paul uses
"provoke," but substitutes "emulation" (instead of jealousy)
- a similar, but not identical concept. In this verse, he is
reminding the former Gentiles that are now Christians that natural
Israel may yet respond to the Gospel.

Notice
the crucial terms used when Paul addresses the results of this
provocation to jealousy. He says "If by any means," the
tactic would work, it's worth a try - hardly a foreordained
conclusion that it will work. When he said if the tactic of
jealousy is used, he "may" be able to provoke the Jews to
emulate the Christians - again not a set outcome - in effect, it may
work, and it may not. He then goes on to say the tactic
of jealousy "might" save "some" of them.

We
can ask ourselves, if Paul has a special prophetic knowledge that ALL
natural "Israel" will be saved, why is he so tentative here?

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

A
poetic vehicle similar to verse 12. "If the casting away of them"
means something good comes of it, wouldn't their restoration mean
something even better? Note also how he again concedes that, at least
in the short term, the term "casting away" is applicable to Israel
- even though he has denied they've been cast away back in verse
one! Paul is definitely in an internal conflict over this issue.

Remember,
he has already anguished over the loss of his people's fate two
chapters earlier when he had "great heaviness and continual
sorrow.:" There he said he would almost be willing to be "accursed
from Christ" in exchange for his "kinsmen according to the
flesh" (9:2,3). Note also that by saying he would just about trade
places, his offer to be "accursed" is to take their place - a
clear indicator he knows deep down inside that Israel is
accursed - and that is why he is so sad.

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

Continuing
the earlier thought that restoration would be wonderful because their
fall coincided with the redemption of those that were not a people, he
is reasoning that each part of the tree of saved Israel - regardless
of when it arrives, or which position it holds, is still part of the
tree --  and that
tree is holy.

This
verse cannot be applied to Israel as a whole as that would
include the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the scribes, and others that not
only refused to enter in themselves, they aggressively sought to keep
others out of the salvation wrought in Christ (Matt 23:13).

He
utilizes the vehicle of analogy in this statement by mentioning the
"first fruit" of the tree, as well as the "lump" (he likely is
referring to the trunk here), followed by the "root" and the
"branches." This entire package, the first fruit, the lump, the
root, and the branches references saved Israel in what is about to be
articulated as a "good olive tree."

Since
Christ is "risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits" the
entire entity under discussion is clearly in Him. With this analogy,
it's almost as though Paul is seeking to pre-empt an anticipated
resentment among the Gentiles if the Jews were to resume their
original position. 

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;

The
well-known passage about how "some" of the branches have been
broken off the olive tree. A clear reference to Israel, it is self
evident the branches broken off were those that refused the salvation
of Jesus Christ. He furthers the simile with a reference to the
Gentiles that came from the "wild olive tree" that have been
"grafted" in to the good olive tree.

This
wonderful verse plainly illustrates much. First of all, there is only one
saved "tree" - not two. Obviously, branches that break off will
die, or are already dead. The "wild" tree has no role in the
kingdom of God, so there is only one entity that embodies salvation
- the "tree" of Israel.  

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

Paul
cautions against Gentile boasting, or propagating a superior attitude
against the natural branches that were broken off.

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

He
narrows the description of the apparent Gentile boast that God broke
off the natural branches so they could be grafted in -
inferring the false idea that God somehow needed the Gentiles. This
'puffed up' attitude is the epitome of sin. 

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

With
the word "Well," Paul notes that it is true that the removal of
"some" (verse 17) of the natural branches made possible the
grafting in of the Gentiles. He specifies those that were "broken
off" were removed because of "unbelief," and those that were
grafted in, were attached because of "faith." He cautions against
being "highminded" or arrogant, but that they should have fear or
awe because of the enormous implications of this epic event.

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

Paul
continues the prior thought that the Gentile believer should be
cautious against pride as "God spared not the natural branches" --
thus if the Gentiles fall in a similar fashion, they could find
themselves in the same position as the natural branches that were
broken off.

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.

A
verse the 'once saved, always saved' crowd would rather not think
about. Paul notes we should be acutely aware of ("behold") the
"severity" of the situation - an event that brought about a
tragic judgment on those that "fell" (there's that word again),
and the spiritually opposite yield of "goodness." He then notes
that the result to "thee" was the "goodness" - something
that will only exist "if thou continue in his goodness�."

It
is more than inferred that "if" the good branches don't continue
in "his goodness" they will be "cut off" - it is explicitly
stated.  Also note that
there is still only one construct that is saved - the
"good olive tree" --  in the analogy that Paul began numerous verses back.

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

We
see that it's 'a 2 way street.' Not only can the "wild"
branches still find themselves broken off if they fail to "continue
in his goodness," the natural branches that were broken off are able
to be grafted back in again "if" they change course and
"abide not" in "unbelief."

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?

Another
bit of rationale similar to verse 15 still utilizing the picture of a
good olive tree. His 'reverse grafting' statement from the previous
verse is elaborated on by saying that in such a situation, those
natural branches would fit the tree very well, because it's the same
tree they were broken off from. With statements like these, it's
difficult to see how anyone can conclude that the believers are not
a part of Israel.

Since
he reaffirms the identity of the branches that were "broken off"
as still being from the original "olive tree," and points out that
"God is able to graft them in again" (verse 23), it is self
evident that the "tree" in question is Israel. He even
notes that the "tree" in the analogy is "their own
olive tree."

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

Paul
refers to this breaking off and grafting in event as a "mystery"
the believers should not be ignorant of. By adding the comment
"brethren," he may have now broadened his address from the earlier
narrative that was more narrowly focused on the believers that were
among the Gentiles (verse 13). They should not have ignorance of this
matter to avoid becoming "wise in [their] own conceits" - yet
another caution against the sin of pride creeping into their hearts.

The
balance of the verse articulates the well known phrase "that
blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the
Gentiles be come in." By breaking down the thought, this complex
statement can be clarified considerably. If we place the "wise in
your own conceits" phrase as a parenthesis, and read it as one
thought, it becomes clearer. For example 'I would not, brethren that
ye should be ignorant�of the fact that blindness, in part, has
happened to Israel�'

This
address to the "brethren" continues the idea that Israel has not
been "cast away" developed from the very beginning of the chapter.
Israel has undergone a metamorphosis in which a "part" of natural
Israel has experienced a deadly "blindness" even as "Gentiles"
have "come in" to join those that remain.

The
last phrase indicates that this "blindness" will continue "until
the fullness of the Gentiles be come in." This would seem to
indicate that at the time of this "fullness," the blindness
experienced by those that have been abiding "in unbelief" (verses
20, 23) will cease. Dispensationalism posits that this means the cycle
then shifts back to the Jews in terms of God's primary dealing --- a
position this text doesn't even hint at.

This
Rapture Cult view further tries to make the removal of the
"blindness" an event that has no scriptural support at all -
i.e. the pre-tribulation rapture. There is absolutely nothing in this
text indicating that there is still a demonstrable period of time left
for fallen Israel to change course once the "blindness" has been
removed.

Clearly,
some event is in view that will bring about the end of Israel's
blindness, but the flow of the passage speaks of a finishing - not
another transition. The "fullness" of the Gentiles would infer
that the entity spoken of throughout the chapter - true Israel -
is now full as the last component said to be scheduled to
"come in" (the Gentiles) has now reached its "fullness."

Furthermore,
3 times in this very book, Paul has written that the collision of good
and evil is manifested "to the Jews first, and also to the
Gentile" (Romans 1:16, 2:9,10) He never proposes that God's plan
is 'to the Jews first, then the Gentiles, then back to the Jews for
one last chance.' The pattern of salvation is plainly said to
conclude with the calling of the Gentiles.

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

This
phrase concludes the thought that Paul has been developing from the
very first verse of this chapter - Israel has not been "cast
away," Israel has been born-again and magnified through the
appending of the Gentiles to the one saved entity that God has
created. Thus, it is consistent for Paul to conclude "And
so�." as he pronounces that "all Israel shall be saved."

Because
he has repeatedly established that there are two Israels, it is
entirely logical for Paul to utilize the phrase "all Israel" to
emphasize that this is the finished result of the LORD's "strange
work" (Isaiah 28:21). He has repeatedly prophesied that "this is
the refreshing: yet they would not hear" (Isaiah 28:12). He has
repeatedly stated He will "lay in Zion for a foundation stone, a
tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation" (Isaiah
28:16) but they would not believe. 

Thus
the idea that God will miraculously cause "all Israel" (awkwardly
forcing the the phrase to refer to physical Israel) to suddenly
believe in Jesus Christ after the 'last Gentile'
converts, is completely without merit. There is no explicit statement
to that effect anywhere in the Bible. It runs counter to everything
said in the entire chapter, and it is contrary to the total body of
statements in the entire book of Romans.

Indeed,
the few Rapture Cultists that have an ounce of honesty left will
confess that when they first read the statement "all Israel shall be
saved," they were taken aback by the odd statement. It's abrupt
insertion represents a sudden shift in the flow of the chapter as it
seemingly jumps to a conclusion that is not consistent with the prior
verses. The truth is, the verse is right where It's supposed to be
- it is the false perspective of Dispensationalism that causes the
narrative to seem disjointed.

Without
the assumption that the Christians, utilizing the shell of the
"church," are a separate group from Israel, the entire system of
dispensationalism collapses under the weight of its own preposterous
suppositions. The total body of New Testament teaching, particularly
Paul's writings in this very book and this very chapter,
categorically testify that the Old Testament order of salvation based
upon one's physical lineage is now forever done away with in Christ.

It
is through "faith" that salvation is based (verse 20), not a
reliance upon physical heritage - e.g. "They who are the children
of the flesh, these are not the children of God" (Romans 9:8).

The
true understanding of the conclusion that Paul has reached may also be
seen by reversing the components of the statement. Speaking of the
"good olive tree," Paul has stated that this new, engrafted
version of Israel will reach its apex - its "all" or its
"fullness - at the point when the last of the Gentiles that are
scheduled to be saved has "come in." In the concluding statement
of the verse, he again asserts that this "fullness" is a fulfillment
of the prophecies that God will remember Israel.

Paul
quotes Isaiah 59:20 which reads "And the Redeemer shall come to
Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob,
saith the Lord." Once again, the idea that salvation is for the
"part" of natural Israel that turns "from transgression" to
the "deliverer" is in view.

27.
For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

Paul
reaffirms this is a fulfillment of the salvation promised to Israel,
and quotes yet another portion of the prior citation in Isaiah 59 with
verse 21 "this is my covenant with them�." He then concludes
that covenant is "when I take away their sins" (Romans 11:27).
This is one of dozens of verses that show the promises to Israel are
fulfilled in Jesus Christ as he redeems "Israel."

28.
As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as
touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

Paul
now shifts emphasis from the concept of "remnant" (11:5) Israel to
"fallen" (11:22) Israel. He notes how the unbelieving Jews are
enemies of the Gospel, "but as touching the election, they are
beloved for the fathers' sake." Because Paul has already stated 3
times that the term "election" corresponds to those that are saved
in this very same book of Romans (9:11, 11:5, 11:7; see also I Thess
1:4 & II Peter 1:10), the phrase "as touching the election"
would refer to the continuing fact that the option of embracing "the
election of grace" (11:5) is still available to fallen Israel.

As
Paul has already stated, the possibility of Jewish conversion still
exists "if they abide not still in unbelief" (verse 23). Jews (the
branches that were "broken off") have been sporadically coming to
Christ for two thousand years, and finding themselves "grafted
[back] into their own olive tree" (verse 24) There is no question
this pleases God, as that was His original desire for "Israel"
when He sent His son.

That
son, Jesus Christ, said "I am not sent but unto the lost
sheep of the house of Israel" (Matthew 15:24) so it is clear "they
are [still] beloved for the fathers' sake." Another way of looking
at this latter phrase is to see that natural Israel is still beloved
for the sake of the fathers of Israel - those that God had
fellowship with in times past. In either event, the door to entry back
into the grace of God is still open to "Israel," and so Paul is
stressing that, even though they are enemies because they have
rejected the Gospel, we must recognize they still have the option of
coming back in to the fullness of the LORD's great plan.

29.
For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

This
remarkable verse has been grossly distorted by many that try to use it
to say that GOD cannot change course once He provides his calling to a
people. This is, of course, an absurd proposition as the LORD is Sovereign
and He can do whatever He pleases. Some would try to use God's
supposed inability to break a covenant to justify the false doctrine
that physical Israel remains the LORD's chosen vessel regardless of
their behaviour - thus making a mockery of Jesus Christ's own
statements that "the kingdom of God shall be taken from you�."
(Matthew 21:43).

Such
false doctrine makes the Word of God of "none effect by your
tradition" (Matthew 15:6). A good verse for such liars is Numbers
14:34 where the LORD indeed changes course and says to Israel "forty
days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty
years, and ye shall know my breach of promise."

30.
For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained
mercy through their unbelief:

Paul
uses yet another analogy to demonstrate how those that are now saved
were at one time in unbelief, but were saved when salvation opened to
them when Israel rejected their Messiah.


31.
Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they
also

may
obtain mercy.

He
continues the analogy in a hopeful tone that even though these are now
in unbelief, through the mercy of the believers they also may
obtain mercy. Once again, not unlike verse 14, there is no definitive
prophetic statement that this is what will happen - only that this may
be the case.

32.
For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy
upon all.

This
somewhat difficult statement is a bit obscured by the usage of
"concluded." The attempt to make the "all in unbelief" Israel
as a way of setting up a justification for saving "all" natural
Israel is faulty as a remnant of Israel embraced the Messiah as
soon as they encountered Him. Indeed, the LORD reserved the remnant to
salvation. This verse is simply telling us that God has allocated, or
appointed circumstances where all men are in disbelief, in order that
His merciful grace may be magnified.

33.
O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How
unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

Paul's
praise of God is abundant in this verse.

34.
For who hath known the mind of the Lord? Or who hath been his
counseller?

His
ways are higher than our ways, and we may not presume to know the
wisdom that is implicit in His being.

35. Or who hath
first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?

We
could never give God enough to justify a reward of the magnificence
that is found in His grace.

36.
For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be
glory for ever. Amen.

In
Him we live and breathe.

In
summary, the 11th chapter of Romans is a favorite of the
Rapture Cult. They regularly demonstrate their cultic tendencies
insomuch as they love to take one verse out of context, attach a
superficial rendering of that verse, then attempt to militate against
20 other verses that disagree with the first verse. This is the case
with the "all Israel shall be saved" constituency.

Solid
spiritual wisdom requires that any seemingly contradictory statements
must be harmonized among the totality of the Scriptures - something
the Cult teaches, but rarely executes.

The
"strong delusion" that has overtaken the church in terms of the
great deception of Dispensationalism has brought some to the point of
saying that Christians that claim their birthright as the "chosen
generation" and the "peculiar people" that Peter told us about
(I Peter 2:9), have somehow become anti-Semitic! This lie is so
monstrous that it manifests the profound nature of the verse in I John
that bluntly informs us that "who is a liar but Antichrist?" (I
John 2:22).

The
Jewish leaders of the generation that saw Jesus walk among them also
claimed an irrevocable birthright when they claimed they were of their
father Abraham. Jesus set them straight as to who their real father
was. So too, those of this "evil and adulterous generation" that
have constructed "another gospel" (Galatians 1:6). The

Rapture
Cult
shall find themselves "accursed" because "they received
not the love of the truth that they might be saved" (II
Thessalonians 2:10). Soon, the false prophets of pre-tribulationism
"shall be amazed one at another; their faces shall be as flames"
(Isaiah 13:8). 

But
ye brethren, are not in darkness that that day should overtake you as
a thief (I Thessalonians 5:4).

October 27, 2003 - James Lloyd

Copyright © 2004 Christian Media Network

See Also

The Remnant In Romans

The Remnant Of Israel

Article Source: 
CMC
Article Number: 
77