Following Jesus

Note: The Apostle Paul’s argumentation in Romans 9-11, and its interpretation – whether in an infernalist or reconciliatory direction – could very well be seen as antisemitic, or at the very least, unfavorable to the Jewish people. Despite the ways Christian interpretation has been used to vilify Jewish people for nearly two millennia, it is vital to take note of the distinctions between the Jewish religion and the Christian religion in the 1st Century and the division that arose around the divinity and Lordship of Jesus Christ. Maintaining the religious distinction is not antisemitic, and can be done with respect without restoring to ethnic stereotyping.

Exclusivist Christians who hold to the eternal infernalist perspective (i.e. eternal hell for the “unsaved”) rely heavily on Romans 9. In fact, it would be difficult for them to make any kind of solid case for infernalism without Romans 9. On its face, the chapter does seem to present quite a stark division of humanity in terms of those predestined to eternal salvation and those predestined to eternal tortuous damnation. From chapters 9-11, predestinarian imagery is thick: branches severed from the tree; God’s hardening of hearts; God’s love for Jacob and hatred for Esau; His molding of vessels for destruction and vessels for mercy; the mention of a remnant that will be saved. These three chapters seem to be in direct opposition to Romans 5.

Thankfully the good news (gospel) of God’s universal reconciliation of all things is precisely why the Apostle Paul puts things in such stark terms in Romans 9-11. Remember, he is structuring a letter-long argument in Romans. He is working up to a conclusion with his argumentation, and we will see that this conclusion is the eventual reconciliation of the whole creation. At the end of chapter 11, we read, “I want you to understand this mystery, brethren: a hardening has come upon part of Israel, until the full number of the Gentiles come in, and so all Israel will be saved” (Romans 11:25-26).

Paul’s use of the word “all” in “all Israel will be saved” is the same as its use in 5:18. Every single Israelite – whether by birth or conversion – will be saved. How, then, should we interpret the phrase, “full number of the Gentiles”? Strong’s Concordance entry 4138 translates the nominative neuter singular pleroma as “a totality,” “a complete filling up.” It is used elsewhere to describe the fullness of the Godhead in Christ Jesus (Col. 2:9); the fullness with which Christ fills everything (Eph. 1:23); and the totality of Jesus’ blessing (Rom, 15:29). In other words, the complete fallenness and sinfulness of creation Paul refers to earlier in Romans is met with the complete restoration of the humanity and all creation. This is the beautiful parallel power of Paul’s argument throughout Romans. He shows how completely desperate we are and how completely reconciled we will be in Christ.

Passages like Romans 9:18; 11:7-10; and 11:25-26 that speak of the hardening of hearts are used by Paul to explain the “release” of the gospel to the Gentiles. The hardening, then, can be seen from a human perspective as a tool used by God to extend salvation beyond the confines of the Jewish community. Paul is very clear as to its purpose: the hardening of hearts leads to the eventual reconciliation of the full number (totality) of Gentiles, and then all of Israel. God will have mercy on all (Rom. 11:32). The underlying reason for the hardening was not to eternally predestine some to eternal hell, but to save all!

Some might object: what about Paul’s claim that only a remnant of Israel will be saved in Romans 9:27? Apart from the fact that 11:26 clearly states all Israel will be saved, the biblical understanding of a remnant is quite different than most modern Christians seem to think. For Paul, a remnant is a sign of God’s faithfulness and a promise that He has not abandoned his people. With this in mind, Romans 11: 16 shows us that the remnant is the “first fruits” by which the “whole lump” of Israel will be reconciled to God. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are that “holy root” which allows the “branches” to be saved. So this remnant does not reflect the total number who will be saved, but the first representatives of all Israel.

The entire chapter of Romans 11 is littered with language of “broken off branches.” Anyone who has heard a Calvinistic sermon has certainly heard these phrases used to defend the eternal punishment of the reprobate. Clearly, though, these “broken branches” are used in an argumentative way by Paul similar to hardened hearts. We have to ask ourselves: what is the purpose of the broken off branches, and what is their ultimate destiny? Romans 11 answers this for us in a clearly reconciliatory way, so it baffles me why the exclusive infernalists continue to use these passages as prooftexts for an eternal punishment.

The “natural branches” here are, of course, Jewish people who did not accept Jesus as the Messiah. The “unnatural branches” are Gentiles. The natural branches were broken off so that the unnatural branches could be grafted on. Just like with the hardening of hearts, the refusal of some Jewish people to accept Jesus as Messiah allowed the gospel to escape the confines of Judaism and spread around the world. That, according to Paul, was the purpose (Rom. 11:19-20). But Paul goes on to explain that the natural branches that were broken off will be grafted in again (Rom. 11:24).

Finally, some might ask about Romans 9:13. Isn’t it clear that God loved Jacob and hated Esau, and isn’t it therefore clear that God loves and saves some but hates and condemns others? No, that is not clear at all. The juxtaposition between loving and hating is a Hebrew hyperbolic idiom to indicate preference or levels of loyalty. It is used that way by Jesus in Luke 14:26. We obviously do not have to literally hate our family members to follow Jesus, but we do need to have our priorities straight and place Jesus first. The Apostle Paul is using that idiomatic expression here to indicate God’s prioritizing of Jacob in the plan of universal reconciliation.

Further, we know how the story of Jacob and Esau ends, and we can see how it fits beautifully into the universalist argument Paul is making. The stealing of Esau’s birthright by Jacob caused many years of enmity and hatred between the two, but when the brothers meet after years of fear and hatred, and Jacob falls down before Esau to ask forgiveness, Esau “ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell on his neck and kissed him, and they wept” (Gen. 33:4). Esau and Jacob were reconciled. No more hardening of hearts. No more broken branches.

So we see that while in the ninth chapter Paul writes of vessels of mercy and vessels of destruction, by the end of the eleventh chapter, these divides are reconciled. We see that Paul was using an argumentative device all along to accentuate divinely initiated universal reconciliation. In the end, “God has mercy upon all” (Rom. 11:32).