From the MLJ Archive

Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones: I would like to call your attention this evening to verses 25, 26, and 27 in the 11th chapter of Paul's Epistle to the Romans. "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. 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: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins."

Now, we're looking at this great statement contained here, and which I've already described to you as the apostle's way of expressing his absolute certainty about the restoration of the Jews to the kingdom of God and to the Christian church. He puts it, as I've shown you, in the form of a prophecy. And last Friday night, we were drawing out some of the implications of that fact. Now then, we can come therefore to the actual statement itself this evening.

Here is a statement which is not only of great and vital importance, but one which is in many ways very difficult. The result is it has been the subject of much controversy, much difference, and disagreement of opinion. Now, that is so for a number of reasons, the form in which the apostle puts it I suppose being the main reason for that. However, it behooves us, therefore, to examine it very carefully. And I trust we've all been praying together as I was trying to pray for you just now, that we may be enlightened of the spirit in such an important statement.

The apostle gives his prophecy in the last part of verse 25 and the first part of verse 26. Then in the second half of verse 26 and in verse 27, he supports it and substantiates it by quotations from the Old Testament. In other words, he's following his usual method: makes his statement, proves it, confirms it, shows that in a sense it's not a novelty by means of his quotation from the Old Testament. Now, here then is the essential prophecy: that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in, and so all Israel shall be saved. That's the prophecy.

Remember, it is a prophecy. It is the revelation of a mystery—something inaccessible to the mind of man, something man can't foresee nor foretell, but something that has been revealed by God to His servant in order that he, in turn, might make it known to others. That's what he's doing here. He doesn't want them to be ignorant. He doesn't want them, as it were, eventually to make fools of themselves by having said the wrong thing and then to be shown publicly to have said and thought the wrong thing.

Very well. Now then, how do we approach this? There are two main ways in which a statement like this can be approached. One is, first and foremost, to give a general statement as to its meaning and then support that by means of a detailed examination. That is the method that is adopted by Charles Hodge, for instance, and others. But there's a second method, and to me, it seems to be the preferable one. It's this: that we first of all take the statement as it is, break it up into its component parts, try to discover the meaning of the words and of the phrases, and then, having got our exact detailed meaning, we can then state the doctrine and argue concerning it, consider the rival points of view, and evaluate them together. It seems to me that that is the better procedure. So, we've got to spend most of our time this evening therefore in what I would describe again as being the mechanics of interpretation.

Let's see what the actual words are. Now, I commend this method for this reason: I think it's almost foolish to be having a general argument as to what the apostle is saying until we are quite clear in our minds as to what he is saying. It's foolish to take up the rival schools of thought with regard to the meaning of "all Israel shall be saved" until we've examined the component parts of the whole great statement. Very well. So, we start with the word "blindness." This is the mystery that he's revealing to them, that blindness in part was happened to Israel. Now, blindness is the word here in the Authorized Version that is before me, and in a sense, it is quite an accurate and a good translation.

But the word that was used by the apostle does not mean blindness in and of itself; it means hardness. It means obtuseness. It means insensibility. That's the root meaning. And, of course, ultimately therefore it does come to mean blindness. If you're insensitive to truth, you can't see it. So, they were quite justified in using the word "blindness," but as they have used "hardness" in other places, it seems to me that it would have been better if they had used "hardness" here.

Now, there's nothing new about this statement to those of us who are familiar with this particular epistle. We've really had this idea put before us in this same chapter already in verses 8, 9, and 10, where we read, "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. And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling block, and a recompense unto them. Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway." Same idea.

He's here putting it like this: that this blindness in part has happened to Israel. And, of course, we've had the same essential idea in chapter 9, where you get it particularly in the 18th verse, where we read, "Therefore hath He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth." Now, this is an idea that you get in the scriptures—that the trouble with the children of Israel was a hardness that led to blindness.

And this, according to statements in the scripture, is ultimately the cause of unbelief. Take, for instance, the way in which the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews puts it in the third chapter. Take verse 8. He says, or he's quoting, "Wherefore as the Holy Ghost saith, Today if you will hear His voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness, when your fathers tempted Me, proved Me, and saw My works forty years."

So this man, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, makes an exhortation of all this. "Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called today; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end." And again the quotation, "While it is said, Today if you will hear His voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation."

Now, that's the idea that is conveyed by this word "blindness." The trouble with Israel, the reason why the Jews as a nation rejected their own Messiah and His teaching and rejected the teaching of the apostles and dealt with them in the cruel fashion they did, was that they had become hardened. They had become insensitive to truth. Truth could make no impression upon them. They had lost a sensibility.

It's a terrible thing, this, and it is the ultimate explanation, as I say, of all unbelief. Now, in that third chapter of Second Corinthians that I was reading at the beginning, the apostle has got the same idea, but there he puts it in terms of a veil over their hearts so that they're not able to see; they've been blinded. This terrible inability to see the truth. Now, that's what he means by the word "blindness."

But then we come to this qualifying statement. He says that "blindness in part is happened to Israel." What does he mean by "in part"? And here again, you see, there is obviously room for several different interpretations. Some people say that it means partial blindness—partial blindness—that the Jews were not totally blind, but they were partially blind; that they still saw aspects of the truth, but they couldn't see it all.

Now, this has got to be rejected completely because the trouble with Israel was that she was totally blind. To reject the Messiah means a total blindness. And that was the charge that our Lord so constantly brought against the Pharisees. They claimed that they had light, that they were teachers of the people, that they were experts in the law. But the trouble was they were absolutely ignorant. It was a total blindness.

Take the case of this apostle Paul himself. You remember how in writing to Timothy he refers to the days when he was a persecutor, and a blasphemer, and injurious. But you remember what he says: "I did it ignorantly... ignorantly in unbelief." It was nothing but ignorance, and it was a total ignorance. Or take the way he puts it in Philippians 3, where he gives a list of his excellencies as a Pharisee, as a Jew, a Hebrew of the Hebrews, his knowledge of the law, and so on. But what he came to see was that he was totally ignorant of the true meaning of the law. It was a total blindness, not a partial blindness. And the trouble with Israel is not that she suffers from a partial blindness; it is a total blindness.

Then others would say that what it means is that blindness has happened to a part of Israel—but it isn't true of all of them, but only true of some of them. Well, of course, that was true. We've already seen in this chapter that the apostle makes that same point himself. He says, "I am a believer." Not only that, he says there is a remnant according to the election of grace. Some of the Jews have believed. So, in a sense, it is true to say that it was only some of the nation of Israel that were unable to see the truth of the gospel.

And yet, I am also going to reject that explanation of the meaning of this term. And I do so for this reason: that the apostle here is dealing not with individuals but with the nation as a whole. Now, I've had to keep on saying this, but in this chapter, he is really dealing with the nation as a whole. The fact was that the nation as a whole was outside the church and had rejected the Messiah and the gospel. And he's here dealing with the nation as a whole.

So, I reject both those suggested explanations as to what he means by saying that "blindness in part is happened to Israel." Well, then, what is he saying? Well, it should be read like this: that blindness has happened in part to Israel. Not partial blindness has happened to Israel, or blindness has happened to a part of Israel, but blindness has happened in part to Israel. What does that mean? Well, it means that he is referring to lengths of time—not the intensity of the blindness, but the duration of the blindness.

So, a better way of translating this would be this: that blindness has happened temporarily to Israel. That's what he means. Blindness for the time being—a temporary blindness—has happened to Israel. Or blindness has happened temporarily to Israel. Now, what confirms that, of course, is the use of the word "until." "Blindness in part is happened to Israel until..." The blindness is not permanent; it's not everlasting. It is a temporary blindness. That's what he means by "in part." It is blindness that has happened to Israel until. So, it's a question of duration of the blindness and not the intensity of the blindness.

Now, you will see that when we come together upon all these points, it will make the exposition I think quite inevitable and my method of approach will be justified. But now we come to the next phrase, which is "is happened." You see, every single statement here, every phrase, every word, is of great importance. "Blindness in part is happened to Israel," which means, of course, has happened.

Why do I pay attention to this? Is he saying any more than that Israel as a whole is blind? Well, obviously he is, because if he only meant that, he'd have said it. When he says that "blindness in part has happened to Israel," he does mean that it is something that has happened to them. And that means this: that the blindness or the hardness to which he is referring is what we had to call when we were doing chapter 9 a judicial blindness.

In other words, it isn't something that they've produced themselves; it is something that has happened to them, something that has been put upon them. Now, the way, in other words, of interpreting this is again to go back to chapter 9 and to read there what we read about God's dealings with Pharaoh, verse 17 and so on. "For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show My power in thee, and that My name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth."

You remember we dealt with that. You may not like that. Not a question of liking. I don't like it. Not a question of whether you like it or what I like; it's what the scripture says. Neither is it a matter of whether you can understand it or not. Who can understand such things? Paul says it's a mystery. And you remember the answer that he gave to the clever objector in chapter 9. "Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth He yet find fault? For who hath resisted His will?" To which the answer is, "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?"

How foolish it is for men to pit their little understandings against profound truth like this. Do you understand a miracle? Do you understand the rebirth? Well, if you think you do, you don't know what it is, because our Lord told Nicodemus that it's a mystery, comparable only to the effect of the wind. "Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." The moment you take up this attitude of saying, "I don't understand it, and I don't like it," you as a Christian are putting yourself into the same position as an unbeliever. You're using exactly the same arguments. People don't believe in God because they can't understand the idea of a God. That's the typical unbeliever's argument. It's not what we understand; it is what has been revealed.

And I'm saying this in order that I may remind you of what a serious thing it is to pit your understanding or your likes or dislikes against the word of the eternal and almighty God. "Blindness in part has happened to Israel." It's been something that has been put upon them. Now, this doesn't mean that God's the author of unbelief, but what it does mean is this: that because of their unbelief and their persistence in it, He deliberately hardens them, as He did with Pharaoh.

Now, all that has been stated already in verses 8, 9, and 10, which I've already read to you this evening. And of course, we've had it again in verses 11 and 12. "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 (the Jews) to jealousy. 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 fulness?" God has chosen to do this to them in order to bring in the Gentiles, and ultimately through that to provoke them to jealousy.

But the point we are making, therefore, is this: that a part of the mystery is this, that God has inflicted upon the Jews as a whole, as a nation and as a race, this judicial blindness. Now, let me show you our blessed Lord Himself really taught exactly the same thing. Do you remember what He says, as it's recorded in the Gospel according to St. Matthew in chapter 13, as to why He spoke in parables?

Listen to this, verse 10. "And the disciples came, and said unto Him, Why speakest Thou unto them in parables?" How often has this been misunderstood. I've heard evangelists sometimes using the argument of parables in this way: they want to justify their own use of stories. They tell stories, and they justify it and say, "But our Lord told stories, didn't He tell the parables? It's got to be made simple." They think that that is why our Lord spoke in parables.

But listen to what He says Himself. They ask Him, "Why speakest Thou unto them in parables?" He answered and said unto them, "Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I unto them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross (same idea, that's the hardening again), and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them."

It's exactly the same thing as He says at the end of Matthew 11: "I thank Thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou hast hid—hid—these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in Thy sight." This is the deliberate action of God. He blinds, He hardens, in a judicial manner, the race of the Jews in order that He may not only punish them, but that He may bring His great purpose to pass of sending the gospel to the Gentile and even ultimately through that to bring back the Jews as a whole.

But this I say is an example therefore of judicial hardening or judicial blindness. Our Lord spoke in parables lest they might understand. He spoke in parables in order that they might not understand, and they didn't. They misunderstood completely, and that was because their hearts were hardened.

Very well, then. You see, the parallel is this: as it is God who inflicts this judicial blindness upon the Jews, it is God also who sometime in the future is going to open their eyes and restore them and graft them in again. It is always God's action, both in the hardening and in the restoring. You notice the phrase in verse 26, where he begins to quote, "As it is written, there shall come out of Sion the Deliverer." And remember, it is the Deliverer who shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob. It isn't that Jacob at some future time is going to decide to believe. No, no. The God who blinds is the God who heals. The God who casts out and breaks away the natural branches is the same God who is able to graft them in again. It is God's action on both sides. It is the Redeemer, the Deliverer alone who has the ability to turn away ungodliness.

We mustn't think of it as some voluntary action in the future on the part of the Jews. No, no, they would continue forever as they are now were it not God's purpose to enlighten them, to drive away their ungodliness and to bring them back into the olive tree to which they originally belonged. Now, this is therefore, you see, a most important phrase. And the fact that the apostle says that the exact time when this is going to take place is known—this is going to happen when the fullness of the Gentiles comes in—it is all a part of God's plan. It is all God's action. He casts down, He raises up. Same God. Christ is set for the fall and the rising again of many in Israel.

It is a mystery, isn't it? Well, he says it is. He doesn't want us to be ignorant of this mystery. Have you ever thought about this? This extraordinary fact of the way in which the Jews as a whole reacted to their own Messiah? It is a profound mystery. Well, thank God here we are given some insight and understanding into this great mystery. And then the next phrase, of course, is "to Israel." And I'm just reminding you that it means to Israel as a whole and not to individuals.

The next word is the word "until." Well, I've already shown you the significance of that. It links up with this temporary hardening, temporary blindness—until. Until when? Well, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in. Now, here again is a most important statement. What's the meaning of the fullness of the Gentiles? And there have been many different explanations of this. There are some who say that it just means this: that the apostle is saying that as long as the Gentiles keep on coming into the Christian church, so some of the Jews will also be converted. You see what it means? They say God has finished with the nation of Israel as such, altogether. But still, you'll get individual conversions among the Gentiles, and the apostle is simply saying here that these individual occasional conversions of the Jews will go on taking place as long as the gospel is still preached to the Gentiles. That's one explanation that is put forward.

Another one which is put forward is this one: that the fullness of the Gentiles means that the Gentiles will make up the fullness that has been partially depleted by the defection of the Jews. Now, let me put that more simply. Put it like this: here, you see, is the olive tree, consisting originally of Jews and Jews only. But the Jews reject their Messiah and they go out. Very well, there's a gap left, and the olive tree is no longer full, as it were. And they say that what this fullness of the Gentiles means is that the Gentiles are being brought in to make up that fullness, part of which had got lost through the defection of the Jews.

But now there is an obvious answer again to this: centuries ago, far more Gentiles had been converted to Christianity and had entered the Christian church than the total number of the Jews alive at the time of our Lord. And it's still going on, and will go on. So obviously and patently it cannot mean that. Well, then, what does it mean? Well, I suggest it means what we interpreted the word "fullness" to mean back in verse 12. It means the great majority of the Gentiles. It means the great majority of the Gentile nations.

It doesn't mean that every single Gentile who's ever lived is going to be saved. No, no. It doesn't mean that all the Gentiles who will be alive at a given point in the future are all going to be saved. It doesn't mean that. This word "fullness" means the Gentiles regarded as a whole. As the fullness of the Jews means the Jews as a nation as a whole, so the fullness of the Gentiles means exactly the same thing: the Gentiles in general, the Gentile world, as it were, will have come in. And it is when that has happened that this is going to happen to the Jews.

Very well then, there is the meaning of the expression "the fullness of the Gentiles." And then I must notice this phrase "become in," which is again most interesting. It's a very definite term, this, and it's almost a technical term. It doesn't mean merely that a given number of Gentiles will have decided throughout the centuries to come in, or that the great bulk of them will decide at some future date. No, the term is much too technical for that. It carries with it this whole notion of being introduced into the kingdom, being introduced or engrafted into the divine life, beginning to partake of the divine glory.

It almost carries with it this idea of being gathered in. In other words, you can't escape it—the very term that the apostle used carries this very definite idea: that God has this great eternal plan. He knows the number of the redeemed. There is a complement to come in from the Gentiles. And the apostle is saying they will be brought in. And when that complement has been brought in, God will then do this other thing with regard to the Jews.

I once remember an old preacher using an illustration like this, not on—he wasn't preaching on this text, but it was the same kind of idea. He talked about a shepherd looking after so many thousands of sheep, and he'd got a number of dogs. And the shepherd was always careful to gather in the whole of his flock at given times in order that he might count them and examine them and so on.

And the point the old preacher was making was that the shepherd kept on sending out dog after dog—there were still some missing, the full complement hadn't come in, some were grazing over there, some over there, and some over there. And he sent these dogs in different directions. And the man, the shepherd, isn't satisfied until they've all been gathered in—safely gathered in. That's the idea that's here in this "entering in"—this complement from amongst the Gentiles that God is purposing and determined to bring unto salvation.

Very well then, there are the terms of the second half of verse 25. Let's have a look at the beginning of verse 26. "And so," says the apostle, "all Israel shall be saved." Now, what does he mean by "and so"? Well, I'm suggesting that he means "after the above"—after what I've just been saying, after the "until" is ended. This blindness has happened temporarily to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has been brought in. But when that happens, then all Israel shall be saved.

Now, there are those who say that we have no right to translate it like that—that the apostle says "and so," not "and then." But that I am interpreting it as "and then" instead of "and so." They say it's not so much referring to time as to God's method. I'm in entire agreement, but I would argue that the method and the time are both worked together. What the apostle ultimately is saying is this: it is that when this fullness of the Gentiles has come in, the Jews will be aroused to jealousy, as he's told us at the end of chapter 11. And in that way, they will be brought in.

So "and so" means the time and the method. I believe we must include both of them. And indeed, he makes this quite plain in verse 31. He says—or take 30 with 31—"As ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy." That's it. He's saying, in other words, this is God's way of doing it. The blindness is going to continue with them until this full complement of Gentiles is in. Then that is the thing that God will use to rouse them to jealousy and bring them in. He's brought you in through their defection. He's now going to bring them in through what they will see in you. And so, it means the time and the method—both operating together.

But this brings us to the crucial statement, which is about the meaning of "all Israel." Now then, here is the thing above all others about which there has been argumentation. And there are three main views with regard to this. The first is this one: that "all Israel" means the total number of the elect, both Jews and Gentiles. "All Israel" means all the saved Jews, all the saved Gentiles. That's "all Israel." That was the view taught by Saint Augustine, John Calvin, Martin Luther.

And yet, I make bold to reject it. Why do I do so? Well, let me give you my reasons. That interpretation means this: that the word "Israel" has a different meaning here in verse 26 from what it had in verse 25. Obviously, in verse 25, it's referring to the nation of the Jews. What right have you therefore in the one and the same statement suddenly to turn its meaning into including saved Gentiles as well as saved Jews? That alone, it seems to me, is enough to put it out.

Why did the great Reformers teach that? They did it undoubtedly because they were reacting rather violently against very wild teaching about the millennium that became current in their day and generation. And it's always a dangerous thing, that. If you're correcting an excess, the danger is that you go to an opposite excess yourself. I believe the great Reformers were guilty of that very thing.

But not only do they make "Israel" have a different meaning in verse 26 from verse 25, it makes the statement run counter to the whole argument of the entire chapter. What Paul is dealing with in this chapter—as I've had to go on repeating and still must repeat—is the case of the bulk of the nation of the Jews. That's what he's dealing with here, and he's still dealing with it.

Verse 28 really proves this to the very hilt. He says, "As concerning the gospel, they are enemies." Who are "they"? Well, it's the Israel about which he's speaking, and that is the nation of Israel as a whole. "As regards, as concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes." That doesn't include the Gentiles; that's Jews only. Indeed, it is not the total of the elect, both Jews and Gentiles. I think those three reasons are more than sufficient to exclude that interpretation altogether.

Let's look at the second interpretation. Some say that it means the total number of elect Jews. They say, "So all Israel shall be saved," like this: the apostle has already told us that even at the very beginning, he was a saved Jew, there was a remnant according to the election of grace. All right. And on it's gone ever since. A number of Jews—not many, unfortunately, but a number of Jews—have been saved from decade to decade and century to century. And they say this will go on right until the end of time, so that by when you come to the end, you will have a total number of saved Jews. "All Israel" is the sum total, the aggregate of all the individual Jews who have been saved throughout the running centuries.

Who's advocated this? Well, the great interpreter Bengel, he took this view. A great Dutch theologian, Herman Bavinck, contemporary of Abraham Kuyper, he taught this. Professor Hallesby, whose books you've read, many of you—"Why I Am a Christian" and so on—a Lutheran theologian in Norway, taught this. And a modern Lutheran American commentator of the name of Lenski teaches this.

Now, again, I'm going to reject this interpretation. Why? Well, for this reason: if that is all it means, well then I say it isn't a mystery. But the apostle tells us he's telling us a mystery. "I would not have you ignorant, brethren, of this mystery." This is a great mystery. This is prophetic utterance. This is something that has been revealed to him. Well, if it's just a question of a number of Jews, odd Jews now and again being converted and added to the church and that eventually there'll be a sum total of them—well, there's no mystery about that. We all know that. We don't need to be told that. That's something we can deduce for ourselves. So, the whole element of mystery has completely gone.

And that enough is enough in and of itself to exclude that interpretation. But let me give you some further reasons for excluding it. That interpretation doesn't seem to me to allow for the difference between the "now" and the "then" that the apostle has been putting before us right the way through. Look at it in verse 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 fulness?" If it's like this now, what will it be like then? Verse 15, same thing: "If the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?" Now and then.

You've got the same thing in verses 23 and 24. He says, "They also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in." He's talking about something that's going to happen, not something that is happening the whole time. He's contrasting the present with something that may take place. It's possible, he says in verse 23; in verse 24, it's probable because God has got the power. "How much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted in?" It's not something continuous; it is a distinct event, carrying with it the contrast between "now" and "then."

But I have an argument here which simply demolishes this interpretation completely, and it's got to be driven right out of court. What is it? It's this: that it completely fails to account for the argument of verses 12 and 15, and especially that great statement at the end of verse 15. Listen again: "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 fulness? If the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?"

You remember we interpreted this great hyperbole—this which is going to be so phenomenal, so amazing, it'll be literally like life from the dead, the most astounding thing that's ever happened. But this interpretation doesn't allow for that at all. An odd Jew converted today, another one tomorrow, and by the end of time, there'll be a certain sum total. But where's the phenomenon? Where's the life from the dead?

You see, it doesn't account for it at all. We've got to have an interpretation which gives us an understanding of this amazing, staggering phenomenon which is going to be comparable to life from the dead. So, I reject both those interpretations and suggest to you that the only valid and consistent interpretation is the one I've been suggesting to you all along, which is this: that he is referring here to something that is going to happen to the bulk of the nation of the Jews.

The "Israel" of verse 26 is the same Israel as in verse 25. It means the bulk of the Jews, the Jews as a whole. It doesn't mean every single Jew, remember, at a given point. It doesn't mean that at all. But it does mean this: it doesn't mean every pure-blooded Jew, but it does mean that those who have Jewish ancestors and those who cling persistently to the Jews' religion will as a whole have their eyes opened, the hardness will be removed, and they will believe and enter the Christian church. "All Israel," as we saw in verse 12 where it's put as "fullness," means the bulk of the Jewish race.

It means not all those, I say, who have pure Jewish blood in them—indeed you can't trace that at the present time, there's been so much intermarriage and so on, the thing is impossible. But it does mean this: the Jews who still separate themselves and worship after the tradition of the fathers and reject the gospel, they as a whole will become believers and they'll come in. And its effect upon the whole church will be comparable to life from the dead.

Very well, we must leave it at that this evening. But still, we're dealing with the mechanics of interpretation. Then we'll consider how he supports it with his prophetic quotations from the Old Testament, and then his argumentation to prove it. And then we shall be in a position to look at the statement as a whole. Let us pray.

O Lord our God, we come again into Thy holy presence, and we come with a sense of amazement and astonishment. O Lord, Thy ways are beyond searching. O the depths of the wisdom. O what can we say unto Thee, O Lord? We are conscious that we are treading on holy ground and that are looking at things that leave our natural minds baffled and stunned. And yet, O Lord, we thank Thee for the glory that comes through to us from it all, as we see that beyond, behind everything is Thy great and eternal plan and purpose, so that we say with the apostle that from Him and through Him and to Him are all things, who is over all, God blessed forever.

O God, receive our unworthy praise and thanksgiving. And now, may the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship and the communion of the Holy Spirit abide and continue with us, now this night, throughout the remainder of this our short, uncertain earthly life and pilgrimage, and evermore. Amen.