Understanding Romans 11:26 as GRAFTED IN ISRAEL

32,790,364 articles and books Periodicals Literature Search Keyword Title Author Topic Understanding Romans 11:26: Baptist perspectives. Link/Page Citation A New Testament scholar would be hard-pressed to find a passage within the corpus of Paul that is more difficult to understand than the words concerning the salvation of Israel in Romans 11:26. Biblical scholars have made numerous attempts to understand Paul's own view. It appears that the conservative nature of Baptists in general and Southern Baptists in particular has produced as much silence as scholarship on the nature of salvation as it pertains to Jews and Gentiles particularly in Romans 9-11. The significance of this passage as it pertains to Jewish-Christian dialogue is enormous. Therefore, it seems appropriate that an exegetical article on Romans 11:26 appear in Baptist History and Heritage as it addresses Baptist-Jewish relations. This article, then, will attempt to examine Romans 11:26 based on an understanding of Paul's use of the Abraham motif in Romans, drawing from the general scholarship on the issue. When Romans 11:26 is examined, the views of several Baptist scholars will be included. I will then offer my own conclusions on both Romans 11:26 and Baptist-Jewish relations. The Purpose of Romans Paul's letter to the Romans was written sometime in the mid- to late-50s A. D. to a congregation he had neither founded nor visited. The place of origin was probably Corinth. (1) Paul's purpose for this letter has generally been viewed as two-fold: (1) to commend himself to the congregation in hope of their support for a missionary endeavor to new regions so Paul could continue his attempt to reach the Gentiles (1:8-15), and (2) to offer an apology in terms of issuing a statement of the meaning of the gospel in light of the Jewish faith (1:16-17). Joseph Fitzmeyer noted that many scholars have viewed Romans as something akin to Paul's last will and testament. Fitzmeyer, however, argued that such a position is weak due to the absence of any teachings on ecclesiology, the Eucharist, or eschatology. (2) If Paul's purpose were to give the reader an argument concerning justification by faith, then the movement of the letter should be driven by this doctrinal concern. If, however, the movement of the letter is concerned with the history of God, then this might explain why Paul continually referred to the Jews as the chosen people of God (Rom. 3:1-8; Rom. 9-11). (3) The history of Israel is highlighted throughout the document and includes references to creation, Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, circumcision, Moses, the Law, Elijah, and Isaiah. Paul quoted the Hebrew Bible fifty-three times and made as many as twenty-four allusions to it. (4) Paul's reference to circumcision having "much value" in Romans 3:2 seems out of place if Paul's purpose is to argue justification by faith, as does Paul's positive reference to the law in Romans 7:7-13. Paul's concern for Israel flows out of his own Jewishness. It is wrong to view Paul as one who stands in opposition to Judaism. In fact, it is anachronistic to read Romans through a lens that separates Judaism and the followers of Jesus. (5) When does this separation between Jew and Christian begin? How can it be characterized? What are the implications of the tension between the Jews and the early Christians? Paul is attempting to define Israel in light of the Gentile inclusion in the kingdom of God. It is not necessary, then, for Paul to posit the permanent exclusion of Israel in order to include the Gentiles. This type of reading of Romans ignores Paul's historical situation. As Paul writes to the church in Rome, one question must be addressed: What is the basis of salvation for the Jews? Whether this is a burning issue for the church in Rome cannot be determined. It does appear, however, that it is an important issue for Paul. Since Paul began these chapters with a reference to Abraham, Paul's argument concerning Abraham in Romans 4 may well serve as an important interpretive tool for understanding Romans 9-11. Romans 4 In Romans 4, Paul attempted to show that Abraham, the father of Judaism, is also the father of those who have faith in Christ. Next to Moses, Abraham is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other character from the Hebrew Bible, appearing seventy-two times in eleven different New Testament books. Paul used Abraham in the discussion of faith and works both in Romans 4 and Galatians 3. The key text from the story of Abraham for Paul is Genesis 15:6. James D. G. Dunn refers to Paul's exposition of Genesis 15:6 as "one of the finest examples of Jewish midrash available to us from this era." (6) Paul displayed a radical revision of the exegetical tradition by arguing that Abraham could not be found righteous on the basis of works because his righteousness would have been earned like a wage, a payment due to the one who had earned it. Therefore, it is the one who does not work but has faith in God who is reckoned as righteous. (7) Paul offered a method of interpretation known as gezerah shavah (an equivalent regulation) in which an inference is drawn from an analogy elsewhere. (8) Paul took the word reckon and found its meaning in a second quotation from Psalm 32:1-2, "Blessed are those whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the one against whom the Lord will not reckon sin" (NRSV). (9) The righteousness "reckoned" to Abraham can be explained by Psalm 32. Paul argued that "reckoning" and "not reckoning" are not a matter of balancing good deeds and bad deeds, but instead a matter of forgiveness and reconciliation. E. F. Sanders noted that Paul chose his words carefully, using phrases like "Jews" (3:29), "the circumcision" (3:30, 4:9,12), and "of the law" (4:14,16) to focus his comments on the issue of status and not religious behavior in an attempt to place Jews and Gentiles on the same level by claiming Abraham as the father of all true believers. In Romans 1-4, Paul continually stressed that all persons are transgressors, and he objected to the idea that righteousness comes through the law. (10) Was Paul successful in his attempt to convince the Jews that righteousness was by faith alone? Richard Longenecker noted that Paul's Jewish audience would have insisted that Genesis 15:6 be read with Genesis 17:4-14 because of the understanding in Judaism that truth appears in two forms, an elemental form and a developed form. In bringing these two passages together, the truth is understood in its fullness. Thus, the elemental statement of faith in Genesis 15:6 finds its completion in the insistence on circumcision in Genesis 17:4-14. (11) Instead of ignoring Genesis 17, Paul boldly quoted Genesis 17:5, "I have made you a father of many nations." He used Genesis 15:6 and 17:5 to make his argument that Abraham is the father of both the Jews and the Gentiles and added to this argument in Romans 4:18 by quoting Genesis 15:5, "So numerous shall your descendants be." According to Paul, the promise to Abraham supported his claim that the gospel of salvation to the Gentiles comes apart from the law. It is a promise based on Abraham's faith--not on works of the law. Paul concluded his argument by returning to Genesis 15:6 in Romans 4:22-23, reminding the reader that Abraham's faith "was reckoned to him as righteousness." For Paul, this referred not only to Abraham but also to those who believe "in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead." Paul's argument seems clear: faith is as old as Abraham. The expression of faith that is found in the new religious communities that follow Jesus' teachings is no different from the expression of faith of Abraham as witnessed to in the text of Genesis. It is not too much to conclude that those who approach God through faith are those who can be referred to as Israel-not an old Israel or a new Israel--simply Israel. Romans 9-11 Before examining Paul's words in Romans 9-11, it is helpful to remember Romans 1:16-17 where Paul stated that the gospel is "the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek," and "the one who is righteous will live by faith." The words of assurance of God's faithfulness to the Jews in Romans 3:1-8 are an important reminder to the Romans that Paul does not believe the God of Israel has abandoned the covenant with God's people. The faithfulness of God is not weakened by any unfaithful response as attested to throughout the Hebrew Bible. Romans 9-11 appears to be the climax of Paul's letter. The words contained in these chapters address an issue that caused Paul much pain: the failure of the Israelites to embrace the gospel message. The rejection of the gospel message by Israel was a mystery to Paul. Yet, Paul did not see Israel as cut off from God. Instead, he affirmed Israel's place in God's salvation history and used words like adoption, covenant, and law to convey this to his readers. The use of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses in Romans 9-11 is paralleled in 4 Ezra 3:13 ff. Each of these figures was significant for Paul in the figure's own right, but their ultimate importance related back to the initial covenant with Abraham. Abraham Outside of the seven references to Abraham in Romans 4, Paul only mentioned Abraham two times in Romans 9-11 (9:7; 11:1), and he alluded to him twice (9:5; 11:28). Whereas, Paul's words in Romans 4 were addressed primarily to Jewish Christians in an attempt to explain the Gentile inclusion through faith, Paul appeared to address the Gentiles in the Roman church in Romans 9-11 to remind them that Israel has received God's promise through Abraham and his descendants, a promise that God will not break. This covenant, however, is not based on the flesh but instead on God's promise. Isaac Paul's explanation in 9:7 is essential to understand God's promise. C. K. Barrett translated verse seven, "Nor are all the children of Abraham counted as his seed; rather, as Scripture says, 'Your descendants through Isaac shall be called your seed'" (12) Again, it was through the promise of God that Abraham and Sarah were blessed with Isaac. This does not deny that Ishmael was a child of Abraham. It only reminded the reader that Isaac was the child of promise, thus the "seed." The use of "seed" seems to correspond to Paul's use in Romans 4 as well as Galatians 3, where Paul used the term to focus on Christ, the descendant of the promise made to Abraham that comes down through the patriarchs. Paul chose not to mention the blessing on Ishmael in Genesis 21:13,18. Paul was interested in the promise of God to Abraham, which continued through Isaac. Jacob The example of Jacob and Esau was intended to clarify Paul's understanding of God's ability to choose freely not on the basis of flesh but divine prerogative. Paul continued in 9:14-29 to defend God's freedom to choose in a way that promotes God's mercy. The quotation of Malachi 1:2-3 fitted Paul's purpose in explaining God's divine prerogative to choose those who will carry the covenant forward through the ages. The hatred of Esau was not a reflection on Esau's ultimate destiny. Instead, it was simply a way to indicate that Esau was not the one through whom God's promise would be traced. The blessing to Jacob and not Esau seems strange, especially when Jacob's life is examined. The writer of Genesis chronicles well the stories of Jacob and his deceit toward almost everyone he meets. The reader is left to wonder if Esau could not have done a better job than Jacob in carrying forward God's promise. The issue for Paul is God's ability to make choices not based on the flesh or any predetermined formula that limits God. In the case of Jacob, as well as Isaac, it was not the firstborn that was blessed with God's promise. Paul did not feel the need to explain God's choices. He noted the mystery that surrounds God's actions and used this idea of mystery to explain the inclusion of the Gentiles and Israel in the kingdom. Paul's ultimate goal was to show that God's mercy is for all people. The exclusion of Ishmael and Esau was not an eschatological exclusion; it was only an indication that the covenant that finds its fulfillment in Christ is not traced through them. Moses Paul cited the words of the Lord to Moses as recorded in Leviticus 18:5, "The person who does these things will live by them." Paul understood the law to be the path by which God granted to the Israelites a meaningful life. He did not state that obedience to the law makes one fully righteous before God in an eschatological sense. Mentioning Moses and the law must be understood in the context in which Paul wrote. For Paul, a Jew, to exclude the law as having no value would challenge the foundation of Judaism. Paul affirmed the law as the expression of the covenant between Israel and God. God's righteousness, then, is expressed in the law. Paul did not say that the law is a means of obtaining righteousness. Romans 3-4 explicitly stated that God's righteousness comes through faith. The use of this passage from Leviticus is perplexing, especially when it is followed by Deuteronomy 30:11-14, a passage that Paul did not interpret as applying to the law but to Christ. Deuteronomy 30:11-14 states: Surely, this commandment that I am commanding you today is not too hard for you, nor is it too far away. It is not in heaven, that you should say, "Who will go up to heaven for us, and get it for us so that we may hear it and observe it?" Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, "Who will cross to the other side of the sea for us, and get it for us so that he may hear it and observe it?" No, the word is very near to you; it is in your mouth and in your heart for you to observe. Paul's insertion of Christ in the text of Romans shows that Paul felt free to use parts of this Hebrew text as a means of support for his argument concerning Christ and the ability to understand his message. From this citation, Paul moved to a statement of what constitutes faith: the confession with the mouth that "Jesus is Lord" and the belief in one's heart that "God raised him from the dead." It may appear that Paul was contrasting the law and faith. It is more probable that Paul simply wanted to complete the Abraham-Isaac-Jacob-Moses motif and did so in a hurried fashion. Fitzmeyer noted the difficulty of Paul's thoughts in this passage: "The problem is to understand his logic, if there is any." (13) Salvation for All Before examining Romans 11:26, it is important to note Paul's preceding words concerning the salvation of Israel. In Romans 10:18-21, Paul appealed to the Hebrew Bible to present his present understanding of the situation of the Jews and Gentiles. Paul quoted from Deuteronomy 32:21: "I will make you jealous of those who are not a nation; with a foolish nation I will make you angry." He followed with a quote from Isaiah 65:1: "I have been found by those who did not seek me; I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me." Paul applied this verse to the Gentiles, then applied Isaiah 65:2 to Israel: "All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people." Paul's use of Second Isaiah pointed to a hope that goes well beyond any exclusive understanding of the covenant. As the Gentiles have responded to God through faith, the Jews have refused to do so. Paul has stated clearly his case for the inclusion of the Gentiles. Paul must now address both the present and the future. What will happen next? As Paul reflected on what will take place in the future, he again turned to the Hebrew Bible. Baptist Perspectives on Romans 11:26 Paul began with a question and answer in Romans 11:1: "Has God rejected his people? By no means!" Paul stated that a remnant existed that has been chosen by grace. Israel's stumbling had led to the inclusion of the Gentiles. Paul declared that his mission to the Gentiles also served the purpose of making his own people jealous so that they will respond out of that jealously and be saved. He then illustrated his point in 11:17-24 by using an analogy of an olive tree in which certain branches had been broken off and wild shoots had been grafted into the tree. Then, by pressing the analogy beyond what seems possible, Paul gave the reader an image of the original branches being grafted back onto the tree. F.F. Bruce, a conservative scholar whose work has influenced many Baptist scholars, noted that the analogy of the olive branch "snaps completely" when Paul suggested that the original branches that were cut off by God from the olive tree can be reattached by God. It is just such a miracle in the spiritual realm that Paul expected and announced in 11:26. According to Bruce, Paul saw himself as an agent of eschatological significance in that his mission to the Gentiles had created the jealousy in Israel that would eventually lead to their inclusion. Bruce saw the emphasis on mercy for both Jew and Gentile as the main point of Paul's disclosure. (14) In Romans 11:25-26, Paul declared a "mystery" to the reader: A hardening has come upon part of Israel, until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved; as it is written, "Out of Zion will come the Deliverer; he will banish ungodliness from Jacob." And this is my covenant with them, when I take away their sins. How should this mystery be solved? What did Paul mean when he declared that "all Israel shall be saved?" This article will examine the understanding of various Baptists as to what Paul meant in Romans 11:26. Millard Erickson Millard Erickson distinguished between the spiritual Israel and the literal Israel and based his understanding of the two in Romans 2:28-29. Paul made the distinction between those who are circumcised outwardly and those whose circumcision is inward. Israel's salvation, according to Erickson, will be like the salvation of the Gentiles. Israel, then, will be saved by entering the church. According to Erickson, "There is no statement anywhere in the New Testament that there is any other basis of salvation." For Erickson, the church is the new Israel and occupies the place in the new covenant that Israel occupied in the old covenant. (15) It is this spiritual Israel that receives the grace of God--an Israel that accepts the terms of the new covenant. George Beasley-Murray George Beasley-Murray noted that many have read Romans 11:26 as a "most favored nation clause in the new covenant." (16) He understood the emphasis to be not simply mercy for Israel, but mercy for all as stated in 11:32. This, according to Beasley-Murray, was a rebuttal of the idea that when all the nations turn to God, the nation through which they came to God will be absent. It is this idea of mercy for all that Paul addressed in the doxology in 11:33-36. In the end, it is God's mystery that Paul recited and not a deduction of his own. (17) Beasley-Murray stated that the church has withheld the blessing of salvation from Israel and instead replaced it with the "sword of the Gentiles" that has led to anti-Semitism through the centuries. (18) The focus, then, should be placed on Romans 11:32 in which God "has predestined 'all' to wrath and 'all' to mercy." (19) Does Beasley-Murray, then, believe Paul was making a universal claim of salvation for all? This is not to be taken as an assertion of unqualified universalism, in the technical, theological sense of the term, but is strictly to be related to the "universe of discourse" in these chapters. On the other hand, it clearly qualifies all that Paul has written in chapters 9-11 to this point, for it forms the conclusion to the entire discussion. (20) Both the elect and the nonelect function in salvation history. The nonelect's service to God results in the furtherance of God's mercy to the world. In return, these nonelect will find mercy. (21) Dale Moody In his book, The Hope of Glory, Dale Moody focused on Paul's words in Romans 9:6, "For not all Israelites truly belong to Israel." For Moody, the reference to the full inclusion of Israel in 11:12 and the full number of Gentiles in 11:25 must be understood in Paul's doctrine of election. This led Moody to believe that all the elect would come to Christ through the missionary activity of the church, both Jew and Gentile. Moody argued that Paul was no universalist but rather a missionary. (22) Moody reproduced this same argument in his later work The Word of Truth: A Summary of Christian Doctrine Based on Biblical Revelation. The only change from his words in The Hope of Glory is that the passage in The Word of Truth contains a critique of C. H. Dodd's position. Moody noted that Dodd's realized eschatology insisted that "all Israel" refers to Israel as a historic nation. When historic Israel is then combined with the full number of Gentiles, then Paul's position, according to Dodd, is clearly that of a universalist. Moody noted that this view required a future eschatological outlook that is at odds with Dodd's realized eschatology. (23) Moody gave this passage a more complete treatment in the Broadman Bible Commentary on Romans. Moody made reference to universalism as an idea that existed as early as Origen in the third century, but again concluded that "all Israel" referred to a "collective conversion that does not include every individual Israelite." (24) His reflection on Romans 11:32 led Moody to clarify his position. Moody noted that both Gentiles and Jews may receive God's mercy. It does not mean, however, that all shall receive it. (25) Charles Talbert In his article, "Paul on the Covenant," Charles Talbert noted that the theme of Romans is the righteousness of God. Paul, then, wanted to connect the covenant of Abraham to the current situation in which he found himself. Talbert saw Paul as offering in the person of Abraham an example of faith for both Jew and Gentile. Israel's rejection of the idea of righteousness through faith as expressed in Romans 9:30-10:21 is unfortunate. Paul, however, showed that God's faithfulness went beyond Israel's rejection. In 11:1-13, Paul acknowledged that God does not reject Israel even after being rejected. Talbert noted, "When the full number of Gentiles has entered, then the whole of Israel will be included." (26) In a footnote, Talbert explained that he followed the view of Francois Refoule that Paul's phrase "all Israel" refers to "all pious Jews who, before the announcement of the gospel could be considered as constituting the remnant, that is, the Israel of the election. " (27) In his recently published commentary on Romans, Talbert gave four possibilities as to what "all Israel" means: (1) every Israelite or every living Jew; (2) the elect Jews who believed in Christ during the gospel era; (3) the church-Jews and Gentiles who follow Christ; and (4) corporate Israel in contrast to a remnant and in contrast to each individual Israelite. Talbert believes that "all Israel" referred to corporate Israel (option four). He noted that in several Jewish texts the reference to "all Israel" is followed by an explanation of individual Israelites who will be excluded from the age to come. (28) For Talbert, this salvation, which will occur in the future, is through God's righteousness as revealed in Jesus. He noted that Paul continually rejected Jewish legalism throughout the letter. For Talbert, it was inconceivable that Paul could have reinstated ethnicity, the Sinai covenant, and righteousness by the law. Israel, then, referred to those who come to believe in Christ by whatever means. For Talbert, "all Israel" is the counterpart of "the full number of Gentiles." (29) Conclusion Paul compared the mercy that Israel will receive to the mercy the Gentiles have just received. According to Paul, God's desire is to be merciful to all. The remnant of Israel in 11:5 has now become "all Israel" in 11:26. Is Paul referring to "ethnic Israel" or did the term represent an "Israel of faith?" Paul's expression here, pas Israe-I is a Hebraism for kol-Yis 'ra-'e-l, which occurs 148 times in the Hebrew Bible and always designates the Israel that is ethnic and historic. It appears to be used diachronically because of the eschatological sense of the future tense of the verb "shall be saved" (so-the-setai). The salvation of Israel, then, refers to "the remnant" in 11:5, "the chosen ones" in 11:7, and "the others" in 11:77. (30) Paul's final words in this section appear to carry the most force. His reminder of Israel's election by God seems to carry the argument, especially the reminder in 11:29 that "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." Paul created a problem for his thesis concerning justification by faith, but he solved a greater problem by arguing that the present state of Israel is not permanent but rather a part of the salvation history of God. (31) Any attempt to find a logical solution to the issue of the salvation of Israel in Paul's letter to the Romans will fail. The "mystery" of which Paul spoke must remain a mystery. What is not a mystery is God's steadfast love that resounds throughout the Hebrew Bible. The cycle of sin, oppression, repentance, and deliverance found in Judges can also be found in the Psalms as well as the words of the Prophets. Is this not the same message that Paul was attempting to convey in his letter to the Romans? It seems, then, that Paul's final words are the most important in this passage: that all Israel shall be saved, and that God desires to be merciful to all. Whereas Paul's style of argumentation may be difficult to understand, God's covenant with Israel is not. Most Baptists get tangled in Paul's argument and neglect his conclusion. The strong Baptist position against universalism leads most Baptists to draw some type of conclusion from this passage that limits the salvation of Israel. Paul certainly provided opportunity to do so, and many Baptists, for whatever reason, take it. For any serious and substantive dialogue to occur between Jews and Baptists, the focus of the dialogue must be centered on Paul's ideas of "mercy" and "mystery." Is this possible? Some Baptists are currently involved in this type of dialogue. They have set aside the issue of conversion to understand more clearly the Jewish idea of covenant as expressed in Hebrew Scriptures. Such dialogue is needed now more than ever. It is only fitting to give the last word to Paul: 0 the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! "For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?.... Or who has given a gift to him, to receive a gift in return?" For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be the glory forever. Amen (Rom. 11:33-36). (1.) For a discussion of authorship and date, see James D. G. Dunn, Romans, in Word Biblical Commentary, 38a (Dallas: Word Publishers, 1988), xxxix-xliv. (2.) Joseph Fitzmeyer, Romans, in The Anchor Bible, 33 (New York: Doubleday, 1993), 74. (3.) Paul Achtemeier, Romans, in Interpretation (Louisville: John Knox Press, 1985), 7-15. (4.) See E. Earle Ellis, Paul's Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1957), 150-51. (5.) See Jeffrey Siker, Disinheriting the Jews: Abraham in Early Christian Controversy (Westminster/John Knox Press, 1991), 14.(6.) Dunn, 195. (7.) William Baird, "Abraham in the New Testament," Interpretation 42 (1988), 375-76. (8.) E. Earle Ellis, The Old Testament in Early Christianity (Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1991), 87. This is the second of seven exegetical rules expounded by Hillel. (9.) All Scripture references are from the New Revised Standard Version. Used by permission. (10.) E. P. Sanders, Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1983), 35-37. (11.) Richard Longenecker, "The 'Faith of Abraham' Theme in Paul, James, and Hebrews: A Study in the Circumstantial Nature of New Testament Teaching," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 20 (1977): 205. (12.) C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1957), 180. (13.) Fitzmeyer, 588. (14.) F. F. Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1977), 333-36. (15.) Millard Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1988), 1053. (16.) George Beasley-Murray, "The Righteousness of God in the History of Israel and the Nations: Romans 9-11," Review and Expositor 73 (Fall, 1976): 436. (17.) Ibid., 445-46. (18.) Ibid., 447. (19.) Ibid., 448. (20.) Ibid., 450. (21.) Ibid. (22.) Dale Moody, The Hope of Glory (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1964), 167-68. (23.) Dale Moody, The Word of Truth: A Summary of Christian Doctrine Based on Biblical Revelation (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1981), 537-38. (24.) Dale Moody, Romans, vol. 10 of The Broadman Bible Commentary (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1970), 245. (25.) Ibid., 246. The italics are Moody's. (26.) Charles Talbert, "Paul on the Covenant," Review and Expositor 84 (1987): 302-03. (27.) Ibid., 311. (28.) Charles Talbert, "Romans," Smyth and Helwys Bible Commentary (Macon, Ga.: Smyth and Helwys Publishing, 2002), 263-65. (29.) Ibid., 266-67. (30.) Fitzmeyer, 623. Dodd noted Paul's inconsistent argument is difficult to understand but is swayed by 11:29 where Paul stated "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." (31.) Fitzmeyer, 626. Toby Ziglar is assistant professor of religion, Carson-Newman College, Jefferson City, Tennessee. COPYRIGHT 2003 Baptist History and Heritage Society No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder. Copyright 2003, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company. Please bookmark with social media, your votes are noticed and appreciated: Article Details Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback Author: Ziglar, Toby Publication: Baptist History and Heritage Geographic Code: 7ISRA Date: Mar 22, 2003 Words: 5100 Previous Article: Baptist-Jewish relations: some observations from a German point of view. Next Article: Southern Baptists abroad: sharing the faith in nineteenth-century Brazil. Topics: Baptists Beliefs, opinions and attitudes Sacred books Criticism and interpretation Related Articles Christian spirituality and the quest for identity: toward a spiritual-theological understanding of life in Christ (1): we live in a "spiritual" era.... Southern Baptists and millennialism, 1900-2000: conceptual patterns and historical expressions. Baptist contributions to liberalism. Baptists and liberation theology: Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. Baptists and liberation theology in South America. Conversing in Christian style: toward a Baptist theological method for the postmodern context (1). Baptists and baptism--a British perspective (1). What "Being Baptist" meant for Southern Baptists during World War II. Youth for Calvin: reformed theology and baptist collegians: a few years ago a fellow employee at a Baptist college decided to enter the pastorate. He... Baptists and "Calvinism": discerning the shape of the question: Baptists and "Calvinism" is an important topic. Much is at stake, if for no other... The Free Library > Humanities > History > Baptist History and Heritage > March 22, 2003 The Free Library > Humanities > Philosophy and religion > Baptist History and Heritage > March 22, 2003 The Free Library > Date >  2003 >  March >  22 >  Baptist History and Heritage Publications by Name Publications by Date Authors Literature A-D E-O P-T U-Z before 1995 1995-1999 2000-2004 2005-2009 2010- A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2018 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters