Israel's Election

[Drew]

I have encountered what I consider to be a compelling argument that God "elected" Israel to "act out the Christ pattern", in other words to be cast away for the sins of the world.

To give credit where it is due, I want to state clearly that this is not my own argument, but rather one put forward by British theologian NT Wright. But I do find his argument very compelling and what follows are mostly his ideas (as I understand them) as further commented on by me.

I think that this national election of Israel is what Paul is writing about in the "potter and clay" account in Romans 9:20-23. Although the foregoing text has largely been interpreted as the classic "predestination unto salvation or damnation" passage, I believe that it is nothing of the sort. Instead it is Paul's assertion that God has elected national Israel to be a "vessel fitted for destruction" - to be cast away for the sins of the world.

This is not to deny that Jesus Christ actually ends up bearing this terrible buren of election - He does. And, as is often the case, God does things in a surprising way. But He is always true to his word, even if we only come to see that in hindsight. In this vein, I think that a theme that undergirds all of Romans is the argument that in all that God has done, up to and including the death and resurrection of Jesus, God has been faithful to His covenant with Abraham - a covenant whose principle purpose was to solve the "Adam problem" - to defeat sin and death.

In very brief overview, these are some of the points that I hope to address more fully in this thread:

1. One of the reason why God gave the Law to Israel is to cause national Israel to become even more sinful. At first glance, this does not sound like something that a loving and righteous God would do. But first glances are just that - first glances. I submit that this reason for the giving of the Law can be shown to be part of a great and loving plan for the redemption of all mankind.

2. God's working in history is far more integrated and inter-connected than we generally think. The story of Israel living under the Law is not merely some kind of "example" of how we cannot achieve salvation by works - instead national Israel was always an integral and necessary part of God's plan to solve the problem of sin. The entire plan of redemption - beginning with the establishment of the covenant in Genesis 15 - is "cruciform" (cross-shaped). I plan to draw on texts from other Pauline epistles to substantiate this claim. The cross is not merely "inerted" into the middle of a history of national Israel that is otherwise not really connected to God's redemptive action in the world.

3. Sin is not an abstract "category" but rather a deeply physical quantity that must be destroyed in what is much more of a "physical" manner than we usually think. Atonement is not achieved "in the air" in some kind of abstract "spiritual" domain, but rather is achieved by God "cornering" sin in the very flesh of Christ and then condemning it. I like to think that this perspective takes "sin" seriously, includings its infection of our very physicality, and does not treat it as a vague spiritual category.

4. Jesus is Israel's truly representative Messiah - He fulfills Israel's destiny to bear the sin of the world, when national Israel cannot carry out this task. This is not a change of plans on God's part however - to use the words of NT Wright: "incarnation was in view from the start".

 

[Drew]

In Romans 5:20, we have what seems like a very curious statement from Paul (my emphasis - obviously):

"The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more."

And in Romans 7:13, Paul writes (my emphasis):

"Therefore did that which is good become a cause of death for me? (Y)May it never be! Rather it was sin, in order that it might be shown to be sin by effecting my death through that which is good, so that through the commandment sin would become utterly sinful"

This probably seems as puzzling to many as it has seemed to me. It almost seems that God is intentionally trying to increase the sin of Israel by giving them the Law. This does not seem like the act of a good God, at least on a superficial analysis.

The use of the phrases "in order that" and "so that" suggest divine intention and purpose. But surely God cannot be doing something to make Israel even more sinful? On NT Wright's view, this is indeed exactly what God is, in fact, doing.

That this makes sense can be seen from a consideration of Romans 8:3:

For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh

How has sin been dealt with? It has been condemned. Where has it been condemned? In the flesh.

We have a funny way of talking about sin. On the one hand, we believe that Adam's sin spread to us, presumably through our genetic connection to Him. On the other, we also tend to think of sin as some kind of spiritual quantity which can be defeated "in the air" somewhere - in some vague "spiritual domain".

Perhaps we ought to take the physicality of sin more seriously - after all, we speak of sin being "in our very nature" and we talk of sin as something we "inherited" from Adam. I suggest that the very nature of sin is that it literally needs to be "cornered" physically - brought together in one place. And Paul tells us where that place was - in the flesh of the faithful Israelite Jesus.

On such a "physical" view of sin, it is entirely coherent to see national Israel as being the place where God begins the process of gathering the world's sin together in one place by first concentrating it on national Israel. This, I suggest, is the election that Paul writes about in Romans 9 - Israel is elected to be a vessel of destruction.

This way of conceptualizing things makes the overall covenant plan seem more coherent and less fragmented. Israel is indeed deeply involved in God's redemptive plan, as I believe the covenant promised. She is not merely an "example" that is subsiduary to the plan of cross - she is part of it.

 

[stranger]

Drew wrote/ quoted Wright:

I think that this national election of Israel is what Paul is writing about in the "potter and clay" account in Romans 9:20-23. Although the foregoing text has largely been interpreted as the classic "predestination unto salvation or damnation" passage, I believe that it is nothing of the sort. Instead it is Paul's assertion that God has elected national Israel to be a "vessel fitted for destruction" - to be cast away for the sins of the world.

Hi Drew,

At the moment I am not sure if Wright intends that the destruction of Israel was to be permanent or that in judgment God would remember mercy.

There are a number of outstanding issues that need to be resolved if Israel's destruction was permanent:
1. There would only be prophesy concerning destruction.
2. All other prophesy's concerning restoration would have to be proven to be fulfilled.
3. Present day resurrection of Israel needs to be explained.
4. Jerusalem still exists and is the focal point of much emnity.
5. In both old and new covenants there is hope and provision for the repentance of Israel.

It can be argued that Israel still has a purpose for the church that has not been fulfilled. Israel and the church have a co-dependancy in God's purpose. If the church is destroyed - and this is a demonic aim - the Kingdom of God cannot ever be consumated. If Israel is destroyed - without being resurrected - then the church cannot reach the end of the age.

It probably makes more sense to talk about the Messianic Church than the nation of Israel. But for all prophesy to be fulfilled the remant surviving destruction would be saved.

 

[Drew]

At the moment I am not sure if Wright intends that the destruction of Israel was to be permanent or that in judgment God would remember mercy.

As I said in previous posts in this thread, although perhaps not as clearly as I might have, Jesus stands in for Israel and actually bears the punishment for the world's sin. So I (Wright?) am not saying that God actually destroys Israel, but rather that she acts out the Christ to a point - she is the place where the sin of the world gets "accumulated" through the effect of the Law, but Jesus ultimately pays the price. So Wright is basically saying that Israel escapes the awful stroke which falls on Jesus.

 

[stranger]

At the moment I am not sure if Wright intends that the destruction of Israel was to be permanent or that in judgment God would remember mercy.

As I said in previous posts in this thread, although perhaps not as clearly as I might have, Jesus stands in for Israel and actually bears the punishment for the world's sin. So I (Wright?) am not saying that God actually destroys Israel, but rather that she acts out the Christ to a point - she is the place where the sin of the world gets "accumulated" through the effect of the Law, but Jesus ultimately pays the price. So Wright is basically saying that Israel escapes the awful stroke which falls on Jesus.

Hi Drew,

While there is such a sin a national sin - it does not abrogate individual sin. Insofar as judgment begins with the household of God - yes Israel's is in a bad way since it remains unrepentant. While the opportunity for a national repentance is possible - it has not happened yet. Therefore it is reasonable that Israel's sin are upon Israel's head as a nation.

The other point you (Wright) make is about Israel bearing the punishment for the world's sin. One of the key features of Israel's guilt occurred when Jesus was being tried by Pilate - the crowd yelled out 'His blood be upon us and upon our descendants' when Pilate tried to exonerate Jesus. So instead of saying Israel escapes the awful stroke (which falls on Jesus) I would think the history of Israel would be sufficient to convince anyone that Israel has not historically escaped anything of the awful stroke. I am more incline to believe Israel has received twice the awful stroke - you have to take into account the covenant curses. . . which I think resulted in the Holocaust as a recent event - persecution of jews is a theme through out history.

Again- a strange sort of logic is offered here - the awful histroically repeated strokes suggest to me that God is still jealous over Israel.

 

[Drew]

Hello stranger:

I think I agree with everything in your post and see no conflict between what I (effectively Wright) am saying and what you say.

 

[stranger]

Drew wrote:

I have encountered what I consider to be a compelling argument that God "elected" Israel to "act out the Christ pattern", in other words to be cast away for the sins of the world.

I think that this national election of Israel is what Paul is writing about in the "potter and clay" account in Romans 9:20-23. Although the foregoing text has largely been interpreted as the classic "predestination unto salvation or damnation" passage, I believe that it is nothing of the sort. Instead it is Paul's assertion that God has elected national Israel to be a "vessel fitted for destruction" - to be cast away for the sins of the world.

This is not to deny that Jesus Christ actually ends up bearing this terrible buren of election - He does. And, as is often the case, God does things in a surprising way. But He is always true to his word, even if we only come to see that in hindsight. In this vein, I think that a theme that undergirds all of Romans is the argument that in all that God has done, up to and including the death and resurrection of Jesus, God has been faithful to His covenant with Abraham - a covenant whose principle purpose was to solve the "Adam problem" - to defeat sin and death.

In very brief overview, these are some of the points that I hope to address more fully in this thread:

1. One of the reason why God gave the Law to Israel is to cause national Israel to become even more sinful. At first glance, this does not sound like something that a loving and righteous God would do. But first glances are just that - first glances. I submit that this reason for the giving of the Law can be shown to be part of a great and loving plan for the redemption of all mankind.

2. God's working in history is far more integrated and inter-connected than we generally think. The story of Israel living under the Law is not merely some kind of "example" of how we cannot achieve salvation by works - instead national Israel was always an integral and necessary part of God's plan to solve the problem of sin. The entire plan of redemption - beginning with the establishment of the covenant in Genesis 15 - is "cruciform" (cross-shaped). I plan to draw on texts from other Pauline epistles to substantiate this claim. The cross is not merely "inerted" into the middle of a history of national Israel that is otherwise not really connected to God's redemptive action in the world.

3. Sin is not an abstract "category" but rather a deeply physical quantity that must be destroyed in what is much more of a "physical" manner than we usually think. Atonement is not achieved "in the air" in some kind of abstract "spiritual" domain, but rather is achieved by God "cornering" sin in the very flesh of Christ and then condemning it. I like to think that this perspective takes "sin" seriously, includings its infection of our very physicality, and does not treat it as a vague spiritual category.

4. Jesus is Israel's truly representative Messiah - He fulfills Israel's destiny to bear the sin of the world, when national Israel cannot carry out this task. This is not a change of plans on God's part however - to use the words of NT Wright: "incarnation was in view from the start".

The birth of Israel is found in the promise to Abraham that God would give him land and descendants. While the history of Israel can be viewed from many perspectives unless we include 'covenant' then the history of Israel can take on overly Christian concerns. God made a covenant first with Abraham, and as a result of the promise to Abraham - then also to his descendants. The sins of Israel invite the covenant curses of God upon the nation. The obedience of Israel ensure that God's covenant blessing attends Israel. In the national rejection of Jesus as Messiah Israel is still in a covenant relationship with God. This is not to say that all Jews reject the Messiah - there are increasing numbers of Messianic Jews - but the marjority are blinded - I agree that sin blinds as you have stated - but it (sin) blinds irrespective of nationality while at the same time recognses that blindness that has come upon Israel for the sake of the Gentiles.

So, in what way does Wright speak about 'covenant blessings and curses' and their impact for Israel as a nation?