# Enemies to the gospel?



## fralo4truth (Jun 16, 2010)

Can someone please render me some assistance with this passage in Romans?

"As concerning the gospel, [they are] enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, [they are] beloved for the fathers' sakes" (11:28)

Surely it is not teaching that some of God's elect are enemies to the gospel! I'm struggling with this passage.

Thanks for your help.


----------



## Poimen (Jun 16, 2010)

God's elect can be enemies to the gospel before they are converted e.g. Saul -> Paul. Paul tells us here that "all Israel" will be saved (future tense) which, I believe, means that in the future those amongst Israel who have fallen away will be ingrafted again in God's merciful plan of salvation. This will occur because of God's plan of election (cf. Romans 11:5ff.)


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jun 16, 2010)

As the Romans context shows, God in his providence has left a great number of the old physical-seed of Abraham out of election-unto-salvation. The open division that God revealed between outward identification and inward grace among Israelites shows the majority of them are now *enemies of the gospel*.

"For your sakes" coincides with Paul's exposition explaining the treasures of grace dispersed to the Gentiles on account of the rejection of the same by those to whom it first was offered. In other words,, they are enemies to the gospel so that in God's economy you Gentiles may become his friends.

But no less, there are still among that heritage, now filled so generally with animosity for Christ, Christians, and the gospel, nevertheless members who are elect-unto-salvation. For those among them who are elect, "they are beloved for their father's sake." In other words,, just because the majority have become open enemies of Christ, God has not abandoned an entire nation for that reason--refusing to elect further from them because of this blatant rage. No, but because of his promises to the fathers, God will never cut off a stream of those shown mercy flowing from the seed-of-Abraham after the flesh.

That is to say, the observation that "not all Israel are of Israel" held then, in days of old; and continues to hold true ever afterward. The promise never was of the flesh, essentially; but was always of grace, and continues to be.


----------



## fralo4truth (Jun 16, 2010)

Let me make sure I'm understanding you correctly. "They are enemies for your sake" has reference to the Jewish nation as a whole, and the expression "but as touching the election" is saying:

but the elect within that nation were not. Correct me if I'm wrong.

If this is true then it seems to be against Daniel's post above where he states that the enemies to the gospel were the elect, but only while in the unregenerate state.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jun 17, 2010)

Kevin,
You've understood my understanding of the text.

The passage as a whole is justifying God's dealings with Israel, starting at Rom.9 where the question arises: If God keeps his promises and my salvation is supposedly sure, then why has the Jewish nation turned their back on Messiah? What about God's promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Israel?

Here, near the end of that section Paul describes the nation (honestly) in terms that juxtapose their stance as largely hostile to the gospel. But he quickly adds once again that when it comes to election, even elect Jews are beloved for the father's sake.


----------



## fralo4truth (Jun 17, 2010)

Contra_Mundum said:


> Kevin,
> But he quickly adds once again that when it comes to election, even elect Jews are beloved for the father's sake.


 
...and consequently, will not be enemies to the gospel. Correct?

Even though the text does not explicitly declare this, it is implied by the transition of "but as touching the election". True, the nation as a whole were enemies to it, "but" the remnant within won't be.

You might be wondering why I'm even questioning something as heretical that God's people could be enemies to the gospel. Well, at this point in my life, I'm being called upon to rebuke an antinomianism spirit that exists in my area, and am examining all the scriptures they use for support of their theory.

Thanks for your insight.


----------

