Romans 10:19-21

Romans 10:19-Paul Cites Deuteronomy 32:21 To Demonstrate That Israel Understood The Gospel

Paul poses another rhetorical question in Romans 10:19, which suggests that Israel didn’t understand the gospel and he refutes this notion by citing Deuteronomy 32:21. Romans 10:19, “But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, ‘I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU.’” “But ” is the strong adversative conjunction alla ( a)llav) (al-lah), which introduces a rhetorical question that stands in direct contrast with what might be expected, namely that the Israelites understood the gospel. In Romans 10:18, Paul anticipated the possible objection that maybe not all Israel heard the gospel message of Jesus Christ in the first place and that is the reason why they have not believed. Romans 10:18, “But on the contrary, I ask, have they never heard? Indeed, they have heard! ‘Their voice has gone out extending throughout all the earth, that is, their teachings extending throughout the ends of the inhabited world.’” In this passage, the apostle Paul poses a rhetorical question that expects a strong affirmation, which asserts that Israel did in fact hear the gospel about Christ and to support this assertion he cites Psalm 19:4. Now here in Romans 10:19, he again anticipates a possible objection, namely that Israel did not understand the gospel. To anticipate this possible objection, the apostle employs the strong adversative conjunction alla that introduces a rhetorical question that implies that not all Israel has understood the gospel message. However, as was the case in Romans 10:18, Paul uses the double negative expression me ouk in Romans 10:19 to emphatically reject such an idea that they did not understand the gospel message of Christ. Just as he cited Psalm 19:4 in Romans 10:18 and to support his assertion that Israel heard the gospel so in Romans 10:19 Paul cites Deuteronomy 32:21 to support his assertion that Israel did understand the gospel. We will translate alla , “but on the contrary .” Romans 10:19, “But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, ‘I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU.’”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 1

“I say ” is the first person singular present active indicative form of the verb lego ( levgw ) (leg-o), which means, “to ask” since it is connected to the rhetorical question that follows it. The first person singular form of the verb refers of course to Paul. The present tense of the verb is an “instantaneous” or “aoristic” present used to indicate that an action is completed at the moment of speaking. The active voice indicates that Paul, as the subject produced the action of asking this rhetorical question. The indicative mood is “declarative” presenting this assertion as an unqualified statement. We will translate lego , “ I ask .” Romans 10:19, “But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, ‘I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU.’” “Surely Israel did not know, did they ” is composed of the negative particle me ( mhv) (may), which is followed by the nominative masculine singular form of the proper name Israel ( )Israh/l ) (Is-rah-ale), “ Israel ” and the emphatic negative adverb ou ( ou)) (oo), “ not ” and the third person plural aorist active indicative form of the verb ginosko ( ginwvskw ) (ghin-oce-ko), “ did know .” The proper name Israel refers of course to the nation of Israel who are descendants racially of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, aka, Israel. It refers to unregenerate Israel since Paul says that they pursued a righteous status with God by obedience to the Mosaic Law and as a result they never attained perfect obedience to the Law, which it required. The word functions as a “nominative subject” meaning that it is performing the action of the verb ginosko . Ginosko denotes in Koine Greek the intelligent comprehension of an object or matter, whether this comes for the first time, or comes afresh, into the consideration of the one who grasps it (“to come to know, to experience, to perceive”) or whether it is already present (“to perceive”). The ingressive aspect of the act of comprehension is originally emphasized but faded into the background and the meaning can be simply “to know,” or “to understand.” The original form gignosko is found from Homer on. The shortened form ginosko was Aeolic and Ionic, but appears in common Greek from Aristotle (384- 322 B.C.) and both these words are formed from the root gno -. Ginosko and its related terms were a part of the vocabulary of religion, philosophy, and ethics, especially in the Hellenistic period.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 2

A distinct characteristic of ginosko in ancient Greek thought was that it accented to a certain extent the idea of understanding what is known in contrast to experiencing something to acquire knowledge. Ginosko means to see things as they truly are and to the Greeks knowledge attained through observation with one’s own eyes was more reliable than hearing which is less tangible. It basically means to notice, perceive, or recognize a thing, person, or situation through the senses, particularly sight. This leads to an intelligent ordering in the mind of what has been perceived in the world of experience. Thus the verb also means experience, learn, get to know: what has been experienced becomes known to the one who has experienced it. Liddell and Scott list the following classical meanings for the word (page 350): (1) to come to know, perceive (2) to know by reflection (3) to know by observation (4) to discern, distinguish, recognize (5) to form a judgment, think (6) to understand (7) to judge, determine, to decree that (8) to be pronounced of a sentence or a judgment (9) to be judged guilty (10) to know carnally (11) to make known, celebrate. Ernst Dieter Schmitz lists the following secular Greek meanings for the word (The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, volume 2, page 392): (1) to notice, perceive, or recognize a thing, person, or situation through the senses, particularly sight (Homer Odyssey 15, 532 and 24, 217). (2) to distinguish, for experience or recognition of a phenomenon among similar or different ones may lead to this (cf. Homer Iliad, 5, 128, 182). (3) to know in a personal way (Heracles Frag. 97), to understand (already in Homer Odyssey 16, 136), to know (Democ. Frag. 198; used par. with oida ), to be acquainted with, to be expert (gnostos , an expert, Plato, Republic 1, 347d), and to judge (Demosthones 658, 23). (4) to recognize as a friend, love as a friend (Xenophon Cyr. 1, 4, 27). (5) to reflect, judge, investigate by logical thought-processes. (6) to be judged. (7) to gain insight, to perceive intuitively. The Greek’s usage of the word contrasts with the Hebrew mind in the Old Testament, which placed more emphasis upon hearing since the perception of doctrine came through hearing as recorded in Deuteronomy 6:4, “ Hear, O Israel .” In the Septuagint, ginosko replaces 14 different Hebrew expressions as well as variations of these: (1) `amar ( rma ), to say (Jgs. 6:29) (2) bin ( wyb ), Qal: perceive, understand (Prov. 24:12; Is. 40:21); hiphil: perceive (Job. 9:11); hithpoel: understand (Jer. 30:24 [37:24]). (3) de `ah ( hud ), knowledge (Is. 11:9). (4) da `ath (jud ), knowledge (Gen. 2:176, Prov. 22:17, Is. 44:19). (5) chazah ( hzj ), see (Is. 26:11). (6) yadha ` ( udy ), Qal: know (Ex. 16:12, 2 Sm. 3:25, Jon. 1:12); niphal: be made known (Lev. 4:14, Jgs. 16:9, Ps. 48:3 [47:3] ); hiphil: make known (Hb. 3:2); hophal: made known (Lev. 4:23, 28); hithpael: make oneself known (Nm. 12:6).

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 3

(7) yedha ` ( udy ), know (Dn. 2:9, 4:17 [4:14] - Aramaic); learn (Ezr. 4:15 - Aramaic). (8) ya `adh ( udy ), appoint; niphal: meet (Ex. 29:42, 30:6, Nm. 17:4). (9) ya `ats ( Juy ), advise, counsel; niphal: consult together (Is. 45:21). (10) laqach (jql ), take (1 Sm. 17:18). (11) matsa ( aXm ), find (Jgs. 14:18). (12) naghadh ( dgn ), hiphil: declare (Is. 48:6). (13) nakhar ( rbn ), Hiphil: regard (Dt. 33:9); recognize (1 Kgs. 20:41 [21:41] ). (14) ra `ah ( har ), see (Nm. 11:23, Jgs. 2:7); consider (Ex. 33:13). (15) shama ` ( umv ), hear (Neh. 4:15, Is. 48:8). (16) takhan ( wbh ), Qal: consider (Prv. 24:12); piel: measure (Is. 40:12 [40:13] ). One term clearly predominates as the correspondent to ginosko which is yadha `, “to know.” While the Greeks were concerned with detached knowledge and a speculative interest in the metaphysical nature of things, the Old Testament regards knowledge as something which continually arises from personal encounter. Schmitz list the following meanings for ginosko in the Septuagint (LXX) (The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology volume 2, page 395): (1) to notice, experience, observe (e.g. Gen. 3:7; 41:31; Jdg. 16:20; Eccl. 8:5; Is. 47:8; Hs. 5:3), then the observing of things like good and bad (2 Sm. 19:35 [MT 19:36]) or right and left (Jon. 4:11) leads to distinguishing between them. (2) to distinguish between (3) to know by learning (Prov. 30:3) (4) to know by observation (5) to know how to do something (1 Kg. 7:14 [LXX 7:2]; cf. Gen. 25:27; 1 Sm. 16:16, 18; Is. 47:11). (6) to concern oneself with, care for, trouble oneself with, or their negatives (e.g. Prov. 27:23; Ps. 1:6; 37:18 [LXX 36:18]; 119:79 [LXX 118:79], and to want to do with (or its negative) (e.g. Dt. 33:9). (7) to have sexual relations with (Gen. 4:1; 19:8; cf. 2:23). (8) to have a personal and confidential relationship with another person (e.g. Dt. 34:10). (9) man’s knowledge of God, i.e., of his grateful and obedient recognition. In the Greek New Testament, ginosko is quite significant in that it occurs in 20 of its 27 books a total of 222 times. It is not found in 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, 1 Peter, 3 John, and Jude. The New Testament usage presupposes the idea of “to know” in the LXX and Hebrew Old Testament. The basic sense of “to know, to understand” as an intellectual process is contained throughout the New Testament Scriptures (Matt. 6:3; 9:30; Mark 13:28; Luke 12:47; Acts 1:7; 1 Corinthians 13:9, 12 etc.). Johannes Behm lists the following New Testament meanings for the verb (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament volume 1, page 703): (1) to detect (Mk. 5:29; Lk. 8:46) (2) to note (Mk. 8:17; 12:12; Mt. 26:10; 2 Cor. 2:4; Jn. 5:42; 8:27). (3) to recognize (Lk. 7:39; Mt. 12:15; 22:18; Gal. 3:7; Jam. 2:20; Jn. 4:1; 5:6; 6:15). (4) to learn (Mk. 5:43; 15:45; Lk. 9:11; Ac. 17:13, 19; Phlp. 1:12; 2:19; Jn. 11:57; 12:9). (5) to confirm (Mk. 6:38; 13:28 f.; Lk. 1:18; 1 C. 4:19; 2 Cor. 13:6; Jn. 4:53; 7:51). (6) to know in the sense of awareness or acquaintance (Mt.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 4

24:50 and par.; Lk. 2:43; 16:4; Hb. 10:34; Rev. 3:3; Jn. 2:24 f.; 7:27; 1 Jn. 3:20). (7) to know in the sense of acquaintance (Mt. 25:24; Lk. 12:47 f.; 16:15; Ac. 1:7; R. 2:18; 7:1; 2 C. 5:16; Jn. 1:48; 7:49). (8) to know in the sense of understanding (Lk. 18:34; Ac. 8:30; Jn. 3:10). Bauer, Gingrich and Danker list the following meanings for the word (A Greek- English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature pages 160-162): (1) know, come to know (a) with accusative of the thing (b) with personal object (c) with hoti following (2) learn (of), ascertain, find out (a) with accusative as object (b) with hoti following (c) abstract (3) understand, comprehend (a) with accusative following (b) abstractly (4) perceive, notice, realize (a) with accusative (b) with hoti following (c) euphemistically of sex relations (5) have come to know, know (a) with the accusative of the thing (b) with accusative and infinitive (c) with hoti following (d) with indirect question (e) with adverb modifier (f) abstractly (6) acknowledge, recognize as that which one is or claims to be. Louw and Nida list the following usages (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains volume 2): (1) to possess information about - to know, to know about, to have knowledge of, to be acquainted with, acquaintance’ (page 334). (2) to acquire information by whatever means, but often with the implication of personal involvement or experience - ‘to learn, to find out’ (page 326). (3) to learn to know a person through direct personal experience, implying a continuity of relationship - ‘to know, to become acquainted with, to be familiar with’ (page 328). (4) to come to an understanding as the result of ability to experience and learn - ‘to come to understand, to perceive, to comprehend’ (page 382). (5) to indicate that one does know - ‘to acknowledge’ (page 369). (6) to have sexual intercourse with’ (page 258). (7) (an idiom, probably an adage or traditional saying, literally, ‘do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing’) an admonition to do something without letting people know it - ‘to do something secretly, to do something without letting the public know’ (page 344). Walter Schmithals lists the following New Testament usages (Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament volume 1, pages 250-251): (1) One learns or comes to know a fact from information (2) One notices or observes a hidden intent (3) One ascertains or seeks to learn through investigation, inquiry and discovery (4) One knows (about) on the basis of experience (5) Of persons: know someone; someone is or becomes known felt/sensed, perceived, decided, understood (6) sexual relations (7) to be skilled at, be able, command of (a language). Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words states that ginosko signifies “‘to be taking in knowledge, to come to know, recognize, understand,’ or ‘to understand completely,’ e. g., (Mark 13:28,29; John 13:12; 15:18; 21:17; 2 Cor. 8:9; Heb. 10:34; 1 John 2:5; 4:2,6) (twice), (7,13; 5:2,20); in its past tenses it

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 5 frequently means ‘to know in the sense of realizing,’ the aorist or point tense usually indicating definiteness, (Matt. 13:11; Mark 7:24; John 7:26); in (10:38) ‘that ye may know (aorist tense) and understand, (present tense)’; (19:4; Acts 1:7; 17:19; Rom. 1:21; 1 Cor. 2:11) (2nd part), (14; 2 Cor. 2:4; Eph. 3:19; 6:22; Phil. 2:19; 3:10; 1 Thes. 3:5; 2 Tim. 2:19; Jas. 2:20; 1 John 2:13) (twice), (14; 3:6; 4:8; 2 John 1; Rev. 2:24; 3:3, 9). In the passive voice, it often signifies ‘to become known,’ e. g., (Matt. 10:26; Phil. 4:5). In the sense of complete and absolute understanding on God's part, it is used, e. g., in (Luke 16:15; John 10:15) (of the Son as well as the Father); (1 Cor. 3:20). In (Luke 12:46), KJV, it is rendered ‘he is... aware.’ In the NT ginosko frequently indicates a relation between the person ‘knowing’ and the object known; in this respect, what is ‘known’ is of value or importance to the one who knows, and hence the establishment of the relationship, e. g., especially of God's ‘knowledge,’ (1 Cor. 8:3), ‘if any man love God, the same is known of Him’; (Gal. 4:9), ‘to be known of God’; here the ‘knowing’ suggests approval and bears the meaning ‘to be approved’; so in (2 Tim. 2:19); cf. (John 10:14,27; Gen. 18:19; Nah. 1:7); the relationship implied may involve remedial chastisement, (Amos 3:2). The same idea of appreciation as well as ‘knowledge’ underlies several statements concerning the ‘knowledge’ of God and His truth on the part of believers, e. g., (John 8:32; 14:20,31; 17:3; Gal. 4:9) (1st part); (1 John 2:3-13,14; 4:6,8, 16; 5:20); such ‘knowledge’ is obtained, not by mere intellectual activity, but by operation of the Holy Spirit consequent upon acceptance of Christ. Nor is such ‘knowledge’ marked by finality; see e. g., (2 Pet. 3:18; Hos. 6:3), RV. The verb is also used to convey the thought of connection or union, as between man and woman, (Matt. 1:25; Luke 1:34). Vine commenting on the distinction between ginosko and oida , writes, “The differences between ginosko (No. 1) and oida demand consideration: (a) ginosko , frequently suggests inception or progress in ‘knowledge,’ while oida suggests fullness of ‘knowledge,’ e. g., (John 8:55), ‘ye have not known Him’ ( ginosko ), i. e., begun to ‘know,’ ‘but I know Him’ ( oida ), i. e., ‘know Him perfectly’; (13:7), ‘What I do thou knowest not now,’ i. e. Peter did not yet perceive ( oida ) its significance, ‘but thou shalt understand,’ i. e., ‘get to know ( ginosko ), hereafter’; (14:7), ‘If ye had known Me’ ( ginosko ), i. e., ‘had definitely come to know Me,’ ‘ye would have known My Father also’ ( oida ), i. e., ‘would have had perception of’: ‘from henceforth ye know Him’ ( ginosko ), i. e., having unconsciously been coming to the Father, as the One who was in Him, they would now consciously be in the constant and progressive experience of ‘knowing’ Him; in (Mark 4:13), ‘Know ye not ( oida ) this parable? and how shall ye know ( ginosko ) all the parables?’ (RV), i. e., ‘Do ye not understand this parable? How shall ye come to perceive all...’ the intimation being that the first parable is a leading and testing one; (b) while ginosko frequently implies an active relation between the one who

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 6

‘knows’ and the person or thing ‘known’ (see No. 1, above), oida expresses the fact that the object has simply come within the scope of the ‘knower's’ perception; thus in (Matt. 7:23) ‘I never knew you’ ( ginosko ) suggests ‘I have never been in approving connection with you,’ whereas in (25:12), ‘I know you not’ ( oida ) suggests ‘you stand in no relation to Me.’” Thayer’s New Greek-English Lexicon lists the following meanings (page 117- 118): (1) To learn to know, come to know, get a knowledge of; pass. To become known (2) To know, understand, perceive, have knowledge of (3) By a Hebraistic euphemism to have sex (4) To become acquainted with, to know. Moulton’s Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised lists the following (pages 79-80): (1) To know, whether the action be inceptive or complete and settled (2) To perceive (3) To mark, discern (4) To ascertain by examination (5) To understand (6) To acknowledge (7) To resolve, conclude (8) To be assured (9) To be skilled, to be a master of a thing (10) To know carnally (11) From the Heb. To view with favor. Ginosko denotes the attainment or the manifestation of knowledge and is used for the following: (1) where there is reference to some earlier state of ignorance, or to some prior facts on which the knowledge is based. (2) where the ideas of thoroughness, familiarity or of approbation are involved. Both ideas arise out of the stress ginosko lays on the process of reception. This is eighth time that we have seen the verb ginosko in the book of Romans. In Romans 1:21, the verb ginosko refers to an objective experiential knowledge of God in the sense that the human race is not only objectively aware of Him through the observation of His creation but also they have in fact experienced His wisdom, power, and love in every moment of their existence. Romans 1:21, “Because even though, they as an eternal spiritual truth had an objective, experiential knowledge of God, they never worshipped Him as God or gave thanks, but rather they became futile in the realm of their thought process and their ignorant hearts became darkened.” In Romans 2:18, the verb ginosko means, “to acquire information through the process of instruction” regarding the will of God as it was revealed to the Jews through 613 commands (365 prohibitions and 248 commands) that appear in the Mosaic Law, which was another great privilege that the Jews possessed. Romans 2:18, “And know His will through instruction and can discern the essentials because you have received oral instruction in the past in a detailed, systematic and repetitious manner by means of the Law and continue to do so.” In Romans 3:17, the verb ginosko means, “to acknowledge” since in context the word is used in relation to unsaved mankind and the way of peace, which is through faith in Jesus Christ and applying His teaching.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 7

To “acknowledge” means, “to admit to be real or true, to recognize the existence, truth of fact of, to express recognition and realization of something.” Therefore, the verb ginosko along with the emphatic negative adverb ou indicates that unregenerate man “emphatically” will not “acknowledge” the way of peace, which is through faith in Jesus Christ in the sense that they will never admit that faith in Jesus Christ is the real or true path to real peace. Romans 3:17, “Indeed, they totally refused to acknowledge the way, which is peace.” Then, in Romans 6:6, Paul employs the verb ginosko to denote the attainment of knowledge that all Christians would be and should be familiar with and to subtly rebuke those who might have succumbed to the antinomian teaching as a result of being ignorant of their identification with Christ in His death and resurrection. Romans 6:6, “This we are very familiar with through instruction , namely, that our old man was crucified with Him in order that the sinful body would be deprived of its power with the result that we are no longer in a perpetual state of being slaves to the sin nature.” In Romans 7:1, the verb ginosko retains the same meaning that it had in Romans 6:6. Romans 7:1, “Or, are some of you in a state of ignorance concerning this fact spiritual brothers (specifically, I am now addressing those who are very familiar with the Law through instruction ), namely, that the Law does, as an eternal spiritual truth, have jurisdiction over a person during the entire extent of time they do live?” In Romans 7:7, the verb is used in relation to the sin nature and means “to know in the sense of awareness.” The word implies an earlier state of ignorance, or to some prior facts on which the knowledge is based. Romans 7:7, “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? Is, the Law, in the state of being identical with the sin nature? Absolutely not! On the contrary, I would have never become aware of my sin nature except by means of the Law. For example, I would never have been able to identify covetousness if the Law had not said, ‘You shall never covet.’” In Romans 7:15, the verb ginosko means, “to understand.” The word’s meaning is emphatically negated by the emphatic negative adverb ou , which means, “absolutely not, by no means.” Together, they mean, “I by no means understand” since in context Paul is expressing his confusion as to why he is committing personal sin in violation of the Law when his desire is to obey and please God. Now here in Romans 10:19, the verb ginosko means “to understand” the gospel since in context Paul is addressing Israel’s rejection of the gospel and Christ, who is its subject.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 8

The verb’s meaning is emphatically negated by the emphatic negative adverb ou , which emphatically negates the idea of the Jew understanding the gospel concerning Jesus Christ, thus setting up the possible objection that not all of Israel has understood the gospel message concerning Jesus Christ. The third person singular form of the verb is a reference to the nation of Israel as a corporate unit since in Romans 9:30-10:21, Paul is addressing Israel’s rejection of the incarnate Son of God, Jesus of Nazareth as their Messiah. Further indicating that he is addressing the Jews’ failure is that Paul quotes extensively from the Jews’ Old Testament Scriptures. He does this to demonstrate to his fellow Jewish countrymen who might be unsaved and heard this letter read in Rome that their own Scriptures anticipated Israel’s rejection. He also quotes the Old Testament to show his fellow unsaved Jewish countrymen who heard or read this letter that salvation through faith alone in Christ that Paul proclaimed through his gospel was in accordance with the Law and the Prophets. Lastly, he uses Old Testament Scriptures to also educate his fellow regenerate Jew and Gentile readers regarding that his gospel was in accordance with the Old Testament Scriptures. The aorist tense of the verb ginosko is a “constative aorist” describing in summary fashion the period of time in which Israel never understood the gospel of Jesus Christ, from the resurrection up to the time Paul wrote this epistle. The negative particle me coupled with ou indicates a strong affirmative response to the rhetorical question indicating that Israel did in fact understand the gospel over this period of time. The active voice indicates that the subject, the nation of Israel, performs the action of the never understanding the gospel, which the negative particle me negates indicating that they did in fact hear it. The indicative mood is an “interrogative” indicative used for a rhetorical question where a “negative assertion is expected” because of the presence of the emphatic negative adverb ou . However, the negative particle me preceding ou reverses this so that a strong positive assertion is expected. The nation of Israel did in fact understand the gospel message proclaimed to them from the time of Jesus Christ’s resurrection up to the time Paul wrote this epistle. Therefore, we will translate the expression ouk egno , “ never understood .” Now, in the emphatic position preceding the expression ouk egno , “ have they never understood ?” is the negative particle me ( mhv) (may), which is used as an interrogative particle. When me is used in questions, a negative answer is expected whereas ou in questions, a positive answer is expected. However, in questions when both words are used together, a strong affirmation is expected. In Romans 10:19, me is introducing a rhetorical question that expects a negative answer “No,” but the question itself is already negated emphatically by the

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 9 emphatic negative adverb ou . So the emphatic negative ou negates the verb ginosko and me implies a negative answer is expected to the rhetorical question made negative. However, the result of me and ou used in the same question is that a strong affirmation is expected in response to the rhetorical question. Therefore, we will not translate me since together with ou it is indicating a strong affirmation, which can be conveyed by adding the third person singular aorist active indicative form of the verb ginosko ( ginwvskw ) (ghin-oce-ko), “ has understood .” The aorist tense of the verb ginosko is a “constative aorist” describing in summary fashion the period of time in which Israel did understand the gospel of Jesus Christ, from the resurrection up to the time Paul wrote this epistle. The active voice indicates that the subject, the nation of Israel, performs the action of the understanding the gospel, which the negative particle me indicates that they did in fact hear it. The indicative mood is a “declarative” indicative presenting this assertion as unqualified statement of fact. We will translate ginosko , “ has understood .” The nation of Israel did in fact understand the gospel message proclaimed to them from the time of Jesus Christ’s resurrection up to the time Paul wrote this epistle. Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:19: “But on the contrary, I ask, has Israel never understood? They have understood!...” Romans 10:19, “But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, ‘I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU.’” “First ” is the nominative masculine singular form of the ordinal number protos (prw~to$ ) (pro-tos). In classical Greek, the cardinal number protos is the superlative adjective form of the term pro , “before.” Thus, the word means “first, foremost.” The meaning of the word is diverse in classical literature in that it can mean “first” in rank, first in order, first in quality, i.e. best or first in a temporal sense. The Septuagint uses the word protos as a translation for several Hebrew terms with the most common being n’shon , “first, former.” It is used primarily in temporal expressions to indicate dates (Genesis 8:5, 10, “first month”; cf. Exodus 12:2; Ezekiel 26:1; 30:20) and sequence (Ecc. 1:11) as well as to denote order (Num. 2:9), rank (2 Kings 25:18 [LXX 4 Kings 25:18] and quantity (1 Sam. 15:21 [LXX 1 Kings 15:21]. The word is used as a title in Isaiah 44:6, which is used to describe the Lord Jesus in Revelation 1:11, 17. Protos appears throughout the Greek New Testament in each of the meanings that appear in classical literature and the Septuagint. In Romans 10:19, protos

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 10 means “first” and is used to denote order indicating that Moses is the first in a long line of Old Testament prophets who served as witnesses testifying to the fact that Israel did understand the gospel. The word functions as a superlative adjective modifying the nominative subject Mouses , “ Moses .” We will translate protos , “ first of all .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:19: “But on the contrary, I ask, has Israel never understood? They have understood! First of all...” Romans 10:19, “But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, ‘I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU.’” “Moses ” is the nominative masculine singular form of the proper name Mouses (Mwu+sh~$ ) (mo-oo-sace), which refers to the individual who led the Exodus generation, wrote the Pentateuch, received the Law from God on Mount Sinai. He is listed in God’s Hall of Fame of faith in Hebrews 11:24-29 and was born during the eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt during the reign of Amenhotep I who reigned between 1546-1526 B.C. The life of Moses is divided into three equal portions of forty years each (Acts 7:23, 30, 36): (1) Life in Egypt: Moses’ birth, adoption into the home of Pharaoh, and the avenging of his countrymen. (2) Exile in Midian (Arabia): Middle years of Moses' life where he was married, call by God to service, and culminating in his return to Egypt as a prophet of God. (3) In the Wilderness as Leader of Israel: Leader of the nation of Israel involving his leading the Exodus, the journey to Sinai, receiving the Law at Sinai culminating in his death. In Romans 10:19, the proper name Mouses , “ Moses ” functions as a nominative subject meaning that it is performing the action of the verb lego , “ says .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:19: “But on the contrary, I ask, has Israel never understood? They have understood! First of all, Moses...” Romans 10:19, “But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, ‘I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU.’” “Says ” is the third person singular present active indicative form of the verb lego ( levgw ), which refers to the “content” of what the Lord communicated through the Moses that is recorded in Deuteronomy 32:21. The third person singular form refers to Moses. This is a “perfective” present, which is used to emphasize the results of a past action. Therefore, the “perfective present” of the verb lego emphasizes that even though Deuteronomy 32:21was written in the past, it still speaks today and is binding on the hearers and in particular the unsaved Israelites in Paul’s day.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 11

The active voice indicates that the Lord as the subject produced the action of the verb in communicating through Moses what is recorded in Deuteronomy 32:21. The indicative mood is “declarative” presenting this assertion as an unqualified statement of fact. We will translate lego , “ says .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:19: “But on the contrary, I ask, has Israel never understood? They have understood! First of all, Moses says...” Romans 10:19, “But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, ‘I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU.’” As we note earlier Paul is quoting from Deuteronomy 32:21. Deuteronomy 32:21, “They have made Me jealous with what is not God; They have provoked Me to anger with their idols. So I will make them jealous with those who are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation .” Paul’s wording differs slightly from the majority Septuagint MSS as well as the MT. He substitutes the second person plural form of the personal pronoun humeis , “all of you” for the third person singular plural form of the intensive personal pronoun autos , “them.” By doing this he makes this quotation personal to Israel. Deuteronomy 32:21 appears in the prophetic song of Moses, which was his final address to the citizens of Israel. In this passage, Moses is speaking prophetically of the Lord’s response to Israel’s future rejection of His Son Jesus Christ in that He will make the Israelites jealous by turning to the Gentiles, which is a prophecy that the Gentiles would respond to the gospel. Thus, this prophecy in Deuteronomy 32:21 was being fulfilled in Paul’s day. Romans 10:19, “But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, ‘I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU.’” “I” is the nominative first singular form of the personal pronoun ego ( e)gwv) (eg- o), which emphasizes the Lord as the subject and involves a contrast between what Israel did to the Lord by provoking Him to jealous through their idolatry with what He will do to them by provoking them to jealousy by turning to the Gentiles. The word functions as the subject meaning that it is performing the action of the verb parazeloo , “ WILL MAKE JEALOUS .” We will translate ego , “ I myself .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:19: “But on the contrary, I ask, has Israel never understood? They have understood! First of all, Moses says, ‘I myself...’”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 12

Romans 10:19, “But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, ‘I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU.’” “WILL MAKE JEALOUS ” is the first person singular future active indicative form of the verb parazeloo ( parazhlovw ) (par-ad-zay-lo-o), which means, “to provoke to jealousy.” This verb indicates the Lord would provoke Israel to jealousy by turning from them and offering salvation to the Gentiles through the gospel. His intention for doing this was so that Israel might respond in faith as well to the gospel. God saved the Gentile so that He might save the Jew. Thus, God had not rejected the Jews altogether but still had them in mind by turning to the Gentiles. By God turning from the Jews for their rejection of the gospel of Jesus Christ and turning to the Gentiles and offering salvation to them indicates that Israel did in fact understand the gospel since the Gentiles who the Jews thought they were superior to, understood the gospel and obeyed it! Also, just as God used other Gentile nations as His instruments to execute judgment upon Israel so He also uses Gentile nations as His instruments to provoke Israel to jealousy so that they would turn to Christ and have faith in Him so as to be saved. By quoting Deuteronomy 32:21, Paul is equating Israel’s rejection of Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah with the idolatry of Israel in Moses’ day. He is also equating God’s response to Israel’s rejection of Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah in his day with that of Israel’s rejection of the Lord in Moses’ day. Therefore, Paul is pointing out to the Jews in this passage that they should have known from their own Scriptures that God predicted that in their day He would turn to the Gentiles from them so as to provoke them to jealousy causing them to have faith in Christ. They should have recognized from their own Scriptures that God was in fact working amongst them and the Gentiles through the gospel of Jesus Christ. As is the case here in Romans 10:19, this word parazeloo appears in Romans 11:1 and 14 with regards to the Lord provoking Israel to jealousy by offering salvation to the Gentiles and saving them so that the Jews would respond in faith to the offer as well. Romans 11:1-14, “I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? ‘Lord, THEY HAVE KILLED YOUR PROPHETS, THEY HAVE TORN DOWN YOUR ALTARS, AND I ALONE AM LEFT, AND THEY ARE SEEKING MY LIFE.’ But what is the divine response to him? ‘I HAVE KEPT for Myself SEVEN THOUSAND MEN

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 13

WHO HAVE NOT BOWED THE KNEE TO BAAL.’ In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God's gracious choice. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace. What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened; just as it is written, ‘GOD GAVE THEM A SPIRIT OF STUPOR, EYES TO SEE NOT AND EARS TO HEAR NOT, DOWN TO THIS VERY DAY.’ And David says, ‘LET THEIR TABLE BECOME A SNARE AND A TRAP, AND A STUMBLING BLOCK AND A RETRIBUTION TO THEM. LET THEIR EYES BE DARKENED TO SEE NOT, AND BEND THEIR BACKS FOREVER.’ I say then, they did not stumble so as to fall, did they? May it never be! But by their transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles, to make them jealous . Now if their transgression is riches for the world and their failure is riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their fulfillment be! But I am speaking to you who are Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, if somehow I might move to jealousy my fellow countrymen and save some of them.” In Romans 10:19, the future tense of the verb parazeloo is a “predictive” future indicating that something will take place or come to pass. It indicates that the Lord in Moses’ day predicted that “it will come to pass” that He would provoke the Israelites to jealousy in Paul’s day by offering salvation to the Gentiles and saving them when they trusted in His Son Jesus Christ as Savior. It emphasizes the certainty of this taking place. The active voice means that from the perspective of Moses’ day the Lord as the subject will perform the action in the future of provoking Israel to jealousy by offering salvation to the Gentiles and saving them when they obeyed it. The indicative mood is “declarative” presenting the assertion as an unqualified statement of fact or Bible doctrine that the Lord predicted in Moses’ day that He would provoke Israel to jealousy by offering salvation to the Gentiles. We will translate parazeloo , “ will provoke to jealousy .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:19: “But on the contrary, I ask, has Israel never understood? They have understood! First of all, Moses says, ‘I myself will provoke to jealousy...” Romans 10:19, “But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, ‘I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU.’” “YOU ” is the second person plural accusative form of the personal pronoun humeis ( u(mei~$ ), which refers to all the unregenerate Jews constituting the nation of Israel that rejected Jesus Christ as their Messiah.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 14

This form of the personal pronoun humeis is used in a distributive sense indicating that the Lord is addressing “each and every” unsaved citizen of Israel. This sense emphasizes God’s concern for each person in Israel. The word functions as an accusative direct object meaning that it is receiving the action of the verb parazeloo . This indicates that Israel is the recipient and the object of God’s grace in that His intention in going to the Gentiles was to provoke Israel to jealousy so that they would turn to Christ and be saved. We will translate humeis , “ each and every one of you .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:19: “But on the contrary, I ask, has Israel never understood? They have understood! First of all, Moses says, ‘I myself will provoke each and every one of you to jealousy...’” Romans 10:19, “But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, ‘I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU.’” “BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION ” is composed of the preposition epi (e)piv) (ep-ee), “ BY THAT WHICH ” and the emphatic negative adverb ou ( ou)) (oo), “ NOT ” and the dative neuter singular form of the noun ethnos ( e&qno$ ) (eth- nos), “ NATION .” The noun ethnos means “nation” and implicitly refers to the Gentiles in contrast to the nation of Israel who were elected by God to His covenant people. We will translate ethnos , “ a nation .” The emphatic negative adverb ou emphatically negates the idea that the Gentiles were a nation from God’s perspective in the sense that they were not His covenant people. We will translate ou , “ non .” The preposition epi functions as a marker of instrument as the basis for a subsequent state. The state involved is jealousy and the Gentiles are the instrument, which serve as the basis for Israel’s jealousy. Therefore, the noun ethnos functions as a “dative of cause” indicating that the Lord provoked the Israelites to jealousy “by” a non-nation, i.e. the Gentiles. As Wallace notes, it is not always best to translate the dative of cause with “because of” due to the fact that in English “because” may express cause or motive since the two ideas are similar but not identical. (Dan Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics; pages 167-168). Thus, it is best to translate the dative of cause “by” or “on the basis of.” We will translate epi , “ by .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:19: “But on the contrary, I ask, has Israel never understood? They have understood! First of all, Moses says, ‘I myself will provoke each and every one of you to jealousy by a non- nation...’”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 15

Romans 10:19, “But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, ‘I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU.’” “BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING ” is composed of the preposition epi ( e)piv) (ep-ee), “ BY ” and the dative neuter singular form of the noun ethnos ( e&qno$ ) (eth-nos), “ NATION ” and the dative neuter singular form of the noun asunetos ( a)suvneto$ ) (as-oon-ay-tos), “ WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING .” The noun asunetos is composed of alpha prefix and the adjective sunetos , “intelligent, wise,” thus the word literally means, “without understanding, stupid. The word pertains to a lack of capacity for insight and understanding and is the result of failing to properly use one’s mental capacity. The adjective describes the man who is a fool, who cannot learn the lesson of experience, who will not use the mind and brain that God has given to him. It implies a lack of high moral quality. This person is without insight or understanding and describes the unregenerate man’s heart as having no capacity to bring together facts and make sense out of them. In context this man is a Gentile who has no insight or understanding of the plan of God and implies that they have a lack of high moral quality as a result. The noun asunetos in Romans 10:19 means “without insight.” It expresses the fact that the Gentiles are stupid with respect to the things of God implying a lack of high moral quality in comparison with Israel since Israel was given the Old Testament canon, the covenants and the promises contained in these covenants and not the Gentiles. Paul describes the Ephesian believers before they were saved and they were Gentiles. Ephesians 2:1-3, “Although, all of you were spiritually dead in your trespasses and sins in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.” Paul describes the Gentiles in Ephesians 2:11-12, which helps us to understand why the Gentiles were stupid with respect to the things of God. Ephesians 2:11, “Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called ‘Uncircumcision’ by the so-called ‘Circumcision,’ which is performed in the flesh by human hands.” The term “ circumcision ” refers to people who are Jewish racially whereas the term “ uncircumcision ” refers to those people who are not Jewish in racial descent, which is synonymous with the term “Gentiles.”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 16

The term “ uncircumcision ” was actually a derogatory term used by the Jews among themselves when referring to the Gentiles. Ephesians 2:12, “remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.” In Ephesians 2:11, Paul gives five-fold description of the Gentiles: (1) “Separate from Christ ”: The Gentiles were not saved and under condemnation since salvation is received through faith alone in Christ alone. (2) “ Excluded from the commonwealth of Israel ”: The Gentiles were not citizens of the nation of Israel, which God had specifically separated from the heathen to represent Him in the world. (3) “ Strangers to the covenants of promise ”: The Gentiles were “not” the beneficiaries of the four unconditional covenants to Israel: (a) New (b) Palestinian (c) Davidic (d) Abrahamic. (4) “ Having no hope ”: The Gentiles were under the deception and tyranny of Satan, in fear of death and having no understanding of the true meaning and purpose of human life, which is to love and serve and worship the Lord Jesus Christ. (5) “ Without God in the world ”: The Gentiles did not know or have a relationship or fellowship with the true and living God, the Lord Jesus Christ. In Ephesians 4:17-19, Paul discusses the vain lifestyle of the unsaved Gentile, which gives us insight as why they were stupid and lacked insight into the things of God and as a result lacked a high moral quality unlike the Jews. Ephesians 4:17-19, “So this I say, and affirm together with the Lord, that you walk no longer just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility of their mind, being darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their heart; and they, having become callous, have given themselves over to sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness.” “In the futility of their mind ” refers to the fact that the unbeliever consumes himself in the pursuit of goals that are purely selfish, in the accumulation of that which is temporary and in looking for satisfaction in that which is intrinsically deceptive and disappointing. The unbeliever makes plans and resolves everything based upon his own thinking and thus becomes his own authority and follows his own thinking to its ultimate result of futility, aimlessness and meaninglessness. The unbeliever is self- centered and empty since a life apart from a relationship with Christ is a life of futility. “Being darkened in their understanding ” refers to the fact that they been deceived by Satan and are totally and completely ignorant of divine viewpoint, which is characterized in the Scriptures as “light.”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 17

“Hardness of heart ” means that the unbeliever is totally unresponsive to God because they refuse to accept the truth of God as revealed by the Spirit in the Person and Work of Jesus Christ. “Having become callous ” refers to the fact that the unbeliever is insensitive to the things of God as a result of habitually rejecting the truth of God as it is revealed not only in creation but also in the gospel concerning the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The phrase “ have given themselves over to sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness ” signifies that the unbeliever is involved in all types of immorality as a result of being unresponsive and insensitive to the truth of God as found in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In Romans 10:19 we will translate asunetos , “ without insight .” In Romans 10:19, the noun ethnos means “nation” and implicitly refers to the Gentiles in contrast to the nation of Israel who were elected by God to His covenant people. We will translate ethnos , “ a nation .” The preposition epi functions as a marker of instrument as the basis for a subsequent state. The state involved is anger and the Gentiles are the instrument, which serve as the basis for Israel’s anger. We will translate epi , “ by .” Therefore, the noun ethnos functions as a “dative of cause” indicating that the Lord provoked the Israelites to anger “by” a nation, i.e. the Gentiles. Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:19: “But on the contrary, I ask, has Israel never understood? They have understood! First of all, Moses says, ‘I myself will provoke each and every one of you to jealousy by a non-nation, by a nation without insight...’” Romans 10:19, “But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they? First Moses says, ‘I WILL MAKE YOU JEALOUS BY THAT WHICH IS NOT A NATION, BY A NATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WILL I ANGER YOU.’” “I WILL ANGER YOU ” is composed of the first person singular future active indicative form of the verb parorgizo ( parorgivzw ) (par-org-id-zo), “ I WILL ANGER ” and the second person plural accusative form of the personal pronoun humeis ( u(mei~$ ), “ YOU .” The verb parorgizo means “to provoke to anger.” It indicates the Lord would provoke Israel to anger by turning from them and offering salvation to the Gentiles through the gospel. Again, His intention for doing this was so that Israel might respond in faith as well to the gospel. Thus, God had not rejected the Jews altogether but still had them in mind by turning to the Gentiles. In Romans 10:19, the future tense of the verb parorgizo is a “predictive” future indicating that something will take place or come to pass. It indicates that the Lord in Moses’ day predicted that “it will come to pass” that He would provoke the

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 18

Israelites to anger in Paul’s day by offering salvation to the Gentiles and saving them when they trusted in His Son Jesus Christ as Savior. It emphasizes the certainty of this taking place. The active voice means that the Lord as the subject will perform the action in the future of provoking Israel to anger by offering salvation to the Gentiles and saving them when they obeyed it. The indicative mood is “declarative” presenting the assertion as an unqualified statement of fact or Bible doctrine that the Lord predicted in Moses’ day that He would provoke Israel to anger by offering salvation to the Gentiles and blessing them with salvation through faith alone in Christ alone. We will translate parorgizo , “ I will provoke to anger .” The personal pronoun humeis is used in a distributive sense indicating that the Lord is addressing “each and every” unsaved citizen of Israel. This sense emphasizes God’s concern for each person in Israel. The word functions as an accusative direct object meaning that it is receiving the action of the verb parorgizo . This indicates that Israel is the recipient and the object of God’s grace in that His intention in going to the Gentiles was to provoke Israel to anger so that they would turn to Christ and be saved. We will translate humeis , “ each and every one of you .” Completed corrected translation of Romans 10:19: “But on the contrary, I ask, has Israel never understood? They have understood! First of all, Moses says, ‘I myself will provoke each and every one of you to jealousy by a non- nation. By a nation without insight, I will provoke each and every one of you to anger.’” So in Romans 10:19, Paul anticipates a possible objection that maybe Israel did not understand the gospel and that is why they have not believed in Jesus Christ so as to be saved. In response to this possible objection, he emphatically refutes such an idea and to support this assertion he cites Deuteronomy 32:21 where states that they did understand.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 19

Romans 10:20-Paul Cites Isaiah 65:1 To Demonstrate That The Gentiles Would Find God And God Would Make Himself Accessible To Them

Paul in Romans 10:20 advances and intensifies his statement in Romans 10:19 by quoting Isaiah 65:1, which teaches that God was found by the Gentiles who were not diligently seeking after a relationship with Him. The Gentiles found God in the sense that they personally encountered and entered into a relationship with Him through faith in Christ. Romans 10:20 also teaches that God permitted Himself to become accessible to the Gentiles who were not diligently inquiring about a relationship with Him. God became accessible to the Gentiles in the sense that they experienced fellowship with Him as a result of exercising faith in His Son Jesus Christ. Therefore, in Romans 10:20, Paul cites Isaiah 65:1 to demonstrate that God would save the Gentiles and that they would have fellowship with Him. Romans 10:20, “And Isaiah is very bold and says, ‘I WAS FOUND BY THOSE WHO DID NOT SEEK ME, I BECAME MANIFEST TO THOSE WHO DID NOT ASK FOR ME.’” “And ” is the “intensifying” use of the conjunction de ( deV) (deh), which introduces a statement that advances upon Paul’s statement in Romans 10:19. Romans 10:19, “But on the contrary, I ask, has Israel never understood? They have understood! First of all, Moses says, ‘I myself will provoke each and every one of you to jealousy by a non-nation. By a nation without insight, I will provoke each and every one of you to anger.’” In Romans 10:19, Paul anticipates a possible objection that maybe Israel did not understand the gospel and that is why they have not believed in Jesus Christ so as to be saved. In response to this possible objection, he emphatically refutes such an idea and to support this assertion he cites Deuteronomy 32:21 where states that they did understand. In fact, Deuteronomy 32:21 predicts that the Lord would provoke Israel to jealousy and anger by turning from them and offering salvation to the Gentiles through the gospel. His intention for doing this was so that Israel might respond in faith as well to the gospel. God saved the Gentile so that He might save the Jew. Thus, God had not rejected the Jews altogether but still had them in mind by turning to the Gentiles. By God turning from the Jews for their rejection of the gospel of Jesus Christ and turning to the Gentiles and offering salvation to them indicates that Israel did in fact understand the gospel since the Gentiles who the Jews thought they were superior to, understood the gospel and obeyed it! Also, just as God used other Gentile nations as His instruments to execute judgment upon Israel so He also used

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 20

Gentile nations as His instruments to provoke Israel to jealousy so that they would turn to Christ and have faith in Him so as to be saved. By quoting Deuteronomy 32:21, Paul is equating Israel’s rejection of Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah with the idolatry of Israel in Moses’ day. He is also equating God’s response to Israel’s rejection of Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah in his day with that of Israel’s rejection of the Lord in Moses’ day. Therefore, Paul is pointing out to the Jews in this passage that they should have known from their own Scriptures that God predicted that in their day He would turn to the Gentiles from them so as to provoke them to jealousy so that it might cause some of them to have faith in Christ. They should have recognized from their own Scriptures that God was in fact working amongst them and the Gentiles through the gospel of Jesus Christ. Now, in Romans 10:20, Paul employs the “intensifying” use of the conjunction de , which is not only introducing a statement that is presenting information that is addition to the prophecy in Deuteronomy 32:21 but it is also advancing upon this information and intensifying this prophecy. This teaches that not only did God turn from the Jews and go to the Gentiles with the gospel but the Gentiles who were not seeking after a relationship with Him found one through faith in Christ and they would also have fellowship with God as a result of this faith in Christ! This echoes Paul’s statement in Romans 9:30, which actually began this section that deals with Israel’s rejection of Jesus Christ as their Messiah. Romans 9:30, “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? That the Gentiles who, customarily and characteristically do not zealously pursue righteousness obtained righteousness, in fact a righteousness, which is by means of faith as a source.” We will translate de , “ in fact .” Romans 10:20, “And Isaiah is very bold and says, ‘I WAS FOUND BY THOSE WHO DID NOT SEEK ME, I BECAME MANIFEST TO THOSE WHO DID NOT ASK FOR ME.’” “Isaiah ” is the nominative masculine singular form of the proper name Hesaias ( JHsaiv+a$ ) (hay-sah-ee-as), which refers to one of the three “major” prophets of Israel who served the Lord during the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah (792- 740 B.C.) and whose name means, “Yahweh’s saves.” In Romans 10:19, we saw Paul quoting from the Law by citing Deuteronomy 32:21 and now here in Romans 10:20 he quotes from one of the prophets by citing Isaiah 65:1. The word functions as a “nominative subject” meaning that it is performing the action of the verb lego , “ says .” “Is very bold ” is the third person singular present active indicative form of the verb apotolmao ( a)potolmavw ) (ap-ot-ol-mah-o), which is a compound word composed of the verb tolmao , “to dare,” whose meaning is intensified by the

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 21 preposition apo , thus the word literally means, “to be very bold and daring in one what does.” Many commentators believe that this word in Romans 10:19 is describing Isaiah as being very bold when he proclaimed to Israel the prophecy recorded in Isaiah 65:1 in the sense that he did not hesitate in the face of danger or possible assassination (Jewish tradition says he was sawn in two and Hebrews 11:37 alludes to this). It was dangerous and courageous for Isaiah to proclaim this to Israel in his day because he was sent by God to rebuke the nation and in particular the Northern Kingdom. However, Cranfield contends and Dunn concurs that this word in Romans 10:20 emphasizes the boldness of Isaiah’s prediction rather than his psychological state. (C.E.B. Cranfield, International Critical Commentary, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans , volume 2, page 540; T and T Clark, A Continuum imprint, London, New York, 1975; James D.G. Dunn, Word Biblical Commentary , volume 38b, Romans 9-16; page 626; Thomas Nelson, 1988) The context in which Isaiah makes this prophecy does not suggest that he was in danger and nor does Paul allude to the fact that he was. Was he bold in the sense that this prophecy was conspicuous in that it attracted special attention or was it bold in the sense of being abrupt or unexpected? Based on the fact that in Romans 10:20 Paul is advancing and intensifying upon the prophecy he quotes in Romans 10:19 from Deuteronomy 32:21, it seems more likely that Paul is describing Isaiah’s prediction as being bold rather describing Isaiah himself. Isaiah’s prediction and not Isaiah himself was bold in the sense that it would attract special attention from the nation of Israel since it would indicate that God was turning to the Gentiles and offering them salvation. In Romans 10:20, Paul is citing Isaiah 65:1 to advance and intensify the prophecy in Deuteronomy 32:21, which he quotes in Romans 10:19. A comparison of Romans 10:19 and 20 indicates that not only did God turn from the Jews and go to the Gentiles with the gospel (verse 19) but the Gentiles who were not seeking after a relationship with God found one through faith in Christ and they also had fellowship with God as a result of this faith (verse 20)! Not only would God provoke to anger and jealousy the Jews for their rejection of Christ by offering salvation to the Gentiles through the gospel but the Gentiles would even have a relationship with God through faith in Christ as Savior and would have access to God in the sense that they would have fellowship with Him. The third person singular form refers to the prophet Isaiah. This is a “perfective” present, which is used to emphasize the results of a past action. Therefore, the “perfective present” of the verb emphasizes that even though Isaiah 65:1 was written in the past, it still speaks today and is binding on the

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 22 hearers and in particular the unsaved Israelites in Paul’s day since it applies to them. The active voice indicates that the Lord as the subject produced the action of the verb in communicating through the prophet Isaiah what is recorded in Isaiah 65:1. The indicative mood is “declarative” presenting this assertion as an unqualified statement of fact. We will translate apotolmao , “ is very bold .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:20: “In fact, Isaiah is very bold…” Romans 10:20, “And Isaiah is very bold and says, ‘I WAS FOUND BY THOSE WHO DID NOT SEEK ME, I BECAME MANIFEST TO THOSE WHO DID NOT ASK FOR ME.’” “And ” is the “ascensive” use of the conjunction kai ( kaiV), which introduces a statement that emphatically expounds upon the prophecy in Deuteronomy 32:21, which is quoted by Paul in Romans 10:19. It also introduces an accessory idea meaning that not only would God provoke to anger and jealousy the Jews for their rejection of His Son by offering salvation to the Gentiles through the gospel but the Gentiles would “even” find Him and He would make Himself accessible to them. The ascensive use of the conjunction kai denotes that what is to follow, as an addition to the previous statement, is out of the ordinary or unexpected and should be translated, “ even .” What is out of the ordinary from the Jewish perspective is that the Gentiles would find God through faith in Christ and that God would permit Himself to become accessible to the Gentiles as well. They would find God in the sense that they would enter into a relationship with Him through faith in His Son Jesus Christ. God would permit Himself to become accessible to the Gentiles in the sense that they would have fellowship with Him as a result of entering into a relationship with Him. Of course, the Jews should have been aware of this since it was predicted in their own Scriptures. But because of their own racial prejudice towards the Gentiles and the own self-righteousness, they were surprised by God turning to the Gentiles and offering them salvation. Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:20: “In fact, Isaiah is even very bold…” Romans 10:20, “And Isaiah is very bold and says, ‘I WAS FOUND BY THOSE WHO DID NOT SEEK ME, I BECAME MANIFEST TO THOSE WHO DID NOT ASK FOR ME.’” “Says ” is the third person singular present active indicative form of the verb lego ( levgw ), which refers to the “content” of what the Lord communicated through the prophet Isaiah that is recorded in Isaiah 65:1.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 23

The third person singular form refers to the prophet Isaiah. This is a “perfective” present, which is used to emphasize the results of a past action. Therefore, the “perfective present” of the verb lego emphasizes that even though Isaiah 65:1 was written in the past, it still speaks today and is binding on the hearers and in particular the unsaved Israelites in Paul’s day since it is a prophecy that was being fulfilled in Paul’s day. The active voice indicates that the Lord as the subject produced the action of the verb in communicating through the prophet Isaiah what is recorded in Isaiah 65:1. The indicative mood is “declarative” presenting this assertion as an unqualified statement of fact. We will translate lego , “ saying .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:20: “In fact, Isaiah is even very bold, saying…” Romans 10:20, “And Isaiah is very bold and says, ‘I WAS FOUND BY THOSE WHO DID NOT SEEK ME, I BECAME MANIFEST TO THOSE WHO DID NOT ASK FOR ME.’” As we noted earlier Paul is quoting from Isaiah 65:1. Isaiah 65:1, “I permitted Myself to be sought by those who did not ask for Me ; I permitted Myself to be found by those who did not seek Me . I said, ‘Here am I, here am I,’ to a nation which did not call on My name.” Paul is quoting from the Septuagint translation of the Massoretic Text Isaiah 65:1. However, he transposes the verbs and reverses the order of the lines, which makes no difference to the sense. נדרשׁתי ללוא שׁאלו :The first line from the Hebrew text of Isaiah 65:1 Translation of the first line from Hebrew text of Isaiah 65:1: “I permitted Myself to be sought after by those who did not ask for Me.” נמצאתי ללא בקשׁני :The second line from the Hebrew text of Isaiah 65:1 Translation of the second line from Hebrew text of Isaiah 65:1: “I permitted Myself to be found by those who did not seek after Me.” The first line from the Septuagint translation of 65:1: e)mfanhV$ e)genovmhn toi~$ e)meV mhV zhtou~sin. Translation of the first line from Septuagint text of Isaiah 65:1: “I became well- known to those who did not seek after Me.” The first line of Paul’s text in Romans 10:20: eu(revqhn e)n toi~$ e)meV mhV zhtou~sin. Translation of the first line of Paul’s text in Romans 10:20: “I was found by those who did not seek after Me.” The second line from the Septuagint translation of Isaiah 65:1: eu(revqhn e)n toi~$ e)meV mhV eperwtw~sin.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 24

Translation of the second line from the Septuagint translation of Isaiah 65:1: “I was found by those who did not ask for Me.” The second line in Paul’s text in Romans 10:20 has e)mfanhV$ e)genovmhn toi~$ e)meV mhV eperwtw~sin. Translation of the second line of Paul’s text in Romans 10:20: “I became well- known to those who did not ask for Me.” A comparison of the Hebrew text of Isaiah 65:1 with that of the Septuagint’s translation of this verse along with Paul’s text indicates the following: (1) The Hebrew of Isaiah 65:1 employs “tolerative niphal” stems but the Septuagint does not account for this and neither does Paul. (2) The Septuagint takes the first verb (seek) in the first line of the Hebrew text and puts it as the second verb in the first line. (3) The Septuagint takes the second verb (ask) in the first line of the Hebrew text and puts it as the second verb in the second line. (4) The Septuagint translates the first verb (found) in the second line of the Hebrew text and puts it also as the first verb in the second line. (5) The Septuagint takes the second verb (seek) in the second line of the Hebrew text and puts it as the second verb in the first line. (6) Paul takes the first verb (found) in the second Hebrew line and places it as the first verb in the first line. (7) Paul takes the second Hebrew verb (ask) in the first line and follows the Septuagint and places it as the second verb in the second line. (8) Paul takes the first Hebrew verb (found) in the second line and places it as the first verb in the first line. (9) Paul takes the second Hebrew verb (seek) in the second line and follows the Septuagint and places it as the second verb in the first line. (10) Paul transposes the lines meaning that the first line in the Hebrew text is his first line and the second line in the Hebrew text is his first line. (11) The Septuagint inverts clauses from each of the lines. So it appears that Paul is following the Hebrew more than the Septuagint since he only transposes the lines of the Hebrew and doesn’t follow the Septuagint by inverting the clauses within the lines. That Paul is transposing the lines does not change the sense. As Paul did with Hosea 1:10 and 2:23 in Romans 9:25-26, in Romans 10:20 he quotes from Isaiah 65:1, which is addressed to Israel and applies Isaiah 65:1 to the Gentiles based on the principle of analogy since the Gentiles did not diligently seek after God or inquire about Him. In Romans 9:25-26, Paul quotes Hosea 2:23 and 1:10 to support his statement in Romans 9:24b that God would not only effectually call Jews but also Gentiles. In Romans 9:25, Paul cites Hosea 2:23 to support his teaching in Romans 9:24 that

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 25 the Scriptures predicted that like the Jews, Gentiles were to be effectually called by God to be the objects of His grace for all of eternity. Romans 9:25, “In fact, as He says in the book of Hosea, ‘I will effectually call those who were never My people to be ‘My people’ and in addition those who were never divinely loved to be ‘divinely loved.’” In Romans 9:25, Paul is quoting freely from Hosea 2:23 (MT and LXX 2:25) and reverses the order of the two clauses he cites from it and uses different wording from both the Septuagint and Massoretic Text. The major difficulty involved with this quotation is that Paul is using this quotation to support his teaching in Romans 9:24 that Gentiles are also included in the plan of salvation, however, Hosea was addressing the Northern Kingdom in Israel and not Gentiles. This problem is resolved by taking in account that this quotation from Hosea 2:23 is rather “free” in that the order of the clauses is reversed by Paul in Romans 9:25 to fit the application to the Gentiles. Notice the order of the clauses in Hosea 2:23 are reversed by Paul in Romans 9:25 in order to make this quote apply to Gentiles. The key to understanding how Paul could apply Hosea 2:23 to Gentiles when it was directed towards the Northern Kingdom in Israel specifically is the expression “ not My people .” So in Romans 9:25, Paul took the expression “ not My people ” that appears in Hosea 2:23 and applied it to the Gentiles as well since by ethnic or racial heritage, the Gentiles of course were not God’s people. Therefore, he was led by the Spirit to apply these verses to Gentiles even though it was originally directed towards the Northern Kingdom of Israel. When Hosea says to the Northern Kingdom that they are not God’s people it was because of their unregenerate state, which placed them on the same status of unregenerate Gentiles. Next, in Romans 9:26, Paul cites Hosea 1:10 to support his teaching in Romans 9:24 that the Scriptures predicted that like the Jews, Gentiles were to be effectually called by God. Romans 9:26, “Furthermore, it will come to pass in the very same place where it was said to them, ‘you are, as an eternal spiritual truth, by no means My people,’ there they will be effectually called sons by the living God.’” In this passage, the apostle continues to apply passages in Hosea to Gentiles that were initially directed towards the Northern Kingdom. He does this since through the Spirit, Paul saw an analogy between God’s present rejection of Israel with His past rejection of the Gentiles. Paul also sees the analogy between the present effectual calling of the Gentiles and His future effectual calling of the Jews. Therefore, Paul quotes both Hosea 2:23 in Romans 9:25 and Hosea 1:10 in Romans 9:26 because he wants his readers to see this analogy.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 26

Now in Romans 10:20, Paul quotes from Isaiah 65:1, which is addressed to Israel and applies Isaiah 65:1 to the Gentiles based on the principle of analogy since the Gentiles did not diligently seek after God or inquire about Him. This brings us back to Romans 9:30 and in this passage Paul presented a paradoxical conclusion based upon what he taught in Romans 9:6-29 that the Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness like the Jews, obtained it by faith. Romans 9:30, “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? That the Gentiles who, customarily and characteristically do not zealously pursue righteousness obtained righteousness, in fact a righteousness, which is by means of faith as a source.” Romans 9:30 actually began the discussion regarding Israel’s rejection of Jesus Christ and the solution to that problem. Romans 10:20, “And Isaiah is very bold and says, ‘I WAS FOUND BY THOSE WHO DID NOT SEEK ME, I BECAME MANIFEST TO THOSE WHO DID NOT ASK FOR ME.’” “I WAS FOUND ” is the first person singular aorist passive indicative form of the verb heurisko ( eu(rivskw ). In classical Greek, heurisko is attested from Homer onwards. Its essential meaning is “to find, to discover.” The word’s origin is rather obscure. While Latin distinguishes between reperire , which implies finding that is preceded by seeking, and invenire , a chance discovery, Greek has only one word for both ideas. Burkhard Gartner lists the following literal and figurative meanings of heurisko in classical literature: (1) Find by chance, come upon (e.g. Homer Iliad, 1 498;); mid. incur (e.g. misfortune, Homer Odyssey 24 462); pass. find oneself, be found (e.g. Odyssey 21, 304; Sophocles Philoctete 452), show oneself (e.g. to be unjust, Euripides, Hecuba 270). (2) Find after seeking, discover (e.g. a way out, Homer, Odyssey 4, 374; a device for rescue, Aeschylus, Sept. 209; a law of nature, Vitruvius , On Architecture 9, Preface 9-12: the famous heureka [“I have found [it]”] of Archimedes). (3) Fetch, obtain (a price for goods by a sale or auction, Xenophon, Hell. 3, 4, 24). (4) Acquire, procure for some one (e.g. soterian , rescue, Plato, Protagoras 321C), mostly, however, mid. obtain (e.g. advantage, Thucydides 1, 31, 2). (The New International Dictionary of the New Testament Theology volume 3, pages 527-530) Herbert Preisker lists the following classical and Hellenistic usages of the verb: (1) “to find after search” (Aesch. Prom. 59; Sept. c. Theb. 191; Epict. Diss. I, 24, 15; III, 6, 4; P. Oxy. VIII, 1153, 18). (2) “to find accidentally, to come across something, to draw evil upon oneself,” (Homer Odyssey 21, 304; Aesch. Prom. 267); pass. “to be struck by, to find oneself” (Euripides Hec. 274; Soph. Phil. 452; Epict. Diss. III, 6, 2). (3) of goods to fetch (money); at auctions to get (Xenophon Hist. Graec. III, 4, 24; Aeschin. 1, 96; at auctions “to get.” (4) “to procure, to

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 27 obtain,” often in the med. “to get for oneself” (Pindar Pyth. 2, 64; 1, 48; 3, 111; Thuc. I, 31, 2). (5) Figuratively of ‘spiritual or intellectual discovery, perception, insight, understanding, on the basis of deliberations, investigations or demonstration” (Homer Od. 12, 392; Aesch. Prom. 59; Soph. Oed. Col. 1188; Hdt. I, 5; P. Oxy. VI, 918); Pass. Often in the sense of moral and religious judgment which is first made by men (Dan. 1:19) but behind which God may stand (Is. 53:9; Da. 6:22). (6) pass in the sense of “to show oneself, to appear, to prove oneself, to be found as” (Jos. Bell. 3, 114; Ditt. Syll. 736, 51; 972, 65; 1109, 73; P. Oxy. IV, 743, 25). (Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament volume 2, page 769) Heurisko is very common in the Septuagint (LXX) and as in classical literature essentially means “to find.” It translates as many as 15 different Hebrew words. In the LXX and late Judaism heurisko was also used in a literal and a figurative sense. The verb mainly serves in the LXX to translate the Hebrew verb matsa ( axm ): (1) Qal: “to meet by chance, to find, to obtain” (Gen. 18:28; 1 Kgs. 1:3; Ecc. 8:17). (2) Niphal: “to be found” (Ex. 35:24; 2 Kgs. 16:8; Mic. 1:13). (3) Hiphil: “to make something happen to someone” (Job 34:11). The verb heurisko is used to translate the following Hebrew terms in the LXX: (1) `amar ( rma ), say; niphal: be said (Dn. 8:26) (2) bo’ ( awb ), Qal: go, come (2 Chr. 30:25; Jb. 28:20); hophal: be brought (2 Kgs 12:9) (3) baqa ` ( uqb ), hatch; niphal: be hatched (Is. 59:5) (4) baqash ( vqb ), Piel: seek (Dn. 9:3) (5) darakh (rrd ), walk; hiphil: let walk (Is. 48:17) (6) yathar ( rjy ), Niphal: be left over, remain over (1 Kgs. 15:18) (7) malat ( ?lm ), Piel: leave, undisturbed (2 Kgs. 23:18-Codex Alexandrinus only) (8) matsa ( axm ), Qal: meet by chance, find, obtain (Gen. 18:28; 1 Kgs. 1:3; Eccl. 8:17); niphal: be found (Ex. 35:24; 2 Kgs. 16:8; Mi. 1:13); hiphil: make something happen to someone (Jb. 34:11) (9) nasa’ (acn ), carry off, win, obtain (Est. 2:9, 15, 17) (10) nasagh ( gcn ), Hiphil: overtake, be able to afford, appear (Lev. 5:11; Nm. 6:21; Jer. 42;16 [49:16] ) (11) `avadh (dbu ), do, commit (Dn. 6:22-Aramaic) (12) puq ( qwP ), Hiphil: gain (Prov. 12:2) (13) ra’ah ( har ), Qal: see (Jgs. 18:9-Codex Alexandrinus only); niphal: appear (Jgs. 6:12-Codex Alexandrinus only) (14) shekhach ( jbv ), Haphel: find (Ezr. 4:15, 19, 7:16; Dn. 2:25-Aramaic) (15) shamar ( rmv ), observe, keep (Prov. 2:20). Its usage in the Septuagint is essentially the same as the classical usage. All the classical usages of heurisko noted above by Gartner are found except for “to fetch, to obtain.” The following objects are found in the LXX: (1) things (teraphim, “household idols” Gen. 31:35) (2) persons (e.g. Saul, 1 Sam. 10:21) (3) God (e.g. Isa. 55:6) (4) grace (Gen. 18:3; Ex. 33:13; Num. 11:11; Heb. hen ) (5) mercy (Gen. 19:19; Judg. 6:17, also hen ) (6) life (Prov. 21:21) (7) rest (Sir. 11:19).

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 28

The verb occurs over 175 times in the Greek New Testament. The range of meaning of heurisko in the New Testament writings is the same as in the classical literature and the Septuagint. Vines Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words has the following article regarding heurisko , “denotes (a) ‘to find,’ either with previous search, e. g., (Matt. 7:7,8), or without, e. g., (Matt. 27:32); in the passive voice, of Enoch's disappearance, (Heb. 11:5); of mountains, (Rev. 16:20); of Babylon and its occupants, (18:21,22); (b) metaphorically, ‘to find out by enquiry,’ or ‘to learn, discover,’ e. g., (Luke 19:48; John 18:38; 19:4,6; Acts 4:21; 13:28; Rom. 7:10; Gal. 2:17), which indicates ‘the surprise of the Jew’ who learned for the first time that before God he had no moral superiority over the Gentiles whom he superciliously dubbed ‘sinners,’ while he esteemed himself to be ‘righteous’; (1 Pet. 1:7; Rev. 5:4); (c) in the middle voice, ‘to find for oneself, gain, procure, obtain,’ e. g. (Matt. 10:39; 11:29), ‘ye shall find (rest)’; (Luke 1:30; Acts 7:46; 2 Tim. 1:18). Bauer lists three categorical usages of the word in the NT (A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature pages 324- 325): (1) Find (a) after seeking find, discover, come upon (b) find, come upon accidentally, without seeking; pass. Be found, find oneself, be (c) with acc. and ptc. or adj. which denotes the state of being or the action in which someone or something is or is involved. (2) Figuratively of intellectual discovery based upon reflection, observation, examination, or investigation find, discover (3) Find (for oneself) obtain. Louw and Nida list four categorical usage of the verb in the NT (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains 2 volumes): (1) To learn the location of something, either by intentional searching or by unexpected discovery- ‘to learn the whereabouts of something, to find, to discover, to come upon, to happen to find’ (page 329). (2) To learn something previously not known, frequently involving an element of surprise- ‘to learn, to find out, to discover’ (page 325). (3) To attain a state, with the supplementary implication of discovery- ‘to attain to, to discover’ (page 151). (4) To begin to experience an event or state - ‘to begin to experience, to come into an experience, to attain’ (page 808). (5) Find (for oneself) obtain. The New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon classifies the word’s meaning under three categories (pages 261-262): (1) to come upon, hit upon, to meet with (a) after searching, to find a thing sought (b) without previous search, to find (by chance), to fall in with (c) eurisko tina or ti with a predicate acc. is used of those who come or return to a place, the predicate ptcp. or adj. describing the state found, or the action which one is found engaged in (2) tropically, to find by inquiry, thought, examination, scrutiny, observation, hearing; to find out by practice and experience,

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 29 i.e. to see, learn, discover, understand; pass. Euriskomai to be found, i.e. to be seen, be present; to be discovered, recognized, detected, to show one’s self out, of one’s character or state as found out by others (men, God, or both) (3) Mid. as in Grk. writ., to find for one’s self, to acquire, get, obtain, procure. Preisker commenting on the verb, writes, “The term may sometimes apply to ordinary earthly and possibly contingent facts, but its reference is predominately to the surprising discovery and mysterious understanding of human existence and historical occurrence in their hidden relationships as seen from the standpoint of and with an ultimate view to the kingdom of God (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament volume 2, page 769). He categorizes the word’s meaning in the NT as follows: (1) Numinous facts (i.e., mysterious, beyond comprehension) (Matt. 1:18; 12:44; Luke 1:30; 9:36; 24:2-3, 23; Acts 5:10; 8:40; Rom. 7:10, 21; Gal. 2:17; Phil. 2:8; Rev. 9:6). (2) In relation to miracles (Matt. 17:27; Mk. 7:30; Lk. 8:35; Jn. 21:6; Ac. 5:22. (3) In relation to faith (Mt. 8:10; Luke 18:8). (4) In relation to supernatural gifts (Mt. 7:7, 14; 10:39; 11:29). (5) The unexpected gift of the kingdom of God (Mt. 13:44, 46). (6) Encounter with Jesus Himself (Mk. 1:37; Luke 2:12; Jn. 1:41, 45; 6:25; 7:34). (7) It may refer to experience with God (Lk. 4:17; Ac. 17:27; Rom. 10:20). (8) To any gift of salvation (Jn. 10:9; Ac. 7:46; Rom. 4:1; 2 Cor. 5:3; 2 Tim. 1:18; Hb. 4:16; 9:12). (9) To being miraculously called and saved by God (Mt. 18:13; 20:6; 22:9; 24:46; Lk. 15:5, 8, 24, 32). (10) But as it suggests endowment, so it also suggests responsibility (Lk. 13:6; 17:18; Ac. 5:39; 1 Cor. 15:15; 1 Pt. 1:7; Rev. 2:2; 3:2; 5:4; 14:5). (11) The whole seriousness of judgment (Mt. 24:46; 2 Pt. 3:14; Rev. 12:8; 16:20; 18:14, 21, 24; 20:15). Harold Moulton list the following meanings in the NT for heurisko (The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised page 176): (1) to find, to meet with, to light upon (2) to find out, to detect, discover (3) to acquire, obtain, win, gain (4) to find mentally, to comprehend, recognize (5) to find by experience, observe, gather (6) to devise as feasible. In Romans 10:20, the first person singular form of the verb heurisko refers to God the Father. In Romans 10:20, the verb is used with God as the subject and in the passive voice meaning “to be found.” The word denotes that the Gentiles “found” God in the sense that through faith alone in Christ alone, they entered into a relationship with Him. This means that they personally encountered God as He is revealed by the Holy Spirit in the person and works of Jesus of Nazareth, the Old Testament Scriptures and the apostolic testimony, which now appears in the New Testament. Paul mentions in Romans 10:3 that the Jews had a zeal for God but not in accordance with an experiential knowledge of Him, which can only be acquired

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 30 through faith alone in Christ alone since no one can come to the Father except through Christ. Romans 10:1-3, “Spiritual brothers, indeed, the desire produced by my own heart and in addition my specific detailed request on behalf of them is always for their deliverance. Because I testify concerning them that they possess a zeal for God, however by no means according to an experiential knowledge. Because they have in the past rejected the righteousness originating from God the Father and continue to do so up to the present moment. In fact, because they have in the past zealously sought to establish their own and continue to do so up to the present moment, they never submitted to the righteousness originating from God the Father.” In Romans 10:20, the aorist tense of the verb heurisko is a “constative” aorist describing in summary fashion the period of time in which the Gentile did find God through faith in Christ, from the resurrection up to the time Paul wrote this epistle. The passive voice of the verb means that the subject receives the action of the verb from either an expressed or unexpressed agency. Therefore, the passive voice means that God, as the subject, received the action of being found or personally encountered through faith in Christ by the Gentiles. The indicative mood is “declarative” presenting the assertion as an unqualified statement of fact. We will translate heurisko , “ I was found .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:20: “In fact, Isaiah is even very bold, saying, ‘I was found…” Romans 10:20, “And Isaiah is very bold and says, ‘I WAS FOUND BY THOSE WHO DID NOT SEEK ME, I BECAME MANIFEST TO THOSE WHO DID NOT ASK FOR ME.’” “BY THOSE WHO DID NOT SEEK ME ” is composed of the articular dative masculine plural present active participle form of the verb zeteo ( zhtevw ) (dzay-the- o), “ THOSE WHO SEEK ” and the negative particle me ( mhv) (may), “ NOT ” and the accusative first person singular form of the personal pronoun ego ( e)gwv), “ ME .” There is a textual problem with this expression in that some MSS have the preposition en before the article tois , which is modifying the participle form of the verb zeteo and some do not have the preposition. The 27 th edition of Nestle- Aland’s Novum Testamentum Graece puts the preposition in brackets to indicate the conjecture with regard to this word. The following witnesses do not support the inclusion of the word: a A C D 1 Ψ 33 1739 1881. The following witnesses include this word are as follows: P 46 B D*

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 31

F G 1506 vid . Thus, we can see why Nestle-Aland put the preposition in brackets since the witnesses are good on both sides. Regardless of whether or not the word is in the original or not will not cause any problems since the participle in the dative can function the same without the preposition en before it. Internally, it would seem that for the sake of parallelism that a preposition should also be in front of the other articular dative participle that appears at the end of the verse. Thus, as Cranfield observes and I believe correctly, that the word found its way into the text because it is unusual to have a dative following the passive form of the verb heurisko . (C.E.B. Cranfield, International Critical Commentary, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans , volume 2, page 540; T and T Clark, A Continuum imprint, London, New York, 1975) However, Bengel’s rule states “The more difficult reading is to be preferred over the easier.” Therefore, we conclude that the preposition en did not appear before the article tois in the original autograph. The verb zeteo means, “to give top priority, to diligently, earnestly and tenaciously seek after something, sparing no effort or expense, for the object sought is of the highest value.” The verb’s meaning in Romans 10:20 is negated by the negative particle me . Therefore, in Romans 10:20, the negative particle me and the verb zeteo indicate that God was found by the Gentiles who did not give top priority to diligently, earnestly, and tenaciously seeking after God and sparing no effort or expense, for they considered a relationship with God of the highest value. The verb functions as a “substantive” participle as indicated by the definite article preceding it, which functions as a substantiver meaning that it converts the participle into a substantive. Thus, we can translate the particle form of this verb with a relative pronoun phrase “those who,” which refers to the Gentiles. The substantive participle form of the verb zeteo functions as a “dative of agency” meaning that the dative substantive is used to indicate the personal agent by whom the action of the verb is accomplished. Here in Romans 10:20 the Gentiles are the personal agent who accomplishes the action of the verb zeteo indicating that God was found “by” the Gentiles who always existed in a state of not diligently seeking after a relationship with God. The present tense of the verb is a “customary” or “stative” present tense emphasizes ongoing state indicating that the Gentiles always existed in the state of not diligently seeking after a relationship with God. The active voice is “stative” meaning that the subject exists in the state indicated by the verb. This indicates that the Gentiles as the subject existed in the state of not seeking diligently after a relationship with God.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 32

We will translate the expression me zetousin , “ by those who always existed in a state of not diligently seeking after .” The personal pronoun ego refers to the Father and functions as an accusative direct object receiving the action of the verb zeteo . The word involves a contrast between the Gentiles and the Jews in that the Gentiles who were not diligently seeking after a relationship with God whereas the Jews who did. This again echoes Paul’s statement in Romans 9:30, which began this entire section regarding Israel’s rejection of her Messiah. Romans 9:30, “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? That the Gentiles who, customarily and characteristically do not zealously pursue righteousness obtained righteousness, in fact a righteousness, which is by means of faith as a source.” We will translate ego , “ Me .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:20: “In fact, Isaiah is even very bold, saying, ‘I was found by those who always existed in a state of not diligently seeking after Me…” Romans 10:20, “And Isaiah is very bold and says, ‘I WAS FOUND BY THOSE WHO DID NOT SEEK ME, I BECAME MANIFEST TO THOSE WHO DID NOT ASK FOR ME.’” Next, we must identify the fact that Paul at this point in the sentence employs the figure of “asyndeton.” The common practice of the Greek language was that each clause be connected with the preceding by some connective word. The term for the lack of such a connective is “asyndeton.” The use of conjunctions came to be very common in the Greek so that the absence was noticeable and was called “asyndeton,” which literally means, “not bound together.” Therefore, at this point in the sentence Paul employs the figure of “asyndeton,” in order to make a solemn affirmation that God permitted Himself to become accessible to the Gentiles who did not diligently inquire about Him. “I BECAME MANIFEST ” is composed of the first person singular aorist middle indicative form of the verb ginomai ( givnomai ) (ghin-om-i), “ I BECAME ” and the nominative masculine singular form of the adjective emphanes ( e)mfanhv$ ) (em-fan-ace), “ MANIFEST .” The verb ginomai means, “to enter into a new condition or state, to become something you weren’t before” indicating God entered into a new condition or state in that He permitted Himself to “become” accessible in the sense that He would permit the Gentiles to have fellowship with Him. The adjective emphanes appears only twice in the Greek New Testament (Romans 10:20; Acts 10:40). In Romans 10:20, the word means “accessible” indicating that God caused Himself to be accessible to the Gentiles in the sense

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 33 that He would permit Himself to have fellowship with the Gentiles as a result of their faith in His Son. The adjective functions as a predicate nominative meaning that God is making an assertion about Himself, namely that He permitted Himself to become accessible or approachable to the Gentiles in the form of fellowship with Him. We will translate emphanes , “ accessible .” The aorist tense of the verb ginomai is “ingressive” emphasizing that God “entered into a state” of making Himself accessible to the Gentiles in the sense that He would have fellowship with them as a result of faith in His Son. The middle voice is a “permissive” middle meaning that God has allowed something to be done to Himself, namely, that He made Himself accessible to the Gentiles in the sense of having fellowship with them. It implies that God tolerated Himself to be accessible to those who were not His covenant people, namely the Gentiles. The indicative mood is “declarative” presenting this assertion as an unqualified statement of Bible doctrine. We will translate ginomai , “ I became .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:20: “In fact, Isaiah is even very bold, saying, ‘I was found by those who always existed in a state of not diligently seeking after Me. I became accessible…” Romans 10:20, “And Isaiah is very bold and says, ‘I WAS FOUND BY THOSE WHO DID NOT SEEK ME, I BECAME MANIFEST TO THOSE WHO DID NOT ASK FOR ME.’” “TO THOSE WHO DID NOT ASK FOR ME ” is composed of the articular dative masculine plural present active participle form of the verb eperotao (e)perwtavw ) (ep-er-o-tah-o), “ TO THOSE WHO DID ASK ” and the negative particle me ( mhv) (may), “ NOT ” and the accusative first person singular form of the personal pronoun ego ( e)gwv), “ FOR ME .” The verb eperotao is a compound word composed of the verb erotao , “to ask, inquire” and the preposition epi prefixed to the word intensifies it, thus the word literally means “to diligently inquire about.” The verb’s meaning is negated by the negative particle me indicating that the Gentiles did not diligently inquire about God or the ways of God. The verb functions as a “substantive” participle as indicated by the definite article preceding it, which functions as a substantiver meaning that it converts the participle into a substantive. Thus, we can translate the particle form of this verb with a relative pronoun phrase “those who,” which refers to the Gentiles. The word functions as a dative of advantage meaning that God permitted Himself to become accessible “for the benefit of” the Gentiles who did not diligently inquire about a relationship with Him.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 34

The present tense of the verb is a “customary” or “stative” present tense emphasizes ongoing state indicating that the Gentiles always existed in the state of not diligently inquiring about God or His ways. The active voice is “stative” meaning that the subject exists in the state indicated by the verb. This indicates that the Gentiles as the subject existed in the state of not diligently inquiring about God or His ways. We will translate the expression eperotao , “ for the benefit of those who always existed in a state of not diligently inquiring about .” The personal pronoun ego refers to the Father and functions as an accusative direct object receiving the action of the verb eperotao . The word involves a contrast between the Gentiles and the Jews in that God permitted Himself to become accessible to the Gentiles who were not diligently inquiring about a relationship with God whereas the Jews who did. We will translate ego , “ Me .” Completed corrected translation of Romans 10:20: “In fact, Isaiah is even very bold, saying, ‘I was found by those who always existed in a state of not diligently seeking after Me. I became accessible for the benefit of those who always existed in a state of not diligently inquiring about Me.” So in Romans 10:20, Paul cites Isaiah 65:1, which teaches that God was found by the Gentiles who were not diligently seeking after a relationship with Him in the sense that they entered into a relationship with Him through faith in Jesus Christ. This passage also teaches that God permitted Himself to become accessible to the Gentiles who were not diligently inquiring about a relationship with Him in the sense that He permitted Himself to enter into fellowship with them.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 35

Romans 10:21-Paul Cites Isaiah 65:2 To Demonstrate That Throughout Her History Unbelieving And Obstinate Israel Rejected God’s Offer Of Salvation

We now complete our study of Romans chapter ten by noting verse 21 and in this passage Paul quotes from Isaiah 65:2 to demonstrate that throughout her history, unbelieving and obstinate Israel has rejected God’s offer of salvation. Romans 10:21, “But as for Israel He says, ‘ALL THE DAY LONG I HAVE STRETCHED OUT MY HANDS TO A DISOBEDIENT AND OBSTINATE PEOPLE.’” “But ” is the “adversative” use of the conjunction de ( deV) (deh), which introduces a statement that presents a contrast with Paul’s statement in Romans 10:20. Romans 10:20, “In fact, Isaiah is even very bold, saying, ‘I was found by those who always existed in a state of not diligently seeking after Me. I permitted Myself to become accessible for the benefit of those who always existed in a state of not diligently inquiring about Me.’” In this passage, Paul cites Isaiah 65:1, which teaches that God was found by the Gentiles who were not diligently seeking after a relationship with Him in the sense that they entered into a relationship with Him through faith in Jesus Christ. This passage also teaches that God permitted Himself to become accessible to the Gentiles who were not diligently inquiring about a relationship with Him in the sense that He permitted Himself to enter into fellowship with them. Now in Romans 10:21, Paul employs the adversative use of the conjunction de in order to introduce a statement that teaches that Israel rejected God’s offer of salvation in the gospel of His Son Jesus Christ. Therefore, the contrast is between the Gentiles positive response to the gospel with that of the negative response of the nation of Israel towards the gospel. Paul doesn’t use the strong adversative conjunction alla since Israel’s rejection of her Messiah is not permanent as Paul will relate in chapter eleven. Thus, he uses de instead in order to simply contrast the Gentiles response to the gospel with that of Israel’s. We will translate de , “ however .” Romans 10:21, “But as for Israel He says, ‘ALL THE DAY LONG I HAVE STRETCHED OUT MY HANDS TO A DISOBEDIENT AND OBSTINATE PEOPLE.’” “As for ” is the preposition pros ( pro$ ), which functions as a marker of reference indicating that the prophecy that appears in Isaiah 65:2 is “concerning” or “with reference to” the unsaved citizens of the nation of Israel. We will translate the preposition pros , “ concerning .”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 36

Romans 10:21, “But as for Israel He says, ‘ALL THE DAY LONG I HAVE STRETCHED OUT MY HANDS TO A DISOBEDIENT AND OBSTINATE PEOPLE.’” “Israel ” is articular accusative masculine singular form of the proper name Israel ( )Israh/l ) (Is-rah-ale), which refers to the unsaved citizens of the nation of Israel who are descendants racially of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, aka, Israel since Paul is quoting Isaiah 65:2 that predicted Israel’s negative response to the gospel. The articular construction of the word is “generic” sense distinguishing the unsaved racial descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (aka Israel) from the saved Gentiles. The word functions as an “accusative direct object” meaning that it is receiving the action of the verb lego , “ says .” “He says ” is the third person singular present active indicative form of the verb lego ( levgw ), which refers to the “content” of what the Lord communicated through the prophet Isaiah that is recorded in Isaiah 65:2. The third person singular form refers to the prophet Isaiah. This is a “perfective” present, which is used to emphasize the results of a past action. Therefore, the “perfective present” of the verb lego emphasizes that even though Isaiah 65:2 was written in the past, it still speaks today and is binding on the hearers and in particular the unsaved Israelites in Paul’s day since it is a prophecy that was being fulfilled in Paul’s day. The active voice indicates that the Lord as the subject produced the action of the verb in communicating through the prophet Isaiah what is recorded in Isaiah 65:2. The indicative mood is “declarative” presenting this assertion as an unqualified statement of fact. We will translate lego , “ he says.” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:21: “However, concerning Israel, he says…” Romans 10:21, “But as for Israel He says, ‘ALL THE DAY LONG I HAVE STRETCHED OUT MY HANDS TO A DISOBEDIENT AND OBSTINATE PEOPLE.’” As we noted earlier, in Romans 10:21, Paul is citing Isaiah 65:2. Isaiah 65:2, “I have spread out My hands all day long to a rebellious people , who walk in the way which is not good, following their own thoughts.” In Romans 10:21, Paul is quoting the Septuagint translation of Isaiah 65:2 and the only difference is that he places the expression o%lhn thVn h(mevran at the beginning of the sentence in order to emphasize God’s longsuffering with Israel and Israel’s rebellion.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 37

Romans 10:21, “But as for Israel He says, ‘ALL THE DAY LONG I HAVE STRETCHED OUT MY HANDS TO A DISOBEDIENT AND OBSTINATE PEOPLE.’” “ALL DAY LONG ” is composed of the accusative feminine singular form of the adjective holos ( o%lo$ ) (hol-os), “ ALL ” and articular accusative feminine singular form of the noun hemera ( h(mevra ) (hay-mer-ah), “ DAY.” The noun hemera can have several meanings depending upon the context. It doesn’t always mean “day” as in a 24-hour period but it can refer to an undefined or defined period of time that are marked by certain particular characteristics. In Romans 10:21, the noun hemera means “day” and is used in a figurative sense for the entire period of Israel’s existence since it is used in an anthropomorphism that depicts God as holding out His hands to offer salvation to Israel through faith alone in Christ alone. The noun hemera functions as an “accusative of time” indicating the extent of the verbal action. It indicates “how long” God has been patient with Israel by continuing throughout her history to extend her grace by offering her salvation through the gospel. The “genitive of time” indicates “kind of time” meaning “time during which” something takes place whereas as the dative of time emphasize point of time answering the question “when?” and the accusative of time, which emphasizes extent of time answering the question “how long?” Therefore, hemera functions as an “accusative for extent of time” indicating the extent of the verb ekpetannumi , “ I HAVE STRETCHED OUT .” It denotes that God has offered grace and salvation to Israel throughout the “the entire extent of” her existence. The article preceding hemera is a function marker indicating that the adjective holos is the first predicate position, which is the adjective-article-noun construction. The term holos , also spelled oulos , is used in classical Greek as an adjective meaning, “whole, entire.” It is also employed as an adverb meaning, “wholly, completely.” The word expressed the sense of “complete in all its parts” whether used of people, places or things. At times, holos appears as a substantive meaning, “the universe” but yet Bauer states the word is never used this way. Liddell and Scott lists the following meaning for the adjective holos (Greek- English, New Edition, page 1218): (1) Whole, entire, complete in all its parts, of persons and things (2) Whole, i.e. safe and sound (3) Entire, utter (4) Neuter, as an adverb, wholly, entirely (5) As substantive, the universe. The adjective holos is used predominately to translate the Hebrew term kol ( lK)) in the Septuagint where it is quite common. The word is used of wholeness in terms of quantity (Gen. 41:43) or of wholeness in terms of length of time (Nm.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 38

11:32; 14:1). It is also used in Deuteronomy 4:29 and 6:5 in the command to serve the Lord with one’s “entire” being. The adjective holos appears 114 times in the Greek New Testament and is used of: (1) With measures of time or space (Lk. 5:5; Mt. 20:6; Rm. 8:36) (2) With groups of people, corporate bodies (Mt. 26:59) (3) Of things (1 Cor. 5:6) (4) In the formula ‘all this happened so that’ (5) Used of total dedication and devotion to God (Mt. 12:30) (6) Used in the imagery of part and whole (Mt. 5:29f; 1 Cor. 12:12-27; Mt. 6:22f) (7) Used predicatively in John, ‘as a whole,” i.e. “completely’ (Jn. 13:10; 7:23) (8) To express unity of some material (Jn. 19:23). The adjective holos is never attributive in position in the Greek New Testament. It has also an indefinite meaning, which pas does have (A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, page 774). Statements which apply to the totality of a group may be made from two different standpoints: (1) Stress may be laid on the group as a whole, therefore the Greek uses pas , or its plural pantes or the singular holos , “whole,” a meaning that is also borne occasionally by polloi . (2) Stress may be laid on each of the many individuals or parts, which make up the totality; therefore we find hekastos or pas . The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised lists the following meanings, “all, entire, whole” (page 287). Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains (volume 2): (1) Pertaining to being whole, complete, or entire, with focus on unity – ‘whole, all, complete, entire’ (page 613). (2) A totality as a complete unit – ‘whole, complete, entire’ (page 597). (3) A degree of totality or completeness – ‘complete, completely, totally, totality’ (page 691). Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (pages 564-565): (1) Used with a noun that has no article, something preceding it, something coming after it, whole (2) Used with a noun that has the article-coming before the noun, after the noun, the noun can be supplied from the context (3) Used with a pronoun, altogether, wholly (4) Used with a preposition, throughout, through. The New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon (page 444): (1) Whole (2) Usually placed before a substantive that has the article (3) Also after the substantive that has the article (4) Denotes the whole city as opposed to its parts (5) Denotes the whole city as opposed to other ideas, as the country, the fields, etc. (6) It is subjoined to an adjective or a verb to show the idea expressed by the adjective or verb belongs to the whole person or thing under consideration. In Romans 10:21, the adjective holos has a predicate relation to the noun hemera since the word is in the first predicate position as indicated by the adjective-article-noun construction. It is used of the extent to which God has

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 39 offered Israel salvation. Therefore, we will translate the expression holen ten hemeran , “ all day long .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:21: “However, concerning Israel, he says, ‘All day long…” Romans 10:21, “But as for Israel He says, ‘ALL THE DAY LONG I HAVE STRETCHED OUT MY HANDS TO A DISOBEDIENT AND OBSTINATE PEOPLE.’” “I HAVE STRETCHED OUT MY HANDS ” is composed of the first person singular aorist active indicative form of the verb ekpetannumi ( e)kpetavnnumi ) (ek- pet-an-noo-mee), “ I HAVE STRECHED OUT ” and the articular accusative feminine plural form of the noun cheir ( xeivr ) (khire), “ HANDS ” and the first person singular genitive (of possession) form of the personal pronoun ego ( e)gwv), “MY .” The verb ekpetannumi is used in an anthropomorphic sense of God the Father in that it is ascribing human hands to Him, which He does not possess in order to convey to our human frame of reference His reconciliatory attitude towards Israel. It expresses the Father’s desire to have the nation of Israel reconciled to Himself. Reconciliation is God’s peace treaty with the entire human race and is appropriated by making the non-meritorious decision to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation. It is the work of Jesus Christ on the cross that removes the barrier between God and man (2 Cor. 5:18; Eph. 2:16; Col. 1:20-21). 2 Corinthians 5:17-21, “Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come. Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” The gospel in relation to the unbeliever is God’s victorious proclamation of God’s love in delivering the entire human race from sin, Satan, his cosmic system and eternal condemnation, having reconciled them to Himself through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, “Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 40 that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.” This reconciliation is presented in the gospel message that God has made a peace treaty with the entire human race and the terms of that peace treaty is accepting the Gospel message through faith alone in Christ alone. This reconciliation with God and deliverance and victory over sin, Satan and the cosmic system that God accomplished through His Son’s crucifixion, burial, death, resurrection and session is received as a gift and appropriated through faith in Christ (John 3:16-18; Acts 16:31; Romans 5:1-2). The peace treaty is the direct result of the spiritual death of Christ on the Cross since it broke down the barrier, which separated man from God. Therefore, it broke down the barrier, which separated man from God and is composed of the following: (1) Mankind commits acts of sin (Isa. 64:6b; Rom. 3:23). (2) The penalty of sin is spiritual death (Rom. 5:12; 6:23a). (3) All are born spiritually dead at physical birth (Gen. 2:17; Rom. 5:12; Eph. 2:1). (4) Man’s relative righteousness cannot compare to God’s perfect righteousness (Isa. 64:6a; Rom. 9:30-33). (5) The character of God demands that our personal sins be judged (Isa. 46:9b; 64:6b; Rom. 8:8). (6) Man’s position in Adam as a result of the imputation of his sin (1 Cor. 15:22a). The Removal of the Barrier: (1) Redemption resolves man’s problem with sin (1 Pet. 1:18-19; Eph. 1:7; Titus 2:14; 1 Tim. 2:6a). (2) The Unlimited Atonement also resolves man’s sin problem (1 John 2:2). (3) Expiation resolves man’s problem with the penalty of sin, which is spiritual death (Col. 2:14). (4) Regeneration resolves man’s problem with being born spiritually dead (John 3:1- 18). (5) Imputation resulting in justification resolves the problem of man’s relative righteousness (1 Cor. 1:30; 2 Cor. 5:21; Rom. 4:1-5; Gal. 2:16). (6) Propitiation resolves man’s problem with the perfect character of God (Rom. 3:22-26; 1 John 2:2). (7) Our position in Christ resolves man’s position in Adam (1 Cor. 5:22b; 2 Cor. 5:17). Colossians 1:13-23, “For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities -- all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 41 cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven. And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach -- if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.” The Author and thus Initiator of the peace treaty is God the Father (2 Cor. 5:18a; Eph. 1:3-7; 2:14-16). Man was totally helpless to make peace with God (Rom. 3:10, 23; 8:5-8; Eph. 2:1) since he was the enemy of God because of his sin and rebellion but God reconciled man to Himself through the death of His Son (Rom. 5:6-10; Eph. 2:1-5). Ephesians 2:1-7, “And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.” The Lord Jesus Christ is the Mediator of the Peace Treaty. 1 Timothy 2:5, “For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” The Lord is the peacemaker (Eph. 2:14) since this peace treaty took place inside His unique Person as the God-Man (2 Cor. 5:19a; Eph. 2:14-16; Col. 1:22; 1 Pet. 2:24). God offers the entire world a full pardon of their sin through faith in Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 5:19b; Acts 13:38; Eph. 1:7; 4:32b; Col. 1:14; 2:13; 1 John 2:12). Therefore, the terms of the Peace Treaty is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31; John 3:16, 36). In the Levitical offerings, the “peace” offering taught Israel the doctrine of reconciliation, which is the manward side of the Cross. The Peace offering in Leviticus 3 is summarized by the apostle Paul in Ephesians 2:14-18. The Jew had peace with God the same way that the Gentile can have peace with God, faith in Jesus Christ. The Peace offering sets forth God as propitiated and the sinner reconciled. There were five Levitical offerings authorized by the Mosaic Law (Lev. 1-6).

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 42

The “burnt offering ” taught propitiation with emphasis on the work of Christ (Lev. 1) whereas the “gift offering ” taught propitiation but this bloodless offering portrayed the perfect Person of Jesus Christ (Lev. 2). The “peace offering ” called for the shedding of blood and taught the doctrine of reconciliation (Lev. 3). The “sin offering ” taught the forgiveness of unknown sins, which John calls in 1 John 1:9, “ all unrighteousness .” The “trespass offering ” taught the confession of known sins (See 1 John 1:9; Psalm 32:1-5). The Peace offering emphasizes the Person of Christ who is described in the Scriptures by the following: (1) “ our peace ” (Eph. 2:14). (2) “ Made peace ” (Col. 1:20). (3) “ Preached peace ” (Eph. 2:17). (4) “ Prince of peace ” (Isa. 9:6). The peace offering is found in Leviticus 3. Leviticus 3, “Now if his offering is a sacrifice of peace offerings, if he is going to offer out of the herd, whether male or female, he shall offer it without defect before the LORD. He shall lay his hand on the head of his offering and slay it at the doorway of the tent of meeting, and Aaron's sons the priests shall sprinkle the blood around on the altar. From the sacrifice of the peace offerings he shall present an offering by fire to the LORD, the fat that covers the entrails and all the fat that is on the entrails, and the two kidneys with the fat that is on them, which is on the loins, and the lobe of the liver, which he shall remove with the kidneys. Then Aaron's sons shall offer it up in smoke on the altar on the burnt offering, which is on the wood that is on the fire; it is an offering by fire of a soothing aroma to the LORD. But if his offering for a sacrifice of peace offerings to the LORD is from the flock, he shall offer it, male or female, without defect. If he is going to offer a lamb for his offering, then he shall offer it before the LORD, and he shall lay his hand on the head of his offering and slay it before the tent of meeting, and Aaron's sons shall sprinkle its blood around on the altar. From the sacrifice of peace offerings he shall bring as an offering by fire to the LORD, its fat, the entire fat tail which he shall remove close to the backbone, and the fat that covers the entrails and all the fat that is on the entrails, and the two kidneys with the fat that is on them, which is on the loins, and the lobe of the liver, which he shall remove with the kidneys. Then the priest shall offer it up in smoke on the altar as food, an offering by fire to the LORD. Moreover, if his offering is a goat, then he shall offer it before the LORD, and he shall lay his hand on its head and slay it before the tent of meeting, and the sons of Aaron shall sprinkle its blood around on the altar. From it he shall present his offering as an offering by fire to the LORD, the fat that covers the entrails and all the fat that is on the entrails, and the two kidneys with the fat that is on them, which is on the

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 43 loins, and the lobe of the liver, which he shall remove with the kidneys. The priest shall offer them up in smoke on the altar as food, an offering by fire for a soothing aroma; all fat is the LORD'S. It is a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings: you shall not eat any fat or any blood.” The Hebrew word for “ peace offering ” is shelem , or zebah shelamim , “sacrifice of peace.” The Peace offering always followed the other offerings. Categories of Peace offerings: (1) Thank offering ( zebah hattoda , “sacrifice of thanksgiving,” Lev. 7:12; 22:29) (2) Votive offering ( zebah neder , “sacrifice of a vow,” Num. 6:2; 15:3, 8) (3) Freewill offering ( zebah nedaba , Lev. 7:16; 22:18, 21). Peace offerings took place on: (1) Public occasions (2) Private occasions. Public: (1) Customary on festive inauguration (Ex. 24:5; 2 Sam. 6:17-18; 1 Kings 8:63) (2) Election of kings (1 Sam.11: 15) (3) Joyous occasions (Deut. 27:7; Josh. 8:31) (4) Prescribed for the feast of Pentecost (Lev. 23:19) (5) Festivals were observed with them (Num. 10:10; 2 Chron. 30:22). Solomon arranged three times a year a sacrificial festival of burnt and peace offerings (1 Kings 9:25). Private: (1) Result of free impulse or fulfillment of a vow (Lev. 7:16; 22:21; Num. 15:8) (2) Recognition of a special favor from Jehovah (Lev. 7:12; 22:29) (3) Regularly employed at the expiration of a Nazarite vow (Num. 6:14). The Peace offering had 2 sources: (1) “ Of the herd ” (Lev. 3:1-5) (2) “ From the flock ” (Lev. 3:6-17). Types of animals were offered: (1) Bull (Lev. 3:1-5) (2) Lamb (Lev. 3:6-11) (3) Goat (Lev. 3:12-16). Qualification for the animals: (1) Must be unblemished which speaks of the impeccability of the Person of Christ. (2) The animal could be either male or female which represents the offerer and what he or she sees in Christ. The fire in the peace offering represents the total commitment of Christ to God the Father’s plan and His human testings and sufferings. The peace offering placed on top of the burnt offering represents the fact that the Person and Work of our Lord go together (Lev. 3:5). The sinner can come to God and have communion and fellowship with Him on the basis of the Person and Work of Christ. The peace offering sets forth God as propitiated and the sinner reconciled. Bull (Lev. 3:1-5): (1) Sets forth the servant side of our Lord (Mark 10:45). (2) Domesticated animal used to “bear” burdens and to plow fields. (3) Represented transportation and commerce in the ancient world. Our Lord served man by paying the ransom price, which delivered all of humanity from the slave market of sin. He served all of mankind by propitiating God the Father’s justice at the Cross with His substitutionary spiritual death. Our

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 44

Lord served God by doing His will. God the Father’s will was for His Son to die on the Cross as a propitiation for our sins. Lamb (Lev. 3:6-11): (1) represents Christ in His complete identification with man in life and death. (2) Pictured Christ as the qualified sin-bearer or His quality and ability to take the place of man in bearing the sins of the world. John 1:29 speaks of the Lamb’s, i.e., the Lord Jesus Christ, work on the Cross. John 1:36 speaks of the Person of our Lord. Isaiah 53 portrays our Lord as a Lamb who becomes our Substitute. Our Substitute is called a lamb in His resurrection (Rev. 5:6). He is the Lamb in His return at the 2nd Advent (Rev. 6:16-17). The “ entire fat tail ” refers to a special breed of sheep peculiar to Palestine. They were found in Palestine, Syria, North Africa and Egypt. They often weighed 15 lbs. or more and consisted of marrow and fat. All the sheep in Palestine were “broad-tailed.” The broad part of the tail is abnormal projection or outgrowth of fat from which the true tail hangs down. This is the rump or tailbone, which passes over into the vertebrae of the tail. This was the Lord’s portion. Goat (Lev. 3:12-16): (1) represents the complete identification of Christ as adequate to take away the sins of the world. (2) Represents that aspect of Christ’s work, which propitiated God the Father. In Leviticus 16:10, the scapegoat was sent into the wilderness on the Day of Atonement and represented that aspect of Christ’s work, which puts away our sins (John 1:29). The Lord Jesus Christ is the propitiation for our sins. God no longer remembers our sins (Psa. 103:12). The Ritual for the Peace Offering ( shelem ): (1) Offerer led the animal to the altar and laid his hand upon its head and killed it. (2) The priest caught the blood and sprinkled it upon the altar. (3) The fat of the intestines was taken from the animal and burned upon the altar on top of the burnt offering (Lev. 3:3-5, 9-11, 14- 16; 9:18-20). (4) The breast and right shoulder were separated from each other. (5) The shoulder was laid aside for the priest. (6) The breast was waved, i.e., symbolically presented to the Lord, from whom the priests received it for their use. (7) The priest’s part may be eaten by him, either boiled or roasted in some clean place (Lev. 7:30-34; 10:13-14). (8) All the flesh of public peace offering belonged to the priests (Lev. 23:20). (9) The rest of the flesh belonged to the offerer and was to be shared with his family and guests. (10) Whatever remained after 3 days was burned. The Law of the Peace Offering (Lev. 7:11-38): (1) Freewill offering for the purpose of thanksgiving (Lev. 7:11-12; cf. Heb. 13:15) (2) Unleavened cakes and wafers speak of the impeccability of Christ, or the lack of evil or sin in His life. (3) The unleavened cakes mixed with oil speak of the presence of the Holy Spirit in our Lord’s life and ministry. (4) The leavened cakes speak of the evil and sin still

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 45 present in the offerer. (5) The leavened cakes were elevated toward heaven, which speaks of occupation with the Person of Christ. Leviticus 7:13-38, “With the sacrifice of his peace offerings for thanksgiving, he shall present his offering with cakes of leavened bread. Of this he shall present one of every offering as a contribution to the LORD; it shall belong to the priest who sprinkles the blood of the peace offerings. Now as for the flesh of the sacrifice of his thanksgiving peace offerings, it shall be eaten on the day of his offering; he shall not leave any of it over until morning. But if the sacrifice of his offering is a votive or a freewill offering, it shall be eaten on the day that he offers his sacrifice, and on the next day what is left of it may be eaten; but what is left over from the flesh of the sacrifice on the third day shall be burned with fire. So if any of the flesh of the sacrifice of his peace offerings should ever be eaten on the third day, he who offers it will not be accepted, and it will not be reckoned to his benefit. It shall be an offensive thing, and the person who eats of it will bear his own iniquity. Also the flesh that touches anything unclean shall not be eaten; it shall be burned with fire. As for other flesh, anyone who is clean may eat such flesh. But the person who eats the flesh of the sacrifice of peace offerings which belong to the LORD, in his uncleanness, that person shall be cut off from his people. When anyone touches anything unclean, whether human uncleanness, or an unclean animal, or any unclean detestable thing, and eats of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace offerings which belong to the LORD, that person shall be cut off from his people. Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel, saying, ‘You shall not eat any fat from an ox, a sheep or a goat. Also the fat of an animal which dies and the fat of an animal torn by beasts may be put to any other use, but you must certainly not eat it. For whoever eats the fat of the animal from which an offering by fire is offered to the LORD, even the person who eats shall be cut off from his people. You are not to eat any blood, either of bird or animal, in any of your dwellings. Any person who eats any blood, even that person shall be cut off from his people.’ Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel, saying, "He who offers the sacrifice of his peace offerings to the LORD shall bring his offering to the LORD from the sacrifice of his peace offerings. His own hands are to bring offerings by fire to the LORD. He shall bring the fat with the breast, that the breast may be presented as a wave offering before the LORD. The priest shall offer up the fat in smoke on the altar, but the breast shall belong to Aaron and his sons. You shall give the right thigh to the priest as a contribution from the sacrifices of your peace offerings. The one among the sons of Aaron who offers the blood of the peace offerings and the fat, the right thigh shall be his as his portion. For I have taken the breast of the wave offering and the thigh

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 46 of the contribution from the sons of Israel from the sacrifices of their peace offerings, and have given them to Aaron the priest and to his sons as their due forever from the sons of Israel. This is that which is consecrated to Aaron and that which is consecrated to his sons from the offerings by fire to the LORD, in that day when he presented them to serve as priests to the LORD. These the LORD had commanded to be given them from the sons of Israel in the day that He anointed them. It is their due forever throughout their generations.’ This is the law of the burnt offering, the grain offering and the sin offering and the guilt offering and the ordination offering and the sacrifice of peace offerings, which the LORD commanded Moses at Mount Sinai in the day that He commanded the sons of Israel to present their offerings to the LORD in the wilderness of Sinai.” Leviticus 7:15-18: (1) Offering was to be eaten that same day without delay in order to teach the importance of staying close to Christ for peace of conscience and for power over temptation. (2) The sacrifice was to be burned on 3rd day in order to guard against the desecration of the sacrificial meal, which was holy. (3) Flesh putrefies on the third day if it is not preserved artificially. Communion and fellowship with God’s people was cut off if any flesh was eaten on the third day. The one who offered the sacrifice would not be accepted by God if the flesh was eaten on the third day. Leviticus 7:19-21: (1) Speaks of the importance of confession of sin for there is no fellowship and communion without confession of sin. (2) Fellowship and communion was cut off if the offer came in contact with anything unclean which speaks of residence in the Cosmic System of Satan. Leviticus 7:23-27: (1) The fat of animals that were not commanded to be sacrifice was unacceptable and could not be eaten because it was unclean. (2) The fat of animals that had been torn to pieces by other animals was an unacceptable or unclean sacrifice and defiled the eater, but could be used for the common purposes of ordinary life. (3) Fellowship and communion was cut off if the individual offered any of these animals as a sacrifice to God. (4) Fellowship and communion was cut off if the fat portions of the ox, sheep or goat were eaten by the offerer because they were gifts set apart for God. (5) The fat portions of the ox, sheep and goat were considered the best portions of the animal and therefore, belonged to God since He only demands the best. (6) Fellowship and communion with God was cut off if the offerer ate any blood. (7) The soul life of the animal was in the blood and was sanctified as the medium of atonement for the soul of man (Lev. 17:10-16). (8) The blood of the animal represented the spiritual death of our Lord on the Cross. Leviticus 7:29-34: (1) the offerer of his own free will was to bring a peace offering. (2) This represents the acceptance of the terms of God’s peace treaty, i.e.,

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 47 reconciliation. (3) The breast of the animal belonged to the high priest (Aaron) and his sons. (4) The breast spoke of Christ’s love for us (Rom. 5:8; Gal. 2:20). The peace offering was performed with the breast-piece, which was called the wave-breast (Lev. 7:34; 10:45; Num. 6:20; Ex. 29:27). The “waving” of the breast was a private thank offering. The priest placed his own hands underneath and moved the hands of the offerer backwards and forwards in a horizontal direction. The movement forwards in the direction of the altar indicated the presentation of the sacrifice or the symbolic transfer of it to God. The movement backwards meant the reception of it back again as a present, which God handed over to His servants the priests. The right thigh belonged to the priest and spoke of the power of Christ to save us and keep us saved forever, Christ is our eternal security (John 10:27-30). The right thigh was used as a heave offering and was called the heave offering because it was “lifted” or “heaved off” from the sacrificial animal as a gift of honor for the officiating priest. The heave offering enabled the priests to take part as God’s representatives in the sacrificial meal. The heave offering was not waved like the breast-piece. The wave and heave offerings were gifts to Jehovah and could only be used by the priest and their children (Lev. 22:10; Num. 18:19). At the moment of his salvation, the church age believer was given a royal ambassadorship in which he is to represent the absent Christ who sits as the right hand of the Father and presents the gospel message of peace with God to the unsaved through faith alone in Christ alone (2 Cor. 5:20a). 2 Corinthians 5:17-21, “Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come. Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” In Romans 10:21, the first person singular form refers to God the Father speaking through the Spirit and the prophet Isaiah. The aorist tense of the verb ekpetannumi is a “constative aorist” describing in summary fashion the entire period of Israel’s existence in which God the Father has offered a reconciliation to the nation of Israel through faith in His Son Jesus Christ.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 48

The active voice indicates that the subject, God the Father, performs the action of the offering salvation to the nation of Israel through the gospel. The indicative mood is a “declarative” indicative presenting this assertion as unqualified statement of fact. We will translate the verb ekpetannumi , “ I stretched out .” The noun cheir is in the plural and means “hands” and is used in an anthropomorphic sense with the verb ekpetannumi meaning it is ascribing human hands to the Father, which He doesn’t possess in order to convey God’s reconciliatory attitude towards unsaved Israel. The articular construction of the word is used with the personal pronoun ego in order to denote possession. The first person singular genitive form of the personal pronoun ego means “my” and functions as “genitive of possession” indicating that these hands “belong to” the Father. We will translate the expression tas cheiras mou , “ My hands .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 10:21: “However, concerning Israel, he says, ‘All day long I stretched out My hands…” Romans 10:21, “But as for Israel He says, ‘ALL THE DAY LONG I HAVE STRETCHED OUT MY HANDS TO A DISOBEDIENT AND OBSTINATE PEOPLE.’” “TO A DISOBEDIENT AND OBSTINATE PEOPLE ” is composed of the preposition pros ( pro$ ), “ TO ” and the accusative masculine singular form of the noun laos ( laov$ ) (lah-os), “ PEOPLE ” and the accusative masculine singular present active participle form of the verb apeitheo ( a)peiqevw ) (ap-i-theh-o), “DISOBEDIENT ” and the conjunction kai ( kaiV), “ AND ,” which is followed by the accusative masculine singular present active participle form of the verb antilego ( a)ntilevgw ) (an-til-eg-o), “ OBSTANITE .” The verb apeitheo is composed of the alpha prefix a, “without” and the verb peitho , “to persuade.” Therefore, the word literally means, “to disobey” in the active sense and “to be unpersuaded” in the passive sense. The verb apeitheo describes an unwillingness or refusal to comply with the demands of some authority. The stem of this word, has the basic meaning of “trust.” This stem is also the basis of the formation with pist -, the root of pisteou , “to have confidence in, to trust in, and to have faith in.” Trust can refer to a statement, so that it has the meaning to put faith in, to let oneself be convinced, or to a demand, so that it gets the meaning of obey, be persuaded. The original intransitive active meaning of peitho was “to trust,” which later became transitive meaning “to convince, persuade.” The active meaning,

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 49

“convince, persuade” is especially characteristic of Greek thought where it was regarded as a goddess. Peitho came to mean to have faith in another such as God. The verb’s versatility was carried over into the Septuagint (LXX) where the translators used it to render 10 different Hebrew words. The Greek idea of persuading was foreign to Semitic thought and thus is virtually non-existent in the LXX, which is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. The verb peitho is consistently used in the LXX to translate batach , “to trust, put confidence in, inspire trust” (2 Kin. 18:19; Job 39:11; Prov. 11:28). Peitho is the term selected by the translators of the LXX to describe “putting one’s confidence in” God (Psa. 2:12; Prov. 16:20; 28:25; 29:25). Marvin Vincent commenting on the verb apeitheo in John 3:36 writes, “Disbelief is regarded in its active manifestation, disobedience. The verb peitho means to persuade, to cause belief, to induce one to do something by persuading, and so runs into the meaning of to obey, properly as the result of persuasion...Obedience, however, includes faith. (Word Studies in the New Testament volume 2, Page 1-109) Therefore, in the Greek New Testament, the verb apeitheo , its cognate noun apeitheia and cognate adjective apeithes do not stand in contrast with the Greek words for “obedience” but rather they stand in contrast with the words that denote faith. Faith is demonstrated by obedience to God’s commands whereas unbelief demonstrates one’s disobedience to God’s commands. A survey of the verb’s usage in the Greek New Testament indicates that it was connected to unbelief, which demonstrated itself in disobedience to the command found in the gospel of Jesus Christ to believe on Him for eternal salvation. In John 3:36, the word refers to the rejection of Jesus Christ as one’s Savior. John 3:36, “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” Again, the verb is used of those who rejected Paul’s presentation of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Acts 19:8-10, “And he entered the synagogue and continued speaking out boldly for three months, reasoning and persuading them about the kingdom of God. But when some were becoming hardened and disobedient , speaking evil of the Way before the people, he withdrew from them and took away the disciples, reasoning daily in the school of Tyrannus. This took place for two years, so that all who lived in Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks.”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 50

In Hebrews 11:31, the verb describes the unbelief of heathen in the land of Canaan and which unbelief manifested itself in disobedience to God’s revelation of Himself in creation and disobedience to their conscience. Hebrews 11:31, “By faith Rahab the harlot did not perish along with those who were disobedient , after she had welcomed the spies in peace.” In 1 Peter 3:2, the word is used of the unregenerate husbands of Christian wives who had not obeyed the gospel message of Jesus Christ to place their faith in Him as their Savior. 1 Peter 3:1-2, “In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior.” The word is used by Peter in 1 Peter 3:20 of the fallen angels of Genesis 6:1-2 who attempted to prevent the incarnation of the Son of God by having sex with human women, which was in disobedience to God’s commands. 1 Peter 3:18-20, “For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient , when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.” In 1 Peter 4:17, the verb apeitheo is used again for the unbeliever who has disobeyed the gospel message to believe on Jesus Christ in order to receive eternal life and the forgiveness of sins. 1 Peter 4:15-19, “Make sure that none of you suffers as a murderer, or thief, or evildoer, or a troublesome meddler but if anyone suffers as a Christian, he is not to be ashamed, but is to glorify God in this name. For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? AND IF IT IS WITH DIFFICULTY THAT THE RIGHTEOUS IS SAVED, WHAT WILL BECOME OF THE GODLESS MAN AND THE SINNER? Therefore, those also who suffer according to the will of God shall entrust their souls to a faithful Creator in doing what is right.” In Romans 2:8, the verb apeitheo refers to the unbelief in the gospel message of Jesus Christ, which manifests itself in disobedience to the command to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ in order to be saved. Romans 2:8, “But to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 51

The verb is used this way in Acts 14:2, where it is attributed to the Jews who rejected the presentation of the gospel of Jesus Christ by the apostle Paul and his entourage. Acts 14:1-7, “In Iconium they entered the synagogue of the Jews together, and spoke in such a manner that a large number of people believed, both of Jews and of Greeks. But the Jews who disbelieved stirred up the minds of the Gentiles and embittered them against the brethren. Therefore they spent a long time there speaking boldly with reliance upon the Lord, who was testifying to the word of His grace, granting that signs and wonders be done by their hands. But the people of the city were divided; and some sided with the Jews, and some with the apostles. And when an attempt was made by both the Gentiles and the Jews with their rulers, to mistreat and to stone them, they became aware of it and fled to the cities of Lycaonia, Lystra and Derbe, and the surrounding region and there they continued to preach the gospel.” In Romans 11:30, Paul uses the verb to describe the unbelief of his Gentiles readers who became believers in Jesus Christ and in Romans 11:31, he uses it to describe the unbelief of the nation of Israel. Romans 11:30-31, “For just as you once were disobedient to God, but now have been shown mercy because of their disobedience, so these also now have been disobedient , that because of the mercy shown to you they also may now be shown mercy.” Again, the word is used to describe the unbelief of the Jews in Israel in the first century, and which unbelief manifested itself in the rejection of Jesus Christ as their Messiah. Romans 15:30-32, “Now I urge you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God for me, that I may be rescued from those who are disobedient in Judea, and that my service for Jerusalem may prove acceptable to the saints so that I may come to you in joy by the will of God and find refreshing rest in your company.” The word apeitheo appears in Hebrews 3:18 in relation to the Exodus generation, who as believers died the sin unto death for their habitual lack of faith in the word of the Lord, which manifested itself in disobedience. Hebrews 3:12-19, “Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called ‘Today,’ so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end, while it is said, ‘TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE, DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS, AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME.’ For who

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 52 provoked Him when they had heard? Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses? And with whom was He angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness? And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient ? So we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief.” In 1 Peter 2:7-8, the verb apeitheo refers to the unbelief of the nation of Israel, which manifested itself in rejecting the gospel message that Jesus Christ is their Savior. 1 Peter 2:4-8, “And coming to Him as to a living stone which has been rejected by men, but is choice and precious in the sight of God, you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For this is contained in Scripture: ‘BEHOLD, I LAY IN ZION A CHOICE STONE, A PRECIOUS CORNER stone, AND HE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED.’ This precious value, then, is for you who believe; but for those who disbelieve , ‘THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED, THIS BECAME THE VERY CORNER stone,’ and, ‘A STONE OF STUMBLING AND A ROCK OF OFFENSE’ for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom they were also appointed.” In Romans 10:21, apeitheo is used to describe the unbelief of unregenerate Israel, which manifested itself in rejecting their Messiah, Jesus Christ. The verb apeitheo functions as an “attributive participle” meaning that it is functioning like an adjective modifying the noun laos , “ PEOPLE .” The present tense of the verb is a “customary” or “stative” present tense emphasizes ongoing state indicating that the nation of Israel always exists in the state of being unbelieving and which state expressed itself in disobedience to the command to believe in Jesus Christ as Savior. The active voice is “stative” meaning that the subject exists in the state indicated by the verb. This indicates that the nation of Israel as the subject existed in the state of being unbelieving and disobedient to God. We will translate the verb “unbelieving .” The conjunction kai is used to connect the concepts denoted by the verbs apeitheo and antilego . It introduces an additional characteristic of the citizens of the nation of Israel. We will translate the word “ and .” The verb antilego is composed of the preposition anti , “against” and the verb lego , “to speak,” thus the word literally means “to speak against.” In Romans 10:21, the verb is used of the nation of Israel’s “obstinate” behavior towards God in the sense that throughout her history she has been firmly and perversely adhering to her own purpose and opinions rather than God’s purpose and viewpoint. It denotes that Israel has been unyielding to divine persuasion as

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 53 expressed through the Old Testament prophets, Jesus Christ Himself and the apostles. The word speaks of their inflexible and unyielding persistence in seeking to do their own will rather than God’s. The verb functions as an “attributive participle” meaning that it is functioning like an adjective modifying the noun laos , “ PEOPLE .” The present tense of the verb is a “customary” or “stative” present tense emphasizes ongoing state indicating that the nation of Israel always exists in the state of being obstinate behavior towards God throughout her history. The active voice is “stative” meaning that the subject exists in the state indicated by the verb. This indicates that the nation of Israel as the subject existed in the state of being obstinate towards God throughout her history. We will translate the verb antilego , “ obstinate .” In Romans 10:21, the noun laos means “people” and is used with reference to the unsaved citizens of the nation of Israel. The word functions as the object of the preposition pros , which functions as a marker of extension denoting approach to an object. In Romans 10:21, the word is used of God the Father approaching the nation of Israel. Completed corrected translation of Romans 10:21: “However, concerning Israel, he says, ‘All day long I stretched out My hands to an unbelieving and obstinate people.’” So in Romans 10:21, Paul quotes from Isaiah 65:2 to demonstrate that Israel rejected God’s offer of salvation. This passage teaches that throughout her history God the Father has offered a reconciliation to Israel through the gospel concerning His Son Jesus Christ. However, Israel has rejected this offer of reconciliation through faith alone in Christ alone because she is unbelieving and obstinate. This verse brings an end Paul’s discussion regarding Israel’s failure to obey the doctrine of justification by faith alone in Christ alone and which discussion began in Romans 9:30. In Romans 9:30, Paul presents a paradoxical conclusion based upon what he taught in Romans 9:6-29 that the Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness like the Jews, obtained it by faith. Romans 9:30, “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? That the Gentiles who, customarily and characteristically do not zealously pursue righteousness obtained righteousness, in fact a righteousness, which is by means of faith as a source.” Then, in Romans 9:31, he teaches that in contrast to the Gentiles even though the nation of Israel zealously pursued righteousness that is based upon obedience to the Mosaic Law, they never measured up to the Law.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 54

Romans 9:31, “However, even though Israel customarily and characteristically zealously pursues a legal righteousness, they never measured up to the Law.” Paul in Romans 9:32a teaches that the reason why Israel never measured up to the Law was that they never zealously pursued it on the basis of faith as the source of justification but rather on the basis of a meritorious system of works. Then, in Romans 9:32b, he instructs his readers that Israel stumbled over the stumbling stone, the Lord Jesus Christ. Romans 9:32, “For what reason? Because they, as an eternal spiritual truth, never zealously pursue it on the basis of faith (as constituting the source of justification) but rather as if it were possible on the basis of meritorious actions (as constituting the source of justification). They stumbled by means of the stone which causes stumbling.” Then, Paul in Romans 9:33 cites the Septuagint translation of Isaiah 28:16 and combines it with the words from the Septuagint translation of Isaiah 8:14 in order to indicate the two contrasting reactions by men to “the Stone,” the Lord Jesus Christ. Romans 9:33, “As it stands written for all of eternity, ‘I solemnly charge you to consider now for yourselves, I will most certainly lay a foundation among the citizens of Zion, a stone, which causes stumbling and in addition a rock, which causes offense. However, those who at any time do exercise absolute confidence in Him will never, as an eternal spiritual truth, be disappointed.’” In this passage, the apostle makes it clear to his readers that God anticipated the Israelites rejecting His Son as well as those who would accept Him by faith. By doing so he supports his premise in Romans 9:6 that God has remained faithful to Israel and that God makes a distinction between those Israelites who accept His Then, in Romans 10:1 that he desires and prays to the Father for Israel’s salvation. Romans 10:1, “Spiritual brothers, indeed, the desire produced by my own heart and in addition my specific detailed request on behalf of them is always for their deliverance.” Then, in Romans 10:2, he testifies to Israel’s zeal for God, though he says it is not according to an experiential knowledge of Him in the sense that they did not personally encounter God through faith as He is revealed in the person and works of Jesus of Nazareth. Romans 10:2, “Because I testify concerning them that they possess a zeal for God, however by no means according to an experiential knowledge.”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 55

Next, the apostle Paul in Romans 10:3 teaches that the reason why unsaved Israel did not have an experiential knowledge of God is that they rejected God’s righteousness, which is offered in the gospel. He also teaches in this passage that because the Jews zealously sought to establish their own righteousness, they never submitted to God’s righteousness, which is offered in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Romans 10:3, “Because they have in the past rejected the righteousness originating from God the Father and continue to do so up to the present moment. In fact, because they have in the past zealously sought to establish their own and continue to do so up to the present moment, they never submitted to the righteousness originating from God the Father.” In Romans 10:4, Paul presents the reason for what is implied in Romans 10:3, namely, that the Jews were wrong for not submitting to God’s righteousness because they zealously sought to establish their own righteousness. They were wrong “because” faith in Christ is the goal or purpose of the Mosaic Law resulting in the imputation of divine righteousness to everyone who believes in Christ as Savior. Romans 10:4, “Because (faith in) Christ is, as an eternal spiritual truth, the purpose of the Law resulting in righteousness for the benefit of each and every member of the human race to those who at any time do exercise absolute confidence (in Christ).” Then, in Romans 10:5, Paul cites Leviticus 18:5 to support his teaching in Romans 10:4 that the purpose of the Law was to lead Israel to faith in Christ. Romans 10:5, “Because Moses writes concerning this particular righteousness, which is based upon obedience to the Law (as constituting a source of justification): ‘The person who obeys them will cause himself to live by means of them.’” The apostle in Romans 10:5 presents the reason why faith in Christ resulting in the imputation of divine righteousness and justification has always been the ultimate purpose of the Law rather than obedience to the Law and to support this he begins to cite a series of Old Testament passages. In Leviticus 18:5, Moses writes concerning the righteousness that is based on obedience to the Law that the Jew who obeys the commandments of the Law perfectly will live by them or in other words, obtain eternal life. Of course, every person born into the world is spiritually dead and possesses a sin nature, making it impossible to render the perfect obedience that the Law requires. In Romans 10:6-8, Paul is personifying the righteousness originating from and based on faith in Christ. In Romans 10:6, the apostle quotes from Deuteronomy 9:4 and 30:12 to teach that the righteousness that originates from and is based on faith in Christ is non-meritorious and attainable unlike perfect obedience to the Law.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 56

Romans 10:6, “However, the righteousness originating from and based on faith speaks in the following manner: ‘Do not think in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ This does imply bringing Christ down.” Paul quotes from Deuteronomy 9:4 to teach that the righteousness originating from and based on faith in Christ is non-meritorious since in the context of this passage the Lord emphasizes with Israel that He would bring them into the land of Canaan not on the basis of their own righteousness. Paul quotes from Deuteronomy 30:12 to teach that the righteousness that originates from and is based on faith in Christ does not ask the question “ Who will ascend into heaven ?” which is an implicit denial of the incarnation. This question also implies that the righteousness that originates from and is based on faith in Christ is not an impossibility and is attainable unlike attempting to obey the Law perfectly, which he mentions in Romans 10:5. Next in Romans 10:7, Paul does not quote exactly from Deuteronomy 30:13 but rather only the principle taught in this passage to further emphasize that the righteousness that originates from and is based on faith in Christ is not an impossibility and is attainable unlike attempting to obey the Law perfectly. Romans 10:7, “Or, ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’ This does imply bringing Christ up from the dead ones.” In this passage, Paul cites the principle taught in Deuteronomy 30:13 to teach that the righteousness that originates from and is based on faith in Christ does not deny the resurrection has taken place in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. Just as he used the question “ Who will ascend into heaven ?” in Romans 10:6 as an implicit denial of the incarnation, so he uses the question “ Who will descend into the abyss ?” in Romans 10:7 as an implicit denial of the resurrection. Just as Paul taught in Romans 10:6 that it is impossible for someone to ascend into heaven since that would imply that Christ did not come in the flesh so in the same way he teaches in Romans 10:7 that it is impossible for someone to descend into the abyss since that would imply that Christ did not rise from the dead. Just as Paul taught in Romans 10:6 that the righteousness that originates from and is based on faith does not reject the incarnation, so in Romans 10:7, he describes this righteousness as not reject the resurrection as well. In Romans 10:8, Paul quotes from Deuteronomy 30:14, “ THE WORD IS NEAR YOU ” to indicate what the righteousness originating from and based on faith in Christ does think. Romans 10:8, “But in contrast what does it say? ‘The word is always readily accessible and available with respect to you,’ in your mouth as well as in your heart, namely, the word, which brings about faith, which we make it a habit to publicly proclaim as heralds in a dignified and authoritative manner.”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 57

This passage teaches that the gospel message that Paul and his fellow communicators were proclaiming everywhere throughout the Roman Empire to the unsaved taught that acquiring God’s righteousness originates from and is based on faith in Christ and not by means of obedience to the Law. Paul is writing rhetorically in Romans 10:9-10 indicating that when he speaks of righteousness and salvation, he is speaking of the justified sinner’s new relationship with God and not two different ideas that are not connected. Thus, in these two verses, Paul is not presenting two conditions for salvation or teaching that there must be a public affirmation of Christ’s deity as well as faith that the Father raised Jesus from the dead. Rather, he is speaking of salvation from two different perspectives: (1) The sinner must acknowledge that Jesus is God. (2) The sinner must believe that the Father raised Him from the dead. The two are inextricably tied to each other since the resurrection demonstrated the deity of Christ. That Paul is writing rhetorically is indicated in that Romans 10:10 he is following the same word order of Romans 10:9 in that in both verses he speaks of believing with one’s heart and acknowledging with one’s mouth. However, in verse 10, believing with one’s heart precedes acknowledging with one’s mouth whereas in verse nine acknowledging with one’s mouth precedes believing with one’s heart. That Paul is writing rhetorically not only suggests that righteousness and salvation are both speaking of the justified sinner’s new relationship with God and not different ideas that are not related but also it indicates that acknowledging with one’s mouth and believing with one’s heart are one in the same. Believing in one’s heart that the Father raised Jesus from the dead is the same as acknowledging that Jesus is God since the resurrection demonstrated that Jesus is God and faith alone in Christ alone is the only way to receive eternal salvation. Therefore, in Romans 10:9, Paul teaches that if the Jew acknowledges with his mouth to the Father that Jesus is Lord, which is equivalent to believing in his heart that the Father raised him from the dead, then the Jew will receive eternal salvation. Romans 10:9, “Because, if you acknowledge with your mouth Jesus is Lord in other words, exercising absolute confidence with your heart that God the Father raised Him from the dead ones, then you will be delivered.” Paul’s statement in Romans 10:9 is not presenting the content of the gospel since Christ Himself and His death and resurrection are the content of the gospel according to 1 Corinthians 15:3-4. Paul’s statement in Romans 10:9 is not presenting the content of the gospel but rather it is explaining “how” the gospel is readily accessible and available to the Jew. Namely, if the Jew acknowledges with his mouth to the Father Jesus is Lord,

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 58 which is to believe in his heart that the Father raised Him from the dead, then he will be saved. Paul in Romans 10:10 continues his thought from verse 9 by teaching that a person believes with his heart that the Father raised Jesus from the dead resulting in righteousness while on the other hand with his mouth he acknowledges to the Father Jesus is Lord resulting in salvation. Romans 10:10, “For you see, with the heart, one, as an eternal spiritual truth, does exercise absolute confidence resulting in righteousness on other hand with the mouth, one, as an eternal spiritual truth, does acknowledge resulting in deliverance.” Notice that both confessing with one’s mouth and believing with one’s heart have the same results since both righteousness and salvation speak of the justified sinner’s new relationship from different perspectives. Therefore, in Romans 10:9 when Paul teaches that if the Jew confesses with his mouth Jesus is Lord and believes in his heart that the Father raised Jesus from the dead he is referring back to what he taught in Romans 1:4, which teaches that the resurrection of Christ demonstrated the deity of Christ. Romans 1:1-4, “Paul, a slave owned by Christ who is Jesus, called as an apostle, set apart for the gospel originating from God, which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures concerning His Son, who was born as a descendant of David with respect to His human nature. The One demonstrated as the Son of God by means of divine power with respect to a nature characterized by holiness because of the resurrection from the dead ones, Jesus Christ, our Lord. In Romans 10:11, he quotes the Septuagint translation of Isaiah 28:16 to support his teaching in Romans 10:9-10 that salvation and justification is through faith alone in Christ alone who is the subject of the gospel. Romans 10:11, “Because, the Scripture says, ‘Anyone who at any time does exercise absolute confidence in Him will never be disappointed.’” Paul’s statement in Romans 10:13 makes clear that calling on the name of the Lord is synonymous with faith in Christ since he says to do so results in salvation and the Scriptures teach that salvation is only through faith alone in Christ alone. Romans 10:13, “Indeed, ‘anyone, whoever, for himself calls on the Lord’s unique person will be delivered.’” In Romans 10:12, Paul teaches that anyone whether Jew or Gentile who places their faith in Jesus Christ will never be disappointed because there are no racial distinctions since Christ is Lord of both racial groups, who is infinitely generous on behalf of those who call on Him. Romans 10:12, “Because, there is, as an eternal spiritual truth, absolutely no distinction between Jew and Greek because the same Lord is, as an eternal

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 59 spiritual truth, Lord over each and every person, who is infinitely generous for the benefit of each and every person, who, at any time, does for himself call on Him.” This passage teaches that the reason why anyone who does exercise faith in Jesus Christ as their Savior will never be disappointed is that there is no distinction between Jew and Gentiles since the same Lord is Lord of both racial groups, who is infinitely generous on behalf of those who call on Him. Paul in Romans 10:13 cites Joel 2:32 to support his teaching in Romans 10:12 that the offer of salvation is for both Jew and Gentile. Romans 10:13, “Indeed, ‘anyone, whoever, for himself calls on the Lord’s unique person will be delivered.’” In Romans 10:14, Paul poses three rhetorical questions that emphasize the importance of the communicators of the gospel in order that the unsaved Jew might have an opportunity to exercise faith in Jesus Christ as Savior so as to be saved. Romans 10:14, “Therefore, how will they, themselves, call on Him in whom they never exercised absolute confidence in? Consequently, how will they exercise absolute confidence in Him whom they never heard of? Consequently, how will they hear apart from someone, as an eternal spiritual truth, publicly proclaiming as a herald in a dignified and authoritative manner to them?” In Romans 10:15, Paul poses a fourth rhetorical question and cites Isaiah 52:7 to demonstrate Israel’s culpability. Romans 10:15, “Consequently, how will they publicly proclaim as heralds in a dignified and authoritative manner, if they are not commissioned? As it stands written for all of eternity, ‘How beautiful are the people, who themselves proclaim the good news, which is divine in quality and character.’” Paul in Romans 10:16 states that not all the citizens of Israel obeyed the gospel command to believe in Jesus Christ in order to be saved and to support this statement and to demonstrate that this rejection of Jesus Christ by Israel was anticipated by God, he quotes Isaiah 53:1. Romans 10:16, “But on the contrary, by no means did everyone obey the gospel for Isaiah says, ‘Lord, who will exercise absolute confidence in our message?’” That Jesus Christ is the object of faith for salvation and justification since His spiritual death on the Cross as an impeccable person redeemed sinful mankind from the slave market of sin. It also satisfied the demands of a holy God that human sin be judged, reconciled the entire human race to God and fulfilled the righteous requirements of the Law. He is also the object of faith for salvation and justification since His physical death dealt with the problem of man’s sin nature, which is the source of personal sin.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 60

In Romans 10:17, Paul summarizes his statements in Romans 10:14-16 and draws the conclusion from them that faith in Christ is based on hearing the gospel message. He then teaches that logically following this is that hearing the gospel message is by means of the proclamation of the gospel, which is concerning Christ. Romans 10:17, “Therefore, faith (in Christ) is, as an eternal spiritual truth based on hearing the (the gospel) message as a source. Consequently, hearing the (the gospel) message is, as an eternal spiritual truth by means of the proclamation concerning Christ.” In summary, Paul is teaching in Romans 10:14-17 that in order for God to hold Israel and all men for that matter responsible for their response to the gospel, he must first send those to communicate the gospel to the unsaved (Romans 10:15a). Secondly, those sent by God must communicate the gospel in order for the unsaved to hear it (Romans 10:14c). Thirdly, the unsaved must hear about Christ through the communication of the gospel in order for them to believe in Christ as God and Savior (Romans 10:14b). Lastly, no one can call on Christ unless they have believed in Him (Romans 10:14a). In Romans 10:17, Paul summarizes his statements in Romans 10:14-16 and draws the conclusion from them by teaching that faith in Christ is based on hearing the gospel message and logically following this is that hearing the gospel message is by means of the proclamation of the gospel, which is concerning Christ. This passage then sets up Paul’s comments regarding Israel in Romans 10:18-21 where he teaches that God did in fact commission people (Christians) to communicate the gospel and that Israel did hear the gospel about Jesus Christ. However, instead of acknowledging that He is Lord, i.e. God as a result of believing that the Father raised Him from the dead, they rejected Him. The apostle Paul in Romans 10:18 poses a rhetorical question that expects a strong affirmation, which asserts that Israel did in fact hear the gospel about Christ and to support this assertion he cites Psalm 19:4. Romans 10:18, “But on the contrary, I ask, have they never heard? Indeed, they have heard! ‘Their voice has gone out extending throughout all the earth, that is, their teachings extending throughout the ends of the inhabited world.’” Now in Romans 10:18, Paul anticipates the possible objection that maybe not all Israel heard the gospel message of Jesus Christ in the first place and that is the reason why they have not believed. In response to this possible objection, he emphatically refutes such an idea that they did not hear the gospel message of Christ and to support this assertion he cites Psalm 19:4. Therefore, the Jews did not have an excuse for rejecting their Messiah, Jesus Christ. In Romans 10:19, Paul anticipates a possible objection that maybe Israel did not understand the gospel and that is why they have not believed in Jesus Christ so as

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 61 to be saved. In response to this possible objection, he emphatically refutes such an idea and to support this assertion he cites Deuteronomy 32:21 where states that they did understand. Romans 10:19, “But on the contrary, I ask, has Israel never understood? They have understood! First of all, Moses says, ‘I myself will provoke each and every one of you to jealousy by a non-nation. By a nation without insight, I will provoke each and every one of you to anger.’” Paul in Romans 10:20 advances and intensifies his statement in Romans 10:19 by quoting Isaiah 65:1, which teaches that God was found by the Gentiles who were not diligently seeking after a relationship with Him. The Gentiles found God in the sense that they personally encountered and entered into a relationship Him through faith in Christ. Romans 10:20 also teaches that God permitted Himself to become accessible to the Gentiles who were not diligently inquiring about a relationship with Him. God became accessible to the Gentiles in the sense that they experienced fellowship with Him as a result of exercising faith in His Son Jesus Christ. Romans 10:20, “In fact, Isaiah is even very bold, saying, ‘I was found by those who always existed in a state of not diligently seeking after Me. I permitted Myself to become accessible for the benefit of those who always existed in a state of not diligently inquiring about Me.’” Therefore, in Romans 10:20, Paul cites Isaiah 65:1 to demonstrate that God would save the Gentiles and that they would have fellowship with Him. Then, lastly Paul in Romans 10:21 quotes from Isaiah 65:2 to demonstrate that through her history, unbelieving and obstinate Israel has rejected God’s offer of salvation. Romans 10:21, “However, concerning Israel, he says, ‘All day long I stretched out My hands to an unbelieving and obstinate people.’” This passage teaches that throughout her history God the Father has offered a reconciliation to Israel through the gospel concerning His Son Jesus Christ. However, Israel has rejected this offer of reconciliation through faith alone in Christ alone.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 62