Bump

Just a little bump here to bring some life back to this blog. *bump* Yes, it's been a while and frankly, much too much has been happening in the lives of all involved in keeping this blog breathing. Personally, I have a baby girl due any day now, a job that is slowly killing me (the research into graveyard shifts say so), and a gut that seems to be expanding like the federal deficit (maybe it's just me that's having difficulty breathing).

Anyway, as excruciating all this talk about Romans 9-11, STJ, and what not, I'm pretty much over it. So what's my final analysis about all the hub-bub? After going through Tony's exposition and going through Romans 9-11 over and again, I can agree with Tony in saying that Paul's main thrust is about the corporately-elected Israel. Paul is assuring his Christian Jewish brothers about an ethnic remnant being reserved by God.

As for when the elected Jewish remnant will be saved, Tony believes this to be at the second coming of Christ. He also believes that this will not be via gospel preaching. Tony's eschatological understanding maybe leading him to these conclusions. I, for one, cannot exegete out from Romans 11 (gotta keep in context!) that it is definitely talking about the second coming of Christ, to which He comes in judgement. *shrugs* Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Others more well-versed in postmillenial theology than I may be able to shed light on this.

But what of individual election? Have I betrayed the Reformed faith because I agree with Tony? Not at all. In one of Tony's commentary, he has affirmed much about individual election. He just doesn't believe that is the main point of Paul's thoughts in Romans 9-11. But to use Tony's own words, "to pit corporate over individual election is to err, and therefore a false dichotomy." In pressing his point about corporate election, the impression that I got from Tony (and I believe I'm not alone in this) is that individual election does not exist in Paul's thoughts at all. Or at best, he pits corporate over individual election. (I may be right, I may be wrong. All I'm saying is that this is the impression I get.) The thing is, just because it is not Paul's main thrust does not negate it from being part of Paul's argument.

Paul's use of Jacob and Esau are individuals first and foremost, representative of the corporate bodies. Paul speaks in such terms from verses 14 through 21 that gets to the heart of the individual. Tony has said "God chooses individuals that would form a PEOPLE." (emphasis his) Absolutely, which is why I think it is relevant that verses 14 through 21 is about individuals, a point Paul makes to bolster the idea of who is in or out of corporately-elect Israel. This is contrary to Tony's point that "there is no hint there of predestination to 'grace' or 'damnation' of an individual.' If an individual Jew is elected (part of corporately-elected Israel), can we say that the individual is damned? From how all of Romans 9-11 reads, it would seem that this individual is, in fact, saved.

Anyway, this subject can continue to go round and round, but I believe enough has been said on both sides of the subject. For those who wish to continue the debate, feel free to call or email each other. Let's move onto other things.

In Christ,

Victor