The Gospel of the Kingdom

By Philip Mauro

CHAPTER FIFTEEN

SO ALL ISRAEL SHALL BE SAVED

In my comments on the words, "until the fulness of
the Gentiles be come in" (Rom. 11:25) I pointed out
that, notwithstanding that the passage in which those
words occur is plainly a prophecy of the state in which
the Jewish people were to exist throughout this
present age, and that it says nothing whatever as to
their state thereafter, it is now commonly interpreted
as predicting that, in a future "dispensation", the whole
nation is to be healed of its spiritual blindness.

The next words of the passage are these:

"And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written,
there shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and
shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob; for this
is My covenant unto them when I shall take away
their sins. As concerning the gospel, they are
enemies for your sakes; but as touching the
election they are beloved for the fathers' sakes."
(Rom. 11:26-28).

This passage likewise has been very badly treated
in the interest of the new dispensationalism. And,
like as the preceding passage has been transmuted
from a prophecy strictly limited to this age into one
relating wholly to a future age, so this passage also
is lifted bodily out of the age where the Spirit of God
has placed it, and is transported to a future age,
an age which exists only in the imagination of men.
For the passage is usually interpreted precisely as if
it read, "And THEN all Israel shall be saved", instead
of "And SO all Israel shall be saved".

Indeed all that is needed for the correction of this
gigantic "dispensational" error is first to note the
significance of that little word "so", and then to
ascertain its meaning from the context, which is
easily done.

The adverb "so" answers to the question "How?".
It says nothing at all in answer to the question "When?".

Yet my experience has been that, whenever Romans 11:26
is cited by dispensationalists, it is presented as proof that
the entire Jewish race, reconstituted into an earthly nation,
is to be saved in a future "dispensation". In fact, however,
the passage teaches the very opposite; namely: that the
phrase "all Israel" means, not the entire Jewish race of
a future age, but the entire body of the redeemed of this
gospel age. The word "so" occurs in the concluding part
of the passage and hence necessarily refers back to the
preceding verses, where the apostle, after explaining who
they are that constitute God's true "Israel", tells in detail,
and illustrates by the figure of the "good olive tree," just
how God's Israel was to "be saved". He there describes
beforehand precisely what God has been doing from that
day to this; and when he finished his description, and has
illustrated it with marvellous clearness by the figure of the
olive tree, he brings the matter to a conclusion by saying:

"And so", that is, in the manner he had been describing,
"all Israel shall be saved". And he adds that the saving
of "all Israel" in that manner would fulfill certain Old
Testament prophecies, which he quotes.

If therefore we simply ascertain from the preceding verses
(as can be done with little trouble and with certainty) who
are the "all Israel" of God's purpose, and how they were to
"be saved", we shall also ascertain in the process when they
were to be saved.

WHO ARE THE "ALL ISRAEL" OF ROM. 11:26?

The "all Israel" of Rom. 11:26 is the whole body of God's
redeemed people. It is composed of "the election" (which,
as we have seen, has "obtained" what the natural Israel as
a whole had "not obtained") with the addition thereto of
believers from among the Gentiles. For the main purpose
of this passage (Rom. IX-XI) and that also of chapter IV,
and likewise of Galatians (chapters III and IV) is to make
known that the real "Israel", the true "children of Abraham",
who inherit the promises of God, are not the natural seed
of Abraham but his spiritual seed.

Paul proves his doctrine, and at the same time exhibits
the great difference between Abraham's natural seed
and his spiritual, by citing the historical fact that
"Abraham had TWO sons" (Gal. 4:22); and from the
Old Testament records of the very different things that
befell Ishmael and Isaac respectively, Paul deduces
the great difference, in the purposes of God, between
the unbelieving mass of the Israelitish people (answering
to the son of the bondwoman) and the believing "remnant"
(answering to the son of the free-woman). For those things,
the apostle tells us, "are an allegory", the meaning of which
he proceeds to explain (Gal. 4:21-31).

Abraham's elder son, Ishmael, represents the natural Israel,
those "born after the flesh". Ishmael had the first-born's
place in Abraham's house for a number of years before Isaac,
who was to be the true and sole heir, was born. And during
all that time, which answers to the period from Sinai to
Pentecost--that is the era of the old covenant--Ishmael was
the heir apparent of all that Abraham had. Moreover, even
after Isaac appeared upon the scene, Ishmael continued for
a time in occupation of the premises, and took advantage
of his position to persecute the true heir. The period when
Ishmael and Isaac were both under one roof and the former
still had the status of a son and heir of Abraham, answers
to the time from Pentecost to the destruction of Jerusalem.
For during that period the natural Israel, "the son of the
bondwoman," still occupied the holy land and city, and
"persecuted" the true Israel (Gal. 4:29; 1 Thess. 2:15).

But that era of the overlapping of "the two covenants" was
of short duration. For "what saith the Scripture? Cast out
the bond woman and her son: for the son of the bond woman
shall not be heir with the son of the free woman" (Gal. 4:30).
And the next verse gives us the application of the incident:
"So then, brethren, we are not the children of the bond woman,
but of the free".

The meaning of the words, "shall not be heir," is free from
all uncertainty. Those words mean that the promises of
God to Abraham are all for his spiritual seed. And this,
moreover, is precisely what the apostle had already said
in plain language: "Know ye therefore that they which are
of faith, the same are the children of Abraham" (3:7).
"And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and
heirs according to the promise" (3:29). The same truth
is plainly taught in Romans 4:13-16.

Coming now to Romans IX-XI, it is the plain teaching
of that passage:

1) That God's true "Israel," the nation concerning which it
is said, "And so all Israel shall be saved", is the whole body
of the redeemed of the Lord.

2) That that body is composed of the believing "remnant"
of the natural Israel (the "remnant according to the election
of grace", Ch. 11:5) with the addition thereto of believing
Gentiles.

Those two elements, so diverse and antagonistic by nature,
are incorporated into a spiritual unity, "the unity of the
Spirit" (Eph. 2:12-18, 4:3). And this is according to that
"mystery" of God's eternal purpose, which was not clearly
revealed in ages past, but now is made fully known
(Eph. 3:4-6). That "mystery" is what is graphically
illustrated by the olive tree of Romans XI. And as regards
the salvation of the natural Israel in a future era, so far
from teaching that doctrine, the passage we are studying
was written for the purpose of refuting it. This will very
clearly appear in what follows.

This section of the Epistle begins with the declaration
of a fact which caused the apostle great heaviness and
continual sorrow in his heart, namely, that "they are
not all Israel which are of Israel" (9:6). Observe here
the phrase, "all Israel," concerning which we are now
inquiring. And observe further that what we here are
told is, not what it includes, but what it does not include.
The "all Israel" of this passage does not embrace
all who are Israelites. Paul is here speaking of his
"kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites"
(ver. 3, 4). And what caused him such acute anguish
of mind was the fact, revealed to him by the Spirit of God,
that not all these, but indeed only a few of them, were
to be included in the "all Israel" of God's purposes.
It is simply impossible that Paul could have penned those
words of poignant grief; it is impossible, I say, that he
could have wished himself "accursed from Christ" for
the sake of his "kinsmen according to the flesh" if he
had held and was about to declare the doctrine now
frequently attributed to him, namely, that all the Israelites
in the world were to be saved at the second coming of Christ
--an event the christians of that day regarded as imminent.
That doctrine, which was the very corner stone of the Judaism
of that day, Paul had cast aside; and it was moreover an
important part of his ministry to expose the falsity of it.

The next two verses (Rom. 9, 7, 8) make the matter
still clearer. There we read:

"Neither because they are the seed of Abraham are they
all children: but 'in Isaac shall thy seed be called'. That
is, they which are the children of the flesh, these are not
the children of God: but the children of the promise are
counted for the seed."

This calls for no explanation; for it is the Spirit's own
explanation. We need only to observe that the reason why
the truth here stated caused the apostle such acute distress
was that it so rigidly excludes from God's salvation all the
natural descendants of Abraham except the few who were
of the faith of Abraham (Rom. 4:13-16) that is, those who
believed the gospel.

The apostle then proceeds to make known that it had been
God's plan and purpose from the beginning to save--not all
the natural descendants of Abraham, but--only such as He
should choose. And here we have the doctrine of "election"
(Rom. 9:10-26) which takes its name from the fact that God
makes an "election" or choice, from among Jews and Gentiles,
of those He will save and have eternally as His own people.
This principle of God's sovereign choice is illustrated by
the case of Esau and Jacob (vv. 10-13) where His choice
was made before the children were born.

In the closing verses of chapter IX (27-33) Paul returns
to the matter that was causing him such acute sorrow,
namely that, as Isaiah had prophesied, "Though the number
of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant
(only) shall be saved". That remnant is the Jewish part of
"the election"; and thus we have a clear light upon verse 26
of Chapter XI; for the words "a remnant shall be saved",
explain the words, "all Israel shall be saved".

In chapter X the apostle, after expressing the desire of his
heart and his prayer to God for Israel "that they might be
saved", goes on to show that none can "be saved" except
by believing the gospel ("the word of faith which we preach",
v. 8); and that in respect to this vital matter there is
"no difference between the Jew and the Greek. For whosoever
shall call on the Name of the Lord shall be saved". And the
chapter closes with a strong intimation that the Israelitish
nation as a whole would not be saved; the word of Jehovah
to that nation being, "All day long I have stretched forth
My hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people" (v. 21).

Special heed should be given to the first part of chapter XI.
It shows that God's rejection of Israel nationally does not
warrant the conclusion that God has cast away His people.
For, as we have already seen, God's part of the nation,
that is, the election, He did not then cast away, and never
will. Hence, in bestowing upon "the election" what had
been promised to "Israel", God was fulfilling His promises
strictly in accordance with their true intent. The result is
that "Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for;
but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded"
(11:7).

Seeing therefore that "the election," by believing the gospel
of Christ, has obtained (and certainly will never be deprived
of) that which God had promised to "Israel", it is clear that
"the remnant according to the election of grace", with
believers from among the Gentiles added, is the "Israel"
of the prophetic Scriptures. Indeed it is evident, upon an
impartial study of the entire passage, that its main purpose
is to make known that very fact.

And this purpose stands forth in the clearest light in the
figure of the olive tree, whereby the apostle, at the end
of the passage, illustrates the truth he has been expounding.
That olive tree represents "the Israel of God",
"the election", the "one body" of the redeemed. Not all who
are of Israel are in it. On the contrary, many of the natural
branches, "because of unbelief were broken off" (v. 20).
And on the other hand, many believing Gentiles are included;
these being the branches of "the olive tree which is wild by
nature, which branches have been "grafted contrary to nature
into a good olive tree". This is the fulfilment of all God's
purposes and promises, the final outcome of all His dealings
in grace with both Jews and Gentiles.

And now, in seeking an answer to the question, Who are
the "all Israel" that are to be saved? We have found also
the answer to the other question. How shall they be saved?
For, as we have seen, the passage teaches in the plainest
way that they are to be saved by believing in Jesus Christ.
And in so teaching, it simply affirms the foundation truth
of the Gospel, namely, that there is no other way of
salvation; for "he that believeth on the Son hath everlasting
life; and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life;
but the wrath of God abideth on him" (John 3:36).
The natural branches of the olive tree were broken off
"because of unbelief," and any of them that are saved,
must be saved by personal and individual faith; for there
is no other way.

Furthermore, in saying that "God is able to graft them
in again", and that He will do so "if they abide not still
in unbelief" (v. 23), the passage bears a clear witness to
the truth that there is no other salvation for them but that
which the olive tree represents. This verse alone forbids
the idea that there is, or can be, a national salvation for
the Jewish race in some future era. God, in His great
forbearance and long suffering (II Pet. 3:9, 15) still keeps
open to them the door of salvation, so that individual
Israelites, by personal faith in Jesus Christ, may enter in
and be saved. But when He rises up and shuts that door,
then they who begin to seek Him for salvation will hear
Him say, "I know you not; depart from Me, all ye workers
of iniquity", and it was to Jews He said this (Lk 13:25, 27).

Furthermore the word "So," in Romans 11:26, meaning
in the manner described above and illustrated by the figure
of the olive tree, plainly answers the question, How all
Israel is to be saved. They will "all be saved" precisely
"SO", and not otherwise.

And finally we have found also, in what has been set forth
above, the answer to the question, "When shall they be
saved?". For, seeing that all Israel shall be saved so--
that is, by means of "the word of faith" which the apostles
preached, then most certainly they must be saved ere this
day of gospel-salvation comes to an end. And this is plainly
declared in other Scriptures, as has been shown above.

http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/1927_mauro_gospel-kingdom/mg-15.html


<What follows is my explanation of those verses>


The "blindness" happened "in part" to national Israel,
so that the fullness of the Gentiles could come in.
Since it does say, "in part", this does not mean that
no Jews could be saved during that time, so yes,
they had their opportunity.

Dispensationalism assuming that he means that some Jews
are saved and some Gentiles are saved and then God goes
back to national Israel and saves it, thereby forcing every
single Jew on the planet to be saved.

But what is Dispensationalism based on? Darby's idea
that Jesus came to set up an Earthly kingdom and failed
and so, it was delayed. And that is what this idea of a
future national salvation of Israel is based on. (:

And it would mean that the blindness would have to happen
to national Israel AS A WHOLE. And yet, we know that
there were some Jews still being saved. In fact, it was
mostly Jews.

Paul was not saying that the whole of national Israel was
blinded. He said, "in part". And what would be the point
of that? If He's going to save all of national Israel anyway,
why save some Jews first and then some Gentiles and then
the rest of the Jews? Huh?! This has God proceeding in a
non-sensical manner. (:

We must stop taking passages out of context, for it is then
that they do not read as they were meant. Looking in THE
SAME LETTER, we can see that Paul discounted the idea of
"national Israel" as being what he was talking about.

"For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel" - Rom 9:6b

Now how can it be that God is going to save national Israel,
when the Scriptures tell us that not everyone who is born
into national Israel, is of Israel? Therefore, it cannot be
"national Israel" that was being discussed as being saved
(although some of it would be, as Paul said).

Do you not see that if you make this claim, that you are
by default claiming that it is circumcision that is the key
and not faith in Christ, because you end up saying that
God is going to save national Israel, regardless if they
believe or not and btw, as a side note, that also fries your
"free will" belief, if you have one. :)

Let us read it again, with Romans 9:6b (quoted above)
in mind...

"For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion,
that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the
fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel
will be saved" - Romans 11:25-26a

The "shall be" is not future tense from the point of time
after the fullness of the Gentiles came in. It was future
tense to the point in time that Paul was writing it and
present tense to the point in time that the fullness of
the Gentiles had come in.

And now we can see that it reads quite differently. Unless
of course, you do think that God was acting in a non-sensical
manner? Surely not, right? :)

"Come, let us REASON TOGETHER, saith the Lord."

Paul is saying that some Jews are saved and some Gentiles
are saved and once the fullness of the Gentiles had come in,
AT THAT POINT, "all Israel shall be saved".

I.e., As I said, some Jews are saved, then some Gentiles are
saved and then, at that point in time, all Israel is saved.

How can this be said? Easy! The true Israel is *NOT*
"national Israel". It is "the Israel of God". They are
confused about what the true "Israel" is and it was
the true Israel that God was going to save. :)

To say otherwise, is to pit the Bible against itself. Namely,
for example, it is to pit Romans 11:25-26 against both
Romans 9:6b and Galatians 6:15-16 (quoted below).

And what the Bible actually tells us in Galatians 6:15-16 is:

Galatians 6:15-16

15) For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth
any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.
16) And as many as walk according to this rule, peace
be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.

Now it is, "in Christ" that we are talking about here,
is it not?

Of course it is. :)

So how can "circumcision availeth nothing", if God
is planning on going back and saving national Israel,
because they are national Israel? That could be the
only reason. While they may wish to quote a covenant,
first of all, that covenant was broken by national Israel
and the covenant that God made, as is clear in Isaiah,
to whom you referred, was to both Jews and Gentiles
as His church/people. So how can it just be to national
Israel?

We must stop looking at Old Testament quotes of prophecy
regarding the church with the idea that they are strictly
national, but rather, we must view them as symbolism of a
spiritual truth. Or we can prefer to claim that the Apostles
were wrong, since there is simply no way at all to reconcile
Paul's statements with them. In fact, there is no way to
reconcile Romans 9:6b with Romans 11:26-26 under their
view and that is in the very same letter! And frankly,
Galatians 6:15-16 puts the final nail in the coffin of this
"God saves national Israel" doctrine. Either it was about
the spiritual truth, or the national salvation of Israel.
Take your pick, because it is absolutely crystal clear
that you cannot have them both!

Now they can quote all of the passages that they want to,
but all they will be doing, is seeking to pit the Bible
against itself. (:

If they wish to quote other passages, that's fine, but in
order for us to think that their doctrine is Biblical, they
must also show how they can be (when viewed from
the perspective of their personal doctrine) reconciled
with Paul's statements. If they cannot do that, in detail
and making it clear to us, then they have not supported
their doctrine as Biblical.

Circumcision is not the issue in Christ and Paul showed
clearly that "the Israel of God" are those in Christ, whether
Jew, or Gentile. Thus, when Paul said that "all Israel"
would be saved, he was speaking of those in Christ.
The "Israel of God". Or does anyone wish to claim that
the "Israel of God" is not what Paul said it is?

Taking it the way they do, they have the Bible at odds with
itself. Paul said that they are NOT all Israel, which are
born of Israel (national Israel). Yet they wish to say that
in the Scripture they quote, Paul is also saying the opposite.
That all of national Israel, is Israel, since God will,
according to them, save all of national Israel anyway.
This is the problem with the Dispensationalist doctrine.
It always ends up pitting the Bible against itself and having
the Apostles teach one thing to one church and the opposite
to another, rather than taking the time to see how it all fits
together and if their doctrine holds water and in this case,
it does not. (:

So it seems that when dealing with Romans 11:25-26,
Dispensationalists change the wording from, "AND SO",
to "AND THEN". This makes a big difference!

And they are forgetting that Paul just finished telling people
how it is not national Israel that the covenant is with, by
comparing it to the bondwoman and the church to the free.
And he clearly says, "they are not all Israel, which are of
Israel". Now why would he say that, if being a Jew is what
mattered in his statement, "and so, all Israel shall be
saved"? How is it that he could be saying that all of
national Israel would be saved, if he just finished saying
that "they are not all Israel", referring to those born into
national Israel? That doesn't make any sense and Paul
would be blatantly contradicting himself. (: He also said
that the bondwoman shall not be heir with the free. So
can they explain how it is that what you believe could be
true, given what else Paul had to say? For your belief to
be true, Paul would have to be contradicting himself. (:

They are interpreting it as if it read, "and THEN all Israel
will be saved". But it doesn't say that and they are changing
the wording of the passage. (:

They read it as follows:

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And THEN all Israel is saved.

And they take #3 as meaning, "national Israel".
But to take it as if it read "and THEN", changed
the wording. The Dispensationalists knows this,
which is why they tried to respond by arguing
that the wording doesn't make any difference.

Huh?!? The wording doesn't make any difference?!?

Translated, that means, "It doesn't matter what
the Bible actually says. My personal doctrine is
right, period and if the wording of the Bible gets
in the way, too bad! Believe me instead! I will!".

In reality, it says, "and SO". Now what does that
word "so" mean? It simply means, "in this manner".

What manner?

Romans 11:25-26a

25) For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be
ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in
your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened
to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
26a) And so all Israel will be saved...

Now note that it says that blindness IN PART had happened
to Israel. Jews WERE being saved!

1) Some Jews are saved.
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) And SO (IN THIS MANNER), all Israel is saved.

It does not say, "and THEN". It does not say, "and then God
goes back and saves all of national Israel". The word "then"
is not there! It says, "and so". I.e., "and in this manner".

Again, what manner? Well, it was what Paul just listed.

1) Some Jews are saved (blindness IN PART).
2) The fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
3) AND SO, all Israel is saved!

And in this manner (way), all Israel is saved. That is what
the word "so" means. If you doubt this, look it up in the
original Greek.

So = Houto (G3779) - in this way

The Gospel of the Kingdom

By Philip Mauro