God’s covenant people: Why most believing Jews in Paul’s day weren’t in the body of Christ (Part Four)

The chosen remnant of Israel contrasted with the body of Christ

I think it goes without saying that those among God’s covenant people who are to be gathered to the land of Israel to enjoy eonian life in the kingdom will be alive on the earth when Christ returns to set up this kingdom (we read about these believing Israelites in Matthew 24 and Revelation 7, for example). But what about in Paul’s day? Were there any believing Israelites destined for this eonian allotment who were alive on the earth at the time that Paul was writing to those in the body of Christ? That is, were there any believing Israelites alive on the earth at this time whose calling and expectation was in accord with everything we read above (and who will thus be a part of the “all Israel” to which the prophecies concerning the eonian destiny of God’s covenant people pertain)? I think scripture gives an affirmative answer to these questions.

Let’s consider a passage that I quoted earlier, in which Paul affirms the truth that the new covenant (and thus the beginning of the fulfillment of the prophecies we’ve looked at from Jeremiah and Ezekiel) will go into effect at some future time (i.e., sometime after callousness has been fully removed from Israel). In Romans 11:25-27 we read, “For I am not willing for you to be ignorant of this secret, brethren, lest you may be passing for prudent among yourselves, that callousness, in part, on Israel has come, until the complement of the nations may be entering. And thus all Israel shall be saved, according as it is written, Arriving out of Zion shall be the Rescuer. He will be turning away irreverence from Jacob. And this is my covenant with them Whenever I should be eliminating their sins.”

The terms “Israel” and “Jacob” in these verses are clear references to God’s covenant people. Furthermore, we know that the “all Israel” which Paul had in view in v. 26 refers to ethnic Israel because of the verses that immediately follow: “As to the evangel, indeed, they are enemies because of you, yet, as to choice, they are beloved because of the fathers. For unregretted are the graces and the calling of God.” (Romans 11:28-29) The “they” of v. 28 refers back to the terms “Israel” and “Jacob” in the previous verses, and are contrasted with the “you” to whom Paul wrote (i.e., those in the body of Christ). It is God’s covenant people (the “they” of v. 28) who will be saved by the “Rescuer” (Christ) when he “will be turning irreverence away from Jacob” and “eliminating their sins.”

Now, that there were, in fact, Israelites alive in Paul’s day who belonged to the company of Israelites that will constitute the saved nation during the eons to come is evident from what Paul wrote in the first seven verses of chapter 11. There, we read:

I am saying, then, Does not God thrust away His people? May it not be coming to that! For I also am an Israelite, out of Abraham's seed, Benjamin's tribe. God does not thrust away His people whom He foreknew. Or have you not perceived in Elijah what the scripture is saying, as he is pleading with God against Israel? Lord, Thy prophets they kill, Thine altars they dig down, and I was left alone, and they are seeking my soul. But what is that which apprises saying to him? I left for Myself seven thousand men who do not bow the knee to the image of Baal. Thus, then, in the current era also, there has come to be a remnant according to the choice of grace. Now if it is in grace, it is no longer out of works, else the grace is coming to be no longer grace. Now, if it is out of works, it is no longer grace, else the work is no longer work. What then? What Israel is seeking for, this she did not encounter, yet the chosen encountered it. Now the rest were calloused…

Which people of God did Paul have in view in the first verse? Answer: Israel, God’s covenant people (see Rom. 10:1-3, 19-21). Some have understood Paul’s reference to his Israelite lineage as evidence that he considered himself to be a member of God’s covenant people, and as representative of this category of people. According to this view, Paul was basically using himself as proof that God had not “thrust away His people.” However, Martin Zender has argued (correctly, in my view) that this understanding of what Paul wrote here is extremely problematic. In part 97 of his “Romans” series (ZWTF, volume 5, issue 33), Martin wrote:

If Paul is an example of the remnant, then there is no assurance whatsoever that Israel will eventually come into her covenantal promises. Why? Because Paul himself jumped the ship of covenantal promises. He actually disqualified himself when he went out killing Christians. So no, Paul is not an example of the remnant. Paul being an example of the remnant and then being held out as an example of the remnant by God—to prove His faithfulness to His promises to Israel—would be like a man picking an early sample of an orange crop and saying, “Here is proof that the rest of the apple crop will come in.”

Again, I think Martin is correct here. Although it’s true that Paul was ethnically an Israelite, he couldn’t have considered himself as any longer being a member of God’s covenant people (which, again, is what Paul had in mind when he asked if God had thrust away “His people”). Martin goes on to provide us with what I believe to be the real reason for why Paul referred to his connection to the Jewish people in Romans 11:1: “Paul has a vested interest in the fate of these people because he’s one of the people. These are his literal relatives. Even though most of them hate him, he loves them.” That Paul did, in fact, have a “vested interest in the fate of these people” because of his physical relationship to them is further confirmed from what Paul wrote in Romans 9:1-4: The truth am I telling in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience testifying together with me in holy spirit, That my sorrow is great, and unintermittent pain is in my heart -- for I myself wished to be anathema from Christ -- for my brethren, my relatives according to the flesh, who are Israelites…

So Paul’s reference to his personal connection to Israel in Romans 11:1 need not (and, I believe, should not) be understood as evidence that God had not thrust away his people. Rather, Paul was providing us with his own personal reason for being so deeply concerned with the subject under consideration in Romans 9-11, and (more specifically) with the question he was asking in 11:1. The question of whether or not God had “thrust away” (or forsaken) his people, Israel, was not just a matter of theoretical or abstract interest to Paul; it affected him on a personal level, for it concerned the nation that was comprised of those whom he considered his “brethren” and “relatives according to the flesh.” 

Paul’s real proof against the idea that God had “thrust away his people” begins with an appeal to the historical precedent involving a believing remnant of Israelites in Elijah the prophet’s day. Just as in Elijah’s day, there was also a Jewish “remnant according to the choice of grace” in existence in Paul’s day. Paul made it clear that this chosen remnant was indeed a part of Israel; however, unlike the majority of Israelites in Paul’s day, those constituting this remnant were the part of Israel on which “callousness” had not come (Rom. 11:7-8, 25). In contrast with the majority of Israelites living at the time Paul wrote, there was a remnant which, by God’s grace, had come to believe that Jesus of Nazareth is, in fact, “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (it should be noted that what Paul said was “according to the choice of grace” was the fact that there was a remnant of believing Jews; apart from God’s grace, all Israel would’ve remained in calloused unbelief).

Moreover, it’s clear that Paul understood this chosen remnant as God’s pledge that he had not “thrust away” his covenant people, Israel, for it was of this people (i.e., Israel) that the chosen remnant was, of course, a remnant (if they hadn’t been believing members of God’s covenant people, Israel - like the 7,000 faithful Israelites of Elijah’s day - then they wouldn’t have been considered a “remnant”). Thus, this chosen remnant must have shared in Israel’s covenant-based expectation and obligation. Otherwise, its existence in Paul’s day would not have been evidence that God hadn’t thrust away his covenant people, Israel.

But how can we know for sure that Paul didn’t belong to the “chosen remnant” of God’s covenant people referred in Romans 11? Well, it’s pretty simple. We’ve already seen that those who constitute the “Israel” that will be saved when the new covenant goes into effect (and of which the chosen remnant is a remnant) have a certain covenant-based expectation and obligation. Thus, if it can be shown from scripture that Paul didn’t share the covenant-based expectation and obligation of Israel, then we can reasonably conclude that Paul was not a member of the chosen remnant of God’s covenant people, Israel. This would imply that Paul had, at some point, lost his covenantal status, either involuntarily (by forfeiture) or voluntarily (by repudiation).

Let’s first consider Paul’s status in regard to Israel’s covenant-based obligation. Paul referred to the status of those who had a covenant-based obligation to keep the law given by God to Israel as being “under law” or “in law” (Rom. 2:12; 6:14-15; 1 Cor. 9:20-21; Gal. 4:4-5, 21). However, those in the body of Christ - whether of a Jewish or Gentile background - are said to be not under law, but under grace (Romans 6:14-15). Does this mean that there is no grace involved in the salvation of God’s covenant people? Not at all; grace is an essential part of the equation of salvation for God’s covenant people (as we’ve seen, the very fact that not all of Israel had been “calloused” was itself an expression of God’s grace). However, when the contrast is between being “under grace” and “under law,” the expression “under grace” means grace only.

Despite the fact that “the law is holy” and “the precept holy and just and good” (7:12), those in the body of Christ have been exempted from the law (7:1-6). In fact, Paul clearly believed that those in the body of Christ who wanted to be circumcised and “be under law” were greatly mistaken, for this was not in accord with their calling and status as members of the body of Christ (Gal. 3:23-29; 5:1-10). Thus, we can conclude that Paul did not have (nor did he consider himself as having) a covenant-based obligation to keep the law given to Israel. And, consequently, Paul couldn’t have considered himself as having been a member of God’s covenant people.

In contrast with Paul’s status and relationship to the law as a member of the body of Christ, it’s evident that the “tens of thousands” of believing, law-keeping Jews referred to by James in Acts 21:20 understood themselves as having a covenant-based obligation to keep the law. Consider, then, the following argument:

1. The “tens of thousands” of believing Jews referred to in Acts 21:20 were a continuation of the “little flock” referred to by Christ in Luke 12:32, and were part of the believing remnant among God’s covenant nation, Israel.

2.  As members of God’s covenant nation, Israel, these believing Jews had a covenant-based obligation to keep the law of Moses (they were, in other words, “under law”).

3. The body of Christ - being a company of saints that is distinct from God’s covenant people, Israel – does not have a covenant-based obligation to keep the law of Moses (we are exempt from the law).

4. The “tens of thousands” of believing Jews referred to in Acts 21:20 were not members of the body of Christ, and Paul was not a member of the company of saints to which these believing Jews belonged.

Paul’s expectation contrasted with the expectation of the twelve apostles

In part two of this study, we saw that the expectation of the twelve apostles is tied to the kingdom of God that is going to be set up on the earth (i.e., the kingdom that is going to be restored to Israel). Here, again, is the logical (and scripturally-informed) argument with which I concluded part two:

1. Those chosen to judge the twelve tribes of Israel will be dwelling among the twelve tribes of Israel in the land that God promised to Israel, and will be among “the saints of the Most High” who will be living and reigning on the earth during the eon to come.

2. The twelve apostles were chosen to judge the twelve tribes of Israel.

3. The twelve apostles will be dwelling among the twelve tribes of Israel in the land that God promised to Israel, and will be among “the saints of the Most High” who will be living and reigning on the earth during the eon to come.

At some point following Christ’s return to earth, the twelve apostles (along with the rest of the deceased saints of Israel) are going to be restored to life in what Christ referred to as “the resurrection of the just” (and which John referred to as “the former resurrection”). After being vivified in Christ to enjoy their eonian allotment in the kingdom of God, the role of the twelve apostles will involve sitting on twelve thrones and judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

But what about Paul? Where will his throne be? Where will he be enjoying his eonian allotment? Will it be in the kingdom of God that is to be set up on earth? Will Paul be enjoying his eonian life in the land promised to Israel, as a member of what Peter referred to in 1 Pet. 2:9 as “a chosen race,” “a royal priesthood,” and “a holy nation?” Will Paul be sitting to either the left or the right of the twelve apostles (perhaps to be judging a newly-added “thirteenth tribe of Israel”)? Will Paul be among those saints who will be dwelling in “the beloved city” when fire descends from God out of heaven and devours all of the nations that will be coming against Israel after the thousand years of Satan’s imprisonment have ended (Rev. 20:7-9)?

If we’re to believe Paul’s own words on this subject, then we’ll have to answer all of the above questions in the negative. For according to Paul himself, his eonian life is going to be enjoyed in the location where Christ is, presently – i.e., “in the heavens” (2 Cor. 5:1-9). We know that Christ is currently sitting enthroned at the right hand of God (which is, of course, in heaven itself; see Heb. 8:1; 9:24). In Ephesians 1:20 Christ’s heavenly location is described by Paul as being “among the celestials” (which, in Eph. 6:12, is also where we’re told the wicked spiritual beings with whom we “wrestle” are as well). And - according to Paul – it is “among the celestials” that those in the body of Christ will be seated together with Christ (Eph. 2:6; cf. 1:3). “For,” Paul elsewhere wrote, “our realm is inherent in the heavens” (Phil. 3:20). Thus, with respect to the locations in which the twelve apostles and the apostle Paul will be during the eons to come, there could not be a greater difference. The location of the twelve apostles will be on the earth with the twelve tribes of Israel, while the location of the apostle Paul (and the company of saints to which he belongs) will be “in the heavens” and “among the celestials.”

Moreover - and in contrast with what we know concerning the conditions that will characterize the kingdom of God on earth during the eon to come - Paul told the saints in the body of Christ that “flesh and blood is not able to enjoy an allotment in the kingdom of God.” In other words, the only people who will enjoy an allotment in the kingdom of God that Paul had in mind here are those who are no longer mortal – i.e., those who have “put on incorruption” and “put on immortality” (1 Cor. 15:51-53). If, when Paul wrote 1 Cor. 15:50, he had in mind the kingdom of God as it will exist on the earth, then he would’ve been contradicting the fact that there will, in fact, be flesh-and-blood (i.e., mortal) humans in this kingdom during the eon to come. However, Paul wasn’t contradicting scripture, because he didn’t have in mind the kingdom of God as it will exist on the earth. Rather, what Paul had in mind in 1 Corinthians 15:50 was the kingdom of God into which the saints in the body of Christ will be entering after the “snatching away” and meeting in the air (1 Thess. 4:13-18) – i.e., the kingdom of God as it will exist in the heavenly realm.

We know that the kingdom of God will be established in the realm in which Christ is presently after Satan has been cast out of it (Rev. 12:7-12). It is this celestial aspect of the kingdom of God to which Paul was referring when he expressed his confidence that the Lord would be saving him “for His celestial kingdom” (2 Tim. 4:18). It is the kingdom of God in heaven – not the kingdom of God on earth – in which “flesh and blood is not able to enjoy an allotment.” Thus, Scripture is clear that, in addition to being established on the earth at the return of Christ (as prophesied in Daniel 2 and elsewhere), the kingdom of God over which Christ will be exercising his authority will be established in the heavens and among the celestials as well. And insofar as the kingdom of God is going to be established both on the earth and in the heavens, it is a future reality that pertains to both Israel and to the body of Christ (1 Cor. 6:9-10; 15:50; Eph. 5:5; Col. 4:11; 1 Thess. 2:12; 2 Thess. 1:5). The primary difference between the kingdom allotment of Israel and that of the body of Christ is, therefore, the location in which the kingdom of God will be present during the eons to come.

Consider, then, the following argument:

1. The twelve apostles were the leaders of the “little flock” referred to by Christ in Luke 12:32, and were part of the believing remnant among God’s covenant nation, Israel.

2.  As members of God’s covenant nation, the twelve apostles have a covenant-based expectation that is in accord with all of the prophecies concerning Israel’s eonian destiny.

3. The body of Christ - being a company of saints that is distinct from God’s covenant people, Israel – does not share Israel’s covenant-based expectation.

4. The twelve apostles were not members of the body of Christ, and Paul was not a member of the company of saints to which the twelve apostles belonged.

Here is another, similar argument that demonstrates that the original recipients of the letter to the Hebrews were not members of the body of Christ:

1. The author of the letter to the Hebrews expected the Jewish believers to whom he wrote to be among the beneficiaries of the new covenant that God promised to make with the house of Israel and house of Judah.

2. As beneficiaries of the new covenant, these Jewish believers will enjoy the blessings described in passages such as Ezekiel 36:24-31 (which will involve dwelling in the land promised to Israel, and walking in the statutes and keeping the ordinances given by God to Israel).

3. The expectation of those in the body of Christ is distinct from the new covenant-based blessings and expectation described in passages such as Ezekiel 36:24-31.

4. The author of Hebrews did not write to members of the body of Christ.