Because salvation is an individual thing, not a corporate thing. That is clear throughout scripture. It's whosoever believes, not which ever nation believes.
Granted. But wasn't talking about the salvation of nations. Is it possible that there are times you misunderstand me because you are reading ideas into my statements that I never intended? I wonder.
I think I spent a fair amount of time talking about generalizations and how they work. I shouldn't think I would need to do this again.
I'm not trying to put you to sleep here. My intent is to challenge your assumption, and it is an assumption, that Paul is talking about individuals in the Olive Tree analogy. I take issues with that assumption for several reasons, chief among them is the idea that God broke off an individual Jew so that an individual Gentile might be put on the tree. Paul would never argue that God intended to save individual Jews according to race as if the tree belonged to them by birth. That is exactly contrary to everything else Paul has taught.
Also, I'm not convinced Paul would ever teach that salvation is granted according to birth but must be maintained by faith. No, salvation is granted to those of faith who make a confession of faith and live according to that confession. Paul would never argue that an Israelite is saved by virtue of being an Israelite, but such person must keep believing in order to maintain his salvation.
Hopefully you can see that if the branches represent individual people, Paul is contradicting his entire teaching concerning this subject. But if Paul's analogy supports his general statement about Israel, then there remains no conflict with his teaching on salvation.
This is obvious.
Yes, this is obvious as well. I hope you are getting to a point here because I'm starting to fall asleep.
Well, I agree. These passages are easily understood. But won't you grant, based on the examples I gave, that Paul is making general statements about Israel for three chapters beginning in Romans 9? If you would grant that, I wouldn't feel compelled to point out the obvious. I think.
Okay, now I am back to completely disagreeing with you again. You are not recognizing that the cultivated olive tree is a picture of the church. What other entity only has both Israelite believers and Gentile believers in it? How does someone become part of the church? By being part of a certain nation? Or is it by putting their faith in Christ? All Paul is doing with the olive tree text is the same thing he did in Romans 10:9-13 where he talked about how Jews and Gentiles are saved the same way - through faith. He just talked about it figuratively there rather than straightforwardly like he did in Romans 10:9-13.
In that context Paul says that there is no distinction between Jew and Greek. But the Olive Tree analogy highlights a different point entirely. In Romans 11:11 and following, Paul answers his rhetorical question concerning the Israel that crucified Christ. He isn't talking about spiritual Israel because spiritual Israel would never crucify Christ. The point of the Olive tree analogy is this. Although the Israel that crucified Christ has rejected God, the Israel that crucified Christ remains holy. As he said, "if the root is holy, the branches are too." This is why I contend that the Olive Tree analogy is focused on holiness. Why is God not done with Israel? Because she is holy. Paul reiterates this point later when he says, "From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of
God’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable."
The Olive Tree represents God's holy people. And Paul refers to the Hebrews as "natural branches" and these branches are holy, he says. When the natural branches are cut off, they don't cease to be holy. As Paul says, they remain enemies of the gospel, but from the standpoint of God's choice, they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. He hints that a time will come when the natural, holy branches will be grafted in again.
One could say that and one would be wrong about that. The branches represent individuals. That is obvious because only an individual can be grafted in because of faith and only an individual can be cut off because of unbelief. You're not going to be grafted in or cut off because of the nation you're part of or because of what anyone else does.
But no individual is naturally saved. Paul never suggests that the natural branches were on the tree because of faith. He says they were cut off for lack of faith, but the natural branches are on the tree because they grew with the tree. Faith or not, their naturalness is inherited. And Paul would never suggest that salvation is inherited.
