Sermon Tone Analysis

Introduction

Two weeks ago Paul gave us Scripture’s clearest and most concise explanation of the nature of saving faith, composed of believing, confessing, and calling upon the name of the Lord.

Last week, Paul gave us Scripture’s clearest and most concise explanation of the means of saving faith, that a sent preacher must declare the word of Christ in such a way that it may be heard and believed by a sinner, at which point they call upon the name of the Lord and are saved.

Paul has done this in the context of the tragedy of the unbelief of Israel.

He has demonstrated that the righteousness that they sought was near to them, contained within the teachings of Moses.

He has demonstrated that it was near to them in that all they needed to do was believe God, believe in the promised Messiah, and be saved.

All they needed to do was return to Him and be cleansed, and they would be delivered.

Having established the absolute and universal availability and accessibility of the gospel of Christ to Israel, Paul presses in on his lament from 9:1-5 and 10:1 to close this chapter out.

Paul is going to demonstrate 4 explicit points in this text, along with 3 implicit points.

The three explicit points are as follows:

Israel has heard the gospel

Israel has understood the gospel

Israel has not believed the gospel

The three implicit points are as follows:

Hearing and understanding do not necessarily result in saving faith

Israel’s unbelief opens the door to salvation for the Gentiles

Israel’s unbelief does not place ethnic Israel beyond the saving power of God

We have a lot to cover today, so let’s dig in.

Israel has heard the gospel

Paul makes this point in Romans 10:18

Paul is utilizing the words of David here to make his point.

This is a familiar Psalm, and one that deserves our attention this morning.

Here we see David drawing a direct correlation between the two ways that God reveals Himself.

The first being what theologians call general revelation.

These are the proofs found in nature of God’s existence.

These are those realities, both outside human beings and inside human beings, that declare that God is.

The second way that God reveals Himself according to David in Psalm 19 is through His Word, described in verse 7-9 as the law, testimony, precepts, fear, and judgment of Yahweh.

So there is a direct correlation between God’s two revelations, in nature and in Word.

For Paul, this double revelation, given to Israel by virtue of their existence within God’s creation, and by virtue of their posession of the Word of God, doubly condemns Israel.

Not only have they seen the glory of God as declared by the heavens, they have also heard the glory of God declared by the Word.

Paul thus rightly applies the words of Psalm 19:4 to both the heavens and to the prophets.

In both sun and Scripture, landscape and lexicon, world and word, God has revealed Himself indubitably and irrefutably.

As John Calvin says:

wherever you cast your eyes, there is no spot in the universe wherein you cannot discern at least some sparks of his glory.

You cannot in one glance survey this most vast and beautiful system of the universe, in its wide expanse, without being completely overwhelmed by the boundless force of its brightness.

That brightness which is borne in upon the eyes of all men both in heaven and on earth is more than enough to withdraw all support from men’s ingratitude—just as God, to involve the human race in the same guilt, sets forth to all without exception his presence portrayed in his creatures.

Despite this, it is needful that another and better help be added to direct us aright to the very Creator of the universe.

It was not in vain, then, that he added the light of his Word by which to become known unto salvation; and he regarded as worthy of this privilege those whom he pleased to gather more closely and intimately to himself.

This double knowledge confirms, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Israel did indeed receive the truth about God, not only from nature, but also from the Word.

Israel has understood the gospel

Paul’s second point is drawn out of Romans 10:19-20

The ESV renders ginosko as understand, and I think that better captures Paul’s sense here.

We would affirm that there is a difference between just hearing something, and actually understanding it.

We would further affirm that there is a difference between understanding something and actually believing it savingly.

We can see from James 2 that demons also understand the truth about God, but it is not understanding in accordance with saving faith.

So Paul’s rhetorical question concerns the nature of Israel’s understanding of the gospel.

Did they in fact understand it correctly, and then act upon that understanding in humble faith?

Paul is not bold enough to answer the question outright, and that is understandable: it is a high accusation to declare that Israel has heard and understood the gospel and yet has not received it in saving faith.

Therefore, he leans on Moses, then on Isaiah to make his point.

First let’s consider the quotation of Moses.

This quote comes at the mid-way point of the Song of Moses recorded in Deuteronomy 32.

In the words of Calvin, Murray, and Hodge, this is a song of Israel’s upbraiding, in other words, Moses is chastising the nation for their future rejection of God’s provision and deliverance.

The song follows 3 basic movements: God’s provision, Israel’s rejection, God’s restoration.

This song was taught to all the people of Israel and then subsequently passed on to each generation, according to Moses’ command.

Therefore, the content of this song would have been familiar to Israel, near to them in their hearts and minds.

And yet, they grow fat and kick, according to verse 14, and by verse 21, they have provoked and angered God with idols, which prompts Him to punish them in kind: He will provoke and anger them with pagan nations, by including them in the blessings of the covenant.

According to Moses then, the nadir of Israel’s unbelieving disobedience is this inclusion of Gentiles in the covenant blessings of God, and according to Paul, this 1400 year old song is proof that Israel knew what would happen, and the fact that the veritable capital of the Gentile world would be receiving this letter is proof that it was happening before their very eyes.

Paul further confirms the reality by quoting a conflation of a handful of passages from Isaiah, demonstrating further a truth that he has already put forth: The pagan Gentiles, by God’s grace, are included in the blessings of the covenant.

This inclusion proves, according to Paul, that Israel understood and rejected the gospel, because if they had not understood and rejected it, the Gentiles would not have been grafted in.

This reality will be the subject of Paul’s attention in chapter 11, so we won’t belabor the point further.

Suffice it to say, Moses and Isaiah effectively demonstrate that the inclusion of the Gentiles serves as irrefutable proof that Israel knew and understood the gospel as declared by Moses and the prophets, and yet rejected it in disobedient unbelief.

Up this point I have argued these points under the assumption that Israel was unbelieving and disobedient.

I now want to look more closely at these realities and make them clearer from the text.

Israel has not believed the gospel

Paul has implied up to this point that the gospel necessitates both belief and obedience, summarized in this idea of the obedience of faith.

Let’s break that down, first with Israel’s lack of belief.

Paul is making explicit what he has been implying since 9:1: Israel has not believed the gospel savingly.

Unbelief, along with disobedience, is an effective summary of what Paul has taught us regarding Israel up to this point.

In chapter 9 we saw that they pursued a righteousness of law rather than of faith, in chapter 10, they have ignorant zeal for God, they have sought to establish their own righteousness, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God.

This is Israel’s folly.

Their self-absorbed self-pursuit of self-righteousness has left them bereft of gospel salvation.

Paul leans once again into Isaiah to make his point, this time from Isaiah 53.

We need to understand the basic points and structure of Isaiah 53 in order to understand what Paul is doing with this quotation.

Isaiah 53 is familiar to us all, and is rightly understood as a prophecy regarding the passion of the Christ.

However, it’s important to note Isaiah’s tense here.

He’s not speaking into the future, saying “He will grow up, He will have no stately form or majesty, He will be despised and rejected by men,” etc. Isaiah is reflecting prophetically on the past.

What we must deduce therefore is that Isaiah 53 is an eschatological song of lament, a song that will be sung in the future by Israel when they finally look upon Him whom they pierced and mourn him as one mourns an only son, according to Zechariah 12:10.

Paul invokes Isaiah to appropriate and extend the prophet’s point: Israel has not yet mourned over their piercing of Christ.

Despite the faithfulness of the prophets and the apostles to preach the gospel to Israel, they have not believed the report.

The future that Isaiah speaks of is the same future that Paul speaks of.

In Isaiah’s day, in Jesus’ day, in Paul’s day, and in our own, Israel has yet to believe the report of Christ.

This failure of belief and obedience, as we saw, is what opens the door of salvation to the Gentiles, and this will be Paul’s focus in chapter 11.

Nevertheless, as Isaiah did, Paul looks forward to the day when, as Isaiah 54 intimates, the barren woman will bring forth children, and the one whom God turned away from for a time will be restored in fullness of fellowship to her covenant Lord.

We’ve examined Paul’s three explicit points.

Now I want to dig deeper into some of the implications contained here.

Hearing and understanding do not necessarily result in saving faith

This is an important implication for Paul and it’s important for us, even as we consider the practical realities and implications of gospel proclamation.

Verse 16 implies that, even though the prophets and apostles have been faithful to declare the message, there will still be unbelief.

Paul’s own experience certainly reflected this reality.

We need look no further than Acts 13 to see this demonstrated with clarity.

Paul arrives at the synagogue in Pisidian Antioch and preaches a rousing sermon to the Jewish congregation there.

What happens as a result?

Paul and Barnabas preached faithfully.

Nevertheless, their message was rejected, at least by the Jews.

Interestingly enough, this scenario in Acts 13 is the prototype for what Paul will teach us in Romans 11: that the Israelite’s rejection of the gospel results in all the more proclamation to the Gentiles.

Apart from Isaiah 53 which demonstrates with clarity the rejection of the Messiah, we see examples in the gospels of Christ and His message being routinely rejected.

No passage sums this up more clearly and succinctly than John 1:9-11

It is therefore to be expected that the preaching of the gospel may, and indeed most likely will, meet with rejection.

This has practical implications for us.

We saw last week that the call to preach in such a way that the gospel message might be heard is not just a mandate for prophets or apostles or pastors or church leaders, but it’s a mandate for the church, whether you’ve been a Christian for 60 years or 60 days.