Check the Facts
In relation to the gospel they are enemies on your account, but in relation to God’s choice they are beloved on account of the fathers; Romans 11:28 NASB
Enemies – Paula Fredriksen is a recognized scholar. Her work on Paul’s apocalyptic message is powerful. But occasionally one must check the claims of even world-renowned authors. In her book, Sin: The Early History of an Idea, she writes about this verse:
“(Most English translations, unconscionably, render this phrase as ‘enemies of God,’ but Paul’s Greek has no such construction: he nowhere mentions ‘God’ here, 11:28.)”[1]
As far as the Greek text is concerned, she is absolutely correct. But of twenty or so English translations, I could find only four that introduce the idea that the Jews are God’s enemy:
Amplified Bible
From the standpoint of the gospel, the Jews [at present] are enemies [of God] for your sake [which is for your benefit], but from the standpoint of God’s choice [of the Jews as His people], they are still loved by Him for the sake of the fathers.
Contemporary English Version
The people of Israel are treated as God’s enemies, so the good news can come to you Gentiles. But they are still the chosen ones, and God loves them because of their famous ancestors.
Good News Translation
Because they reject the Good News, the Jews are God’s enemies for the sake of you Gentiles. But because of God’s choice, they are his friends because of their ancestors.
Weymouth Translation
In relation to the Good News, the Jews are God’s enemies for your sakes; but in relation to God’s choice they are dearly loved for the sake of their forefathers.
This is hardly “most English translations.” The GNT is abominable in many places and Weymouth is quite dated (and supersessionist). As for the Amplified, this is a case where the added text is clearly theological, not lexical. I find the CEV nothing more than an attempt by the publisher to sell another English Bible. Fredriksen may have enlarged the claim to make a point, but I don’t think it’s true. Of course, that doesn’t mean that she isn’t right about other mistranslations of Paul’s Greek (e.g., see Romans 1:3-4 in Today’s Word, 12 August 2019). It just means we need to check—everything. In this book, I have a dozen or more question marks in the margins, particularly involving her apparent confusion between “God-fearers” and “Christian Jews.” This is a common confusion, as if there actually were “Christians” in the first century. But that’s another story for another investigation.
There are two important lessons here.
- The Jews are not by any means enemies of God. That idea is theological rubbish, perpetrated by the Church of the Middle Ages in order to justify itself. No religious believer with any integrity concerning the text of the Bible can entertain such deliberate religious lies.
- Even the best scholars have blindsides (me too, for sure, although I’m not confident I fall into the “scholar” classification and therefore, all the more reason to be careful). Jonathan Sacks considered Paul a Christian. So does Frederiksen. Heschel seems not be have been interested in Yeshua, perhaps because “Jesus” was so thoroughly Christian Greco-Roman. Sarna misses the point about “Eve,” but he comes much closer than most. And the great fathers of the Church (Justin, Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin, Luther, and more) are so blind to their own anti-Jewish rhetoric that we stand amazed they aren’t condemned by the faithful. But we all have blinders somewhere.
Be careful. When it doesn’t smell right, get digging.
Topical Index: enemies, Fredriksen, Romans 11:28
[1] Paula Fredriksen, Sin: The Early History of an Idea (Princeton University Press, 2012), p. 45.
The soul that is corrupted—being removed from that spiritual reflection of holiness and righteousness that should characterize human nature…that is, the image of God—is a soul in exile. With respect to the gospel…these are enemies toward those who have now been shown mercy; but with respect to God’s sovereign election—His own merciful choice…these are dearly loved for the sake of the fathers who believed, trusted, and demonstrated faith and allegiance. The communicated Word of God is in a real sense the image of God in man, a spiritual image both as means of rule and participation in the restored order of spiritual jurisdiction.
I’m not sure how you meant your statement, but I would be very careful not to incorporate the typical Augustinian/Lutheran view of noetic depravity. Sin might affect how we think, but being born isn’t a sin and doesn’t carry with it some kind of epistemological sin.
Yes, it’s always been difficult to strike a balance between God’s grace and human effort/activity within salvation history. Even Paul’s manageable statement, “Now it evident that no one is justified before God by the law, because the righteous one will live by faith,” appears to find its conclusion only within an eschatological context. Frankly, apart from the spiritual restoration realized in Christ, I’m not certain precisely how that (balance) works… Perhaps…”Christ in you, the hope of glory.”?
Then there is the Bible in Basic English (BBE): “As far as the good news is in question, they are cut off from God on account of you, but as far as the selection is in question, they are loved on account of the fathers.”
Although the author may error in her statement regarding “most English translations” she is probably not far off from “most English Interpretation!” I use a “New Testament” version as a reference tool, “The Jewish Annotated New Testament,” compiled by many Jewish scholars. I find it so sad and troubling that they only offer explanations in regard to what “Christians” say and believe (and, apparently, they consider Paul a Christian) instead of commenting on, perhaps what was more likely being said based on who, when, where and to whom it was being said. These scholars could offer so much insight if they could just take these “New Testament” Jewish manuscripts and help us interpret them from a more “Jewish” viewpoint. I love Nehemia Gordon for doing exactly that!
With that being said, it is pretty amazing that these Jewish scholars would even take the time to work thru and comment on the Christian New Testament. We are certainly a step closer to coming together. It was much persecution and troubling times that separated us … perhaps it will be the same that will bring us back together again?!?!?
Yes, you’re right. It’s a shame that so many Jewish scholars not only see Paul as Christian (I believe because the Church has viewed him that way for 2000 years) but also fail to help the rest of us read these texts as Jewish. Gordon does that. So does Boyarin.