19/6/2019 The Fulness of the Gentiles - A Response to Israel Only - #1

Wednesday, June 19, 2019

DonKPreston.com
PRET E RIST RESEARCH I N S T I T U T E

HOME BIBLE PROPHECY HOME ARTICLES & MEDIA  ABOUT  PPW

STORE FULFILLED RADIO CONTACT DON FAQ’S

DONATE TO THE ANNUAL PPW SITEMAP VIDEO/AUDIO SHOWS

CURRENT YOUTUBE SPECIALS

 Print This Post

ESCHATOLOGY EXEGETICAL STUDIES RESPONDING TO THE CRITICS

RESTORATION OF ISRAEL RESURRECTION

The Fulness of the Gentiles – A Response to

Israel Only – #1
 December 5, 2018

 Fullness of the Gentiles Fulness of the Gentiles Israel Only Responding to the
Critics restoration of all things Restoration of Israel Romans 11:25-27 Second
Coming the resurrection then comes the end

https://donkpreston.com/the-fulness-of-the-gentiles-a-response-to-israel-only-1/?fbclid=IwAR1DHRGOFx8N8rjBbjF_cv_SUKsmsfpp4jR5bFxIOj-R… 1/9
19/6/2019 The Fulness of the Gentiles - A Response to Israel Only - #1

It is critical to
understand
Paul’s role in the
fulness of the
Gentiles

The Fullness of the Gentiles –

Numeric or Relational – #1
A Response to “Israel Only”
An absolutely fundamental tenet of what is known as the IO
(Israel Only) crowd (mob might be a better description) is that
when Paul said that at the coming of the Lord “the fulness of the
Gentiles would come in” he supposedly meant that this is (was)
the end of salvation. The full number of the Gentiles – which in
that paradigm is in reality only the totality of Israel – would be
saved. There is no salvation for anyone today. God loves no one
today. To say that this is an “ungodly” and horrible doctrine is a
huge understatement. It is deplorable. Frankly, I am amazed that
anyone could “fall” for that doctrine.

My purpose in this brief study is to focus on the word translated

as “fullness” (pleroma, πλήρωμα, Strong’s #4138) in Romans
11:25, as well as the antonym, hettema. If it can be shown that
these words do not inherently mean and demand a numeric
fullness, then one of the key pillars of the IO paradigm is negated
and falsi ed. In reality, that entire house of cards comes crashing
down.

Let me begin by saying that pleroma and hettema are numeric

“neutral” words. Both could be used to refer to number fullness
or de ciency. However, neither word is used of numbers in the
https://donkpreston.com/the-fulness-of-the-gentiles-a-response-to-israel-only-1/?fbclid=IwAR1DHRGOFx8N8rjBbjF_cv_SUKsmsfpp4jR5bFxIOj-R… 2/9
19/6/2019 The Fulness of the Gentiles - A Response to Israel Only - #1

Bible! As we shall see, Paul never uses pleroma of numeric

fullness.

Pleroma is used seventeen times in the NT, and to reiterate, Paul

never uses the word, in his epistles to refer to numeric fullness
even though he uses the word in discussions of the Gentiles.

Let’s take a look at those occurrences:

Matthew 9:16 – That which is put in a basket to ll it.

Mark 2:21 – A new piece of cloth as a patch “ lls” up the hole.

Mark 8:20 – When Jesus fed the multitude, they took up twelve
baskets “full” of the leftovers.

John 1:16 – Of his fullness we have received.

Romans 11:12 – “If their loss is riches for the world, what shall
their fulness be…”

Romans 11:25 – “Until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in.”

Romans 13:10 – Love is the ful lling of the Law.

Romans 15:29 – It was Paul’s prayer to go to Rome “in the

fullness of the blessings of Christ.

1 Corinthians 10:26 – The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness

thereof.

1 Corinthians 10:28 – Same citation.

Galatians 4:4 – When the fullness of time was come

Ephesians 1:10 – In the dispensation of the fullness of time

Ephesians 1:23 – The fullness of the one who lls all in all.

Ephesians 3:29 – That you might be lled with all the fullness of
God.

Ephesians 4:13 – Until we all come to the measure of the stature

of the fullness of Christ.

https://donkpreston.com/the-fulness-of-the-gentiles-a-response-to-israel-only-1/?fbclid=IwAR1DHRGOFx8N8rjBbjF_cv_SUKsmsfpp4jR5bFxIOj-R… 3/9
19/6/2019 The Fulness of the Gentiles - A Response to Israel Only - #1

Colossians 1:19 – It pleased the Father that in him should all the
fullness dwell.

Colossians 2:9 – In him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead

bodily.

I believe that any objective reader can carefully examine each of

these usages and agree that not one of them uses pleroma in a
numeric focused sense. Now, does that alone demand that Paul
could not have used it with a numeric connotation in Romans 11?
No, that would be to be guilty of illegitimate totality transfer. But,
the consistent use of the word is at least indicative of the fact
that Paul consistently used pleroma in a non-numeric sense. That
means that the clear burden of proof lies on those who insist that
he is using it in a numeric sense in Romans 11. I am convinced
that a close look at the actual context and the verbiage used
demonstrates very clearly that he was not doing so. And we will
get to that momentarily.

It should be noted that Paul uses pleroma and another word

hettema, as antonyms, contrasting words. Hettema is the opposite
of pleroma. If hettema is not numeric, then pleroma is not numeric
and vice versa. How does Paul use hettema? Notice Romans
11:12:

“Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure (Greek,
hettema, ἥττημα, Strong’s #2275) riches for the Gentiles, how
much more their fullness!”

I believe that Paul uses a parallelism in the text. His use of “their
fall” is parallel to “their failure.” If this is true, then what was
“their fall”? It was their transgression, (Greek, paraptōma,
παράπτωμα, Strong’s #3900); it was their sin. Their failure, their
diminishing, was not a diminishment of their number, it was their
sin, their failure to accept their own Messiah. That rebellion, led
to their diminished / forfeited place in the Presence of God.
There is not a hint of number in Paul’s discussion of “their failure.”
At the very least, one is on absolutely safe ground to say that
Israel’s sin led to their diminished state. Not their diminished
number, but, the loss of their standing with God. They had been
“cut off” as a result of that paraptōma, that transgression. The
lexicons support this idea, revealing that diminished number is
not the main idea – or in any way demanded – by hettema.

https://donkpreston.com/the-fulness-of-the-gentiles-a-response-to-israel-only-1/?fbclid=IwAR1DHRGOFx8N8rjBbjF_cv_SUKsmsfpp4jR5bFxIOj-R… 4/9
19/6/2019 The Fulness of the Gentiles - A Response to Israel Only - #1

Now, one has a perfect right to ask why hettema is not translated
as “diminished number” more often if it is a word that suggests or
demands numeric diminishment.

Let’s look at the Lexicons on hettema:

Arndt and Ginghrich– p. 349– “defeat” – commenting on 1 Cor.

6:7– it is utter defeat for you.”

Thayers – “A diminution, decrease: i.e defeat…brought upon the

Jewish people in that so few of them had turned to Christ.”
Notice that he does not say that the “few” is the focus, but rather
that hettema is was caused by the fact that so few of them were
obedient.

Balz-Scheinder- Vol. II, p. 125- “the defeat of the Jews means a

wealth for the Gentile peoples.”

Analytical Lexicon of the NT (Revised and Updated, 2012)-

Robinson and House– p. 171– “A defeat, failure.”

Analytical Greek Lexicon, Revised, 1978, 189– Under hetton -“to

be less, inferior to, to fare worse, to be in a less favorable
condition”– Hettema– “an inferiority, to a particular stand and,
default, failure, shortcoming, (Romans 11:12; 1 Cor. 6:7).”

Vines Theological Dictionary, (1966), p. 285, Under “Defect” –

“Primarily a lessening, a decrease, diminution, denotes a loss. It is
used of the loss sustained by the Jewish nation in that they had
rejected God’s testimonies and His Son and the Gospel, Romans
11:12, the reference being not only to national diminution but to
spiritual loss.”

Notice that not one– not ONE– of the lexicons de ne hettema as

a numerical de ciency, or diminishing. What that suggests is that
since pleroma is the antonym, the opposite, of hettema, that
pleroma is likewise not a numeric fulness. It is, rather, as the use of
all of the words in Romans 11 indicate, hettema is the cutting off,
the failure, (failure being a majority rendering), the loss, fall, etc,
and is used as an antonym to pleroma. This means that Paul was
speaking of Israel’s failure and loss (her rejection) versus her
blessing! It is her loss of status as opposed to her “restoration” to
the Presence of God. It is clearly not their diminished number
versus their full number.

https://donkpreston.com/the-fulness-of-the-gentiles-a-response-to-israel-only-1/?fbclid=IwAR1DHRGOFx8N8rjBbjF_cv_SUKsmsfpp4jR5bFxIOj-R… 5/9
19/6/2019 The Fulness of the Gentiles - A Response to Israel Only - #1

In full support of the lexical evidence, notice the translational

evidence. A quick look at all 59 translations on
BibleGateway.com shows the following:

Nine translations (less than 10%), give “diminished number.”

However, in the rest of the translations hettema is rendered as
“failure,” “defeat,” “loss,” “stumbled,” and similar words. Thus, the
idea of diminished number is far and away the least attested
translation. Now, since the lexicons do not support the idea that
hettema is referent to diminished number, one has a right to
ponder why the translators in those nine versions choose to
render it “diminished number.” That concept is not inherent, not
inferred, not necessary in the word itself. It is very clear that the
preponderant lexical and translational evidence does not support
the idea that diminished number is on Paul’s mind.

In the translations, pleroma in v. 25 is translated as full number in

28 of the translations, half of them. The question of course is,
since pleroma is the antonym of hettema, and since hettema
absolutely does not indicate number in Romans 11, what is the
justi cation for rendering pleroma as “full number”?

So, Paul did not mention, suggest or imply numeric fullness a

single time leading up to verses 25f. Hettema is no such reference,
as we have shown.

Let me now draw together the information on both hettema and

pleroma to show that a numeric diminishing and a “full number” is
not the focus of Paul’s discussion, but rather, a diminished
standing or status, versus a “standing” or status. I will do this by
examining the terms that Paul uses in Romans 11 to describe
Israel and her standing, or lack thereof, in his day.

Romans 11:7 – “God has given them a spirit of stupor, Eyes that
they should not see And ears that they should not hear, To this
very day.”

In verse 10, we nd this: “Let their eyes be darkened, so that they

do not see, And bow down their back always.” The focus in these
verses is clearly not on a given number, but on the standing or
status of “Israel” in Paul’s day. They were blind, they refused to
see. That is not a focus on numbers but, on the condition of
“Israel” when Paul wrote. Their blindness is directly related to

https://donkpreston.com/the-fulness-of-the-gentiles-a-response-to-israel-only-1/?fbclid=IwAR1DHRGOFx8N8rjBbjF_cv_SUKsmsfpp4jR5bFxIOj-R… 6/9
19/6/2019 The Fulness of the Gentiles - A Response to Israel Only - #1

their rejection, their being cast off, their loss, their death.
Blindness is status, it is condition, it is NOT number.

Romans 11: 11-12 – “I say then, have they stumbled that they
should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them
to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles. 12 Now if their
fall is riches for the world, and their failure (hettema) riches for
the Gentiles, how much more their fullness (pleroma)!
The contrast here could not be more clear. It is a state of
stumbling or fall, of loss of standing and status. The contrast is
that through their blindness, through Israel’s failure, (not her
diminished number) salvation was offered to the Gentiles. A
“diminished number” of Israelites had nothing to do with
salvation being taken to the Gentiles.

Romans 11:15 – “For if their being cast away is the reconciling of

the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?”
Now, if numbers are the issue in Romans 11 one has the right to
think that Paul would have expressed that in this verse. But no,
the only emphasis is on Israel’s being cast off, cast away but the
anticipation of their “acceptance.” Now, casting away is not,
needless to say, a numeric reference. It is a status reference, just
as “acceptance” is not numeric, but has reference to a change in
status, from being cast off (lost in sin, dead) to being accepted
which is reconciliation. And for Paul, Israel’s reconciliation is
Israel’s resurrection from the dead.

(Please carefully note that Paul does not say that Israel’s
reconciliation would result in them eventually being raised. His
words are clear, their acceptance (their reconciliation) would be
their resurrection!)

Paul is focused on Israel’s sin, their transgression, and their

consequent status. He is patently NOT focused on the number
but on the covenantal standing of the rebellious. He uses
stumbled (literally, transgressed) three times, refers to their
“defeat” once, and then contrasts that with the anticipated
“inclusion” being grafted back into the root. These are status,
standing, relational words and ideas– NOT NUMERIC! It is
eisegesis of the worst sort to turn these references to status into
a reference to number.

Paul said it was his desire to provoke Israel – no numbers

mentioned- in order to save some– no numbers mentioned – and
https://donkpreston.com/the-fulness-of-the-gentiles-a-response-to-israel-only-1/?fbclid=IwAR1DHRGOFx8N8rjBbjF_cv_SUKsmsfpp4jR5bFxIOj-R… 7/9
19/6/2019 The Fulness of the Gentiles - A Response to Israel Only - #1

the focus is their inclusion into Christ. This is the body of Israel
versus “some” (number unknown and un-referenced).

Paul continues this theme of rejection / acceptance, with not one

mention of numbers: (It should be noted that the Greek language
has words for numbers, but, Paul never used any of them in his
discussion of the fullness of the Gentiles. Not one).

Romans 11:17-21 – “But if some of the branches were broken off,

and you, a wild olive shoot, were grafted in their place to share
the rich root of the olive tree, do not boast over the branches. If
you do boast, remember that it is not you that support the root,
but the root that supports you. You will say, “Branches were
broken off so that I might be grafted in.” That is true. They were
broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand only through
faith. So do not become proud, but stand in awe. For if God did
not spare the natural branches, perhaps he will not spare you.”

Now, you can argue all day long that “some” means a number of
folks, but, Paul is not focused on numbers, but on the relationship
and status of that some, however many or few that might be.
Look carefully at his focus on branches being “broken off” versus
being grafted in, and his reference to “they were broken off that
you might be grafted in.” Absolutely no reference or focus on
numbers– to reiterate– it is about standing, about relationship,
about status, of “them” and “you.”

Once again, Paul continues:

“And even those of Israel, if they do not persist in unbelief, will be

grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. For if you
have been cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree and
grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much
more will these natural branches be grafted back into their own
olive tree.” (V. 23-24).

Notice the generic “Israel” and “they” and “them.” Look at how he
refers to the Gentiles simply as “you” and not to any concept of
number. You must impose and interject the idea of numbers into
the text to get them there, because numbers are not there.

And then, we come to the crucial text of verses 25-27:

https://donkpreston.com/the-fulness-of-the-gentiles-a-response-to-israel-only-1/?fbclid=IwAR1DHRGOFx8N8rjBbjF_cv_SUKsmsfpp4jR5bFxIOj-R… 8/9
19/6/2019 The Fulness of the Gentiles - A Response to Israel Only - #1

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

Now, since Paul has not mentioned, suggested or implied

numeric fulness, or numeric diminishing, a single time leading up
to these verses, one must have some powerful linguistic and
contextual evidence to make it say “full number” or “diminished
number.” Preconceived ideas are not suf cient.

What is the “fullness” that Paul has in mind? Contextually, it is

their acceptance into the one root, along with Israel. And that
“fullness” was not dependent on how many or how few had
accepted the Gospel. It was their status within the Root that was at
stake, a status that was being resisted by Israel, but, a status that
some of them were boasting about, as if they had replaced Israel.
They were claiming that they were now in the predominant
position, but, Paul was denying that and af rming their equality of
standing. (If the Gentiles were Israel, how could Israel – the
Gentiles – say that they had replaced Israel? That would be a
nonsensical argument).

In our next installment on the Fullness of the Gentiles, I will

explore more from the Pauline epistles, as well as showing that
the Jews, Jesus and the rst century saints knew full well that the
Gentiles were not Israel. Israel was not “the Gentiles.”

Hits: 915

https://donkpreston.com/the-fulness-of-the-gentiles-a-response-to-israel-only-1/?fbclid=IwAR1DHRGOFx8N8rjBbjF_cv_SUKsmsfpp4jR5bFxIOj-R… 9/9