Why does the rejection of the Jews mean the reconciliation of the world?

In the original Greek the word here translated in the ESV as rejection is one the apostle Paul never uses anywhere else in his writings, apobole, which means casting off, and which can be understood as meaning the opposite of possessing. It describes the action involving casting something off, losing it, and no longer being in possessing it. The word is used only on one other occasion in the New Testament, namely, when Paul’s journey to Rome is described. During that journey Paul promises that no person will die—there will be no loss of anyone’s life (Acts 27:22 apobole psuches; ESV: there will be no loss of life among you). Considering the meaning of this word, it is at the very least doubtful that Paul used the word apobole here to mean the rejection of Israel. Is it not more likely that he is rather speaking about their being lost? By approaching the Gentiles, God loses the Jews (they remain behind).

The opposite of rejection would have to be adoption in the sense of election. Paul does indeed use the word proslepsis which is in the ESV rightly translated as acceptance and which has no connection to election (see also Romans 15:7, in which Paul urges members of the church to accept one another). Accepting someone means no longer pass him by or ignoring him, but actually becoming involved with him. At the very least it is doubtful that when he uses the word proslepsis, Paul has some kind of re-election of Israel in mind. Is he not rather here speaking about a renewed concern regarding this nation on the part of God? This is the preferred meaning especially in light of proslepsis often meaning add along with, accept in additional to. After God had lost the Jews on his way to the Gentiles, he still accepts them along with the Gentiles, so that he ends up with both Gentiles and Jews. In this manner the world is reconciled through faith and the dead come to life again.

This passage therefore concerns the actions of God by which he casts away and picks up again. It therefore does not pertain to his definitive reprobation or predestination, but rather his attitude towards his people. When he approaches the nations with the gospel of the Messiah Jesus, he passes by unbelieving Israel. It remains behind. And when the conversion of the Gentiles leads to the salvation of Jews, God actively picks his people up again. This is why the same Paul who, in Romans 11:15, speaks about a God who lets people go and who picks them up again, can also write in Romans 11:29, which does speak about predestination, that God’s gifts of grace and his call to repent are irrevocable.

Like in Romans 11:12, Paul is being extremely concise in Romans 11:15. It is clear, however, from the rest of the letter that the world is indeed reconciled to God through Jesus Christ rather than through the transgression of the Jews and their denial of the Messiah. When Paul speaks about the historical path of the gospel to the Jews firstly and then also to the Gentiles, however, the attitude of the Jews certainly plays a role. History would have looked completely different if all the Jews had come to believe in Jesus on Pentecost. Since they did not do so, the gospel became much more fruitful among the Gentiles than among the Jews. Paul can therefore for rhetorical purposes state that the Gentiles owe the speedy coming of the gospel (and therefore their riches and reconciliation to God) to the transgression of the Jews and in particular to the fact that they failed to accept the Messiah. However, Paul also immediately turns this around into an argument urging the Gentiles to devote themselves to seeking the Jewish nation’s return to God. Those who owe so much to Israel’s shortcoming ought now use what they have received to eliminate that shortcoming, if possible. Ultimately, this historic turn of events will culminate in the same way that the parable of the prodigal son does: For this your brother was dead, and is alive; he was lost, and is found (Luke 15:32).  ¹