What about the Jews?

Romans 9–11 as an Aside to Paul’s Main Argument

We continue tonight looking at Romans and we're going to talk about how the 11th chapter sort of fits into the book of Romans as a whole. Interestingly enough, if you were to take the book of Romans and you were to remove chapters 9 through 11, it would actually flow the same as if it were not there.

And I don't mean to indicate in any way that it shouldn't be there, but what I mean is chapters 9 through 11 of Romans really are an aside to Paul's overarching point. He's been making his point from the beginning of the book about sin and about the only remedy for sin, which is Jesus Christ.

And he's been dealing with the fact that Gentiles are sinners, Jews are sinners, thus everyone needs a Savior. And there is no one who doesn't need a Savior, which is why we have that passage, Romans 3 .23, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

But then you get to chapter 9 and it's like he dives into this very serious issue, the issue of, well, what about Israel? What about the promises? What about the fact that for the previous thousands of years, for many hundreds of years, God has made promise after promise after promise to this one family, this one nation, the descendants of Abraham.

What about them? Has God just wiped his hands of them? Is he just done with them? Is he tired of their nonsense and he's just going to go on and do something else? Well, that's what Romans 9 through 11 is about.

Romans 9, Paul made the point that basically God is at liberty to do as he chooses. Romans 9 is all about God's freedom and his sovereignty. And that's what we learn about in Romans 9. It's really God's will to do what he wants.

He chose Jacob, but he didn't choose Esau. They both came out of the same womb. They both had the same mom, the same dad. They were in every way similar. They were twins. Yet God chose one, didn't choose the other.

And that's God's prerogative to do that. It's his right as creator to make out of one lump some vessels for honorable use and some for dishonorable use. That's what Romans 9 tells us. It's a direct quote.

Romans 9 is about who are you, old man, to answer back to God? Can the thing formed say to him who formed it, why have you made me like this? That's Paul's whole point. He's like, as to the question of Israel, who are you to even ask?

That's the first way that he sort of deals with the issue. And then in chapter 10, he focuses on the fact that the problem is that Israel has sought its righteousness by works. And that anyone who seeks a righteousness before God based upon their own righteousness have already started at the wrong place.

They've already started at the wrong. It's you can't get there from there. You can't get to the righteousness that is required of God by starting with your own. You have to start with the righteousness which comes from God, the righteousness which is based on faith in Jesus Christ.

Because it's his righteousness, not ours, that gets us there. So Romans 10, which we finished last week, sort of it focuses on that. It focuses on Israel's main dilemma was that they missed the point all the way back to Abraham.

Because if you go all the way back to Abraham in Genesis 15, 6, it says Abraham believed God and it was accounted unto him as righteousness. It was his faith and not his works that God accepted and declared him righteous.

So based on all of that, we come now to chapter 11. And that's not bankruptcy. I'm waiting to use that joke for weeks. We come now to chapter 11. And in chapter 11, Paul really digs in on the subject of Israel.

He's already said it's God's prerogative to do as he wishes. He's already said Israel's problem was that they were seeking righteousness by works and not by faith. Now he's going to really deal with the big question.

Because really, if Romans 10, at the very ending, and I want to read just the end of Romans 10, at the very ending of Romans 10, you could read that and sort of come away with it assuming that God has ended his tie with Israel as a nation.

I mean, you could read just the last few verses of Romans 10 and be like, OK, well, that's it for Israel. Let's just read it, starting in verse 19, Romans 10, 19. Paul says, But I ask, did Israel not understand?

First Moses says, I will make you jealous of those who are not a nation. With a foolish nation I will make you angry. Then Isaiah is so bold as to say, I have been found by those who did not seek me. Talking about the Gentiles.

I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me. But of Israel, he says, and this is where I said it could be easy for people to think that God has sort of pulled away. He says, But of Israel, he says, all day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.

As if to say, now he's pulled his hand back. It's almost as if to say, you know, I've held out my hand to them. I've given them the opportunity upon opportunity upon opportunity of mercy. And I've been doing this and they just haven't received it.

So there you go. And it would be easy for someone to read that and to come away believing or at least assuming that God had ended his tie with ethnic Israel. And some groups in Christian history have actually made the case that that is, in fact, what happened, which at times has led to something which I'm sure most of you are familiar with called anti-Semitism.

You familiar with the phrase anti-Semitism? It's based on actually the Semite comes from the son of Noah, which was Shem, which is the ancestor of Abraham. Thus, the groups are called anti-Semites. Those who would just look to Jewish people as being somehow inherently bad.

And honestly, this is something that's pretty, pretty rampant. I get surprised sometimes in talking to some of my friends who are not necessarily believers and just hearing them say, well, it's just those Jews.

You know, those Jews are doing this or those Jews. And they sort of throw it out as if it's like if it's just accepted that Jews are bad people. I mean, obviously, I would disagree with their with where they're coming from.

But I don't know if you've ever heard that, if you've ever experienced that. But there's there is a real thing called anti-Semitism, which is out there. And there there has been anti-Semitism in the church.

There are people who would say that the church has replaced Israel as God's people and Israel nationally has no more place within the plan of God. And there are some people call this covenant theology.

But more specifically, it's called replacement theology. It teaches that generally that the covenants that God made in the Old Testament have been replaced by the new covenant. And thus God's promises in the Old Covenant are no longer binding.

OK, that's that's what or or or now they apply to the church. The replacement theology is that either the Old Testament promises either are no longer binding or now they have been replaced by the church.

Now, I don't like to use the term replacement theology, but also there's another kind of theology that's out there. And tonight I wanted to sort of address both because I think both can be bad. I think replacement theology can be bad.

But I also think there's something called dispensational theology, which many of you have heard me talk about before. Dispensational theology. I know Richard's very familiar with dispensational theology, Dallas Seminary, dispensational institution.

So very familiar with that. But what happens is in dispensationalism, what I call hyper dispensationalism basically is that they teach a separate plan of salvation for the Jews and for the church. Now, I'm not saying that all dispensationalists teach that.

I'm saying that there's a there's a hyper sort of a fringe element, sort of one, the one that I would disagree with. They would say, well, yeah, God has his plan for Israel and God working out his plan for Israel.

And God has his church and he's working out his plan for the church. And I've heard people make the analogy of railroad tracks. God's got his plan for Israel. And that's one track. God has got his plan for the church.

And that's another track. And they just continually go down that parallel track and they never cross and they never go over one another. They never meet. They just continue with the plan of God. God's got the Jews.

God's got the Christians. And he keeps them on track. Obviously, I have a major problem with that theology, because what that teaches and what I've actually heard some hyper dispensationalists teach is what that means is that, well, a Jew can be saved apart from Christ simply by virtue of his Judaism.

Now, you have a problem with that? I certainly do. I believe that it's an error of the I think it was the error of the Jews of Jesus's time. I think it's the error of Paul's time. I think it's what he's dealing with in this passage, because honestly, if that were the case, let me give you an example.

I'm not a fan of Pat Robertson. And I don't mean to disparage him as an individual, but I tell you, as a theologian, he ain't got a he ain't got a whole lot to say. And one of the things that he does do or what he did do, I have it on video.

He had a guy, a Jewish guy sitting across the table from him. The Jewish guy is interviewing him in regard to his faith. Obviously, Robertson would be a hyper dispensationalist. And they're having this conversation.

And the Jewish guy says, says, well, well, what about me? Because he's talking about Jesus Christ and going to heaven and, you know, being a follower of Christ. And the Jewish guy says, well, what about me?

You know, am I going to go to hell? Now, here's a here's here's a perfect time for somebody to get to share the gospel. If somebody asked me, am I going to hell? I mean, really, how often do I mean, do you have people come up to you in Wal-Mart?

Hey, am I going to hell? Wouldn't you just love to have an opportunity to share grace just that quickly? I mean, you know, you didn't have to go through nothing. They yes, like softball. You know, they put they lobbed you a softball.

But of course, in his attempt to be politically correct, though, Robertson, he he sits there and he goes, well, you're a Jew. And you see, the Bible says all Israel will be saved. First taken out of context, which we will see later on.

But he says, you see, it says all Israel will be saved. So you're going to be OK. I mean, I want to fall out of my chair. And I have a couch that's hard to do. I'm sitting there thinking, what are you talking about?

You're you're you just you just told this man you had an opportunity. You said you're on national television. He says, am I going to go to hell? You could have proclaimed the gospel of Jesus Christ, that you can be saved from your sins if you turn and repent of your sin and trust in Jesus Christ.

But instead, an attempt to either be politically correct or to demonstrate that he is a theological missing the boat in theological terms. He had to say that. And I don't know what his motivation was other than, again, political correctness.

But the point is this, you see how this hyper dispensationalism is just as dangerous as anything else. It can be very bad when somebody just gets to the point where you don't have to have Jesus to be saved.

You can be saved by virtue of your Judaism. If you can be saved by virtue of Judaism, Romans 9 to 11 means nothing. Because Romans 9 to 11 is all about that. Paul's very first part of Romans nine. He says, I wish I could be accursed if it meant the salvation of my countrymen according to the flesh.

I wish I could be, you know, I would give myself over to the pits of hell if that meant my countrymen according to the flesh would be saved. How does that make any sense if they're already saved by virtue of their nationality?

It does not make any sense. Yeah, absolutely. They don't need to save it. They got it as virtue of their DNA. So I see, like I said, you got two problems. You got hyper dispensationalism and you got replacement theology.

And I think both of them can lead to anti-Semitism. Replacement theology I think leads to anti-Semitism because it just says, well, God has canceled all his promises to Israel. And thus we have no more concern for really the Old Testament in general.

Or the other side of it is that it leads to anti-Semitism because hyper dispensationalism, the worst kind of anti-Semitism is to tell a Jew he doesn't need Christ. I think that's problem too. So either way, you're not loving the Jewish person.

You're hating them because either way you're not demonstrating to them the truth. Now, I do want to address one thing before going further on the subject of replacement theology. There is one place in the scripture where Jesus is teaching.

And he makes a point that sounds very much like replacement theology. It's in the parable of the tenants. It's in Matthew chapter 21 and verse 33. We'll just read it if you want to go there. Matthew chapter 21.

Matthew 21 and 33. Most of you familiar with this will read it anyway because it's always good to read these things and learn about them. He says, hear another parable. There was a master of a house who planted a vineyard and put a fence around it and dug a winepress in it and built a tower and leased it to tenants and went into another country.

When the season for fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the tenants to get his fruit. And the tenants took his servants and beat one, killed another and stole another. Again, he sent other servants, more than the first, and they did the same to them.

Finally, he sent his son to them saying, they will respect my son. But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, this is the heir. Come, let us kill him and have his inheritance. And they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.

When therefore the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do with those tenants? They said to him, he will put out those wretches to a miserable death and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons.

And we'll just end right there. The point is, what's the analogy? What's the parable? The parable is you have this vineyard which has been given over to tenants. Jesus' analogy here is that all of the wondrous gifts of God had been given to the Israelite people.

They had been given the priesthood, temple sacrifice services, all of the things which God gave to them. He gave to them all throughout the Old Testament. And instead of happily and joyfully receiving them, they were killing the prophets and they were stoning those who had been sent to them.

You know what Jesus said? Oh, Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those who are sent to you. They did exactly what the parable says. He said God would send them one after another, one servant after another, after another.

And they beat him. And finally, he sent his own son. Obviously, there's no question about what the analogy is there. Jesus himself being God's son. He sent his son and they killed him. And what should the tenant, what should be done with those tenants, Jesus says.

An analogy, obviously. What should be done to Israel who has spurned the promises of God? They should be put out and put somebody else in who will appreciate it. So there has a, you know, you could see how someone could get a picture of replacement theology from that.

You know, get them out, put someone else in. So I can imagine being able to look at this text and sort of finding the idea that the church has come in as the new tenant. The church has come in to replace those who were unable to sustain God's promises and God's commands.

So that's one place in the scripture that I would say there's sort of an issue there, that someone who believes in replacement theology might be able to look at that text and say, well, here's a place where we see the tenants being replaced by God.

Yet we were grafted in the way that they were branches of the root tree. And then we were those were cut off and we were grafted into. Yes. And that's what we're going to get. That's well, that's that's that's why that's what I'm trying to do.

I'm setting the stage for chapter 11 of Romans because that's what chapter 11 teaches us. Is there is a sense in which the church has come in to God's paradigm, but we have not come in to replace Israel.

You see, I don't like the idea. I don't like the word replacement theology. And I really don't like the idea of dispensational theology. And in this sense, hyper dispensationalism, I tend to I tend to use the phrase expansion theology.

And again, maybe that's just something I made up or I heard somebody smarter than me say at one time. But what I mean by that is that the promises of Israel are not stopped. It's just gone from being the ownership of Israel alone to have expanded out to people who were not born of Israel.

Me, I get to call myself a son of Abraham by faith because I've been grafted in as a wild olive branch to the root, which was Israel. Now, the key is when we start reading through chapter 11, what we're going to see is Paul makes some pretty important points.

He says, now, look, you know, even though you've been grafted in, don't think for a second that God couldn't just as easily graft the Jews as a nation that he couldn't just as easily bring them back in, you know, boot us out, not individually.

But, you know, there is a sense and we're going to talk about this in the weeks to come. If the Lord gives us time and strength to do so, we're going to talk about what that phrase means. The times of the Gentiles are complete.

Jesus said it and Paul says it again in Romans 11. He says there's a time of the Gentiles which are coming. And when that's done, you know, is there going to be another time where God opens the heart of ethnic Israel to receive their savior, to receive the Messiah?

Is it possible? Could there be a national revival for Israel coming? R .C. Sproul, in his book on, I forget which book it was, the one I was reading. He says this, I have this quote here. He says, Personally, I have been persuaded that God does intend to write another chapter for the Jewish people.

I have been persuaded that there will still, excuse me, that there will be a restoration of the Jewish people to faith in Christ before the end of the age. So, I mean, here's a guy who many would say, well, he's a replacement theologian.

But yet he still, in this reference, says, here is my belief is that God may yet bring revival to the nation of Israel. You really want to say something?

One of the great prophets said it very pertinently. Thus says the Lord who gives the sun for light by day and depicts the order of the moon and the stars for light by night. Which stirs up the sea so that its waves roar.

The Lord of hosts is his name. If this fixed order departs from before me, declares the Lord, then the offspring of Israel also will cease from being a nation before me forever. Last time I looked here, we still have the sun and the stars.

That's pretty compelling.

Oh yeah, absolutely. The whole key to everything, I think, is the idea that God has not done away with Israel. God has expanded. He hasn't told them no. He has expanded it. Let's just read verse 1. I don't know how far we're going to get tonight.

But verse 1 sounds good. We may get further than that. We'll see. Paul, like I said, in chapter 9, chapter 10, he's been dealing with this subject. But in chapter 11, he just asked the question that's on everybody's lips.

I asked then, has God rejected his people? Now, who is his people? In the context, there is no question the context is Israel. Has God rejected Israel? And then he says, Meganoita, that Greek term, the strongest of the negative form to say by no means.

Let it never be. May it never come into existence. That's Meganoita. Meganoita being the form of to be or existence. Don't let it even come into your mind that God has rejected his people. Has God rejected his people?

No. And then he gives the testimony of the evidence that I think is so. I mean, nobody smarter. Obviously, Jesus. And you could make the argument Solomon was. Even though, how do you live with 700 wives?

Well, Solomon had wisdom from God. Jesus is God in the flesh. And then you have Paul. Nobody make argument like the Apostle Paul. And this is his argument. He says, I asked then, has God rejected his people?

By no means. For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. His argument is simple. God could not have rejected Israel in Toto. Because I am saved. I am a member of the church.

If I, being an Israelite, have come to faith in Christ. I have demonstrated that God has not rejected Israel as a whole. He could not have. Because I am here. I am proof positive. I am the evidence. And you know what?

At this time in the church's history. You know, we are looking at the book of Romans. You are looking at early church history. You are looking at probably, I think, 60. I am trying to think of the date for Romans.

I cannot think of it in my mind right now. You are looking at a book. Mid 50s. So, by 60 it is written. It is no later than 60. You have a book here fairly early. And really, if you think about it, at this point in history.

The church is still made up of many Jewish people. Who were the 12 apostles? They were all Jews. Of course, I mean, obviously, Judas died and Matthias came and took his place. But still, you have Jewish apostles.

When Peter preached on the day of Pentecost. How many people were saved? A little Bible trivia. Huh? 3 ,000 on the first day. 3 ,000 on the first day. Am I right about that? I think it is 3 ,000. I am sitting here asking for trivia.

I do not even know the answer. So, he preaches. 3 ,000 are saved. But why? Rather than making sense. 3 ,000 are saved preaching the gospel. 3 ,000 who? Jewish people. Because they are where? They are in Jerusalem for what?

The feast of Pentecost. Why do they come to Jerusalem for the feast of Pentecost? Because they are Jews. So, the first large evangelistic crusade that ever happened in the history of the church. Happened among the Jews.

And then we see, not a few chapters later, it happens again. Thousands more come. And they are likely, at least the majority of them, Jewish people. So, Paul is not really, he is not just making the argument for himself.

He is not just saying, look, hey, I am the exception that proves the rule. He is saying, look, look around us. Look at the fact that I am a Benjaminite. I am a Jew. But I am not the only one. If God had totally written off the Jewish people, then none of this would make any sense.

I would not even be here. And Paul goes over his pedigree in Philippians chapter 3. He talks about the fact that he is a Hebrew of Hebrews. And we know, there is no question, he is an Israelite. And God has not rejected Israel in toto because Paul is there.

So, then he goes on in verse 2. And I do not know, verses 2 through 10 make up one idea. So, whether or not we get to looking at all of it, I do not know. But I want to just, I want to read through it very quickly.

Read through verse 2 through 10. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Oh, what an important phrase. We are going to go back to that. Trust me. Do you not know what the scripture says of Elijah?

How he appeals to God against Israel. Lord, they have killed your prophets. They have demolished your altars. And I alone am left. And they seek my life. But what is God's reply to him? I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.

So too, at this present time, there is a remnant chosen by grace. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works. Otherwise, grace would no longer be grace. What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking.

The elect obtained it. But the rest were hardened, as it is written. God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day. And David says, let their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them.

Let their eyes be darkened so that they cannot see and bend their backs forever. Ultimately, what we see here, verses 2 through 10, Paul makes a series of points. One, God has not turned his back on Israel because I am an Israelite.

Two, there is a remnant from Israel that has been chosen by grace from God. That he has chosen Israelites to be saved. I am not the only one, but there is an entire group of us. And he uses the example of Elijah, which we are going to look at in a little while.

And then he goes on to say that the elect, which is that word he really dealt with in chapter 9, God's choosing, the elect have obtained salvation by grace and the rest have been blinded. Not just that they have been left to themselves, but they have been hardened against the truth.

That is a scary thing, really and truly. But his argument is sound. His argument is very sound because honestly, I don't know if you have ever dealt with Orthodox Judaism and tried to bring the message of Christ to an Orthodox Jew.

But I tell you what, the hardness against the Messiahship of Christ, the hardness against the fact that Jesus is the promised one from the Old Testament. There is a hardness in that community against Christ himself.

It is all over in the world of unbelief. But particularly there, because of this hardness that has come upon them. Let's look back at verse 2 and like I said, we are just going to sort of walk through the text.

I gave you the overview of it. I want to walk through the text and just sort of see what it says. Verse 2 says, God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Now, if he would have just stopped and said, God has not rejected his people, that would have been enough to follow up verse 1 because verse 1 says, he says, no, he has not rejected Israel because I am an Israelite, other Israelites are being saved.

Obviously, God has not rejected Israel in toto. But here he goes on to add this little aside, this little extra statement. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. When we were studying Romans chapter 8, we did a lot of study on that word foreknow.

We did a lot of study on what it means for God to foreknow someone. And I made the point and I wanted to reiterate with you tonight, the truth of how that word foreknow does not simply mean that God looked down the corridor of time and saw someone and gained knowledge about them and as a result of gaining knowledge about them, he saved them as a result of gaining knowledge.

That is not what it means as a result of God knowing someone. When the Bible talks about God knowing someone, it is always in the sense of a salvific knowledge. Jesus said, many will come to me on that day and will say, Lord, Lord, have we not done this?

Have we not done that? And Jesus said, depart from me because I never what? I never knew you. The word know there indicating a salvific relationship that never been established. In the Old Testament, the book of Amos, God says to Israel, you only have I known of all the nations of the world.

What does the word know there mean? It means love. It actually means have affection for a saving relationship I've established with you and established with anybody else. I know you. Jesus said, I didn't know you.

God said, I did know you. So there's this idea when God talks about knowing someone, it's not just taking in of information. I can say, yeah, I know Nathan. It means I have information about Nathan over the years I've taken in information.

But I can say, I know Nathan. What does that mean? I mean, I have an affection for him. He's my friend. I trust him. Somebody says, I saw Nathan. I saw Nathan the other night and he was doing bad with somebody who was bad and they were doing bad together.

That's probably mean. What would I say? I know Nathan. He didn't do that. There's more to just a knowledge there. I have a relationship with this guy. I know Nathan. So you understand now? So when it says, God has not put away his people.

God has not abandoned his people whom he foreknew. It's referring to the fact that God has in eternity already foreknown those who will be saved. He has already foreknown. He has already established a relationship.

I had a Mormon the other day try to tell me, we preexisted our own lives. The Mormon said, we preexisted our own lives. I said, what do you mean? He said, well, we live, we've always lived. We're eternity beings and we just don't remember it, but we were.

I said, where do you get that? And he said, well, right here in Jeremiah 1 .5 where it says, it's about Jeremiah. It says, before you were formed in the womb, I knew you. And before you, I'd sanctified you as a prophet.

Jeremiah 1 .5, you're familiar with that passage. And I said, you're taking this fact that God can know us before we're even created because God is outside of time and you're building into that a theology of preexistence?

Really? I said, talk about eisegesis. That's how you wrote it. And then he went, eise what? No, I'm just kidding. The point is, though, when God in his infinite knowledge knows us, it means he has a relationship with us.

And that's the key to this whole verse is that no one whom God has chosen, no one whom God has elected are going to perish, whether they be of Israel, whether they be of the Gentiles. And he says, God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew.

Does that mean he hasn't rejected some of Israel? Yes, he has. Does that not mean he hasn't rejected some of the Gentiles? Yes, he has. But those whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son.

For whom he predestined, he also called. Whom he called, he justified. And whom he justified, he glorified. So we connect the word foreknew in chapter 11, verse 2, back to chapter 8, and verse 28, verse 30.

Yes? I just liked it when you said that the action is carried out by God Almighty. Yes. Not by me. Absolutely. I enjoyed that. That really helped me. Well good, I'm glad. And that's the key. God foreknows us.

He chooses us. He predestines us. He's the one who calls us. He gives us new life. All of this is a result of his work, not my work. I can be confident in him that I will not lose what I've been given because he is God and I am not the one who is ultimately responsible for my ending.

And then he goes on. He gives the analogy of Elijah. I really like this story. I really, recently particularly, I've been kind of connecting with Elijah on a different level. Elijah, he did all this great stuff and then he got afraid and ran away.

He preached before the prophets of Baal. He made fun of them. I connect with him on that a thousand times over. If you remember the story of Baal, he tells them, he goes, Okay, you build your altar. You cry out for your God to bring fire down from heaven and absorb the sacrifice.

And I'll wait for you to do what you're going to do. And then when you're done, I'll do what I'm going to do. And I'm paraphrasing here. Okay? If you want to look it up, I believe it's in 1 Kings 18, but I'll have to look that up.

Is it 1 Kings 18? Okay. All right. But I'm paraphrasing the story here. They all start crying out to their God. Nothing happens. Elijah sits there. Why don't you cry a little louder? They start cutting themselves.

And he says, Why don't you cut yourself a little deeper? I mean, you know, somewhat of a, I don't want to say sarcasm, but just, you know, he's really just, you're deceived. You've been lied to and you're following a false God.

And then what does he do? He brings water, pours it on the sacrifice. He builds a trench around for the water to fall into and it's poured out. And then the fire comes down from heaven and it not only absorbs the sacrifice, but it licks up all the water.

The text says it licks the water up to where there's not even a drop of water left, totally dry. And he says, This is the true God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And that's the God whom the people should serve.

And thus, all these prophets are then, you know, they're slaughtered, you know. And as a result, there's this short-lived revival. But then there is, you know, Jezebel, who he's afraid of. What does he do?

Does he stand up and he say, you know, Let my people go? No. He runs out. He runs into the wilderness. He hides and he asks that God would kill him. I mean, he did. He went from the highest he could have ever been to the lowest.