Discussion Questions

Paul says “the ones chosen” are “those who have believed,” and the lesson argues Israel “still observes the law” yet “reaps no righteousness” because they missed the law’s “ultimate purpose”; what does this imply about God’s intention in giving the law, and what does it expose about religious obedience that can exist without faith? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does this suggest God wanted the law to do, and what does it show about obeying rules without real faith?

The transcript insists, “We should not imagine that God deliberately blinds someone who would otherwise believe…He blinds the others by abandoning them to their darkness”; how does that portrayal of God’s foreknowledge and “turning His face away” challenge (or correct) common modern instincts about sovereignty, fairness, and human responsibility? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How does the idea that God “blinds” people by leaving them in their chosen darkness challenge what we think is fair, what God controls, and what humans are responsible for?

Clement says it would be “blasphemous” to think the Lord caused Israel’s ignorance, and Origen asks whether the “eyes that they should not see” language is “retribution”; how does the group understand divine judgment here—what exactly is God doing, and what is the sinner doing—and what would early Christians assume about the moral logic of God “giving people over”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In this view, what is God doing in judgment and what is the sinner doing? Why would early Christians see God “giving people over” as morally right?

The lesson compares Israel’s “spirit of stupor” to Romans 1 where God “gave up the Gentiles” to sin; what patterns do you see in how God judges in Romans (abandonment, retribution, consequences), and how should that affect the way Christians interpret spiritual dullness in themselves or their churches? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What pattern do you see in Romans about how God judges (like letting people go their own way), and how should that shape how we understand spiritual numbness in ourselves or our churches?

When Paul quotes Psalms about Israel’s “table” becoming “a snare,” the fathers interpret “table” as “luxurious living” and “comforts” turning into vulnerability “open to attack”; what modern “tables” (forms of comfort, status, security, or religious privilege) might function as snares, and how would we recognize when blessings are turning into judgment? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What kinds of modern comforts, status, security, or religious privilege can become a trap, and how can we tell when a blessing is starting to turn into judgment?

Paul asks whether Israel “stumbled so as to fall” and answers “God forbid,” with Origen saying they can rise and will be converted “at the end of the age” when “the fullness of the Gentiles has come in”; how does this future hope shape the way we should speak about unbelieving Jews today, and what attitudes does it rule out? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If Israel can still rise again later, how should we talk about unbelieving Jews today, and what attitudes should we avoid?

The lesson uses Jesus’ parables (tenants; marriage feast) to argue the kingdom was “taken from you” and given to others producing fruit, and that Jerusalem’s destruction is foretold; what does this reveal about God’s priorities (fruitfulness, faithfulness, worthiness), and how does it confront modern assumptions that being “invited” or having heritage guarantees safety? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What do these parables show God cares most about (like faithfulness and producing fruit), and how do they challenge the idea that being invited or having a religious heritage guarantees safety?

Chrysostom is quoted denying that Gentiles would “never have been called,” but saying they came in “ahead of the Jews” out of order; what does this teach about God’s timing and strategy in salvation history, and how should it humble Gentile believers who might assume they are the “default” people of God? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does this say about God’s timing in saving people, and how should it humble Gentile believers who think they are God’s “default” people?

Origen says Jews could observe Gentile conversions and notice “the law and the prophets” being obeyed “with a greater and more exalted respect among the Gentiles,” possibly provoking their return; in what specific, observable ways could Gentile Christians today live so that Jews (or any unbelievers) see a holiness and reverence that provokes “jealousy” rather than disgust? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What clear, everyday actions could Gentile Christians take so Jews—or any unbelievers—see real holiness and respect for God that makes them curious, not disgusted?

Paul tells Gentiles he “magnifies” his ministry by trying to “save some” of his own people, and Ambrosiaster says rescuing those “to whom he was not sent” brings “greater honor”; what would it look like for a church to “magnify” its primary calling while intentionally pursuing people outside its natural mission field—and what sacrifices, risks, or reputation costs might that require? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How can a church stay focused on its main mission while also reaching people outside its usual circle, and what costs or risks might come with that?