Verse 3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets - They will not permit any person to speak unto them in thy name; and they murder those who are faithful to the commission which they have received from thee. Digged down thine altars - They are profligate and profane beyond example, and retain not the slightest form of religion. I am left alone - There is no prophet besides myself left, and they seek to destroy me.

Rom 11:1-6

I say then, Hath God east away his people! God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not east away his people which he foreknew (or, predetermined. See the same word, Rom 8:29). Wot ye not what the Scripture saith of (rather, in; i.e. in the passage concerning) Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel saying, Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what faith the answer of God (ὁ χρηματισμός, denoting a Divine communication to man; in this case by the "still small voice." Only here in the New Testament; but cf. Mat 2:12, Χρηματισθέντες κατ ὄναρ; also Luk 2:26; Act 10:22; Heb 8:5; Heb 11:7) unto him? I have left to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to Baal. Even so at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. The usual interpretation of this whole passage, and notably that of the ancients, has been to take the proof of God not having cast off his people as beginning in Rom 11:1, with "for I also," etc., and all the rest to be in sequence. Chrysostom’s explanation of the argument is to the following effect: God has not rejected his ancient people; for I myself am eminently of it; and I have been selected as a chief proclaimer and expounder of the gospel to the world; this would not have been the case if the nation had been cast off. But it may be said to me," You are only one of the ancient people; you are not the people." Nay, but I do not stand alone; there are thousands of Israelite believers as well as myself; and these are God’s true people, the people whom he foreknew. And of them there may be more than we are aware of; it is as it was in the days of Elias; he had supposed himself to be left alone; but he was told that there were seven thousand with him who were God’s true people still. And so now, there is a faithful remnant, the number of which is known to God alone, which is his people still, according to the election of grace. The same Father further understands the citation of the whole of the passage from 1Ki 19:14, though not required for the apostle’s proof, to be intended as significant. It would have sufficed, he says, to cite only what was said about a remnant being left; but the whole complaint of Elias is cited, so as to show by the way that the present rejection of Christ and persecution of the Church by the majority of the Jews had also its counterpart in ancient times; and thus the apostle, he says, λανθανόντως τὴν κατηγορίαν (i.e. of the unbelieving Jews) αὔξει. It is to be observed that the above interpretation of the passage, which in its main points has been most generally adopted, goes on two suppositions; vie. that "for I also," in 1Ki 19:1, is the first part of the proof that Israel is not cast off; and that "which he foreknew," in 1Ki 19:2, is intended as a limitation of the meaning of "his people." According to another view, decidedly upheld by Meyer, "for I also" is not part of the proof, but connected with μὴ γέροιτο: "I must needs say, God forbid! being myself a Hebrew of the Hebrews" Then, according to this view, comes the positive statement that God has not east off his people in the same general sense as before, after which the proof begins; the addition of ὂ προέγνω not being a limitation of τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ, but intended to enforce the idea of the impossibility of the final rejection of the race of Israel (cf. verse 29; also Psa 94:14 and 1Sa 12:22). The fact that, throughout the chapter, it is Israel as a nation that is in view, and that the coming of the whole nation into the kingdom of Christ is contemplated in the end, adds decided probability to this view of the significance of ὂν προέγνω, though καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ, etc., in 1Ki 19:1, may still be regarded as possibly part of the proof. St. Paul’s designation of himself as "of the seed of Abraham" seems meant to express that he was an Israelite of pure descent, not a proselyte or descended from proselytes. In Php 3:5, as well as here, he specifies his tribe as that of Benjamin, the tribe that with Judah had clung to the house of David, and had shared the privileges of Judah. The quotation from 1Ki 19:1-21. is given freely from the LXX., varying a little, but not so as to affect the meaning. One variation is in the feminine, instead of masculine, article before Βάαλ, which has been explained by supposing εἰκόνι understood (so in the Authorized Version, "the image of Baal "), or by there having been a female Baal, or by the god having been supposed androgynous, or by the feminine being used of idols in contempt. St. Paul may possibly have found this reading in his copy of the LXX. The variation is of no importance with regard to the drift of the passage. "According to the election of grace," at the end of 1Ki 19:5, does not seem to be directly suggested by the passage cited, but added by St. Paul so as to make plain his position—maintained throughout the Epistle, and about to be pressed in this chapter on the consideration of Gentile Christians—that the calling of all, whether Jews or Gentiles, is "of grace," and not claimable as of right by any on the ground of the merit of their own works. And in order to enforce this position, he adds, And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace; i.e. the word "grace" loses its essential meaning. [But if of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.] The preponderance of ancient authorities is against the retention of the clause within brackets, which does not seem required. It is the same as in Rom 4:4.

Verse 10. Let their eyes be darkened. This is taken literally from the psalm, and was evidently the main part of the passage which the apostle had in his eye. This was fulfilled in the insensibility and blindness of the Jews. And the apostle shows them that it was long ago predicted, or invoked, as a punishment on them for giving the Messiah vinegar to drink, Ps 69:21,23. And bow down their back alway. The Hebrew (Ps 69:23) is, "Let their loins totter or shake;" that is, as one does when he has on him a heavy burden. The apostle has retained this sense. It means, let them be called to bear heavy and oppressive burdens; let them be subjected to toil or servitude, as a reward for their sins. That this had come upon the Jews in the time of Paul is clear; and it is further clear that it came upon them, as it was implied in the psalm, in consequence of their treatment of the Messiah. Much difficulty has been felt in reconciling the petitions in the Psalms for calamities on enemies, with the Spirit of the New Testament. Perhaps they cannot all be thus reconciled; and it is not at all improbable that many of those imprecations were wrong. David was not a perfect man; and the Spirit of inspiration is not responsible for his imperfections. Every doctrine delivered by the sacred writers is true; every fact recorded is recorded as it was. But it does not follow that all the men who wrote, or about whom a narrative was given, were perfect. The reverse is the fact. And it does not militate against the inspiration of the Scriptures that we have a record of the failings and imperfections of those men. When they uttered improper sentiments; when they manifested improper feelings; when they performed wicked actions, it is no argument against the inspiration of the Scriptures that they were recorded. All that is done in such a case, and all that inspiration demands, is that they be recorded as they are. We wish to see human nature as it is; and one design of making the record of such failings is to show what man is, even under the influence of religion; not as a perfect being, for that would not be true; but as he actually exists, mingled with imperfection. Thus many of the wishes of the ancient saints, imperfect as they were, are condemned as sinful by the spirit of the Christian religion. They were never commended or approved, but they are recorded just to show us what was in fact the character of man, even partially under the influence of religion. Of this nature, probably, were many of the petitions in the Psalms; and the Spirit of God is no more answerable for the feeling because it is recorded, than he is for the feelings of the Edomites when they said, "Rase it, rase it to the foundation," Ps 137:7. Many of those prayers, however, were imprecations on his enemies as a public man, as the magistrate of the land. As it is right and desirable that the robber and the pirate should be detected and punished; as all good men seek it, and it is indispensable for the welfare of the community, where is the impropriety of praying that it may be done? Is it not right to pray that the laws may be executed; that justice may be. maintained; and that restraint should be imposed on the guilty? Assuredly this may be done with a very different spirit from that of revenge. It may be the prayer of the magistrate that God will help him in that which he is appointed to do, and in what ought to be done. Besides, many of these imprecations were regarded as simply predictions of what would be the effect of sin; or of what God would do to the guilty. Such was the case we are now considering, as understood by the apostle. But in a prediction there can be nothing wrong.