ROMANS - Lakeside Ministries€¦ · Web viewLuther's Preface to Romans. In chapters 9; 10 and...

THIS MATERIAL HAS NOT BEEN EDITED FORSCRIPTURAL ACCURACY, SPELLING, OR GRAMMAR

ROMANSChapter Nine

9:1-11:36 DISPENSATIONALA 9:1-5. Paul’s sorrow regarding Israel’s failure. B 9:6-13. God’s purpose had respect only to a portion. C 9:14-29. God’s purpose regarded only a remnant. D E-1 9:30-33. Israel’s failure in spite of the Prophets.

E-2 10:1-13. Israel’s failure in spite of the Law.E-3 10:14-21. Israel’s failure in spite of the Gospel.

D-1 11:1-10. God’s purpose regarding the remnant accomplished. D-2 11:11-32. God’s purpose will ultimately embrace the wholeA 11:33-36. Paul’s joy regarding God’s purpose.

9:1-5 (A, above). PAUL’S SORROW REGARDING ISRAEL’S FAILURE.A F 9:1-3. Paul’s kinship to Israel according to flesh (kata sarka). His former wise to be accursed,

And his present sorrow. G 9:4. What belongs to Israel? G 9:5-. Who belong to Israel? F 9”-5. Christ’s kinship to Israel according to flesh (kata sarka). His eternal existence as God

Over all, blessed for ever.

Luther's Preface to RomansIn chapters 9; 10 and 11, St. Paul teaches us about the eternal providence of God. It is the original source which determines who would believe and who wouldn't, who can be set free from sin and who cannot. Such matters have been taken out of our hands and are put into God's hands so that we might become virtuous. It is absolutely necessary that it be so, for we are so weak and unsure of ourselves that, if it depended on us, no human being would be saved. The devil would overpower all of us. But God is steadfast; his providence will not fail, and no one can prevent its realization. Therefore we have hope against sin.

But here we must shut the mouths of those sacrilegious and arrogant spirits who, mere beginners that they are, bring their reason to bear on this matter and commence, from their exalted position, to probe the abyss of divine providence and uselessly trouble themselves about whether they are predestined or not. These people must surely plunge to their ruin, since they will either despair or abandon themselves to a life of chance.

You, however, follow the reasoning of this letter in the order in which it is presented. Fix your attention first of all on Christ and the Gospel, so that you may recognize your sin and his grace. Then struggle against sin, as chapters 1-8 have taught you to. Finally, when you have come, in chapter 8, under the shadow of the cross and suffering, they will teach you, in chapters 9-11, about providence and what a comfort it is. [The context here and in St. Paul's letter makes it clear that this is the cross and passion, not only of Christ, but of each Christian.] Apart from suffering, the cross and the pangs of death, you cannot come to grips with providence without harm to yourself and secret anger against God. The old Adam must be quite dead before you can endure this matter and drink this strong wine. Therefore make sure you don't drink wine while you are still a babe at the breast. There is a proper measure, time and

1


age for understanding every doctrine. (From Luther: Preface to Romans, PC Study Bible formatted electronic database Copyright © 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)

ROMANS CHAPTER NINERom 9:1-59:1 Israel's Rejection of Christ I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, 2 that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, 4 who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; 5 of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen. NKJV

Israel's Rightful Place9:1-3. Paul's love and willingness to sacrifice himself for his people would remind his biblically informed hearers of Moses (Exodus 32:32), although God did not permit Moses to sacrifice himself, either (Exodus 32:33-34).

9:4-5. "Covenants" may be plural to include an allusion to God's covenants with the patriarchs, or to his frequent renewing of his covenant with his people in the *Old Testament, also recognized in later Jewish texts. The blessings Paul had assigned to believers in Jesus (8:2,15,18,29) belonged to Israel, according to the Old Testament. By recognizing Christ as God (NIV and other translations of 9:5; cf. 1:25 for the same construction), Paul makes the point even more emphatically: God himself came to humanity through Israel. (From IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.)

III. Israel and the Gentiles in the Plan of God. Paul looks at the plan of God as it relates to the two divisions of mankind that he, as a Jew, saw-Israel or the Jewish people and the Gentiles.

A. Concern of Paul for His Own People, Israel. 9:1-5.Verse 1-5. This chapter begins with an array of proof that Paul had great grief and unceasing pain in his heart with reference to his own people. Here is the proof: he speaks truth in Christ; he is not lying; his conscience testifies for him in the presence of the Holy Spirit. The apostle told this because he knew how the Jews maligned him (see, e.g., Acts 21:28-an event that occurred after he wrote Romans but indicative of how the Jews felt.)

3. So deeply did Paul feel about his people that he here employs the language of an unattainable wish (potential imperfect in Greek): I could wish that I myself would be under a curse (and thus separated) from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my fellow countrymen with respect to earthly descent. The language here sounds like that of Moses when he pleaded that God would blot him out of His book (Ex 32:31-32). Paul now lists the blessings that belonged to his fellow countrymen.

4. They were Israelites to whom belonged the adoption-i.e., a people whom God made his own (cf. Isa 43:20-21). They had the glory. This could be either the honor of being God's people or the glory of God that appeared in the midst of his people (Ex 24:16-17). The word covenants are in the plural because God spoke to his people about his covenant relation with them on a number of occasions. It might also

2


be rendered decrees or assurances. To them also belonged the legislation, i.e., the Mosaic Law, and the service or worship of God-the ritual of the Tabernacle and the Temple. They had the promises of God, especially the Messianic promises.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE5. The fathers-Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob-also belonged to them. But the most important blessing was that Christ, with respect to his flesh, came from Paul's fellow countrymen, the Israelites. But this one (Christ), who on the human side came from Israel, was much more than a fellow Israelite; he was God over all, blessed forever. (For evidence that this last clause refers to Christ, see Sanday and Headlam, Epistle to the Romans, ICC, pp. 232-238). Knowing Christ's exalted place only increased Paul's anguish over the blindness of his people. They had refused such a Messiah. These lines are not a doxology to God, for that does not fit the train of thought. Rather, the lines show how exalted Christ is, which fits the train of thought perfectly.(From The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright © 1962 by Moody Press. All rights reserved.)

Rom 9:1Luther says: "Who hath not known passion, cross, and travail of death, cannot treat of foreknowledge (election of grace) without injury and inward enmity toward God. Wherefore take heed that thou drink not wine while thou art yet a sucking babe. Each several doctrine hath its own reason and measure and age."

1. In Christ. Not "by" Christ, as the formula of an oath, "Christ” is never used by the apostles in such a formula, but "God." Rom 1:9; 2 Cor 1:23; 11:31; Phil 1:8. For this favorite expression of Paul, see Gal 2:17; 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 2:14, 17; 12:19, etc.

2. Conscience. See the note at 1 Peter 3:16.

3. Bearing me witness. The English Revised Version (1885): "bearing witness with me." See the note at Rom 8:16.

4. Concurring with my testimony. Morison remarks that Paul speaks of conscience as if it was something distinct from him, and he cites Adam Smith's phrase, "the man within the breast."

5. In the Holy Ghost. So the English Revised Version (1885). The concurrent testimony of his declaration and of conscience was "the echo of the voice of God's Holy Spirit" (Morison).(From Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1997 by Biblesoft)

(9:1-3) Alford explains the inclusion of chapters 9-11 as follows: “The gospel being now established in its fullness and freeness, as the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth, - a question naturally arises, now unaccompanied with painful difficulty, respecting the exclusion of that people, as a people, to whom God’s promises were made. With this national rejection of Israel the apostle now deals:

1. The Abrahamic covenant, promising Israel the possession of the land from the Nile on the southwest to the Euphrates on the northeast and east, actually, from the Mediterranean Sea on the west to the Euphrates on the east, and the

3


2. Davidic covenant, promising to Israel an eternal dynasty of kings of whom the last one would be an eternal Person, had never up to the time of the writing of Romans, been fulfilled.”

Paul explains this by calling Israel’s attention to the fact that these covenants were designed for a spiritual people, whereas Israel at that time was apostate. He goes on to explain that Israel will be:

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEA. Brought back in sovereign grace,B. Saved, Remember Paul was Prophet, HistorianC. And restored to its land,D. Under its covenanted King, the Lord Jesus.

Denney says of Paul’s opening words: “This solemn asseveration is meant to clear him of the suspicion that in preaching to the Gentiles he is animated by hostility or even indifference to the Jews.” The same authority says of the phrase “in Christ,” that it means that he speaks in fellowship with Christ, so that falsehood is impossible.

Romans 9:1Concerning the A.V. “My conscience also bearing me witness,” [‘Truth I-am-saying in anointed not I-am-falsifying of-together-witnessing to-me the conscience of-me in Spirit Holy Concordant Greek Text] The words “Ghost” and “Spirit” being the translation of the same Greek word pneuma, the former designation being obsolete English for the word “Spirit.”

(9:2) “Heaviness” is Lupe, and means, “sorrow, pain grief,” used of persons mourning. 1. “Sorrow” is odune, “consuming grief.” 2. Its verbal form, odunao and means, “to cause intense pain, to be in anguish, to be tormented.” 3. “Continual” is adialeiptos, from dialeipo, “to intermit, leave off,” and Alpha privative which

negates the word [makes it negative instead of positive], namely, “unintermitted, unceasing, without leaving off.”

(9:3) in the words, “I could wish,” Paul uses the optative mode in the imperfect tense, Alford says, “The imperfect is not historical, alluding to his days of Pharisaism, as Pelagius and others, but quasi-optative, as in I was wishing had it been possible… The sense of the imperfect in such expressions is the proper and strict one: “the act is unfinished, an obstacle intervening.”

Rom 9:3I could wish eeuchomeen (NT: 2172). Or "pray," as 2 Cor 13:7, 9; James 5:16. Literally, "I was wishing;" but the imperfect here has a tentative force, implying the wish "begun," but stopped at the outset by some antecedent consideration which renders it impossible, so that, practically, it was not entertained at all. So Paul of Onesimus: "Whom I could have wished eboulomeen (NT: 1014) to keep with me," if it had not been too much to ask (Philem 13). Paul would wish to save his countrymen, even at such sacrifice, if it were morally possible. Others, however, explain the imperfect as stating an actual wish formerly entertained.

(NOTE: Some make the words "I could wish-from Christ," parenthetical, and suppose Paul to refer to his own attitude toward Christ before his conversion, by way of illustrating the sad spiritual condition of his countrymen. and thus accounting for his sorrow of heart.

4


Others retain the same sense without the parenthesis. The word may also mean "I prayed" (2 Cor 13:7; James 5:16). In Classical Greek, though not in the New Testament, it has the meaning "vow."

1. Lange renders "I made a vow," saying that he probably made some fearful pledge when he received authority to persecute the Christians.

2. The student will find the various interpretations fully discussed in Morison's monograph on Rom 9 and Rom 10, and in Schaff's Lange.)

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEAccursed from Christ [anathema apo tou Christou] anathema (NT: 331) apo (NT: 575) tou (NT: 3588) Christou (NT: 5547). Compare Gal 1:8-9; 1 Cor 12:3; 16:22. See the note on "offerings," Luke 21:5. Set apart to destruction and so separated from Christ (Phil 1:21; 3:8, 20). An expression of deep devotion.

"It is not easy to estimate the measure of love in a Moses and a Paul. For our limited reason does not grasp it, as the child cannot comprehend the courage of warriors" (Bengel). Compare Moses, Ex 32:32.

(Vincent)Romans 9:2, 3‘That I have great heaviness [That sorrow to-me is great] and continual sorrow in my heart [and un-intermittent pain to-the heart of-me] For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ [I-wished for anathema to-be same I from the Anointed] for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: [over the brothers of-me the together-generateds of-me according-to flesh].’ Romans 9:2, 3 + Concordant

The unexpressed but mentioned wish was, “I myself to be anathema from Christ.” The word “anathema” is the spelling of the Greek word meaning, “a curse, and a man accursed, devoted to the direst woes.”

1. Thayer interprets it as meaning, “doomed and separated from Christ,”2. Alford says, “It never denotes simply exclusion or excommunication, but always devotion to

perdition – a curse.” 3. He quotes Burton as defining it as follows, “cut off and separated from Him (Christ) forever in

eternal perdition.” 4. Denney says, “Anathema is to be construed with from Christ; the idea of separation from

Christ, final and fatal separation, is conveyed.”

ANATHEMA -CURSENT:331 anáthema, anáth¢ma, katáthema.Anáthema and anáth¢ma are variants for a. "something dedicated to deity," b. "something put under divine curse." 1. The NT has the first sense only in Luke 21:5 (temple offerings). 2. Paul uses the term for the object of a curse. Calling Jesus accursed is a self contradiction for Christians in 1 Cor 12:3. Handing over to God's judicial wrath is the idea in 1 Cor 16:22 (cf. Gal 1:8; Rom 9:3). Paul's readiness for this on behalf of his people (Rom 9:3) is a supreme instance of his devotion to the gospel and his race. (From Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, abridged edition, Copyright © 1985 by William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. All rights reserved.)

Of the spiritual heroism of Paul’s act, Denney says; “There is a passion in it more profound even than that of Moses’ prayer in Exodus 32:32. Moses identifies himself with his people, and if they cannot be saved, would perish for them; Paul could find it in his heart, were it possible, to perish with them.”

5


And now for the reasons why Paul did not follow through with that wish:

1. In the first place, he had just written Romans 8 which begins with no condemnation in the saint in Christ Jesus and ends with no separation of the saint from Christ Jesus. So to wish what scripture plainly makes impossible would be futile.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE2. In the second place, Paul knew that were such a thing possible that he, a saved person should

spend eternity in the Lake of Fire, that that would not do what the Holy Spirit did not do, namely, bring the nation to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus. Man’s will must be reckoned with, and the persuasive power of Paul’s sacrifice could not do what the power of the Holy Spirit did not do.

3. In the third place, Paul knew that in the sovereign grace of God, the nation would be saved at the Second Advent, and such a sacrifice of himself would be unnecessary. ‘And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son,…’ Zechariah 12:10 KJV

Translation from Wuest‘Truth I speak in Christ. I am not lying, my conscience bearing joint-testimony with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have a consuming grief, a great one, and intense anguish in my heart without a let-up. For I could wish that I myself be accursed from Christ on behalf of my brethren, my kindred according to the flesh.’ Romans 9:1-3

Homily 16. Romans 9:1."I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost."

Did I not seem yesterday to you to have spoken some great and exorbitant things of Paul's love toward Christ? And great indeed they were, too great for any words to express. Yet what you have heard to-day are as far above those things, as those things were above ours. And yet I did not think they could be exceeded, still when I came to what has been read to-day it did appear far more glorious than the whole of the former. And that he was aware of this himself he shows by his exordium. For as on the point of entering upon greater things than those, and therefore liable to be disbelieved by the generality, he first uses a strong asseveration about the matter he is going to speak of; which many are in the habit of doing when they are going to say somewhat which is not believed by the generality, and about which they feel the utmost certainty in their own minds. Hence he says, "I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, and my conscience beareth witness,"

Ver. 2,3. "That I have a great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ."

What sayest thou, O Paul? from Christ, thy beloved One, from Whom neither kingdom nor hell, nor things visible nor intelligible, nor another world as great, would separate thee, is it from Him that thou wouldst now be accursed? What has happened? Hast thou changed, hast thou given over that love? No, he replies, fear not. Rather I have even made it more intense. How then is it that thou wouldest fain be

6


accursed, and seeks a separation, and a removal to such a distance, that after it there is no possibility of finding a more distant one? Because I love Him exceedingly, he may reply.

How, pray, and in what manner? For the things seem a riddle. Or rather, if you will, let us learn what the curse is, and then we will question him upon these points, and shall understand this unspeakable and extraordinary love. What then is the curse? Hear his own words, "If any man love not our Lord Jesus Christ, let him be accursed." (anathema, 1 Corinthians 16:22.) That is, let him be set apart from all, removed from all.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 - Romans 9:2, 3For as in the case of a thing dedicated a)naqhma, which is set apart for God, no one would venture so much as to touch it with his hand or even to come near it; so too with a man who is put apart from the Church, in cutting him off from all, and removing him as far off as possible, he calls him by this name a)naqema in a contrary sense, thus with much fear denouncing to all men to keep apart from him, and to spring away from him. For the thing set apart, no one, from respect of it, ventures to come near to. But from him who is cut off, all men separate themselves from a very opposite feeling. And so the separation is the same, and both the one and the other are equally removed from the generality. Still, the mode of separation is not the same, but in this case it is the opposite to what it is in that.

1. For from the one they keep back as being dedicated to God; 2. From the other as being estranged from God, and broken off from the Church.

This then is what Paul means when he says, "I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ." And he does not say merely that I could be willing, but using a stronger term, he says even, "I could wish" (or pray h)ukomhn ). But if what he says trouble you in your a)sqenesteron feebleness, consider the real state of the case,

1. Not only that he wished to be separated, 2. But also the cause for which he wished it, 3. And then you will see the greatness of his love.

For he even circumcised (Timothy, Acts 16:3), and we pay no attention to what was done, but to the intention of it, and the cause of it, and hence we wonder at him the more. And he not only circumcised a person, but he even shaved himself and sacrificed (Acts 18:18; 21:24), and yet surely we do not therefore assert him to be a Jew, but upon this very score to be perfectly free from Judaizing, and clear of it, and a genuine worshipper of Christ. As then when you see him circumcising and sacrificing, you do not therefore condemn him as Judaizing, but upon this very score have the best reason for crowning him as quite an alien to Judaism; thus when thou seest him to have become desirous of being accursed, do not therefore be troubled, but upon this very ground give him the loudest praise, when thou knowest the cause why he wishes this.

For if we do not look narrowly into the causes, we shall call:1. Elijah a manslayer, 2. And Abraham not a manslayer only, but a murderer of his son. 3. And Phineas and Peter we shall implied for murder likewise. 4. Nor is it in the case of the saints alone,5. But also of the God of the universe, that he who does not keep to this rule, will be suspecting

sundry unbecoming things. 7


Now to prevent this happening in all cases of the kind, let us bring together both the cause, and the intention, and the time, and all that makes in behalf of what is so done, and in this way let usinvestigate the actions. And this we must do now also in the case of this blessed soul. Now what is the cause? It is Jesus Himself Who is so beloved. And yet he does not say for Him; for what he says is, I would wish that I were accursed from Him for my brethren. And this comes of his humbleness of mind. For he has no wish to make himself conspicuous, as if he were saying something great, and doing Christ a favor in this. Wherefore also he said "my kinsmen," that he may conceal his high aim pleonekthma.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 – Romans 9:2,3 Since to see that he wished it all for Christ's sake, just hear what comes next. After speaking of kinsmen then, he proceeds, (Archbishop John Chrysostom of Constantinople A.D. 400(From Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 1, Volume 11, PC Study Bible formatted electronic database Copyright © 2003, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Rom 9:41. Who hoitines (NT: 3748). The double relative characterizes the Israelites with their call and privileges as "such that" for them he could even wish himself accursed.2. Israelites. See the note at Acts 3:12.3. Adoption. See the note at Rom 8:15. Israel is always represented as the Lord's "son or first-born" among all peoples. Ex 4:22; Deut 14:1; Hos 11:1.4. The glory. The visible, luminous appearance of the divine presence was called by the Israelites "the glory of Yahweh," or, in rabbinical phrase, "the Shechinah." See Ex 24:16; 40:34-35; Ezek 1:28; Heb 9:5. Not the final glory of God's kingdom; for this belongs to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews.5. The covenants [hai diatheekai] hai (NT: 3588) diatheekai (NT: 1242). See the note at Matt 26:28. Those concluded with the patriarchs since Abraham. See Gal 3:16-17; Eph 2:12. The plural never occurs in the Old Testament. See the note at Heb 9:16.6. The giving of the law [hee nomothesia] hee (NT: 3588) nomothesia (NT: 3548). The act of giving, with a secondary reference to the substance of the law; "legislation."7. The service [hee latreia] hee (NT: 3588) latreia (NT: 2999). See the notes at John 16:2; Luke 1:74; Rev 22:3; Phil 3:3. Here the sum total of the Levitical services instituted by the law.8. The promises. The collective messianic promises on which the covenants were based. The word originally means "announcement." See the note at Acts 1:4. (Vincent)

(9:4, 5) Denney says, “The intensity of Paul’s distress and of his longing for the salvation of his countrymen is partly explained in this verse:

1. It is the greatness of his people, 2. Their unique place of privilege in God’s providence, 3. The splendor of the inheritance and 4. Of the hopes which they forfeit by unbelief, 5. That makes their unbelief at once so painful, and so perplexing.”

“Who” is the word hoitines, emphasizing character or quality, namely, “who are of such a character or quality as to be” Israelites. The term “Hebrew” speaks of a member of the Chosen People as a Hebrew-speaking rather than a Greek-speaking Jew, the latter called a Grecian in Acts 6:1, or one could use the

8


designation, “a Hellenist,” or “a Hellenistic Jew,” one who read his Old Testament in the Septuagint (Greek) version called the LXX.

The name “Jew” speaks of him in his national distinction from a Gentile. The term “Israelite” refers to him as a member of the theocracy, and a partaker of the theocratic privileges and glorious vocation of the nation Israel and an heir of the promises. The term “theocracy” in the Greek means literally “the power of God.” It speaks of Israel as the nation which enjoys the privilege of having a unique relationship to God as its sovereign, a privilege which is not accorded the Gentile nations. Israel in its apostate condition, repudiated this honor.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINERomans 9:4The word “adoption” here is huiothesía, “the son-placing.” However, here there is no reference to that which is designated by the same term in 8:15, but rather to that to which reference is made in Exodus 4:22 and Hosea 11:1, the word huiós “son” being used in Exodus 4:22, and teknon, “child,” in Hosea 11:1. Israel as a nation was known as a son of God in the Old Testament. When the word “son” is used in the plural in the Old Testament, it refers to angels, such as Genesis 6:2 and Job 1:6, 2:1. [Beney Elohim sons of God]. The glory was that luminous cloud that led Israel out of Egypt that rested over the Mercy Seat in the Holy of Holies, the visible manifestation of God’s presence with His Chosen People. The covenants refer to the various covenants God made with Israel. God never makes any covenants with the Gentiles. “The service” is he latreia, “to render religious service.” Here it refers to the service as seen in the tabernacle, offerings, and priesthood as found in Exodus and Leviticus. The promises refer to the Messianic promises.

Rom 9:5Of whom [ex hoon] ex (NT: 1537) hoon (NT: 3739). From the midst of whom. But in order to guard the point that the reference is only to Christie "human" origin, he adds, "as concerning the flesh."

Who is over all, God blessed for ever [ho Oon epi pantoon Theos eulogeetos eis tous aioonas] ho (NT: 3588) Oon (NT: 5607) epi (NT: 1909) pantoon (NT: 3956) Theos (NT: 2316) eulogeetos (NT: 2128) eis (NT: 1519) tous (NT: 3588) aioonas (NT: 165). Authorities differ as to the punctuation; some placing a colon, and others a comma after "flesh." This difference indicates the difference in the interpretation;

1. Some rendering "as concerning the flesh the Christ came: God who is over all be blessed for ever;" thus, making the words "God," etc., a doxology:

2. Others, with the comma, "the Christ, who is over all, God blessed forever;" i.e., Christ is God (For minor variations see margin of the English Revised Version (1885))

(NOTE: I incline to the doxological view, but the long and intricate discussion cannot be gone into here. 1. For the doxological view the student may consult Meyer's note, Professor Ezra Abbot, "Journal of the American Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis," 1881 (also "Critical Essays"), and Beet's "Commentary on Romans." Also G. Vance Smith, "Expositor," first series, ix, 397, to which are appended answers by Dr. Farrar and W. Sanday. 2. On the other side, President Dwight's note in the American Meyer. He refers in this to his own article in the same number of the "Journal of Biblical Literature" in which Professor Abbot's article appears. See, also, Farrar in "Expositor" as above, p. 217, and Godet on Romans.)

9


Amen. See the note at Rev 1:6.(From Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1997 by Biblesoft)

‘Whose are the fathers, [Of-whom the fathers] and of whom as concerning the flesh [and out of-whom the Anointed the according-to flesh] Christ came, Who is over all, [the One-being on all] God blessed for ever. Amen [God blessed into the eons amen].’ Romans 9:5 + Concordant

‘…from among whom Christ appeared in the flesh, who is God over all,…’ Romans 9:5 Peshitta TextNote: I sometimes like to back to the language of Jesus and the disciples for clarification. I take # 2

Paul the Learner

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE(9:5) The fathers refer to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

1. Denney says: “The greatness of its ancestry ennobled Israel, and made its position in Paul’s time harder to understand and to endure. Who could think without the keenest pain of the sons of such fathers forfeiting everything for which the fathers had been called?

2. The supreme distinction of Israel is however seen in the words, “out from whom as a source the Christ (Messiah) came according to the flesh.” The word “Christ” is the English spelling of the Greek word Christos which in turn is the translation of the Hebrew word for Messiah, both words meaning “the Anointed.”

The Messiah, so far as His humanity is concerned, came out of Israel. But so far as His deity is concerned, Paul says, He is “over all, God blessed forever.” Paul’s Greek here is “out from whom as a source (Israel) the Christ came according to the flesh (His humanity), the One who is above all things, God eulogized forever.” This statement is an ascription of praise and a doxology with reference to God.

Note: Paul uses the word, “Anointed [Christ] according to flesh” and “the One-being [God] on all.” In dealing with His being the image and likeness of God or God in a human form called the Word.

Robertson says: “A clear statement of the deity of Christ following the remark about His humanity”. This is the natural and obvious way of punctuating the sentence. To make a full stop after ‘flesh’ (or a colon) and start a new sentence for the doxology is very abrupt and awkward.

See Acts 20:28 and Titus 2:13 for Paul’s use of theós (God applied to Jesus Christ). Denney suggests that use of the doxology. Alford’s reasons for rejecting the idea of a doxology here are as follows:

1. Without one exception in Hebrew or Greek, the predicate eulogeetos (blessed) precedes the name of God. Here the word order is theós eulogeetos (God blessed); the descriptive word “blessed” follows the name “God.”

2. The present participle on would be altogether superfluous if we understood the words to be a doxology having reference to God rather than a descriptive clause speaking of the deity of the Lord Jesus. The construction in Greek is as follows:

(a) After speaking of ho Christos, the Christ coming as to His human nature out of Israel,(b) Paul adds ho on, the article pointing back to ho Christos and the participial form of the verb of

being,(c) The Greek reading “the One being above all,” or in good English diction, “the One (Christ) who

is above all.”

10


(d) The sense then follows, “The One (who is above all), who is God.”

3. The word “blessed” is eulogeetos, made up of lego, “to speak,” and eu, “good,” thus, “to speak well of a person, to eulogize him (the word “eulogize” being the English spelling of the Greek word).

4. Thus, our Lord is spoken of as God, the One who is well-spoken of, eulogized, praised, forever.5. The doxology would be unmeaning and frigid in the extreme. It is not the habit of the apostle to

break out into irrelevant ascriptions of praise; and certainly there is here nothing in the immediate context requiring one.

6. If it be said that the survey of all these privileges bestowed on his people prompts the doxology, - surely such a view is most unnatural: for the sad subject of the apostle’s sympathy, to which he immediately recurs again, is the apparent inanity of all these privileges in the exclusion from life of those who were dignified with them.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE7. If it be said that the incarnation of Christ is the exciting cause, the words “according to the

flesh” come in most strangely, depreciating, as they would on that supposition, the greatness of the event, which then becomes a source of so lofty a thanksgiving.

8. The expression ‘blessed forever’ is twice used by Paul, and each time unquestionably not in an ascription of praise, but in an assertion regarding the subject of the sentence (Romans 1:25, 2 Corinthians 11:31).

9. In 2 Corinthians 11:31, the same construction is found, ho on, and there it refers to the subject of the sentence.

10. The interpretation which holds that the clause is not a doxology but descriptive of the Christ is the only one admissible by the rules of Greek grammar and arrangement.

11. It also admirably suits the context: for, having enumerated the historic advantages of the Jewish people, he concludes by stating one which ranks higher than all, - that from them sprung, according to the flesh, He who is God over all, blessed forever.

The Amen implies no optative ascription of praise, but is the accustomed ending of such solemn declarations of the divine Majesty.

Thus does the devout scholar, Henry Alford, demolish the position of the present-day Liberal who would fain take out of the Bible as much of the testimony to our Lord’s absolute deity as he can, changing Paul’s Greek from a descriptive clause to a doxology to the God he professes to worship but which he does not possess, for John says that a Unitarian does not have God as his God (1 John 2:22, 23) ‘Who is a liar but he that denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist that denies the Father and the Son. Whosoever denies the Son, the same hath not the Father: [but] he that acknowledgth the Son hath the Father also.’ Wuest

Translation by Wuest‘Who in character are Israelites, who are possessors of the position of a son by having been placed as such, and of the glory, and of the covenants, and to whom was given the law, and [who are] possessors of the sacred service and the promises, of whom are the fathers, and out from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, the One who is above all, God eulogized forever. Amen.’ Romans 9:4, 5

TO PUT IT IN SIMPLE TERMS:1. God is one [there is only one God, and even God doesn’t know of any others].2. God created the Word [this was the beginning of creation by God].

11


3. The Word then created [everything that is, heaven, earth, hell etc].4. The Word became flesh [John 1:14 we know Him as Jesus the Christ of God].5. The Word became the sacrifice of the Father [for our sins].6. The Word is now back in heaven with all the power of Jehovah [the name for Jews].7. The Word is coming back [for us and for judgment of all mankind].

Paul the LearnerHomily 16 - Romans 9:4, 5Ver. 4,5. "To whom pertained the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the Law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the father's, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, Who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen."

And what is this? one asks. For if with a view to the belief of others he was willing to become accursed, he ought to have also wished for this in the Gentiles' behalf. But if he wishes it in the Jews' behalf only, it is a proof that he did not wish it for Christ's sake, but for his own relationship to them.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 – Romans 9:4, 5But in fact if he had prayed for the Gentiles only, this would not have been equally clear. But since it is for the Jews only, it is a clear proof that it is only for Christ's glory that he is thus earnest. And I am aware that what I am saying will seem a paradox to you. Still if ye do not make a disturbance, I will presently endeavor to make it clear. For what he has said he has not said nakedly; but since all were talking and accusing God, that after being counted worthy of the name of sons, and receiving the Law, and knowing Him beyond all men, and enjoying such great glory, and serving him beyond the whole world, and receiving the promises, and being from fathers who were His friends, and what was the greatest thing of all, having been forefathers of Christ Himself (for this is the meaning of the words, "of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came"), they are now cast out and disgraced; and in their place are introduced men who had never known Him, of the Gentiles.

Now since they said all this, and blasphemed God, Paul hearing it, and being cut to the heart, and vexed for God's glory's sake, wished that he were accursed, had it been possible, so that they might be saved, and this blasphemy be put a stop to, and God might not seem to have deceived the offspring of those to whom He promised the gifts. And that you may see that it was in sorrow for this, that the promise of God might not seem to fall to the ground, which said to Abraham, "I will give this land to thee and to thy seed," that he uttered this wish, he proceeds, (Chrysostom)

Rom 9:6-136 Israel's Rejection and God's Purpose (Gen 25:19-23)But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, 7 nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, "In Isaac your seed shall be called." 8 That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed. 9 For this is the word of promise: "At this time I will come and Sarah shall have a son." 10 And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac 11(for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), 12 it was said to her, "The older shall serve the younger." 13 As it is written, "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated." NKJV

9:6-13 GOD’S PURPOSE HAD RESPECT ONLY TO A PORTION.

12


H 9:6. The word of God not having failed. I 9:7, 8. Election of seed. Different mothers. J 9:9. The promise. I 9:10, 11. Election of seed. Same mother. J 9:12. The prophecy.H 9:13. The word of God confirmed.

Not Saved by Ethnic DescentMost Jewish people believed that their people as a whole was saved, in contrast to the *Gentiles. Israel's salvation began with God choosing Abraham (chap. 4). Paul argues here that ethnicity is insufficient grounds for salvation, as the *Old Testament also taught (e.g., Numbers 14:22-23; Deuteronomy 1:34-35; Psalms 78:21-22; 95:8-11; 106:26-27); God can save on whatever terms he wishes.

9:6-9. Abraham had two sons while Sarah was alive, but only one received the promise (Genesis 17:18-21).

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE9:10-13. Isaac had two sons, but only one received the promise. This was determined before their birth (Genesis 25:23; cf. Malachi 1:2-3). Although God may have chosen Jacob because he foreknew Jacob's heart (8:29), the point here is that God has the right to choose among the chosen line. Not all Abraham's descendants received the promise; the rest of the Old Testament was clear that many Israelites broke the covenant (Exodus 32:33-35; Numbers 11:1; 14:37; 16:32-35; 25:4-5; Deuteronomy 1:35). Why do most of Paul's contemporaries act as if things are different in their own time? (From IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.)

B. God free Righteous and Sovereign in His dealings with Israel and with all men. 9:6-29Rom 9:6-13From Rom 9:6 to the end of chapter 11 Paul discusses a profound question: How could God reject his elect people? He points out to what extent the people have been rejected, why they have been rejected, the existence of a remnant, and what plans God has for the future of his people, Israel.

In 9:6-29 the writer is answering an argument of his Jewish opponents that went like this: "We have circumcision as a sign (cf. Gen 17:7-14) that we are God's elect people. Members of God's elect people will not perish. Therefore, we will not perish."

1. Rabbinical evidence shows that this was the attitude of most Jews in Paul's day. Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck have prepared a Commentary on the New Testament in which they bring together parallels from the Talmud and Midrashim that shed light on the NT.

2. In Vol. 4, Part 2, they have devoted an entire excursus (#31) to the subject of Sheol, Gehenna (place of punishment), and the Heavenly Garden of Eden (Paradise).

3. The following quotations include names of tractates of the rabbinical writings from which their ideas about these places are drawn, as well as indicate the location in Strack-Billerbeck.

4. Rabbi Levi has said: In the future (on the other side-what the Greeks called the spirit world) Abraham sits at the entrance of Gehenna and he allows no circumcised ones from the Israelites to enter into it (i.e., Gehenna). (Midrash Rabba Genesis, 48 (30 a, 49) SBK, IV, Part ii, p. 1066)

13


5. In this same context the question is asked: How about those who sin excessively? The answer is: They are returned to a state of uncircumcision as they enter Gehenna. The next quotation deals with the question of what happens after death to an Israelite.

6. When an Israelite goes into his eternal house (=grave), an angel is sitting over the heavenly garden of Eden, who takes each son of Israel who is circumcised for the purpose of bringing him into the heavenly garden of Eden (paradise). (Midrash Tanchum, Sade, waw, 145 a, 35; SBK, IV, Part ii, p. 1066)

7. Again the question is raised: How about those Israelites who serve idols? As above, the answer is: They will be returned to a state of uncircumcision in Gehenna. Here is a quotation that looks at the Israelites as a group:

8. All Israelites who are circumcised come into the heavenly Garden of Eden (paradise). (Midrash Tanchuma, Sade, waw, 145 a, 32; SBK, IV, Part ii, p. 1067)

9. It is clear from these quotations that most Jews believed and taught that all circumcised Israelites who have died are in paradise and that there are no circumcised Israelites in Gehenna.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINETo the claim that the Lord could not reject his elect people, Paul first of all replies by emphasizing God's freedom, righteousness, and sovereignty. God acts freely, acts in righteousness, and acts sovereignty because he is free, righteous, and sovereign in his own eternal being.

1) God's Choice of Isaac Rather Than the Other Sons of Abraham. 9:6-9.But it is by no means as if the word of God had come to failure. The present state of the Jews does not indicate that the divine promise has been rescinded. Not all those who are descended from Israel are really Israel. The promises of the Lord at any one period of history may actively involve as many of his people as he decides.

7. In the case of Abraham's children, God made a choice. In ([through) Isaac you are to have your descendants (cf. Kaleo, Arndt, 1. a, p. 400).

8. Here a distinction is made between the children of the flesh, those born of Hagar and Keturah (Gen 16; 25:1-4), and Isaac, born according to promise. That is, not the children of the flesh are thereby children of God, but the children of the promise are looked upon as seed. The AV is unsatisfactory in verse 8. Paul puts the negative first to make clear that the children of the flesh do not automatically become children of God. Isaac was born because of promise. God chose through him to bring blessings to all of mankind. (Wycliffe)

Rom 9:6Not as though [ouch hoion de hoti] ouch (NT: 3756) hoion (NT: 3634) de (NT: 1161) hoti (NT: 3754). The English Revised Version (1885), "but it is not as though." The thought is abruptly introduced. I am not speaking of a matter of such a nature as that the doctrine of faith involves the failure of God's promises to Israel.

Hath taken none effect ekpeptooken (NT: 1601). Literally, "has fallen out." The English Revised Version (1885): "come to naught." (Vincent)

14


(9:6, 7) Thayer translates, “But the thing (state of the case) is not such as this, [Not which-which yet] that the Word of God hath fallen to the ground, [that has-out-fallen the saying of-the God] i.e. the Word of God hath by no means come to naught [not for all the ones out of-Israel these Israel].’ Romans 9:6 + Concordant.

“Hath taken none effect” is ekpipto, “To fall out of, to fall down from, to fail, to fall from a place which one cannot keep, to fall powerless, be without effect.” The verb is in the perfect tense speaking here in connection with the negative, of the fact that the Word with reference to Israel has not failed to work effectively in time past and at present is still potentially effective.

Denney explains the statement, “For not all those who are out of Israel as a source (the physical nation) these are Israel (the spiritual remnant). The meaning is, But in spite of my grief, I do not mean to say any such thing as that the Word of God has come to nothing. For not all they who are of Israel, i.e. born of the patriarch, is Israel, i.e. the people of God. This is merely an application of our Lord’s words, ‘That which is born of the flesh is flesh.’ It is not what we get from our fathers and mothers that ensure our place in the family of God.”

Note: God has no grandchildren. Paul the Learner

ROMANS CHAPTER NINERom 9:7In Isaac. Not in Ishmael, though Ishmael also was the seed of Abraham. The saying of Gen 21:12 is directly added without "it is written or it was said," because it is assumed to be well known to the readers as a saying of God. The Hebrew is: "in Isaac shall posterity be named to thee." In the person of Isaac the descendant of Abraham will be represented and recognized. The general principle asserted is that the true sonship of Abraham does not rest on "bodily" descent.

Shall be called kleetheesetai (NT: 2564). Named. See the note at Rom 4:17. Others "called from nothing." But the promise was made after Isaac was born. (Vincent)

Regarding verse 7, the same authority [Thayer] says; “Nor because they are Abraham’s seed, [Not-yet that they-are seed of-Abraham] are they all tekna, i.e. children in the sense which entitles them to the inheritance…[all of springs but in Isaac] God from the very first made a distinction here, and definitely announced that the seed of Abraham to which the promise belonged should come in the line of Isaac –not of Ishmael, though he also could call Abraham father [will-be-being-called to-you seed].’ Romans 9:7 + commentary + Concordant

Commenting on the words, “In Isaac shall thy seed be called,” Denney says: “The words literally mean that in the line of Isaac, Abraham should have the posterity which would properly bear his name and inherit the promises made to him by God. Isaac’s descendants are the true Abrahamidae.” “Call” is kaleo, here, “to bare a name or title.”

Translation by Wuest‘But the case is not such as this, that the Word of God is fallen powerless; for not all who are out of Israel, these are Israel, nor because they are off spring of Abraham, are all children, but in Isaac an off spring shall be named for you.’ Romans 9:6, 7

Homily 16 - Romans 9:6

15


Ver. 6. "Not as though the word of God had taken none effect."

To show that he had courage (Mar. and 4 MSS. wished) to bear all these things for the word of God, that is, the promise made to Abraham. For as Moses seemed to be pleading for the Jews, yet was doing everything for God's glory (for he says, "Lest they say, Because He was not able to save them, He led them forth to destroy them in the wilderness" (Deuteronomy 9:28); stay Thy wrath), so also does Paul, That they may not say (he means) that the promise of God has fallen to the ground, and He has disappointed us of that. He vouched to us, and this word has not issued in deed, I could wish to be accursed.

This then was why he did not speak of the Gentiles (for to them no promises had been made by Him, nor had they worshipped Him, wherefore neither did any blaspheme Him on their account), but it was for the Jews who had both received the promise, and had also been brought into closer connection with Him than others, that he expressed this wish. Do you see, that if he had expressed it for the Gentiles, he would not have been shown to be doing this so purely for Christ's glory? But since he was willing to become accursed in the Jews' behalf, then it was most evidenced that it was for Christ's sake only that he desired this. And for this cause he says,

"To whom pertained the adoption, and the glory, and the service of God, and the promises."

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 - Romans 9:6For the Law, he means, which speaks of Christ, comes from thence, and all the covenants made with them, and Himself came from them, and the Fathers who received the promises were all from them. Yet still the opposite has resulted, and they have fallen from all their good things. Hence, he means, I am vexed, and if it were possible to be separated from the company about Christ, and to be made an alien, not from the love of Him (that be far from him; for even all this he was doing through love), but from all that enjoyment and glory, I would accept that lot, provided my Master were not to be blasphemed, that He might not have to hear same saying, that it has been all for stage-effect; He promises to one, and gives to another.

He was sprung from one race, He saved another. It was to the forefathers of the Jews that He made the promises, and yet He has deserted their descendants, and put men, who never at any time knew Him, into their good things. They labored in the practice of the Law, and reading the Prophets, while men who have come but yesterday from heathen altars and images have been set up above them. What foresight is there in all this? Now that these things may not be said of my Master, he means, even if they are said unjustly, I would willingly lose even the kingdom and that glory unutterable, and any sufferings would I undergo, as considering it the greatest consolation possible no longer to hear Him Whom I so long for, so blasphemed.

Homily 16 - Romans 9:7Ver. 7. "Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children."

Now when you come to know of what kind the seed of Abraham is, you will see that the promise is given to his seed, and know that the word hath not fallen to the ground. Of what kind, pray, is the seed then? It is no saying of mine, he means, but the Old Testament itself explains itself by saying as follows, "In Isaac shall thy seed be called." (Genesis 21:12.) What is, "In Isaac?" Explain. (Chrysostom)

16


(9:8, 9) “That is” is tout’ estin, “this is,” “The Old Testament saying amounts to this” (Vincent). Paul says, “Not the children of the flesh (earthly descendants of Abraham) [This is that not the off springs of-the flesh] these are the children of God, [these off springs of-the God] but the children of the promise are counted for off spring, [but the off springs of-the promise] for the promise is this, [He-is-accounting into seed of-promise].’ Romans 9:8 + Concordant

And then he quotes from Genesis 18:10, ‘And he said, I will certainly return unto thee according to the time of life; and, lo, Sarah thy wife shall have a son. And Sarah heard it in the tent door, which was behind him.’ Rabbi Hertz says ‘more accurately, ‘now Sarah was listening at the entrance of the tent.’The words “at this time” are data ton kairon touton, “according to this season.” Vincent explains, “The reference is to Genesis 18:14, where the Hebrew is when the season is renewed or revives, i.e. next year at this time. The season is represented as reviving periodically.”

Translation by Wuest‘That is, not the children of the flesh, these are children of God, but the children of the promise are counted for off spring; for the word of promise is this. According to this season I will come, and there will be to Sarah a son.’ Romans 9:8, 9

‘Is anything too wondrous for the Lord? I will return to you at the same season next year, and Sarah shall have a son.” Genesis 18:14 Tanakh Hebrew Text

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 - Romans 9:8, 9Ver. 8. "That is, they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise, these are counted for the seed."

And observe the judgment and depth of Paul's mind. For in interpreting, he does not say, "they which are the children of the flesh, these are not" the children of Abraham, but, "the children of God:" so blending the former things with the present, and showing that even Isaac was not merely Abraham's son. And what he means is something of this sort:

1. As many as have been born as Isaac was, they are sons of God, and of the seed of Abraham. 2. And this is why he said, "in Isaac shall thy seed be called." 3. That one may learn that they who are born after the fashion of Isaac,4. These are in the truest sense Abraham's children. 5. In what way was Isaac born then? 6. Not according to the law of nature, not according to the power of the flesh, 7. But according to the power of the promise.

What is meant then by the power of "the promise?"

Ver. 9. "At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son."

This promise then and word of God it was that fashioned Isaac, and begat him. For what if a womb was its instrument and the belly of a woman? Since it was not the power of the belly, but the might of the promise that begat the child. Thus are we also gendered by the words of God. Since in the pool of water it is the words of God which generate and fashion us. For it is by being baptized into the Name of the Father [Lord]and of the Son [Jesus] and of the Holy Ghost [Christ] that we are gendered. And this birth is not of nature, but of the promise of God. (John 3:3; Ephesians 5:26; James 1:18; 1 Peter 3:21.)

17


For as after first foretelling the birth of Isaac, He then accomplished it; so ours also He had announced before, many ages ago by all the Prophets, and afterwards brought it to pass.

You know how great He has set it forth as being, and how, as He promised a great thing, He furnished it with abundant easel (Hos. 2:1 , etc.) But if the Jews were to say, that the words, "In Isaac shall thy seed be called," mean this, that those born of Isaac should be reckoned to him for a seed, then the Edomites too, and all those people, ought to be denominated his sons, since their forefather Esau was a son of his. But now so far are they from being called sons, that they are the greatest possible aliens. You see then that it is not the children of the flesh that are the children of God, but that even in nature itself the generation by means of baptism from above was sketched out beforehand.

And if you tell me of the womb, I in return have to tell you of the water. But as in this case all is of the Spirit, so in the other all was of promise. For the womb was more chilled than any water owing to barrenness and to old age. Let us then gain accurate knowledge of our own nobility, and display a life worthy of it. For in it is nothing fleshly or earthy: hence neither let there be in us. For it was neither sleep, nor the will of the flesh (John 1:13), nor embraces, nor the madness of desire, but "God's love toward man," which wrought the whole. (Titus 3:5.) And as in that case it was when the age was past hope, so in this also it was when the old age of sins had come over us, that Isaac suddenly sprang up in youth, and we all became the children of God, and the seed of Abraham. (Isaiah 40:31.)

(Chrysostom)

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE2) God's Choice of Jacob Rather Than Esau. 9:10-13.Paul's Jewish contemporaries might have replied: "We are children of Isaac; hence, we can be certain that God will not reject us."

10, 11. But Paul shows that God made a choice between Isaac's two sons, even before the sons were born or had done anything good or bad. Such a choice occurred in order that the purpose or plan of God which operates by selection might continue not from works but from the one who calls. God's selection was not based upon legalistic works but upon himself and his plan for the world.

12, 13. What did this selection involve? The older will be in subjection to the younger. Since this selection occurred before the twins were born (Gen 25:23), Paul was certainly thinking of two individuals here. In the quotation from Mal 1:2-3, which looks back to God's dealings with Jacob and Esau, the emphasis falls upon nations. What began in the lifetime of the founders of these peoples continued among their children. The selection had to do with the roles these two groups were to play in history. The Lord showed his love for Jacob by making the patriarch's descendants the channels through which He spoke His oracles and made known His truth.

God hated Esau in the sense that He did not make Esau's descendants channels of revelation but rather, as Malachi says: God "made his mountains a desolation and gave his heritage to the jackals of the wilderness" (Mal 1:3). In looking back upon Esau's history, Malachi also uses the word "hate" because of God's severity in dealing with Esau. The historical situation of both individuals and peoples certainly affects their eternal destiny. But election in Rom 9:10-13 is not selection for eternal salvation or damnation. Rather, it is selection for the roles God has called individuals and nations to play in their earthly life. (Wycliffe)

18


Rom 9:10And not only so. The thought to be supplied is: Not only have we an example of the election of a son of Abraham by one woman, and a rejection of his son by another, but also of the election and rejection of the children of the same woman.

By one. Though of one father, a different destiny was divinely appointed for each of the twins. Hence, only the divine disposal constitutes the true and valid succession, and not the bodily descent.(Vincent)

Homily 16 - Romans 9:10Ver. 10. "And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac."

The subject in question was an important one. Hence he turns to several arguments, and endeavors by all means to solve the difficulty. For if it was at once strange and new for them to be cast out after so great promises, it is much more strange that we even should come into their good things, who did not expect anything of the kind.

THE EXAMPLEAnd the case was the same as if a king's son, who had promises made him that he should succeed to the power he had, were to be cast into the level of disreputable men, and in his place a condemned man, and one laden with evils unnumbered, after being taken out of prison, were to come into the power, which properly was the other's.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 – Romans 9:10For he means, what have you to say? that the son is unworthy? Well, but so is this man unworthy, and much more so. Hence he ought either to have been punished along with the former, or to have been honored along with him.

Now it was something of this sort which befell the Jews and the Gentiles, or something far more strange than this. Now that all were unworthy, he has shown above, where he says, "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:23.) But the new thing is, that when all were unworthy, the Gentiles were saved alone. And beside this there is another difficulty that some one may start, he says. If God had no intention of fulfilling the promises to them, why make them at all? For men who know not the future, and are many times deceived, do promise even the undeserving that they shall have their larges.

But He Who knoweth beforehand things to come as well as things present, and hath a clear knowledge that they will make themselves undeserving of the promises, and therefore will not receive any of the things specified,-why should He promise at all? Now what is Paul's way of meeting all this? It is by showing what the Israel is to whom He made the promise. For when this has been shown, there is at the same time demonstrated the fact that the promises were all fulfilled. And to point this out he said, "For they are not all Israel that are of Israel." And this is why he does not use the name of Jacob, but that of Israel, which was:

1. A sign of the virtue of that just man, 2. And of a gift from above, 3. And of having seen God. (Gen. 32:28 .)

19


Yet, "all," he says, "have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:23.) Now if all have sinned, how come some to be saved, and some to perish? It is because all were not minded to come to Him, since for His part all were saved, for all were called. However, he does not set this down yet awhile, but meets it from an advantageous position, and from other examples, by bringing before them another question, and as in the former case meets a difficulty very great, by another difficulty. For when he was discussing how by Christ being justified all the rest enjoyed that righteousness, he brought in Adam's case, saying, "For if by one man's offence death reigned, much more they which receive abundance of grace shall reign in life." (Romans 5:17).

And the case of Adam, indeed, he does not clear up, but from it he clears up His (or his own), and shows that it was more reasonable that He Who died in their behalf should have power over them at His will. For that when one had sinned all should be punished, does not seem to be so very reasonable to most men. But that when One had done aright all should be justified, is at once more reasonable and more suited to God. Yet still he has not solved the difficulty he raised. For the more obscure thatpoint remained, the more the Jew was put to silence. And the difficulty of his position passed over to the other, and this become clearer from it (Mar. and 4 MSS. "than that").

So in this passage also, it is by raising other difficulties that he meets the questions raised, inasmuch as it was against Jews that he was contending. Hence he takes no pains to solve the examples which he has brought before us. For he was not answerable for them as in the fight against the Jews. But from them he makes his own subject throughout clearer. Why do you feel surprised, he means, that some of the Jews were saved, and some not saved at this time?

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE SECTION TWOHomily 16 - Romans 9:10Why of old, in the patriarch's times, one may see this happening.

1. For why was Isaac only called the seed, 2. And yet he was the father of Ishmael also, and of several others. "But he was of a mother that

was a slave." 3. And what has this to do with his father? 4. Still I will not be captious. Let this son be set aside on his mother's account. 5. What are we to say of those sprung from Keturah? 6. Were they not free, and from a mother that was free? 7. How came they not to be honored with the same preference as Isaac? 8. And why do I speak of these? 9. For Rebecca was even Isaac's only wife, 10. And bearing two children she bore them both to Isaac; 11. Still those so born, though of the same father, and the same mother, and the fruit of the same

labor, being both of one father and one mother, and twins besides, 12. Yet did not enjoy the same lot.

And yet here you have no mother's slavery to account for it, as in Ishmael's case, nor can you say that one was begotten of this womb and the other of a different one, as in the case of Keturah and Sarah, since in this case they had the same hour in common to them for their birth. This was why Paul then, in order to give a clearer example, says that this happened not in Isaac's case only, "but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac." (Chrysostom)

20


(9:11) The words, “Purpose according to election” are he kat’ eklogen prothesis. The word “purpose” in its verbal form is protithemi, “to set before one’s self, to propose to one’s self, to purpose, to determine.” The word speaks of the action of an individual setting before him a proposed action. Thus, it presupposes deliberation upon a course of conduct, and then the determination to carry it through.

The word “election” is eklogee. The verbal form is eklego, “to select out from a number.” The noun means, “The act of picking out, choosing.” The Greek order is “the according to selection out purpose.” The words, “according to selection out” are used like an adjective describing “purpose.”

‘And not only this; [Not only yet] but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, [but Rebecca out of-one] even by our father Isaac; [lie-ing having Isaac the father of-us] (For the children having not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, [No-as-yet for of-being-generated no-yet of-practicing any good or foul] that the purpose of God according to election might stand, [that the according-to choice before-placing of-the God may-be-remaining] not of works, but of Him that calleth [not out of-acts but out of-the One calling].’ Romans 9:10, 11 + Concordant

Rom 9:11(1). Evil faulon (NT: 5337). See the notes at John 3:20; James 3:16.(2). Purpose according to election [hee kat’ eklogeen] hee (NT: 3588) kat' (NT: 2596) eklogeen (NT: 1589). (3). For prothesis (NT: 4286) "purpose," see the note on the kindred verb proetheto (NT: 4388), Rom 3:25, and compare Rom 8:28. The phrase signifies a purpose so formed that in it an election was made. The opposite of one founded upon right or merit.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE(4). For similar phrases see Acts 19:20; kata (NT: 2596) kratos (NT: 2904) "according to might, mightily;" Rom 7:13, kath' (NT: 2596) huperboleen (NT: 5236) "according to excess, exceedingly." See note.(5). Might stand menee (NT: 3306). Literally, "abide, continue:" remain unchangeable. This unchangeableness of purpose was conveyed in His declaration to Rebecca. Contrast with "come to naught" (Rom 9:6).(6). Of works ex (NT: 1537). Literally, "out of." By virtue of.(7). Calleth kalountos (NT: 2564). Eternal salvation is not contemplated. "The matter in question is the part they play regarded from the theocratic stand-point" (Godet). (Vincent)

Denney’s note is helpful; “But the argument can be made more decisive. A Jewish opponent might say, ‘Ishmael was an illegitimate child, who naturally had no rights as against Isaac; we are the legitimate descendants of the patriarch, and our right to the inheritance is indefeasible.’

To this the apostle replies in verses 10-13. Not only did God make the distinction already referred to, but in the case of Isaac’s children, where there seemed no ground for making any distinction whatever, He distinguished again, and said, ‘The elder shall serve the younger.’ Jacob and Esau had one father, one mother, and were twin sons; the only ground on which either could have been preferred was that of priority of birth, and this was disregarded by God; Esau, the elder, was rejected, and Jacob the younger, was made heir of the promises.

Homily 16 - Romans 9:11-1321


Ver. 11-13. "For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth, it was said unto her, the eider shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated."

What was the cause then why one was loved and the other hated? why was it that one served, the other was served? It was because one was wicked, and the other good. And yet the children being not yet born, one was honored and the other condemned. For when they were not as yet born, God said, "the elder shall serve the younger." With what intent then did God say this? Because He doth not wait, as man doth, to see from the issue of their acts the good and him who is not so, but even before these He knoweth which is the wicked and which not such. And this took place in the Israelites' case also, in a still more wonderful way. Why, he says, do I speak of Esau and of Jacob, of whom one was wicked and the other good? For in the Israelites' case, the sin belonged to all, since they all worshipped the calf. Yet notwithstanding some had mercy shown them, and others had not. (Chrysostom)

Rom 9:12Elder ... younger [meizoon …. elassoni] meizoon (NT: 3187) ... elassoni (NT: 1640). Literally, "greater ... smaller." Compare Gen 27:1, where the Hebrew is: "Esau his great son;" Septuagint, presbuteron (NT: 4245) "elder." Gen 29:16, Septuagint, "The name of the greater was Leah, and the name of younger [tee neootera ] tee (NT: 3588) neootera (NT: 3501) Rachel."

Meizoon (NT: 3187) "greater," occurs in forty-four passages in the New Testament, and in no case with the meaning "elder." Compare Gen 25:23, "be stronger;" Septuagint, huperexei "shall surpass." The reference, if to the persons of Jacob and Esau, is to them as representatives of the two nations. See Gen 25:23.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINERomans 9:121. Historically the Edomites, represented by Esau, were for a time the greater, and surpassed the Israelites in national and military development. Moses sent envoys to the king of Edom from Kadesh, asking permission to pass through his country, which was refused, and the Edomite army came out against Israel (Num 20:14-21).

2. Later they were "vexed" by Saul (1 Sam 14:47), and were conquered and made tributary by David (2 Sam 8:14). Their strength was shown in their subsequent attempts to recover independence (2 Kings 8:20-21; 14:7; 2 Chron 28:17).

3. Their final subjugation was effected by John Hyrcanus, who incorporated them into the Jewish nation and compelled them to be circumcised. (Vincent)

“Further, this was done by God of His sovereign freedom: the decisive word was spoken to their mother while they were as yet unborn and had achieved neither good nor evil. Claims as of right therefore, made against God, are futile, whether they are based on descent or on works. There is no way in which they can be established: and, as we have just seen, God acts in entire disregard of them. God’s purpose to save men, and make them heirs of His kingdom – a purpose which is characterized as ‘according to election,’ or involving a choice – is not determined at all by consideration of such claims as the Jews put forward.

22


Rom 9:13Jacob ... Esau. See Gen 25:23. Representing their respective nations, as often in the Old Testament. Num 23:7,10,23; 24:5; Jer 49:10; compare also the original the citation, Mal 1:2-3, the burden of the word of the Lord to "Israel." Compare also "Edom" in Rom 9:4, synonymous with "Esau" in Rom 9:3; and "Israel," Rom 9:5, synonymous with "Jacob," Rom 9:2.

Hated emiseesa (NT: 3404). The expression is intentionally strong as an expression of moral antipathy. Compare Matt 6:24; Luke 14:26. No idea of malice is implied of course. (Vincent)

Jacob I loved but Esau I hated; and further than this we cannot go. To avoid misapprehending this, however, it is necessary to keep the apostle’s purpose in view. He wishes to show that God’s promise has not broken down, though many children of Abraham have no part in its fulfillment in Christ. He does so by showing that there has always been a distinction among the descendants of the patriarchs, between those who have merely the natural connection to boast of, and those who are the Israel of God; and, as against Jewish pretensions, he shows at the same time that this distinction can be traced to nothing but God’s sovereignty.

It is not of works, but of Him who effectually calls men…No Jewish birth, no legal works, can give a man a claim which God is bound to honor; and no man urging such claims can say that God’s Word has become of no effect though his claims are disallowed, and he gets no part in the inheritance of God’s people.”

The word “hate” is miseo, “to hate.” However, when it is used in contrast to “love” here, it does not retain its original meaning of a literal hatred, but of a lesser degree of love. God cannot be said to hate anyone. The idea is, “Jacob I loved, but Esau, I loved less.” Wuest

ROMANS CHAPTER NINETranslation by Wuest‘And not only, but also Rebecca, conceiving by one, Isaac, our father. For not yet having been born, nor having practiced any good or evil, in order that the purpose of God dominated by an act of selecting out, may abide, not out of a source of works, but out of the source of the One who calls, it was said of her. The older shall serve the younger; even as it stands written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.’ Romans 9:10-13

God's Choice in Moses' Time9:14-15. In Exodus 33:19, God has the right to choose whom he wills. In the context, he has forgiven Israel as a whole because Moses has found favor in his sight (33:12-17), and God would show Moses his glory (33:18-23) because Moses is his friend (33:11). God's choice of individuals, however, was not arbitrary but was based on people's response to God (32:32-34), although God had initially called both Israel and Moses unconditionally.

9:16-18. God raised up this particular Pharaoh for the purpose of showing his power, that "the Egyptians may know that I am the Lord," as Exodus repeatedly says (e.g., 9:16). God clearly hardened Pharaoh's heart (Exodus 9:12,35; 10:27; 11:10), but not until Pharaoh had hardened his own several times (Exodus 7:22; 8:15,32). In other words, God elevated a particular person to fight against him; but that person also made his own choice, which God foreknew, before God punished him with a continuously hard heart (cf. Romans 1:24-25; 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12). The *Old Testament affirms both God's

23


sovereignty (e.g., Deuteronomy 29:4) and human responsibility (e.g., Deuteronomy 5:29), assuming that God is sovereign enough to ensure both (although human choice could not nullify God's word; cf., e.g., 1 Kings 22:26-30,34-35). (From IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.)

3) God's Mercy toward Israel and Hardening of Pharaoh. 9:14-18.Therefore, what shall we say? There isn't unrighteousness with God is there? By no means. The fact that God's selection is not based upon human works does not make the Lord unrighteous. He is free, righteous, and sovereign.

15. These qualities are seen in his action toward Moses and Pharaoh. His declaration to Moses - I will have mercy upon whomever I am having mercy and I will have compassion upon whomever I am having compassion (Ex 33:19) - came after Israel's sin of the golden calf. At that point Israel could not possibly have deserved God's mercy. Such idolatry as theirs deserved only wrath.

16. The "it" supplied by the AV refers to the mercy or compassion. Mercy and compassion therefore do not belong to the one willing or the one running but to God who constantly has mercy. That is, no one has a claim on God's mercy. God also pours out his wrath as he sees fit.

17. The verb "to rise up" is better translated in this verse: For this very reason I cause you to appear. God brought Pharaoh upon the scene of history in Egypt for the purpose of showing His power and proving that His name would be proclaimed in all the earth. Pharaoh would still have been his own stubborn self if God had placed him in some obscure settlement up the Nile. But God put him over all Egypt in order to carry out His own purpose and plan.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE18. In looking back over these two cases of Moses and Pharaoh, Paul concludes: Therefore, then, he shows mercy to whom he wishes and he hardens whom he wishes. God was free and sovereign in the hardening of Pharaoh's heart, but He was not arbitrary. A study of the Exodus narrative shows that Pharaoh hardened his own heart before God hardened it. And even after God hardened it, Pharaoh still had power to harden it further.

The Lord clearly predicted that he would harden Pharaoh's heart: 1. "I will harden (hazaq, piel, "make rigid, hard; harden") his heart" (Ex 4:21; cf. Rom 14:4); 2. "I will make hard (qashah, hiphil, "make hard, stiff, stubborn") the heart of Pharaoh" (Ex 7:3).3. But not until Rom 9:12 does the record of Exodus say that God actually hardened the king's

heart: "And Jehovah hardened (hazaq, piel, "make rigid, hard; harden") the heart of Pharaoh."

The Scriptures have much to say about the fact that Pharaoh's heart was "growing hard," and about Pharaoh's "making his heart heavy, dull, unresponsive," even before they state that God hardened Pharaoh's heart. The phrase, "Pharaoh's heart grew hard," means that Pharaoh's moral character (see BDB, p. 525) grew hard. Moral character is a most important aspect of one's person.

Hence, in a real sense Pharaoh grew hard as the result of his own activity. "And the heart of Pharaoh grew hard" (hazaq qal, "grow stout, rigid, hard"; see Ex 7:13, 22; 8:19 (Heb. text Rom 8:15). "The

24


heart of Pharaoh is hard" (kabed, adj., "heavy," "dull," "hard"; see Ex 7:14). "The heart of Pharaoh became hard" (kabed, qal, "be heavy, insensible, dull, hard"; see Ex 9:7).

"Pharaoh made heavy (or dull, unresponsive; all possible translations of kabed, hiphil) his heart" (see Ex 8:15 (Heb. text Rom 8:11); 8:32 (Heb. text 8:28). After all this activity on the part of Pharaoh, "Jehovah hardened (hazaq, piel, "make rigid, hard; harden") the heart of Pharaoh" (see Ex 9:12). But Pharaoh had the power to continue what he had been doing: ". . . he (Pharaoh) sinned more, and he made heavy (or dull, unresponsive; all possible translations of kabed, hiphil) his heart, he and his servants. And the heart of Pharaoh grew hard" (hazaq, qal, "grow stout, rigid, hard"; see Ex 9:34 b, 35 a).

Then Jehovah completed his judicial punishment of Pharaoh. "And Jehovah hardened (hazaq, piel, "make rigid, hard"; "harden") the heart of Pharaoh," (see Ex 10:20, 27; 11:10; 14:8). "And Jehovah said unto Moses: 'Go unto Pharaoh because I am making heavy (dull, unresponsive; all possible translations of kabed, hiphil) his heart and the heart of his servants'" (see Ex 10:1).

So the conclusion that God hardens whom he wishes is based upon his righteousness as well as upon his freedom in dealing with Pharaoh. (Wycliffe)

THE PURPOSE OF ALL OF THIS IS:1. Does God have the right to chose for mankind or not?2. Does mankind have any say in the matter?

THE ANSWER IS THIS:1. God does indeed know the future as we see in many Scriptures [Example Isaiah 45:1 etc]2. But God has given to every individual the promise of choice. Man can choose for themselves.3. That’s why a Christian who is born again and has received the gift of the Holy Spirit can fall

from grace and face judgment as a sinner. Paul the Learner

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 - Romans 9:15Ver. 15. "For I will have mercy, He says, on whom I will have mercy, and I will show compassion on whom I will show compassion." (Exodus 33:19.)

This one may see also in the case of those who are punished, for what would you say of Pharaoh who was punished, and had to pay so heavy a penalty? You say he was hardened and disobedient. Was he then alone such, and not even one person else? How came he then to be so severely punished? Why even in the case of the Jews did he call that a people which was no people, or again, why not count all worthy of equal honor? "For if they be" (it says) "as the sand of the sea, yet shall a remnant be saved." (Isaiah 10:22.) And why is it to be only a remnant? You see what difficulty he has filled the subject with. And with great propriety.

1. For when you have power to throw your adversary into perplexity, 2. Do not at once bring forward the answer, 3. Because if he be found himself responsible for the same ignorance, 4. Why take unnecessary dangers upon yourself? 5. Why make him more bold, by drawing it all upon yourself?

25


Now tell me, O thou Jew, that hast so many perplexing questions, and art unable to answer any of them, how thou comest to annoy us on account of the call of the Gentiles? I, however, have a good reason to give you why the Gentiles were justified and ye were cast out. And what is the reason? It is that they are of faith, ye of the works of the Law. And it is owing to this obstinacy of yours that ye have in every way (Mar. and several MSS.; all) been given up. For, "they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God." (Romans 10:3.)

The clearing up then of the whole passage, to give the whole sense summarily, is here brought out by that blessed person. But that this may be clearer, let us investigate the things he says also one by one; this knowing, that what the blessed Paul aimed at was, to show by all that he said that God only knoweth who are worthy, and no man whatever knoweth, even if he seem to know ever so well, but that in this sentence of his there are sundry aberrations. For He that knoweth the secrets of the hearts, He only knoweth for a certainty who deserve a crown, and who punishment and vengeance. Hence it is that many of those, by men esteemed good, He convicts and punishes, and those suspected to be bad He crowns, after showing it not to be so; thus forming his sentence not after the judgment of us slaves, but after his own keen and uncorrupt decision, and not waiting for the issue of actions to look at the wicked and him who is not so there from. But that we may not make the subject more obscure, again let us go to the very words of the Apostle.

Ver. 14. "What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid."Hence there is no such thing in the case of us and the Jews. And then he goes on with another thing, a more clear than this. And of what sort is it?

Ver. 15. "For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."Here again he adds force to the objection by dividing it in two and meeting it, and starting an other fresh difficulty. But to make what I have said clearer, one must needs explain it. God, he means, said that "the elder shall serve the younger," before the travail. What then? "Is God unrighteous?" By no means.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 - Romans 9:15Now listen to what follows also. For in that case the virtue or the vice, might be the decisive thing. But here there was one sin on which all the Jews joined, that of the molten calf, and still some were punished, and some were not punished. And this is why He says, "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion." (Exodus 33:19: observe context.) For it is not thine to know, O Moses, he means, which are deserving of My love toward man, but leave this to Me. But if Moses had no right to know, much less have we. And this is why he did not barely quote the passage, but also called to our minds to whom it was said. For it is Moses, he means, that he is speaking to, that at least by the dignity of the person he might make the objector modest. Having then given a solution of the difficulties raised, he divides it in two, by bringing forward another objection besides, as follows: (Chrysostom)

Rom 9:15I will have mercy ... compassion [eleeesoo….oiktireesoo] eleeesoo (NT: 1653) ... oiktireesoo (NT: 3627). See Ex 33:19. For "mercy" see the notes at 2 John 3; Luke 1:50. (1). The former verb emphasizes the sense of human wretchedness in its active manifestation; the latter the inward feeling expressing itself in sighs and tears.

26


(2). "Have mercy" therefore contemplates, not merely the sentiment in itself, but the determination of those who should be its objects. (3). The words were spoken to Moses in connection with his prayer for a general forgiveness of the people, which was refused, and his request to behold God's glory, which was granted. (4). With reference to the latter, God asserts that His gift is of His own free grace, without any recognition of Moses' right to claim it on the ground of merit or service. (Vincent)

Rom 9:14-2414 Israel's Rejection and God's Justice What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! 15 For He says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion." 16 So then it is not of him, who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to the Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth." 18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. 19 You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?" 20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, "Why have you made me like this?" 21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? 22 What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? NKJV

9:14-29 GOD’S PURPOSE REGARDED ONLY A REMNANT.K 9:14-16. Divine election justified by Scripture. L 9:17, 18. Gentiles hardened for sake of Israel. M 9:19-21. Divine election not to be challenged. M 9:22-24. Divine election benevolent so far as man can apprehend. L 9:25, 26. Israel restored to supremacy over Gentiles.K 9:27-29. Divine election justified by Scripture.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE(9:14-16)

1. The first “I will have mercy” is a future indicative, predicting a future event. 2. The second occurrence of these words is a present subjunctive. The relative pronoun is

accompanied by an, a particle used with the subjunctive mode, used here with the relative pronoun to make the latter mean “whoever,” emphasizing indefiniteness.

(The idea is not, “I will have mercy on whoever I desire or will to have mercy.”) it is, “I will have mercy on anyone, whoever he is, that I will show mercy to in the future.” This emphasizes the absolute sovereignty of God in the disposition of His mercy. (Wuest)

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEI WILL HAVE MERCY

C. éleos/eleéœ in the NT. 1. The NT often uses éleos/eleéœ for the attitude that God requires of us. In Matt 9:13; 23:23 it denotes the kindness owed in mutual relationships. The LXX phrase "showing mercy" occurs in Luke 10:37 for the actions of the Samaritan. In Matt 18:33 the demand for mercy is based on the divine mercy which

27


precedes ours (cf. James 2:13). The new feature here as compared with Judaism is that God's mercy is known in and through Christ. In James 3:17 and Rom 12:8 éleos embraces loving kindness in general, though pity is included. Concern for eternal as well as temporal welfare may be meant (cf. Jude 22).

2. God's éleos in the NT is often his gracious faithfulness (cf. Luke 1:58; Eph 2:4; 1 Peter 1:3; Rom 11:30 ff.). Paul significantly relates God's éleos to his salvation; it is God's saving eschatological act in Christ (cf. Titus 3:5). The opposite in Rom 9:22-23 is God's wrath. Eschatological awareness may also be seen in Rom 9:15 ff.; 15:8-9; 1 Peter 2:10; believing Gentiles are now caught up by the divine mercy.

The need of mercy in the judgment comes to expression in 2 Tim 1:18; Jude 21, and cf. Matt 5:7. In salutations éleos may carry only an indirect reference to Christ, as in Gal 6:16. Mercy may be individual as well as general, as we see from the cry for mercy in Mark 10:47-78 or the mercy shown to Paul according to 1 Cor 7:25; cf. Mark 5:19; Phil 2:27; 2 Tim 1:16. In such cases there may not always be a specific reference to God's saving act in Christ. (From Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, abridged edition, Copyright © 1985 by William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. All rights reserved.)

‘To Moses for He saith I will have mercy [éleos/eleeoe #1] on whom I will have mercy [éleos #2]…’As you see the same words but two different meanings. ‘To the Moses for He-is-saying I-shall-being-merciful [God’s mercy is known in and through Christ]-to whom ever I-may-be-being-merciful [Eschatological awareness that the Gentiles are now caught up by the divine mercy] and I-shall-be-pitying whom ever I-may-be-pitting.’ Romans 9:15 + Concordant

Rom 9:16It is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth. "It," the participation in God's mercy. "Of" him, i.e, "dependent upon." "Runneth," denoting strenuous effort. The metaphor from the foot-race is a favorite one with Paul. See 1 Cor 9:24, 26; Gal 2:2; 5:7; Phil 2:16; 2 Thess 3:1. God is laid under no obligation by a human will or a human work. (Vincent)

ROMANS CHAPTER NINERomans 9:16A participation in God’s mercy is dependant upon God’s sovereign will alone. The question of verse 14 in the Greek requires a negative answer, the negative me being included.

Translation by Wuest‘What shall we say then? Away with the thought. For to Moses He says; I will have mercy upon whoever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whoever I will have compassion. Therefore then, mercy is not of the one who desires nor even runs, but of the One who is merciful, God.’ Romans 9:14-16

Homily 16 - Romans 9:16, 17, 18, 19Ver. 16,17. "So then it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showed mercy. For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth."

28


As then in the one case, he means, some were saved and some were punished, so here also. This man was reserved for this very purpose. And then he again urges the objection.

Ver. 18,19. "Therefore He hath mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardened. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he then find fault? For who hath resisted His will?"

See what pains he takes to embarrass the subject in every way. And the answer he does not produce forthwith, it being a useful thing not to do so, but he first stops the disputant's mouth, saying as follows,

(Chrysostom)Note: I am reminded of a passage of Scripture‘And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man who was blind from his mother’s womb. 2: And his disciples asked him, saying, Teacher, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind? 3: Jesus said to them, Neither did he sin nor his parents. But that the works of God might be seen in him,’

John 9:1-3 Peshitta Text1. God elected that this person would be born blind.2. God had a purpose in this example before us.3. God wanted the works of God to be seen in this miracle.4. Was that fair, ‘…Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are ye in mine hand…’ Jer. 18:65. There were many in that day that were blind but we only read here of the one.

Paul the LearnerRom 9:171. Saith. Present tense. "There is an element of tirelessness in the utterance. If the Scripture ever spoke at all, it continued and continues to speak. It has never been struck dumb" (Morison).2. Pharaoh. The original meaning of the word is now supposed to be "the double house [king of both upper and lower Egypt] or palace." Compare "the Sublime Porte."3. Raised thee up exeegeira (NT: 1825). Hebrew "caused thee to stand." Septuagint, dieteereethees "thou were preserved alive." Only once elsewhere in the New Testament, 1 Cor 6:14, of raising from the dead. 4. The meaning here is general, "allowed thee to appear; brought thee forward on the stage of events," as Zech 11:16. So the simple verb in Matt 11:11; John 7:52. 5. Other explanations are, "preserved thee alive," as the Septuagint, "excited thee to opposition," as Hab 1:6; "created thee."

ROMANS CHAPTER NINERomans 9:176. Might be declared diangelee (NT: 1229). Published "abroad, thoroughly" dia (NT: 1223). So the English Revised Version (1885). See the note at Luke 9:60. 7."Even to the present day, wherever throughout the world Exodus is read, the divine intervention is realized" (Godet). (Vincent)

(9:17, 18) Denney shows that while in verse 16 the experience of God’s mercy does not depend on man’s resolve or effort, in verse 17, the contrary phenomenon is seen, “that of a man who does not and cannot receive mercy.” The same authority says concerning Paul’s use of Scripture here, “It is on Scripture the burden of proof is laid here and at verse 15. The Jew might answer the arguments Paul uses here if they were the apostle’s own; to Scripture he can make no reply; it must silence, even where it does not convince.”

29


The verb “raised up” is exegeiro, and means “to arouse, to raise up.” Concerning Paul’s choice of Pharaoh as an example of God’s sovereignty, Denney says, “Pharaoh as well as Moses can be quoted to illustrate it. He was the open adversary of God an avowed, implacable adversary; yet a divine purpose was fulfilled in his life, and that purpose and nothing else is the explanation of his very being.”

(9:18) the word “hardeneth” is skleruno, “to make hard, to harden,” metaphorically, [a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness or analogy between them. Webster Dictionary], “to render obstinate, stubborn.”

Rom 9:18He will thelei (NT: 2309). In a decretory sense. See the note at Matt 1:19.

Hardeneth skleerunei (NT: 4645). Only here by Paul. See the note on "hard," Matt 25:24; Jude 14; James 3:4. Three words are used in the Hebrew to describe the hardening of Pharaoh's heart. The one which occurs most frequently, properly means "to be strong," and therefore represents the hardness as "foolhardiness," infatuated insensibility to danger. See Ex 14. The word is used in its positive sense, "hardens," not merely "permits to become hard." In Exodus the hardening is represented as "self-produced" (Ex 8:15, 32; 9:34), and as "produced by God" (Ex 4:21; 7:3; 9:12; 10:20, 27; 11:10). Paul here chooses the latter representation. (Vincent)

We are not to understand in the latter instance [produced by God] that God arbitrarily and directly forced upon Pharaoh an obstinate and stubborn resistance to Himself. Evil cannot be laid at the door of God. God not only does not solicit a sinner to do evil (James 1:13), but He also does not cause man to do evil. When man does wrong, that wrong comes from his own totally depraved nature (James 1:14). Therefore when Pharaoh acted in stubborn rebellion against God, all of that rebellion came as a result of his own depravity, not any directly from God.

HE HARDENETHNT: 4645 skl¢rýnœ.1. This word, meaning "to harden," is primarily a medical term.

2. The NT uses it figuratively in Acts 19:9; Rom 9:18; Heb 3:8, 13, 15; 4:7. It is linked with unbelief in Acts 19:9, God punishes by means of it in Rom 9:18, but Christians are admonished against it in Heb 3:8 etc.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE3. Rom 9:18; Heb 3:8, etc. have in view incidents such as those of Ex 4:21; 15:23. In the LXX Gentile rulers are hardened, but so are Israel and her kings. The LXX also uses the term with no stress on hardening (cf. the heavy hand of Israel in Judg 4:24, the hard thing of 2 Kings 2:10, the heavy yoke of 2 Chron 2:10, and the withered grass of Ps 90:6).

4. The apostolic fathers follow the biblical use for hardening in 1 Clem. 51.3.5 (cf. Barn. 9.5). [K. L. and M. A. SCHMIDT, V, 1022-31]

(From Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, abridged edition, Copyright © 1985 by William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. All rights reserved.)

(1). When God is said to harden Pharaoh’s heart, it is that He be demanding the release of Israel, confronted him with an issue which he did not wish to meet.

30


(2). Paul says, “Whom He will, He hardened.”(3). “Will” is the word thelo, “to be resolved, to determine, to purpose.”

Pharaoh was an incorrigible, and God simply used him as He found him to demonstrate His power to the human race, in the last analysis, an act of mercy to the larger number, while also an act of perfect justice toward Pharaoh, for God’s demands were just. Denney says: “The purpose Pharaoh was designed to serve, and actually did serve, on this stage, was certainly not his own; as certainly it was God’s: God’s power was shown in the penal miracles by which Pharaoh and Egypt were visited, and His name is proclaimed to this day wherever the story of the Exodus is told.”

Translation by Wuest‘For the scripture says to Pharaoh, For this same purpose I raised you up, in order that I may demonstrate in you my power, and in order that there may be published everywhere my Name in all the earth. Therefore then upon whom He desires, He shows mercy, and whom He desires to harden, he hardens.’ Romans 9:17, 18

4) God's Control Over Vessels of Wrath and Mercy. 9:19-24.Paul has been directing his argument to the Jews, who thought that, because they had circumcision and were members of God's elect people, the Lord was duty-bound to grant them earthly prosperity and eternal bliss. The apostle has stressed the divine sovereignty and freedom as a corrective to this erroneous Jewish view. The Lord is duty-bound only to his own righteous being-not to claims put upon him by those who misunderstand his being and action.

At this point, Paul imagines that one of his opponents is saying: "Look what your argument leads to. The Lord hardens a man like Pharaoh and then finds fault with him. That doesn't make sense." The question is: Why does he still find fault? Who can resist his will? Paul's answer is phrased in terms suited to the man who makes the objection rather than in terms of an intellectual analysis of the man's counterargument.

Paul writes (v. 20 a): O man, on the contrary, who are you who answers back to God in this way? A real knowledge of the true God makes such an objection preposterous. Paul turns to an illustration (vv. 20 b, 21): What is molded will not say to the molder, why have you made me in this fashion, will it? Or, the potter has the right over the clay, doesn't he, to make from the same lump one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEThis illustration of the potter had been used very effectively by Jeremiah centuries before (Jer 18:4-6). Paul stresses the complete control of the potter over the clay in terms of that for which the vessel is to be used. A vessel is honored or dishonored by the use to which it is put (cf. Arndt, time, 2, b, p. 825). One pot may be intended for carrying water and another for carrying away refuse. The same material is used for both. But they are to be made for different functions, and so the potter gives each one a shape that accords with its intended function.

Paul now applies this principle. He does this in one long sentence that extends from Rom 9:22-24. If a potter may do what he wants with his vessels, certainly God may do what He wants with His vessels. Although Paul is still stressing God's sovereignty and freedom, he carefully avoids picturing the Lord as having the same relationship to the vessels of wrath as he does to the vessels of mercy.

31


Now if God, although he wished to show his anger and make known his power, bore patiently (endured) with much forbearance the vessels of wrath made ready (prepared) for destruction and (if he did this) in order that he might make known (reveal) the riches of his glory to vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory, us whom also he called not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles (how can you (sing.; cf. v. 19) bring any objection against God's justice?)

In the concessive clause beginning with "although," Paul certainly has in mind Pharaoh and others like him. The words to show his anger and make known his power are merely a variation of the language he used in verse 17: "in order that I might show in you my power." Paul was very eager to emphasize God's patience and forbearance with the vessels of wrath. (Wycliffe)

22. These are described as made ready (prepared; see katartizo,) for destruction. 1. Some Bible students, taking the participle to be in the middle voice, have translated: those who have been in a state of preparing themselves for destruction. 2. Others have regarded the participle as passive and have said: those who have been in a state of being prepared by God for destruction. 3. But the context certainly favors the passive without confining the agent to one being or thing.

23. God is specifically connected with the preparing beforehand (active voice) of the vessels of mercy. But when it comes to the vessels of wrath, the student finds this indefinite passive. What operates on man to put him in a state of being made ready (prepared) for eternal destruction? The answer is complex: 1. It includes his own sinful acts and rebellious nature. 2. It involves his environment, which makes sin enticing, as well as the judicial judgments of God (cf. Rom 1:24, 26, 28).

These factors influence certain vessels to become vessels of wrath, i.e., objects that are in a state of being prepared for destruction. God specifically prepared beforehand vessels of mercy for glory, and he also revealed to them the riches of his glory. Glory refers to the radiance of the being of God. The outpouring of God's bounty means riches untold to the recipients. Who are these vessels of mercy? In 9:24 Paul defines the us as those whom God has called not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles. The Lord's freedom, power, and sovereignty on the one hand are placed over against his forbearance, his revelation of the riches of his glory, and his preparation beforehand of the vessels of mercy (vv. 22-24). The destiny of those thus prepared is glory (cf. 8:30). (Wycliffe)

ROMANS CHAPTER NINERom 9:19Hath resisted anthesteeken (NT: 436). The English Revised Version (1885), more correctly, "with standeth." The idea is the "result" rather than the "process" of resistance. A man may resist God's will, but cannot maintain his resistance. The question means, who can resist him? (Vincent)

God Chooses Gentiles9:19-21. Paul here uses the language of Isaiah 29:16; 45:9 and 64:8, which the *Dead Sea Scrolls often used in prayers. The point is that God made people, and God can therefore do with them as he wills. In the context this means that he can choose either Jews or *Gentiles, not that his predestination is arbitrary. Some nineteenth-century churchgoers reasoned that God would save them if he chose and hence made no effort to seek salvation. Their view misrepresented the point of this passage. Although

32


Paul teaches "predestination," we must understand what he means by that term in the light of what it meant in his own day, not what it has meant in recent centuries' theology (or, as in the case just mentioned, in distortions of that theology).

Most Jewish people believed that their people as a whole had been chosen for salvation; they viewed predestination in corporate, ethnic terms. Paul here discusses predestination only in the context of the salvation of Israel (9:1-13) and the Gentiles (9:23-29); thus he means only what both context and culture suggest: God can sovereignty choose to elect whom he wills, and that need not be on the basis of descent from Abraham. God's sovereignty means that he is free to choose on another basis than his covenant with ethnic Israel (3:1-8); he can choose on the basis of (foreknown) faith in Christ (4:11-13; 8:29-30).Some older New Testament scholars, like Rudolf Bultmann, thought that Romans 9-11 had nothing to do with the argument of the letter; but these scholars misunderstood Romans. In this letter Paul puts Jews and *Gentiles on the same spiritual footing (see the introduction), and Romans 9-11 is in fact the climax of his argument.

9:22-23. Here Paul means that God tolerated those who would remain in evil for the sake of those who would be saved, rather than ending the world immediately (cf. 2 Peter 3:9; cf. Proverbs 16:4).

9:24-26. In context Hosea 2:23, which Paul cites here, refers to God's restoring Israel, despite his temporary abandonment of them (1:9). If God could abandon but then restore Israel, he could also graft Gentiles into Israel if this were his will.

9:27-28. Here Paul quotes Isaiah 10:22-23: the prophet warned that only a remnant would survive and return to the land after judgment. If God saved only a remnant in the *Old Testament and promised that only a remnant would survive judgment, Paul asks what makes Jewish people of his own day feel secure that their Jewishness will save them.

9:29. Now Paul cites Isaiah 1:9, which makes the same point as Isaiah 10:22-23 (which he just quoted). In the context in Isaiah, Israel has acted like Sodom, the epitome of sin (1:10); they are fortunate to have any survivors (1:7-9), because God demands justice (1:16-17), not mere sacrifices (1:11-15). (From IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.)

Note: God made an unconditional promise to Abraham and God will keep it in the saving of the remnant as we see in Revelation 7, 14 with the 144,000 of the twelve tribes saved. Now God may elect to save many more Jews in that day, only time will tell. Paul the Learner

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 - Romans 9:20Ver. 20. "Nay but, O man, who art thou that replies against God?"

This he does to take down the objector's unseasonable inquisitiveness, and excessive curiosity, and to put a check upon it, and teach him to know:

1. What God is, 2. And what man, 3. And how incomprehensible His foreknowledge is, 4. And how far above our reason,

33


5. And how obedience to Him in all points is binding.

So when he has made this preparatory step in his hearer, and has hushed and softened down his spirit, then with great felicity he introduces the answer, having made what he says easy of admittance with him. And he does not say, it is impossible to answer questions of this kind, but that (5 MSS. No, but what? that) it is presumptuous to raise them. For our business is to obey what God does, not to be curious even if we do not know the reason of them. Wherefore he said,

1. "Who art thou that replies against God?" You see how very light he makes of him, how he bears down his swelling spirit!

2. "Who art thou?" art thou a sharer of His power? (compare Job 38) nay, 3. Art thou sitting in judgment upon God? Why in comparison with Him thou canst not have a

being even! nor this or that sort of being, but absolutely none!

For the expression, "who art thou?" doth much more set him at naught than "thou art nothing." And he takes other ways of showing further his indignation in the question, and does not say, "Who art thou that" answers "God?" but, "that replies against," that is, that gainsays, and that opposes. For the saying things ought to be so, and ought not to be so, is what a man does that "replies against." See how he scares them, how he terrifies them, how he makes them tremble rather than be questioning and curious. This is what an excellent teacher does; he does not follow his disciples' fancy everywhere, but leads them to his own mind, and pulls up the thorns, and then puts the seed in, and does not answer at once in all cases to the questions put to him. (Chrysostom)

Note: I heard something and I do not know if it is so or not, but I want to pass it on to you. ‘In the concentration camps of Germany, the Jews had a trial, and placed God on trial for His actions. They found Him guilty and so decided that they no longer wanted any part of Him.’ And so we know that over six million Jews perished for what purpose? I want to bring out a thought, that may make people very mad at what I am about to say:

1. The Jews of Europe and the rest of the world, had settled in after over 2,000 years to no longer having a home land, some did desire a homeland but many did not.

2. Satan put it in the heart of a man called Hitler to try to exterminate all of the Jews, and though he tried, he failed.

3. God allowed this to happen, He could have stopped it be He didn’t do it.4. Because of this mass murder, the world felt sorry for the nation of Israel and decided to allow

them to have there own land again. 5. This fulfilled Bible Prophecy, which was God’s purpose.6. Some may say that this is unfair, well God allowed it anyway.7. Sometimes we must accept the fact that God who made everything is in control.

Paul the Learner

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE(9:19, 21) “Hath resisted” is the perfect tense verb of anthistemi, “to set one’s self against, to withstand, resist, oppose.” The simple verb is histemi, “to stand,” the prefixed preposition, anti “against,” thus, “to stand against.” The use of the perfect tense here speaks of a process of standing against God’s will which has come to a finished end, and the resulting state, that of a confirmed and permanent stand against God. Wuest

34


Paul leaves the question unanswered, for there is no answer which a finite mind can either reason out nor understand, since it involves the sovereignty of God and the fact of man as a free moral agent. The point where both of these touch each other has never been found by man.”

1. Denney’s note is most helpful. “But human nature is not so easily silenced. The interpretation of all human life, with all its diversities of character and experience, through the will of God alone, as if that will by itself explained everything, is not adequate to the facts.”

If Moses and Pharaoh alike are to be explained by reference to that will – that is, are to be explained in precisely the same way – then the difference between Moses and Pharaoh disappears. The moral interpretation of the world is annulled by the religious one. If God is equally behind the most opposite moral phenomena, then it is open to anyone to say, what Paul here anticipates will be said; why does He still find fault? For who withstands His resolve? To this objection there is really no answer, and it ought to be frankly admitted that the Apostle does not answer it.

The attempt to understand the relation between the human will and the divine seems to lead of necessity to an antinomy (the opposition of one law to another) which thought has not yet succeeded in transcending. To assert the absoluteness of God in the unexplained, unqualified sense of verse 18 makes the moral life unintelligible; but to explain the moral life by ascribing to man a freedom over against God reduces the universe to anarchy.

Up to this point Paul has been insisting on the former point of view, and he insists on it still as against the human presumption which would plead its rights against God; but in the very act of doing so he passes over (in verse 22) to an intermediate standpoint, showing that God has not in point of fact acted arbitrarily, in a freedom uncontrolled by moral law; and from that again he advances in the following chapter to do full justice to the other side of the antinomy – the liberty and responsibility of man. The act of Israel, as well as the will of God, lies behind the painful situation he is trying to understand.”

Rom 9:20O man. Man as man, not Jew.That replies [ho antapoklrinomenos] ho (NT: 3588) antapokrinomenos (NT: 470). Only here and Luke 14:6. Literally, "to contradict in reply: to answer by contradicting." Thus, in the case of the dropsical man (Luke 14.), Jesus "answered" apokritheis (NT: 611) the thought in the minds of the lawyers and Pharisees by asking, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?"

Then He asked, "Who of you would refuse on the Sabbath to extricate his beast from the pit into which it has fallen?" And they were unable "to answer Him in reply: to answer by contradicting Him." So here, the word signifies to reply to an answer which God had already given, and implies, as Godet observes, the "spirit" of contention. (Vincent)

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE(9:20) “Replies” is the word antapokrinomai, made up of apokrinomai, “to give off a judgment,” thus, “to answer,” and he prefixed preposition anti “against,” thus, “to answer by contradicting.”

1. Denney remarks that the phrase O man “is not used contemptuously, but is set intentionally over against ‘God’: the objector is reminded emphatically of what he is, and of the person to whom he is speaking. It is not for a man to adopt this tone toward God.”

35


2. The adaptability of the illustration of a lump of clay in the potter’s hand to the idea of man in God’s hand is seen in Vincent’s note: “Lump, from phurao, ‘to mix so as to make into dough.’ Hence any substance mixed with water and kneaded.

3. Philo uses it of the human frame as compounded. By the lump is here meant human nature with its moral possibilities,

4. “But not yet conceived of in its definite, individual, moral stamp’ (Meyer). 5. The figure of man as clay molded by God carries us back to the earliest traditions of the creation

of man (Genesis 2:7). According to primitive ideas man is regarded as issuing from the earth. (Wuest)

6. The traditions of Libya made the first human being spring from the plains heated by the sun. 7. The Egyptians declared the Nile mud, exposed to the heat of the sun, brought forth gems which

sprang up as the bodies of men. A subsequent divine operation endowed these bodies with soul and intellect, and the divine fashioner appears upon some monuments molding clay, wherewith to form man, upon a potter’s wheel.

8. The Peruvians called the first man ‘animated earth;’ 9. And the Mandans of North America related that the Great Spirit molded two figures of clay,

which he dried and animated with the breath of his mouth, one receiving the name First Man, the other that of companion.”

Note: I would like to inject the words that God gave to Job.Job 38:1-2438 Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said: 2 "Who is this who darkens counsel by words without knowledge? 3 Now prepare yourself like a man;I will question you, and you shall answer Me. 4 "Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. 5 Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? 6 To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, 7 When the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy? 8 "Or who shut in the sea with doors, When it burst forth and issued from the womb; 9 When I made the clouds its garment,And thick darkness its swaddling band; 10 When I fixed My limit for it, And set bars and doors; 11 When I said, 'This far you may come, but no farther, And here your proud waves must stop!' 12 "Have you commanded the morning since your days began, And caused the dawn to know its place, 13 That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, And the wicked be shaken out of it? 14 It takes on form like clay under a seal, And stands out like a garment. 15 From the wicked their light is withheld, And the upraised arm is broken. 16 "Have you entered the springs of the sea? Or have you walked in search of the depths? 17 Have the gates of death been revealed to you? Or have you seen the doors of the shadow of death? 18 Have you comprehended the breadth of the earth? Tell Me, if you know all this. 19 "Where is the way to the dwelling of light? And darkness, where is its place, 20 That you may take it to its territory, That you may know the paths to its home? 21 Do you know it, because you were born then,Or because the number of your days is great? 22 "Have you entered the treasury of snow, Or have you seen the treasury of hail, 23 Which I have reserved for the time of trouble, For the day of battle and war? 24 By what way is light diffused, Or the east wind scattered over the earth? NKJVI think that you get the idea. Paul the Learner

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 - Romans 9:20, 21Ver. 20,21. "Shall the thing formed say to Him that formed it, Why hast Thou made me thus? Hath not the potter (Read Jeremiah 18:1-10) power, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?"

36


Here it is not to do away with free-will that he says this, but to show, up to what point we ought to obey God. For in respect of calling God to account, we ought to be as little disposed to it as the clay is. For we ought to abstain not from gainsaying or questioning only, but even from speaking or thinking of it at all, and to become like that lifeless matter, which followeth the potter's hands, and lets itself be drawn about anywhere he may please. And this is the only point he applied the illustration to, not, that is, to any enunciation of the rule of life, but to the complete obedience and silence enforced upon us. And this we ought to observe in all cases, that we are not to take the illustrations quite entire, but after selecting the good of them, and that for which they were introduced, to let the rest alone.

As, for instance, when he says, "He couched, he lay down as a lion;" (Numbers 24:9) let us take out the indomitable and fearful part, not the brutality, nor any other of the things belonging to a lion. And again, when He says, "I will meet them as a bereaved bear" (Hosea 13:8), let us take the vindictiveness. And when he says, "our God is a consuming fire" (Deuteronomy 4:24; and Hebrews 12:29), the wasting power exerted in punishing. So also here must we single out the clay, the potter, and the vessels. And when he does go on to say, "Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?"

Do not suppose that this is said by Paul as an account of the creation, nor as implying a necessity over the will, but to illustrate the sovereignty and difference of dispensations; for if we do not take it in this way, divers incongruities will follow:

1. For if here he were speaking about the will, 2. And those who are good and those not so, 3. He will be Himself the Maker of these, 4. And man will be free from all responsibility.

And at this rate, Paul will also be shown to be at variance with himself, as he always bestows chief honor upon free choice. There is nothing else then which he here wishes to do, save to persuade the hearer to yield entirely to God, and at no time to call Him to account for anything whatever. For as the potter (he says) of the same lump makes what he pleases, and no one forbids it; thus also when God, of the same race of men, punishes some, and honored others, be not thou curious nor meddlesome herein, but worship only, and imitate the clay. And as it followeth the hands of the potter, so do thou also the mind of Him that so ordered things.

For He Worketh nothing at random, or mere hazard, though thou be ignorant of the secret of His Wisdom. Yet thou allows the other of the same lump to make divers things, and finds no fault: but of Him you demand an account of His punishments and honors, and will not allow Him to know who is worthy and who is not so; but since the same lump is of the same substance, you assert that there are the same dispositions. And, how monstrous this is! And yet not even is it on the potter that the honor and the dishonor of the things made of the lump depends, but upon the use made by those that handle them, so here also it depends on the free choice. Still, as I said before, one must take this illustration to have one bearing only, which is that one should not contravene God, but yield to His incomprehensible Wisdom.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 - Romans 9:21

37


For the examples ought to be greater than the subject, and than the things on account of which they are brought forward, so as to draw on the hearer better. Since if they were not greater and did not mount far above it, he could not attack as he ought, and shame the objectors. However, their ill-timed obstinacy he silenced in this way with becoming superiority. And then he introduces his answer. Now what is the answer? (Chrysostom)

(9:21) the word “vessel” is skeuos, “a vessel such as a receptacle, household utensil, the tackle and armament of ships, an implement,” here, a human being as an implement or utensil to be used of God for a special purpose.

NOTE JOB’S ANSWER‘Moreover the Lord answered Job, and said, Shall he that contends with the Almighty instruct him? He that reproves God let him answer it. Then Job answered the Lord, and said, Behold I am vile; what shall I answer thee? I will lay mine hand upon my mouth.’ Job 40:1-4 Read Job chapters 38, 39

(9:21) As the potter molds some clay into a utensil to be used for noble purposes such as eating, and other clay to be used for ignoble purposes such as a depository for refuse, so God is sovereign in His use of an incorrigible such as Pharaoh for the purpose of demonstrating His power in the case of such an evil character, hardening his heart by forcing him to an issue which he did not want to meet, and in His use of Moses, the man meek above all men on the face of the earth, demonstrating His grace in using him to His glory. “The thing formed” is plasma, from which we derive our word “plastic.”

Rom 9:21To make one vessel unto honor and another unto dishonor [poieesai ho men eis timeen skenos ho de eis antimian] poieesai (NT: 4160) ho (NT: 3588) men (NT: 3303) eis (NT: 1519) timeen (NT: 5092) skeuos (NT: 4632), ho (NT: 3588) de (NT: 1161) eis (NT: 1519) atimian (NT: 819). The English Revised Version (1885), more correctly, "to make one part a vessel unto honor, and another part," etc. For "vessel," see the note at 1 Peter 3:7; compare Matt 12:29; Acts 9:15. The "vessel" here is the one which has just come from the potter's hand. Those in Rom 9:22 have been in household use. (Vincent)

Translation by Wuest‘Then you will say to me, Why does He still persist in finding fault? For with respect to His counsel, who has taken a permanent stand against it? O man; nay, surely, as for you, who are you who contradicts God? The plastic material shall not say to the one who molds it, Why did you make me thus, shall it? Or, does not the potter possess authority over the clay, out of the same lump to make on the one hand an instrument which is for honorable purposes, and on the other hand, one which is for dishonorable uses? Romans 9:19-21

NOTE: I want to explain what I am doing in these verses:1. First I am giving you the Scripture written in Italics.2. Then in [ ] I am giving you the Greek letters.3. Then following this I am putting the Greek letters into English [this is called Transliteration].4. You will find the following (NT then a number). The NT stands for New Testament [Strong’s].5. Then you will find the meaning of this word also in Italics.6. Finally you will find how the word as it is used in the context.

Paul the Learner

38


ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 - Romans 9:22, 23, 24Ver. 22, 23, 24. "What if God, willing to show His wrath, and to make His power known, endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had afore prepared unto glory, even us, whom He hath chosen, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles."

What he means is somewhat as follows. Pharaoh was a vessel of wrath, that is, a man who by his own hard-heartedness had kindled the wrath of God. For after enjoying much long-suffering, he became no better, but remained unimproved. Wherefore he calleth him not only "a vessel of wrath," but also one "fitted for destruction." That is, fully fitted indeed, but by his own proper self.

1. For neither had God left out aught of the things likely to recover him, 2. Nor did he leave out aught of those that would ruin him, 3. And put him beyond any forgiveness. 4. Yet still, though God knew this,

"He endured him with much long-suffering," being willing to bring him to repentance. For had He not willed this, then He would not have been thus long-suffering. But as he [Pharaoh] would not use the long-suffering in order to repentance, but fully fitted himself for wrath, He [God] used him for the correction of others, through the punishment inflicted upon him making them better, and in this way setting forth His power. For that it is not God's wish that His power be so made known, but in another way, by His benefits, namely, and kindnesses, he had shown above in all possible ways. For if Paul does not wish to appear powerful in this way ("not that we should appear approved," he says, "but that ye should do that which is honest,") (2 Corinthians 13:7), much less doth God.

But after that be had shown long-suffering, that He might lead to repentance, but he [Pharaoh] did not repent, He [God] suffered him a long time, that He might display at once His goodness and His power, even if that man were not minded to gain anything from this great long-suffering. As then by punishing this man, who continued incorrigible, He showed His power, so by having pitied those who had done many sins but repented, He manifested His love toward man. But it does not say, love towards man, but glory, to show that this is especially God's glory, and for this He was above all things earnest. But in saying, "which He had afore prepared unto glory," he does not mean that all is God's doing.

Since if this were so, there were nothing to hinder all men from being saved. But he is setting forth again His foreknowledge, and doing away with the difference between the Jews and the Gentiles. And on this topic again he grounds a defense of his statement, which is no small one. For it was not in the case of the Jews only that some men perished, and some were saved, but with the Gentiles also this was the case. Wherefore he does not say, all the Gentiles, but, "of the Gentiles," nor, all the Jews, but, "of the Jews." As then Pharaoh became a vessel of wrath by his own lawlessness, so did these become vessels of mercy by their own readiness to obey.

For though the more part is of God, still they also have contributed themselves some little. Whence he does not say either, vessels of well-doing, or vessels of boldness ( parrhsia$ ), but "vessels of mercy," to show that the whole is of God. For the phrase, "it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runneth," even if it comes in the course of the objection, still, were it said by Paul, would create no difficulty, Because when he says, "it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runneth," he does not deprive us of free-will, but shows that all is not one's own, for that it requires grace from above.

(Chrysostom)39


ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 - Romans 9:24For it is binding on us to will, and also to run: but to confide not in our own labors, but in the love of God toward man. And this he has expressed elsewhere. "Yet not I, but the grace which was with me." (1 Corinthians 15:10.), And he well says, "Which He had afore prepared unto glory." For since they reproached them with this, that they were saved by grace, and thought to make them ashamed, he far more than sets aside this insinuation. For if the thing brought glory even to God, much more to them through whom God was glorified. But observe his forbearance, and unspeakable wisdom. But those that obtained mercy he draws from the people of the Jews.

And besides, he also has spoken in a sufficient way in God's behalf, because:1. Though He knew very well that the nation was fitting itself as a vessel of destruction, still He

contributed all on His part, His patience, His long-suffering, and that not merely long-suffering, but "much long-suffering;" yet still he was not minded to state it barely against the Jews.

2. Whence then are some vessels of wrath, and some of mercy? Of their own free choice. God, however, being very good, shows the same kindness to both. For it was not those in a state of salvation only to whom He showed mercy,

3. But also Pharaoh, as far as His part went. For of the same long-suffering, both they and he had the advantage. And if he was not saved, it was quite owing to his own will: since, as for what concerned God, he had as much done for him as they who were saved.

4. Having then given to the question that answer which was furnished by facts, in order to give his discourse the advantage of other testimony in its favor, he introduces the prophets also making the same declarations aforetime. For Hosea, he says, of old put this in writing, as follows:

(Chrysostom)Rom 9:22Willing theloon (NT: 2309). "Although" willing, not "because." Referring not to "the determinate purpose" of God, but to His "spontaneous will" growing out of His holy character. In the former sense, the meaning would be that God's long-suffering was designed to enhance the final penalty. The emphatic position of "willing" prepares the way for the contrast with "long-suffering." Though this holy will would lead Him to show His wrath, yet He withheld His wrath and "endured."

1. Vessels of wrath [skeuee orgees] skeuee (NT: 4632) orgees (NT: 3709). Not "filled with wrath," nor "prepared to serve for a manifestation of divine wrath;" but "appertaining to wrath." Such as by their own acts have fallen under His wrath. Compare Ps 2:9.

2. Fitted kateertismena (NT: 2675). Literally, "adjusted." See the note on "mending," Matt 4:21; "perfect," Matt 21:16; Luke 6:40; 1 Peter 5:10. Not "fitted by God for destruction," but in an adjectival sense, "ready, ripe" for destruction, the participle denoting a present state previously formed, but giving no hint of "how" it has been formed.

3. An agency of some kind must be assumed. That the objects of final wrath had themselves a hand in the matter may be seen from 1 Thess 2:15-16. That the hand of God is also operative may be inferred from the whole drift of the chapter.

40


ROMANS CHAPTER NINE SECTION THREERomans 9:22"The apostle has probably chosen this form because the being ready certainly arises from a continual reciprocal action between human sin and the divine judgment of blindness and hardness. Every development of sin is a net-work of human offences and divine judgments" (Lange). (Vincent)

(9:22) the Word “and” presents a difficulty in interpretation as to just what the connection is. Westcott and Hort omit it from their text on the single authority of the manuscript B [Codex Vaticanus].

‘What if God, [If the willing the God] willing to shew His wrath, [to-in-show the indignation] and to make His power known, [and to-knowize the able of-Him] endured with much longsuffering [carries in much far-feeling] the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction [instruments of-indignation having-been down-equipped into destruction]. And that He might make known the riches of His glory [And {B omits and} that He-should-be-knowing the riches of-the esteem of-Him] on the vessels of mercy, [on instruments of-mercy] which He had afore prepared unto glory [which He-before-makes-ready into esteem].’ Romans 9:22, 23 + Concordant

Note: You have three Greek Manuscripts to read from and to check against one another for the meaning of a verse. One of the Manuscripts doesn’t have a certain word, but the other two has this word in the text. Now you can choose to only state the one Manuscript and say that ‘it is not found in the ancient texts’ or you can tell the truth and say, one of the three doesn’t have this word in it, but the other two does have it. So you choose to either add it or take it away. Paul the Learner

Rom 9:23And that He might make known. The connection is variously explained.

1. Some make "and that" dependent on "He endured:" "If, willing to show His wrath God endured and also that."

2. Others make "that" dependent on "fitted:" "Vessels fitted to destruction and also that He might make known," etc.

3. Godet supplies "He called" from Rom 9:24: "And called that lie might make known," etc. 4. The difficulty is resolved by the omission of kai (NT: 2532) "and." 5. So Westcott and Hort, on the single authority of Coded Vaticanus (B). 6. See the English Revised Version (1885), in the margin. Notice ‘And’ is in there.

Paul the Learner

His glory. See the note at Rom 3:23. Godet thinks the phrase was suggested by Moses' request, "Show me thy glory," Ex 33:18.

Afore prepared proeetoimasen (NT: 4282). Only here and Eph 2:10. (1). The studied difference in the Nse of this term instead of katartizoo (NT: 2675) "to fit" (Rom 9:22), cannot be overlooked. (2). The verb is not equivalent to "foreordained" (3). Proorizoo (NT: 4309). "Fitted," by the adjustment of parts, emphasizes the concurrence of all the elements of the case to the final result. (4). "Prepared" is more general. In the former case "the result" is indicated; in the latter, "the preciousness."

41


ROMANS CHAPTER NINERomans 9:23(5). Note "before" prepared, while "before" is wanting in Rom 9:22. In this passage the direct agency of God is distinctly stated; in the other the agency is left indefinite. Here "a single act" is indicated; there "a process." (6). The simple verb hetoimazoo (NT: 2090) often indicates, as Meyer remarks, "to constitute qualitatively;" i.e., to arrange with reference to the reciprocal quality of the thing prepared, and that for which it is prepared. See Luke 1:17; John 14:2; 1 Cor 2:9; 2 Tim 2:21. (7). "Ah, truly," says Reuss, "if the last word of the Christian revelation is rained in the image of the potter and the clay, it is a bitter derision of all the deep needs and legitimate desires of a soul aspiring toward its God. This would be at once a satire of reason upon herself and the suicide of revelation. (8). But it is neither the last word nor the only word; nor has it any immediate observable bearing on the concrete development of our lives. It is not the only word, because, in nine-tenths of Scripture, it is as wholly excluded from the sphere of revelation as though it had been never revealed at all; and it is not the last word, because, throughout the whole of Scripture, and nowhere more than in the writings of the very apostle who has faced this problem with the most heroic inflexibility, we see bright glimpses of something beyond. (9). How little we were intended to draw logical conclusions from the metaphor, is shown by the fact that we are living souls, not dead clay; and Paul elsewhere recognized a power, both within and without our beings, by which, as by an omnipotent alchemy,(10). “heart vessels can become precious, and vessels of earthenware be transmuted into vessels of gold" (Farrar). See note at end of Rom 11. (Vincent)

Translation by Wuest‘But if, as in the case, desiring to demonstrate His wrath and to make known His power He endured with much long suffering instruments of wrath fitted for destruction, in order that He might make known the wealth of His glory upon instruments of mercy which were previously prepared for glory, even us whom He called not only from among the Jews but also from among the Gentiles. Romans 9:22-24

Homily 16 - Romans 9:25, 26, 27Ver. 25. "I will call them My people, which were not My people; and her beloved, which was not beloved."

Here to prevent their saying, that you are deceiving us here with specious reasoning, he calls Hosea to witness, who crieth and saith, "I will call them My people, who were not My people." (Hos. 2:23 .) Who then are the not-people? Plainly, the Gentiles. And who the not-beloved? The same again. However, he says, that they shall become at once people, and beloved, and sons of God.

Ver. 26. "For even they shall be called," he says, "the children of the living God."

But if they should assert that this was said of those of the Jews who believed, even then the argument stands. For if with those who after so many benefits were hard-hearted and estranged, and had lost their being as a people, so great a change was wrought, what is there to prevent even those who were not estranged after being taken to Him, but were originally aliens, from being called, and, provided they obey, from being counted worthy of the same blessings? Having then done with Hosea, he does not content himself with him only, but also brings Isaiah in after him. sounding in harmony with him.

42


Ver. 27. "For Esaias," he says, "crieth concerning Israel."

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 – Romans 9:27That is, speaks out boldly, and uses no dissimulation. Why then lay a charge against us, when they afore declared the same thing with more than trumpet's loudness? And what does Isaiah cry? "Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved. (Isaiah 10:22.)

Do you see that he too does not say that all are to be saved, but that those that are worthy shall? For I regard not the multitude, he means, nor does a race diffused so far distress me, but those only do I save that yield themselves worthy of it. And he does not mention the "sand of the sea" without a reason, but to remind them of the ancient promise whereof they had made themselves unworthy. Why then are you troubled, as though the promise had failed, when all the Prophets show that it is not all that are to be saved? Then he mentions the mode of the salvation also.

1. Observe the accuracy of the Prophet, 2. And the judgment of the Apostle, 3. What a testimony he has cited, 4. How exceedingly apposite!

For it not only shows us that those to be saved are some and not all, but also adds the way they are to be saved. How then are they to be saved, and how will God count them worthy of the benefit? (Chrysostom)

5) God's Testimony in Hosea and Isaiah to an Extension and Limitation of His Saving Work. Rom 9:25-29.The us in verse 24 refers to those whom God has called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles. The writer now turns to the OT to show that it supports such a call.

Rom 9:25-26Paul quotes Hos 2:23; 1:10, passages originally addressed to the ten tribes. The words not my people and not beloved were spoken to the ten tribes because of their departure from the Lord. They had become like the Gentiles. God promised the ten tribes that one day they would be called sons of the living God in the very place where they had been called "not my people." The apostle takes this quotation from the LXX and applies it to the Gentiles.

Rom 9:27-28The writer turns to the testimony of Isaiah about Israel and quotes from Isa 10:22-23. He uses the LXX, which in Isa 10:23 is quite different from the Hebrew text. But on the main point for which Paul is quoting this passage, the Hebrew and LXX agree. Only a remnant will be saved (LXX), will turn back, (Heb text), shall return (AV), i.e., turn back to God. Paul develops this theme further in Rom 11. Difficulty has been found in interpreting Rom 9:28 because of the language and textual variation. The words "in righteousness: because a short work" of the AV are not found in the best texts.

Here are two possible ways of translating and interpreting this verse (see Arndt, suntemno, p. 800):(1) The Lord will act by accomplishing his word and by shortening or cutting off. The shortening can be construed as fulfilling the promises to a limited degree or as shortening the nation into a remnant.

43


(2) The Lord will act by closing the account and shortening (the time). This means that God will not prolong indefinitely the period of his long-suffering, but that his judgment will come. In Paul's context here, the second interpretation seems the better. (Wycliffe)

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE‘For He will finish the work, and cut if short in righteousness [Saying for together-finishing and together-cutting will-be-doing] because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth [Master of the land and according-as has-before-declared]. Romans 9:28 + Concordant

Rom 9:25That my people which was not my people [tonou laon mou loan mou] tonou (NT: 3756) laon (NT: 2992) mou (NT: 3450), laon (NT: 2992) mou (NT: 3450). The Greek is much more condensed. "I will call the not-my-people my-people." See Hos 1:6-9. The reference is to the symbolical names given by the prophet to a son and daughter: "Lo Ammi not my people," and "Lo Ruhama not having obtained mercy."

The new people whom God will call "my people" will be made up from both Jews and Gentiles. Hosea, it is true, is speaking of the scattered Israelites only, and not of the Gentiles; but the ten tribes, by their lapse into idolatry had put themselves upon the same footing with the Gentiles, so that the words could be applied to both.

A principle of the divine government is enunciated "which comes into play everywhere when circumstances re-appear similar to those to which the statement was originally applied. The exiled Israelites being mingled with the Gentiles, and forming one homogeneous mass with them, cannot be brought to God separately from them. Isa 49:22 represents the Gentiles as carrying the sons of Israel in their arms, and their daughters on their shoulders, and consequently as being restored to grace along with them" (Godet). (Vincent)

Rom 9:25-3025 As He says also in Hosea:"I will call them My people, who were not My people,And her beloved, who was not beloved." 26 "And it shall come to pass in the place where it was said to them,' You are not My people,'There they shall be called sons of the living God."

27 Isaiah also cries out concerning Israel: "Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea,The remnant will be saved. 28 For He will finish the work and cut it short in righteousness,Because the LORD will make a short work upon the earth."

29 And as Isaiah said before:"Unless the LORD of Sabaoth had left us a seed,We would have become like Sodom,And we would have been made like Gomorrah."

Homily 16 - Romans 9:28, 2944


Ver. 28. "He will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness," he says, "because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth." (Isaiah 10:23, LXX.)

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 – Romans 28, 29What he means then is somewhat of this sort.

1. There is no need of fetching a circuit, and of trouble, and the vexation of the works of the Law,2. For the salvation is by a very short way. 3. For such is faith, it holds salvation in a few short words. 4. "For if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thine heart that God hath

raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." (Romans 10:9.) 5. Now you see what this, "the Lord shall make a short work (LXX. lit.) upon earth," is. 6. And what is indeed wonderful is, 7. That this short word carries with it not salvation only, but also righteousness.

Ver 29. "And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabbath had left us a seed, we had been as Sodom, and had been made like unto Gomorrah." (Isaiah 1:9.)

Here again he shows another thing, that not even those few were saved from their own resources. For they too would have perished, and met with Sodom's fate, that is, they would have had to undergo utter destruction (for they (of Sodom) were also destroyed root and branch, and left not even the slightest remnant of themselves,) and they too, he means, would have been like these, unless God had used much kindness to them, and had saved them by faith. And this happened also in the case of the visible captivity, the majority having been taken away captive and perished, and some few only being saved. (Chrysostom)

Israel's Wrong RighteousnessWhy had Israel so often failed God in the *Old Testament, with only a remnant surviving? Because they pursued the *law in terms of human effort (see comment on 9:29) instead of trusting in God, who transforms the heart. Although the term "faith" is rare in translations of the Old Testament (Paul already used most of the references in 1:17 and 4:3), Paul believes that the idea permeates the Old Testament, where God's people must respond to his *grace from their hearts.

9:30-32. Israel rightly sought the law but missed its point by stressing works rather than faith (see comment on 9:29) - faith was the law's point (3:21,31). The two approaches to the law (one right and the other wrong) are essential to Paul's argument (3:27; 8:2; 10:5-8).

9:33. Here Paul follows a common Jewish interpretive practice of blending texts together (Isaiah 8:14; 28:16). Because Isaiah 28:16 probably alludes back to Isaiah 8:14, Paul's blending of the two is especially reasonable, although perhaps only his Jewish readers caught what he was doing. The point is that the same stone that caused Israel to stumble (Isaiah 8:14, which also speaks of the stone as a sanctuary) would save those who believed (Isaiah 28:16). (From IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.)

Rom 9:30-33

45


30 Present Condition of Israel What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE33 As it is written:"Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense,And whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame." NKJV

(9:25, 26) the contents of these verses refer back to the fact that Paul includes the Gentiles with the Jews within the scope of God’s mercy. The “my people which were not my people” and the “beloved which was not beloved” are the Gentiles.

1. Alford says: “It is difficult to ascertain in what sense the apostle cites these two passages from Hosea as applicable to the Gentiles being called the people of God. That He does so is manifest from the words themselves and from the transition to the Jews in verse 27. In the prophet they are spoken of Israel…who after being rejected and put away, was to be again received into favor with God.”

He suggests that the explanation is as follows:1. “He (Paul) brings them forward to show that it is consonant with what we know of God’s

dealings, to receive as His people those who were formerly not His people;2. That this may now take place with regard to the Gentiles, as it was announced to happen with

regard to Israel, - and even more;3. That Israel in this as in so many other things were the prophetic mirror in which God

foreshowed on a small scale, His future dealings with mankind.”

Translation by Wuest‘As also in Hosea He says, I will call those not my people, my people, and those not beloved, beloved. And it shall come to be that in the place where it was said to them, Not my people are you, there they shall be called sons of the living God.’ Romans 9:25, 26

Rom 9:29Finally, in completing the OT picture of God's saving action, Paul quotes Isa 1:9 from the LXX. Where the LXX has "left us seed," the Hebrew text has "a very small remnant." If God had not left some, the nation Israel would have been blotted out. (Wycliffe)

Rom 9:271. Crieth krazei (NT: 2896). An impassioned utterance. See the note at Luke 18:39; compare John 7:28, 37; Acts 19:28; 23:6. Mostly of an inarticulate cry. "The prophet in awful earnestness, and as with a scream of anguish, cries over Israel" (Morison).2. Concerning huper (NT: 5228). Literally, "over," as proclaiming a judgment which hangs over Israel. (Vincent)

(9:27-29) Denney explains, “From the calling of the Gentiles, as foretold in prophecy, Paul passes now to the partial, but only partial, calling of Israel, as announced by the same authority. The Jews cannot quarrel with the situation in which they find themselves when it answers so exactly to the Word of

46


God.” Paul speaks of the remnant in Israel during its apostasy as a nation, elected to salvation by the sovereign grace of God.

Rom 9:28For the reading of the King James Version read as the English Revised Version (1885). "The Lord will execute His word upon the earth, finishing and cutting it short."

ROMANS CHAPTER NINERomans 9:28Difficulty arises on account of the variation in the Greek text and the difference between the readings adopted by the best authorities and the Septuagint, and again on account of the variation of the latter from the Hebrew.

The Hebrew reads: "Extirpation is decided, flowing with righteousness, for a consumption and decree shall the Lord of hosts make in the midst of all the land." The English Revised Version (1885) adopts the shorter reading of the Septuagint.

Work logon (NT: 3056). It does not mean "work," but "word, utterance, doctrine;" not "decree," which logos (NT: 3056) never means, though the idea may underlie it. Better "reckoning."

Finish ... cut short [sunteloon ... suntemnoon] sunteloon (NT: 4931) ... suntemnoon (NT: 4932). The preposition sun (NT: 4862) "together" signifies "summarily;" bringing to an end at the same time. Compare the peculiar word ekolobootheesan (NT: 2856) "should be shortened," in Matt 24:22, and see note. Omit "in righteousness." (Vincent)

Translation by Wuest‘And Isaiah cries in anguish concerning Israel, If the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, the remnant will be saved. For the Lord will execute His word upon the earth, finishing and cutting it short. And even as Isaiah said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us seed, we would in the case have become even as Sodom and been made like Gomorrah.’ Romans 9:27-29

C. Failure of Israel and success of the Gentiles. 9:30-10:21Rom 9:30-31Paul now takes up the relation of Israel and the Gentiles to righteousness faith, and salvation. He shows that this is a crucial matter because the Jews believed that since they were marked by circumcision as God's elect people, the Lord could not reject them.

1) Attainment by Gentiles of What Israel Missed. 9:30-33.Since God has called us, Christians (v. 24), from both Jews and Gentiles, what shall we say then about the attainment of righteousness by the Gentiles and Israel? The answer: We say or declare that the Gentiles, who were not striving for righteousness attained righteousness that is the righteousness which is because of faith. But Israel, although pursuing law that would produce righteousness, did not attain to law producing righteousness. Paul is very concise here. Nevertheless, notice that in verse 30 the word righteousness occurs three times. Believing Gentiles had found the key to man's relationship with God-righteousness that God bestows because of faith or trust (cf. Rom 3:21-26). Israel had pursued the principle of law (the Mosaic code was Israel's most treasured embodiment of this principle) in order to obtain righteousness, but they never attained to that righteousness.

47


Rom 9:32-33Why did Israel not attain to righteousness? Tragically the reply comes: because not from faith but as by works (they sought after righteousness). Faith or trust is important because of the object (Christ) believed and trusted. Israel rejected the object. They rejected (or stumbled at) the stone which causes men to stumble. In the warning note of Isa 8:14, Jehovah is the stone of stumbling to the majority of those in both houses of Israel. In the NT it is Christ who is the stone of stumbling (here and in 1 Peter 2:6-8).

ROMANS CHAPTER NINE33. Most of Paul's quotation in this verse is from the promise of Isa 28:16. But the apostle takes the language of warning from Isa 8:14 - a stumbling stone and rock of offence-and inserts this warning in the middle of the positive teaching about the stone in Isa 28:16, and then completes the verse.

The last clause of Rom 9:33 - And the one trusting in him will not be disappointed-introduces a ray of light into an otherwise dark picture. Such a positive response, however, was not that of Israel as a whole, for Israel stumbled at the stone that God placed in Zion.(From The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright © 1962 by Moody Press. All rights reserved.)

‘Therefore thus saith the Sovereign Lord: Behold I lay for the foundation of Sion a stone of inestimable worth – a chosen, precious corner stone for the foundations of it, and he who believeth shall not be ashamed.’ Isaiah 28:16 LXX‘For if thou hast put trust in Him, He will be to thee a sanctuary, and you shall not run against a stumbling stone, nor as under a falling rock. But as for the houses of Jacob, they are in a trap, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem are in a pit:’ Isaiah 8:14 LXX

Rom 9:30Attained katelaben (NT: 2638). See the note on "perceived," Acts 4:13, and "taketh," Mark 9:18; John 1:5. Compare "attained" efthasen (NT: 5348), Rom 9:31). The English Revised Version (1885): "arrive at." See the note at Matt 12:28. The meaning is substantially the same, only the imagery in the two words differs; (1). The former being that of "laying hold of a prize," (2). And the latter of "arriving at a goal." (3). The latter is appropriate to "following after," and is carried out in "stumbling" (Rom 9:32).(4). Even de (NT: 1161) or "and that." Subjoining something distinct and different from what precedes, though not sharply opposed to it. (5). Attained righteousness, "that is" not that arising from these works, but from faith.(Vincent)

(9:30-33) Denney introduces this section as follows; “We come now to the second main division of that part of the epistle in which Paul discusses the problem raised by the relation of the Jews to the Gospel. He has shown in chapter 9:6-29 that they have no claim as of right to salvation:

1. Their whole history, as recorded and interpreted in the Scriptures, exhibited God acting on quite a different principle;

2. He now proceeds to show more definitely that it was owing to their own guilt that they were rejected.

3. They followed, and persisted in following, a path on which salvation was not to be found;

48


4. They were inexcusable in doing so, inasmuch as God had made His way of salvation plain and accessible to all.”

There is no article [the] in the Greek text before “Gentiles.” Gentiles as a class of individuals are in view in contrast to Israel. “Followed” is the word dioko, “to run swiftly in order to catch some person or thing, to run after, pursue,” in a metaphorical sense, “to seek after eagerly, earnestly endeavor to acquire.”

ROMANS CHAPTER NINERomans 9:30-33This the Jews were doing but in the wrong way, by works. “Attained” is katalambano, “to lay hold of so as to make one’s own, to appropriate, take possession of.” Concerning the repetition of the word “righteousness,” Denney says; “The repetition of ‘righteousness’ is striking:

A. It is the one fundamental conception on which Paul’s gospel rests;B. The questions at issue between him and the Jews were questions as to what it was, and how it

was to be attained.”

Concerning the fact that the pagan Gentiles did not eagerly pursue after righteousness, Denney says, “Not an unfair description of the pagan races as contrasted with the Jews; how to be right with God was not their main interests.”

A GENTILE SHOWS GREAT FAITH IN JESUS‘And a certain centurion’s servant who was dear unto him, was sick, and ready to die…Lord, trouble not thyself: for I am not worthy that thou should enter under my roof: Wherefore neither thought I myself worthy to come unto thee: but say in a word, and my servant shall be healed…I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel…found the servant whole that had been sick.’

Luke 7:2, 6, 7-10. KJV

RIGHTEOUSNESS IN THE LAWDikaiosýn¢C. Righteousness in the Synagogue.

1. The Righteousness of God. The rabbis do not speak about God's righteousness along the lines of Rom 3:21. (Deut 33:21 is construed differently.) The Messiah is called righteousness with a connotation of mercy.

2. Righteousness as Human Action. For the rabbis this is especially almsgiving or benevolence, which is one of the most meritorious of works.

3. The Basis of the Rabbinic View. The underlying idea, discernible in the LXX, is that every observance of the law is meritorious. Standing before God depends on whether the good or bad predominates. Alms and works of charity are especially helpful. The last judgment decides whether merit or transgression is greater.

4. The Relation of the Justice of God to His Mercy. In Psalms of Solomon, Jubilees, and the like God's righteousness and mercy are related.

49


(a). God may exercise unexpected mercy in virtue of his righteousness. (b). The rabbis, too, state that the measure of mercy is greater than that of strict justice. (c). Righteousness, then, is thought of as mercy. (d). As mercy is better than legal rigidity even in human justice, so it is with God. (e). Yet uncertainty remains when divine justice and mercy are balanced against one another, (f). For in the first instance the two are sharply contrasted.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINERIGHTEOUSNESS IN CHRIST

Dikaiosýn¢1. Origin and Presupposition of the Pauline Message of Justification. Legal righteousness forms the starting point. The law is a law of righteousness because it demands righteousness (Rom 9:30). Those who do righteousness live by it (10:5). But this is impossible except for the relative blamelessness of Phil 3:6. Dikaiosýn¢ cannot be achieved by way of law (Gal 2:21).

Salvation is by divine mercy, not in virtue of deeds that we have done in righteousness (Titus 3:5). In the struggle to understand this, which leads him into conflict with a legalistic Judaism, Paul comes to a new and comprehensive concept of the righteousness of God which offers a new insight into the relation of the law and Christ.

The roots are to be found in the OT teaching concerning the judgment of God, the sinful bondage of humanity, the collapse of synagogue piety, and the dependence on God's gracious intervention in Christ if there are to be righteous people who enter into true fellowship with God.

2. The Meaning of the Pauline Use of dikaiosýn¢ theoú and the Main Elements in the Doctrine of Justification. As used by Paul, the theoú in the term dikaiosýn¢ theoú is a subjective genitive. This is God's righteousness, into which we are set. It is a conjunction of judgment and grace which God demonstrates by showing righteousness, imparting it as forgiveness, and drawing us into his kingdom, as the last judgment will fully manifest. (From Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, abridged edition, Copyright © 1985 by William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. All rights reserved.)

With reference to the Gentiles appropriating a righteousness which comes by faith, Denney remarks: “It is not surprising that a righteousness of this sort should be found even by those who are not in quest of it: its nature is that it is brought and offered to men, and faith is simply the act of appropriating it.”

Dikaiosýn¢ righteousness continued in Christ.a. The Whole of Humanity. This righteousness of God is not just an individual experience; it is a universal happening in Christ on behalf of the whole race.

b. The Divine Action. It is not just an attribute but shows God at work with an efficacy no less than that of his wrath (cf. 1:17; 3:5, 17, 25-26).

50


c. The Center in the Cross. It is in the cross that the saving action takes place. But the resurrection is closely associated with the crucifixion, so that justification is not just a declaration, but has a historical core. For this reason Christ may be called our dikaiosýn¢ (1 Cor 1:30; cf. Rom 10:4).

d. God both Is and Demonstrates Righteousness. God is righteous (Rom 3:25), but his righteousness is an expression of grace that also displays his justice in the concrete form of an act of atonement (Gal 3:13; 2 Cor 5:21; Rom 8:3). Thus justice and grace are actively united for all time and at the deepest level. This means that antinomian laxity is excluded, for forgiveness is an act of judgment which expresses God's uncompromising No to sin. God's righteousness is judicial and gracious at the same time in the one act of salvation in Christ.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEe. Forensic Justification. God's righteousness means justification. Righteousness is forensically ascribed to believers. God's judgment achieves this by remission. The justification is no mere "as if," for God's sentence is sovereign. Nor is it the attainment of moral rectitude. The justified are "right" before God.

The forensic element, of course, is only a figure, for we are not in the sphere of human justice, but are dealing with the divine Judge who is also unlimited King. We have thus to transpose the legal aspect into the divine key. An act of grace replaces ordinary legal procedure. But this grace, as the legal concept shows, is not capricious.

It conforms to true right. The image of God as Judge is tenable inasmuch as human law does to some extent express imperishable divine norms. But it must be understood in terms of the divine act that strictly finds no human parallel. (From Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, abridged edition, Copyright © 1985 by William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. All rights reserved.)

Speaking of Israel in pursuit of the law of righteousness, the same authority [Denney] is most helpful; “The idea is not that Israel was in quest of a law of righteousness, in the sense of a rule by the observance of which righteousness would be attained.”

Homily 16 - Romans 9:30, 31Ver. 30, 31. "What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness."

Here at last is the clearest answer. For since he had used a proof as well from facts ("for they are not all Israel that are of Israel") as from the case of the forefathers Jacob and Esau, and from the prophets Hosea and Isaiah, he further gives the most decisive answer, after first adding to the perplexity. The points discussed, then, are two;

1. One that the Gentiles attained, 2. And the other that they attained it without following after it, that is, without taking pains about

it. And again in the Jews' case also there are two difficulties of the same kind;

1. One that Israel attained not,

51


2. The other that, though they took pains, they attained not. Whence also his use of words is more emphatically. For he does not say that they had, but that they "attained to righteousness." For what is especially new and unusual is, that they who followed after it attained not, but they which followed not after it attained. And he seems to be indulging them by saying, "followed after." But afterwards he strikes the blow home. For since he had a strong answer to give them, he had no fear of making the objection a little harsher. Hence he doth not speak of faith either, and the righteousness ensuing thereon, but shows that before the faith even, on their own ground they were worsted and condemned.

For thou, O Jew, he says, hast not found even the righteousness which was by the Law. For thou hast transgressed it, and become liable to the curse. But these that came not through the Law, but by another road, have found a greater righteousness than this, that, namely, which is of faith. And this he had also said before.

ROMANS CHAPTER NINEHomily 16 – Romans 9:30, 31"For if Abraham was justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God" (Romans 4): so showing that the other righteousness was greater than this. Before, then, I said that there were two difficulties, but now they have even become three questions:

1. That the Gentiles found righteousness, 2. And found it without following after it, 3. And found a greater than that of the Law.

These same difficulties are again felt in the Jews' case with an opposite view. 1. That Israel did not find, 2. And though he took pains he did not find, 3. And did not find even the less.

Having then thrust his hearer into perplexity, he proceeds to give a concise answer, and tells him the cause of all that is said. When then is the cause? (Chrysostom)

(9:31) Every Israelite believed himself to be, and already was, in possession of such a law. It must rather be that Israel aimed incessantly at bringing its conduct up to the standard of a law in which righteousness was certainly held out, but was never able to achieve it purpose. The law of righteousness, the unattained goal of Israel’s efforts, is of course the Mosaic Law; but it is referred to, not definitely, but in its characteristic qualities, as law, and as exhibiting and enjoining (not bestowing) righteousness. (They) did not attain to, arrive at, that law – it remained out of their reach. Legal religion proved a failure.”

The stumbling stone against which Israel stumbled was the necessity of faith in Messiah; remember under Righteousness in the Law that ‘the Messiah is called righteousness with a connotation of mercy.’ But they would not recognize the one who fulfilled all the scriptures concerning the Messiah, was none other than Jesus who was called the Christ [anointed one – Messiah]. Paul the Learner

Godet says; “In their foolish course Israel thought that they were advancing on a clear path, and lo! All at once there was found in this way an obstacle upon which they were broken; and this obstacle was the very Messiah whom they had so long invoked in all their prayers.”

52


Faith in the Messiah was also a rock of offence. Denney explains; “The offence of the Cross [‘cursed is every one who hangs on a tree], at which they stumbled, is not simply the fact that it is a cross, whereas they expected a Messianic throne; [they confused the first coming with His final coming to conquer all the world see Revelation 19:11-17 also remember the disciples asking the question, ‘…Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?’ Acts 1:6]. The Cross offended them because, as interpreted by Paul, it summoned them to begin their religious life, from the very beginning, at the foot of the Crucified, and with the sense upon their hearts of an infinite debt to Him which no ‘works’ could every repay.”

Rom 9:33Offence skandalou (NT: 4625). See the notes at Matt 5:29; 16:23.Shall not be ashamed [ou kataischuntheesetai] ou (NT: 3756) kataischuntheesetai (NT: 2617). The Hebrew in Isa 28:16 is, "shall not make haste, or flee hastily." The quotation combines Isa 8:4 and Isa 28:16. (From Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1997 by Biblesoft)

ROMANS CHAPTER NINETranslation by Wuest‘What then shall we say? That Gentiles, the ones who do not earnestly endeavor to acquire a righteousness, appropriated righteousness, in face, a righteousness which is out of a source of faith. But Israel, earnestly endeavoring to acquire a law of righteousness, did not measure up to the law.

Because of what? Because, not out of a source of faith but even as out of a source of works (they sought to acquire it). They stumbled up against the stone which is a stumbling stone, even as it stands written, Behold I place in Zion a stone, a stumbling stone, and a rock of offense. And the one who places his faith upon it will not be put shame.’ Romans 9:30-33

Homily 16 - Romans 9:32, 33Ver. 32. "Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the Law."

This is the clearest answer in the passage, which if he had said immediately upon starting he would not have gained so easy a hearing. But since it is after many perplexities, and preparations, and demonstrations that he sets it down, and after using countless preparatory steps, he has at last made it more intelligible, and also more easily admitted. For this he says is the cause of their destruction: "Because it was not by faith, but as it were by the works of the Law," that they wished to be justified. And he does not say, "by works," but, "as it were by the works of the Law," to show that they had not even this righteousness.

"For they stumbled at that stumbling-stone;"

Ver. 33. "As it is written, Behold I lay in Sion a stumbling-stone, and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on Him shall not be ashamed."

You see again how it is from faith that the boldness comes, and the gift is universal; since it is not of the Jews only that this is said, but also of the whole human race. For every one, he would say, whether Jew, or Grecian, or Scythian, or Thracian, or whatsoever else he may be, will, if he believes, enjoy the privilege of great boldness. But the wonder in the Prophet is that he foretells not only that they should believe, but also that they should not believe. For to stumble is to disbelieve. As in the former passage

53


he points out them that perish and them that are saved, where he says, "If the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, the remnant shall be saved. And, If the Lord of Sabbath had not left us a seed, we should have been as Sodom."

And, "He hath called not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles;" so here too he implies that some will believe, and some will stumble. But stumbling comes of not taking heed, of gaping after other things. Since then they did give heed to the Law, they stumbled on the stone, "And a stone of stumbling and rock of offence" he calls it from the character and end of those that believe not. (From Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 1, Volume 11, PC Study Bible formatted electronic database Copyright © 2003, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Points to Ponder:1. God is Holy and Righteous.2. The Jews thought that they could get God’s righteousness by obeying the Law, which they failed

to do.3. The Gentiles knew nothing, but believed God and received His Righteousness.

Paul the Learner

ROMANS CHAPTER NINESummary.The Jews concept for reaching God was only one way and that was to become a Jewish proselyte that was the only way. Now here comes this Jewish Pentecostal preacher who is saying, no there is another way and I want to show you this way through the Old Testament Scriptures, which laid a foundation for this belief. To do this Paul must establish certain points:

1. Paul must show through the Jewish history the two paths.1. He quotes in 9:9 the verse in Genesis 18:10 “…Sarah will have a son…”2. Now he speaks in 9:10 the verse in Genesis 25:21 “…Rebecca conceived by Isaac two sons…”3. Now in 9:11 he quotes Deuteronomy 7:6“…the holy people [Jews] are a special people to God.4. Now in 9:12 he establishes the separation in Genesis 25:23 “the elder shall serve the younger.”5. Conclusion in 9:13 is in Malachi 1:2, 3 “Loved Jacob and hated Esau.”

Note: So from two natural sons from Abraham through Isaac we find that God accepts the one and does not accept the other. So laying this foundation, the apostle then in 9:6, 7 showing the two types of children and now bring the thought to:(1) The natural posterity of Abraham [Jews as the sand]. (2) And the spiritual children of Abraham [Gentiles as the stars of heaven].

As there were two lines in the lineage of Isaac there are now two lines in the lineage that God accepts as they both accept God’s sacrifice at Calvary which was Jesus Christ [Messiah]. Compare Romans 4:1-3; Galatians 3:6-7 and John 8:37-39. Paul the Learner

Next Paul will show that God’s mercy is under His sovereign will and not according to what we may think or even do to change God’s mind. Paul points out the following:

1. In 9:15 “will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. [Exodus 33:19]. God makes the decision as we also see in 9:16.

2. Now he quotes Exodus 9:17 showing that God raised up Jesus from the dead to show forth His power and that His name would be declared throughout all of the earth.

54


Now Paul must show through the scriptures that the blinding of the nation of Israel and the mercy that God gives to the Gentiles is foretold in the prophets. So again Paul quotes from:

1. Hosea 2:23 showing that God gave mercy and accepted the Gentiles into His family. 9:252. Hosea 1:10 it has been said the Gentiles were not His people but now God calls them sons. 9:263. Isaiah 10:22 Paul showing again the remnant of Israel will return which we saw in 1948. 9:274. Isaiah 10:23 Paul next shows that God is going to make a short work [consumption]. 9:285. Isaiah 1:9 Paul shows unless God had left a small remnant (144,000 Rev. 7) Israel no more 9:296. Isaiah 8:14 Paul speaking of Jesus Christ as a stone of stumbling and rock of offence. 9:337. Isaiah 54:4 + Daniel 12:2 don’t accept Christ and shame is all you will have to look for. 9:33

The apostle Paul was establishing his doctrine from the Old Testament to show that his doctrine was not new by any means but well established throughout the Old Testament as we have seen today.

Paul the Learner

55

ROMANS - Lakeside Ministries€¦ · Web viewLuther's Preface to Romans. In chapters 9; 10 and...

Documents

Transcript of ROMANS - Lakeside Ministries€¦ · Web viewLuther's Preface to Romans. In chapters 9; 10 and...