SECTION INTRODUCTION (I think this is very important)Our Romans study changes course beginning right here. No one should study Romans chapters 9-11 without a having clear and solid understanding of Romans 1-8. Doing so will cause confusion and frustration. You simply can't safely move forward in this letter without clearly understanding the first eight chapters.
This second half of Romans drastically changes focus from the first half. Paul shifts his attention from the relationship of law, grace, sin, and righteousness (the primary themes of Chapters 1-8) and turns toward the topic of election. One simple indicator of this shift is that in Romans 1-8 the "law" appears 71 times in 44 verses. in Romans 9-16 "law" appears only 7 times in 6 verses.
Romans 9-11 raise some of the most difficult theological questions man has ever asked.
- Does God hand-select or elect certain people to be saved?
- Does God hand-select or elect certain people to not be saved?
For a Jewish audience, the topic of election naturally involves discussing God’s covenant and promises to Abraham and Israel (his descendants).
Some commentators and scholars believe that Romans 9-11 are out of place in our records – as if Paul dropped his scrolls and put them back together in the wrong order. Others believe that those three chapters were added to the letter at a much later date, maybe by a completely different author.
Why do people feel the need to suggest hypotheses like this? Because those interpreters can't see the continuous flow of thought between Romans 1-8 and Romans 9-11.
But to me, the chapters flow easily and clearly. I think the trouble some have had with the continuity results of them misunderstanding the first 8 chapters… interpreting them according to presuppositions and then not being able to fit those presuppositions into the text of chapter 9. I believe if chapters 1-8 are understood properly, there is a natural flow into the new focus of chapter 9.
So, before I dig into this text I'd like to establish that continuity. If you care to understand my interpretation of this text (which impacts my interpretation of the rest of Romans), you'll need to understand my starting point.
To begin, look back at Chapter 8. In that chapter, Paul brought up the idea that God knew ahead of time who would be saved, and that He chose those people to live purposeful lives:
“
For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified... Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies” (
Romans 8:29-30, 33)
Paul clearly said there that God knew ahead of time who would submit to Him. But don't jump to conclusions too quickly…
Yesterday morning I watched a news story on TV and saw the same story this evening. This evening
I knew what was going to happen, but I didn't
cause it to happen. Knowing that something will happen isn’t the same as causing it to happen.
God did predestine people - those He knew ahead of time would submit to Him - to be like Christ.
But He didn’t predestine them to submit.
He predestined them to be conformed to Christ's image after they submitted. That distinction is loaded and it is critical to comprehend it. Hopefully I've described it clearly enough.
After God predestined those submissive people, He called them, justified them, and glorified them.
I once read about a university that laid out a fixed track for each student to follow– the classes they'd take, the jobs they'd hold during school, and more. The students had no choices. Students who freely chose to go to that university had to formally agree to follow the plan that was laid out for them. That innovative structure enabled students to earn bachelor’s degrees in 3 years instead of 4.
First the students
chose that school. Then the school
predestined the path those students would follow.
Similarly, God predestined a path for people who freely chose to believe. They would be called, justified, and glorified.
But He
didn't predestine which people would choose to believe any more than the university chose which students would apply.
So no one can bring charges against God's people. Why? Because their actions don't justify them - God does. Let's see how that distinction impacts our understanding of Romans 9.
Romans 9:1-4a 1 I speak the truth in Christ--I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit-- 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, 4 the people of Israel.
Strange as it may sound, to some people Paul seems a little anti-Semitic - a first-century “Uncle Tom.” After reading Paul's words, a Jew might say “Now wait just a dadburn cotton-picking minute!" [Sorry, I'm from WV]." God promised that ISRAEL would be His people. He said ISRAEL were His elect. He said ISRAEL would be special children of the promise. And now you're telling us that most of Israel will be cut off because they don’t believe in Jesus Christ.
And you’re saying that many Gentiles have been brought in. So are you saying that God reneged on His word? Did God change His mind? If that’s the kind of God He is, how can we feel confident that ‘neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God (Romans 8:38-39)?’ Maybe He’ll change His mind again! And you want me to feel confident and secure?”
Those are great questions. Paul begins his answer by expressing intense love and unwavering desire for his own people to be saved - even if he has to be damned for that to happen.
Someone steeped in the Jewish scriptures would remember
Exodus 32:32-34 at this point: Moses comes down Mt. Sinai after a face-to-face encounter with God's Shekinah glory, carrying words which intimately express God’s nature in God's own handwriting.
To his dismay, Moses discovers that the Israelites had abandoned God while he was gone. So he ascends back up the mountain with a heavy heart. He pleads for God to either forgive the people for this sin or else blot him (Moses) out of the book of life.
God refused to blot out Moses but vowed to punish the peoples’ sins individually (which is better than the corporate punishment Moses feared would happen.
Paul loved Israel more than he loved himself, just as Moses did. He had already given up everything for Christ ["Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things” (Php. 3:8)].
Now he’s even willing give up His relationship with Christ Himself if the people of Israel could be saved by that choice.
9:4b-5
4bTheirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. 5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.
Paul first discussed advantages of being a Jew way back in the beginning of chapter 3. "
First of all," he began, "
they have been entrusted with the very words of God" (
Romans 3:2).
He said "first of all," but he never added a "second of all."
Instead, he took his readers down a 5-chatper rabbit trail (I love that he's as ADHD as I am).
Then here in chapter 9 he lists another advantage: They not only have the scriptures; they have the historical relationship with God. Israel and God go way back.
But Paul is challenging their theology. They believed that:
- God’s promises fell upon the nation of Israel.
- Israel would experience national salvation by God’s grace.
- Gentiles who were grafted into Israel by proselytism required a special salvation that was at a lower level than Israel’s salvation.
- Gentile who were saved had to transfer their citizenship to Israel.
They had good reasons to believe these things. God had indeed promised Abraham and the prophets that the Messiah would come, that the Messiah would be Abraham’s offspring, and that the Messiah would
save Abraham’s offspring.
So a reasonable question arises: “Paul, How can we accept this? If Gentiles are on equal footing with Jews, then God has either lied or failed!”
But Paul already defined what it means to be a genuine Jew way back in
Romans 2:28-29:
“…a man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. A man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code.”
Similarly, he told the Corinthians, that God "has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life."
This inadequacy of the Law was because of Romans 7:9-10, "I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. 10 The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me."
Romans 9:6-7
6 It is not as though God's word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children. On the contrary, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned."
Please spend a lot of time on this section. Don't blow through it. Understanding this section clearly is required in order to accurately understand the controversial theology through chapter 11. Paul is laying the foundation here.
So God made promises to the descendants of Abraham and to the descendants of Jacob/Israel. But not all of either of their descendants became heirs of these promises, as Paul explains next:
Romans 9:88 In other words, it is not the natural children who are God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring.
That is, being born in Abraham's or Jacob's lineage ("natural children") didn't automatically qualify a person to be an heir. God's promises were only to certain of Abraham's and Jacob's offspring, and God decided which ones would be the children of the promise.
Romans 9:9-13
9 For this was how the promise was stated: "At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son." 10 Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad--in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls--she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13 Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
Abraham had many children: Ishmael by Hagar, Isaac by Sarah, and others by Keturah.
Which of these children carried God’s promise forward? His second son, Isaac. He was the one God chose for the promise, not Ishmael (who would have been man’s choice since he was born first). Thus, many descendants of the first level of the family tree (Abraham) were not included in the promise.
Isaac had only two children, Esau and Jacob. It was Jacob, the second son, who carried the promise forward. Not both of them. Though the first born twin would have normally received the promise, only Jacob – the second-born twin – carried the promise. Even though Jacob himself tricked Esau out of his birthright, God saw ahead of time (foreknew) that this would happen. Again, this was God’s choice, not man’s.
So Jacob, then was obviously not elected by God based upon his own righteousness. Nor was he elected because of Esau’s unrighteousness.
Neither was righteous, and the election took place before they were even born! But look even further into Israel’s history of God’s election.
Romans 9:14-18 14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
Consider Sinai: Moses came down from the mountain and discovered the golden calf idol that the people built while he was gone. God, of course, knew what was going on before Moses came down. He even knew they would do it before they did it. It would have been perfectly understandable for God to blot them out.
Instead, God called Moses to the mountain a second time and gave the Law, but only after explaining that He would “
have mercy on whom I will have mercy” (
Exod. 33:19). God chose to give them mercy. The people obviously didn't earn or deserve it.
Next look at Pharaoh:Pharaoh, who became Israel’s oppressor, sinned greatly against God. He deserved death. But God spared him from death for a purpose - so that God could display His own power by delivering Israel from the plagues that Egypt and Pharaoh had to undergo. Once again, God showed mercy (in sparing Pharaoh’s life), and this time to someone obviously “undeserving” of it.
Throughout Israel’s history, God showed mercy to people who seemed least likely to deserve it.
Election by God is a free act based solely on God’s own choice.
In every case, mercy and grace are free. If God showed mercy based upon people earning or deserving them, they would no longer be free.
Why did Paul discuss these topics here? To emphasize this: For God to elect anyone at all shows that He is merciful.
If He were to act strictly out of legal justice (obeying the Law), the whole nation of Israel would have been eradicated. Paul is setting the stage for what is coming in our next few studies. But we have to be clear here before continuing. God chooses people to be saved according to His own criteria.
