Deeper Commentary
ROMANS CHAPTER 9
9:1 As explained in the introduction to this commentary, Romans is very
thematic. The first eight chapters outline a theology of grace, intended
to bind together the Jewish and Gentile elements within the membership of
the church at Rome. Chapters 9-11 present God's dealings with Israel as
the parade example of His grace and way of working. Chapters 12-16 then
draw on the preceding chapters in appealing for practical behaviour
motivated by the theology there outlined.
I speak the truth in Christ, I do not lie, my conscience bearing
witness with me in the Holy Spirit- Paul is about to make a momentous
personal statement in :2 and :3, reflecting a level of love which is hard
to believe a man could reach- being prepared to offer his eternity for the
sake of Israel. He says that his own conscience is corroborated by the
Holy Spirit, that this is indeed how he feels. For in 1 Cor. 4:4 he states
that whether or not our conscience is clear in a matter is not of ultimate
importance; it is the Lord's judgment of our position which is all
important, as human awareness of internal conscience can be faulty. I have
noted on 2 Cor. 5:11 and elsewhere that Paul felt that the operation of
the Holy Spirit in the heart of believers ought to influence the
conscience. And here he states under Divine inspiration that what he is
now writing is indeed true and confirmed by the Holy Spirit.
9:2 That I have great sorrow and unceasing pain in my heart-
This is the spirit of Jeremiah, who likewise suffered at the hands of a
Gospel-resistant Israel, but loved them to tears. The rejection of the
Gospel by others should not be met by indifference on our part. Any who
have a real sense of God's glory and the tragedy of any man's rejection of
the cross will feel likewise. Paul uses the same word for "sorrow" in
writing of his pain at Corinth's rejection of the Gospel (2 Cor. 2:1,3),
and we note that Paul may well have been writing to the Romans from
Corinth. Paul had these feelings "in Christ" (:1) because he was
manifesting the Lord's emotions towards Israel.
9:3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for
the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh- One of
the (many) agonies of Paul's soul was that he felt that his brethren did
not appreciate the depth of love which he had for them. Israel certainly
didn't; and he loved them to the same extent as Moses did, willing, at
least in theory, to give his eternal salvation so that they might
be saved (Rom. 9:3). The more (Gk. 'the more-and-more-abundantly') he
loved Corinth, the less they realized his love, and the more they turned
away from him (2 Cor. 2:4; 12:15); and he so earnestly wished (Gk.) that
the believers in Colosse and Laodicea appreciated how much he spiritually
cared for them (Col. 2:1).
"I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my
kinsmen according to the flesh" was the spirit of Moses, in being willing
to give his own physical and eternal life for the salvation of Israel (Ex.
32:30-32). Paul is here rising up to imitate Moses at perhaps his finest
hour- willing, at least in principle, to give up his eternal life for the
sake of Israel's salvation. The extent of Paul's love for natural Israel
does not come out that strongly in the Acts and epistles; but this
allusion to Moses says it all. The RVmg. renders Rom. 9:3: “I could
pray…”, more clearly alluding to Moses’ prayer that the people might enter
and he be rejected. Yet Paul perceived that God would not accept a
substitute offering like that; and hence he says he could pray
like this. In essence, he had risen to the same level. Likewise he wrote
in 1 Thess. 2:8 RV that he was “well pleased [i.e. theoretically willing]
to impart unto, you not the gospel of God only, but our own souls, because
ye were dear unto us”. He perceived the difference between mere imparting
of the Gospel in preaching, and being willing to give ones’ soul, ones
salvation, because of a heart that bleeds for others. No wonder Paul was
such a convincing preacher, with such love behind his words.
Paul was willing in theory to give up his salvation for them, even
though he knew that in actual fact this is not the basis on which God
works. He emphasizes that he is not using mere words: "I say the truth in
Christ, I lie not [note the double emphasis], my conscience also bearing
me witness in the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 9:1-3). The Holy Spirit confirmed
that what he felt in his conscience for them was in fact valid; this
really was the level of devotion Paul reached for a nation who
systematically worked for his extermination, and even more painfully, for
the infiltration and destruction of his lifetime's work. The Jewish
infiltrators had indirectly had their effect on Corinth, who mocked and
denigrated the Paul who would have laid down his life for them. And yet
time and again he calls them his brethren, he sees them as an innocent Eve
in Eden, about to be beguiled by the snake of the Jewish infiltrators; he
sees them as a chaste virgin. But remember how they denigrated him, in the
cruellest ways. Yet his love for them was surpassing. If indeed Paul wrote
Romans from Corinth, his experience with the Corinthians prepared him for
this momentous statement to the Romans about Israel.
9:4 Who are Israelites, whose is the adoption, the glory, the
covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God and the promises-
We note that Israel were God's "adopted" son; not His only begotten
Son. This would have been a sideways swipe at Jewish emphasis upon
ethnicity as a basis for being God's children. All the glory, covenants
etc. were given initially to Israel; which is why the tragedy of their
rejection of the Christ who was the focal point of all these things was
the more tragic. Paul is writing here not so much as to glorify Israel as
to explain why he felt the deep sense of tragedy for them which he did as
expressed in :3.
9:5 Whose are the fathers and of whom is Christ, as concerning the
flesh, who is over all. God be praised forever! Amen- The praise of
Christ as being so exceedingly "over all" was a swipe at the Jewish
tendency to consider Messiah as inferior to the fathers such as Abraham
and David. The Lord tackled the same mistaken view by reminding the Jews
that David referred to Messiah as his "Lord" (Mk. 12:37); the "Son of
David" was in fact David's Lord and master. "Of whom is Christ" is a clear
statement that the Lord Jesus came 'out of' the Jewish fathers as the
promised seed of men like Abraham and David. In no way can the idea of a
personal pre-existence of Christ be supported Biblically, the evidence is
all against it.
9:6 But it is not as though the word of God has come to nothing.
For they are not all Israel, that are of Israel- This is an allusion
in terms of ideas, although not lexical items [words], to the grand
encouragement of Is. 55:11 that God's word shall not return void but will
accomplish His purpose, even if in different ways than those initially
intended. God's word of salvation in Christ same to 'something' through
the redefinition of Israel as those who accepted His grace in Christ. "For
they are not all Israel that are of Israel" was a quotation from right
wing Judaism in condemnation of their weaker brethren; but Paul is
effectively saying that it is they who are condemned in these terms.
9:7 Neither, because they are Abraham's seed are they all children,
but: In Isaac shall your seed be called- Physical descent from
Abraham did not make anyone the true "children" of Abraham; because
Ishmael also was the seed of Abraham, but was not his "child" in the sense
that he did not walk according to the faith of Abraham in his future
Messianic seed. That promise was fulfilled through Isaac. So within the
statement "In Isaac shall your seed be called" there is the implication
that the "seed" of Abraham is to be understood in two senses- referring to
the literal children of Abraham, and secondly, specifically referring to
the Messiah. Abraham's true seed was therefore one man- the Lord Jesus.
Only those "in Him" were the seed to which the promises had reference.
9:8 That is: it is not the children of the flesh that are children
of God, but the children of the promise who are counted as the seed-
See on :7. Fleshly descent from Abraham did not make one a member of the
seed of promise. That seed was one person- the Lord Jesus. And only
identity with Him makes a person part of the promised seed. This connects
with all Paul has written in chapters 1-8; that acceptability with God is
on the basis of being in Christ and being thereby counted as Christ, who
alone is the promised seed. Galatians 3 makes these points again in very
clear language.
9:9 For this is the word of promise: According to this season will
I come and Sarah shall have a son- The 'coming' of God was in the son
of Abraham and Sarah; God 'came' in Christ supremely. In no way did the
promised seed literally come down from some pre-existent state in Heaven;
He too was conceived on this earth, and through Him God 'came' to His
people.
9:10 And not only so, but Rebecca also having conceived by one, by
our father Isaac- "Conceived by one" is hard to make sense of.
Perhaps the idea is that Rebecca was Isaac's only wife. But the next
verses speak of how out of two children, the choice of which one was to be
the seed was made on the basis of predestination. Both Jacob and Esau had
the same one father; but one was chosen and the other wasn't. Abraham had
children by various women (Hagar, Keturah and Sarah at least); Isaac had
children by only one woman. So there was no question about whether Esau
and Jacob were in the right line, as it were. But the point was, a choice
was made by predestination and calling.
9:11 For the children being not yet born, neither having done
anything good or bad, that the purpose of God according to election might
stand, not of works but of Him that calls- As noted on :10, Paul is
defining the 'seed' as being not according to fleshly descent [for both
Esau and Jacob were from the same father and mother], but according to
calling and predestination independent of the works they did. For the
Genesis record frames Jacob as being inferior to Esau in his works. This
historical interlude about Israel in Romans 9-11 is in exemplification of
the theology outlined in chapters 1-8. There we have read that works do
not save a person; it is by God's grace. And the obvious exemplification
of grace is in the very existence of concepts like predestination and
calling (Rom. 8:30). Struggle with these concepts as we may, the simple
point is that salvation is not by works nor intellectual ability or good
fortune to correctly understand the text of Scripture. This is what
predestination implies. One is called and the other isn't, even when the
works of one [Jacob] are not much to boast of, and the one who is not
called [Esau] comes over in the record as a far nicer, more forgiving kind
of guy than the one who was called.
9:12 It was said to her: The elder shall serve the younger-
Esau is presented as the stronger of the two; but he was to serve Jacob.
The calling was not of works nor of human strength. We note here that Paul
apparently brushes by the blessing of Isaac to the intent that one day,
Esau would rise above his brother Jacob and cast off the yoke of
servanthood which the earlier statement of the Angel had required (Gen.
27:40). Whilst the record of those words is inspired, we have there an
example of where a man spoke as he felt was required, and the content of
his words was not inspired because it was at variance with God's own word.
We can reflect further that Jacob and Rebecca did not believe the Angelic
words of blessing, thinking they must make them come true through their
own works- which resulted in the fair mess up of much of Jacob's life. The
Angelic word was a word of grace that should have just been accepted; no
works could bring it to fulfilment. And this too is the exemplification of
what Paul has written at such length in chapters 1-8.
9:13 Even as it is written: Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated-
The point has been fairly made that the Hebrew in Mal. 1:2,3 can mean that
God loved Esau less, rather than "hated". But that possibility of meaning
is not reflected in the quotation here; and Paul is unafraid to tweak Old
Testament quotations in order to give the better sense. Perhaps he goes
with the term "hated" in order to set us up to indignantly protest that
something isn't write here. And he then proceeds to deal with that in the
following verses, which teach that we ought to focus on the wonder of the
fact that the unworthy Jacob has been loved, and we can share in that love
by identification with the seed; and in any case, it is not for us to
question God, but rather simply accept His grace. This is the answer to
those who experience endless angst about the fate of those who
have not heard. No answer is given. We are taught by the whole problem to
praise God for the grace He does show to some, and learn our humility
before Him in accepting those things which seem so deeply unfair. The
context of Mal. 1:2,3 is God appealing to Judah to not refuse God's love
towards them, seeing it has not been shown to all. And that challenge and
appeal comes through to us in all our struggles concerning the morality of
God.
9:14- see on Rom. 13:12.
What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God
forbid!- As noted on :13, the apparent hatred of God towards Esau is
set up to test our response. To protest against it is to say that God is
unrighteous, and this is a possibility we are not to even entertain. His
predestination of one but not another, loving one and hating another, is
in fact His righteousness. And again, Paul has written in chapters 1-8 of
God's ultimate rightness in imputing His righteousness to us- when we do
not deserve it. This problem is here placed before us from a different
angle- God is 'right' and 'righteous' to love Jacob and hate Esau. Even if
all within us cries out against such a position as being immoral and
unfair- by our human standards. Likewise, His imputation of righteousness
to the unrighteous seems immoral and unfair. But the whole glorious
situation is set up to test our obedient acceptance of His grace.
9:15 For He said to Moses: I will have mercy on whom I will have
mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion-
This quotation from Ex. 33:19 concerns the manifestation of the Yahweh
Name. The fact God makes a sovereign choice to save some and not others is
actually the most fundamental part of His very being as revealed to us.
This whole concept of calling some and not others to salvation is
presented in Romans 8 as the parade example of God's grace, and that such
grace is the basis of salvation and not works. 'What happens to the rest?'
is of course the question God foresees shall arise, and He carefully says
nothing about it. Exactly because He wants us to focus upon His grace and
accept that it is indeed beyond understanding and against all that we have
known in any other aspect of human life and thinking.
9:16 So then it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but
of God that shows mercy- God's statement that "I will have mercy"
means that it is His will which saves men, and not the will of
man ["him that wills"] and all the works done as an outflow of human will.
His mercy is therefore operative on a level above human will / volition
and works ['running']. It is God and not man who does the 'running' for
our salvation.
9:17- see on Phil. 2:15.
For the scripture says of Pharaoh- When we read His word, we
hear His voice. 1 Kings 13:21 speaks of us hearing "the mouth of God".
Jeremiah spoke "from the mouth of the Lord" (2 Chron. 36:12). His word
brings Him that near to us, if we will perceive it for what it is. Thus
"Scripture" is put for "God" (Rom. 9:17; Gal. 3:8) and vice versa (Mt.
19;4,5). When we speak and preach God's word, we are relaying God's voice
to men, and should make appropriate effort to deport ourselves as the
ministers of His word and voice- not to mention diligently ensuring that
our expression and exposition of His word is correct and not fanciful. We
are to speak / preach "as it were oracles of God" (1 Pet. 4:11 Gk.). We
are His voice to men in our preaching of His word.
For this very purpose did I raise you up, that I might show in you
My power, and that My Name might be published abroad in all the earth-
The question of those that are not called and who are hardened is
presented from the perspective of God's purpose to save those whom He has
called. The publishing of God's Name throughout all the earth is the Old
Testament language of the Kingdom of God on earth (Dt. 28:10; 1 Kings
8:43; Ps. 66:4; 83:18; 102:15; Zech. 14:9) and is repeated in Rom. 15:9.
The earlier quotation from Malachi in :13 goes on to explain that the
loving of Jacob and hating of Esau will climax in all the Gentiles seeing
God's Name in all the earth (Mal. 1:11). Somehow- and the process is as
yet hidden from us- the saving of some and not saving of others shall
result in God's Name being published throughout all the earth. This in a
limited sense happened when Israel were redeemed from Egypt and Pharaoh
was destroyed, but the final reality of it will be in the salvation of
God's people at the time of the Kingdom of God on the whole earth.
9:18 So then He has mercy on whom He wishes to, and hardens who He
wishes- The emphasis is upon the wishing or willing of God. The will
of God is for our salvation- that is the repeated theme of the New
Testament. There is another side to that will- in that He does not save
all. Some He hardens. But the will of God is for our salvation,
and the death of His Son to that end was the deepest articulation of that
will (Heb. 10:7,9). That is the Biblical emphasis and we are out of step
with God's will for us if we chafe against that with the pretensions of
our will. The Bible revealed God's will as being opposed to human
will; and our will is to doubt and walk away from the way His will
operates. The question of 'What about the unsaved?' is purposefully built
into human experience as an exercise for us in this regard.
In the same way as Pharaoh hardened his heart, so natural Israel have
done (11:7). Those Jews who refused grace in Christ are therefore as Egypt
and are not the true people of God, and will receive Egypt's condemnation.
Pharaoh hardened his own heart, but God also hardened his heart. And it is
this latter aspect which is focused upon here, in exemplification of how
the Spirit works on human hearts, as explained in chapter 8.
9:19 Then you will say to me: Why does He still find fault? For who
withstands His will?- Seeing we are so often exhorted to do God's
will, and we have freewill not to, it is apparent that indeed God's will
can be withstood. The same word is used of Elymas and others resisting the
Gospel (Acts 13:8; 2 Tim. 3:8; 4:15) and Paul will go on to use the word
in saying that some do indeed withstand God (Rom. 13:2). God does not
"find fault" with those whom His will forces to rebel against Him. But in
:20 Paul doesn't make that perhaps obvious rejoinder; rather he says that
it is not for us to question God.
It seems that Judaism was arguing that the Jews were chosen and
therefore must be acceptable to God. But Paul deconstructs this by making
several links with Job, whom he appears to read as initially having the
same wrong attitudes as did the Jews:
Romans 9
|
Job
|
:19 "Thou (the Jews) wilt say then unto me, Why doth He yet
find fault (with Pharaoh and the Jews)? For who hath resisted
His will? The Jews were saying that it was God's pre-ordained
purpose that they should be His people, therefore their
behaviour was excusable. |
"He is… mighty in strength: who hath hardened himself (NIV
"resisted" ) against Him, and hath prospered?". Job's
reasoning is similar to that of the Jews-
effectively he too is asking why God is finding fault with him
(9:4). |
:20 “O man, who art thou that disputest (AVmg.) with God" |
This is what Job desired to do: "I would order my cause
before Him, and fill my mouth with arguments... there the
righteous might dispute with Him" (23:4-7 cp. 9:3). |
:14 "Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid" . The
context is that the Jews were saying that their Calvinistic
view of predestination allowed them to sin yet still remain
God's people. |
By Job saying "It profiteth a man nothing that
he should delight himself in God" because he is either
predestined to salvation or not, Job provoked the
comment from Elihu "Far be it from God, that He should do
wickedness; and from the Almighty, that He should
commit iniquity" (34:10). The link between this and Rom. 9:14
shows that Job had the same mentality as the Judaizers, and
was thus also shown the blasphemous conclusion to which his
reasoning led. |
9:20 No, O man; who are you to answer back to God? Shall the thing
formed say to Him that formed it: Why did you make me thus?- See on
:19. There are plenty of legitimate answers to the complaint that God is
forcing people into sin and therefore He is being unreasonable. I suggest
that Paul purposefully throws up an obviously illegitimate objection, to
which we as readers are already formulating good answers before we reach
:20. But our eager expectations that Paul will trounce such objections is
purposefully disappointed by what we are to consider the even greater mega
argument- that it is not for us to answer back to God. The allusion, as
mentioned on :19, is to Job and his friends answering back to God when
they should have fallen silent [well before they did]. That is the abiding
impression we have at the end of the book of Job- that Job has fallen
silent, laying his hand upon his mouth, but he should have done this far
earlier. And Paul asks us to do the same.
9:21 Or has not the potter a right over the clay, from the same
lump to make one part a vessel to honour, and another to dishonour?-
The obvious Old Testament allusions are to Is. 29:16; 64:8 and Jer. 18. In
all these passages, Judah considered that God had been unreasonable. They
were not correct- the answer could so easily have been that they were in
the situation they were in because of their sins. But as here in Romans 9,
the answer instead is that they are but clay in the hands of the potter.
It is God who has the "right" to use clay as He wishes. The whole humanist
objection to this is that we have 'rights'. It is a humbling
thing to learn that as God's children, our only 'right' is to an eternal
grave; nor do we have any 'right to life'. All is of grace, of gift. In
this age of obsession with 'our rights', it's so hard to accept God's
perspective- that His will and right is supreme, and our personal focus
should be more upon our own wrongs rather than our rights. "The same lump"
repeats the teaching of :10, that from one couple came Jacob and Esau, and
one was a vessel to honour and another to dishonour. And in any case, we
are only being made into "vessels"- for the Father's use in His house.
Paul surely wrote this with his eye on how he himself was a "chosen
vessel" (Acts 9:15 s.w.). Yet he had to exercise freewill to be part of
that purpose and Divine intention. The same words are used in 1 Thess. 4:4
where Paul urges his converts to deport themselves appropriately for those
who are vessels of honour by acting with "sanctification and honour". He
uses the same words in appealing to Timothy to act likewise as a vessel of
honour (2 Tim. 2:20,21). Divine choice is one thing, but nobody is being
forced to be righteous. We are to respond to the grace of His calling.
Paul has earlier taught the Romans that they are to seek for honour, and
those who 'work good' shall indeed receive it (Rom. 2:7,10). Here in
Romans 9 we are asked to understand that in the perspective of God having
actually chosen us for that end- and He didn't choose everyone. The fact
we were called to this end and others weren't should be accepted in
gratitude, and responded to- rather than complaining about the
philosophical issues arising from some others not having been called.
9:22 And so what if God is willing to show His anger and to make
His power known, enduring with longsuffering vessels of anger prepared for
destruction- The fact some will be destroyed at the last day can be
seen from a positive viewpoint; it means that God is amazingly tolerant of
them right now. Perhaps his tolerance is so long because he even seeks
their repentance, as it seems He did with Pharaoh. Again, the existence of
this class of unsaved, condemned persons is to highlight His grace towards
us. It's rather like asking why there are so many uninhabited planets and
life forms on earth which shall not be saved. It is to give backdrop to
the wonder of the grace which has invited us to salvation in
God's Kingdom. The showing of God's anger is balanced by His making of His
power known. The same word translated 'make known' is found in :23- God
will make known the riches of His glory to us who are saved. The showing
of God's anger and long endurance of those He shall destroy is therefore
in order to highlight and emphasize His power and grace made known to us.
9:23 And that He might make known the riches of His glory upon
vessels of mercy- The existence of the vessels for destruction is in
order to provide context for the glory of the vessels who receive mercy.
"Make known" translates a word which means 'make to understand'. Then we
shall understand- at the last day, when the riches of glory are realized
upon the saved. Then we shall perceive how the whole thing worked out for
His glory, and in great richness of that glory. In that day, we will
learn by the condemnation of the wicked. The very existence of “the
vessels of wrath fitted to destruction” is in order to “make known the
riches of his glory upon the vessels of mercy”. After the experience of
Divine judgment, "ye shall be comforted concerning the evil that I have
brought upon Jerusalem"; and yet these are exactly the words used to
describe how God will be 'comforted' after the judgments (Ez. 5:13;
14:22). We will come to share God's perspective through our experience of
the judgment process. It will teach us to be like Him, to see things from
His viewpoint. As a result of it, the struggles we have over "why…?" not
all are saved will be resolved.
Which He beforehand prepared for glory- Our place in God's
Kingdom was "prepared" from the beginning of the world (Mt. 25:34; Heb.
11:16 s.w.), although it was the Lord's death which prepared the place for
us (Jn. 14:2,3 s.w.). But it is up to us to accept it; places in that
Kingdom were "prepared" for Israel but they declined the invitation (Mt.
22:4 s.w.). This is the tragedy- eternity is prepared for some who refuse
it. The depth of the tragedy of itself urges us to do all we can to spread
the Gospel and strengthen those who have responded.
9:24- see on 1 Thess. 4:7.
Even us, whom He also called, not from the Jews only, but also from
the Gentiles?- Again we note the connection with the earlier teaching
about calling in Rom. 8:30, where the concept of calling is given as an
example of how salvation is by grace. That calling pays no regard to
ethnicity; for whoever hears the invitation is in that sense called to the
Kingdom. Therefore it is not the case that only Jews were called; for the
Gospel was being heard by non-Jews as well.
9:25 As He said also in Hosea: I will call them My people, who were
not My people; and she that was not beloved shall be called beloved-
The 'calling' here in Romans means 'calling to hear the Gospel'. The
context of Hos. 2:23 is that Israel, like Hosea's faithless wife Gomer,
were not God's people but would again be called "My people". But that
'calling' is through the calling of the Gospel in Christ. In fact Hos.
2:23 is alluding to the fact that Gomer had become pregnant with a child
[indeed, children] by another man whilst married to Hosea, and Hosea had
named the child Lo-Ammi, 'Not my people'. But as Hosea dreamed of adopting
the child as fully his and accepting Gomer again, so God did for Israel.
But as things were never really resolved between Hosea and Gomer, neither
were they between God and Israel on a national sense. But Paul perceives
that the desire to call a 'not My people' as 'My people' would be
fulfilled through the calling of individuals of all ethnicities to be
God's people. Hosea's plans for Gomer and Lo-Ammi were rooted in pure
grace, stemming from deepest love. Likewise God will impute righteousness
to those whom He calls, so that the not loved wife becomes the beloved
wife, and the illegitimate children are counted as "My people". Here again
we see connection to the preceding theological arguments about imputed
righteousness in Romans 1-8. Israel shall again be counted as the beloved
wife, and the illegitimate children counted as legitimate- for all who
respond to the call.
9:26 And it shall be, that in the place where it was said to them: You
are not My people, there shall they be called children of the living God-
The illegitimate child of Gomer, Lo-Ammi ["not my people"] would be
adopted by Hosea, through his imputing righteousness to his wayward
family. It is tempting to interpret "the place" as Jerusalem. But there is
no particular reason for thinking that there is some geographical
reference in view. The quotation from Hos. 1:10 uses the Hebrew maqom,
which often refers to the holy place, the temple. It is in the temple of
God, which now refers to the church, that the new children of God are
adopted and accepted.
9:27 And Isaiah cried out concerning Israel- Paul perceived
through the Spirit that Isaiah cried aloud with passion the idea
that although there were many people theoretically "of Israel" in that
they were the seed of Abraham, only a remnant of them would be saved. And
Paul implies that this holds true in our dispensation too (Is. 10:22 cp.
Rom. 9:27). One can sense how much Paul felt the passion of God's word. It
wasn't just black print on white paper to him. Thus he speaks of how
"Esaias is very bold, and saith... Esaias also crieth concerning
Israel..." (Rom. 9:27; 10:20). Paul had meditated deeply upon Isaiah's
words, even to the point of considering the tone of voice in which he
first spoke them. See on Acts 13:27.
Even if the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the
sea, it is only the remnant that shall be saved- Again we have the
idea of two seeds of Abraham. Those who are indeed "as the sand of the
sea", fulfilling the promise about the multiplication of Abraham's seed,
are not thereby saved. Salvation is for the remnant; see on :6. Truly not
all Israel are of Israel.
There may also be particular reference to the saving of Israel in the
last days. The Isaiah quotation is from Is. 10:20-23, which says that in
the context of the Assyrian invasion, “the remnant of Israel”, those who
survive it, will trust in the Lord alone and “in truth”, i.e. in covenant
relationship with Him. It seems that all others of natural Israel will
perish in the latter day holocaust upon Israel. (as in Is. 4:2-4). This
language of the remnant ‘returning’ unto the Lord is quoted here about the
repentance of the Jewish people and their turning to Christ. Israel were
intended to repent because of Sennacherib’s invasion (Is. 37:31,32), and
then “the consumption” of God’s plan could have happened. But the prophecy
has been reinterpreted with reference to Israel in the last days,
repenting finally as the result of the latter day Assyrian invasion.
Isaiah 10 speaks of how Israel’s affliction by Assyria leads them to
repentance; a “remnant shall return… unto the mighty God” (Is. 10:21)- and
the “mighty God” has just been defined in Is. 9:6 as a title for the Lord
Jesus. This will be a result of God using the Assyrian invader to “make a
consumption… in the midst of all the land” of Israel (Is. 10:23). The
“yoke” of Assyria “shall be destroyed because of the anointing” (Is.
10:27)- i.e. the coming of Christ, the anointed one, in response to the
remnant returning unto Him.
9:28 For the Lord will execute His word upon the earth, finishing
it and cutting it short- This seems to mean that God's word of
salvation shall be fulfilled by the actual salvation of God's people at
the last day. But the intended time period will be shortened- as a display
of God's grace. This becomes apparent by comparing Rom. 9:28,29 with
Matthew 24:
Matthew 24
|
Romans 9 |
v. 22 "For the elect's sake |
The seed preserved by the Lord of hosts / Angels (:29) |
Those days shall be shortened |
v. 28 "He will finish the account (of Israel's sin), and
cut it short in righteousness: because a short(ened) work will
the Lord make upon all the earth (land)" |
...[or else] there should no flesh be saved" |
v. 29 "as Sodom" |
Romans 9 is quoting from Is. 28:22 , which is about "a consumption,
even determined upon the whole land... from the Lord God of hosts
(Angels)". Thus the Angels planned to destroy Israel even more terribly
than they did in AD70, but the "determined" "days" of "consumption" were
"shortened" because the Angels- other ones apart from the destroying
Angels?- had preserved a faithful seed or remnant, which is the theme of
the section of Romans where the quotation from Is. 28 occurs. And there
must be marked similarities in the last days too. “The remnant” of Israel
will be saved, those who believe in Jesus, “For the Lord will execute his
word upon the earth, finishing it and cutting it short… as Isaiah hath
said before, Except the Lord of sabaoth had left us a seed [i.e. the
remnant] we had become as Sodom” (Rom. 9:28,29 RV). This associates the
shortening of the last days with the salvation of the Jewish remnant. Paul
is surely expanding the Lord’s own words, that the days will be shortened
“for the elect’s sake”. And that “elect”, according to Paul’s inspired
exposition, are the Jews who repent and accept Jesus in the last days.
Quite simply, the quicker we get the remnant of Israel to repent, the
quicker the Lord will be back. The bigger message, in the context, is that
the shortening of intended time periods is another example of the
operation of grace in bringing about final salvation.
9:29 And, as Isaiah has said before: Except the Lord of Sabaoth had
left us a seed, we had become as Sodom and had been made like Gomorrah-
Paul makes the point that for the sake of the tiny group of Jews who did
still hold and practice the truth, Israel would not suffer the judgments
of Sodom in totality (Rom. 9:29 cp. Is. 1:9). This would indicate that
there will also be a latter day Jewish remnant which will stop the
faithless Israel of today receiving the judgment of permanent destruction.
But in the context of Romans, the point is that the remnant themselves are
"left" as such; it is God's grace which preserves them faithful and
acceptable. Not human works. God "left" a remnant of faithful believers in
apostate Israel. Whilst their faithfulness was obviously a result of their
own spiritual effort, God 'leaving' them from apostasy suggests that He
was also active in preserving them from it too. The record does not speak
of them saving themselves from it. Is. 1::10 goes on to state that in
fact, Judah are as Sodom and Gomorrah: "Hear the word of Yahweh,
you rulers of Sodom! Listen to the law of our God, you people of
Gomorrah!". But by grace, the remnant are "left" by Him so that they are
not treated as Sodom and Gomorrah. This is again a great example
of how righteousness is imputed to people by grace, and how the grace /
gift of the Spirit works to keep the saved abiding faithful. This is why
Rom. 8 speaks so much of the gift of the Spirit in the hearts of
believers; this is why the remnant are "left", maintained in faith, so
that although they are as Sodom (Is. 1:10), they are not seen as Sodom
(Is. 1:9).
9:30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, who followed not
after righteousness, attained to righteousness, even the righteousness
which is of faith- The whole situation with Jews and Gentiles is
being presented here as an exemplification of how salvation is by grace.
Verse 31 speaks of following after "a law of righteousness", so here we
need to read that in too- the Gentiles "followed not after [a law of]
righteousness". Gentiles who were ignorant or disinterested in the Law of
Moses which was holy, righteous and good (Rom. 7:12 s.w.) end up
righteous- because that righteousness is imputed to them by faith in
Christ whereby they are counted as Him.
9:31 But Israel, following after a law of righteousness, did not
arrive at that law- In contrast to the Gentiles who believed in
Christ, Israel did not obtain righteousness before God through the law of
Moses. They did not arrive at the righteousness of faith, because the
Mosaic law offered no righteousness on the basis of it being imputed by
faith. Instead, there had to obedience. And we are too weak to attain
total obedience to it.
9:32 Therefore because they sought it not by faith, but as it were
by works, they stumbled at the stone of stumbling- Attaining
righteousness by attempted obedience to a set of laws requires no faith.
And if the game is simply obedience to rules, then there is no real need
for the Lord Jesus and the wonderful offer of being counted as Him, if we
believe into Him. And thus He becomes a stone of stumbling.
9:33 Even as it is written: Look, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling
and a rock of offence- This uses the same Greek words as found in
Rom. 14:13, where we are exhorted not to lay [s.w.] a stumblingstone
[s.w.] nor rock of offence [AV "occasion to fall"] in our brother's path.
What God does isn't necessarily a pattern for us; we are not, e.g., to use
war or murder people in the way He has done at some times. Christ is the
stumblingstone to all those who seek justification by works- their trust
in works means that they don't perceive the need for Him, and so the whole
idea of salvation by grace through being in Him becomes a stumblingstone
for them. What this means for us is that we aren't to demand salvation by
works from our brethren [e.g. from demanding dietary obedience from our
brethren, which is the context of 14:13].
And he that believes in him shall not be put to shame- The
emphasis is upon 'believing'. It is faith which makes us unashamed- in
that the "faith" is faith that really, God does impute righteousness to us
because we are "in Christ".