Great topic, ScottEmerson.
I always love this type of discussion. It's kinda funny thinking about Calvinism and Arminianism. The first time I actually checked out the specifics of these two viewpoints, it was because I had been 'accused of being an Arminian'. **grin** So
naturally, I just had to read up on both sides. I found I don't fully subscribe to either, but that's neither here nor there, huh?
Anyway...
Originally posted by Julie
Romans chapters (9-11) are national , in the sense that they answer questions as to the relationship of the Gospel to Israel.
Julie
I would love to hear more on that side of this. This is not what I've seen in this text...at least, not
solely, anyway. While this
does talk about the nation of Israel, it
also speaks of the spiritual truths of God's relationship with all men.
Originally posted by ScottEmerson
To do so requires a close view of the OT passages and allusions Paul uses in this chapter. (As a note, Paul states in Romans 8:32 that Christ died for us all (hamon panton) which kind of throws a hole in the whole Limited Atonement thing... But I digress)
We see from the first 9 verses that Paul specifically speaks of Israelites as a group. He notes that not all Israelites were saved, nor were all Ishmaelites damned. When he states that "Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated." He refers specifically to a passage in Malachi which specifially uses Jacob to refer to the land of Israel and Esau to refer to the Edomites. (Mal. 1:2-3)
I think an examination of the OT scriptures are essential with this also, and I'm just going to expound on this a bit. **grins and nods** The only real discussion I've seen here about the first 13 verses is this reference here,
soooo...
In verse 3 Paul speaks of his kinsmen according to the flesh (those of Israel), to whom the kingdom pertains (verses 4 and 5). That is what they (of Israel) believed the scriptures clearly taught. * * Pertaining to the adoption/covenant, there are many references they used to know this, such as Gen. 17:2; Deut. 4:10,13,15; Deut. 4:10,13,15; Deut. 14:1,2 and many others such as these
seem to teach that the adoption/covenant is
only for the Israelites as a specific chosen people. * * Of course, we know that the scriptures may appear to teach something clearly when in actuality it is teaching something quite different.
Even in the OT, we can see that there were times when "foreigners" were adopted into the Israel covenant. Aside from the history of Ruth and Naomi, we see that the Lord commanded
all foreigners who come under the roof (to live) of an Israelite was commanded to be circumcised, them and their children (the physical marking of the covenant). Although scripture clearly taught that the adoption pertained
only to the Israelites, we see that in actuality this is not the case - it was a foreshadow of gentiles being
included in the promise.
In verse 6 we see that Israel is not
quite what they thought. "They are not all Israel, who are of Israel." Just because an Israelite had the proper blood lineage (such as the Jews - Abraham's seed - in John 8:31-47... "Ye are of your father the devil..."),
and the promise of the covenant in the scriptures, they were not necessarily "Israel", because they did not all follow after the living God by faith (as did Abraham, Job and others). Hence, not all of the literal seed of Abraham is considered to be a child of Abraham, as was always believed (as seen in John 8:39 "...If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham"). Just because they were the seed of Abraham (to whom the adoption pertained, him and his seed), they were not all his true children. This is clearly taught in the gospels as well as some of the epistles.
Abraham was righteous because of his faith, and he received the promised child, Isaac. In Isaac the seed shall be called, being the children of promise (Romans 9:7, 8). This is a contrast between the child Ishmael, who was born to Abraham according to the flesh (with the handmail Hagar), and of the child of the promise with Sarah (Gal. 4:22-28 as well as here in Romans). Even Isaac and Ishmael were likened to an allegory as compared to Mt. Sinai (the covenant of the law/flesh) and Jerusalem (the covenant of the free/spirit). This is also referenced in the OT (this is getting long and I'm trying to be at least
initially somewhat brief,
so if anyone wants any specific verses from the OT here, let me know).
So far, verses 9:1 - 9 clearly show that these references are not
strictly referencing
only the literal seed (individuals), but is clearly teaching in regards to those who receive the promise by faith versus those who try to inherit the promise by the flesh/law. Up to now, the OT has completely foreshadowed this truth, revealing that what had been "clearly taught" in the scriptures wasn't actually what had been taught.
Thus far, the major focus of importance is not on the literal historic persons, but rather on what they represent (faith vs. works and freedom/spirit vs. flesh/law).
I'll be back with more in just a bit...
Blessings in Christ our Lord, HITR