Why do people think Romans 9 is about absolute individual predestination?

BBAS 64

Contributor
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
9,844
1,707
58
New England
✟484,033.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I was only sharing a Calvinist doctrine they hang their hat on since you commented on my saying that.

I am well versed in Calvinism and have several books and participated in a lot of threads already.

But I might research Spurgeon s specific POV. Was he a 5 pt or a 4 pt Calvinist

Good day, ToBeLoved

He was no Christmas Calvinist... "noeL" or better know as Amyraldism.

Which books have you read?


CH Defense of Calvinism,

https://www.chapellibrary.org/files/6713/7643/3188/doc2.pdf

This also has the historical affirmation of Baptist John Gill as well.

In Him,

Bill
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,790
✟322,365.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Yes. "Vessels of mercy" clearly refers to individuals elected from both Jews and Gentiles. So the parallel "vessels of wrath" would also refer to reprobate individuals. The example given of a vessel of wrath is Pharaoh - an individual. Also Esau, an individual, is given as an example in God's sovereign purposes. I know that both of those individuals have national implications, but I believe the focus is on individual election. God does not elect nations for salvation. He elects people.
Incorrect, In Roman's the passage is preceded with the words, "What if". He then says that God was "longsuffering". What purpose is there in longsuffering if the outcome has already been determined?

Secondly, Pharaoh wasn't ordained to hell, his heart was hardened by God for a specific purpose.

4:21 And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go. Exodus

Notice the words, "that he shall not let the people go". That was the purpose, period.
 
Upvote 0

Butch5

Newbie
Supporter
Apr 7, 2012
8,932
767
62
Homer Georgia
Visit site
✟308,497.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Clearly it's about God choosing the Gentiles who are faithful to the gospel while rejecting Israel who seeks righteousness through the law. How did people read the doctrines of the Greek philosophers Zeno and Plotinus into that and conclude it's about no free will and absolute individual predestination?

Actually, the passage is Paul explaining what he said in chapter 8. Chapter 9 is about is about Israel. If you look at 2:17, Paul, while addressing the church at Rome in general, is specifically addressing the Jewish believers. He carries this dialog through to 11:13 where he turns his attention to the Gentiles. In chapter 9 Paul is explaining how the promises that God made to Abraham have not failed and that God will bring them to fruition. How that got misconstrued is anyone's guess. I suspect that it's like other doctrines. People just believe something and they search the Scripture to find things that they think will support it.
 
Upvote 0

BBAS 64

Contributor
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
9,844
1,707
58
New England
✟484,033.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Actually, the passage is Paul explaining what he said in chapter 8. Chapter 9 is about is about Israel. If you look at 2:17, Paul, while addressing the church at Rome in general, is specifically addressing the Jewish believers. He carries this dialog through to 11:13 where he turns his attention to the Gentiles. In chapter 9 Paul is explaining how the promises that God made to Abraham have not failed and that God will bring them to fruition. How that got misconstrued is anyone's guess. I suspect that it's like other doctrines. People just believe something and they search the Scripture to find things that they think will support it.


Good day, Butch

So long as you count the children of Promise as Israel, and not the flesh children of Abraham (nation).
As defined in Romans 9...

Then we could agree.

In Him,

Bill
 
Upvote 0

BBAS 64

Contributor
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
9,844
1,707
58
New England
✟484,033.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Incorrect, In Roman's the passage is preceded with the words, "What if". He then says that God was "longsuffering". What purpose is there in longsuffering if the outcome has already been determined?

Secondly, Pharaoh wasn't ordained to hell, his heart was hardened by God for a specific purpose.

4:21 And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go. Exodus

Notice the words, "that he shall not let the people go". That was the purpose, period.

Good day, Jack

What in your mind it the Grammatical connection of the "what if" and the "in order to"

What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory—even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

You make some long jumps that are way outside the text. Long-suffering and determining ( prepared for a purpose)are not opposed to one another. The made known his riches of his glory to the vessels prepared for glory ( is his determination) which is dependent on his long-suffering... now why is that because he is glorified in his own long suffering of those he created for destruction.

It is a very constructive argument for answering the question:

You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?

In Him,

Bill
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Silverback

Well-Known Member
Feb 13, 2019
1,306
853
61
South East
✟66,756.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Clearly it's about God choosing the Gentiles who are faithful to the gospel while rejecting Israel who seeks righteousness through the law. How did people read the doctrines of the Greek philosophers Zeno and Plotinus into that and conclude it's about no free will and absolute individual predestination?

God's unconditional election was completed before the foundation of the world, that's when our names were entered in the book of life. Roman 9, is absolutely about God's sovereign choice.
 
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
God's unconditional election was completed before the foundation of the world, that's when our names were entered in the book of life. Roman 9, is absolutely about God's sovereign choice.
Romans 9 is NOT about individual predestination.
In Roman's 2 Paul makes the case that Jews make their boast in the law, but an actual Jew is one that is a Jew that is saved inwardly.

(In other words) An Israelite that practiced Judaism outwardly isn't an actual Jew, only an Israelite that practiced Judaism inwardly.

The first thing one must grasp when studying Romans is the difference between Jews, Israelites, and Gentiles.

2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. Romans

This is a very misused verse by both Calvinists and Preterists. Their claim is that this verse teaches that being a Jew has NOTHING to do with the lineage of Jacob. But that isn't what this verse says at all.

What God IS saying is quite simple: physical circumcision is the symbol of a covenant made by God with the lineage of Abraham, and his chosen son of promise, Isaac, followed of course by Jacob, the patriarch of Israel. This symbol (circumcision) was only an outward symbol of what God wants to do with each individual of that nation (Israel), inwardly. Where the individual allows God to perform a circumcision of the heart.

That doesn't mean that Gentiles become “spiritual” Jews when they accept Jesus as Saviour, (the text doesn't say that).

Read this carefully:

2:17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, Romans

In verse 17 the “Jew" (after the flesh) is the person, or persons collectively, that are being addressed.

Notice the single personal pronoun “thou".

Please follow along …

2:19 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, Romans “thou" 2:21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Romans

“thou" (4 times)

2:22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? Romans

“thou" (4 times)

2:23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God? Romans

“thou" (2 times)

2:25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. Romans

“thou" (2 times) and “thy" 1 time.

2:27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? Romans

“thee"

The Holy Spirit is directly addressing Jews according to the flesh.

Now the Holy Spirit needs them to get the point.

2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: Romans

You may be a Jew outwardly, (just like the Jews in the wilderness), but until you address your need of salvation inwardly (as individuals), and get circumcised inwardly, you are not a real Jew that can fulfill the purpose of being a Jew …

19:6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. Exodus

Nowhere in the above text does Paul say that Gentiles become Jews. What he does say is that the only real Jew, is one who is a Jew inwardly. To the shame of the Jews after the flesh; the Holy Spirit tells the fleshly Jews, that Gentiles who have had God circumcise their hearts have received salvation; while Jews who are only circumcised outwardly, are still under the judgment of the law.
 
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Good day, Jack

What in your mind it the Grammatical connection of the "what if" and the "in order to"

What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory—even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

You make some long jumps that are way outside the text. Long-suffering and determining ( prepared for a purpose)are not opposed to one another. The made known his riches of his glory to the vessels prepared for glory ( is his determination) which is dependent on his long-suffering... now why is that because he is glorified in his own long suffering of those he created for destruction.

It is a very constructive argument for answering the question:

You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?

In Him,

Bill
Are you saying the words between "What if God", and "in order to" serve no purpose?

In other words, The HS said, "What if God" did thus and so, "in order to" so and so.

Do the words, "did thus and so", and "so as so" not matter?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BBAS 64

Contributor
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
9,844
1,707
58
New England
✟484,033.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Are you saying the words between "What if God", and "in order to" serve no purpose?

In other words, The HS said, "What if God" did thus and so, "in order to" so and so.

Do the words, "did thus and so", and "so as so" not matter?


Good day, Dr. Jack

No that is not what I am saying at all...
 
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Good day, Dr. Jack

No that is not what I am saying at all...
Here is my understanding of the opening of Romans 9 ...

9:1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, 9:2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. Romans

The Holy Spirit now confirms that the Apostle Paul bears great heaviness and a continual sorrow in his heart. Keep in mind the following two things:

1) Paul is writing under inspiration of the Holy Spirit; and 2) Even though Paul has been called to be the Apostle to the Gentiles, the Holy Ghost is the Person who is giving Paul this heaviness in his heart.

You may ask how I know such a thing? The answer is quite simple, the Apostle Paul has totally surrendered his heart, will, and life to serve his Messiah. I once heard a man put it this way; the Holy Spirit reveals through the pen of the Apostle Paul, and even through the pen of Luke (Acts), that Paul had so surrendered his life to his Messiah, that since Paul was about the same age as Jesus when He died, that the Apostle Paul freely gave his life to the Holy Spirit that, it was Paul's way of saying, “Lord, your life here on earth was ended in order to bring me life; I now surrender the rest of my life to You, so you can finish your life through me”.

What would happen if every Christian did this same thing?

9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Romans

Now this is quite a mouthful, but Paul establishes some things here, quite quickly. So let's unpack this!

“For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:”

Now we need to remember back to Chapter Two of Romans. 2:23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God? 2:24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written. 2:25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. 2:26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? 2:27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. Romans

Many people try to say that when Paul refers to “Jews", he is referring to a ‘spiritual Jew'. The fact of the matter however, is that Paul is saying no such thing. Paul is telling the National Jews (Israelites) that unless their circumcision is of the heart, their physical circumcision is worthless. If they really want to be the Jew that follows Judaism correctly, they need to be circumcised in their heart.

So once again, Paul is directly reaching out to Israelites. Notice the words, “my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:”. Why would Paul wish to be accursed for the saved? It makes no sense! He is saying that He, like Jesus, would be willing to sacrifice his life to have the Israelites be saved! “Who are Israelites”

I know this is hard to believe, but folks such as Calvinists and Preterists insist that Paul isn't referring to Israelites, as in the offspring of Jacob, who's name was changed to Israel. Folks, it says, “Who are Israelites”, and this followed “my kinsmen according to the flesh:”.

Now I know in Chapter 2 Paul addressed the idea that real Jews (from a spiritual perspective) are the Jews who have had a circumcision of the heart; but that clearly isn't the case here. The only people who insist this is referring to “spiritual Jews" (or Israelites) are groups such as Calvinists and Preterists who deny any sort of distinction between Jews and Gentiles. Essentially, these folks believe that the nation of Israel never consisted of pure Jews. Because of the following text, they believe that Israel was always made up of both Israelites, and Gentiles.

12:38 And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle. Exodus

However, look at what this verse ACTUALLY says … “And (this is a conjunction, joining this verse with the previous verse, or verses), a mixed multitude went up ALSO (also means in addition to) WITH (this means that the “mixed multitude” was joined to another group) THEM (now we must look back to the previous verses to see who the “them" is) and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle” (additionally they brought their livestock of all sorts with them).

So let's now add the previous verses (to see who the “them" is:

12:35 And the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment:12:36 And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they lent unto them such things as they required. And they spoiled the Egyptians.12:37 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children.12:38 And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle. Exodus

Oh look! “the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses”. “and they borrowed of the Egyptians”

The “they" is referring to the “children of Israel”

“And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians”

Again “the people” is referring to “the children of Israel”

“so that they lent unto them”

“them” is still talking about the “children of Israel”

“And they spoiled the Egyptians”

Yep, “they" is still the “children of Israel”

“And the children of Israel journeyed”

Oh look, “the children of Israel”

So, “the children of Israel (ISRAELITES) journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children.” AND (in addition to them) “a mixed multitude went up ALSO WITH them (the Israelites); and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.”

Now you might be saying, ‘I think you're stretching this. Okay, observe:

11:1 And when the people complained, it displeased the LORD: and the LORD heard it; and his anger was kindled; and the fire of the LORD burnt among them, and consumed them that were in the uttermost parts of the camp.11:2 And the people cried unto Moses; and when Moses prayed unto the LORD, the fire was quenched.11:3 And he called the name of the place Taberah: because the fire of the LORD burnt among them.11:4 And the mixt multitude that was among them fell a lusting: and the children of Israel also wept again, and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat? 11:5 We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlick: 11:6 But now our soul is dried away: there is nothing at all, beside this manna, before our eyes. Numbers

I will not go into detail as I did above but please notice …

“And the mixt multitude that was among them fell a lusting: and the children of Israel also wept again” (verse 4)

“the mixt multitude that was AMONG THEM" …

Again, who is the “them"?

Just keep reading ..

“and the children of Israel also wept again”.

Yes, there was a mixed multitude that journeyed WITH the Israelites, and they may have even practiced Judaism (becoming Jews by faith; but not lineage).

Paul has been making a direct distinction between Jews, and Irsaelites "according to the flesh".
 
Upvote 0

BBAS 64

Contributor
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
9,844
1,707
58
New England
✟484,033.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Here is my understanding of the opening of Romans 9 ...

9:1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, 9:2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. Romans

The Holy Spirit now confirms that the Apostle Paul bears great heaviness and a continual sorrow in his heart. Keep in mind the following two things:

1) Paul is writing under inspiration of the Holy Spirit; and 2) Even though Paul has been called to be the Apostle to the Gentiles, the Holy Ghost is the Person who is giving Paul this heaviness in his heart.

You may ask how I know such a thing? The answer is quite simple, the Apostle Paul has totally surrendered his heart, will, and life to serve his Messiah. I once heard a man put it this way; the Holy Spirit reveals through the pen of the Apostle Paul, and even through the pen of Luke (Acts), that Paul had so surrendered his life to his Messiah, that since Paul was about the same age as Jesus when He died, that the Apostle Paul freely gave his life to the Holy Spirit that, it was Paul's way of saying, “Lord, your life here on earth was ended in order to bring me life; I now surrender the rest of my life to You, so you can finish your life through me”.

What would happen if every Christian did this same thing?

9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Romans

Now this is quite a mouthful, but Paul establishes some things here, quite quickly. So let's unpack this!

“For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:”

Now we need to remember back to Chapter Two of Romans. 2:23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God? 2:24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written. 2:25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. 2:26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? 2:27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. Romans

Many people try to say that when Paul refers to “Jews", he is referring to a ‘spiritual Jew'. The fact of the matter however, is that Paul is saying no such thing. Paul is telling the National Jews (Israelites) that unless their circumcision is of the heart, their physical circumcision is worthless. If they really want to be the Jew that follows Judaism correctly, they need to be circumcised in their heart.

So once again, Paul is directly reaching out to Israelites. Notice the words, “my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:”. Why would Paul wish to be accursed for the saved? It makes no sense! He is saying that He, like Jesus, would be willing to sacrifice his life to have the Israelites be saved! “Who are Israelites”

I know this is hard to believe, but folks such as Calvinists and Preterists insist that Paul isn't referring to Israelites, as in the offspring of Jacob, who's name was changed to Israel. Folks, it says, “Who are Israelites”, and this followed “my kinsmen according to the flesh:”.

Now I know in Chapter 2 Paul addressed the idea that real Jews (from a spiritual perspective) are the Jews who have had a circumcision of the heart; but that clearly isn't the case here. The only people who insist this is referring to “spiritual Jews" (or Israelites) are groups such as Calvinists and Preterists who deny any sort of distinction between Jews and Gentiles. Essentially, these folks believe that the nation of Israel never consisted of pure Jews. Because of the following text, they believe that Israel was always made up of both Israelites, and Gentiles.

12:38 And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle. Exodus

However, look at what this verse ACTUALLY says … “And (this is a conjunction, joining this verse with the previous verse, or verses), a mixed multitude went up ALSO (also means in addition to) WITH (this means that the “mixed multitude” was joined to another group) THEM (now we must look back to the previous verses to see who the “them" is) and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle” (additionally they brought their livestock of all sorts with them).

So let's now add the previous verses (to see who the “them" is:

12:35 And the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment:12:36 And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they lent unto them such things as they required. And they spoiled the Egyptians.12:37 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children.12:38 And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle. Exodus

Oh look! “the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses”. “and they borrowed of the Egyptians”

The “they" is referring to the “children of Israel”

“And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians”

Again “the people” is referring to “the children of Israel”

“so that they lent unto them”

“them” is still talking about the “children of Israel”

“And they spoiled the Egyptians”

Yep, “they" is still the “children of Israel”

“And the children of Israel journeyed”

Oh look, “the children of Israel”

So, “the children of Israel (ISRAELITES) journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children.” AND (in addition to them) “a mixed multitude went up ALSO WITH them (the Israelites); and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.”

Now you might be saying, ‘I think you're stretching this. Okay, observe:

11:1 And when the people complained, it displeased the LORD: and the LORD heard it; and his anger was kindled; and the fire of the LORD burnt among them, and consumed them that were in the uttermost parts of the camp.11:2 And the people cried unto Moses; and when Moses prayed unto the LORD, the fire was quenched.11:3 And he called the name of the place Taberah: because the fire of the LORD burnt among them.11:4 And the mixt multitude that was among them fell a lusting: and the children of Israel also wept again, and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat? 11:5 We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlick: 11:6 But now our soul is dried away: there is nothing at all, beside this manna, before our eyes. Numbers

I will not go into detail as I did above but please notice …

“And the mixt multitude that was among them fell a lusting: and the children of Israel also wept again” (verse 4)

“the mixt multitude that was AMONG THEM" …

Again, who is the “them"?

Just keep reading ..

“and the children of Israel also wept again”.

Yes, there was a mixed multitude that journeyed WITH the Israelites, and they may have even practiced Judaism (becoming Jews by faith; but not lineage).

Paul has been making a direct distinction between Jews, and Irsaelites "according to the flesh".


Good day, Jack

In general I agree the "my kinsmen according to the flesh. They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law"

Is the only chosen Nation of individual people that were Jews just like Paul, and he did have great sorrow for his people the Jews.

The Gevena bible notes:
Rom 9:3 For I could wish that myself were (a) accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the (b) flesh:

(a) The apostle loved his brethren so completely that if it had been possible he would have been ready to have redeemed the castaways of the Israelites with the loss of his own soul forever: for this word "accursed" signifies as much in this place.

(b) Being brethren by flesh, as from one nation and country.



... what I have yet to find was any evidence of your assertion here as it relates to verse 3.

I know this is hard to believe, but folks such as Calvinists and Preterists insist that Paul isn't referring to Israelites, as in the offspring of Jacob, who's name was changed to Israel. Folks, it says, “Who are Israelites”, and this followed “my kinsmen according to the flesh:”.


Read Piper's exergesis on Romans Chapter 9, read Boice's work on Romans, read DA Carsons work in the NIV study bible, Read MacArthur work in his commentary, looked at Hendriksen commentary on Romans, and John Gill's work

None of them hold the view attributed to them in your post. Do you have a reference to a Reformed source for such a view as it relates to Romans 9:3. There is a coming twist in verse 6 notice the "but" here:

9:6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham obecause they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring

Not sure what that has to do with the verse we were discussing 9:22?

In Him,

Bill
 
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Good day, Jack

In general I agree the "my kinsmen according to the flesh. They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law"

Is the only chosen Nation of individual people that were Jews just like Paul, and he did have great sorrow for his people the Jews.

The Gevena bible notes:
Rom 9:3 For I could wish that myself were (a) accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the (b) flesh:

(a) The apostle loved his brethren so completely that if it had been possible he would have been ready to have redeemed the castaways of the Israelites with the loss of his own soul forever: for this word "accursed" signifies as much in this place.

(b) Being brethren by flesh, as from one nation and country.



... what I have yet to find was any evidence of your assertion here as it relates to verse 3.




Read Piper's exergesis on Romans Chapter 9, read Boice's work on Romans, read DA Carsons work in the NIV study bible, Read MacArthur work in his commentary, looked at Hendriksen commentary on Romans, and John Gill's work

None of them hold the view attributed to them in your post. Do you have a reference to a Reformed source for such a view as it relates to Romans 9:3. There is a coming twist in verse 6 notice the "but" here:

9:6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham obecause they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring

Not sure what that has to do with the verse we were discussing 9:22?

In Him,

Bill
Hello 64,

Please forgive the length of this, just addressing the text.

Part One:

Let me begin with a few words from Gill:

"for they are not all Israel, which are of Israel;
that is, they which are the descendants of the patriarch Jacob, whose name was Israel; or who are of the Israelitish nation, of the stock of Israel, belonging to that people; they are not all (larvy ta) , "the Israel", by way of emphasis, as in ( Psalms 25:22 ) , or the "Israel of God", ( Galatians 6:16 ) , the Israel whom Jehovah the Father has chosen for a peculiar people; which Christ has redeemed from all their iniquities; which the Spirit of God calls with an holy calling, by special grace, to special privileges; the seed of Israel who are justified in Christ, whose iniquities are so pardoned and done away, that when they are sought for they shall not be found, and who are saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation: or in other words, though they are "Israel after the flesh", ( 1 Corinthians 10:18 ) , yet not after the Spirit; though they are by nation Israelites, they are not Israelites "indeed", as Nathanael was, ( John 1:47 ) ; they are Jews outwardly, not inwardly; they have not all principles of grace, uprightness, and sincerity in them: now to these spiritual Israelites, or seed of Abraham, were the word of God, the promises of God concerning spiritual and eternal things made, and upon these they had their effect; and therefore it could not be said that the word of God had taken none effect; though the whole body of Israel after the flesh were cut off and rejected."

When Gill says, "the Israel whom Jehovah the Father has chosen for a peculiar people; which Christ has redeemed from all their iniquities; which the Spirit of God calls with an holy calling, by special grace, to special privileges; the seed of Israel who are justified in Christ, whose iniquities are so pardoned and done away, that when they are sought for they shall not be found, and who are saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation", he is referring to the doctrine of Unconditional Election.

Hence, the Physical seed is not what the real promise is, the Spiritual seed (the Elect) is.

I will now present my comments on this text. I hope that by me providing further comments, these additional comments will also answer what my previous comments had to do with verse 22. (Remember, verse 22 must be understood in the context of the entire text.)

9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Romans


So Paul says it's the Israelites, and then gives us a list of things that pertaineth to the Israelites:

1) The adoption
2) The glory
3) The covenants
4) The giving of the law
5) The service of God
6) The promises
7) And as concerning the flesh Christ came” (through their fathers)

Now look at this list. There are six things listed prior to mentioning the fact that Christ came through the lineage of the Israelites. But this list is preceded by the words, “to whom pertaineth”. So each of the six things in this list pertain to the “Israelites". Notice, the Holy Spirit didn't inspire Paul to say “Jews". He specifically said “Israelites”. There is no doubt that he is referring to the lineage of Jacob because of the statement, “Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came”. In both Matthew and Luke we have a lineage which verifies this point. Now follow closely … the things listed here by Paul pertain to “Israelites", not Jews. The Holy Spirit clearly says that the things that Paul is about to mention do NOT pertain to Jews that were circumcised in their hearts; He has Paul declare that they pertain to the people known as “Israelites", that concerning the flesh (NOT THE SPIRIT), are lineage of Christ.

Again, “Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came”

So the things that Paul mentions here pertain to the national Israelites, who are the descendants of Jacob, whom God named Israel. Let's consider things on this list individually:

1) The adoption God has chosen to adopt, as His children the Israelites. Be careful how you treat God's children. (This includes how we speak concerning them.)

2) The glory One day (of God's choosing), He will bring glory to His children. Consider this, Paul wrote this letter in about 58 AD. Since the Holy Spirit had Paul write that the glory pertained to the Israelites, isn't it only logical that at some time in the future God will glorify them? This of course doesn't fit the teachings of Preterism , because they think that God so judged the Israelites in 70 AD, that God is absolutely finished with them as a nation. Maybe the Holy Spirit didn't get the memo from Preterism when inspiring Paul to write this text.

3) The covenants The first thing I want you to notice here is what this doesn't say. It doesn't say , “covenant” singular; it says “covenants” plural. This means that both the Old Covenant, and the New Covenant pertain to Israelites! This is why Peter was the Apostle to the Israelites.

2:8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles) Galatians

So according to Paul in his epistle to the Galatians, the Holy Spirit bears witness to the fact that Peter “wrought effectually” to the “circumcision”. Notice, he didn't say “Jews". Why? The New Covenant, just like the Old Covenant pertains to the Israelites.

Consider this, as we have already seen, Christ came through the lineage of the Israelites. Christ is the Messiah of the Israelites. Christ preached the New Covenant to the Israelites. We will see as we examine Chapter 11, that the Israelites are the “olive tree" which the Gentiles are “graffed" into. Why? Because the New Covenant pertains to the Israelites.

4) The giving of the law God gave the law to the Israelites, but the Gentiles benefit from it, because it serves as our schoolmaster, to bring us to the grace of God.

5) The service of God As God established the nation of Israel, God desired to make Himself available to mankind; while also making mankind available to Himself. God chose to give this service to the Israelites. Paul with these few words, establishes that, in order to get to the Creator God, we must go through the God of the Israelites. He has established a way to bring mankind and Himself together, and that “Way” came through the Israelites. 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. John

6) The promises The promises of God begin with salvation, and blossom from there. Since salvation came through Christ, and Christ came through the lineage of the Israelites, it is only logical that the promises of God pertain to the Israelites.

Paul continues, “who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.”

No person who claims Christianity as their “religion” would deny this. (That Christ is over all.) BUT, when you put this portion of Scripture together, all of a sudden, there's an issue.

9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Romans

I must take a few moments to establish an important point. After the reign of Solomon; the “kingdom" of Israel was divided. Rather than getting into all kinds of details, allow me to get straight to the point. In that divided kingdom, only two tribes remained in the southern kingdom which was called Judah. Interestingly, the southern kingdom were called Jews, while the northern tribes were called Israelites; but, here in this text, Paul makes no such distinction. As a matter of fact, even though Paul was of the tribe of Benjamin (which we will see in Chapter 11; Paul refers to Himself as an Israelite. Here are the distinctions Paul makes; 1) all the lineage of Israel are Israelites; 2) the typical Israelite practiced Judaism, and was therefore called a Jew, (because he was Jewish); 3) in Chapter 2 of this epistle (Romans), Paul makes a distinction (which I refer to above), between the Israelite that is a Jew inwardly, versus a Jew that is one outwardly; the former having experienced the operation of God on his heart, while the latter only followed the law outwardly.

Hence, when Paul now says that all the things we have in Christ, pertain to the Israelites, there are particular sects of Christianity that don't agree with Paul. Well, they don't say they disagree with Paul, they simply say that people other than them do not understand what Paul is saying. They appeal to Chapter 2, but refuse to acknowledge everything else Paul says about the matter.

Moving on with our study …

9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. Romans

Paul, as I stated in the introduction of this study constantly expounds upon that which he says. Here, Paul is about to make sure that his readers don’t have any misconceptions about what he is about to say. Remember Paul was a Pharisee trained by the great Gamaliel, hence, Paul learned to present his arguments well, and make sure he covered every detail. In the above text we see Paul addressing the fact that God did not choose ALL of Israel's seed. Israel (Jacob) had two sons, Esau and Isaac. But as we are soon reminded of by Paul, God chose the seed that came through Isaac, rather than Ishmael.

What Paul is going to do through the next several verses is show that God chooses a cording to His purposes.

9:6A Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect.

Why do we see this phrase?

We must remember that God has a plan of Redemption for individuals through grace, but God also chose a Nation, and thereby a bloodline, to bring forth the Redeemer. What Paul is about to address is the fact that even being of the ‘bloodline’ of Messiah doesn’t merit anyone ‘salvation’.

Years ago I worked for a company in which an ‘Israelite’ was also employed. As I spoke to him concerning his need for Christ, he quickly did his best to remind me that it was me that needed to get right with the Messiah; for he, (as was at least his thinking), was just fine because, (by his own words), “I'm a Jew, I'm one of God's chosen people". Now what he was really saying was, I'm an Israelite, I'm part of God's chosen Nation, and therefore I'm saved!

9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect.

The Israelites thought that ALL Israelites of ALL ages would be saved, but that isn’t what Scripture teaches. That is why the Israelite I knew thought he was “safe".

However, this is precisely what Paul was teaching against in this passage. A Jew is not a real Jew unless that practice of religion is based upon an inner change of the heart; and an Israelite is not guaranteed eternal life based upon a birthright, (just because he is of the seed of Israel (Jacob).

The common denominator of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was faith. Yes, Messiah will come through a particular bloodline, but that bloodline does not merit eternal life. (Hence, not all Israel are true Israelites, because not all of the bloodline of Israel imitate the faith of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.)

9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. Romans

9:8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. 9:9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son. 9:10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; 9:11 (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) 9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Romans

This is one of Calvinism’s favorite texts to say that God predetermines who gets saved, and who doesn't. The problem is, this “call" isn't about Jacob or Esau being saved, or lost, it is a call to fulfill the purpose of God; that purpose being, the lineage that God chose to bring Christ. The offspring of Esau were called the Edomites. Esau was a very hairy man, and his hair was red. The word “edom" refers to the color red, and therefore the name “Edomites" reflects back to Esau, the man with red hair.

Jacob on the other hand was God's chosen to be in the lineage of Christ. I would like to take a few moments to look at the parenthesis we see in this text.

“(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)”
 
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Good day, Jack

In general I agree the "my kinsmen according to the flesh. They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law"

Is the only chosen Nation of individual people that were Jews just like Paul, and he did have great sorrow for his people the Jews.

The Gevena bible notes:
Rom 9:3 For I could wish that myself were (a) accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the (b) flesh:

(a) The apostle loved his brethren so completely that if it had been possible he would have been ready to have redeemed the castaways of the Israelites with the loss of his own soul forever: for this word "accursed" signifies as much in this place.

(b) Being brethren by flesh, as from one nation and country.



... what I have yet to find was any evidence of your assertion here as it relates to verse 3.




Read Piper's exergesis on Romans Chapter 9, read Boice's work on Romans, read DA Carsons work in the NIV study bible, Read MacArthur work in his commentary, looked at Hendriksen commentary on Romans, and John Gill's work

None of them hold the view attributed to them in your post. Do you have a reference to a Reformed source for such a view as it relates to Romans 9:3. There is a coming twist in verse 6 notice the "but" here:

9:6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham obecause they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring

Not sure what that has to do with the verse we were discussing 9:22?

In Him,

Bill
Part Two:

In the normal way things were done, the first born would be the offspring of blessing, but, sometimes God chose to do things differently, because He can. It is interesting that Paul words this statement as he does. The first words we see are, “For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil”. This shows the omniscience of God, and it also shows his sovereignty. Esau and Jacob were both in the womb of Rebecca, but God had foreknowledge of who they would become. Neither had yet done any works, “good or evil"; but God, already knowing the heart of them both, knew which son He would chose to fulfill His purpose. God elected Jacob because God foreknew the heart of Jacob. Then we see, “that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth)”. The call of God has nothing to do with our works (good or evil), the call of God has to do with the heart. The heart responds to love with trust, which binds us in our relationship. This is not a determined event of God, but rather God acting on what He knows, because He is the omniscient God.

“It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”

Again, this is not God choosing to create Esau, a person whom He would simply determine to hate. God hated Esau because Esau would choose not to have the same type heart of heart that Jacob chose to have.

9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.9:15 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.9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. Romans

Is it unrighteous for God to use either His omniscience, or His omnipotence to bring about His sovereign plan? No, not at all. What would be unrighteous would be for God to determine a person to transgress the law, (giving the person no option but to transgress the law), and then hold the person accountable for transgressing, even though God Himself took away his option to be obedient. (This by the way is EXACTLY what Calvinism teaches about Adam in the Garden of Eden.)

God is free to show mercy, (I LOVE when God shows me mercy)! If God gave me what I deserved, I would go straight to Hell, I wouldn't stop at “Go", I wouldn't “collect $200.00”; Nope, just straight to Hell, and throw away the key! By the way, every single day God allows a lost person to live, He has extended His hand of mercy to that person. He gives them another day to receive Himself as Saviour.

God is free to show compassion. I also love when God shows me compassion, being gentle with me, when I so deserve otherwise. What a great God we serve!

9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. Romans

Now this verse along with … 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. John

These verses have a common element … the “will" of men. Men are neither saved, nor used of God according to our own will.

The will is what we desire; but it doesn't automatically assume we have the ability. Calvinism tries to make the “will" and “ability” equivalent; but they are not.

I may will to fly, but, I have not the ability to do so. I may will to be saved, but, I have no ability to save myself. I may have the will to serve God in a particular way, but I have no ability to do so.

God can call me through the witness of creation, but that doesn't save me. I may see that God is the Creator God, (because of the witness of God in the creation), but even that doesn't save me. I may see God as the Creator God, and will that I would be saved, but I still have no ability to save myself. It is only when I realize that I have no ability to save myself, and surrender to the power of God, that I can be saved, and or be used of Him.

9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Romans

Now Calvinists like to say that God initially hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and this proves determinism. But God didn't initially harden Pharaoh's heart; Pharaoh already had a hard heart, but now that Pharaoh was about to ask a really bad question; God was about to harden his heart the more, to insure that Pharaoh learned the answer well.

5:2 And Pharaoh said, Who is the LORD, that I should obey his voice to let Israel go? I know not the LORD, neither will I let Israel go. Exodus

Pharaoh believed he was a god. Hence, some “god" of the Israelites wasn't going to tell him what to do. Pharaoh asked the worse question he could have ever asked, “Who is the LORD, that I should obey his voice to let Israel go?”

Here is the point; God never hardens a person's heart to keep that person from getting saved. But, God will take a person whom He already knows will not get saved, and use that person to fulfill His purpose, and His plan. That is what Paul is referring to in this text. (Regardless of what Calvinism teaches.)

9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Romans

Why did Paul refer to Pharaoh? Because Pharaoh thought that this “god" of the Israelites was no more personal to the Israelites, than his “gods" were to him. The gods of the Egyptians weren't personal, with interactions between them and the gods. This is what God was about to show Pharaoh, the Egyptians, and even every nation around them who would learn of the events that were about to unfold.

God can use ANYONE or ANYTHING to show His power. That is the point.

Once again, God is omniscient and omnipotent, and He is perfectly within His rights to act as the sovereign God.

9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, Romans

The HS now has Paul ask a number of rhetorical questions. “Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

God is sovereign (that means the way He wants to be sovereign).

Please allow me to make a point at this juncture. A “Sovereign” decides how he wants to exercise his “sovereignty”.

Prior to being President, Donald Trump had a TV show called, “The Apprentice”. He was the ‘sovereign’ on that show. He could choose to personally select each member of either team, or he could have the contestants choose teams. He could choose the captains, or he could ask for volunteers. He was sovereign, and chose how to exercise that sovereignty.

God is SOVEREIGN, He can choose how to exercise His sovereignty.

Paul is explaining this exact point. Who is entitled to challenge the sovereignty of God? NOONE!

So after asking several rhetorical questions that establish God’s sovereignty, Paul throws out a curveball.


Paul asks a question that is treated like an indicative, or even an imperative statement by Calvinists. “What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,”

Do you see the words “What if"?

What if God chose to endure with long suffering those vessels fitted (not ordained or decreed) to destruction?

The vessels that are “fit" for destruction are deserving of destruction, but rather than just give them what they deserve, what if God decided to be longsuffering to them, and that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,”

Okay, we all are “fit" for destruction; but what if God is purposely being longsuffering so that he can make known to us the riches of His glory, (we would then be the vessels of His mercy, which (the mercy) He had prepared unto glory.

How glorious is it to have a God that would take vessels that deserve destruction, have mercy upon them through longsuffering, just so He could then be glorified?

You see Paul isn’t saying God ordained vessels to damnation, he said the vessels were fitted (perfect for damnation due to their own rebellion, not God ordaining them for such), but since God doesn’t desire their damnation He chose to be longsuffering towards them, so He might have mercy upon them … hence the words “what if"!

God chose to exercise His sovereignty by calling all through many witness, by being lifted up, (like the serpent in the wilderness), and giving us such a great witness of His grace, that we would be “without excuse” (having no excuse to not believe His witnesses to us).

9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? Romans

We need to understand, the Jews (believing Israelites) thought that God would only use them, (because they were both Israelites and believers in Christ). Keep in mind Peter has already brought the gospel to some Gentiles through Cornelius. But the Jews needed all the Apostles to confirm that God had reached out to the Gentiles in the same manner as He had to the Jews.

Even though God's chosen nation was Israel “collectively”, God was reaching to the Gentiles individually to become “Christians”. That is why in the meeting held among the Apostles, (about 49 AD), that circumcision is not required at all for salvation. Converts were not becoming “Jews", and did not therefore require them to perform the brit milah.

9:25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.9:26 And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God. Romans

This is where things get interesting. Paul (by inspiration of the Holy Spirit), is about to use the Old Testament references to explain that God is now using non-Jews to accomplish His work. As an introduction to this portion of his epistle, Paul explains to the believing Israelites, and the believing Jews, that God can use anyone He wants to in order to show his power. Hence, Paul brings up Pharaoh. (Now keep in mind, since Paul has already established the fact that God can, and did use the wicked Pharaoh to show His power, Paul is now free to show how can use Gentiles for His purposes as well.)

Now Paul says, “in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. 9:26 And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.”

This of course is a reference to Hosea 2:23. The Believing Jews understand they are God's people, but need to see how non-Jews can be God's people as well. And so, as was the custom of Paul, he provides the references needed to show the believing Jews, that the prophets wrote of this very event. But, as we are about to see, Paul, in his normal fashion, isn't finished expounding just yet.

9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved: 9:28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth. Romans

Isn't it interesting that Paul has once again shifted terms? Now he says, “Esaias also crieth concerning Israel”, not “Jews". He futher says, “Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved: 9:28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.”

So once again, we aren't speaking about just “Jews" (religious); but the “children of Israel” (lineage). God doesn't say the remnant will be “Jews", he is referring to the “children of Israel”. (Israelites)

God is going to do a work with the “children of Israel” upon the earth, in which a remnant will be left,. But then Paul continues …

9:29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha. Romans

The remnant that will be left (of the children of Israel … lineage of Israel … Israelites) will be so small, it will be as a seed, (compared to the number of the sand of the sea, as it once was). And were it not for cutting His “work short", they would be destroyed like Sodoma and Gomorrha. But Paul still isn't finished.

9:30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. Romans

Paul now says that that the Gentiles, (these are neither Israelites nor Jews), which followed not after righteousness have attained righteousness. What is he talking about? The Gentiles would receive the preaching of the gospel in its intended way, to see their sin, and need of a Saviour.

9:31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. 9:32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone; 9:33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. Romans

Paul is referring to the exact thing that Ezekiel said pertaining to the Israelites …

33:13 When I shall say to the righteous, that he shall surely live; if he trust to his own righteousness, and commit iniquity, all his righteousnesses shall not be remembered; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it. Ezekiel

The key word in the above text is the word “own". If he trust to his “own" righteousness, and commit iniquity, all his righteousnesses shall not be remembered; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it.

The problem is, that the religious Israelites were focused on there “own" righteousness, instead of using the law as the intended schoolmaster. The law that should have been used as a schoolmaster, had become a stumblingstone to them. Rather than allow the law to show them their sin, and need of the Saviour; they tried to use the law as the means of obtaining righteousness, and thereby salvation.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Butch5

Newbie
Supporter
Apr 7, 2012
8,932
767
62
Homer Georgia
Visit site
✟308,497.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Good day, Butch

So long as you count the children of Promise as Israel, and not the flesh children of Abraham (nation).
As defined in Romans 9...

Then we could agree.

In Him,

Bill
Hi Bill,

When you say the Children of promise who do you mean?
 
Upvote 0

Ttalkkugjil

Social Pastor
Mar 6, 2019
1,680
908
Suwon
✟34,572.00
Country
Korea, Republic Of
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
That God showed patience in their case had the object to give a proof of God's glory upon us, in whom God's purpose is realized.

By calling us, by converting us to Jesus, God has glorified Godself.

By God's call we've received God's mercy, God has made us grace's bearers in Christ.

We've been prepared beforehand for glory. Both our call and our entrance into glory is a result of God’s grace.

So God glorified Godself upon us through the manifestation of God's grace, and simultaneously God gathered for Godself a people that sees God's mercy and will behold God's glory in eternity.
 
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
6,112
1,696
✟201,659.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Rom 9:12-15
It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.What shall we say then? Is thereunrighteousness with God? God forbid. 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.


In verse 13, by referencing Esau and Jacob, Paul intimates that election/predestination is individualized. The point is reinforce in verse 15 which, in the Greek shows clearly (ὃν ἂν translated as "on whom" is singular) that God determines to have mercy and compassion on some individuals. He also hardens individuals . . .


What of the nations these were?????????? At least to become.
Ge 25:23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.


Rom 9:12-15
It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.What shall we say then? Is thereunrighteousness with God? God forbid. 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.
The above appears to include two manner of "peoples", two nations?
 
Upvote 0

Dr. Jack

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2019
839
120
63
Pennsylvania
✟26,705.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
That God showed patience in their case had the object to give a proof of God's glory upon us, in whom God's purpose is realized.

By calling us, by converting us to Jesus, God has glorified Godself.

By God's call we've received God's mercy, God has made us grace's bearers in Christ.

We've been prepared beforehand for glory. Both our call and our entrance into glory is a result of God’s grace.

So God glorified Godself upon us through the manifestation of God's grace, and simultaneously God gathered for Godself a people that sees God's mercy and will behold God's glory in eternity.
None of this supports predestination. The mindset of the Israelites was that God would ONLY use them, even converted Jews had trouble grasping the idea that God was now not only saving Gentiles (None Israelites), but that He was also using them in His ministry!

That is what the purpose of Paul saying ...

9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Romans

It has NOTHING to do with predestination.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

msortwell

Senior Member
Mar 9, 2004
1,245
147
64
Gibson, Wisconsin
✟183,401.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
What of the nations these were?????????? At least to become.
Ge 25:23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.

The above appears to include two manner of "peoples", two nations?

If I understand what you are alluding to . . . you are offering that we should reject the plain and literal meaning of what Paul writes, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (wherein individuals referred to by name, and subsequent references employing singular pronouns) in favor of an allegorical interpretation?

It's a bit surreal that someone would make such an argument to defend a dispensational theological position against a Reformed/Covenantal view.
 
Upvote 0