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.