By Liaf
The book of Romans is a great epistle of the
Apostle Paul that explains to the Church of Rome the basic
fundamentals of Christianity and its logical discourse. As a
matter of fact, when there is a Christian new to the faith, I
often suggest to him or her if they do not know much about the
Bible to start off by reading one gospel (maybe Mark). I
then suggest reading two epistles, namely Romans and
Galatians (the “reformation epistle” that Luther
loved). Then they can get more into historical backgrounds
that set the stage for Christianity through Israel, learn why
everything is the way it is, and finally learn where everything
is headed. Most Christians are yet babes. One of the hardest
things to do is to balance the basics yet create an environment
where they will want to learn more so that their understanding is
much greater (without losing them). That’s a gift I
haven’t got (yet).
So what’s so special about Romans 9? Up
to this chapter Paul already dealt with the theological
“whys” and problem of sin, that righteousness comes by
faith, and the nature of the Law. In essence, the Law cannot save
anybody, but only acts as a mirror for one to see himself or
herself so that the statement “all have sinned and come
short of the glory of God” is true. Thus, the way for
salvation through faith is illustrated by the Law’s
ineffectual power to save anybody, and indeed, Paul argued, the
modus operandi of faith antedated the Law by the example
of Abraham and God’s pronouncement of Abraham’s
righteousness by his faith. Because Paul brought up the issue of
the Law (or I should say so many were concerned about it), right
away this brings up the question of Israel. If all people
are saved by grace, what was the purpose of the Law, and for that
matter Israel (the custodians of the Law)? Paul deals with the
“Israel” factor in the equation in these chapters.
After all, this is a web site that places heavy emphasis on the
nature and purpose of Israel and the coming Kingdom of God.
Besides, you have probably heard enough about sin, the Law and
salvation by faith that I do not need to drill that into you (I
hope). But Paul felt that the issue of Israel was important
enough to devote three chapters (chapters 9 and also 10 and 11)
of a sixteen-chapter epistle dealing with foundational
Christianity. I also think it’s important to look closely at
these three chapters.
Probably you were taught that Israel was the Jews that rejected the Messiah and persecuted the early church. As a result, their fall was needed for Gentile conversion but they themselves were enduring their plight because of this (they are blinded for a time). Nevertheless, the Jews are God’s chosen people and one day will see the light and be restored. And in a nutshell, that’s what we’re lead to believe about these three chapters. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Let’s start by looking at Romans
chapter nine:
Romans 9:1-5: I say the truth in Christ,
I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy
Ghost,
That I have great heaviness and continual
sorrow in my heart.
For I could wish that myself were
accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the
flesh:
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;
Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
First of all, we know that all Israelites
are from the house of Judah (the Jews) and the house of
Israel (the remaining exiled Israelites from the Northern
Kingdom). Paul’s wish here for his own kinsmen pertained
to the Jews since he himself was of the tribe of Benjamin (Romans
11:1). The Jews then, are Israelites. By extension Israelites
are from a greater number of people than just the Jews is in
effect what he was saying. In other words, he was saying
that his wish was for his kinsmen who in turn were from the much
larger population of the Israelites. There are times
he alternates back and forth between the house of Israel, the
Jews, or possibly both. How do we know which is which? We must go
by the context, and I will show later on the justification for
this. Verse four speaks of all Israelites because they are
“to whom pertaineth the adoption”. Sorry folks.
That is not the Jew. The Jew cannot make that claim. Who can? The
tribe of Joseph can say that (one of the Lost Tribes) when Paul
was alluding to Genesis 48:5 that states Israel adopted
Joseph’s two sons Ephraim and Manasseh (we shall see another
allusion to these passages later). Now other parts of the verse
can apply to the Jew such as “the covenants”, the
“giving of the Law”, and the “service of God”
if by that you include the tribe of Levi with the Jews. As children
of Israel, the Jew had covenantal rights and land allotments
the same as all the other Israelites and of course we saw that
the promise of the scepter was given to them--- but not
the adoption or birthright! But collectively, he addressed all
Israelites here and all Israel collectively had these privileges
listed in this verse. “Whose are the fathers, and
of whom, as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over
all, God blessed for ever. Amen.” Verse five is saying
that from Israel all the fathers came (from whence came the
twelve tribes) but from one (of whom) came Christ from the
tribe of Judah and the predecessor of course (of whom )
was Israel, Isaac, and Abraham. Let’s continue on:
Romans 9:6-17: Not as though the word of
God hath taken none effect. For they are not all
Israel, which are of Israel:
Neither, because they are the seed of
Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac
shall thy seed be called.
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.
For this is the word of promise, At this
time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.
And not only this; but when Rebecca also
had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;
(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;)
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 there
unrighteousness 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.
So then it is not of him that willeth,
nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
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.
I heard all kinds of explanations of this
next passage because it is supposed that the grace and promises
to the Jew “did not take effect” (as the verse starts
out) due to their unbelief. And then it is taught that Paul was
trying to defend God’s faithfulness by saying here that not
all Israelites are true Israelites because not all have faith in
Christ. Here come the Christians who are sons of Abraham by faith
and therefore they are the children of promise (replacement
theology) for the Jew. They are the “true Israelites”.
Hence, the Jews “blew it” and God ‘s promises
would work instead to those who placed their faith in Him. Fiddlesticks!
Paul was teaching about election and God’s mercy
here. He will then compare that to the spiritual aspect
(where I am eventually going here is that there is racial
election, as in these examples and also and election of grace). Regarding the statement, "For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel", Paul was saying is that Jews (or that portion of Israel) are NOT all of Israel--- there were more Israelites in the Lost Tribes. And the (lost) tribe of Joseph had the promises of the birthright, not the Jews. In addition, Paul
was saying was that not all physical children of
Abraham were the promise recipients. In other words,
Abraham had Ishmael and Isaac. The promises went to Isaac through
God’s choosing. Later Isaac had Esau and Jacob. The promised
lineage went through Jacob and so on. That’s why you never
hear God say, “I am the God of Abraham Isaac and Esau”
or again, “I am the God of Abraham, Ishmael and Kedar”.
That would sound awfully silly, wouldn’t it? No. Instead you
hear God say, “I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob.” Yet, all these names were children of
Abraham but not all were recipients of the promise as the
chosen seed. Later on, we shall see how this relates to spiritual
sons of Abraham by faith in Christ. However, if I cleared
this much up for you, I suspect that with this added clarity you
may get an “Aha!” experience and see where this is
taking us. Nevertheless, the remaining verses show
God’s mercy in whom He wants to choose for His purposes. In
other words, God’s the boss. He chooses the way that He
wants to carry out His plan with whomever He wants (it’s
not by man’s will nor is it because man was either bad or
good). Got that? That’s all Paul was effectively trying
to say.
Before we go on, we see here that Paul set
the stage for God’s calling and election in order to carry
out his plan. By extension, this will answer the upsetting
statements regarding Paul’s sorrow for his kinsmen and
God’s word “not taking effect” to the Jew if
indeed that is surprising to many people. The stage he set will
clarify these things as we read on.
Romans 9:18-21: Therefore hath he mercy
on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he
yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
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?
Hath not the potter power over the
clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour,
and another unto dishonour?
Of course since Paul was a thinker and knew
that people would naturally ask philosophical questions regarding
God’s mercy. He created the hypothetical situation where a
person challenges God by claiming if God made somebody the way
they were that their freedom of choice would be gone--- the
responsibility for the way they were would then be on God. What
does he effectively reply? “It’s none of your
business!” Just as a potter can make elegant or common
vessels, likewise God can make one person for his mercy and
another one for hardening of the heart. But that’s
predestination! That’s right. Where’s the choice? You
still have it. Both coexist but don’t ask me to
explain that. God works in a totally different timeframe and
place. Time and space does not mean the same for God as it does
for us. By the way, this “potter” analogy reminds me of
Jeremiah chapters 18 and 19. In chapter 18 the house of Israel
(later becoming the Lost Tribes) is regarded as marred clay, but
could still be reworked. In chapter 19 the house of Judah
(the Jews) is compared to a broken vessel. Aha! This gives
us the key! By separating the two houses (which you virtually never
hear being taught today) we can see why the most of the Jews
“did not take” as some put it, and the
“Gentiles” (which also included the lost and divorced
house of Israel) “did take”. You see, so much confusion
results when one applies all of the promises to Israel to
the Jew only. That’s why contradictions arise. We must see
that there were two main groups or nations of God’s
people--- not one! And by extension, Paul (and only Paul) was
given the revelation that the (non-Israelite) Gentiles were also
included with the promises to the house of Israel!
Romans 9:22-33: 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:
And that he might make known the
riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore
prepared unto glory,
Even us, whom he hath called, not of
the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
As he saith also in Osee, [Hosea] I
will call them my people, which were not my people; and her
beloved, which was not beloved.
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.
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:
For he will finish the work, and cut it
short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make
upon the earth.
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.
What shall we say then? That the
Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained
to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
But Israel [i.e.
the part of Israel] which followed after the law
of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
Wherefore? Because they sought it not by
faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled
at that stumblingstone;
As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a
stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on
him shall not be ashamed.
Indeed, as we read on we see that is exactly
what Paul was trying to say. God made some people objects of
wrath (such as Pharaoh and the Jews) to make His mercy shown such
as to the house of Israel as quoted in the passage of Hosea.
“But Paul used that passage to justify the calling of the
Gentiles, not Israel!” protests a stern-faced evangelist
warning all thinking people that they will go to hell if they do
not see things his way. Listen here! Nobody in his or her
right mind or scholarly intellect denies that the passage Paul
quoted in Hosea was addressed to Israel. Paul took some extra
liberties in expanding its meaning because he was shown
that the gospel was intended for the (non-Israelite) Gentiles as
well. That does not justify changing the original
recipient of that prophecy just because he added another
recipient! And what does that passage say? We’ve done many
messages before on it--- in a nutshell, the house of Israel would
lose their identity, they would eventually become populous in
other areas of the world, and they would embrace Christianity
(i.e. become “sons of the Living God”)! The house of
Israel as you (should) know has the birthright tribe of
Joseph---- the chosen seed! Besides, anybody who is not Jewish
is Gentile. And that includes the lost house of Israel! Likewise,
Paul quoted a famous end-time passage in Isaiah regarding the
chosen remnant. Thus, “What shall we say then?” Paul
asked. Indeed, the house of Israel and the Gentiles would receive
and accept the gospel as God reworked that marred clay! What
about the Jew? What about the part of Israel that follows after
the Law? They do not receive their righteousness because they
seek it after works and not faith. They are that broken
vessel which cannot be repaired and as such are objects of wrath.
That’s why the gospel seemingly “did not
take” with them. And knowing this, that’s why Paul
would have been accursed for his brethren’s sake. He loved
his kinsmen and did not want to see them lost! God’s
election and mercy had everything planned out ahead of time so
this was no surprise to Him. And Paul assured us that God’s
promises did not fail and supported his claim with the scripture
about the “rock of offence”.
If you notice something carefully in this chapter, Paul is using a dualistic description of Israel--- one under Law, and one that is the election. Both are Israel, just as Yankees and Rebels were citizens of the United States (wanting to separate). Therefore, it gets confusing which of the two portions of Israel Paul means unless we study the context, e.g. "Israel which follows after the Law". Mainline Christendom goes wrong because Paul used Jews and Gentiles (or Jews and Greeks) and believe he was talking in contrast about a non-Israelite population. True, Paul does include non-Israelites Gentiles, but we must remember that the subject of this chapter and the next two is about Israel.
In the next lesson we will continue this
fascinating subject when we look at Romans 10.