Romans 9: Part Four
Happy New Year! It's been interesting to watch the conversation in the comment box. So here's where I'm at so far.
Summary
Romans 9:1-5 brings up a problem. The majority of Israel was opposed to the gospel of Jesus Christ. Thus, they stood accursed, facing God's eternal condemnation (v. 1-3). However, they were also recipients of great promises from God (v. 4-5). These promises of blessing seemed to guarantee Israel's salvation.
So, here was the common Jewish objection to Paul's message. If God's promises guarantee Israel's salvation, and the majority of Jews is not saved, then Paul's gospel is not accurate. In other words, has God's Word (His promised blessings for Israel) failed? (v. 6) No, it's hasn't. In fact, God's intention to bless Israel (His purpose in election) stands. It has not failed.
How's that? Well, not all Israel is Israel. God never intended to bless every physical descendant of Abraham. Instead, Paul asserts that He has named only certain individuals as the recipients of His promises. Then, he gives two illustrations of this. Isaac and Ishmael and then Jacob and Esau. Although Ishmael and Esau were physical descendants of Abraham, they were not named by God as heirs of the promises. On the other hand, Isaac and Jacob were (6-13).
By Him Who Calls
The key to this passage is verse 8. This verse shows who God considers to be recipients of His promises. Paul writes, "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" (ESV). In this verse, Paul uses two common terms that appear elsewhere in His writings--the children of the flesh and the children of the promise. These two types of people stand in direct contrast in Paul's thoughts.
Check out Galatians 4:28-31. "Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. But what does the Scripture say? 'Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son.' Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman" (NIV).
Throughout Galatians, Paul compares two types of people, those who trust in themselves for salvation and those who trust in Jesus for salvation. The first group Paul allegorically represents with Ishmael and the second group Paul associates with Isaac. (Now it must be clear. As the interpreter, I don't have the right to allegorize the text. However, it is different if Paul, as the author, allegorizes the text). This is exactly what Paul does. He uses Ishmael as a type representing the children of the flesh, those who rely on their works in order to please God. And he uses Isaac as a type to represent the children of the promise, those who rely on faith in Christ to please God.
The similarities are clear. Paul uses the same language and the same individuals as types (only this time he adds Jacob and Esau as another illustration). Here's why God has not broken His Word with Israel. He only considers the children of the promise, represented by Isaac and Jacob, to be recipients of His blessings. The children of flesh, those Jews who are relying on their ethnic heritage or works, are not included. God has kept His promises. Paul's gospel is thus true.
Summary
Romans 9:1-5 brings up a problem. The majority of Israel was opposed to the gospel of Jesus Christ. Thus, they stood accursed, facing God's eternal condemnation (v. 1-3). However, they were also recipients of great promises from God (v. 4-5). These promises of blessing seemed to guarantee Israel's salvation.
So, here was the common Jewish objection to Paul's message. If God's promises guarantee Israel's salvation, and the majority of Jews is not saved, then Paul's gospel is not accurate. In other words, has God's Word (His promised blessings for Israel) failed? (v. 6) No, it's hasn't. In fact, God's intention to bless Israel (His purpose in election) stands. It has not failed.
How's that? Well, not all Israel is Israel. God never intended to bless every physical descendant of Abraham. Instead, Paul asserts that He has named only certain individuals as the recipients of His promises. Then, he gives two illustrations of this. Isaac and Ishmael and then Jacob and Esau. Although Ishmael and Esau were physical descendants of Abraham, they were not named by God as heirs of the promises. On the other hand, Isaac and Jacob were (6-13).
By Him Who Calls
The key to this passage is verse 8. This verse shows who God considers to be recipients of His promises. Paul writes, "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" (ESV). In this verse, Paul uses two common terms that appear elsewhere in His writings--the children of the flesh and the children of the promise. These two types of people stand in direct contrast in Paul's thoughts.
Check out Galatians 4:28-31. "Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. But what does the Scripture say? 'Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son.' Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman" (NIV).
Throughout Galatians, Paul compares two types of people, those who trust in themselves for salvation and those who trust in Jesus for salvation. The first group Paul allegorically represents with Ishmael and the second group Paul associates with Isaac. (Now it must be clear. As the interpreter, I don't have the right to allegorize the text. However, it is different if Paul, as the author, allegorizes the text). This is exactly what Paul does. He uses Ishmael as a type representing the children of the flesh, those who rely on their works in order to please God. And he uses Isaac as a type to represent the children of the promise, those who rely on faith in Christ to please God.
The similarities are clear. Paul uses the same language and the same individuals as types (only this time he adds Jacob and Esau as another illustration). Here's why God has not broken His Word with Israel. He only considers the children of the promise, represented by Isaac and Jacob, to be recipients of His blessings. The children of flesh, those Jews who are relying on their ethnic heritage or works, are not included. God has kept His promises. Paul's gospel is thus true.
posted by Daniel | 2:37 PM
1 Comments:
Twgrimace, thanks for visiting.
Magnum,
These commentaries have helped me in understanding Romans 9: Doug Moo's NICIT, Cranfield's ICC, and ironically, Piper's The Justification of God. I've found helpful info in each of these.
This interpretation is best developed in Jacob Arminius' commentary on Romans 9.
Post a Comment
<< Home