• whose is the adoption,
• the glory,
• the covenants,
• the giving of the law, (Rom 3:1-2)
• the service,
• and the promises;
• 9:5 of whom are the fathers,
• and from whom is Christ as concerning the flesh,

who is over all, God, blessed forever. Amen.

9:8 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God,
but the children of the promise are counted as a seed.

9:9 For this is a word of promise,
"At the appointed time I will come, and Sarah will have a son."(Gen 18:14)
9:10 Not only so, but Rebecca also conceived by one, by our father Isaac.
9:11 For being not yet born, neither having done anything good or bad,
that the purpose of God according to election might stand,
not of works, but of him who calls,
9:12 it was said to her, "The elder will serve the younger."(Gen 25:23)
9:13 Even as it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." (Mal 1:2)

9:15 For he said to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." (Ex 33:19)

9:17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I caused you to be raised up, that I might show in you my power, and that my name might be published abroad in all the earth." (Ex 9:16)

9:19 You will say then to me, "Why does he still find fault? For who withstands his will?"

9:20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God?
Will the thing formed ask him who formed it, "Why did you make me like this?"
9:21 Or hasn't the potter a right over the clay,
from the same lump to make one part a vessel for honor, and another for dishonor?

9:22 What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known,
endured with much patience vessels of wrath made for destruction,
9:23 and that he might make known the riches of his glory on vessels of mercy,
which he prepared beforehand for glory,
9:24 us, whom he also called, not from the Jews only, but also from the Gentiles?

9:25 As he says also in Hosea, "I will call them 'my people,' which were not my people; And her 'beloved,' who was not beloved."
9:26 "It will be that in the place where it was said to them, 'You are not my people,' There they will be called 'children of the living God.'" (Hos 1:10)
9:27 Isaiah cries concerning Israel, "If the number of the children of Israel are as the sand of the sea, It is the remnant who will be saved; (Is 10:22)
9:28 For He will finish the work and cut it short in righteousness, Because the LORD will make a short work upon the earth."
9:29 As Isaiah has said before, "Unless the Lord of Hosts {Greek: Sabaoth} had left us a seed, We would have become like Sodom, And would have been made like Gomorrah."  (Is 1:9)

That the Gentiles, who didn't follow after righteousness,
attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith;
9:31 but Israel, following after a law of righteousness,
didn't arrive at the law of righteousness.

Because they didn't seek it by faith, but as it were by works of the law.
They stumbled over the stumbling stone;
9:33 even as it is written, "Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and a rock of offense; And no one who believes in him will be disappointed."(Is 8:14; Is 28:16)

What Constitutes Israel?

vs 2
Paul shares his heart - his emotions here. Very commonly in Paul's writings he expresses his emotions. One thing which is important to understand here is that - HIS EMOTIONS ARE PART OF THE MESSAGE. They are not the content of the message, but rather they are a part of communicating the message. "because our gospel came to you not simply with words, but also with power, with the Holy Spirit and with deep conviction. You know how we lived among you for your sake." 1Thess 1:5

These are the kind of emotions we should have when we consider the state of the unsaved. The communication of the gospel is not just about facts. The emotions of the messenger also communicate ideas about the gospel.

vs 3
"I could wish" Robertson mentions:. Idiomatic imperfect, "I was on the point of wishing." We can see that I could wish (hucomhn). Idiomatic imperfect, "I was on the point of wishing." We can see that eucomai (I do wish) would be wrong to say. an hucomhn would mean that he does not wish (conclusion of second class condition). an hucomhn would be conclusion of fourth class condition and too remote. He is shut up to the imperfect indicative (Robertson, Grammar, p.  886).

Nonetheless what does it mean to wish himself accursed (anathema)? Interesting how NIV translates his usage of that word in Gal 1:8  "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!" And I would not be surprised if this was Paul's meaning, though there be few Christians who have such love for the unsaved.

"my brothers, those of my own race, the people of Israel." Despite the fact they are unsaved Paul puts them in an endearing category in his heart, as one would one's own earthly family. Yet despite his heart for the Jews God called him primarily to minister to the Gentiles. In fact when he tried to minister to the Jews they tried to kill him. Yet he has this heart for them.

vs 4
"Adoption as sons" - not as Christians are born of God, but rather Israel was allegorically referred to as God's children, like the parable of the lost son, or lost sheep. But of Christians it says, "Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God." John 1:12 Yet Paul was speaking of the unsaved Jews who had not received Christ. And how do you identify children of God? By their love for Christian brethren. "This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother." 1John 3:10

"divine glory" - God revealed himself through interacting with the nation of Israel.

"Covenants" - like the Old Covenant

"Receiving of the Law" - on Mt. Sinai

"Temple Worship" - as specified in the Law of Moses

"Promises" - as specified through the Law and prophets

vs 5
The Patriarchs - the sons of Israel

The human ancestry of Christ (God in the flesh) - as specified in Matt and Luke. Robertson also comments concerning the allusion to his diety in this verse. "A clear statement of the deity of Christ following the remark about his humanity. This is the natural and the obvious way of punctuating the sentence. To make a full stop after sarka (or colon) and start a new sentence for the doxology is very abrupt and awkward. See #Ac 20:28; Tit 2:13 for Paul’s use of "God" applied to Jesus Christ."

However despite all these advantages they had, they were not saved. Paul mentions previously the advantage of growing up Jewish.

"What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? Much in every way! First of all (or Primarily), they have been entrusted with the very words of God." Rom 3:1,2

They had the Word, but they hadn't listened to it in the right spirit. But the word of the LORD was to them, "Precept upon precept, precept upon precept, Line upon line, line upon line, Here a little, there a little," Isa 28:13

vs 6-13
"not all who are descended from Israel are Israel."

"Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children"

"it is not the natural children who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring."

In fact in Gal 3:29 Paul mentions the converse to this. Namely that Gentile Christians are Abraham's seed. "If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise."

So here we see in the beginning verses of this chapter he spoke of an Israel which was not saved - the one for whom he grieved. But then he introduces another kind of Israel - let's say a "spiritual" or allegorical Israel, as opposed to the genetic physical Israel - those who are Jews according to the flesh.

There are many such allegorical relationships in the Bible. For instance according to Eph 5, marriage is a metaphor for the relationship between Christ and the church. Paul himself makes use of the history of Israel such as in 1Cor 10 to teach lessons to Christians. However one has to be careful not to take an analogy too far. For analogies taken too far break down. But safe to keep the analogy within the limits the scriptures place on them.

Paul himself was, of course, both born a Jew and a born-again Jew. For having believed he became  a child of the promise. That is, through faith people become children of promise, having not been children of God prior to that point. "You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus." Gal 3:26 And thus says in a later chapter "by their unbelief they were broken off." Rom 11:20 But "if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again." Rom 11:23

Concerning Isaac's offspring and the children of promise, Paul elaborates upon this in Gal 4:22-31 where he associates the unbelieving Jews who were persecuting the church (among whom he himself was formerly a member, persecuting the church prior to his conversion) as children of Hagar, not children of Isaac, even through genetically they were descended from Isaac. "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." Gal 4:28,29 Paul had been a child of Hagar, but was born-again as a child of Sarah. To the believers he says, "So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free."Gal 4:31 Therefore unbelieving Jews are Jews in the flesh only, but not real Jews. Believing Gentiles (as well as believing Jews) are real Jews - Jews in the Spirit.

These ideas from Romans 9 and Galatians 4 introduce an issue concerning Bible interpretation. That is, whenever the Bible speaks of Israel, one has to determine using proper hermeneutics whether it is referring to physical or spiritual Israel. And speaking of proper hermeneutics, I would like to warn readers not to be led astray into Calvinistic theology as they read this and the following chapters.

Notice that I made mention of the significance of faith. The significance of faith is downplayed under Calvinism. Pure Calvinists will baptize unbelieving infants as if they were part of the Church just because their parents are Christian. A Calvinistic interpretation of this passage is that man's free will is not involved in God's "choice"; that "free will" is merely an illusion and in the end, God causes people to do the things they do; that saving faith is what God produces completely apart from the person's free will; and that God holds people responsible for things they have no control over. It's a fatalistic puppet theology which Calvinists read into this chapter.

While Calvinists point out that verses 1-29 don't use words "faith" or "believe" and thus conclude that these verses have nothing to do with faith, yet notice two things. Notice first of all Paul's conclusions. When he answers verse 30 "What shall we say then?", notice the priority he places on faith in his concluding verses. So how is it that his main argument doesn't mention faith and yet his summary conclusions  include faith as an essential element? The reason why is because he expects the reader to understand that he was thinking in terms of faith throughout that chapter. This is chapter 9 of Romans. Paul expected his readers to take into account what he already said in the first 8 chapters. (That's called - reading it in context) Furthermore Paul had elaborated upon this very subject in Galatians, where he spoke explicitly of the element of faith. And this emphasis on faith flows strongly into chapter 10. So let us not be led astray by those who are blind to the faith Paul implies throughout this chapter.

This idea is that God choses on a categorical, rather than individual basis. This interpretation can also be applied to Ephesians chapter 1. This interpretation is contrary to the concept of "Unconditional Election" advocated in Calvinism.

vs 14-16
Here come the skeptics. Jesus answers a similar objection to this in his The Parable of The Workers in the Vineyard The basic idea is that mercy does not conflict with justice. If you have two sinners, God is not obligated to forgive either of them. If He himself paid the penalty for their sins, he could then chose to forgive one or both based on whatever arbitrary standard he invented. He could have decided to forgive people based on whether they were right-handed. That would not be unjust. If one were right-handed and the other left-handed, he would forgive one and not the other. He is under no obligation to forgive people their sins. It is not a matter of justice, but mercy. His actual standard for forgiveness is faith in Christ. Those who measure up are forgiven. This is not unjust.

"Not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth" simply means that people can't chose the basis upon which God will chose to forgive people. God is in the one who choses such a condition.

vs 14-18
Then from 9:14 he deals with objections to this idea, namely whether God is being unjust. After all since Christ died for sins, why not automatically save everyone? Why chose some over others? But this is very much like the parable of The Workers in the Vineyard in Matt 20:1-16. Notice how it ends: "It is my desire to give to this last just as much as to you. Isn’t it lawful for me to do what I want to with what I own? Or is your eye evil, because I am good?’ So the last will be first, and the first last. For many are called, but few are chosen." In other words graciousness does not conflict with justice. While God condemning people is a matter of justice, forgiving people is a matter of grace, not of justice. Society recognizes that while it is unjust to condemn the innocent, it is not necessarily unjust to pardon the guilty. The parable indicates that God conforms to the same concept of justice and graciousness as that which is recognized in the society. Does God condemn people for things they have no control over? Certainly not! That would be unjust. But forgiveness is a matter of grace. It is optional. And God can chose as he pleases. And the Bible reveals that he has chosen to forgive those who believe.

"it does not depend on man’s desire or effort." God choses the way he wants to chose. God could have chosen based on people's desires. Many people of many religions desire to be saved. But God does not chose based upon a person's desires. God could have chosen people based upon doing particular things - rituals or good works. But God has decided not to chose people on that basis either. Instead he has decided to chose people based upon their faith in Jesus Christ.

Yet there are those who will for God to be gracious to them apart from faith in Christ. There are those who zealously work to be saved. But God's choice are those who believe in Christ. So then, he has mercy on whom he desires, and he hardens whom he desires. So while he "who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth." 1Tim 2:4, he has mercy on those who believe. But for those who persist in unbelief, he hardens their hearts. Paul already talked about that process all the way back in chapter one. And I would think that by the time they got up to chapter nine Paul would have still expected them to remember what they read in chapter one. (Else, as James writes, they're like a man looking into a mirror and then turning away forgets what he looks like.) In fact if we examine the context of the Old Testament passage, namely Isaiah 6:9,10, which Jesus and Paul mention concerning hardening, we note that God was doing so because of their prior record of unbelief. Whom does he chose to harden? Those who persist in unbelief.

vs 19-24
Now in verse 19, there are those who object saying, "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" These are those who recuse themselves of accountability for their being hardened, and as such call into question God's judicial nature. But the fact is, as Paul had concluded all the way back in Chapters 1,2,3 all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. As such, since all are guilty, any treatment less than that of eternal damnation is of grace. God has the right to chose whom gets mercy and whom doesn't, because having sinned people don't have a right to mercy. Mercy is of grace and not a judicial matter.

That's why Paul continues on to talk about God tolerating the vessels of wrath. And he speaks of vessels of mercy. Vessels of wrath are unbelievers. Vessels of mercy are believers. Notice Eph 2:3 "Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath." So it seems that those who are objects of wrath can later become objects of mercy. How? He explains this to the Ephesians saying, "it is by grace you have been saved, through faith". Eph 2:8 God graciously changed their destiny because of their faith in Christ.

vs 25-27
Here Paul justified the idea that Gentile believers will also be included among the children of promise by quoting the Old Testament. So this also serves as a lesson in Old Testament interpretation.

He first quotes Hosea 1:10 which is in reference to one of the sons of Gomer whose name, given by God, meant "not my people". He apparently symbolizes the Gentiles whom later converted. The whole quote goes, "Yet the Israelites will be like the sand on the seashore, which cannot be measured or counted. In the place where it was said to them, ‘You are not my people,’ they will be called ‘sons of the living God.’"Hos 1:10 What's interesting here is that one would not have thought this is referring to Gentile converts. For it speaks of Israelites. Yet Paul takes this to mean that these, formerly unbelieving Gentiles, became Israelites.

Next he quotes Isaiah 10:22 "Though your people, O Israel, be like the sand by the sea, only a remnant will return." This does not support his position that additional people - namely Gentile believers - will also be included among Israel, but rather it does support his contention that not all who call themselves Israel are Israel. And so also concerning Isaiah 1:9. So it seems he was giving scripture support for both ideas, namely that those who were formerly not his people will be called sons of the living God, and that not all of those who consider themselves his people are necessarily his people.

An application to the Christian life is not to presume one is actually a child of God just because one calls himself a "Christian" or associates with other Christians. I suspect what is true of Israel is true of the Christian community - that only a remnant will be saved - yet among that remnant are rather unlikely candidates.

vs 30-33
Here's the "crux" of the matter. (pun intended) First of all Gentiles did not run swiftly after righteousness, but nontheless attained it by faith. The greek word for "pursue" is "dioko", which interestingly enough is most frequently translated "persecute". It's a word communicating religious zeal to the point of fanaticism. This is not mere "seeking". This is trying to obtain righteousness through zealous religious works. He had made this point previously in Rom 4:5 "to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness." As faith, though it is something you do, is not categorized as a work, those who attain righteousness by faith didn't work for it.

In contrast he speaks of the Jews who zealously pursued righteousness, but it was not the zealousness of their pursuit which was the issue, but rather they should have been zealously pursing it by faith and not by works. And again as faith is not categorized as a work, to zealously pursue and attain things by faith is not to attain them by works.

Thus we have two kinds of people who attain righteousness. Those who hadn't run after it, but just ran across it by faith. These are like the man of the Parable of the Hidden Treasure. And there are those who zealously purse a righteousness by faith. These are like the merchant of the Parable of the Pearl of Great Price.

But the "crux" of the matter is FAITH. That is the basis of God's choice. That is a stumbing block both for the legalists and for the fatalists. Believe in the LORD Jesus and you will be saved.