ROMANS 9: 6-13
THE CHOICE OF GOD
[Genesis 18:9-19]
If the Jews have rejected and crucified Jesus, the Son of God, does that mean God's purposes were frustrated and His plan defeated? Paul provides an argument from ancient biblical history to prove otherwise.
The present situation of rejection by Abraham's physical seed reproduces a pattern of divine action which has been unfolded often enough in the past. Through God's choice of Isaac but not his brother Ishmael, and Jacob instead of his older brother Esau, God established the precedent of His right to chose the person and thus the people of His promise.
The initial disciples of Jesus were Hebrews. It was the faithful remnant of Israel as always that became heir to the promise. It was this faithful remnant of Israel, this Israel within Israel, that brought the Gospel to the Gentiles. This faithful remnant were the children of Israel and the children of promise who bore the fruit of spiritual children who became heirs to the original promise to Abraham.
The plan of God is not limited to merely physical decedents of Abraham. It is God's choice that determines who will be the child of promise (CIT).
I. ISRAEL WITHIN ISRAEL, 6-8.
II. GOD'S CHOSEN MAN, 9.
III. GOD'S CHOSEN PLAN, 10-13.
Verse 6 again introduces the concept of a SPIRITUAL ISRAEL. "But it is not as though the Word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are [descended] from Israel;"
Apparently Paul was afraid that the statement (in verse 2) with regard to his great sorrow and unceasing anguish might be interpreted as if he meant that God's word -His promise with respect to Israel- had failed. God's Word never fails. Heaven and earth will pass away before God's Word could fail (Lk. 16:17). So the Apostle explains that although a marvelous promise had indeed been made to Israel that promise was never realized in the entire nation, but only in the godly remnant of Israel (a truth he had presented earlier in Romans 2:28-29).
The failure of all Jews to respond to the gospel of Christ did not mean God's Word had failed. All Israel is not the true or Spiritual Israel. There is an Israel within Israel. For, "They are not all Israel who are [descended] from Israel." All the natural descendants of Abraham are not necessarily the true sons of God. All the descendants of Abraham do not unconditionally possess the promise. Only those who walk by faith are the true sons of Abraham (Gal. 3:7-9; Rom. 4) and possess the promise. Thus the Apostle distinguishes between the natural seed and spiritual seed of Abraham.
Paul knew that the Word of God had not failed, though most of Israel had not believed in Jesus Christ. This is true because God's promises were obviously not intended for all who could boast of racial descent from Abraham [which he will prove in verse 7]. So three Old Testament illustrations of the principle of God's sovereign choice (Isaac and Ishmael, 9:7b-9; Jacob and Esau, vv.10-13; and Pharaoh, vv. 14-18) are provided. The first two (which will deal with tonight) show that God made a sovereign choice among the physical descendants of Abraham in establishing the spiritual line of promise.
Verse 7 and the verses that follow confirm that natural descent from Abraham does not secure a portion in God's promised inheritance. Verse 7 designates the CHILD OF PROMISE. "nor are they all children because they are Abraham's descendants, but: "through Isaac your descendants will be named."
Abraham had two children according to the flesh, Ishmael (Gen. 16) and Isaac, but only Isaac inherited the promise since he was the child specified in the promise which Paul quotes from Genesis 21:12. Ishmael, [born to Hagar] and the six sons of Keturah (Gen. 25:1-4) were Abraham's descendants (sperma), but they were not counted as Abraham's children (tekna, "born ones") in the line of promise. Instead, as God told Abraham (Gen. 21:12), "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned" [lit. "in Isaac seed (sperma) will be called to you"].
Ishmael was just as much a child of Abraham as was Isaac. Yet no Jew would consider the descendants of Ishmael to be children of God's promise to Abraham. The Covenant relationship continued on only through Isaac, the child of promise.
We learn about the CHILDREN OF PROMISE in verse 8. "That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants."
"That is" means "what the Old Testament is saying signifies this." The children born of the physical lineage (lit., "the born ones of the flesh") of Abraham are not necessarily the "children of God" (tekna, "born ones of God"). The children of promise are those who, like Abraham, believe the promise of God and are therefore Abraham's spiritual offspring [sperma].
When the Bible says "the children of promise" are "the children of God" it is not just referring to New Testament Christians. Paul is specifically meaning the remnant of faithful Israel. But to be a physical descendant of Abraham is not sufficient; the children of promise are those who live by faith in God (4:3, 22-24). The children of promise are the spiritual children of Abraham (Lk. 3:8). God's spiritual children are those who are truly governed by God (like you and me).
II. GOD'S CHOSEN MAN, 9.
Obviously who constitutes the true Israel is not because of racial heritage but because of the supernatural endowment of God's promise. This is the point of the quotation in verse 9 of the three divine messengers who gave the promise to Abraham. "For this is the word of promise: "At this time I will come, and Sarah shall have a son."
God's word in the form of a beautiful covenant promise came to Abraham. This word of promise that God gave Abraham is that he would have a son. The promise seemed so absurd to the elderly Sarah that initially she laughed at it (Gen. 18:13). Though physically it was impossible, Isaac was conceived in response to the promise of God. This promise became the enabling for Isaac to be born.
God's assurance that the promise would come through the un-conceived Isaac, not Ishmael, was given to Abraham. He was asked to wait for its fulfillment that would come at God's appointed time. "At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son" [a combination of Gen. 18:10 & 14 from the LXX].
We see that God has complete freedom to act as He chooses. He decided that Isaac rather than Ishmael would be the ancestor of the Messiah, the child born of God's promise rather than son of natural consideration. What God had decreed would be what would happen.
III. GOD'S CHOSEN PLAN, 10-13.
The second Old Testament illustration of God's sovereign choice is drawn from the second generation of the Jewish Patriarch ancestry. Not only did Abraham have two sons but when Isaac had kids only one was chosen. The story continues with of Issac's twin sons in verse 10. "And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived [twins] by one man, our father Isaac;"
The descent of the promise now referenced concerns children of the same mother and father. Perhaps some one would point out that Isaac and Ishmael had different mothers. Ishmael's mother was Hagar, the slave women, whereas Isaac's mother was Sarah, the free born wife of Abraham. Was this the reason for the choice of God? Verses 10-13 describe God's choice between two brothers who had the same father and mother.
God's chose of one son and His forgetting of the other has more precedent that just one case, no matter that the first case was the one through which the race initially began. Though the twins Esau and Jacob had the same father and mother [and the same grandparents] a different destiny way divinely appointed for one.
This illustration emphasizes God's sovereignty even more than the first since it involves God's choice of one twin over another. Apparently God purposed to establish this principle of God right to choose at the beginning of His relationship with His Chosen People.
God has complete freedom to act as He chooses. This is clearly illustrated in His dealings with Israel in general and the lineage of Christ through Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in particular. He decided that Isaac rather than Ishmael and Jacob rather than Esau would be the ancestors of His Messiah, the children born of the promise, rather than natural consideration.
Verse 11 references the fact that God made a distinction between the twins before they were born, before their characters were shaped. "for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls,"
Even as God sovereignly chose Isaac and ignored Ishmael, He sovereignly chose Jacob, the younger of Isaac's sons. This choice could not be because of either good or evil actions. Before the twins in Rebekah's womb came to birth, He chose Jacob rather than Esau rejected the fact that Esau was the firstborn.
So in the case of Rebecca's children God's choice was indicated before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad. This demonstrated that God's sovereign choice was not by works, even foreseen works, but by Him who calls (1:6; 8:28, 30). God's plan (8:28; 9:11), and not man's works (4:2-6), is the basis of His election or choice.
Clearly God was choosing as He saw fit, and His choice was based on considerations quite different from those which might have been expected. The result of all this was that there were two kinds of children of Abraham—those who were "children of the flesh" and those who were "children of the promise" (Rom. 9:8). Paul sees this distinction still operative in the sense that some of the people of Israel had gladly acknowledged Jesus as the Christ while others had rejected Him. There had always been two Israels, and the situation he was dealing with was not new. [Briscoe, D. Stuart; The Preacher's Commentary Series, Vol 29 : Romans. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Inc, 1982, S. 186]
It becomes very obvious that simply being able to trace your natural linage all the way back to Abraham does not necessarily mean that the promise given to Abraham is yours also. Being able to reference good deeds also does not mean you have received the promise, for the ground of choice was not the twins deeds.
God's plan and purpose is the determining factor in who receives His promised Messianic blessing.
Verse 12 references the fact that Rebecca was informed of God's chose before their birth. "it was said to her, "The older will serve the younger."
When Rebecca the wife of Isaac was with child, she was told by God that in her womb were two children who would be the father of two nations and that in the days to come the older would serve the younger (Gen 25:33 LXX). That "The older will serve the younger" was divine choice. The priority of birth was disregarded by God. The younger brother was chosen over the natural heir, the older brother. Claims of rights as seen by man and their laws are futile before God.
Esau, the older, did not actually serve Jacob, his younger twin; but Esau's descendants, the Edomites, did (1 Sam. 14:47; 2 Sam. 8:14; 1 Kings 11:15-16; 22:47; 2 Kings 14:7). [Walvoord, John; Zuck, Roy; The Bible Knowledge Commentary. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983, S. 477.]
To clinch the argument Malachi 1:2 & 3 is quoted in verse 13. "Just as it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
The original context refers to the nations of Israel and Edom rather that the individual ancestors Jacab and Esau. Edom incurred God's wrath because of their ungodly conduct toward Israel in the day of Israel's calamity (Ps. 137:7; Isa. 34:5-7; Jer. 49:7ff; Ezek. 25:1ff; Ob. 10ff). God's love is so great for His people of promise that by comparison He hates those who have not received the promise.
Now God didn't exclude Esau from knowing and loving Him. God saves all who believe in Him. Yet God has reserved for Himself the right to choice the lineage or man of His Promise. So even though we may not understand sovereignty, we know that His choices are good, even when we don't understand His reasons.
God's hate is particularly troublesome for some. It should be borne in mind that the prophet is speaking of the people of Jacob and Esau, with particular reference to the Edomite's refusal to come to Israel's aid at a time of difficulty. [The apostle's choice of this statement should be understood first as a comment on God's attitude to a people and, second, in light of the fact that] "hate" as opposed to "love" is by no means as absent in New Testament usage. Recall the remark of our Lord about discipleship recorded in Luke 14:26, "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother he cannot be My disciple." This verse bears ample testimony to the fact. For the apostle Paul there was clear evidence throughout Scripture that "they are not all Israel who are of [or called] Israel." [Briscoe, D. Stuart. S. 186]
God's "love" for Jacob was revealed in His choice of Jacob and God's "hatred" for Esau was seen in His rejecting Esau for the line of promise. Hatred in this sense is not absolute but relative to a higher choice (Mt. 6:24; Luke 14:26; John 12:25). [Walvoord & Zuck, p. 487]
In CONCLUSION
The argument is that the Children of Promise, the Israel within Israel, doesn't come simply from natural birth, lineage, or works. For God has made distinctions between who He will accept and who He will not.
A Jew would thoroughly understand and accept the argument so far. The Arabs were the descendants of Ishmael who was the flesh a blood son of Abraham. The Jews though would never have said that the Arabs belonged to the chosen people. The Edomites were the descendants of Esau and Esau was a true son of the son of promise Isaac. No Jew though would ever have said that the Edomites had any share in the chosen people. From a Jewish point of view Paul has made his point. There was no election within the family of Abraham's physical descendants.
Paul is not teaching unconditional election. He is making an argument for God's sovereignly, for God's right to choose to whom He gives His promise. It is an argument that the Jew would understand.
Let me summarize. God has sovereignly chosen His man Jesus Christ and He has chosen all those who are "in Him." God has a Chosen Man and those who by faith choose to receive Him as Savior and follow Him as Lord become children of the Promise. God has established the precedent of His right to chose the person & thus the people of His promise.
