Expounding Romans 9:6-9, the ‘gateway’ to Romans 9–11
Dec 26, 2013 5:16:13 GMT
Post by Colossians on Dec 26, 2013 5:16:13 GMT
This material is for the teaching of the Body of Christ, however the author reserves copyright over it.
_________________________________________________________
EXPOUNDING ROMANS 9:6-9, THE ‘GATEWAY’ TO ROMANS 9–11
In the introductory verses (1-5) of this 9th chapter of Romans, Paul laments the unregenerate state of the bulk of those who are physically descended from Abraham.
[6] “Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect,
However he now turns to encouragement in a reorienting of things away from the prima facie of outward perception, and instead toward that which accords with spiritual-mindedness.
And so and commensurately we will note the characteristic understating of the Spirit: we are not beckoned to the viewing room via that which demonstratively declares that the word of God has had its way, but via the more-sensitive double negative – that the word of God has “not ... taken none effect”.
For whether presented in the relatively-elementary teachings of Christ, or those more complex of Paul, the gospel will be that which seeks the “poor in spirit” (Mt 5:3), who oft have difficulty in receiving the positive, but who readily latch on to the same truth when expressed in the double negative.
So the Psalmist:
“Take not thy Holy Spirit from me” (Ps 51:11);
and the rendering of the prophecy of Micah in the gospel of Matthew:
“And thou Bethlehem … art not the least among the princes of Juda” Mt 2:6.
And so we are not to take such apparently-unassuming statement here at v6 as that which might suggest that God's word will have anything other than full and unmitigated effect, but rather and simply that the same will be expressed in the modality of the very grace it proclaims – that God’s word will of necessity consist of an illocutionary act. For it is said of Him who is that very Word of God:
“A bruised reed shall He not break, and smoking flax shall He not quench” Mt 12:20.
For they are not all [the] Israel [(of ultimate concern)], which are of Israel [(of the flesh)]:”
Paul comes quickly to the heart of the matter: the reason God’s word will achieve its purpose, is that its scope with regard to Israel of the flesh was never universal in the first place: it is implied to us here that only some of those who are of Israel of the flesh will also be members of the Israel with which God is ultimately concerned and to which therefore the word of God was actually directed.
Given then that the only alternative to a determination along fleshly lines is a determination along spiritual lines, we understand that the Israel with which God is ultimately concerned is delineated solely by the spirits within it and not at all by the flesh within which those spirits reside. Thus the implication in John the Baptist's words to the Jews:
“And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham” Mt 3:9
and in the more doctrinal (from the Lord Himself):
“That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” John 3:6.
What is incidental then but nevertheless worth stating, is that given that there can be no fleshly criteria by which one who calls upon the name of the Lord might be excluded from the Israel with which God is ultimately concerned, such Israel will highly likely be far greater in number than Israel of the flesh.
[7] “Neither, because they are the [(physical)] seed of Abraham, are they all children:
Paul here reinforces his teaching thus far via the literary device known as “synthetic parallelism”.1
In particular, his substituting “the [(physical)] seed of Abraham” here for the second-mentioned “Israel” of v6 (and then declaring them not necessarily the "children [(of God)]") conveys to us in no uncertain terms the fact that the Israel with which God is not primarily concerned is one and the same as that which has proceeded physically from Abraham.
We might reasonably expect then to find that, just as “Israel” is used in reference to two very different entities, so also might “the seed of Abraham” be used in reference to two very different entities. And indeed such is the case, for in addition to what is manifestly a reference to the physical seed of Abraham here at Rom 9:7, we find elsewhere in scripture the following reference to the spiritual seed of Abraham:
“And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed” Gal 3:29.
but In Isaac shall thy seed be called.”
Accordingly and in place of any argument he might otherwise provide, Paul here invokes a direct quote from the Lord to Abraham: “In Isaac shall thy seed by called” (Gen 21:12), in so doing laying over the top of everything an ‘overhead transparency’, as it were, of the story of Isaac in pictorial form: it would be Isaac’s miraculous birth that would provide the conceptual template by which the bona fide children of God would be delineated: they would be they who would be “born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:13): their lives would be characterised solely by the will of the Spirit.
And so it is the spiritual seed of Abraham which Paul here at Rom 9:7 implies constitutes the bona fide children of God.
1 What is providential with regard to this exposition, is that Paul elsewhere employs synthetic parallelism with regard to the exact same topic, for at Gal 6:16 we find: “And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God”, where the phrases we have underlined are in reference to one and the same group of people. But what is perhaps of even greater providence, is that at the very preceding verse (15) we find: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature”.
[8] “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.”
Paul sums up decisively with the same as we have pre-empted above.
And which summation is in accord with his elsewhere words:
“For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God” Rom 2:28,29
: any and only those persons who will call upon the name of the Lord, regardless of genealogy and background, are in God’s eyes, Jews. No-one else qualifies for the brand name.
Thus it is unmistakably clear that this “promise” is not constrained in any manner whatsoever by the flesh, either in the positive, which would have Israel of the flesh selected for salvation on the basis of the flesh, or the negative, which would have Israel of the flesh rejected from salvation on the basis of the flesh (and which would therefore contradict Rom 11:22), but that rather:
"Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise" Gal 4:28
: the promise is to those in Christ.
And thus:
"Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ" Gal 3:16
: although the singularity in grammatical number of the word "seed" provides for Paul to conclusively assert that the promises of God are to the Son and Him alone, we nevertheless understand that, by virtue of the fact that the author of language has composed the word so that it speaks to plurality as well, such is not at the expense of the plural who are in Him.
So:
"For all the promises of God in Him are yea, and in Him Amen" 2 Cor 1:20.
2 Romans 11:2 is commonly misunderstood: in declaring that God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew, Paul does not intend to relate that God favours Israel of the flesh with regard to salvation, but simply that He has not barred them from salvation. That is, and putting the matter of particular election momentarily aside, all Paul is saying at Rom 11:2 is that those who are of Israel of the flesh are no less able to come to Christ than the Gentiles.
[9] “For this is the word of promise, At this time I will come, and Sarah shall have a son”
As if what he has thus far related were not sufficient for us, Paul reprises the matter of the miraculous: yet again he invokes a direct quote from God to Abraham, only this time that which focuses more on the faithfulness of God, for he points us again to the notion that is “promise”.
Thus we are not only led to understand that our being born again is supernatural - that it was solely by the will of God – but that with regard to our election it was never in doubt: just as God had first of all to appoint the time at which He would visit Sarah, so also He appointed the time that each of us who are born of the Spirit, would indeed be so born.
“Of His own will begat He us” James 1:18.
Summary
The Israel with which God is ultimately concerned and which Paul at Gal 6:16 calls “the Israel of God”, is that Israel which of necessity is born of the Spirit of God and not of the will of man. As such it is in no way delineated by the flesh.
For God is “the Father of spirits” (Heb 12:9).
We therefore understand that Israel of the flesh enjoys no favour with regard to the salvation of its members, and that any interpretation of scripture which ascribes such a favour to it, is necessarily errant.
Romans 9:6-9 provides the definitive hermeneutic by which we are to interpret Romans 9-11. Let us be sure we stay within the constraints it provides.
Amen.
_________________________________________________________
EXPOUNDING ROMANS 9:6-9, THE ‘GATEWAY’ TO ROMANS 9–11
In the introductory verses (1-5) of this 9th chapter of Romans, Paul laments the unregenerate state of the bulk of those who are physically descended from Abraham.
[6] “Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect,
However he now turns to encouragement in a reorienting of things away from the prima facie of outward perception, and instead toward that which accords with spiritual-mindedness.
And so and commensurately we will note the characteristic understating of the Spirit: we are not beckoned to the viewing room via that which demonstratively declares that the word of God has had its way, but via the more-sensitive double negative – that the word of God has “not ... taken none effect”.
For whether presented in the relatively-elementary teachings of Christ, or those more complex of Paul, the gospel will be that which seeks the “poor in spirit” (Mt 5:3), who oft have difficulty in receiving the positive, but who readily latch on to the same truth when expressed in the double negative.
So the Psalmist:
“Take not thy Holy Spirit from me” (Ps 51:11);
and the rendering of the prophecy of Micah in the gospel of Matthew:
“And thou Bethlehem … art not the least among the princes of Juda” Mt 2:6.
And so we are not to take such apparently-unassuming statement here at v6 as that which might suggest that God's word will have anything other than full and unmitigated effect, but rather and simply that the same will be expressed in the modality of the very grace it proclaims – that God’s word will of necessity consist of an illocutionary act. For it is said of Him who is that very Word of God:
“A bruised reed shall He not break, and smoking flax shall He not quench” Mt 12:20.
For they are not all [the] Israel [(of ultimate concern)], which are of Israel [(of the flesh)]:”
Paul comes quickly to the heart of the matter: the reason God’s word will achieve its purpose, is that its scope with regard to Israel of the flesh was never universal in the first place: it is implied to us here that only some of those who are of Israel of the flesh will also be members of the Israel with which God is ultimately concerned and to which therefore the word of God was actually directed.
Given then that the only alternative to a determination along fleshly lines is a determination along spiritual lines, we understand that the Israel with which God is ultimately concerned is delineated solely by the spirits within it and not at all by the flesh within which those spirits reside. Thus the implication in John the Baptist's words to the Jews:
“And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham” Mt 3:9
and in the more doctrinal (from the Lord Himself):
“That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” John 3:6.
What is incidental then but nevertheless worth stating, is that given that there can be no fleshly criteria by which one who calls upon the name of the Lord might be excluded from the Israel with which God is ultimately concerned, such Israel will highly likely be far greater in number than Israel of the flesh.
[7] “Neither, because they are the [(physical)] seed of Abraham, are they all children:
Paul here reinforces his teaching thus far via the literary device known as “synthetic parallelism”.1
In particular, his substituting “the [(physical)] seed of Abraham” here for the second-mentioned “Israel” of v6 (and then declaring them not necessarily the "children [(of God)]") conveys to us in no uncertain terms the fact that the Israel with which God is not primarily concerned is one and the same as that which has proceeded physically from Abraham.
We might reasonably expect then to find that, just as “Israel” is used in reference to two very different entities, so also might “the seed of Abraham” be used in reference to two very different entities. And indeed such is the case, for in addition to what is manifestly a reference to the physical seed of Abraham here at Rom 9:7, we find elsewhere in scripture the following reference to the spiritual seed of Abraham:
“And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed” Gal 3:29.
but In Isaac shall thy seed be called.”
Accordingly and in place of any argument he might otherwise provide, Paul here invokes a direct quote from the Lord to Abraham: “In Isaac shall thy seed by called” (Gen 21:12), in so doing laying over the top of everything an ‘overhead transparency’, as it were, of the story of Isaac in pictorial form: it would be Isaac’s miraculous birth that would provide the conceptual template by which the bona fide children of God would be delineated: they would be they who would be “born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:13): their lives would be characterised solely by the will of the Spirit.
And so it is the spiritual seed of Abraham which Paul here at Rom 9:7 implies constitutes the bona fide children of God.
1 What is providential with regard to this exposition, is that Paul elsewhere employs synthetic parallelism with regard to the exact same topic, for at Gal 6:16 we find: “And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God”, where the phrases we have underlined are in reference to one and the same group of people. But what is perhaps of even greater providence, is that at the very preceding verse (15) we find: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature”.
[8] “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.”
Paul sums up decisively with the same as we have pre-empted above.
And which summation is in accord with his elsewhere words:
“For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God” Rom 2:28,29
: any and only those persons who will call upon the name of the Lord, regardless of genealogy and background, are in God’s eyes, Jews. No-one else qualifies for the brand name.
Thus it is unmistakably clear that this “promise” is not constrained in any manner whatsoever by the flesh, either in the positive, which would have Israel of the flesh selected for salvation on the basis of the flesh, or the negative, which would have Israel of the flesh rejected from salvation on the basis of the flesh (and which would therefore contradict Rom 11:22), but that rather:
"Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise" Gal 4:28
: the promise is to those in Christ.
And thus:
"Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ" Gal 3:16
: although the singularity in grammatical number of the word "seed" provides for Paul to conclusively assert that the promises of God are to the Son and Him alone, we nevertheless understand that, by virtue of the fact that the author of language has composed the word so that it speaks to plurality as well, such is not at the expense of the plural who are in Him.
So:
"For all the promises of God in Him are yea, and in Him Amen" 2 Cor 1:20.
2 Romans 11:2 is commonly misunderstood: in declaring that God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew, Paul does not intend to relate that God favours Israel of the flesh with regard to salvation, but simply that He has not barred them from salvation. That is, and putting the matter of particular election momentarily aside, all Paul is saying at Rom 11:2 is that those who are of Israel of the flesh are no less able to come to Christ than the Gentiles.
[9] “For this is the word of promise, At this time I will come, and Sarah shall have a son”
As if what he has thus far related were not sufficient for us, Paul reprises the matter of the miraculous: yet again he invokes a direct quote from God to Abraham, only this time that which focuses more on the faithfulness of God, for he points us again to the notion that is “promise”.
Thus we are not only led to understand that our being born again is supernatural - that it was solely by the will of God – but that with regard to our election it was never in doubt: just as God had first of all to appoint the time at which He would visit Sarah, so also He appointed the time that each of us who are born of the Spirit, would indeed be so born.
“Of His own will begat He us” James 1:18.
Summary
The Israel with which God is ultimately concerned and which Paul at Gal 6:16 calls “the Israel of God”, is that Israel which of necessity is born of the Spirit of God and not of the will of man. As such it is in no way delineated by the flesh.
For God is “the Father of spirits” (Heb 12:9).
We therefore understand that Israel of the flesh enjoys no favour with regard to the salvation of its members, and that any interpretation of scripture which ascribes such a favour to it, is necessarily errant.
Romans 9:6-9 provides the definitive hermeneutic by which we are to interpret Romans 9-11. Let us be sure we stay within the constraints it provides.
Amen.