A Contextual and Honest Explanation of Romans Nine

Romans chapter nine is a passage that is not often mentioned by non-Calvinists. When brought up, it is often dismissed as speaking of nations, or is explained away by the philosophical construction of "Foreknowledge." Why is this passage treated with such contempt, you ask? The answer is simple: It greatly disturbs long-held traditions of those who kick against God's word. A friend of mine recently posted an appendix in an attempt to explain why Romans nine does not teach the sovereignty of God, however once again the clear teaching of the passage was muddled by the beloved man-made doctrine of free will. This note is first and foremost an attempt to edify the saints of God with scriptural truth, even if from a weak and lowly vessel. Secondly, it is a humble invitation to this friend of mine, who seems to be very certain that Calvinism is false, to test her traditions with scripture. It is my contention that one can not go verse-by-verse through this chapter without being confronted with uncondiional election--God's sovereign choice (and right) to choose who will go to Heaven or Hell. I know that this doctrine is hated in today's church, but Spurgeon made a good point when he said that we must not dull the sharp edges of some doctrines in order to make them more acceptable to our flesh (see Spurgeon, A defense of Calvinism).

I am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience testifies with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises, whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen. But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel;nor are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendants,

This is the introduction to this tremendous chapter. The context becomes clear--Paul is anticipating his audience's response to his teachings: "Well, Paul, if Jesus really is the Messiah, hasn't He failed miserably, since the Jews have rejected Him?" And Paul responds that although he is very broken in his heart over the fact that his countrymen have rejected the Messiah, he knows that the word of God has not failed. He says this is because "not all Israel are descended from Israel." In other words, God's people are not God's people simply by physical descent. How are they made His people, then?

but: "THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED." 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. For this is the word of promise: "AT THIS TIME I WILL COME, AND SARAH SHALL HAVE A SON." And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; 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, it was said to her, "THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER." Just as it is written, "JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED."

Mankind is made God's people through God's sovereign election of individuals. The result of God's choosing was that Isaac and Jacob were God's people and Ishmael and Esau were excluded from God's blessings. Many make the argument from this text that the election is nations, not people; and the election is unto lands, not salvation. How one gets this interpretation is hard to understand, for the text is simply not speaking of nations, but of God's election of Isaac and Jacob as the people of God. Yes, the result of this election is that Israel came from Jacob and not Esau, but what IS Israel? Israel is the chosen people of God; and Paul says that the reason that this is so is because God chose Jacob as a child of promise, and passed over Esau. Thus, Jacob was chosen as a member of God's true people, while Esau was excluded from salvation. Salvation was not given to the Edomites because they are not the people of God even though they descended from Abraham; only the children of promise are the people of God--And they are determined not from a bloodline but from God's sovereign choice. We are made children of promise through faith in Abraham's seed, Christ, as Paul clearly sets forth in the rest of the context of Romans:

and he (Abraham) received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, (4:11)

and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised. (4:12)

For this reason it is by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, (4:16)

And in Galatians:

Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham. (3:7)

And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. (4:28)

Does that phrase, "children of promise," sound familiar to you? It should, for Romans 9 is about God's sovereign choice of those who are children of promise (9:8).

This is the Biblical way to view Romans nine. By comparing scripture with scripture we see that in Paul's theology New Testament believers are the children of promise and heirs of Abraham's covenant through faith in Christ; and Romans nine teaches us that it is God's sovereign choice that determines who is included in that category. That Paul has this in view is evident from what follows from Romans nine.

What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For He says to Moses, "I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION." So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH." So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.

God has mercy on some, and hardens some. He includes some into His fellowship and chooses some as His people, while passing over some. Paul gives an example that God restrains mercy from some by the example of Pharaoh, who was raised to power in Egypt for the very purpose that he would display God's power in that nation through the magnificent plagues and destruction of him and his army. Don't believe me? Read Exodus 14:16, 17:

As for you, lift up your staff and stretch out your hand over the sea and divide it, and the sons of Israel shall go through the midst of the sea on dry land. As for Me, behold, I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians so that they will go in after them; and I will be honored through Pharaoh and all his army, through his chariots and his horsemen.

How was God honored through Pharaoh and all his army? By God showing His wrath and making His power known (Romans 9:22) in their death when the waves crashed over them. Some say "Well, Pharaoh hardened his own heart." I agree. The traditional Calvinistic view of hardening is God restraining His common grace toward sinners (as seen in Romans 1 and elsewhere). Thus God was simply allowing Pharaoh to live in accordance with his sinful heart. Continuing on in our study:

You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory,

Paul anticipates the very objection that is still given against God's sovereignty. The argument Paul anticipates is, in essence, "Well, we're all just puppets if this is true, aren't we?" This same exact argument was given to me in a discussion yesterday about Romans nine! It seems that those who wish to deprive God of His rightful throne have not come up with better arguments over 2,000 years. Paul does not entertain these opponents nor does he apologize for dealing a death blow to their view of man's autonomy, but replies with a sobering rebuke; saying in effect "Who do you think you are?" (See Sproul's commentary on Romans).

Are we to believe, at this point in Paul's argument, that he is not speaking of election to personal salvation? How does one reconcile "vessels of mercy/wrath" with the previous argument that this passage speaks of nations? By Paul's own argument that theory is overthrown. Indeed, most who hold to that belief, when attempting to interpret this chapter, make a sudden switch from Paul speaking of nations in his arguments about Jacob and Esau to speaking of individuals in this portion. What in the context, though, warrants such a switch? Nothing of course. Isaac and Jacob were vessels of mercy; Esau, Ishmael and Pharaoh were vessels of wrath. This is the simple reading of the text. Paul now includes us in his argument.

even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

Thus Paul shows us our place in the discourse. We are called, just like Jacob, as children of promise and vessels of mercy through God's sovereign choice. It astounds me that some would argue that the calling of Jacob in 9:11 would be completely disconnected from our calling in 9:24, saying that the former was a calling unto a nation while the latter is unto salvation. That view is 100% inconsistent and it butchers the text.

God is completely sovereign in His choice of who will be His people. Romans nine does not teach about nations and lands while every other chapter in Romans deals with salvation. As we have seen, Paul's own words shatter the arguments of those who would isolate the chapter from its greater context. We must not diminish any hard doctrine, and though the doctrine of God's sovereignty is detestable to our flesh we must learn to submit to God's rulership over the earth and acknowledge that God is the potter and we are the clay. We can not overrule God's plans with our puny wills, for His counsel will stand forever.