Kingswood Hart, Exegesis of Romans 9-11

[This is a compilation of Kingswood Hart’s key exegetical posts on Romans concerning Romans 9-11. (Several of his posts on the structure of the letter have been left out but can be found at his website [see the link below]. Some references to Hart’s discussion of structure remain in this compilation even though that discussion is not included here. Minor changes have been made to fit the posts together. The main focus of this article is chapters 9-11 of the letter. Hart explains, “These chapters, particularly chapter 9, have been interpreted in various different ways. My aim is to demonstrate what I consider to be the correct interpretation. I will do this by considering the structure and context of the letter and then focusing in on these chapters, showing how the proposed interpretation fits with the context and structure of the letter, as well as being internally consistent within chapters 9-11.” For a summary of Hart’s approach to Romans 9, see this post. Hart’s work was first published at the Predestination Station, where comments can be made.]

Romans – Who Is Paul addressing?

In Romans, Paul is writing to both Jew and Gentile Christians, but is the whole letter aimed at both groups or are parts of the letter aimed at one or the other of the two groups? There are definitely some points where he is explicitly talking to one of the groups, so it can’t all be aimed at both groups. The question then is, Which bits are for one group and which bits are for both? Do the explicit texts apply just to a small local area or does the group in focus carry on until there is an explicit change in focus in the letter? I’ve had a look for any other clues and it seems to me that the focus generally carries on past the explicit bits until there is an explicit change of group, rather than the letter defaulting to being addressed to both groups soon after an explicit bit, without warning. If this is the case, then quite a large chunk of the letter is actually addressed specifically to the Jewish Christians, which may be a surprising conclusion to some. 

Here’s how I think it works out (blue for both, red for Jews, green for Gentiles):

• 1:1-15 (both)
• 1:16-11:12 (Jews)
• 11:13-36 (Gentiles)
• 12:1-16:27 (both)

The evidence for this is as follows:

• 1:7 ‘to all those in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints’
• 1:8 ‘all of you’
• 1:13 ‘the rest of the Gentiles’ (i.e. the (non-Christian) Gentiles not being written to)
• 1:16-32 No explicit reference, but it talks about Gentiles in order to set up the charge of hypocrisy to judgemental Jews in chapter 2
• 2:14 ‘Gentiles’ in the third person – ‘they are a law unto themselves’, but 2:17 ‘if you call yourself a Jew’
• 3:9 ‘we Jews’
• 4:1 ‘Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh’
• 7:1 ‘I am speaking to those who know the law’
• 7:4-6 Paul is speaking to those who used to be under the law (i.e. Jewish Christians). e.g. 7:6: ‘but now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code’
• 8:2-4 seems also to be aimed at Jewish Christians. e.g. 8:2: ‘the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death’
• 9:10 ‘our forefather Isaac’
• 9:24 ‘us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles’ – he has to add a mention of ‘also from the Gentiles’ in order to expand the ‘us’ in this case to cover Gentiles as well
• 11:13 ‘now I am speaking to you Gentiles’
• 11:13-24 ‘you’ is used clearly for the Gentiles in various places, with the Jews being ‘they’
• 11:28 ‘as regards the gospel, they [Jews] are enemies of God for your [Gentiles] sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers’
• 11:30-31 similar use of ‘they’ and ‘you’
• 12:1 obviously starts a new section due to 11:33-36
• 12:3 ‘I say to every one among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think’
• 12:1-16:27 It makes sense that Paul brings things together for them both at the end of the letter. I can’t see any clues in this section like those listed above to suggest that only one group is being addressed. Paul also doesn’t associate himself with one side any more.

It seems to me that people often forget to think about questions such as “whom is the author addressing”, especially with the tendency to delve deep into the letter and go through it in small chunks, as the author doesn’t always make it clear in each small chunk whom he is addressing. That’s why taking a look at things like this in a zoomed-out approach can be helpful before zooming in.

Of course, as a Gentile Christian, it doesn’t mean I should ignore the bits that Paul was writing to Jewish Christians. There will be plenty in there for my benefit, but I need to be careful not to read everything there as if it were written directly to me or about me. When reading from these sections, I first need to note that it was written to Jewish Christians, and then work out how I can relate to it. There will be some bits that cover situations that apply to Jews and Gentiles alike, but there will be others that don’t directly apply to me.

It might be a coincidence, but this structure fits quite nicely with Paul in Romans 1:16 referring to ‘the Jew first and also to the Greek’, in that he addresses the Christians in this order.

It seems that a/the main focus of the letter is Paul wanting the Jewish and Gentile Christians to be united in the gospel, so he deals with each group in turn in addressing problems each side may have regarding the presence of both Jews and Gentiles in the church, then from chapter 12 explains how to live out this united life together.

While chapters 12-16 are well known as being the instruction part of the letter, there are two other sections of instruction before this. The first is chapter 6, and the second is 11:17-20. Chapter 6 is Paul’s instruction to the Jewish Christians (i.e. ethnic Israelite believers) and 11:17-20 is Paul’s instruction to the Gentile Christians. The Jewish Christians are instructed not to continue sinning, and the Gentile Christians are instructed not to be arrogant towards the Jewish Christians.

Background to Romans 9-11: Key Teaching from Romans 3:1-4:25

Having considered the structure of chapters 3-4, we are almost ready to focus on chapters 9-11 in detail. Before we do that, we will go through some of Paul’s key teaching from chapters 3-4, which is of foundational importance in understanding the related chapters 9-11.

Chapters 3-4 and chapters 9-11 match with each other in the structure of the whole letter, so the most important part of the letter outside chapters 9-11 for understanding these chapters is chapters 3-4. As we will see, chapters 3-4 provide the context for the discussion in chapters 9-11. If our interpretation of chapters 9-11 does not fit with chapters 3-4, then we know we have interpreted it incorrectly.

The diagram below shows one of Paul’s main points in chapters 3-4:

Paul was writing to a church containing ethnic Jews as well as Gentiles (i.e. not ethnic Jews) and he wanted them to be united, rather than to divide into two groups according to their ethnicity. He showed them that the church contains some people from ethnic Israel and some people from the Gentiles. An ethnic Israelite couldn’t claim salvation from God simply for being an ethnic Israelite, and a Gentile wasn’t prevented from salvation simply for not being an ethnic Israelite.

The reason that the church in Rome contained both ethnic Israelites and Gentiles is that salvation is not according to ethnicity but is on the basis of who has faith in Christ. We see this taught over and over in Romans. First, in 1:16-17 we have:

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, “The one who by faith is righteous shall live”.”

We see that the gospel (the good news) brings salvation to everyone who believes (i.e. has faith) – both Jew and Gentile (“Greek” is another word for non-Jew, in this context).

Then we have chapter 3, with Paul saying that “all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin” (3:9), and going on to say that (3:20-30):

“For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it: the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe – for there is no distinction; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God – and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one—who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.”

We see Paul talking about two kinds of law here: there is the “law of works” and the “law of faith”. The law of works relates to the idea that a person will try to make themselves righteous before God by obeying all of the law in the Old Testament. This strategy is doomed to fail for all of us though, as “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”. Anyone trying to save themselves this way isn’t going to make it. The alternative is the “law of faith”, which refers to people obtaining the righteousness of God not through their own works but “through faith in Jesus Christ”. These people obtain righteousness through faith in Jesus – as they are united to Jesus through faith in him they share in his righteousness.

Another point to note is that Christians are justified by God’s grace as a “gift”, and that this gift is “received by faith”. Faith is simply accepting this gift from God, as opposed to refusing the gift, which is what people do when they try to obtain righteousness by their own works instead. When we hear the gospel, God graciously gives us all the choice of whether to try to save ourselves, or to admit defeat (with respect to our own abilities) and accept salvation from Jesus instead. A person with faith is someone who has simply reached the position that “it’s not about me, it’s about Jesus”. Because salvation operates in this way, boasting is excluded (3:27), as faith is inherently about looking away from “me” and looking to Jesus. In doing this, I am acknowledging that I have nothing to boast about, and am instead relying entirely on Jesus.

Paul goes on in Chapter 4 to demonstrate that the way for a person to reach a position of righteousness before God has always been by faith. This isn’t a new idea. “The law of faith” has always been the true purpose of the law – to bring people to faith in Christ. This was true even in Old Testament times, though then they were looking forward to the Messiah (i.e. Christ) who was to come. Paul explains that Abraham was justified by faith and not by works (“Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness” – 4:3). Paul therefore refutes the view of many first-century ethnic Israelites that they could rely on their own works to be considered as righteous before God.

This explains how Paul could talk in chapter 2 about “when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires” (2:14), and “he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law” (2:27) – they keep the law and do what the law requires by having faith in Christ, which is what the law was always about. The good works they go on to do in their lives are not a way of obtaining righteousness before God but are a thankful response to the blessings that have come to them in Christ.

We can see that Paul wanted to remove any ethnic distinctions between ethnic Israelites and Gentiles in the church by verses like 2:28-29:

“For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.”

Paul shows that being a true Jew (a member of the true Israel) is not a matter of physical descent or works, but is a matter of the heart – a true Jew will have their heart focussed on Jesus rather than turned in on themselves. Chapter 4 makes a similar point (4:1-12):

“What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.” Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? For we say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness. How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised. He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well, and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.”

So Abraham is shown to be the father of all who believe – both the circumcised and the uncircumcised (i.e. both ethnic Jews and Gentiles). Using another diagram, the situation is like this:

True Israel is those who believe in Christ – they can be ethnically Israelites or Gentiles.

Abraham was given a promise by God, and Abraham received this promise by faith, as shown in 4:13-17:

“It was not through the law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith. For if those who depend on the law are heirs, faith means nothing and the promise is worthless, because the law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression. Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring – not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all.”

Abraham received the promise given to him by faith. All who share in Abraham’s faith also receive the promise when they come to share in his faith. They can claim Abraham as their father and are therefore part of the true Israel.

Romans 9-11: Key Terms and Categories

Having had an introduction to some of Paul’s foundational teaching in Romans 3:1-4:25 (the C1 section), we’re ready to turn our focus on to chapters 9-11 (the C2 section). Before getting an overview of the structure of chapters 9-11, we will use the diagrams from the previous section to see how Paul refers to these different groups of people in chapters 9-11. Paul uses a lot of different terms to refer to these groups, which can get confusing. In the diagrams below, I’ve collected the different terms used by Paul in these chapters, and put them on the appropriate diagram to show what Paul means by each term. I’ve given one chapter and verse reference for each term, but some terms are used multiple times by Paul.

To make matters potentially even more confusing, Paul sometimes gives the same word more than one meaning, and we have to use the context of the word to work out what he means by it. This is most apparent with Paul’s use of the word “Israel”. Paul uses the word “Israel” in three different ways, as we’ll see. “Israel” can refer to:

1. all ethnic Israelites (9:6 (1st), 9:27, 11:2, 11:25)
2. ethnic Israelites who are not trusting in Jesus (which is the majority of ethnic Israelites at Paul’s time of writing) (9:31, 10:19, 10:21, 11:7)
3. true Israel (all who have faith in Christ – including some ethnic Israelites and some Gentiles) (9:6 (2nd), 11:26)

Aside: some may consider that “true Israel” (option 3) includes only some ethnic Israelites and not some Gentiles as well. I’ll address this in a later section, but the answer to that doesn’t affect the other points I’ll be making.

The first diagram shows the world according to ethnicity:

The solid line between the two categories shows that the division is a fixed one. An ethnic Israelite will always been an ethnic Israelite, and a Gentile will always be a Gentile. If salvation were based on ethnicity, then that would be good news for all ethnic Jews, and bad news for all Gentiles. Thankfully, salvation isn’t based on ethnicity! The gospel is good news for all, not just a lucky few, as we will see.

The next diagram shows the world according to Paul:

Paul divides the world into those who are trusting in Jesus and those who are not. The dashed line dividing the two groups shows that, although the two categories are fixed in status, it is possible for an individual person to cross the dividing line and have his or her category changed. For example, when a Gentile becomes a Christian, he or she crosses from being “not true Israel” to being “true Israel”. Paul talks about this in 11:17-24 (which we will consider in more detail later). The olive tree from these verses represents true Israel and the branches are individual people. The branches connected to the olive tree represent believers. Paul speaks, regarding both Israelites and Gentiles, of branches (i.e. people) being grafted into the tree due to belief and being cut off the tree due to unbelief.

The dashed line represents one of the main reasons that Paul’s gospel message really is “good news” – anyone hearing the message who isn’t yet in the “true Israel” category is able, thanks to God working in their heart via the gospel message, to trust in Christ and find themselves crossing the divide into the “true Israel” category.

In the final diagram, we see Paul’s divisions mapped out in the two ethnic groups – ethnic Israelites can be internally divided into “true Israel” and “not true Israel”, and Gentiles can also be internally divided in this way. The full “true Israel” is a combination of the “true Israel” of both ethnic groups.

Again we have dashed lines showing that individuals can cross over from one category to the other. A good example of this is 9:25, which talks about Gentiles: “I will call them ‘my people’ who are not my people; and I will call her ‘my loved one’ who is not my loved one”. When a Gentile becomes a Christian, they get their category changed from “not one of God’s people” to “one of God’s people” and from “not God’s loved one” to “God’s loved one”. What a great blessing to the Gentiles!

We’re now ready to get going properly on Romans 9-11. It will be important to keep the background of these first sections in mind as we do so. Let’s go!

Romans 9-11: Structure and Summary

So having established some relevant background and key terms for chapters 9-11, let’s now focus on these chapters, which form the part of the letter that is probably most disputed in terms of how it should be interpreted. I want to show that there is a neat structure to this section of the letter, and that knowing the structure helps us to understand the points Paul was making. I will first set out the structure and then I will summarize each of the sections. Later sections will look in more detail at the different sections.

I have set out my analysis of the structure of Romans 9-11 below. It is a chiastic structure, which is commonly found in the Bible. I have labelled the sections as “C2-A1”, etc. The “C2-” part shows that this is the C2 section of the letter (chapters 9-11). The next part (e.g. “A1”) shows the subsection within this section of Romans. The two “C2-A” sections match, as do the two “C2-B” and “C2-C” sections, with the “C2-D” section forming the center of the passage.

The next diagram shows the same structure with added details about each section. This helps to demonstrate the similarities between the corresponding sections (e.g. C2-B1 and C2-B2).

The first section (9:1-5) is setting up the issue that Paul will address for the rest of chapters 9-11: the fact that many of Paul’s fellow ethnic Israelites are not currently trusting in Christ (when using words like ‘currently’, I am always referring to time from Paul’s perspective). This is a tragedy for Paul because, as he has taught earlier in Romans, it is those who have faith in Christ who are in a right-standing with God, so his fellow ethnic Israelites are currently outside of God’s blessing. Paul’s sorrow for this situation is clear.

The final section (11:33-36) is a stark contrast in that, having assessed the situation introduced in the first section (9:1-5), Paul almost explodes in praise of God. What has happened in between to change his emotions from sorrow to praise? It can be seen from the text just before the final section as well as from the central section (10:4-13) that Paul is praising God because his fellow ethnic Israelites can still be saved!

Moving inwards from the outside of the structure shown above, the next pair of sections (9:6-29 and 11:1-32) start to address the situation set out in the first section (9:1-5) and consider whether it is God’s fault that so many ethnic Israelites are not currently trusting in Christ.

The first section of this pair (9:6-29) asks whether God has failed on an earlier promise to save all of ethnic Israel. Paul is responding to a hypothetical objector who thinks that all ethnic Israelites should be saved. Paul’s objective in this section is to demonstrate that God is under no obligation to save all of ethnic Israel. God can save whomever he wants to save.

In the second section of this pair (11:1-32), Paul considers the same issue but from the opposite angle. In this section, Paul is considering the possibility that God has chosen to reject all of ethnic Israel. Paul’s point in this section is that God has not chosen to reject any of ethnic Israel. Paul demonstrates this by showing, first, that there are some ethnic Israelites who have come to faith (such as himself!), showing that God therefore can’t have rejected all of ethnic Israel. Second, he explains that it is still possible for the other Israelites who are not yet trusting in Christ (Paul’s contemporaries from 9:1-5) to become united with Jesus, so they have not been rejected either.

Having shown in these two sections that the situation of 9:1-5 is not God’s fault, the next pair of sections inward from this (9:30-10:3 and 10:14-21) turn the focus onto Israel (i.e. the ethnic Israelites of 9:1-5).

In the first section of this pair (9:30-10:3), Paul explains that these ethnic Israelites have made the error of pursuing righteousness based on their own works. This is contrasted with Gentile Christians, who have obtained righteousness by faith.

In the second section of this pair (10:14-21), Paul considers some possible excuses for why these ethnic Israelites have not come to Jesus (e.g. perhaps they had not heard the good news about Jesus). He rules out these excuses and shows that the situation is simply that these Israelites have not believed what they have heard. Paul therefore puts the blame firmly on the ethnic Israelites of 9:1-5.

Then we have the central section (10:4-13). Paul explains the great news that God has made salvation possible for all. He has made salvation depend on a criterion that, thanks to Christ’s work, we are able to meet: having faith in Christ. This salvation is for all who believe, and is without distinction between ethnic Israelite and Gentile.

Seeing the structure of Romans 9-11 like this helps us to interpret the respective sections. In particular, this applies to the pair of sections 9:6-29 and 11:1-32. The first of these sections (9:6-29) has been interpreted in various different ways by Christians, and the realisation of how it relates to its corresponding section (11:1-32) helps us to understand what 9:6-29 is actually saying. As the two sections look at the same issue from opposite angles (“should God save all ethnic Israelites?” Vs “has God rejected all ethnic Israelites?”), each section acts as a counterbalance for the other. If we interpret one section in a way that goes too far to one extreme, we will find that the other section rules out this interpretation. We must find an interpretation of each of these two sections that is compatible with the other, as well as being compatible with the rest of Romans 9-11 and the letter as a whole.

That will be the plan for the rest of this article.

The next section will cover the first section of this structure (Romans 9:1-5).

For those interested, here are some notes explaining some more details about the structure:

The C2-A sections contain the only uses of “Amen”.

“Called” appears 6 times, five in C2-B1 and once in C2-B2.

“Abraham” only appears twice, both referring to “seed of Abraham” (C2-B1 and C2-B2). “Seed” appears three other times, all in C2-B1.

“Flesh” appears 4 times – twice in C2-A1 and once in each of C2-B1 and C2-B2.

“Father” appears 3 times – once in each of C2-B1 and C2-B2, and once in C2-A1.

“Jacob” appears 2 times – once in each of C2-B1 and C2-B2.

“Mercy” appears 9 times, all in C2-B1 and C2-B2.

“Moses” appears 3 times – once in each of C2-C1 and C2-C2, and once in C2-B1 (but this is not a quote of Moses).

“will”/”wills” appears 5 times – four in C2-B1 and once in C2-B2.

“the Scripture says” appears 3 times – in C2-B1, C2-D and C2-B2.

“name” appears 2 times – in C2-B1 (9:17) and C2-D (10:13) – these refer to God’s name being declared throughout all the earth, and that whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

“people” appears 6 times – 3 close together in C2-B1 (9:25-26), and 3 close together around the beginning of C2-B2 (one is at end of C2-C2) (10:21-11:2).

“remnant” in 9:27 and 11:5 are different words, but the word for “reserved” in 11:4 is the same root as 9:27.

“hardening” is different words in the C2-B1 and C2-B2 sections, but the concept is similar.

“righteousness” appears 13 times – 12 between 9:28 and 10:6, one at 10:10.

“Stumbling” appears in 9:32-33 and 11:9 (but different words used in Greek between the two). There is an argument for 9:30-33 being in the C2-B1 section, but I think there is a stronger argument the other way.

“faith/believe” (same word in Greek) appears 14 times. All but one of these are in the C2-C1, C2-D and C2-C2 sections.

“Israel” appears 12 times.

The only uses of the word “Christ” are three times in C2-A1 and three times in C2-D.

“Jesus” appears only once, and it is in the central C2-D section.

Romans 9:1-5 – Why Is Paul So Upset?

We have seen that chapters 9-11 of Romans match with chapters 3-4. In chapters 3-4, Paul explains that a right-standing before God is not based on ethnicity or works, but is given to all who have faith in Christ. Chapters 9-11 continue to discuss the implications of this key teaching from Paul. One way we can see this is that the central section of chapters 9-11, i.e. 10:4-13, makes the same point again:

“[9] if you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. [10] For it is with the heart that one believes and is justified, and it is with the mouth that one declares their faith and is saved. [11] As Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” [12] For there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile, for the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, [13] for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.””

While this is great news for everyone, because God has made salvation possible for all by his gift of righteousness to those who trust in Christ, there is an implication of this teaching which brings great sadness, particularly to Paul. Many of his ethnic Israelite brothers and sisters are not currently trusting in Christ (at his time of writing) and are therefore, according to Paul’s own teaching, not currently in right-standing with God.

Paul has mentioned this already in chapter 4:

“[13] It was not through the law that Abraham and his seed received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith. [14] For if those who depend on the law are heirs, faith means nothing and the promise is worthless, [15] because the law brings wrath.”

Paul’s teaching is that those who are relying on the law instead of Christ are not in a right-standing with God. In their present situation, they are actually facing his wrath.

It is not difficult to imagine that many ethnic Israelites would not like this teaching from Paul. An expected response to this teaching is: “has God failed to keep his promises to the ethnic Israelites? Shouldn’t God save them anyway just because they are ethnic Israelites? Is there any hope for them?” Paul will go on to address these questions in chapters 9-11.

Before answering these questions, in the first section of chapters 9-11, Paul introduces the situation that he will be addressing:

“[1] I am speaking the truth in Christ—I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit—[2] that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. [3] For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. [4] They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. [5] To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.”

Paul is deeply sad that many ethnic Israelites are not currently in a right-standing before God (through faith in Christ), despite them having had many privileges in being able to know who Christ is.

We can see from verse 3 that he is talking about his fellow ethnic Israelites, who are his “kinsmen according to the flesh”. What’s so sad is that many of them are not currently Paul’s spiritual kinsmen in Christ.

Paul says he could wish that he would be cut off from Christ for the sake of his ethnic brothers and sisters who are currently separated from Christ. However, he knows that this wouldn’t work because the only way they can be saved is by Christ himself.

Paul’s desire for the salvation of the ethnic Israelites is similar to that of Moses in Exodus 32:30-32, when Moses visits the Lord after the people of Israel sin in making the golden calf. Moses says to the people of Israel, “perhaps I can make atonement for your sin”, and then he says to the Lord, “please forgive their sin – but if not, then blot me out of the book you have written”. The Lord did not grant Moses’ request to be blotted out of the Lord’s book, but we see that Moses’ love for his people was self-sacrificial, like Paul’s. He was willing to be cut off for their salvation.

Paul and Moses’ desire for the salvation of the ethnic Israelites mirrors that of Jesus himself, who said “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing” (Matthew 23:37). Jesus also longs for the salvation of the ethnic Israelites.

Jesus was also willing to be cut off for their salvation, and he actually went through with this: “he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was punished” (Isaiah 53:8), “he himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed” (1 Peter 2:24). Sadly, many of Paul’s fellow ethnic Israelites “were not willing” to come to Jesus to be saved.

Back in Romans 9, in verses 4 to 5, Paul lists many of the advantages that ethnic Israelites have had in being able to know Christ, ending with the fact that the Christ himself is ethnically one of them! It reminds us of Romans 3:1-2:

“Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God.”

Note that in Romans 3:2, Paul says “to begin with”, and then introduces only one advantage of being a Jew (i.e. an ethnic Israelite) – that they were “entrusted with the oracles of God”. He doesn’t list any further advantages of being a Jew in chapter 3. The words “to begin with” show that Paul is intending to return to this subject later in the letter. This is what he does in chapter 9, starting with the list in verses 4 and 5 of further advantages of the Jew. This shows us that the discussion in chapter 9 is linked with that of chapter 3:1-8 (this is one of the connections between the related sections of chapters 3-4 and 9-11). We will consider further implications of this later in this article.

It was a great advantage for the ethnic Israelites to have these privileges, but, as Paul also makes clear in chapter 3, this is no guarantee of an individual ethnic Israelite’s salvation. It is, however, a very sad situation when someone who has been blessed with all these privileges refuses to accept his own ethnic brother – Jesus – for who he is.

This situation – the fact that many of Paul’s fellow ethnic Israelites are not currently trusting in Jesus – sets up the whole of Paul’s discussion in chapters 9-11, until he ends chapter 11 in the same way as this section (9:1-5) ends: “forever. Amen”.

Paul’s sadness at the beginning of chapter 9 is in stark contrast to his happiness at the end of chapter 8, and occurs without a link being made between the two passages. The clear break between chapters 8 and 9 is best explained by the fact that chapter 9 is returning to the discussion of chapters 3-4. A good exercise is to read chapters 3-4 and then read chapters 9-11 (skipping out chapters 5-8). All of these chapters relate to Paul’s teaching of righteousness by faith, and all form one section of the letter.

There are points that Paul starts making in the next section (Romans 9:6-29) that he picks up and develops further in the related section of 11:1-32. It is helpful to look at 11:1-32 before 9:6-29 so that we know where Paul is going with the points he starts to make in 9:6-29. This will help to ensure that we interpret Paul’s initial points in 9:6-29 in the right way. There is disagreement among Christians about what 9:6-29 is teaching; this approach will help us to interpret this section correctly according to its context. For this reason, we will be leaving the next section (9:6-29) until last. So next we’ll be looking at 9:30-10:3.

Romans 9:30-10:3 – Why Have So Many Ethnic Israelites Failed to Obtain Righteousness?

As explained at the end of the previous section, which covered Romans 9:1-5, we will skip over 9:6-29 for now and move on to 9:30-10:3.

Let’s start with 9:30-33:

“[30] What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have obtained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; [31] but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. [32] Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, [33] as it is written, “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.””

In this section Paul sums up the reason why so many of his Christian brothers and sisters are Gentiles, and so few of them are ethnic Israelites. It’s clear that when he talks of “Gentiles” here he is referring to those Gentiles who are trusting in Christ, and when he talks of “Israel” he is referring to those in ethnic Israel who are not trusting in Christ (sadly the majority of them).

Paul’s explanation of the reason why there are so many Gentile Christians and so few ethnic Israelite Christians is simple: many Gentiles have put their faith in Christ, whereas many ethnic Israelites have not put their faith in Christ and have been relying on their own works instead. There is no mention of any extra aspects to the situation or of anything going on behind the scenes; it’s purely and simply a matter of who is trusting Christ and who is not. This fits precisely with what Paul has been saying earlier in Romans – it all depends on faith.

In verse 31, Paul states that the non-Christian ethnic Israelites have not succeeded in reaching the law that they were pursuing, which they thought would lead them to righteousness before God (see the earlier discussion on the difference between the “law of works” and the “law of faith”). In contrast, in verse 30 we see that the Christian Gentiles have achieved righteousness.

In verse 32, Paul asks the crucial question about non-Christian ethnic Israel’s situation: “why?” – why have these ethnic Israelites failed to obtain righteousness while these Gentiles have obtained it? The first two words of Paul’s answer are very important. He starts with “Because they” rather than “Because God”. His answer isn’t “Because God ultimately didn’t want to save them” or “Because God hadn’t given them the ability they needed in order to be saved”, but his answer is “Because they [non-Christian ethnic Israel] did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works”.

Paul is laying the blame solely with these ethnic Israelites – they chose to try to obtain a right-standing before God based on their own good works. It is implicit that they could have trusted Christ instead (and Paul will make this explicit in chapter 10). If it were not possible for them to have faith, then Paul’s answer would not have been “because they did not pursue it by faith” – that would not be answering the “why” question. He would instead have explained why it was not possible for them to have faith, and that would have been the real reason why these ethnic Israelites had failed to obtain righteousness.

Unsurprisingly, what Paul is saying here fits squarely with what John’s gospel says (John 3:18):

“Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.”

Back in Romans 9, Jesus is the “stone of stumbling” and “rock of offense” of verse 33. He came to save his fellow ethnic Israelites, but many of them rejected him. Rather than accepting his offer to save them, they rejected him and chose to continue to trust in their own works. Because of this, Jesus became a “stone of stumbling” and “rock of offense” to them, when if only they had trusted him instead of themselves, he would have been their saviour. “Whoever believes in him will not be put to shame”.

Now we can move to the second part of this section, 10:1-3:

“[1] Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. [2] For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but their zeal is not in line with the truth. [3] For, disregarding the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness.”

Paul’s prayer in verse 1 is striking. He is praying for the non-Christian ethnic Israelites to be saved. Note that Paul is speaking only of the non-Christian ethnic Israelites, and that he does not split them into two groups and only pray for one of those two groups to be saved. Instead, he treats all of the non-Christian ethnic Israelites in the same way and prays for them to be saved.

We can conclude one important truth from this prayer – Paul thinks that it is possible for the non-Christian ethnic Israelites to be saved! (Otherwise, why pray for it?) Paul must also think that this is something appropriate for him to pray to God. This means that Paul can’t be in a position of believing that God has rejected any of these people such that they can never be saved. Paul would never pray for something that he knew to be against God’s will. If Paul believed that God had rejected some or all of these people, he would never have prayed for them to be saved. Such a prayer would amount to Paul saying “God ultimately doesn’t want them to be saved but I do, and I think God needs to hear this from me”. Paul would be asserting himself over God in praying for something that he knew God didn’t ultimately want.

We can therefore conclude from this prayer that Paul cannot possibly be in a position of thinking that God has condemned any of his fellow ethnic Israelites, such that they have no hope of being saved. Any of them could still be saved, which is why Paul is praying for it to happen. Paul thinks it is both possible and in accordance with God’s will for these people to be saved. (We will see that chapter 11 confirms that this is Paul’s view.)

In verses 2 and 3, Paul notes that the non-Christian ethnic Israelites have a zeal for God – they really want to please God and to be accepted by him. However, they are going about this in completely the wrong way. Rather than acknowledging that they can never be good enough for God on their own (and instead accepting the free offer of Jesus’ righteousness), they are trying to achieve a right-standing before God based on their own works. This is the same point Paul was making earlier in 9:32 (see above).

The fact that these ethnic Israelites were going about obtaining righteousness in the wrong way was not due to ignorance on their part. Paul goes on to rule out such excuses for them in the parallel section of 10:14-21. A number of translations use English words such as “knowledge” and “ignorant” in verses 2 and 3, which can be understood to imply an excuse for the ethnic Israelites, but this is not the sense intended by Paul. I have used the words “truth” and “disregarding”, in line with the NET and HCSB translations, respectively.

All the talk of “righteousness” and “faith” in this section reminds us of the key statement from Romans 1:16-17:

“[16] For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. [17] For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, “The one who by faith is righteous shall live.””

We see that Paul is sticking firmly to his key message of salvation by faith to all who believe.

Here is a structure for this section of Romans (9:30-10:3):

In the next section, we will look at the center of Romans 9-11: the central section of Romans 10:4-13.

Romans 10:4-13 – Who Is Salvation For? Is It Possible?

Having looked at Romans 9:30-10:3, now we come to Romans 10:4-13, which is the central section of chapters 9-11. It starts with this:

“[4] For Christ is the culmination of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes. [5] For Moses writes this about the righteousness that is by the law: “The person who does these things will live by them.””

Jesus has fulfilled the law; he is what the law was pointing towards. The result of this is that everyone who believes in him is considered righteous before God – they can claim Jesus’ righteousness for themselves. Because Jesus has fulfilled the law, living a sin-free life and being the spotless sacrificial lamb to take away the sins of the world, those who trust in him can rely on his record instead of their own. Jesus is “the person who does these things” (verse 5, i.e. the person who perfectly keeps the law), and he lives, as seen by his resurrection. So, those who trust in him will live as he lives.

However, for someone who is trying to live a righteous life on their own without relying on Jesus, the words “the person who does these things will live by them” are to the condemnation of that person. No one apart from Jesus fully obeys all of the law (“all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” – Romans 3:23), so no one who is living a life separated from Jesus and trying to obey the law on their own will be able to live by this.

Paul contrasts the “I’ll meet the law’s requirements on my own” attitude (righteousness by the law, which is doomed to fail) with the “I’ll rely on Jesus’ righteousness as I have no hope without him” attitude – the righteousness that is by faith:

“[6] But the righteousness that is by faith says: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ ” (that is, to bring Christ down) [7] “or ‘Who will descend into the deep?’ ” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). [8] But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim),”

Paul’s exciting news is that righteousness by faith is possible! We can actually achieve it. Whereas a person trying to be righteous by obeying the law on their own is doomed to fail, this radically different strategy of trusting in Jesus (to share in his righteousness) is something that we can actually achieve.

The quotations in these verses are from Deuteronomy 30:12-14. We can see the point Paul is making by looking at the surrounding text from the quote from Deuteronomy, which Paul’s ethnic Israelite audience would have known well. It is from Moses’ final speech to Israel:

“[11] “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. [12] It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ [13] Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ [14] But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it. 

[15] See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. [16] For I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.

[17] But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient, and if you are drawn away to bow down to other gods and worship them, [18] I declare to you this day that you will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess.

[19] This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live [20] and that you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the Lord is your life, and he will give you many years in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.”

Moses was presenting the people with two options, and both of these options were possible thanks to the grace of God in giving them the word. In the same way, Paul explains that righteousness by faith is possible for all.

How is righteousness by faith something we can actually achieve, when “there is no one who seeks God” (Romans 3:11)? The reason is that, despite the situation that we don’t seek God, God seeks us! The spirit-breathed word of God comes to us and enters our hearts. With the word of God in our hearts, our hearts are opened so that we are able to trust him. Without the word of God coming to us, God would be so far away from us that we would never be able to get to him, and in fact we would never even try given our sinful nature and rebellion against him. But because the word of God comes to us and enters our hearts, we become enabled by this spirit-filled word to trust in Christ.

Note that the word Paul speaks about is near to the people but not all of the people believe it. This word therefore doesn’t automatically cause people to trust in Christ. What it does is make belief possible. People are graciously given the option of trusting in Christ and the ability to do so, which is a change from their natural (fallen) state, in which they do not have this option or ability and so would never trust Christ on their own. The word changes the situation from one in which none would believe to the situation that some people believe while others do not. The reason why some people do not believe is not a lack of provision by God such that it was ultimately impossible for them to believe – the word is near to all of them.

Although God could cause those who hear his word to trust him automatically, it’s clear that he hasn’t made things be that way. He wants people to make a genuine decision about whether or not to trust in Christ, rather than not giving them any option but to trust in Christ. Who are we to question God’s sovereign decision to let people have a decision?

This situation is in fact great news for all of us. If it were the case that all people who become Christians had no option other than to trust in Christ, that would mean that there are many people who are never given the option or ability to trust him (as many do not become Christians). Someone not yet a Christian would then have no way of being sure that God will give them a genuine opportunity to trust in Christ, and Christians would not know whether God ultimately wants to save their non-Christian friends and family. Thankfully, that view isn’t true – it would run completely against Paul’s message that the gospel is for everyone. The next part of Romans 10 makes this clear – the good news of the gospel is for everyone! Let’s carry on with Paul in this section of Romans, with arguably his most emphatic message of the whole letter:

“[8] But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim), [9] because if you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. [10] For it is with the heart that one believes and is justified, and it is with the mouth that one declares their faith and is saved. [11] As Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” [12] For there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile, for the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, [13] for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.””

What great news! God has not excluded anyone, so everyone can be saved! All they have to do is to believe the word of God and, as a result of this, declare that Jesus is Lord. This is not too difficult to do, as the word of God has come to their hearts and their mouths (verse 8), so that they are able to do this.

Note the abundance of inclusive terms like “all” and “everyone” – the gospel is for all!

In verse 12, Paul again returns to one of his main themes of Romans, by saying that “there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile” (see Romans 1:16 and Romans 3:22 for other examples). We can deduce something very significant from all of this – God has not excluded ethnic Israelites! (More of this in Chapter 11.) God wants all to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4), he enables all to be saved (see the next section if you’re not yet convinced of this), and all who are saved are saved in the same way – through faith in Christ (Romans 3:30, John 14:6).

This teaching of “no distinction between Jew and Gentile” appears both in this section of Romans (chapters 9-11) and in the corresponding section of Romans 3:1-4:25 (in Romans 3:22). Righteousness by faith is also taught in both of these sections (3:22, 10:6). The structure of Romans as a whole is explained here, the structure of Romans 3:1-4:25 is explained here, and the structure of Romans 9-11 is explained here.

We’ll end this section with a look at the structure of this section. It’s no surprise that the key verses of this section have a chiastic structure, as Paul sets out his great news in a beautiful way:

“Saved” is given an extra emphasis by being mentioned at the end as well as in the middle.

Here is a structure for the whole section, with the chiasm above forming the middle section:

Verses 11-13 also have a chiastic structure, with verses 11 and 13 having similar quotations, and surrounding verse 12.

Verses 9-10 are the very center of Romans 9-11, and they contain the only use of the word “Jesus” in these chapters of Romans.

In the next section, we’ll look at the next section (Romans 10:14-21).

“Humbly accept the word planted in you, which is able to save your souls” (James 1:21)

Romans 10:14-21 – Do Unbelieving Ethnic Israelites Have Any Excuse for Not Believing?

Having reached the center of Romans 9-11, i.e. 10:4-13, we are now on the return journey, with each section matching with its corresponding earlier section.

The next section is Romans 10:14-21. In this section, Paul goes through possible excuses as to why the unbelieving ethnic Israelites are not currently trusting in Christ (at Paul’s time of writing). Perhaps it’s not really their fault? Perhaps it’s somehow God’s fault? This section matches up with 9:30-10:3 – both are used by Paul to demonstrate that the situation of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites is entirely their own fault. They could easily trust in Christ and it’s not in any way God’s fault that they haven’t done so yet.

Paul finished the central section (10:4-13) with the very simple summary of salvation that “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved”. That sounds straightforward enough, but perhaps the unbelieving ethnic Israelites have an excuse for not calling on the name of the Lord? This is what Paul discusses in this section:

“[14] How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? [15a] And how are they to preach unless they are sent?”

These verses take us backwards through a series of steps leading to salvation. Setting out the steps in chronological order we have:

1. Preacher is sent to them
2. Preacher preaches the word of Christ (see v. 17) to them
3. They hear the word of Christ
4. They believe in Christ
5. They call on Christ

A few verses before this, Paul has set out that someone reaching steps 4 and 5 will be saved: “For it is with the heart that one believes and is justified, and it is with the mouth that one declares their faith and is saved” (10:10). (It seems that steps 4 and 5 are linked, so that anyone reaching step 4 will reach step 5 as well.) So if the unbelieving ethnic Israelites had not reached step 3 yet (i.e. they hadn’t heard the word of Christ), they would have an excuse for not having reached steps 4 and 5. Paul will go on to demonstrate that the unbelieving ethnic Israelites have indeed reached step 3, so they don’t have this excuse (see verses 16 and 18 below).

“[15b] As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!””

This covers steps 1 and 2 – there have been preachers and they have been preaching the good news (i.e. the “gospel”) to the ethnic Israelites. The quote is from Isaiah 52:7: “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news, who publishes peace, who brings good news of happiness, who publishes salvation, who says to Zion, “Your God reigns.””

“[16] But they have not all obeyed the good news. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?””

This covers step 3 – they have heard. This also shows that it is possible to get to step 3 but not reach step 4. It is possible to hear the word but not believe it. Such a person has been given all they need to believe, but they choose to disobey the good news by not trusting Christ.

“[17] So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.”

The way to get to step 4 is via step 3.

Paul will now make three points to address the remaining potential excuses for the unbelieving ethnic Israelites. Perhaps they hadn’t heard? Perhaps they heard but did not understand? Perhaps they could not find the one they were seeking? For each of the three points, Paul introduces the situation and then quotes a Bible verse. Each time, Paul is addressing the question of the unbelief of the ethnic Israelites, but Paul’s Bible quotation relates to Gentiles. What Paul is doing is proving that the ethnic Israelites have no excuse for not trusting in Christ by proving that even the Gentiles have no excuse for not doing this. If Paul can prove that even the Gentiles have no excuse, then the ethnic Israelites, who have been in a privileged position compared to the Gentiles (see 9:1-5), certainly must have no excuse.

“[18] But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have, for “Their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world.””

Paul confirms again that the unbelieving ethnic Israelites have indeed heard, i.e. they have reached step 3. What they have heard is the word of Christ (see verse 17). The quotation is from Psalm 19:4, which talks of the proclamation of the creation, which goes to everyone (even the Gentiles). Paul is saying that even the proclamation of creation declares the word of Christ, and this word goes to everyone. The ethnic Israelites have heard this word and so much more, thanks to the various prophets and evangelists that God has sent to them. As the proclamation of creation is enough to make the Gentiles “without excuse” (Romans 1:20), then the ethnic Israelites certainly must be without excuse for having heard this and more. We will discuss some implications of this verse in more depth at the end of this section.

“[19] But I ask, did Israel not understand? First Moses says, “I will make you jealous of those who are not a nation; with a foolish nation I will make you angry.””

After establishing that the Israelites have heard the word of Christ, the next possible excuse is that perhaps they didn’t understand it. Paul contrasts these ethnic Israelites against a non-Israelite “foolish nation”. In context, the point Paul is making is that there are plenty of Gentile Christians, and while these ethnic Israelites have had hundreds of years of theological training, along with all the blessings set out at the beginning of Romans 9, the Gentiles haven’t had those blessings but many of them have become Christians. If even those Gentiles understood the good news about Christ, it would be absurd to suggest that the ethnic Israelites were in a position of not understanding it.

“[20] Then Isaiah is so bold as to say, “I have been found by those who did not seek me; I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.””

In his third and final point about the lack of excuse for the unbelieving ethnic Israelites, Paul speaks of Gentiles who have become Christians even though they weren’t seeking God. In contrast, the unbelieving ethnic Israelites “have a zeal for God” (10:2), so they are seeking God. Therefore they are in a better position to find God than the Gentiles, so this is also no excuse for them. Paul is making a similar point to Romans 9:30-31, which is in the parallel section to this one. The point made both times is that Gentiles who have not sought God have found him, while ethnic Israelites who have sought God have not found him.

We’ve gone through all the remaining excuses and none of them has succeeded in taking any blame away from the unbelieving ethnic Israelites. We can see the true situation is that, rather than seeking God according to the way God has revealed to them, these unbelieving ethnic Israelites are disobediently trusting in themselves and trying to achieve their own righteousness instead. How does God respond to this disobedience?

“[21] But of Israel he says, “All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.””

God really wants these Israelites to be saved! He holds out his hands to them all day long. Even though they have been so disobedient, he still loves them and wants them to turn to him. As we’ve seen in Chapter 10, the word of Christ has been preached to them and has entered into their hearts so that they can be saved. God really wants this to happen! There is no one who wants ethnic Israelites to be saved more than God does. God has done nothing whatsoever to permanently cut any of them off or permanently prevent any of them from being saved.

It’s clear that it’s not God’s fault in any way that any of the ethnic Israelites are not trusting in Christ. All of them have had everything they need to be able to do this, and God continues to hold out his hands for them to come to him. We’ll see in chapter 11 the lengths to which God is going to increase the number of ethnic Israelites who are being saved.

Verse 21 begins with the words “but of Israel he says” (referring to the unbelieving ethnic Israelites) because the previous three Bible quotations relate to Gentiles (although, as explained above, they were used to prove a point about the ethnic Israelites).

Here is a structure for this section of Romans (10:14-21):

The C2-C2-A sections are about the unbelieving ethnic Israelites, and consider whether they have an excuse for not believing. The C2-C2-B section is a general truth that is stated without reference to the specific situation of the ethnic Israelites. This general truth helps us to understand the situation of the ethnic Israelites – they don’t have an excuse because they have heard the word of Christ.

In the next section, we’ll be starting out on Romans 11.

“Why will you die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord GOD; so turn, and live.” (Ezekiel 18:31b-32)

Additional discussion of Romans 10:18

We will now consider further implications of this verse, following the initial discussion of it above.

“[18] But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have, for “Their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world.””

The Bible verse to which Paul refers to prove this is striking. Paul does not speak here of prophets or evangelists going to speak the word of Christ to the Israelites (although that has happened many times, as mentioned in verse 15b). Instead, Paul speaks of the proclamation made by the creation itself, from Psalm 19:

“[1] The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. [2] Day to day pours out speech, and night to night reveals knowledge. [3] There is no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not heard. [4] Their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.”

Paul is therefore saying that the creation preaches the word of Christ. Paul is not merely saying that the creation is sufficient to let us deduce that some kind of “God” exists; he is saying that the creation specifically preaches the word of Christ. This should not really be a surprise to us – if the creation preached anything other than the word of Christ, the creation would be a heretic! Given that the creation was created by Christ (John 1:3), it shouldn’t be at all surprising that it proclaims his word.

Some people find this difficult to believe, and don’t see how the creation specifically preaches the word of Christ. Although they wouldn’t put it like this, their reasoning is really that, because they don’t understand how the creation preaches the word of Christ, the creation must only be preaching a general message rather than one about Christ. However, the problem is not with the clarity of the proclamation of the creation – the problem lies with the people hearing the proclamation! Due to our sinful natures (since the fall), we are naturally inclined against listening to the proclamation of the word of Christ, so we don’t usually see it for what it really is.

Because Paul shows us that the word of Christ is preached by the creation through all the earth to everyone, we can conclude that all people reach step 3 (hearing the word of Christ), so all are given the possibility to reach step 4 (believing in Christ). This doesn’t mean that there is no point in having human evangelists, as “how beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news” (verse 15b). A person who hears the word of Christ from a human evangelist as well as from the creation is in a better position than a person who has heard it only from the creation. Paul himself dedicated his ministry to preaching the gospel to people who had not heard from a human evangelist before (Romans 15:20-21), so he saw the importance of human evangelism alongside his awareness that the creation proclaims the word of Christ. God wants us to engage in personal evangelism, but the reason for this is not that he is incapable of communicating to people without our help.

The point is that the proclamation of creation is sufficient to ensure that everyone reaches step 3, which makes step 4 a possibility for everyone (thanks to the enabling of the spirit-filled word of Christ – see the previous section). On judgement day, no non-Christian will be able to lay any blame on God that they never heard the word of Christ, even if they never met a human evangelist.

This also fits with Romans 1:

“[18] For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. [19] For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. [20] For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. [21] For although they knew God, they did not honour him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.”

These people suppress the truth, and the truth is not simply that there is a “God”, but it is far more detailed than that, as Paul explains. They are “without excuse” because the proclamation of creation is enough for them to know God, but they choose not to honour him or give thanks.

If you’re still not convinced, consider what Paul says in Colossians 1:

“[15] The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. [16] For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. [17] He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. [18] And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. [19] For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, [20] and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. [21] Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behaviour. [22] But now he has reconciled you by Christ’s physical body through death to present you holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation – [23] if you continue in your faith, established and firm, and do not move from the hope held out in the gospel. This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.”

Paul says that the gospel has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven. This would be hard to believe if he meant only the spoken word of human evangelists, but it makes sense if he is also including the proclamation of creation, which proclaims the word of Christ to everyone.

One reason why people might struggle with accepting this is if they have an understanding of what the “gospel” is that is too detailed and specific, requiring a long sequence of historical events to be listed before the “gospel” has been presented. However, in Galatians 3:8, Paul states that “the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.”” Paul can call this simple statement the “gospel”, so we should broaden our understanding of what the “gospel” is, not requiring it to be a long list of propositions. This makes it easier to comprehend how the creation could proclaim the “gospel”. This verse also shows us that the gospel was known about before Jesus’ incarnation. The same point can be made from Paul’s introduction to Romans. In Romans 1:1-2, Paul refers to:

“the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through the holy scriptures, concerning his Son.”

The gospel about God’s Son was revealed long before Jesus’ incarnation.

People often like to discuss what happens to those who have never heard the gospel. It is often considered that a large proportion of the world’s population has never heard the gospel. Is it fair of God to punish people who have not reached step 3 of the five steps listed above? However, the Bible never directly addresses this question. Would the Bible really have nothing to say about so many people? It seems the more biblical position is to go along with Paul’s teaching that the gospel has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven. The Bible does not explain what happens to people who have never heard the gospel because there are no such people. Everyone has heard at least the proclamation of creation, so even if someone has never heard the gospel from a human evangelist, they have still heard the word of Christ preached by the creation, which makes them ‘without excuse’ (Romans 1, see above). The sad fact is that many people resist and reject the gospel, not that God withholds the gospel from many people.

If you’re still not convinced on this point, this post might help (see in particular the comments made by Paul Blackham and Glen Scrivener – I also chip-in later in the discussion). Otherwise, don’t worry for now as this point doesn’t affect the rest of this analysis of Romans 9-11.

Romans 11:1-6 – Has God Rejected Ethnic Israelites?

Having finished Romans 10:14-21, we’re now on to 11:1-32. This section matches in the structure of Romans 9-11 with 9:6-29, which we haven’t considered in detail yet. We are considering this section first as it resolves some questions that are left unanswered in 9:6-29. We can then use what we have learnt when we consider 9:6-29, to ensure that we reach an interpretation which is consistent with this section. As this section is a big section which makes some important points, we will be going through it carefully and splitting the analysis into a few sections. This first section covers Romans 11:1-6.

As we will see, both this section (11:1-32) and its matching section (9:6-29) are considering whether the situation set out in 9:1-5 is God’s fault. The situation set out in 9:1-5 is that there are many ethnic Israelites in Paul’s day who are not currently trusting in Christ. Each section considers the situation from a different angle. The first section (9:6-29) considers whether God was obliged to save all of ethnic Israel, and explains that he was not obliged to do this. The second section (11:1-32) looks from the opposite angle and asks whether God has rejected all of ethnic Israel, so that none of them can be saved. Let’s see what Paul has to say about this:

“[1] I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin.”

We can see what Paul means by ‘his people’, as he goes on to explain that he himself is ‘an Israelite’ and ‘a member of the tribe of Benjamin’, showing that his ethnic heritage is in view. If he had meant something else by ‘his people’, to follow this by stating that he is an ethnic Israelite would not have justified his negative answer to the question. This interpretation is backed up by the context of Romans 9:1-5, which introduces this section of Romans (chapters 9-11) and is about the ethnic Israelites, and the various references to the ethnic Israelites in the preceding and following verses, including the previous verse (10:21). Paul is clearly talking about ethnic Israel.

Paul’s conclusion is that God has not rejected his people, i.e. God has not rejected the ethnic Israelites. Paul’s first evidence for this is himself. He is an ethnic Israelite and is also trusting in Christ and therefore in a right-standing with God. He is a living example that God has not rejected the ethnic Israelites. The fact that there exists one ethnic Israelite who is trusting in Christ is a sufficient example to prove that God has not rejected the ethnic Israelites.

Of course, the fact that God has not rejected a group of people does not mean that all people in the group necessarily will trust in Christ. It just means that the door is still open for them to receive God’s blessing. We can see that this is what it means to be “not rejected” by God from 1 Samuel 12:19-25:

“[19] And all the people said to Samuel, “Pray for your servants to the LORD your God, that we may not die, for we have added to all our sins this evil, to ask for ourselves a king.” [20] And Samuel said to the people, “Do not be afraid; you have done all this evil. Yet do not turn aside from following the LORD, but serve the LORD with all your heart. [21] And do not turn aside after empty things that cannot profit or deliver, for they are empty. [22] For the LORD will not reject his people, for his great name’s sake, because it has pleased the LORD to make you a people for himself. [23] Moreover, as for me, far be it from me that I should sin against the LORD by ceasing to pray for you, and I will instruct you in the good and the right way. [24] Only fear the LORD and serve him faithfully with all your heart. For consider what great things he has done for you. [25] But if you still do wickedly, you shall be swept away, both you and your king.””

The Israelites are “not rejected” by God, and therefore have the opportunity to ‘fear the Lord and serve him faithfully’, but the possibility of them not doing this still remains, in which case they will be ‘swept away’.

The fact that Paul is trusting in Christ shows that God has not rejected the ethnic Israelites of Paul’s day. If God had rejected the ethnic Israelites of Paul’s day, then it would not be possible for any of them to trust in Christ, including him. The point Paul is making is that God has not made it impossible for any ethnic Israelite to trust in Christ and therefore reach a right-standing before God. He is not saying that every ethnic Israelite always will do this.

After beginning with the example of himself, Paul continues with an example from history to show that this situation with ethnic Israel is the same in his day as it was in the past:

“[2] God did not reject his people whom he knew before – do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he appeals to God against Israel? [3] “Lord, they have killed your prophets, they have demolished your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life.” [4] But what is God’s reply to him? “I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.””

Paul refers to the ethnic Israelites during the days of Elijah as an example of a generation of God’s people in the past – those ethnic Israelites whom he ‘knew before’ (see the translation discussion below). To be “known” by God refers to more than his mere knowledge about them, but includes a relational aspect as well (this is consistent with Amos 3:2, in which God says to the people of Israel ‘you only have I known among all the families of the earth’). Clearly God knows about all the families of the earth, so this special “knowing” refers to more than this. God’s “knowing” of the ethnic Israelites (‘his people’) applies to the nation as a whole, even when they sin against him, as was the case in Amos 3:2, which continues with ‘…therefore I will punish you for all your sins’.

The example with Elijah’s generation shows that God did not reject the ethnic Israelites during the time of Elijah, even though at that time, as in Paul’s time, there were so few ethnic Israelites trusting in the Lord. There were 7000 men who did not bow the knee to Baal, because they were instead trusting in the Lord. All of the Israelites at that time could have trusted in the Lord (thanks to the word of God coming to them and enabling them to trust Him – see discussion of Romans 10:4-13), but many did not do so and turned to Baal instead.

In the account of this event in 1 Kings 19:18, when God is speaking of punishment by death being inflicted, God says ‘yet I will leave seven thousand in Israel, all the knees that have not bowed to Baal, and every mouth that has not kissed him’. God chose to punish those who did not trust in the Lord, but to preserve those who did trust in him. God’s criterion for determining who to punish and who to preserve was whether the person was trusting Baal or trusting the Lord. This fits with what Paul has been saying earlier in Romans – that salvation comes to those who have faith in the Lord (e.g. Romans 10:13). Those with faith in the Lord are credited with righteousness as a gift by God’s grace (see 4:1-17), so that they do not receive the punishment they deserve.

Paul may have found himself seeming to be in a position like Elijah, as apparently the only ethnic Israelite in his community that was actually trusting in the Lord. However, Paul knows that, like in Elijah’s day, he is not alone and there are other ethnic Israelites also trusting in the Lord. These other ethnic Israelites from Paul’s day are further examples that God has not rejected the ethnic Israelites.

Having finished his example from ethnic Israel’s past, Paul continues with:

“[5] So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. [6] And if it is by grace, then it cannot be based on works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.”

The phrase ‘so too at the present time’ shows that Paul has switched from an example in the past (those whom God ‘knew before’) to a discussion of the present time (i.e. Paul’s present time) – the ethnic Israelites whom God “knows” now (we saw God’s love for the ethnic Israelites of Paul’s day in Romans 10:21).

Paul says that the situation is the same now (‘so too’) as it was in the past. There is a ‘remnant’ within ethnic Israel – i.e. only some people within ethnic Israel are trusting in the Lord.

The remnant is ‘chosen by grace’ because they do not deserve to be chosen. Their chosenness, along with their justification, is God’s gracious gift to people who don’t deserve it. This is why justification can’t be based on works, as then anyone obtaining it would have earned it and would therefore deserve it. Paul is making the same point here as in Romans 4:2-5:

“[2] For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. [3] For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” [4] Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. [5] And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness”

It’s important to note that Romans 11:5 does not explain how God decides which ethnic Israelites will be in the remnant. It simply explains that those who are in the remnant do not deserve their chosen status (i.e. they are ‘chosen by grace’). Verse 6 then explains that they are not chosen due to their works. Paul wants to teach his ethnic Israelite audience against the idea that ethnic Israelites can achieve righteousness by their own works (see Romans 9:31-32). If this were achievable, those who would be successful (if any!) would deserve their chosen status, and therefore would not be chosen ‘by grace’. Paul therefore rules out works as being the determining factor in who is chosen. He doesn’t explain in this verse what the determining factor is, only that they are chosen ‘by grace’, i.e. their chosenness is not deserved but is a gift.

We must turn to other verses to understand how God graciously decides who will be his chosen people – those who are considered righteous. Thankfully, there are plenty of these verses, such as Romans 4:5 (quoted above) – it is not about works but about belief/faith. Another relevant verse is Romans 4:16: ‘that is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace’. Philippians 3:8b-9 is also helpful: ‘in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith’. This is consistent with Paul’s example of Elijah’s day that ‘I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal’ – God decided that his chosen people would be those who trusted in him rather than in Baal.

God has graciously decided that everyone who trusts in Christ will be his chosen people. Any ethnic Israelite who trusts in Christ will be in the remnant. It’s as simple as that. We will see this view of election confirmed in the next section.

‘Knew before’/‘foreknew’

The translation of verse 2a I have used above is ‘God did not reject his people whom he knew before’. It should be pointed out that many modern translations follow the King James Version in using the word ‘foreknew’ instead of ‘knew before’. The translation ‘knew before’ appears in the Tyndale Bible (written before the KJV) and in Young’s Literal Translation. John Wycliffe (another pre-KJV translation) has ‘before-knew’. The Jubilee Bible, which translates into English an early Spanish translation by Casiodoro de Reina, a contemporary of William Tyndale, uses ‘knew beforehand’.

The significance of this difference is that the English word ‘foreknew’ refers to knowledge of something before it happens/exists – knowledge that looks ahead into the future from sometime in the past, whereas ‘knew before’ does not carry this implication. For example, I can say that my grandfather (who passed away a few years ago) is someone I ‘knew before’ – I knew him in the past while he was still alive. It would be very different for me to say that I ‘foreknew’ my grandfather – that I knew him in advance from before he existed! The theological term “foreknowledge” refers to God’s ability to know events and people before they happen or exist. God does have this kind of knowledge, but it is helpful to be clear that this verse is not talking about this kind of divine knowledge.

From the context of verse 2, there is no suggestion in the surrounding wording that God’s knowledge of the future is in view. The reference to God’s people whom he ‘knew before’/‘foreknew’ is immediately followed by a reference to God’s people in the past – the ethnic Israelites of Elijah’s generation, so the meaning ‘knew before’ fits perfectly with that. Paul is looking back to God’s dealings with these people in the past, and there is no reason to add in an element of God’s knowledge of these people from a point in time even further in the past, with God looking into the future from a time before they existed.

The relevant Greek word appears in other places in the New Testament, for example in Paul’s speech in Acts 26:5, where it is not translated as ‘foreknew’ (including by the KJV and popular modern translations). Acts 26:4-5 states:

“[4] The Jewish people all know the way I have lived ever since I was a child, from the beginning of my life in my own country, and also in Jerusalem. [5] They have known me for a long time and can testify, if they are willing, that I conformed to the strictest sect of our religion, living as a Pharisee.”

The knowledge that these Jewish people had about Paul was not foreknowledge (knowledge of Paul in advance). It was knowledge from the past, because they knew Paul in the past. Their knowledge of Paul coincided with the existence of Paul. This corresponds with Romans 11:2, which speaks of God’s knowledge in the past of a past generation of ethnic Israelites.

The relevant Greek word therefore does not necessarily imply a future-knowing element, but the English word ‘foreknew’ does imply this, which makes the word ‘foreknew’ a flawed translation as it brings in a meaning not present in the original Greek and not apparent from the context of this word in Romans 11:2.

When the word ‘foreknew’ is used instead of ‘knew before’ in verse 2, the effect of this is that verse 2a then links more closely with verse 1 rather than the rest of verse 2. In the ‘knew before’ version discussed above, verse 2a introduces the example from the past in verse 2b. In the ‘foreknew’ version, verse 2a states that ‘God has not rejected his people, whom he foreknew’. This verse therefore makes a similar statement to verse 1, which asks ‘has God rejected his people? By no means!’. Both verses are saying that God has not rejected the ethnic Israelites, with verse 2a now adding the extra information that the ethnic Israelites were “foreknown” by God, i.e. God knew the ethnic Israelite nation in advance (with this “knowing” most likely including the relational sense as explained above).

The choice of ‘knew before’ or ‘foreknew’ doesn’t have a significant impact on the overall meaning of this passage – most Christians (me included) already believe that God did know the ethnic Israelites in advance. The question isn’t whether or not this theological statement is true, but whether or not this verse is about that. For the reasons set out above it seems that the ‘knew before’ translation should be preferred. The link of verse 2a into verse 2b fits more comfortably than the understanding of verse 2a mostly repeating what Paul has already said in verse 1. It also fits well with the switch to the present time in verse 5. The understanding of the ‘knew before’/‘foreknew’ distinction will also be of relevance when we come to consider the use of this word in Romans 8:29, which will be covered in a later section.

There are some who, using the “foreknew” translation, think that ‘those he foreknew’ is referring only to the individuals within ethnic Israel whom God has decided in advance to save. Paul would then be answering his question from verse 1 (“has God rejected the ethnic Israelites?”) by saying that God has not rejected those individuals from ethnic Israel whom he chose in advance to save. This amounts to Paul saying “God hasn’t rejected the ones he hasn’t rejected”. The implication of this view is that God therefore has rejected all the other individuals within ethnic Israel whom he has not chosen in advance to save. As will be demonstrated in the next sections, this view is inconsistent with what Paul goes on to teach in chapter 11, as he will demonstrate that God has not rejected any of Paul’s fellow ethnic Israelites (i.e. all of them still have an opportunity to join the spiritual people of God). This view is also inconsistent with what Paul has just said in Romans 10:21 – that God holds out his hands all day long to the ethnic Israelites.

In the next section, we’ll consider Romans 11:7-10 and will answer the question, “who are the elect”?

Romans 11:7-10 – Who Are the Elect?

After considering Romans 11:1-6 in the previous section, now we’ll continue with verses 7-10.

Having established that God has not rejected the ethnic Israelites, Paul goes on to explain what has been happening “at the present time” (i.e. Paul’s present time – see verse 5):

“[7] What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened,”

Because so many of Paul’s fellow ethnic Israelites have not trusted in Christ, he uses the word ‘Israel’ to refer to the unbelieving ethnic Israelites, saying that “Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking” (see Romans 9:31-32 for another example of the word ‘Israel’ being used in this way). They were seeking righteousness but wanted to obtain it themselves rather than accepting the offer of Christ’s righteousness (see Romans 10:3).

Paul then goes on to explain that there are a relatively small number of ethnic Israelites who have obtained righteousness. These are “the elect”. They correspond to the “remnant” from verse 5. Paul distinguishes “the elect” from “the rest”. “The rest” is everyone else in ethnic Israel who is not “the elect”. (The Gentiles could also be categorised as “elect” and “non-elect”, but the context is clear that Paul is focusing on ethnic Israel in these verses. The hardening referred to is a hardening of some ethnic Israelites (not Gentiles). As the hardened ones are “the rest”, the “elect” ones must also be ethnic Israelites only.)

Paul divides ethnic Israel up into “the elect” and “the rest”. This is very important in understanding who “the elect” are, as we will see. This diagram shows the situation:

“The rest” are “the rest” because they are not “the elect”. Paul does not need to give them their own title – he simply refers to them as “the rest”, which distinguishes them from “the elect”. We can therefore say with certainty that “the rest” are not elect. “The rest” are “the non-elect”.

Paul goes on to talk about “the rest” (picking up from verse 7):

“[7b] The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, [8] as it is written, “God gave them [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day.” [9] And David says, “Let their [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect]; [10] let their [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] eyes be darkened so that they [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] cannot see, and bend their [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] backs continually.””

So, the non-elect ethnic Israelites have been hardened: their eyes have been darkened and their ears do not hear. (A ‘stumbling block’ is also referred to in 9:33, which similarly speaks of the situation of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites.) A burden is weighing down on them and bending their backs. As they are not elect, and have had their eyes darkened etc., one might conclude that these non-elect ethnic Israelites will always remain in this state and will therefore never be saved.

However, let’s see what Paul has to say about this. Does Paul think that none of these non-elect ethnic Israelites will ever be saved? Let’s read through the rest of this section with only this question in mind:

[11] So I ask, did they [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] stumble in order that they [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] might fall? By no means! Rather through their [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make them [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] jealous. [12] Now if their [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] trespass means riches for the world, and if their [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] full inclusion mean! [13] Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry [14] in order somehow to make my fellow Jews [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] jealous, and thus save some of them [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect]. [15] For if their [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] acceptance mean but life from the dead? [16] If the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, so is the whole lump, and if the root is holy, so are the branches. [17] But if some of the branches [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, [18] do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. [19] Then you will say, “Branches [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” [20] That is true. They [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear. [21] For if God did not spare the natural branches [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect], neither will he spare you. [22] Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect], but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. [23] And even they [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect], if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. [24] For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect], the natural branches, be grafted back into their own olive tree. [25] Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect], until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. [26] And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, “The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”; [27] “and this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins.” [28] As regards the gospel, they [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. [29] For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. [30] For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] disobedience, [31] so they [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect] also may now receive mercy. [32] For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.

Paul thinks that non-elect people, who have been hardened, can be saved!

This tells us a lot about Paul’s understanding of what it means to be “elect”. Paul started off (in verse 7) by dividing ethnic Israel into “the elect” (who have obtained righteousness) and “the rest” (who have not obtained righteousness, are non-elect, and have been hardened). “The elect” Israelites are those who are trusting in Christ, as they have obtained righteousness already (verse 7). Regarding “the rest”, Paul thinks it is possible for a non-elect person to trust in Christ and therefore be saved.

By Paul’s definition, when a non-elect person trusts in Christ, they will become part of “the elect”, as they will then have obtained righteousness. On an individual basis, therefore, a person can change from being non-elect to being elect. They move from the group of people called “the rest” into the group of people called “the elect”.

Another understanding of “election”

In contrast to this understanding of what it means for someone to be “elect”, there are some people who believe that everyone who does or will eventually trust in Christ has always been “elect” – even before they trusted in Christ, and that everyone who ultimately never will trust in Christ has always been “non-elect”.

The people who take this view therefore see the hardening of the non-elect that Paul speaks of as being permanent and unchangeable, such that they never will trust in Christ. They tend to argue that when Paul speaks in the following verses about more ethnic Israelites coming to faith, he is speaking of different ethnic Israelites than those who have been hardened. If we apply this consistently, the following situation arises. In verse 7, Paul states that the elect ethnic Israelites “have obtained” righteousness (i.e. this has already happened), while the rest (i.e. all other ethnic Israelites) have been hardened. If the hardening is permanent and cannot be changed, then Paul is teaching that every ethnic Israelite alive at his time of writing who is not already trusting in Christ never will trust in Christ. Paul would therefore have no hope for the salvation of any of his fellow ethnic Israelites that he is upset about (see 9:1-5). However, in Romans 11:13-14, Paul goes on to say:

“[13] Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry [14] in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them. “

It is clear that Paul has hope for the salvation of at least some of the ethnic Israelites who are alive at the same time as him, who have not (yet) obtained righteousness, and who have been hardened. Therefore we can reject any interpretation of the text that has Paul teaching that none of these ethnic Israelites can be saved. The understanding of election/non-election as being eternally and unchangeably applied to individuals is therefore inconsistent with Paul’s teaching.

Paul’s understanding of “election”

So (having dismissed this false interpretation) “the elect” can correctly be defined as “those who are trusting in Christ”. It doesn’t also include people who will eventually trust in Christ but aren’t doing so yet (see Titus 1:1, which refers to “the faith of God’s elect”). So all non-Christians are currently non-elect, whether or not they will eventually trust in Christ. They will only join “the elect” if and when they put their trust in Christ. “The elect” therefore corresponds to the church (i.e. the group of all true believers).

This is why the Bible uses so much corporate language to refer to the church (e.g. “the bride of Christ”, “the body of Christ”, etc.). A common biblical phrase for “the elect” is those who are “in Christ”. Those who are “in Christ” share in the blessings that have come to Christ. For example, those who are “in Christ” share in Christ’s righteousness, and are considered as righteous due to being in Christ (Romans 3:21-26).

Another example is that Paul can say of Christians that God “seated us with him [Christ] in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 2:6). The Christians to whom Paul was writing were not individually seated in the heavenly places, but because they were “in Christ”, what was true of Christ was true for them.

Similarly, those who are “in Christ” share in Christ’s chosenness, as Christ is “the Chosen One of God” (see Luke 9:35, John 1:32-34 (NET Bible, including notes), and Isaiah 42:1 (with Matthew 12:18)). Just as, before a person becomes a Christian, they have no righteousness to claim as their own, so a non-Christian also has no chosenness of their own unless and until they can claim Christ’s chosenness through being “in him”.

Every spiritual blessing that the Christian has is “in Christ”, including the spiritual blessing of being chosen/elect (Ephesians 1:3-4). That is why Paul can say that God the Father “chose us in him [Christ] before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:4), while also saying of himself individually that Andronicus and Junia “were in Christ before me” (Romans 16:7). Paul was not always in Christ, but only became in Christ when he began to trust in Christ for salvation. Once he became “in Christ”, he became “righteous”, “seated in the heavenly places” and “chosen before the foundation of the world” – all because these are true of Christ and therefore became true of Paul as he became “in Christ”.

This understanding of election is known as “Christocentric election” or “corporate election” (I prefer the first term as it recognizes Jesus as the center of the chosenness). We will continue in Romans 11 in the next section.

Romans 11:11-16 – Why Has God Hardened Unbelieving Ethnic Israelites?

Now that we have an understanding of Paul’s view of election, we can continue with this section of Romans (11:1-32), picking up from verse 11:

“[11] So I ask, did they [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect among the ethnic Israelites – those who are not currently trusting in Christ] stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make them jealous.”

The use of the word ‘they’ and the reference to stumbling (see verse 9) shows that Paul is speaking about the same people as in the previous verses – ethnic Israelites who are not currently trusting in Christ. As Paul has just explained, these ethnic Israelites have been hardened. The reference to a ‘fall’ is referring to a situation in which they are spiritually lost forever. Paul is asking if the purpose of their stumbling was so that they would be lost forever. He answers strongly against this.

We discover here that God had a higher purpose in hardening the ethnic Israelites who were not trusting in Christ. God did not harden them for the purpose of rejecting them. Instead, God worked through their rejection of Christ to bring about, first of all, a proclamation of the gospel to the Gentiles. We see an example of this in Acts 13:44-46:

“[44] The next Sabbath almost the whole city gathered to hear the word of the Lord. [45] But when the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy and began to contradict what was spoken by Paul, reviling him. [46] And Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly, saying, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken first to you. Since you thrust it aside and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles.”

The active opposition from the Jewish leaders in thrusting aside the message that they had heard, rather than simply disagreeing with it and allowing Paul to continue preaching, resulted in the gospel being spread to the Gentiles. We see in Acts that the persecution of the believers in Jerusalem results in them spreading the gospel throughout the world. If these believers had not been persecuted, then the gospel would not have spread nearly as quickly. God’s hardening of the hearts of those carrying out the persecutions was a deserved act of judgement against their rejection of Christ, but it was done with the aim of promoting a spread of the gospel.

The ultimate example of this is the Jews who rejected Jesus’ claim to be the Messiah and had him crucified. Their active rejection against Jesus resulted in Jesus’ death and resurrection, which (little did they know at the time) is the event that had to happen for salvation to be available to anyone and everyone. Did the fact that those who sent Jesus to be crucified had hard hearts and did not accept him for who he is mean that they would always be in this state? By no means! (As Paul might say!) Look what happened in Acts 2:36-38:

““[36] Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” [37] Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” [38] And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”

Some of the people who, in their hardness of hearts and rebellion, had sent Jesus to be crucified, subsequently came to trust in Christ for their own salvation. So, God brought an enormous good out of their original rejection of Jesus (the salvation of all who believe), but God did not want to permanently reject those who had rejected Jesus. God patiently gave them a subsequent opportunity to repent, and enabled them to do this.

The situation Paul is describing in Romans 11 is that the hardening of the many ethnic Israelites who have rejected Christ has been a means for God to bring salvation to the Gentiles, but that this was not done in such a way that the unbelieving ethnic Israelites have been rejected for the rest of their lives. In fact, the salvation of the Gentiles is intended to provoke jealousy in these ethnic Israelites, with the intended result that at least some of them will repent and turn to Christ. God’s actions with the unbelieving ethnic Israelites are done to promote salvation of Gentiles, which is itself intended to promote salvation of those ethnic Israelites. All of God’s actions are therefore aimed at increasing the number of people who will be saved. This demonstrates the point that Paul introduced in verse 1: God has not rejected any of the ethnic Israelites.

Carrying on with Romans 11:

“[12] Now if their [“the rest”, i.e. the non-elect among the ethnic Israelites – those who are not currently trusting in Christ] trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean! [13] Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry [14] in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them.”

Paul is talking about how great it would be if the ethnic Israelites who currently are not trusting in Christ were to repent and trust in Christ. Paul is not guaranteeing that all of them will do this – he is talking hypothetically. The word ‘will’ in the English translation of verse 12 can be misunderstood as meaning that their full inclusion definitely will happen, but a more literal translation is ‘how much more their fullness’, which doesn’t imply that it is inevitable. The point is that none of these ethnic Israelites has been rejected, and all of them could still be saved, which would be a great blessing to the world. Whether they will actually be saved depends on whether they will trust in Christ.

When Paul speaks of making his fellow Jews jealous, and thus saving some of them, it is clear that he is considering the same people throughout this. He is not looking ahead to a future generation of Jews, but is trying to save his fellow Jews – the ones alive at the same time as him. He wants to make his fellow Jews jealous. As he wants to save some of them, it’s implicit that he doesn’t think that the ethnic Jews of his generation have been rejected by God – otherwise there would be no hope of any of them being saved.

When he speaks of saving ‘some of them’, he doesn’t mean that salvation is only possible for some of them – he’s just being modest in his expectations of the number of ethnic Jews that will be saved as a result of his personal ministry (see the end of verse 13). Paul was aware of other ethnic Jews coming to trust in Christ through the ministry of others, such as Peter, and he will have wanted that to continue, so he doesn’t expect to single-handedly save all of the ethnic Jews himself.

“[15] For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead? [16] Now if the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, so is the whole lump, and if the root is holy, so are the branches.”

In verses 15 and 16, Paul is considering the great benefit that would arise from the salvation of these ethnic Israelites. Does ‘their rejection’ (verse 15) refer to God’s rejection of these ethnic Israelites, or does it refer to the fact that these ethnic Israelites have rejected Christ? As Chapter 11 begins with Paul emphatically saying that God has not rejected these people, it must be that the rejection being referred to is their rejection of Christ. In particular, this brought about Christ’s death and resurrection, which ‘means the reconciliation of the world’. ‘Their acceptance’ would therefore refer to these ethnic Israelites accepting Christ. Paul notes how much good came from their rejection of Christ, so think what a positive effect their acceptance of Christ would bring! (Again, the word ‘will’  in verse 15 is not in the Greek, so the Greek does not imply certainty that this will happen.)

‘Life from the dead’ would seem to refer to conversion – people spiritually coming to life from their previous position of spiritual death in their rejection of Christ (as in Romans 6:13). This would happen to the ethnic Israelites themselves if they came to trust in Christ, and we would see many more conversions throughout the world as a result of this. There would be a global impact of their acceptance of Christ, just as there was a global impact of their rejection of Christ.

From verse 16 onwards, we have three metaphors being used. They are:

1. The dough offered as firstfruits and the whole lump (16a)
2. The root and the branches (16b)
3. The natural branches and the wild olive shoot (17-24)

What could these metaphors be referring to? The context of the surrounding text is talking about two groups of people: ethnic Israelites and Gentiles. Paul has just spoken in verse 15 about the effect that the ethnic Israelites have had (and could have) on the rest of the world. When examining the metaphors, we see that they come in pairs. It makes sense to see each pair as referring to ethnic Israelites and Gentiles. If we try to over-complicate matters and think of other things that some of the metaphors might be referring to, we would have to engage in pure speculation, as the surrounding text really talks only of ethnic Israelites and Gentiles. This means it is best to treat each of the three pairs individually. In particular, ‘branches’ appear in the metaphors of both verse 16b and verses 17-24, but we will see that they are used in different ways in each metaphor. We’ll also see in the next section that the metaphor of verses 17-24 has its own structure, showing that it is distinct from verse 16b.

The two metaphors in verse 16 would then each refer to the benefit that the salvation of Paul’s fellow ethnic Israelites would bring to the rest of the world (as verse 15). The ethnic Israelites are the ‘dough offered as firstfruits’ and the ‘root’ in the respective metaphors, and their salvation would bring a blessing to the rest of the world, who correspond to the ‘whole lump’ and the ‘branches’.

In the next section, we will look at the third metaphor from verses 17-25.

Romans 11:17-24 – Can Unbelieving Ethnic Israelites Still Be Saved? Can a Believer Stop Believing?

Continuing on from the discussion of the three metaphors Paul uses to refer to the ethnic Israelites and the Gentiles, let’s consider the third metaphor:

“[17] Now if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, [18] do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you.”

The ‘branches’ are the ethnic Israelites. Those that were broken off the olive tree are the unbelieving ethnic Israelites, while the believing ones have not been broken off. The ‘wild olive shoot’ that has been grafted in refers to the believing Gentiles. Paul uses the word ‘you’ because he is now addressing the believing Gentiles (see verse 13). In verse 24, Paul refers to the branches that were broken off as ‘the natural branches’. The Gentiles are not natural branches but have been grafted in to the olive tree. The olive tree therefore has two types of branches – natural branches (believing ethnic Israelites) and wild olive shoots (believing Gentiles). They both share the benefits of ‘the nourishing root of the olive tree’.

Those who are sharing in the root of the olive tree are those who are trusting in Christ – including both ethnic Israelites and Gentiles. The tree can therefore be seen as a metaphor of the spiritual family of all true believers – those who are Abraham’s true spiritual offspring (see Romans 4:11-12). These are the people who share in the faith of Abraham, throughout the ages. All believers benefit from the ‘nourishing root’, which represents Christ – the source of life for all believers. The metaphor is similar to that of John 15:1-11, where Jesus says ‘I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers’ (verses 5-6).

Language such as the “vine” or the “olive tree” is used of Israel in the Old Testament. Jesus, as the ‘root of Jesse’ (Romans 15:12), is the ultimate fulfilment of this. Before the time of Jesus’ resurrection, most of the “branches” of this olive tree were ethnic Israelites, though there were some Gentile believers who shared in Abraham’s faith. Given this, as well as Jesus’ ethnic heritage and the promises made to Abraham, the olive tree could therefore be described as a Jewish (i.e. ethnic Israelite) tree. At the time of Paul’s writing, many Gentiles were becoming believers, and the believing ethnic Israelites in the olive tree were becoming outnumbered. There was a risk that the Gentiles could become arrogant, thinking that the time of the ethnic Israelites had come to an end, and that the Gentiles were now taking over. Paul’s message to the believing Gentiles, who have been grafted in to the olive tree, is that they shouldn’t be arrogant towards the natural branches of the tree, i.e. the believing ethnic Israelites. The Gentiles should remember that they have graciously been allowed to join a family that they don’t naturally belong to, so they shouldn’t be arrogant towards those who were there before them. Paul reminds the Gentiles that their presence in the spiritual people of God relies on Christ, who upholds his people. They are not in the olive tree by their own strength, and they must not stop relying on Christ for their presence in the olive tree, even as their numbers continue to increase.

In Romans 15:26-27, Paul explains a real-life example of the attitude that Gentile believers should have towards ethnic Israelite believers. Gentile believers from Macedonia and Achaia made a financial contribution to the struggling ethnic Israelite believers in Jerusalem. These Gentiles understood that ‘the Gentiles have shared in the Jews’ spiritual blessings’, and therefore felt that they owed their financial support to the ethnic Israelite believers.

Continuing with Romans 11, Paul has a warning for the Gentile believers:

“[19] Then you will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” [20] That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but fear. [21] For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. [22] Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off.”

The believing Gentiles might arrogantly think of themselves as worth more than ethnic Israelites, as the grafting-in of these Gentiles happened as a consequence of the disbelieving actions of many ethnic Israelites. However, Paul reminds them that the reason many ethnic Israelites were “cut off” from the olive tree is that they did not believe. Correspondingly, the reason that these Gentiles are currently in the olive tree is that they do believe. Paul is again making it clear that the question of whether someone is in a right-standing with God is equivalent to the question of whether they are trusting in Christ. Faith is the only criterion as to whether or not someone is a member of the olive tree.

Paul says that, instead of becoming proud, it would be better for these Gentiles to fear. The reason for this is the fact that God did not refrain from breaking unbelieving ethnic Israelites off the tree. If God was willing to break some of his own ethnic people off due to unbelief, then he would surely have no hesitation in doing the same to those who are not his ethnic people.

The continual presence of the believing Gentiles in the olive tree depends on their continual trusting in Christ. If they stop trusting in Christ, they will be broken off the tree.

In thinking about what Paul might mean with this metaphor of the olive tree, we can distinguish between two different types of “falling away”:

1. Someone who for a time appears to be a Christian, but actually isn’t, later “falls away” and is then clearly not a Christian. In this situation, they never really had faith to begin with and were never really a Christian.
2. Someone who really is a Christian, with real faith, later falls away and no longer has this faith and is therefore no longer a Christian.

Paul’s language that the unbelieving ethnic Israelites were “broken off” the tree might imply that they once had faith and then no longer had it. However, this may be where the metaphor breaks down. It may be that they never had faith, but Paul speaks of them being “broken off” to fit with the metaphor of the tree having a Jewish heritage. Paul does not explicitly state whether or not they had faith beforehand. What we know for sure is that they do not have faith at Paul’s time of writing.

However, Paul does give an explicit statement regarding the Gentiles currently in the tree. He says that they ‘stand by faith’, so it’s clear that he thinks they actually do have faith at the moment. We can therefore conclude that Paul isn’t considering the “type 1” version of “falling away” discussed above when he speaks about the Gentiles. He must be considering the “type 2” version, i.e. the possibility of those who do currently have faith later no longer having this faith. For someone in the “type 1” situation, the concern would be for them to begin in the faith that they have so far not had. For someone in the “type 2” situation, the concern is that they keep going with the faith they already have. Paul’s message to the Gentiles that they ‘continue in his kindness’ (verse 22) therefore shows that Paul has “type 2” falling away in mind.

Paul is therefore warning genuine believers against the possibility of them not continuing with their faith. Paul acknowledges the possibility that these Gentiles could reach the same situation as the current situation of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites – finding themselves outside of the olive tree.

For the Christian, salvation is ultimately a future reality (e.g. Romans 5:9). Those who are members of the olive tree of believers at the time of their death or when Christ returns (whichever is sooner) will be saved from God’s final judgement of sin. Christians look forward to this salvation. The question of whether it is possible for a believer to become an unbeliever (and therefore no longer have hope of future salvation) often gets tangled up with other issues and so is often not considered properly. Often, the question gets tied up with the different issue of whether there is a particular sin that a Christian could commit for which God would not be willing to forgive them. People who advocate the position that a believer can never become an unbeliever sometimes attack the view that it is possible for this to happen by saying that we couldn’t have confidence in our salvation as we would keep falling out of favour with God when we sin, and/or that we would be worrying about whether a really big sin would cut us off from God. However, it’s clear that the only factor that determines whether someone is in or out of the spiritual people of God is whether they are trusting in Christ. That means that anyone who is trusting in Christ can have confidence that they are in the olive tree. A Christian does not remain in the tree of believers by making sure they behave themselves sufficiently well to avoid being cut off, but by continuing to trust in Christ for their salvation.

As Christians, our confidence that we will remain in the tree of believers shouldn’t rest on the idea that it is impossible for a believer to stop believing. Instead, our confidence should rest solely on Christ, who will keep us safe as long as we keep trusting in him.

While Paul does clearly teach that it is possible for a believer to become an unbeliever in this passage, he does not state explicitly whether or not it will actually happen. Any debate on this issue should really be about whether it actually happens, rather than whether it is possible (something can be possible while not actually happening). Other passages must be considered to find a clear teaching that “falling away” actually happens, not just acknowledging its possibility. This would take us outside the scope of this series so we will stick with Romans!

In verse 22, Paul refers to the real possibility of Gentiles being cut off from the tree of believers. This will happen if they do not continue to trust in Christ for their salvation. God’s kindness to the believing Gentiles depends on them continuing to believe. Similarly, God’s severity toward the ethnic Israelites who have fallen due to their unbelief lasts only as long as they continue in unbelief:

“[23] And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. [24] For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree.”

Paul gives the great news that the hardened, non-elect (see discussion of verse 7) ethnic Israelites, who are currently not part of the olive tree, actually can become part of the tree of believers! As the only thing keeping them out of the tree is their unbelief, if this comes to an end they will be grafted into the tree. Paul acknowledges that God has the power to graft these unbelieving Israelites in again, and that it could actually happen. Paul says that if God can unnaturally graft a Gentile into the olive tree, then surely he can graft in a branch that naturally fits into it. That is actually an easier task. As God has been doing the more difficult task of grafting in Gentiles, we can trust that he will be able to do the easier task of grafting in ethnic Israelites. So any ethnic Israelite who trusts in Christ will be brought into the tree of believers, and any ethnic Israelite can actually believe thanks to the word of Christ coming to all of them (see discussion of Romans 10:14-21). Again, Paul is teaching that this is possible, without making an explicit statement regarding whether or not it will actually happen. Whether it will happen is conditional for each ethnic Israelite on whether they trust in Christ. In this case, Paul has given an example of an ethnic Israelite actually coming to faith in Christ – himself (see verse 1). We therefore know that it does actually happen to some ethnic Israelites, but sadly others do not do this (even though they could).

The possibility for unbelieving ethnic Israelites to be grafted into the olive tree shows that God has not rejected any ethnic Israelites, as Paul stated in verse 1. None of the ethnic Israelites has been rejected by God; any of them can still trust in Christ and be saved!

We’ll finish this section with a look at the beautiful structure Paul gives to this section. The symmetry helps to show that God treats ethnic Israelites and Gentiles fairly and in the same way, with the salvation of each depending only on the question of who believes:

In the next section, we will look at Romans 11:25-32.

Romans 11:25-32 – Who Does God Want to Have Mercy On? – Who Is “All Israel”? – Structure of Romans 11:1-32

Following Paul’s metaphor of an olive tree for the spiritual people of God, and his teaching that unbelieving ethnic Israelites are still able to join the spiritual people of God, we’re now reaching the end of this section of Romans (11:1-32). Paul continues his message to the Gentile believers:

“[25] For I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers, lest you be wise in your own opinion: a hardening of part of Israel has happened until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in, [26a] and in this way all Israel will be saved.”

The phrase ‘a hardening of part of Israel has happened’ is sometimes translated as ‘a partial hardening has happened to Israel’. The question is whether the word ‘part’/’partial’ refers to the extent of the hardening (i.e. only a part of ethnic Israel has been hardened) or the degree of the hardening (i.e. it is not a “full-strength” hardening but only a “partial-strength” hardening). If it refers to the extent of the hardening, then ‘Israel’ in this phrase refers to all ethnic Israelites, with only a ‘part’ of these being hardened (i.e. only the unbelieving ethnic Israelites). If it refers to the degree of the hardening, then ‘Israel’ must refer only to the unbelieving ethnic Israelites, because Paul has already explained that only the unbelieving ethnic Israelites have been hardened.

Whichever translation is used, the situation is the same: some ethnic Israelites have been hardened, while the others are already trusting in Christ. This matches with verse 7, which states that ‘Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened’. Therefore, only a ‘part’ of ethnic Israel has been hardened. The ‘elect’ ethnic Israelites (those already trusting in Christ) have not been hardened. As Paul has just been explaining, this hardening of the unbelieving part of ethnic Israel has been resulting in Gentiles coming to faith in Christ (verse 11), and Paul has already stated his hope that the inclusion of these Gentiles will result in at least some of his fellow ethnic Israelites (who have been hardened) turning to Christ (verse 14). The hardening that they are experiencing (whether understood as a “partial hardening” or simply a “hardening”) therefore does not make it impossible for them to trust in Christ.

I prefer the translation of ‘part’/‘partial’ to refer to the extent of the hardening, rather than the degree of the hardening, but both are consistent with Paul’s teaching. The concept of there being different “degrees” of hardening has not been discussed elsewhere by Paul, so this translation does not fit the context as well as the “extent” translation, which has been explicitly set out by Paul earlier in the chapter.

The unbelieving part of ethnic Israel has been hardened, and this situation will remain ‘until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in’. Paul is speaking of Gentiles “coming in” to the spiritual people of God – the olive tree from the previous verses. During this time, there have been some ethnic Israelites who have transitioned from being unbelievers to being believers (such as Paul himself), and Paul has spoken of the possibility of his fellow ethnic Israelites (who currently do not believe) being saved (verse 14). This hardening therefore cannot mean that no unbelieving ethnic Israelites can become believers until the last Gentiles are saved. It therefore must be possible for individual hardened, non-elect (see verse 7), ethnic Israelites to move into the unhardened, elect, part of ethnic Israel (which happens when they trust in Christ). The hardened ethnic Israelites who are not currently believing (at the time of Paul writing the letter) do not have to wait until ‘the fullness of the Gentiles has come in’ before they can become believers. We are now about 2000 years after this; there are still Gentiles coming in and there have been ethnic Israelites putting their trust in Christ throughout this time.

Paul is therefore talking about a process that is taking place within his generation, and will continue to take place ‘until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in’. Paul does not speak here of anything happening after ‘the fullness of the Gentiles has come in’. Instead, Paul describes the current situation, stating that it will last ‘until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in’, and he goes on to say ‘and in this way all Israel will be saved’. This is Paul’s summary of the process that is currently taking place. At the end of this process, ‘all Israel’ will have been saved. Paul does not say “and then after this something else will happen which will result in all Israel being saved”.

The term ‘in this way’ (or ‘so’) links verse 26 with verse 25. It is the situation of verse 25 that results in ‘all Israel’ being saved. Paul has already explained that the situation of Gentiles coming in to the spiritual people of God is intended to make the unbelieving ethnic Israelites envious (verse 11), resulting in some of them turning to Christ and being saved (verse 14). The process of:

1. unbelieving ethnic Israelites being hardened,
2. some Gentiles coming in as a result of step 1, and
3. some of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites from step 1 coming in as a result of step 2

is the way in which God is saving ‘all Israel’.

We must then ask what ‘all Israel’ means in verse 26. First, it cannot have the same meaning as ‘Israel’ in verse 25. Verse 25 refers to a hardening on part of ethnic Israel that was already underway at the time of Paul’s writing and will continue ‘until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in’. This covers at least about 2000 years up to the present day. ‘Israel’ in verse 25 therefore includes all unbelieving ethnic Israelites stretching at least as far back in time as Paul’s time of writing and stretching on into our future. Not all of these ethnic Israelites turned to Christ so not all of these people will be saved (if they were all saved then Paul would have no reason to wish for himself to be cut off for their sake, as he did in 9:3).

In contrast, all of ‘Israel’ from verse 26 will be saved, so the term ‘Israel’ must have different meanings in these two verses. There is no problem with the term ‘Israel’ having two different meanings when used so close together – this has already happened in Romans 9:6 (in the parallel section of Romans 9:6-29), where the term ‘Israel’ is used twice in one verse and has two different meanings. Romans 9:6 states that ‘not all of Israel is Israel’, i.e. not all ethnic Israelites are part of the true Israel – those who share in Abraham’s faith. These are the same two meanings of the term ‘Israel’ used in Romans 11:25 and 11:26.

In verse 26, Paul is referring to the true Israel, i.e. those who share in the faith of Abraham. Other parts of Romans help to demonstrate this. In Romans 9:8, Paul says 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.”

Romans 2:28-29 states that:

“[28] For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. [29] But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter.”

Romans 4 states that:

“[11] [Abraham] received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well, [12] and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.”

“[16] That is why the promise depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—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, [17] as it is written, ‘I have made you the father of many nations’”

In Romans 4:16 (above), the word ‘all’ is used and Paul explains that by this he is referring both to believing Jews and believing Gentiles. Similarly, Paul refers to ‘all Israel’ in Romans 11:26 to emphasise that he is referring both to Jews and Gentiles (who are both involved in the three-step process set out above). For other uses of ‘all’ in this way, see 1:16, 2:9, 2:10, 3:9, 10:12 and 11:30-32.

The ‘all Israel’ of Romans 11:26 is therefore all believers – the true spiritual people of God, which corresponds perfectly with the olive tree metaphor of verses 17 to 24. All believers, both Jew and Gentile, are in the olive tree, while all non-believers, both Jew and Gentile, are not in the olive tree. Anyone outside the olive tree can become part of the olive tree (and therefore part of the true Israel) by believing in Jesus (see 11:19-20 and 11:23).

Other interpretations

There are some people who interpret the phrase ‘all Israel’ in verse 26 differently. Some consider it to refer only to believing ethnic Israelites, rather than all who believe (believing ethnic Israelites and believing Gentiles). This interpretation doesn’t have an effect on the interpretation of any other parts of Romans 11, but seems less likely to be correct given Paul’s emphasis throughout Romans of the lack of any distinction between believing ethnic Israelites and believing Gentiles (e.g. 3:22-23 and 10:12), and the situation that believing ethnic Israelites and believing Gentiles are part of the same olive tree as expressed a few verses earlier in chapter 11.

Others consider the phrase ‘all Israel’ to refer to all (or most) ethnic Israelites alive at a particular time in the future. This is something of a surprising interpretation, as Paul has been talking about his fellow Israelites throughout chapter 11 (e.g. verses 5, 14, 23 and 31), rather than looking ahead to a future generation. This interpretation would disconnect this phrase from the rest of chapter 11, whereas the preferred interpretation above fits comfortably with the rest of the chapter.

The context of Romans 9-11 is that Paul is looking upon his fellow ethnic Israelites alive at the same time as him (see 9:3). In chapter 11 he is asking if there is still any hope for them, or if they have been rejected by God. A belief that salvation will come to a future generation of ethnic Israelites would have been of little comfort to Paul, who was so concerned about people he actually knew. Paul’s point in chapter 11 is that there is still hope for his fellow ethnic Israelites because they can still be saved (see verses 1, 11, 14, 23 and 31-32 – discussed below). There is no suggestion that he is looking ahead to a particular generation in the future. Finally, Paul has not used the term ‘Israel’ in this way anywhere else in Romans, but the interpretation of the term I have set out above is the same as its interpretation in 9:6.

Some people who take the “future generation” view use the language of optimism when referring to this future generation. However, compared to Paul’s view, the “future generation” view is very pessimistic. Paul was optimistic for his own generation of ethnic Israelites – it was possible for them all to turn to Christ. Paul also believed that this situation would apply throughout the age until Christ returns, so any generation of ethnic Israelites could come to trust in Christ in large numbers.

We do not need to wait until the last generation of ethnic Israelites (whenever that may be) to see many of them trusting in Christ. This could happen in any generation. We should share Paul’s excitement about this and share the good news with our ethnic Israelite friends, knowing that they can come to faith even if they are not in the last generation before Christ’s return.

The “future generation” view also has a disturbing implication. In this view, God will do something different at the time of the future generation that will result in all/many ethnic Israelites from that generation turning to Christ. The implication of this view is that whatever it is that God will do in the last generation is something he has refrained from doing for every generation before the last generation. God is therefore acting in every generation before the last generation in a way to limit the number of ethnic Israelites being saved, and he will only stop this at the last generation. An advocate of this view may suggest that it is God’s hardening of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites that has been limiting the number of them coming to faith. However, Paul has explained that God’s hardening of them is actually intended to increase the number of them that are saved (verses 7, 11 and 14). In the “future generation” view, the unbelieving ethnic Israelites from Paul’s day have an excuse for not believing – God has been limiting the numbers of the ethnic Israelites who believe. This view is contrary to Paul’s teaching in Romans 9-11 that the situation of ethnic Israelite unbelief is in no way God’s fault and is in every way their fault, and is in particular contrary to Paul’s teaching of chapter 11 that God has not rejected the ethnic Israelites of his day.

Continuing with Romans 11

“[26b] As it is written, “The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will turn away ungodliness from Jacob”; [27] “and this is my covenant with them, when I take away their sins.””

The presence of the words ‘as it is written’ show that the references to scripture that Paul is about to make are intended to reinforce what he has just taught, not to introduce something new. We should therefore not derive significant additional teaching from these references.

The deliverer is Christ. He will take away the sins of those who believe in him (those in the true Israel), and in doing this he will turn away ungodliness from Jacob (i.e. Israel, again referring to the true Israel). Christ, the Deliverer, will come when the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. He will come from the heavenly Zion and will live in this city (the new Jerusalem) with his people (Hebrews 12:22, Revelation 21:2).

The context of the quote in verse 26 is helpful. The quote is from Isaiah 59:20-21, and the previous verse (19) says ‘so they shall fear the name of the Lord from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun’. This verse is talking of people believing in the Lord from west to east – across the whole world. It is therefore the true Israel being spoken of, which includes in-grafted Gentiles from across the world (Matthew 8:11 uses similar “east and west” language to refer to Gentiles entering the kingdom of heaven).

Paul goes on to refer to Isaiah 27:9. Just before this, in verse 6, it states ‘Israel will bud and blossom and fill all the world with fruit’. Again, the spreading out of blessing throughout the world is in view. Verse 13 goes on to speak of exiled Israelites returning to worship God, showing the hope of restoration for ethnic Israelites. This hope remains until Christ returns, and some ethnic Israelites are being restored throughout this period.

“[28] As regards the gospel, they [unbelieving ethnic Israelites] are enemies for your [believing Gentiles] sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. [29] For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.”

Having finished his Bible references, Paul is continuing to talk to the believing Gentiles (see verse 13), and therefore ‘they’ refers to the unbelieving part of ethnic Israel (i.e. those ethnic Israelites who have been hardened, as referred to in verse 25). The reference to ‘enemies’ means that believing Israelites can’t be included in those that are being referred to. No believer is an enemy of God, but non-believers are (Romans 5:10). The non-believing ethnic Israelites are God’s enemies because they have not believed the gospel. Of course, when a non-believer becomes a believer, they are no longer God’s enemy. The non-believing ethnic Israelites are ‘enemies for your sake’ (i.e. for the sake of the believing Gentiles) because these Gentiles have come to faith as a result of the rejection of God by the non-believing ethnic Israelites (see 11:11 and 11:19, for example).

God still loves all of unbelieving ethnic Israel – they are ‘beloved’. He loves them as he loved their forefathers. He wants them to become believers and therefore become elect. All of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites are non-elect at Paul’s time of writing, as is clear from verse 7 (Paul does not say they are elect in verse 28), but any of them who trusts in Christ will at that time become elect, as they will then begin to share in Christ’s blessings, including the blessing of his chosenness (as explained here). The statement that ‘as regards election, they are beloved’ must therefore refer to God’s love for the unbelieving ethnic Israelites and his hope that they will benefit from the blessing of election, which will happen to individual ethnic Israelites if and when they put their trust in Christ.

In this verse, Paul is therefore contrasting the way in which the unbelieving ethnic Israelites are enemies of God in one sense (because they have rejected the gospel), but are loved by God in another sense (because God wants them to become elect).

The ‘gifts’ in verse 29 seems to refer to the benefits of being an ethnic Israelite, as discussed by Paul in Romans 9:4-5 and 3:1-2. The ‘calling’ (a different Greek word from that translated as “call” in Romans 8 and 9) seems to refer to their calling by God to the position and benefits of being an ethnic Israelite. The ‘gifts’ and ‘calling’ are both ‘irrevocable’ as there continue to be benefits of being an ethnic Israelite (3:1-2). This applies despite the disobedience of most ethnic Israelites in Paul’s time.

The ‘gifts’ and ‘calling’ are ways in which God is loving the unbelieving ethnic Israelites, so this verse is demonstrating Paul’s point from the previous verse that they are ‘beloved’ (which is why verse 29 begins with the word ‘for’). God continues to love these people and he wants them to turn to him: ‘of Israel he says, “All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people”’ (Romans 10:21).

“[30] For just as you [believing Gentiles] were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their [unbelieving ethnic Israelites] disobedience, [31] so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. [32] For God has consigned all to disobedience, so that he may have mercy on all.”

Paul is summarising the process that he has been talking about throughout chapter 11 – the disobedience of many of his fellow ethnic Israelites has resulted in mercy for many Gentiles, which is intended to result in mercy for at least some of those disobedient ethnic Israelites due to provoking jealousy in them. Paul is talking about the same two groups of people throughout, and he explains how what happens to one group is affecting what happens to the other group. Those who have been disobedient (the unbelieving ethnic Israelites) are the same people as those who ‘may now receive mercy’. They ‘may now receive mercy’ because they can trust in Jesus ‘now’ and immediately receive mercy, just as the Gentiles have ‘now’ received mercy (verse 30).

The word ‘now’ also shows that Paul is talking about his fellow ethnic Israelites throughout, and does not switch mid-sentence to refer to a distant generation (the other interpretation discussed above). There are some manuscripts that omit the second word ‘now’ in verse 31. The “final generation” interpretation requires this word ‘now’ not to be present in order for it to fit with the text. In contrast, the view I have put forward is consistent with the text whether or not the word ‘now’ is present. It therefore seems likely that the word ‘now’ was present in the original manuscript and was removed by someone who held to something like the “final generation” view and was trying to correct the inconsistency between the text and his view. There would be no need for someone taking the view I have proposed to add or remove the word ‘now’, whichever was the original form.

The point Paul is making in saying that the unbelieving ethnic Israelites ‘may now receive mercy’ is that any of his fellow ethnic Israelites who are not currently trusting in Christ could start doing this and therefore receive God’s mercy. As Paul stated at the beginning of chapter 11, God has not rejected his people. Paul’s great news is that his fellow ethnic Israelites can still be saved!

Verses 30 and 31 have similar forms. Verse 30 is about Gentiles transitioning from (their) disobedience to (God’s) mercy, and verse 31 is about ethnic Israelites going through the same transition. Just as Paul’s Gentile audience (verse 13) has already gone through this transition, so it is possible for the unbelieving ethnic Israelites to go through the same transition.

Verse 32 brings verses 30 and 31 together and explains that all have been consigned to disobedience (‘all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God’ – Romans 3:23). The reason for this is so that God ‘may have mercy on all’ (‘For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile; for the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”’ – Romans 10:11-13). Paul truly means ‘all’ both times in verse 32. God has consigned all to disobedience because he wants to have mercy on all (see also 1 Timothy 2:4 and 2 Peter 3:9). The reason it says that God ‘may’ have mercy on all is that, although God wants to have mercy on all, this will not necessarily happen. The question of whether or not God will have mercy on someone depends on whether they will accept or refuse his gift of righteousness (Romans 9:30-32).

The great news of Romans 9-11 is that God wants to have mercy on all people, and that he enables us to come to him in faith so that we can receive his mercy. This applies even to all ethnic Israelites (see earlier discussion on Romans 10:8 and 10:21), many of whom were rejecting Christ at the time of Paul’s writing.

Here is a structure for this section (Romans 11:1-32):

We saw in the previous section how the central C2-B2-B part (11:17-24) has a chiastic structure of its own.

The words and phrases listed above regarding the C2-B2-A sections do not appear in the central C2-B2-B section.

In the next section, we will look at the ending of Romans 9-11: Paul’s outburst of praise in Romans 11:33-36.

Romans 11:33-36 – Why Is Paul So Full of Praise?

Having finished Paul’s explanation of how God has not rejected the ethnic Israelites, we now come to the last section of Romans 9-11. In the first section (9:1-5), we saw Paul’s intense sorrow and anguish due to the fact that many of his fellow ethnic Israelites are not currently trusting in Christ and are therefore not in a right-standing with God. The mood of this last section is distinctly different:

“[33] Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgements and how inscrutable his ways! [34] “For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counsellor?” [35] “Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?” [36] For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.”

Paul spends this section in an outburst of praise to God. What is it that has brought Paul up from the despair of the first section (9:1-5)? It must be what he has been talking about between these two sections. We have seen that Romans 9-11 forms a chiastic structure, with sections forming matching pairs either side of the central section. Inside the outer pair of sections (9:1-5 and 11:33-36), Paul has explained in 9:6-29 and 11:1-32 that the situation of most ethnic Israelites currently rejecting Christ is not God’s fault. In the next inward pair of sections (9:30-10:3 and 10:14-21), he has explained that this situation is the fault of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites. In the central section (10:4-13), he has explained that God has made salvation possible, and that salvation is for all who believe and call on God, whether Jew or Gentile.

Paul has just ended the previous section (11:1-32) by explaining that it is still possible for his fellow ethnic Israelites (who are currently rejecting Christ, are non-elect and have been hardened) to be saved. He sets out his hope that the entry of many Gentiles into the family of believers will provoke at least some of these ethnic Israelites to envy so that they will turn to Christ and end their separation from God.

This great news causes Paul to rejoice in the final section (11:33-36). He praises the wisdom and knowledge of God because, remarkably, God is hardening the unbelieving ethnic Israelites with a view to more of them being saved! Their hardening is resulting in the grafting-in of more Gentiles to the “tree” of believers, and the grafting-in of these Gentiles is intended to result in the grafting-in of more of these hardened ethnic Israelites. Who else would have thought of such a plan?

Some may have looked at the hardened state of these non-elect ethnic Israelites and concluded that God had rejected them, but nothing could be further from the truth. God is in fact working out a plan to bring more of them to salvation, and this plan also involves the salvation of more Gentiles than would otherwise have been saved if these ethnic Israelites had not been hardened. God’s actions with each group are done with the aim of increasing the total number of people who are saved, both among the ethnic Israelites and the Gentiles.

This is what Paul has just been talking about in the verses before this section (see verses 30-32) and is the main reason for Paul’s outburst of praise. Paul has not forgotten his sorrow over the present situation of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites from the first section; instead his sorrow has turned to praise due to the fact that God has not rejected these people whom Paul cares about so dearly. It is still possible for them to be saved, and Paul sings praises to God for this.

To God be glory forever!

Here is a structure for this section. There are seven phrases, with the middle three being rhetorical questions:

Now we have an understanding of the rest of Romans 9-11, we are ready to use this to reach a true understanding of Romans 9:6-29. We’ll start this in the next section.

Introduction to Romans 9:6-29

Now we have appreciated the great news of Romans 9-11, we are at last ready to look at Romans 9:6-29 (the second section of Romans 9-11), about which there has been much debate. We will see that this section actually fits comfortably with the rest of Romans 9-11. The context and clarity of the rest of Romans 9-11 will help us to check that we are staying on the right track as we go through this section. Romans 11:1-32, which is the matching section to this section in the structure of Romans 9-11 and discusses many of the same concepts, will be particularly useful in helping us to understand this section. Romans 3:1-4:25, which is the matching section to Romans 9-11 in the structure of the whole letter, will also aid our understanding of this section.

The first two sections of Romans 9-11 (Romans 9:1-5 and Romans 9:6-29) are developing a discussion on ethnic Israelites that Paul has begun already in Romans 3:1-8, which is the beginning of Romans 3:1-4:25 – the parallel section to Romans 9-11. Romans 3:1-8 starts with this:

“[1] Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? [2] Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. [3] What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? [4] By no means!”

In chapter 3, Paul briefly introduces one advantage that ethnic Israelites have: ‘to begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God’, but doesn’t discuss this any further. He has been holding back until chapter 9 to consider this in more detail. In Romans 9:1-5, Paul develops this point by listing various other advantages that the ethnic Israelites have (see 9:4-5).

Similarly, Paul’s question and answer from 3:3-4: ‘does their [i.e. the ethnic Israelites’] faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means!’ corresponds to the beginning of Romans 9:6-29:

“[6] But it is not as though the word of God has failed.”

This is what Paul will go on to demonstrate in Romans 9:6-29 – that the faithlessness of so many of Paul’s fellow ethnic Israelites (i.e. the situation that so many of them are not trusting in Christ) does not mean that God has been unfaithful to his word. (The reference in Romans 9:6 to the ‘word’ of God corresponds to the references to the ‘oracles’ and ‘words’ of God in Romans 3:2 and 3:4 – all these words have the same Greek root.)

Throughout Romans 9:6-29, Paul makes his point by answering objections from a hypothetical questioner (see verses 14 and 19). There is also an implicit question at the beginning of this section, which corresponds to the question from 3:3 – “has the word of God failed?” (i.e. “has God been unfaithful to ethnic Israel?”). It makes sense for the objecting questioner to be an ethnic Israelite because, as well as fitting the context, Paul is specifically addressing the ethnic Israelites of the church in Rome in this part of the letter.

The objection is that, if most of the ethnic Israelites are not in proper relationship with God, then the word of God must have failed because (the objecting questioner believes) God is under some kind of obligation to save all ethnic Israelites. In particular, God gave the ethnic Israelites his word in the form of the law. These ethnic Israelites believed that they were following the law and that the works they were doing made them righteous (see 9:31-32), so the situation that this was not resulting in them being in proper relationship with God would lead them to conclude that God’s word to them had failed. The two issues that would be of most importance to people with this belief regarding the question of who is saved would therefore be ethnicity and works.

Paul’s answer to the objection that the word of God has failed is straightforward. The word of God has not failed because God never promised to save people based on their ethnicity, nor is salvation based on works. This situation might anger the objecting questioner, who thinks that God ought to save based on ethnicity and/or works, but God has the right to save whomever he wants to save, and it is up to him to decide how he will go about doing this.

An important distinction needs to be made at this point, to avoid the risk of things being read into the text that are not actually present. The statement that it is God’s right to decide who will be saved does not itself explain anything about how God uses his right – i.e. how he actually decides who will be saved. God could use his right in different ways – he could pick individual people at random, or he could decide that no one will be saved, for example. It is God’s right to choose how to use his right to choose.

By this point in Romans, Paul has already explained very clearly how God decides who will be saved. In particular, in chapters 3-4 (which is the parallel part of Romans to chapters 9-11), it is stated that:

• The righteousness of God is ‘through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe’ (Romans 3:22).
• God’s people are ‘justified by his [God’s] grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith’ (Romans 3:24-25).
• God is ‘the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus’ (Romans 3:26).
• God’s people are ‘justified by faith apart from works of the law’ (Romans 3:28).
• – God ‘will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith’ (Romans 3:30).
• ‘Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness’ (Romans 4:3).
• ‘To the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness’ (Romans 4:5).
• Abraham ‘received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised’ (Romans 4:11).
• Abraham is ‘the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well’ (Romans 4:11).
• Abraham is also ‘the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised’ (Romans 4:12).
• ‘The promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith’ (Romans 4:13).
• ‘That is why it [the promise] depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his [Abraham’s] offspring’ (Romans 4:16).
• Righteousness will be counted to ‘us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord’ (Romans 4:24).

Romans 1:16 also states that the gospel is ‘the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes’.

In summary, God has decided to use his right to choose whom to save in this way: he has decided to save everyone who has faith in Christ. He does this by justifying people by his grace as a gift, which is received by faith (Romans 3:24-25).

Does Paul go off-message in Romans 9-11 and put forward a different view of how God decides who will be saved? By no means! As we have already seen from within Romans 9-11:

• ‘Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have obtained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works’ (Romans 9:30-32).
• ‘Christ is the culmination of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes’ (Romans 10:4).
• ‘“The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”’ (Romans 10:8-13).
• In Paul’s “olive tree” metaphor for the church, ‘they [unbelieving ethnic Israelites] were broken off because of their unbelief, but you [believing Gentiles] stand fast through faith’ (Romans 11:20).
• The unbelieving ethnic Israelites, ‘if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again’ (Romans 11:23).

Paul’s teaching on this could not be clearer.

Paul anticipates an objection that some ethnic Israelites would make in response to his clear teaching in 3:1-4:25, and he addresses this objection in the parallel section of chapters 9-11. If salvation is given to all who trust in Christ, and most ethnic Israelites are not trusting in Christ, does this mean that God has failed them? The objection is from someone who does not like Paul’s teaching that salvation depends on faith. The quotes above from chapters 9-11 show that Paul does not answer this objection by abandoning his teaching from 3:1-4:25 and instead teaching something else about salvation. Rather, Paul is acting to defend and uphold this teaching.

In the next section, we will begin to see how Paul does this in 9:6-29.

Overview of Romans 9:6-13 – Has God Been Unfaithful to Ethnic Israel?

In the previous section, we saw that the question, “has the word of God failed?” – i.e. “has God been unfaithful to ethnic Israel?”, is being asked in response to Paul’s clear teaching that God has decided to save all who have faith in Christ. Paul anticipates that this teaching will prompt an objection from some ethnic Israelites who consider that God ought to save ethnic Israelites due to their physical descent from Abraham and/or their obedience to the law (as they understand it).

In Romans 9:6-29, Paul is therefore addressing an objection from people who do not like the situation that God has decided to save all who have faith in Christ. These people have heard Paul’s teaching on how God has decided who will be saved, and they think that God should do things in a different way. It is to these people that Paul responds in this section. Their suggestion that God ought to apply salvation in a different way from how Paul has explained it prompts Paul to remind them that God has the right to decide who will be saved, and it is entirely up to God how he will do this. It is not our place as mere human beings to criticise God’s plan for salvation. Paul is particularly concerned to express this fact, as the way in which God has decided to bring about his salvation plan – that everyone who trusts in Christ will be saved – is the great news of the gospel (which is what Paul gets so excited about in the central section of Romans 10:4-13). No one is automatically rejected or without hope in this situation. In contrast, if God were to save people based on ethnicity, for example, then the gospel would not be good news for those who fail to meet the criterion. They would be ruled out with no way of switching in to the group of people who will be saved.

Romans 9:6-29 is therefore more concerned with explaining that God has the right to decide who will be saved, and has less of an emphasis on how God uses this right. The reason for this is that it is Paul’s prior explanation of how God has decided who will be saved that has prompted the objection at the beginning of this section. In any event, we will find that this part of Romans 9 is entirely consistent with what we have read throughout the rest of Romans – that God has decided to save all who have faith in Christ.

In verses 6-13, Paul sets up the accusation that he will be addressing and then answers it by making two points. As explained previously, the accusation set out in verse 6 is that, by making salvation dependent upon faith, God’s word to the ethnic Israelites has failed. This accusation is based on the understanding (held by some ethnic Israelites) that God ought to save ethnic Israelites purely due to their ethnicity and/or their works. The first thing Paul does is to reiterate that this is a false understanding. He does this by making two points. The first point can be summarised as “not based on ethnicity” and the second point can be summarised as “not based on works”.

Before we look into the text in detail, we can see these two points being made. The first point, “not based on ethnicity”, is made in verses 6b-9, as the underlined wording below demonstrates:

“[6b] For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, [7] and not all of Abraham’s children are his seed, but “Through Isaac shall your seed be named.” [8] 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 seed. [9] For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.””

The second point, “not based on works”, is made in verses 10-13, as the underlined wording below demonstrates:

“[10] And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, [11] though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad, in order that God’s purpose of election might stand — not because of works but because of him who calls — [12] she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” [13] As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.””

At a high level, we can see that Paul’s argument in verses 6-13 is that God’s word has not failed, because “not based on ethnicity” and “not based on works”. God has not chosen for salvation to be based on ethnicity or works, so the objection that God’s word has failed is based on a false assumption that God had said he would save people based on ethnicity and/or works.

In each of the two sections quoted above, Paul surrounds the main teaching of the section (‘not the children of the flesh’ and ‘not because of works’) with an example. In the first section, the example relates to Abraham’s children, Isaac and Ishmael. In the second section, the example relates to Isaac’s children, Jacob and Esau. The main teaching of the section is presented in the middle of the example. What Paul is doing in these verses is similar to what he does in Galatians 4:22-30, where he uses the example of Hagar and Sarah to illustrate the main point he is making. The main point is expressed in verse 28, with the example surrounding it on both sides in verses 22-27 and 29-30.

In Paul’s day, the way to highlight something in writing was to place it in the center of a section of writing. We have seen this occur throughout Romans in the way the letter is structured (see the Contents page for posts about the structure of the letter). The wording in the center of each example is therefore the key to understanding the point Paul is making. The first example (involving Isaac and Ishmael) is intended to illustrate the main point of ‘not the children of the flesh’, and the second example (involving Jacob and Esau) is intended to illustrate the main point of ‘not because of works’.

In modern times, we are not used to the main point of a section of text being placed in the middle. Some English Bible translations have even put the key central wording in parentheses, as if this wording were simply an aside. Without an appreciation of the importance of the central wording in each example, people have reached various different conclusions about what Paul is intending to teach by these examples. Some people have built their entire understanding of how salvation operates on these examples, without appreciating that Paul was only using these examples to illustrate the main points of “not based on ethnicity” and “not based on works”. An appreciation of this will help us to avoid deriving things from details of the examples that Paul was not intending to teach.

There is a particular risk of misunderstanding in the examples that Paul uses. As we have seen, the overall context of this section is the question of the salvation of the ethnic Israelites. Paul has taught that salvation is based on faith, rather than ethnicity and/or works. Paul has anticipated an objection to this, and is reiterating in these verses that salvation is not based on ethnicity or works, by making his main points of “not based on ethnicity” and “not based on works”. However, as we will see from a detailed study of the examples surrounding each of the main points, the examples themselves do not relate directly to salvation. The examples relate to God’s choice of one brother over another brother, but it is clear from the examples that this choice is not a choice of which brother to save and which not to save.

The reason Paul includes these examples is because of the way God makes the choice in the example, rather than because of what the choice is about. Although the choice God makes in each of the examples is not about salvation, the choice God makes in the first example is a choice that he makes “not based on ethnicity”. The choice God makes in the second example is a choice that he makes “not based on works”. These examples therefore help to illustrate the main points that Paul is making, even though the examples do not directly relate to salvation themselves. They show that, even since the time of Abraham, God has been making choices that are not based on ethnicity or works.

A failure to appreciate this can result in one of two errors. As salvation is the main issue being addressed, the examples can be read as if they relate directly to salvation in every detail, which can lead to an understanding about salvation that conflicts with what Paul has taught clearly throughout the rest of Romans. Alternatively, the realisation that the examples do not relate directly to salvation can lead to a view that Paul is not speaking about salvation at all in Romans 9:6-29. This view detaches this section from the rest of Romans 9-11, which clearly has the salvation of ethnic Israelites as its main issue. Both of these views results in an incorrect interpretation of what Paul is teaching, with potentially dangerous results.

The examples Paul chooses have extra relevance because they relate to God’s choices involved in establishing who would be part of the ethnic nation of Israel. It is ironic that the people objecting to Paul’s teaching (that salvation is based on faith rather than ethnicity and/or works) are doing so as members of an ethnic nation that was itself set up in a way that demonstrated that God chooses “not based on ethnicity” and “not based on works”. Ishmael was excluded from being part of this ethnic nation despite being an ethnic descendant of Abraham. Correspondingly, Esau was excluded from being part of this ethnic nation despite him not having done anything before God made this decision, showing that God’s choice could not have been based on Esau’s works. The examples will have a strong effect on Paul’s audience, as each example shows a decision by God not to give a blessing to someone who might have been considered to be entitled to receive the blessing. This will challenge Paul’s audience not to rely on their ethnicity and/or works for their salvation, but instead to trust in God for their salvation.

Next, we will look at the two parts of this section of Romans 9 in detail, starting with verses 6 to 9.

Romans 9:6-9 – “Not Based on Ethnicity” – Isaac and Ishmael

Having had an overview of what Paul is saying in Romans 9:6-13, we will now look in more detail at the “not based on ethnicity” part – verses 6b to 9. As explained before, in these verses Paul is demonstrating that physical descent from Abraham is no guarantee of receiving God’s blessing:

“[6] But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, [7] and not all of Abraham’s children are his seed, but “Through Isaac shall your seed be called.” [8] 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 seed. [9] For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.””

Paul’s main point is clear. The fact that a person is ethnically a descendant of Abraham (even if also a descendant of Abraham’s grandson, Jacob, also known as Israel) does not guarantee that the person is in a right-standing with God. The statement that ‘not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel’ reminds us of Romans 2:28-29: ‘no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter.’ Those who ‘belong to Israel’, in Paul’s terminology, are those who have circumcised hearts, i.e. those who are trusting in God.

The statement in verse 7a that ‘not all of Abraham’s children are his seed’ is often translated as ‘not all are children of Abraham because they are his seed’. The difference is whether “children” or “seed” is the broad term, with the other being the narrower term (i.e. the term that does not apply to all ethnic Israelites). The translation I have used may be preferred because it has “seed” as the narrower term, which is consistent with the use of the word “seed” later in verse 7 and in verse 8. A corresponding translation is used in the NRSV and the CEB. Whichever translation is used, the point Paul is making is the same: not all who are physical descendants of Abraham are true, spiritual, descendants of Abraham.

As explained in the previous section, Paul states his main point in verse 8 and surrounds it with an example in verse 7b and verse 9. Although Paul’s main point is to demonstrate that God does not choose based on ethnicity, Paul does make a brief statement regarding who it is that God does regard as his children: ‘the children of the promise are counted as seed’ (verse 8). Paul does not need to explain again who the ‘children of the promise’ are, as he has done this already in Romans 4:16:

“That is why it [the promise] depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his [Abraham’s] seed — 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.”

Paul has already explained the link between the promise to Abraham and faith, so we know that the ‘children of the promise’ are those who share in the faith of Abraham. In verse 8, the ‘children of the promise’ are contrasted with the ‘children of the flesh’ (i.e. the ethnic Israelites). The ‘children of the promise’ are said to be ‘the children of God’ and ‘counted as seed’. Paul is again stating that ethnic descent does not determine whether a person is in a right-standing with God – what matters is whether the person shares in the faith of Abraham. Therefore, not all of the ‘children of the flesh’ (i.e. the ethnic Israelites) are ‘children of the promise’.

Although God has the freedom and right to choose people however he wants to, some methods of choosing reflect his character better than others. It is therefore not surprising to those who know God’s character that he did not choose for salvation to be dependent on ethnicity, such that all people of one particular ethnicity will be saved and all people of other ethnicities will not be saved.

To illustrate his point, Paul gives an example. The example relates to Isaac and his brother, Ishmael (who is not mentioned by name in the passage). We will see that the specific choice being made by God in the example was not a choice of who would be saved and who would not be saved, but it was a choice relating to which of Abraham’s two sons would inherit the blessing of being an ancestor of Christ, Abraham’s promised ‘seed’ (i.e. offspring). The ‘seed’ promised to Abraham is Christ, as Paul explains in Galatians 3:16. God was explaining to Abraham that Christ would come through Isaac’s family line, and not through Ishmael’s. The blessing of being an ancestor of Christ is one of the blessings of the covenant that God made with Abraham (Acts 3:25-26). God chose for this covenant to be passed through Isaac and not through Ishmael (Genesis 17:18-21).

Paul and his ethnic Israelite audience would have been well aware that this choice by God of Isaac over Ishmael did not dictate their eternal salvation, and Paul does not claim in the passage that this was the case. Instead, Paul is using the example to illustrate his main point – that being an ethnic descendant of Abraham does not guarantee inclusion in God’s blessing.

The example is being used by Paul as an example of God making a choice not based on ethnicity. As both Ishmael and Isaac were ethnic descendants of Abraham, God’s decision to bring forth Christ through Isaac and not through Ishmael cannot have been a decision based on ethnicity. It is not Paul’s main purpose to explain what this decision was based on, but the example is used as a demonstration of God making a choice not based on ethnicity.

The example is of particular relevance to Paul’s ethnic Israelite audience. The fact that Ishmael was excluded from the blessing of being an ancestor of Christ, even though he was a descendant of Abraham, shows that descendants of Abraham should not consider their physical descent from Abraham as a guarantee of receiving God’s blessing. The situation is analogous to the unbelieving ethnic Israelites of Paul’s day, who were finding themselves outside of God’s blessing despite being ethnic descendants of Abraham.

The example shows that God had the right to decide which of Abraham’s sons would be the ancestor of Christ, and that it was up to God how he would make this decision. It is clear that the decision was not based on ethnicity, as both Ishmael and Isaac are physical descendants of Abraham. In any event, Ishmael did not have a right to complain about missing out on the blessing of being an ancestor of Christ. Neither he nor Isaac deserved this blessing, and it was up to God to decide who would receive it. Ishmael could not point to his physical descent from Abraham as evidence that he deserved this blessing.

In a similar manner, the ethnic Israelites of Paul’s day could not point to their physical descent from Abraham as evidence that they deserved to be considered as children of God. Nobody deserves to be called a child of God, and it is up to God to decide who will receive this blessing. Those not currently in possession of this blessing do not have the right to demand that God should give it to them because of their ethnicity.

The example is used by Paul to show that, as God did not choose based on ethnicity regarding which of Abraham’s two sons would become an ancestor of Christ, so God does not choose based on ethnicity regarding who will be saved.

Looking at the example in more detail, the first quote, ‘through Isaac shall your seed be called’ is from Genesis 21:12. This is God’s message to Abraham after Abraham expressed his concern about Ishmael and Hagar (Ishmael’s mother) being sent away. God confirms to Abraham that the promised seed will come through Isaac, but also reassures Abraham regarding Ishmael: ‘I will make a nation of the son of the slave woman also, because he is your seed’ (Genesis 21:13). After Ishmael and his mother are sent away, ‘God heard the voice of the boy [Ishmael], and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven’ (Genesis 21:17). God promises to Hagar that he will ‘make him [Ishmael] into a great nation’ (21:18), and after this we are told that ‘God was with the boy, and he grew up’ (21:20). God’s actions in hearing the voice of Ishmael and being with him as he grew up do not fit well with the view some people have that God had made a prior decision to damn Ishmael and save Isaac. It is clear that God cares for both Isaac and Ishmael, and that his decision did not relate to their salvation.

The second quote of the example is found in verse 9: ‘For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.”’ This is from the earlier passage of Genesis 18:10, and was God’s word to Abraham a year before Isaac was born. Isaac’s birth was miraculous, as Sarah was too old to conceive naturally (Genesis 18:11). This quote demonstrates that it was entirely of God for Isaac to be born. It was God who made the decision for Isaac to be born and it was God who miraculously made it happen. While Abraham and Sarah’s flesh was old and unable to produce a child, God was able to produce a child through them. This was in contrast to the older son, Ishmael, who was produced in the normal manner according to the flesh. God’s decision of Isaac over Ishmael was therefore another indication that he does not choose based on matters of the flesh – it seems God avoided choosing the “made by the flesh” child (Ishmael) to avoid any misunderstanding that one’s flesh can determine one’s favour with God. Paul is therefore drawing an analogy between Isaac and Ishmael, and ‘the children of the promise’ and ‘the children of the flesh’ from verse 8. As with the first quote, God is the one speaking – he alone has the authority and ability to set the terms of the situation.

In the next section, we will look at the “not based on works” part – verses 10 to 13.

Romans 9:10-13 – “Not Based on Works” – Jacob and Esau

This detailed analysis follows from the previous overview of Romans 9:6-13. As we saw in the previous section, looking in detail at the “not based on ethnicity” part (9:6b-9) of this section, Paul has demonstrated that descent from Abraham is no guarantee of receiving God’s blessing. Now, in the “not based on works” part (9:10-13), he proceeds in a similar way to make his second point, and he also surrounds the main point by an example to illustrate it:

“[10] And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, [11] though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad, in order that God’s purpose of election might stand — not because of works but because of him who calls — [12] she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” [13] As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.””

As with the previous section, the main point is clear: relying on “works” also gives no guarantee of receiving God’s blessing. Verse 10 acts as a bridge between the two sections. The reference to Rebekah’s children being conceived ‘by one man’ shows that the second example will also demonstrate Paul’s first point of “not based on ethnicity”, but Paul moves on after this to focus on the second point of “not based on works”.

It is important to remember that Paul is addressing an anticipated objection from some ethnic Israelites who will not like his teaching set out in the corresponding section earlier in Romans (3:1-4:25) – that God has decided to save all who have faith in Christ. They consider that God ought to save ethnic Israelites due to their physical descent from Abraham and/or their works done in obedience to the law (as they understand it). The first part of Paul’s response to these people is to reiterate that God does not save based on ethnicity and/or works.

As a reminder, the teaching of Paul from Romans 3:1-4:25 relating to “works” that has caused these people to object includes:

• “By works of the law no human being will be justified in his [i.e. God’s] sight” (Romans 3:20)
• “Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.” (Romans 3:27-28)
• “[1] What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? [2] For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. [3] For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” [4] Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. [5] And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, [6] just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: [7] “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; [8] blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.”” (Romans 4:1-8)

It is Paul’s teaching that God’s people are justified by faith apart from works of the law that will cause some ethnic Israelites to object. As we saw previously, Paul does not go off-message in Romans 9-11, but maintains the same teaching, for example (Romans 9:30-32):

“What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have obtained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works.”

Returning to the current section (9:10-13), we see that its main point fits with the rest of Paul’s teaching on “works” in Romans. Paul states: ‘not because of works but because of him who calls’ (verse 11). Salvation is not something we earn by doing good works, but it is a gift given by God. Salvation is therefore “because of what God does”, not “because of what we do”.

The statement ‘because of him who calls’ shows that salvation is up to God and not up to us (because it is God who “calls”), but it does not say anything about how God has decided who will be saved. There is no need for Paul to set out again in full his positive case for who gets saved at this point, as it is Paul’s clear teaching on this matter from earlier in Romans (see the long list of quotes here) that has prompted the objection now being addressed. Paul’s aim here is to focus on the negative case of “not based on works”. This is the error that the objector has made, in thinking that salvation should be based on works.

The statement ‘because of him who calls’ also does not give any detail regarding the process that the word “calls” is referring to. We therefore can’t use the word “calls” from this verse to draw any detailed conclusions about this process. As Paul is focussing on the negative case, he does not set out any details regarding this process here. The word “calls”/“called” will be discussed in more detail in relation to Romans 9:24-29. Whatever interpretation of “calls” one considers to be correct in verse 11, we should be careful not to build our theological understanding of salvation on our chosen interpretation of this word in this verse, given that its meaning is not explicitly clear.

To illustrate his point of “not based on works”, Paul refers to the example of Jacob and Esau. As with the example of Isaac and Ishmael considered in the previous section, we will see that the specific choice being made by God in the case of Jacob and Esau was also not a choice of who would be saved and who would be dammed. Rather, Paul is using Jacob and Esau as an example of the way God made the choice, i.e. ‘not because of works’. Paul does not claim that every aspect of the lives of Jacob and Esau corresponds to the situation he is discussing; he is simply referring to them to illustrate a point.

Looking at the example in more detail, we can understand what choice was being made by God by looking at verse 12. The quote, ‘the older will serve the younger’ is from Genesis 25:23, which is God’s message to Rebekah (Isaac’s wife) while she was pregnant with twins:

“Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you shall be divided; the one shall be stronger than the other, the older shall serve the younger.”

We can see that the choice had nothing to do with the salvation/damnation of Jacob or Esau. Instead, God revealed to Rebekah that each of her twins would become the ancestor of a nation, and that the nation of the younger twin (Jacob) would take precedence over the nation of the older twin (Esau). This did not mean that all individuals from Esau’s nation were automatically dammed as a result of this decision, in the same way as all individuals from Jacob’s nation were not automatically saved. In fact, descendants of Esau were allowed to enter the assembly of the Lord, as explained by Moses in his final sermon to the Israelites: ‘You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother. You shall not abhor an Egyptian, because you were a sojourner in his land. Children born to them in the third generation may enter the assembly of the LORD.’ (Deuteronomy 23:7-8 – the word for ‘assembly’ in the Greek Old Testament (LXX) is the word that is translated as ‘church’ in the New Testament.)

Jacob, not Esau, did indeed receive this blessing, as can be seen in Genesis 27:29, when Isaac blesses Jacob (thinking it to be Esau):

“Let peoples serve you, and nations bow down to you. Be lord over your brothers, and may your mother’s sons bow down to you.”

Returning to Romans 9, in verse 13, Paul also confirms that God’s choice of Jacob’s nation having precedence over Esau’s nation was fulfilled:

“Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

This quote is from Malachi 1:2-3, which was written long after Jacob and Esau had died and is part of a passage that relates to the nations of Jacob (Israel) and Esau (Edom). The contrast between ‘loved’ and ‘hated’, when literally translated into English, does not convey its original meaning well. It is apparent from other parts of the Bible that these terms are used to indicate an order of preference, rather than speaking of pure hatred against the “hated” person. For example, in Luke 14:26, Jesus said ‘if anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple’. He clearly was not speaking of pure hatred here as Jesus also endorsed the commandment to ‘honour your father and mother’ (Mark 10:19). Instead, Jesus was teaching that his disciples must put him ahead of all other people. This is confirmed by Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 10:37 that ‘anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me’. Another example is Genesis 29:30-31. In verse 30, Jacob is said to have ‘loved Rachel more than Leah’, while verse 31 states that ‘Leah was hated’. The “hated” person is the one who is second in the order of preference. We can therefore see that a more appropriate translation into English of the phrase ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’ would be something like ‘I loved Jacob more than Esau’.

Another issue with our understanding of this phrase is that, in modern English, the word “love” is often understood to relate primarily to a feeling, whereas in the Bible, the word “love” relates primarily to actions. When God says that he “loved” Jacob, he is referring primarily to his actions, not his feelings. The context is that God chose for Jacob to be the brother that would inherit the promise made to Abraham, while Esau did not inherit this promise. God “loved” Jacob by blessing him and his descendants with being his special people, Israel, who were given a special role in being a nation that would show the rest of the world what God is like (Exodus 19:6, 1 Kings 8:41-43). On the other hand, God did not do this with Esau and his descendants, so Esau was not “loved” by God in this sense. Esau can therefore be said to have been “hated” by God because God did not bless him in the way that he blessed Jacob.

We see that Paul’s point in using the example of Jacob and Esau was to demonstrate an example of God choosing (i.e. electing) to bless one person over another in a manner that was not based on works. In Romans 9:11, Paul emphasises the fact that neither of Jacob and Esau had done anything good or bad at the time when God announced (before they were born) that Jacob would receive the blessing. The reason Paul mentions this is that it demonstrates that God’s decision was not based on any works done by the twins. As the decision was made before either of the brothers had done anything, the decision could not have been made based on their works. This is the point that Paul is making, as shown by his statement ‘not because of works but because of him who calls’. Just as God’s choice of Jacob to receive the blessing instead of Esau was made “not based on works”, so God’s choice regarding salvation is made “not based on works”. In both cases, it is God who decides who he will bless and no one has the right to tell God that he should do it in another way.

As with the example of Isaac and Ishmael, the example of Jacob and Esau would have been particularly pertinent to the ethnic Israelites being addressed by Paul. (The reference to ‘our forefather Isaac’ in verse 10 is one piece of evidence that Paul is speaking to ethnic Israelites in this part of the letter.) They would have understood Paul to be teaching that the unbelieving ethnic Israelites of their generation correspond in the example to Esau, not Jacob. Just as Esau found himself outside of God’s blessing in a choice (not relating to salvation) that God made “not based on works”, so the unbelieving ethnic Israelites find themselves outside of God’s blessing in a choice (relating to salvation) that God made “not based on works”. In both situations, the person/people outside of God’s blessing had no right to rely on their works as a reason why God should in fact include them in his blessing. No one’s works are sufficiently good to deserve God’s blessing. It is entirely within God’s rights to bless people in a manner that does not relate to their works.

God’s ‘purpose in election’ (verse 11) includes his desire to bless those who do not deserve it, rather than those who might (wrongly) be expected to deserve God’s blessing. The word “election” simply means “choice”. The term is often understood to include additional meaning due to there being theological doctrines of “election”. However, it would be inappropriate to include the definition of this doctrine in our understanding of the word “election”, as this would be imposing our preferred version of the doctrine of “election” into the text.

Paul does not give any information regarding why God chose Jacob over Esau to receive the blessing. Paul only states that the choice was not based on works, and that it was ‘because of him who calls’ (i.e. it was up to God to decide who would receive the blessing – see the discussion above). This is as far as Paul intends to take the analogy between God’s choice (election) to bless Jacob over Esau and God’s choice (election) in salvation. While we know from what Paul has already taught in Romans that God’s choice in salvation is that God has decided to save all who trust in Christ, it is not necessarily the case that God’s choice of Jacob over Esau was made on the same basis. There is no suggestion in the text that God’s decision to bless Jacob over Esau was linked to Jacob’s future faith (foreseen by God), as some have suggested. As with God’s choice to bless Isaac over Ishmael, God’s choice to bless Jacob over Esau was again a choice of the younger son over the firstborn son, which (we may speculate) may have had an influence in why God chose as he did. While the firstborn son would expect to be favoured over the younger son in normal circumstances, God shows his authority and his grace by choosing to bless the younger son instead.

Some people have read into this passage that Paul is teaching that God decides which individual people to save and which to damn before they are born and without any reference to faith, but this comes from the mistaken view that the example of Jacob and Esau relates directly to salvation. Although salvation is in view in Paul’s overall argument, the example does not itself relate directly to salvation, as explained above and in the overview of Romans 9:6-13. The “before they were born” part of verse 11 is used as evidence that the particular choice of the example was made ‘not because of works’. There is no suggestion that all choices God makes that are “not based on works” must be made in exactly the same manner as the choice of the example. Paul does not teach that every aspect of the example (which relates to a choice that is not about salvation) exactly corresponds to God’s choices regarding salvation. He is merely drawing on the similarity that both God’s choice in the example and God’s choice regarding salvation are made “not based on works”, and that in both cases it is up to God whom he chooses to bless. As has been noted, Paul has already taught clearly that God’s choice regarding salvation is that he has chosen to save everyone who trusts in Christ (rather than choosing based on works and/or ethnicity). The view that God chose in the past whom to save and whom to damn individually and without reference to faith in those individuals conflicts with what Paul has been teaching regarding salvation. Such a choice by God would not depend on faith, but Paul has been teaching that salvation does depend on faith (and he goes on to repeat this in Romans 10:9-13). Given that Paul does not teach this non-faith-based view, and that this view conflicts with Paul’s clear teaching, there appears to be no good reason to hold it.

In summary, Romans 9:6-13 is the beginning of a response from Paul to some ethnic Israelite objectors who will not like his teaching that God has decided to save all who have faith in Christ. They consider that God ought to save ethnic Israelites due to their physical descent from Abraham and/or their works, and that the current situation of many ethnic Israelites not receiving God’s blessing is down to a failure on God’s part to keep his word. Paul demonstrates that the word of God has not failed, as God never promised to save physical descendants of Abraham based on their ethnicity, and he never promised to save people based on their own works. Paul reminds his ethnic Israelite objectors that it is up to God to decide who will receive his blessing.

In the next section, we will move on to begin looking at the next section: verses 14-18.

Romans 9:14-16 – God’s Right to Show Mercy – Moses

To recap, Paul has been responding to some hypothetical ethnic Israelite objectors who will not like his teaching that God has decided to save all who have faith in Christ. They consider that God ought to save ethnic Israelites due to their physical descent from Abraham and/or their works, and that the current situation of many ethnic Israelites not having God’s blessing of salvation is down to a failure on God’s part to keep his word. Paul responds by demonstrating that the word of God has not failed, as God never promised to save all physical descendants of Abraham, and he never promised to save people based on their own works. Having reminded them of this, Paul goes on to focus on the point that it is up to God to decide who will receive his blessing. The ethnic Israelite objectors therefore have no right to complain about the situation that God’s way of salvation has resulted in many ethnic Israelites currently being outside of God’s blessing.

“[14] What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! [15] For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.””

The ‘injustice’ being alleged by these ethnic Israelite objectors is God’s decision to save those who trust in Christ, rather than saving people based on their ethnicity and/or works. A consequence of this decision by God is that many ethnic Israelites are currently outside of God’s blessing of salvation, due to their lack of faith in Christ. The ethnic Israelite objectors see this as unfair. The accusation of injustice follows Paul’s reinforcement of the point that God has indeed decided not to save people due to their ethnicity and/or their works, which he has illustrated by referring to the examples of Isaac and Ishmael, and Jacob and Esau. The ethnic Israelite objectors are not objecting directly to the examples that Paul has used – these ethnic Israelites would have no complaints about their ancestor Isaac being chosen over Ishmael, or their ancestor Jacob being chosen over Esau. Instead, they are objecting to Paul’s application of these examples, in which the unbelieving ethnic Israelites find themselves in a position corresponding to Ishmael and Esau – they are outside of God’s blessing.

The ethnic Israelite objectors whom Paul is addressing have no right to claim that there is injustice on God’s part due to the situation that many ethnic Israelites are currently outside of God’s blessing. The reason for this is that it is entirely up to God to decide whom he will save. The statement, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy’ is God’s statement that it is entirely up to him to decide whom he will have mercy on. It is important to note that this statement says nothing about how God has decided whom to have mercy on, it simply states the truth that it is God’s right to decide this.

Paul has no need to restate how God has decided to use his right, as it is Paul’s prior explanation that God has decided to use his right to save all those who have faith in Christ (rather than saving based on ethnicity and/or works) that has caused the complaint from these ethnic Israelites in the first place. They think that God ought to save ethnic Israelites because of their ethnicity and/or their works, and Paul is pushing back against this, pointing out that they have no right to tell God how he should go about his business of salvation.

“[16] So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.”

The ethnic Israelite objectors thought that the ethnic Israelites currently outside of God’s blessing of salvation deserved to be in a right-standing with God. These ethnic Israelites really wanted to achieve righteousness, and were working exceptionally hard in order to achieve this. If being in a right-standing with God were based on how much a person wanted to be righteous, or how hard they were trying to be righteous, then these ethnic Israelites would have a stronger case than anyone for receiving God’s blessing. Paul himself acknowledges how much these people wanted to achieve righteousness: ‘for I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but their zeal is not in line with the truth. For, disregarding the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness’ (Romans 10:2-3). The problem for these people was not how much they wanted to be righteous, but that they were trying (and failing) to achieve it themselves by establishing their own righteousness.

Not only did these ethnic Israelites really want to be righteous, they were also working hard in order to try to achieve this. Paul states that ‘Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works’ (Romans 9:31-32). The problem for these people was not that they weren’t trying hard enough, but that they refused to admit that they were incapable of achieving righteousness on their own. If they had done this instead and had trusted in God, rather than trying to establish their own righteousness, then they would be considered by God as righteous (like Abraham was – Romans 4:2-5) and would therefore be saved (Romans 5:9). Instead, these ethnic Israelites find themselves outside of God’s blessing of salvation.

This is why Paul says ‘it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy’. ‘Him who wills’ refers to a person who desires to be righteous. ‘Him who runs’ refers to a person who is working to try to be righteous. Although there is debate about what exactly Paul is referring to (the words ‘it is’ are not actually present in the Greek), the point being made is that the source of ‘it’ is God, not a person who desires to be righteous or a person who is trying to achieve righteousness. Given this context, the word that fits best as a word that could be used instead of ‘it’ in the translation is ‘righteousness’. The verse would then be stating that righteousness is not achieved by people desiring it or working hard for it, but righteousness is given by God as a gift in an act of mercy (see Romans 4:1-8). The source of the righteousness is God, not the person.

In context, the people desiring and/or working hard to achieve righteousness are the unbelieving ethnic Israelites. Paul is saying that righteousness is not achieved by these people but it is instead given as a gift by God. Paul is therefore again stating that it is up to God whom he will bless with being credited as righteous, so the unbelieving ethnic Israelites have no right to complain about this situation.

Paul’s teaching in this verse that God is the source of righteousness does not tell us anything about how God has decided whom he will bless with this gift. It simply explains that it is up to God. Of course, we know from what Paul has said already that God has decided to credit as righteous all who trust in Christ. All people who trust Christ to save them rather than trying to achieve righteousness themselves will receive God’s mercy and will be credited as righteous.

Verse 16 (‘not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy’) is Paul’s third central “not… but…” statement in Romans 9. The first was ‘not the children of the flesh… but the children of the promise’ (verse 8). The second was ‘not because of works but because of him who calls’ (verse 11). The “not… but…” statement in verse 8 is the central teaching of the “not based on ethnicity” section of verses 6b to 9. Similarly, the “not… but…” statement in verse 11 is the central teaching of the “not based on works” section of verses 10 to 13.

Each of these central “not… but…” statements is surrounded by an example which illustrates the central teaching. The examples each involve two people: one who receives God’s blessing in the example and one who does not. The first statement (verse 8) is surrounded by the example of Isaac and Ishmael. The second statement (verse 11) is surrounded by the example of Jacob and Esau.

The same structure is being used in verses 15 to 17. The central verse 16 has a “not… but…” statement, and it is surrounded by an example involving two people: Moses (verse 15) and Pharaoh (verse 17). Verse 14 (‘is there injustice on God’s part?’) acts as an introductory question to the section, similar to how verse 6a starts its section off with an implicit question (“has the word of God failed?”). Verse 18 provides a conclusion to the section.

The verses on Moses and Pharaoh are therefore illustrating the central statement of ‘not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy’. It was God who decided to have mercy on Moses. He did this not because of Moses’ own efforts, as can be seen from the context of the quote in verse 15, which is from Exodus 33:14-19:

“[14] The Lord replied, ‘My Presence will go with you, and I will give you rest.’ [15] Then Moses said to him, ‘If your Presence does not go with us, do not send us up from here. [16] How will anyone know that you are pleased with me and with your people unless you go with us? What else will distinguish me and your people from all the other people on the face of the earth?’”

This response from Moses shows that he is not relying on his own efforts to convince God to bless him. Instead he is admitting that, without the Lord, he would be no different from anyone else.

“[17] And the Lord said to Moses, ‘I will do the very thing you have asked, because I am pleased with you and I know you by name.’”

The Lord grants Moses’ request, not because Moses has worked hard for this, but because Moses humbly acknowledges that he has nothing in himself to boast about. God has chosen to bless people who respond in this way.

“[18] Then Moses said, ‘Now show me your glory.’ [19] And the Lord said, ‘I will cause all my goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the Lord, in your presence. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.””

Because the Lord is pleased with Moses and his humility, the Lord chooses to bless Moses and grant his request. Moses did not deserve this blessing, but God has the right to choose whom to bless and he chose to use his right to bless Moses.

As with the previous central “not…but…” statements in Romans 9, while the central statement itself relates to salvation (in the context of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites from Romans 9:1-5), the example surrounding each central statement does not itself relate directly to salvation. (This is discussed generally in the overview of Romans 9:6-13 and specifically with respect to verses 6-9 and 10-13.) Instead, the example is used to illustrate the way God made the choice (e.g. ‘not because of works’) rather than what the choice was about. For the example with Moses, we can see that the choice being made by God was not a choice of whether to save or damn Moses, but it was a choice about whether or not to accept Moses’ requests for God’s Presence to go with him and for God to show him his glory. Just as God accepted Moses’ requests for reasons that were not based on Moses’ desire to be righteous or his efforts in trying to be righteous, so God’s choice with respect to salvation is also not made based on these factors.

In the next section, we will consider the situation with Pharaoh.

Romans 9:17-18 – God’s Right to Harden – Pharaoh

In the previous section, we saw how this section (verses 14-18) teaches that God has the right to have mercy on whomever he chooses. After giving the first part of his example in verse 15 (relating to Moses, whom God decided to have mercy on), and making his main point in verse 16 (‘it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy’), Paul now gives the second part of his example, which relates to Pharaoh.

“[17] For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.””

After comparing the current situation of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites to that of Ishmael (verses 6b to 9) and Esau (verses 10 to 13), Paul now shocks his audience further by comparing the current situation of these ethnic Israelites to that of Pharaoh. The Pharaoh that Paul is speaking of is the Pharaoh from the book of Exodus who would not let God’s people leave Egypt, as God was requesting (through Moses and Aaron). This Pharaoh was a particularly stubborn character, as God explained to Moses before Moses went back to Egypt to speak to Pharaoh: ‘I know that the king of Egypt will not let you go unless compelled by a mighty hand’ (Exodus 3:19).

Hundreds of years before the Exodus, God had explained to Abraham what would happen: ‘know for certain that your offspring will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs and will be servants there, and they will be afflicted for four hundred years. But I will bring judgement on the nation that they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions’ (Genesis 15:13-14). God’s actions against Pharaoh as described in the book of Exodus are an act of judgement against him.

We can see that Pharaoh was deserving of judgement by his response to Moses and Aaron on their first visit to him (Exodus 5:1-2):

“Moses and Aaron went and said to Pharaoh, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, ‘Let my people go, that they may hold a feast to me in the wilderness.’” But Pharaoh said, “Who is the LORD, that I should obey his voice and let Israel go? I do not know the LORD, and moreover, I will not let Israel go.””

Pharaoh’s response shows that he considers himself to be higher than the Lord, so that he does not need to obey him. This is an outrageous sin worthy of full judgement. It would be no defence to claim ignorance – God has revealed himself to everyone (see discussion of Romans 10:14-21). God would have been entirely justified in striking down Pharaoh and killing him at that moment. He could have done this, and God’s people could have then calmly walked out of Egypt. However, rather than killing Pharaoh instantly, God wanted to use the situation as an evangelistic opportunity. God wanted the whole world to know that salvation can be found through him. We see this in Exodus 9:13-16:

“The Lord said to Moses, “Get up early in the morning, stand before Pharaoh, and tell him, ‘Thus says the Lord, the God of the Hebrews: “Release my people so that they may serve me! For this time I will send all my plagues on your very self and on your servants and your people, so that you may know that there is no one like me in all the earth. For by now I could have stretched out my hand and struck you and your people with plague, and you would have been destroyed from the earth. But for this purpose I have caused you to stand: to show you my strength, and so that my name may be declared in all the earth.”

God’s motivation in withholding immediate and full judgement from Pharaoh and instead keeping him standing in his position as King of Egypt was so that God’s name may be declared throughout the world. God wanted the world to know about him. We see an example of this in Joshua 2:8-13, as Rahab had heard reports of God’s actions in the Exodus, and she had trusted God as a result.

When Paul quotes Exodus 9:16 in Romans 9:17, he quotes it as ‘for this very purpose I have raised you up’. The meaning of ‘raised you up’ should be interpreted in accordance with the original wording of ‘caused you to stand’. The point is that God kept Pharaoh in his position as King rather than killing him immediately. His purpose in withholding Pharaoh’s deserved full judgement was for evangelism.

Although God withheld full and immediate judgement from Pharaoh, God did begin to judge Pharaoh after Pharaoh’s rejection of God in Exodus 5:2. In Exodus 7:1-5, we see that God begins to harden Pharaoh’s heart. The act of hardening Pharaoh’s heart was an act of judgement against Pharaoh:

“And the LORD said to Moses, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet. You shall speak all that I command you, and your brother Aaron shall tell Pharaoh to let the people of Israel go out of his land. But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in the land of Egypt, Pharaoh will not listen to you. Then I will lay my hand on Egypt and bring my hosts, my people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great acts of judgement. The Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I stretch out my hand against Egypt and bring out the people of Israel from among them.””

This is describing the first occasion on which Pharaoh’s heart is said to have been hardened. It happened after the first display of a miracle by Moses and Aaron (see Exodus 7:8-13). This is as God had said it would be in Exodus 4:21: ‘And the LORD said to Moses, “When you go back to Egypt, see that you do before Pharaoh all the miracles that I have put in your power. But I will harden his heart, so that he will not let the people go.’

The hardening of Pharaoh’s heart by God is linked to the display of miracles. Pharaoh’s earlier rejection of God in Exodus 5 (discussed above) was not associated with the display of a miracle, and no mention of Pharaoh’s heart being hardened was made at this point. The hardening of Pharaoh’s heart was therefore a legitimate response by God to Pharaoh’s earlier rejection of him. It is clear that Pharaoh already did not want to let God’s people leave, so God’s hardening of him was not making him do something he did not want to do; instead it was giving Pharaoh the strength to do what he already did want to do.

The great acts of judgement that were to happen were also intended by God such that ‘the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD’ (Exodus 7:5). God also wanted to evangelize the Egyptians, and some of them did come to fear him, as shown in Exodus 9:20 (in response to warning of the next plague): ‘whoever feared the word of the Lord among the servants of Pharaoh hurried his slaves and his livestock into the houses’.

We can now compare Pharaoh with the unbelieving ethnic Israelites of Paul’s day. We will see that there are various similarities between Pharaoh’s situation and that of these ethnic Israelites.

Just as Pharaoh had rejected God’s word by refusing to let God’s people go, so the unbelieving ethnic Israelites of Paul’s day had rejected God’s word by refusing to trust in Christ. The unbelieving ethnic Israelites were also in a position of deserving full and immediate judgement for their rejection of God’s word. As with Pharaoh, God decided that, rather than giving full and immediate judgement to these ethnic Israelites, he would create an evangelistic opportunity out of the situation. God therefore hardened the unbelieving ethnic Israelites (Romans 11:7), as Pharaoh had previously been hardened. The motivation behind the hardening was to bring salvation to more Gentiles, which would itself bring salvation to more of the ethnic Israelites, due to their jealousy (Romans 11:11). In the same way, God’s motivation behind hardening Pharaoh was so that God’s ‘name might be proclaimed in all the Earth’ (Romans 9:17, Exodus 9:16).

The hardening process is described in more detail in chapter 11. One reason why we have considered chapter 11 before this part of chapter 9 is that chapter 11 (in particular verses 1-32, which is the parallel part to 9:6-29) provides an important clarification on the consequences of hardening. Reading these few verses of chapter 9 without the surrounding context, it is not immediately apparent whether or not somebody who has been hardened can ever subsequently repent and come to faith in Christ. One might propose the situation that, if God decides to harden a person, that person has been permanently rejected by God and will definitely end up in hell. However, chapter 11 refutes this position. As explained previously, chapter 11 makes it clear that the unbelieving ethnic Israelites, who have been hardened, can still come to faith in Christ (Romans 11:23). In fact, God’s motivation for hardening them in the first place is to bring about a series of events that will cause more of them to be saved (Romans 11:11, 11:30-32).

After discussing Pharaoh, Romans 9 continues with:

“[18] So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.”

Paul’s statement that God ‘has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills’ is another statement that shows that God has the right to have mercy on whomever he wants to have mercy. As with previous verses like this, this verse does not in itself say anything about how God has decided whom to have mercy on and whom to harden. From the surrounding context, we can see that God has decided to have mercy on all those who trust in his word (like Moses), and to harden those who reject his word (like Pharaoh). However, we have seen that for somebody to be hardened by God does not rule out the possibility that they will eventually come to trust in his word and receive his mercy.

As explained previously, Paul is making this point (that God has the right to have mercy on whomever he wants to have mercy, and to harden whomever he wants to harden) to hypothetical ethnic Israelite objectors who will not like Paul’s teaching that God has decided to have mercy on all who trust in Christ and to harden people who have rejected Christ. The objectors think that God ought to have mercy on ethnic Israelites based on their ethnicity and/or works, but Paul is rejecting that view and reiterating that God has the right to do as he pleases regarding choosing who will receive his mercy and who will be hardened.

Thinking about this section (verses 14 to 18), we can see that the central “not… but…” statement (‘it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy’) is surrounded by the example of Moses and Pharaoh. As with the decision made by God in the part of the example relating to Moses (verse 15), the decision made by God in the part relating to Pharaoh (verse 17) is also not a decision that relates directly to salvation/damnation. Instead, the decision God makes is to harden Pharaoh in judgement against Pharaoh’s rejection of him. The decision by God to harden a person is not identical to a decision to damn that person. If every person who is hardened will ultimately be damned, then there would be no hope for the unbelieving ethnic Israelites who are currently being hardened. This is not the view Paul takes in chapter 11, as explained above.

As with the previous examples of Isaac and Ishmael and Jacob and Esau, the purpose of the example of Moses and Pharaoh is to illustrate the central “not… but…” statement of verse 16: ‘it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy’. As explained in the previous section, God chose to show mercy to Moses, and his decision to do this was not because of Moses’ efforts or his desire to be righteous. In one sense, God also showed mercy to Pharaoh by not giving him the full and immediate judgement that his actions deserved (see above), which links the Pharaoh example with verse 16 (which refers to mercy only). Based on Pharaoh’s actions, he deserved no mercy, but God did decide to give him some mercy.

In another sense, the hardening of Pharaoh is in contrast to the mercy God gave to Moses, which links the Pharaoh and Moses examples to verse 18 (which refers to both mercy and hardening): ‘he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills’. God had mercy on Moses and hardened Pharaoh, and he has the right to do this. Although the choices God made regarding Moses and Pharaoh were not choices relating directly to salvation, the way in which God made those choices has a similarity with the way God makes his choices regarding salvation. God chose to have mercy on Moses in response to Moses’ humble reliance on God, and God chose to harden Pharaoh in response to Pharaoh’s rejection of God’s word.

Having seen how the Moses and Pharaoh examples in verses 15 and 17 illustrate the main point being made in verses 16 and 18, we can see the high-level argument that Paul is making in this section. The context is that, according to Paul’s teaching that God has decided to save all who trust in Christ, the unbelieving ethnic Israelites of Paul’s day are currently outside of God’s blessing due to their unbelief (see verses 1-5). Paul is responding to an anticipated objection from ethnic Israelites who think this situation means that God’s word has failed, because they think that God ought to save all ethnic Israelites based on their ethnicity and/or their works (even if they are not trusting in Christ). In verses 6-13, Paul responds to this objection by defending his teaching that salvation is not based on ethnicity (verse 8) or works (verse 12). In verse 14, Paul then anticipates an objection that it is unjust for God to save people on the basis of who is trusting in Christ, rather than based on ethnicity and/or works (because saving people based on faith means that many of the ethnic Israelites are currently not in a position to receive this blessing). Paul responds to this objection by stating that it is entirely up to God to decide whom he will have mercy on and whom he will harden. If God wants to have mercy on those who trust in Christ, and to harden people who reject Christ (in particular, the unbelieving ethnic Israelites), he is entirely within his rights to do that. The objectors want God to save the unbelieving ethnic Israelites based on their own efforts and desire to achieve righteousness, but God has decided to give salvation as a gift to people of his own choosing who do not deserve it, rather than giving salvation as a wage to people who do deserve it (see Romans 4:4-5).

The great news for us is that the people of God’s own choosing who receive his gift of salvation are everyone who trusts in Christ, which is what Paul gets so excited about again in Romans 10:9-13.

In the next section, we will consider Paul’s next anticipated objection from the ethnic Israelite objectors.

Romans 9:19-20 – Is It Right for God to Find Fault with Unbelieving Ethnic Israelites?

To recap, Paul is addressing an anticipated objection from some hypothetical ethnic Israelites who will not like his teaching that God has decided to save all who have faith in Christ. This means that many of Paul’s fellow ethnic Israelites are not currently receiving God’s blessing, because they are not trusting in Christ. Paul’s objectors think that God ought to save ethnic Israelites due to their physical descent from Abraham and/or their works. Paul has responded by reiterating that God does not save based on ethnicity (verses 6-9) or works (verses 10-13), and by noting that God has the right to save whomever he wants to save (verses 14-18).

Paul now anticipates a further objection from these ethnic Israelites:

“[19] You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who has resisted his will?””

To understand this verse, we will consider the parallel passage in Romans 3. As we have seen, Romans 3 begins in a similar way to Romans 9. In Romans 3:1-2, Paul states that there are advantages in being an ethnic Israelite, and he gives an example of one such advantage. Correspondingly, in Romans 9:4-5, Paul continues his list of advantages of the ethnic Israelite. Back to Romans 3, in verses 5-8 Paul goes on to say:

“[5] But if our unrighteousness serves to show the righteousness of God, what shall we say? That God is unrighteous to inflict wrath on us? (I speak in a human way.) [6] By no means! For then how could God judge the world? [7] But if through my lie God’s truth abounds to his glory, why am I still being condemned as a sinner? [8] And why not do evil that good may come?—as some people slanderously charge us with saying. Their condemnation is just.”

This part of Romans 3 corresponds to Romans 9:19. Verse 7 of Romans 3 is the closest match with Romans 9:19. It asks a question, posed on behalf of an unbelieving ethnic Israelite, as to why this person is being condemned as a sinner, given that this person’s sinful actions have not prevented God from being glorified. God is able to use the ‘lie’ of this person to bring about a proclamation of his ‘truth’, so the person’s lie does not stop God from achieving his purposes and being glorified. The argument is that God is being glorified whether the person sins or not. So, the argument goes, why is God condemning the sinner when the sinner hasn’t prevented God from being glorified? We can see that Paul is very dismissive of such an argument by his statement at the end of Romans 3:8 – ‘their condemnation is just’.

A similar question is being asked in Romans 9:19 – ‘Why does he still find fault? For who has resisted his will?’ Why does God find fault with the unbelieving ethnic Israelites, as none of them are preventing God from being glorified? ‘Who has resisted his will?’ is a rhetorical question with the implied answer: no one has resisted his will. No one is stopping God from achieving what he wants to be achieved, so why find fault in anyone? The unbelief of these ethnic Israelites has actually led to the gospel being proclaimed to the Gentiles. God’s will to proclaim the good news to the whole world has not been resisted. If these ethnic Israelites had accepted Jesus, they would have taken the gospel message to the world themselves. On the other hand, with their rejection of Jesus, God still used this to achieve his will by using their rejection of Jesus as a means to promote the spread of the gospel (see Romans 11:11).

This argument is prompted by the reference to Pharaoh in verse 17, which the ethnic Israelite objectors would have understood as being an example which applied to their situation. Just as Pharaoh’s rejection of God was used by God (by hardening Pharaoh in response to this) to cause the good news that the Lord saves to spread throughout the world, so God has reacted to the rejection of Christ by these ethnic Israelites (by hardening them in response) to promote a spread of the gospel. As we have seen, hardening is an act of judgement against someone who has rejected God, but God’s motivation for doing this is to promote a spread of the gospel so that more people can be saved, even those who have been hardened themselves.

The objector is implying that God should not judge sin, because sin does not prevent God achieving his purposes – God is able to respond to sin in such a way that his purposes are not thwarted by it. Of course, for someone to tell God that he should not judge sin is outrageous. As well as dismissing this line of argument in Romans 3:8, Paul also explains in Romans 3:6 that if this argument were true, God would not be able to judge the world. God would have to leave evil unpunished. This cannot be the case, so the argument can be dismissed.

We get a similarly dismissive response from Paul in Romans 9:20:

“[20a] But who are you, O man, to answer back to God?”

The phrase ‘O man’ is similar to Paul’s statement in Romans 3:5 that ‘I speak in a human way’. Paul is dismissing the argument as being man-made and not in accordance with God’s ways. It is not the place of these objectors to tell God who should or should not be judged.

Analysis of how some others have interpreted Romans 9:19

Some interpret verse 19 differently, and this comes from a misunderstanding of the previous verses. They interpret verse 18 (which states that God has mercy on whom he desires and hardens whom he desires) as meaning that God chooses arbitrarily whom to have mercy on and whom to harden (i.e. God’s choice is made without any reference to the people). They misunderstand the statement that God has the right to choose whom to have mercy on / harden as meaning that God makes this decision not based on anything to do with the people (e.g. who has faith in Christ and who has rejected him). With this view of God’s arbitrary mercy/hardening, they understand the objection of verse 19 to be an objection against God’s arbitrariness. It could be phrased like this: “why has God hardened me but had mercy on that other person, based on nothing about either of us? That’s unfair!” The phrase “who has resisted his will?” in verse 19 (sometimes wrongly translated as “who can resist his will?”) is seen as saying that no one has the power to resist God’s will to have mercy and harden arbitrarily. A person who has been arbitrarily chosen to be hardened couldn’t have done anything to resist being hardened and can’t do anything to reverse the situation of being hardened because God’s will was to harden him, so he is condemned to punishment. The objector is seen as objecting to God’s arbitrariness and is told in verse 20 that he is not allowed to ask such a question.

Of course, the problem with this interpretation is that it is built on the incorrect understanding that Paul has just taught that God chooses whom to have mercy on and whom to harden arbitrarily (i.e. without reference to anything about the people). In fact, Paul has simply been asserting that God has the right to choose whom to have mercy on or harden, without specifying in these verses how God decides whom to have mercy on and whom to harden. When we are careful not to add this incorrect understanding of God’s arbitrariness to the text, we see that the best understanding of verse 19 is as explained above.

In fact, if Paul had been teaching that God arbitrarily chooses whom to have mercy on and whom to harden, the objector would have a reasonable point to make in objecting to this! The Bible says that God judges fairly and does not show partiality (Romans 2:2, Acts 10:34-35), so for God to show partiality in arbitrarily choosing some people for mercy and some people for hardening based on nothing about them would go against God’s own standards. Thankfully, we don’t have to face such a dilemma as Paul was not teaching God’s arbitrariness. Paul has already explained in Romans that God gives righteousness “to all who believe” (Romans 3:22), and that “to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness” (Romans 4:5). God has therefore sovereignly decided to show mercy to everyone who trusts in Christ. This is not showing partiality as everyone is given the ability and opportunity to trust in Christ through the gospel, rather than some being excluded from the outset. No one deserves God’s mercy, but he has graciously chosen to show mercy to anyone who trusts in Christ. God has the right to choose people in this way and anyone who would prefer for him to choose in a different way has no justified reason to complain. I, for one, am very glad he decided to do it this way!

Another indication that this other interpretation of verse 19 is wrong is that it has the ethnic Israelite objectors protesting about the hardening of Pharaoh. The hardening of Pharaoh is not something that most ethnic Israelites would have been very upset about, as he had put their ancestors under such harsh conditions in their slavery in Egypt. The interpretation put forward above has the ethnic Israelite objectors objecting in respect of the situation of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites of Paul’s day, rather than objecting about God’s treatment of Pharaoh. As explained in the previous section, Pharaoh was referred to by Paul as an example that illustrated aspects of the situation of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites.

In the next section, we will consider the structure of Romans 9:6-29, which will help in our understanding of this passage.

Structure of Romans 9:6-29

Having reached up to verse 20a of Romans 9, we will pause to consider the structure of Romans 9:6-29 (the C2-B1 section). This is a good time to do so because, as we will see, verse 20a is in fact the central point of this section. The structure will help us to ensure that we interpret the rest of the section correctly, as we can compare corresponding parts of the structure as we go through the second half of the section.

As can be seen below, each part has a corresponding matching part (e.g. the C2-B1-A1 part matches with the C2-B1-A2 part), with the C2-B1-G part standing alone in the center. The text is arranged to have the corresponding sections vertically aligned. I have underlined the words or themes that appear in both matching parts (e.g. ‘mercy’ in C2-B1-C1 and C2-B1-C2).

Here is the structure:

We will consider the significance of this structure as we go through the rest of the section, starting in the next section with Romans 9:20b-21. For now, we can just marvel at the care and attention with which Paul wrote this wonderful letter.

Romans 9:20-21 – Do Unbelieving Ethnic Israelites Have a Right to Criticize God’s Judgement? – The Potter and the Clay

Having reached the center of the structure of Romans 9:6-29, we are now ready to begin the return journey in this section. Following from verse 20a (‘But who are you, O man, to answer back to God?’), Paul continues with:

“[20b] Will what is moulded say to its moulder, “Why have you made me like this?””

The sense of the question ‘why have you made me like this?’ is an objection that is answering back to God (see verse 20a) – i.e. the ethnic Israelite objector can be paraphrased as saying “you should not have made me like this”. This objection, which is expressed in the form of a question, matches in the structure with the objection from verse 19 of ‘why does he still find fault?’, which can be paraphrased as meaning “you should not be finding fault in me”.

Being made ‘like this’ (verse 20b) corresponds to the situation of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites of being outside of God’s blessing and instead experiencing God’s judgement due to their rejection of Christ (with this judgement involving being hardened).

Paul is likening the objection of “you should not be finding fault in me” (from verse 19) to the situation of a moulded vessel (e.g. a pot) saying to the person who moulded it, “you should not have made me into one of these” – clearly a ridiculous situation. Verse 20b is a rhetorical question from Paul. Paul’s point is that, as the moulder has the right to make whatever he wants out of the material he has, so God has the right to make whatever he wants out of what he has. Therefore, God has the right to judge those whom he considers it appropriate to judge. No one being judged has the right to tell God that he should not be judging them.

As we have seen from similar statements before, the statement that God has the right to judge whom he wants and to judge them in the way he wants doesn’t say anything about how God has decided to do this. Paul is responding to an anticipated objection from people who will not like his explanation of whom God has decided to judge. He is explaining to them that they do not have a right to complain about this. We know already that Paul’s explanation of whom God has decided to judge is that God has decided to judge those who reject Christ and refuse to repent (Romans 2:1-5). An aspect of this judgement is to harden them in response to their rejection of Christ, but this does not dictate that they will always be in this state of judgement.

“[21] Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honourable use and another for dishonourable use?”

This is another rhetorical question, making the point that a potter has the right to make two types of vessel from the same lump of clay. In this illustration, the potter is God, and the clay is the ethnic Israelites (see below). The ‘vessel for honourable use’ is those ethnic Israelites who are receiving God’s blessing (i.e. those who are trusting in Christ). The ‘vessel for dishonourable use’ is the remaining ethnic Israelites who are outside of God’s blessing (i.e. those who have rejected Christ). Paul is making the point that God has the right to include some ethnic Israelites in God’s blessing, and to exclude others. Again, the statement that God has the right to do this does not say anything about how God has decided which ethnic Israelites will be included in God’s blessing, or whether individual ethnic Israelites currently not included in God’s blessing can switch sides and receive God’s blessing.

Verse 21 matches in the structure with verse 18: ‘so then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills’. This is another verse that states God’s right to do as he pleases in having two categories of people, without explaining how God has decided which people will be in each category, and without addressing the question of whether or not someone who has been hardened can become someone on whom God has mercy.

The potter and clay analogy used by Paul appears in the Old Testament. It appears briefly in Isaiah 29:16 and 45:9, which Paul alludes to in verse 20b. Its most extensive appearance is in Jeremiah 18. We will see that its use there fits with the context we have seen from Romans. Here is Jeremiah 18:1-11:

“[1] The word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD: [2] “Arise, and go down to the potter’s house, and there I will let you hear my words.” [3] So I went down to the potter’s house, and there he was working at his wheel. [4] And the vessel he was making of clay was spoiled in the potter’s hand, and he reworked it into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to do. [5] Then the word of the LORD came to me: [6] “O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter has done? declares the LORD. Behold, like the clay in the potter’s hand, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel. [7] If at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom, that I will pluck up and break down and destroy it, [8] and if that nation, concerning which I have spoken, turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I intended to do to it. [9] And if at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom that I will build and plant it, [10] and if it does evil in my sight, not listening to my voice, then I will relent of the good that I had intended to do to it. [11] Now, therefore, say to the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem: ‘Thus says the LORD, Behold, I am shaping disaster against you and devising a plan against you. Return, every one from his evil way, and amend your ways and your deeds.’”

The potter was making a vessel, but the vessel ‘was spoiled in the potter’s hand’ (verse 4). The potter did not spoil it himself, but rather this was an action of the vessel. In response to this, the potter reworked it into another vessel.

Verse 6 shows us that the clay corresponds to the ethnic Israelites. Verses 7 to 10 speak of God announcing something, but giving people an opportunity to respond before what God announced takes place. If God announces punishment, and the nation then turns from its evil, then God will react to this and not give the people the punishment that he had announced (verses 7 to 8). The reverse is also true (verses 9 to 10). So the reason some are punished by God is that they do not heed the warning given to them and therefore do not turn from their evil ways, and the reason others are blessed by God is that they trust God and do heed the warning given to them, turning from their evil ways. God decides how to treat people based on their response to his graciously offered warning. All of them were warned and all therefore had an opportunity to repent.

The story of the potter and the clay has a strong correspondence with the situation of the ethnic Israelites of Paul’s day. The ethnic Israelites were supposed to be a ‘kingdom of priests’ (Exodus 19:5-6) through whom God would make himself known to the whole world (1 Kings 8:41-43, 59-60). However, many of Paul’s fellow ethnic Israelites had ‘rejected the purpose of God for themselves’ (Luke 7:30). Just as the potter in the story decides to do something else with the clay in response to it being spoiled in his hand, so God responds to the rejection of him by most of the ethnic Israelites by doing something else with them. God is determined to make himself known to the world, and the intention was for the ethnic Israelites to be the people that would show the world who God is. With the rejection by most of the ethnic Israelites of God’s purpose for them, God decides to use the unbelieving ethnic Israelites in a different way in order to achieve his goal of making himself known. The different way God chooses is to harden the unbelieving ethnic Israelites, which itself results in the world coming to hear about God. Paul talks about this further in Romans 11, as we have seen with respect to Romans 11:11.

Linking this back to Romans 9:21, Paul refers to making, out of the same lump of clay (i.e. the ethnic Israelites), a ‘vessel for honourable use’ and a ‘vessel for dishonourable use’. The ‘vessel for honourable use’ is those ethnic Israelites who are trusting in Christ, and the ‘vessel for dishonourable use’ is those ethnic Israelites who have rejected Christ. The ethnic Israelites who are trusting in Christ are being used by God for the ‘honourable use’ of making God known to the world. The ethnic Israelites who have rejected Christ are being used by God for the ‘dishonourable use’ of being hardened, which also indirectly results in God being made known to the world (as explained via the link above regarding Romans 11:11).

Verse 21 is therefore stating that God has the right to use some ethnic Israelites for ‘honourable use’ and some for ‘dishonourable use’. Verse 21 does not address the question of how God decides which ethnic Israelites will be included in each vessel, nor does it address the question of whether it is possible for an individual ethnic Israelite who is currently part of the ‘vessel for dishonourable use’ to change category to become part of the ‘vessel for honourable use’. Regarding the first question, we have seen above that God has decided for the criterion for determining which vessel each ethnic Israelite will be in to be the criterion of whether or not that ethnic Israelite is trusting in Christ (if yes: honourable use, if not: dishonourable use). Regarding the second question, we must look to other verses to consider whether it is possible for an individual ethnic Israelite to change category from being used for ‘dishonourable use’ to being used for ‘honourable use’.

The terminology of ‘vessels’ for ‘honourable use’ and ‘dishonourable use’ from Romans 9:21 is also used by Paul in his second letter to Timothy. This also helps us to understand its meaning. Here is 2 Timothy 2:20-22:

“[20] Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for honourable use, some for dishonourable. [21] Therefore, if anyone cleanses himself from what is dishonourable, he will be a vessel for honourable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work. [22] So flee youthful passions and pursue righteousness, faith, love, and peace, along with those who call on the Lord from a pure heart.”

Paul again refers to the two types of vessels. Note that Paul considers it possible for an individual who is a ‘vessel for dishonourable use’ to change their status to become a ‘vessel for honourable use’. The two types of vessels are two fixed categories, but a person who is a vessel for dishonourable use can change category to become a vessel for honourable use. This is what happens when someone becomes a Christian. Therefore individual people are not permanently and unchangeably fixed as one particular type of vessel, but their type of vessel can change, depending on how they respond to God’s gracious warning.

In the next post, we will continue with Romans 9:22-23.

Romans 9:22-23 – Why Does God Put Up with Unbelieving Ethnic Israelites? Can ‘Vessels of Wrath’ Become ‘Vessels of Mercy’?

Having considered Romans 9:20-21 (about the potter and the clay), in this section we will continue with verses 22-23:

“[22] What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, [23] in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory”

In the structure of Romans 9:6-29 (which is one of the sections of Romans 9-11), verse 22 matches with verse 17: ‘For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth”’. Both verses refer to God showing/making known his power for the purpose of the proclamation of the good news about God. As we saw when considering verse 17, God was explaining to Pharaoh why he had not yet issued full and complete judgement against him by killing him, which was what Pharaoh deserved following his rejection of God. God explained that he had instead kept Pharaoh in his position of power and had hardened him because doing this caused a greater spread of the good news about God, which was achieved through the great miracles/plagues and final triumphant exodus of God’s people. This had a much greater impact than if God had simply killed Pharaoh immediately and then quietly led his people out of Egypt.

For a similar reason, God did not immediately kill the unbelieving ethnic Israelites upon their rejection of Christ, even though this was their deserved full judgement. Instead, God kept them in place and hardened them (also an act of judgement). The result of this was that Gentiles were coming to trust in Christ following the spread of the gospel to the nations. If God had immediately killed all the ethnic Israelites who rejected Christ, the gospel would not have spread as quickly, as more believers would have stayed in Jerusalem rather than leaving to flee persecution. Furthermore, this would have removed the opportunity for any of these ethnic Israelites to repent at a later time and come to trust in Christ. One such person who did this was Paul himself! Others would also do this, as Paul explains in Romans 11 (see below).

Verses 22 and 23 of Romans 9 therefore explain that God fulfils his desire to show his wrath and make known his power by keeping in place people who deserve ultimate destruction so that he can show his wrath and make known his power through the situation in which he keeps them. His desire to show his wrath and make known his power is a gospel desire to make the riches of his glory known, just as his desire in the situation with Pharaoh was a gospel desire to have his name proclaimed in all the earth. He fulfilled that desire by keeping Pharaoh in place so that he could show his power and wrath through the miracles/plagues and the exodus.

(Some English translations of verse 22 are differently worded to state, e.g. ‘What if God, although desiring…, has endured…’, i.e. asserting that God is choosing not to show his wrath (etc.) yet but is doing something else instead. This understanding would have God’s wrath in final judgement in view. However, God doesn’t only show his wrath at the final judgement but also does so before that (see Romans 1:18, for example). The parallel with Pharaoh makes the translation I have used above preferable over this one.)

Verses 22 and 23 speak again of two categories of people: ‘vessels of wrath’ and ‘vessels of mercy’. Regarding the ‘vessels of wrath prepared for destruction’. God has ‘endured’ them ‘with much patience’ as they are deserving of full judgement now and their continued existence requires patience on God’s part in allowing them to continue sinning. The reason God does this is because he wants to ‘make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory’. God has a gospel motivation in withholding full and final judgement from those who deserve it due to their rejection of Christ.

Paul talks more about this process in Romans 11, explaining that Gentiles have come to faith as a result of the rejection of Christ by unbelieving ethnic Israelites. In Romans 11:11, Paul states that ‘by their [i.e. unbelieving ethnic Israelites] transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles’. Also, in Romans 11:30, Paul states that Gentiles ‘have been shown mercy because of their [i.e. unbelieving ethnic Israelites] disobedience’. God has therefore endured with much patience the disobedience of the unbelieving ethnic Israelites, and this has resulted in Gentiles coming to know the riches of God’s glory.

A question Paul does not address at this point in Romans 9 is whether the ‘vessels of wrath prepared for destruction’ have any hope of salvation. Are they all destined to die without repenting and trusting in Christ, or is it still a possibility for them to do this? We do not need to speculate on the answer of this question, as Paul goes on to answer it himself in Romans 11. At the end of Romans 9:23, Paul breaks off his train of thought and doesn’t answer this question. He does this because he is going to continue on this topic in Romans 11:1-32, which is the parallel section to Romans 9:6-29 (similar to how Romans 9 itself is picking up where Paul left off in the parallel section of Romans 3).

So far in Romans 9, Paul has only started to consider the first two links of a three-link chain:

1. Rejection of Christ by unbelieving ethnic Israelites, resulting in
2. Acceptance of Christ by Gentiles

There is a third link in the chain explained in Romans 11:

3. Unbelieving ethnic Israelites coming to trust in Christ due to their jealousy of the Gentiles who have accepted Christ

Reading on in the quote from Romans 11:11 we saw above, Paul states that ‘by their [i.e. unbelieving ethnic Israelites] transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles, to make them [i.e. unbelieving ethnic Israelites] jealous’. Paul goes on to state that ‘inasmuch then as I am an apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, if somehow I might move to jealousy my fellow countrymen and save some of them’ (Romans 11:13-14). Similarly, Paul goes on in Romans 11:30-31 to state ‘for just as you [i.e. believing Gentiles] once were disobedient to God, but now have been shown mercy because of their [i.e. unbelieving ethnic Israelites] disobedience, so these also now have been disobedient, that because of the mercy shown to you they also may now be shown mercy’.

Paul is clear that the unbelieving ethnic Israelites (who are currently ‘vessels of wrath prepared for destruction’) can still be saved.

The ‘vessels of wrath’ and ‘vessels of mercy’ are referring to two categories of people, but we have seen from Romans 11 that it is possible for an individual person to change from being a ‘vessel of wrath’ to become a ‘vessel of mercy’. This is significant, as there are some people who consider that each individual person was selected by God in eternity past to be of either one category or the other, and that it is impossible for any person of either category to change to the other category at any time. We will now see that, as well as the passages discussed above and in the previous section regarding verse 21, there is additional biblical context that also shows that this view is wrong.

First, in Romans 10:1, Paul speaks of the ethnic Israelites who have rejected Christ and states that ‘my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved’. In the view I have presented above, these unbelieving ethnic Israelites are all ‘vessels of wrath’ but can individually change categories to become ‘vessels of mercy’ and be saved if they repent and trust in Christ. It therefore makes sense that Paul would pray for their salvation collectively, as any of them could still be saved. On the other hand, those who are of the opinion that people cannot change categories would understand that the unbelieving ethnic Israelites Paul is praying for include some people who are ‘vessels of mercy’ (those that will come to believe at some point in the future) and some people who are ‘vessels of wrath’ (those who will continue rejecting Christ until they die). It would be very strange for Paul to believe that some of these people are unchangeably fixed as ‘vessels of wrath’ and then to pray collectively for the salvation of all of them. Instead, it is clear that Paul thinks that these people can be saved!

Romans 11:23-24 also speaks of unbelieving ethnic Israelites returning as members of the church if they do not continue in their unbelief, which is further evidence that Paul thinks it is possible for any unbelieving ethnic Israelite to do this.

Furthermore, in Ephesians 2:1-5, Paul, speaking to Christians, says this:

“[1] And you were dead in the trespasses and sins [2] in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience—[3] among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. [4] But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, [5] even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved”.

Paul says that all Christians can look back to a time when they were ‘children of wrath’. This shows that people are not permanently fixed in one category or the other, because all Christians, who are now ‘vessels of mercy’, were once ‘children of wrath’. They were deserving of God’s wrath like the rest of mankind (Ephesians 5:3), but they accepted the gift from God of salvation by faith (Ephesians 2:8) and therefore their status before God was changed.

Romans 2:1-5 is also of relevance:

“[1] Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgement on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. [2] We know that the judgement of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. [3] Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgement of God? [4] Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? [5] But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God’s righteous judgement will be revealed.”

God is being patient with these ethnic Israelites in not giving them full judgement immediately, but instead giving them an opportunity to repent. They are currently ‘storing up wrath’ for themselves as ‘vessels of wrath prepared for destruction’, but God is giving them an opportunity to escape the punishment that they deserve. They can escape this punishment through repentance, which is what God’s kindness and patience in delaying their deserved judgement is intended to enable.

In 1 Timothy 1:15-16, Paul speaks of how God’s patience applied to him in his own life:

“[15] Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners – of whom I am the worst. [16] But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his immense patience as an example for those who would believe in him and receive eternal life.”

This understanding of God’s patience also fits with 2 Peter 3:9, which states that ‘the Lord is not slow to fulfil his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance’. This would not make sense if God had chosen some people to permanently and unchangeably remain as ‘vessels of wrath’. The context of this verse is God’s judgement (2 Peter 3:10). God patiently delays the full judgement that people deserve in the hope that they will repent before it is finally too late. Praise God for his patience and mercy! Peter goes on to encourage his readers to ‘count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters’ (2 Peter 3:15-16). Peter’s teaching on God’s patience is the same as Paul’s.

From this analysis, we can therefore conclude that it is possible for people to change from being a ‘vessel of wrath’ to being a ‘vessel of mercy’, so people have not been permanently fixed in one category or the other from eternity past. We can therefore define the two categories as follows:

The ‘vessels of wrath’ are those who have rejected Christ and are therefore heading towards final judgement and hell, which is the place prepared for such people. While God patiently delays the final judgement they deserve, they have the opportunity to repent and thereby change categories before it is too late.

The ‘vessels of mercy’ are those who are currently trusting in Christ. They therefore correspond to the ‘elect’, as defined by Paul in Romans 11:7. The ethnic Israelites referred to as vessels for honourable/dishonourable use from Romans 9:21 are therefore vessels of mercy/wrath, respectively.

Paul does not speak in these verses about how God decided who would become a vessel of mercy (e.g. arbitrarily, dependent on faith, etc.) – he only states that the vessels of mercy were ‘prepared beforehand for glory’. It is not explained whether they were prepared beforehand individually or corporately. As we have seen that individuals who are ‘vessels of mercy’ have not always been that kind of vessel, it makes sense for the preparation beforehand for glory of the ‘vessels of mercy’ to have been done corporately, rather than individually. God was preparing what would happen to the ‘vessels of mercy’ collectively, rather than individually selecting who would be a ‘vessel of mercy’. Paul does not specify when this preparation beforehand took place. It may have been when God first decided to save a people in Christ. The glory this group has been prepared for seems to be future resurrection glory.

The ‘vessels of wrath’ are also in a corporate situation. They are ‘prepared for destruction’ – the final destination of the ‘vessels of wrath’ has been fixed, but God gives individual ‘vessels of wrath’ an opportunity to repent and change categories.

This corporate understanding fits with the context of the verses, which have been distinguishing between two categories of people: vessels of wrath/mercy and vessels for honourable/dishonourable use.

Even if an individualistic interpretation of the vessels were to be taken, this would not rule out the possibility of an individual vessel of wrath being able to change to become a vessel of mercy. Before an individual becomes a Christian, they are ‘prepared for destruction’, i.e. that is the destination in which they are heading. Even if God is taken as the agent doing the preparing, God has prepared them for destruction but could still relent from this. After an individual becomes a Christian, they become ‘prepared beforehand for glory’, i.e. they are prepared for glory before they reach resurrection glory. Paul does not specify how far ‘beforehand’ each individual is prepared for glory, but since each individual was once a ‘vessel of wrath’ before they became a ‘vessel of mercy’, God’s preparation of a person for glory could take place when the person becomes a Christian. Alternatively, God could prepare that person for future glory from an earlier point in time based on his knowledge that the person would trust in Christ in the future.

Although Paul starts verse 22 by saying ‘what if…’, it seems that Paul does believe that what follows is what God is actually doing (so Paul is not merely speculating). As mentioned above, he doesn’t finish the sentence, which breaks off at the end of verse 23. In the context of the previous verses (20-21), the point Paul seems to be making could be paraphrased as “what if God wanted to do X, [who would have the right to question that]?” – with the implied answer: no one. Paul is again pushing back against the ethnic Israelite objector who does not like what God is doing, as explained for verses 20-21.

In the next section, we will finish this portion of Romans 9 with verses 24-29.

Romans 9:24-29 – Whom Has God “Called”? What Does “Called” Mean?

In the previous section we looked at Romans 9:22-23. Continuing from the end of verse 23:

“…vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— [24] even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? [25] As indeed he says in Hosea, “Those who were not my people I will call ‘my people,’ and her who was not beloved I will call ‘beloved.’” [26] “And in the very place where it was said to them, ‘You are not my people,’ there they will be called ‘sons of the living God.’””

The words in verse 24 show that, while Paul was previously speaking specifically about ethnic Israelites (e.g. as the lump of clay in verse 21), he has now broadened the scope of his discussion to include Gentiles as well. If he had been talking about both ethnic Israelites and Gentiles before this, there would have been no need for him to specify ‘also from the Gentiles’ at this point.

The statement ‘not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles’ is another key “not… but…” statement by Paul in Romans 9. We have seen three of these already. First, there was ‘not the children of the flesh… but the children of the promise’ from Romans 9:8. Second, there was ‘not because of works but because of him who calls’ from Romans 9:11. Third, there was ‘not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God’ from Romans 9:16.

Paul is speaking of the inclusion of Gentiles into the church. Some of those who were not God’s people have become part of God’s people (verse 25, quoting from Hosea 2:23). Some who were once vessels of wrath have become vessels of mercy (as explained in the previous section). Note that these Gentiles were not always God’s people – they only became God’s people when they put their trust in Christ (see Romans 9:30 and Romans 11:20). Verse 26 (quoting from Hosea 1:10) similarly speaks of people transitioning from being “not God’s people” to being ‘sons of the living God’.

There is a strong emphasis here on God’s ‘call’. Verses 24 to 26 match in the structure with verses 10 to 13, which also refer to God’s call (end of verse 11). Paul is emphasising that those in the church have been called by God. They are not in the church due to their own works or their own ethnicity.

The word ‘call’ is best understood here in the sense of “appointed” or “named”. (An example of the “appointed” meaning from outside the Bible is how a barrister/attorney is said to have been “called to the bar”, which refers to their appointment to their role.) Paul begins his letter by stating ‘you also are the called of Jesus Christ’ and that his audience is ‘called as saints’ (Romans 1:6-7). 1 Corinthians 7:17-24 also shows that a person being ‘called’ by God refers to the time when they became a Christian.

On this understanding, verse 24 is using the word ‘called’ to identify those people God has appointed/named as his own. This fits with the next verses, which describe God doing exactly that. The beginning of verse 25 (‘as indeed he says in Hosea’) links this verse with the previous verse, so we should expect the “call” to be the same in both verses. It is not stated here how God decides whom to appoint/name as his own people, but we have seen before that God has chosen to do this to everyone who trusts in Christ.

The Greek word translated ‘call’ sometimes has the meaning “invite”, but this meaning does not fit as well here. Paul seems to be using the word to refer only to believers, but the “invitation” of the gospel goes out to all. If, for the sake of argument, the “invited” understanding were used in verse 24, the following situation would apply. Although Paul refers to those in the church as being ‘called’ (i.e. “invited” in this understanding), he does not say that those not in the church are not “invited”. We can be confident that he would not have considered those outside the church as not being “invited”, as such a view would be in conflict with other scriptures, such as the parable of the wedding feast in Matthew 22:1-14. Jesus uses this parable to explain the situation that many ethnic Israelites had not entered God’s kingdom. The king in the parable corresponds to God, and he ‘sent his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding feast, but they would not come’ (Matthew 22:3). (The word ‘call’ clearly has the “invited” meaning in this verse, given the context of the invitation to the wedding feast.) These invited people correspond to the ethnic Israelites, and they refuse to come to the feast despite being called to come. Then the king invites all others to come (corresponding to the Gentiles) and the wedding hall is filled with guests. In the parable, everyone gets invited. Only those who accept the call and put on a wedding garment will get to enjoy the feast (Matthew 22:11-13). Putting on a wedding garment presumably corresponds to relying on Christ to cover one’s sins (see Genesis 3:7 and 3:21 – this is what clothes are for). Jesus concludes the parable by saying that ‘many are called, but few are chosen’ (Matthew 22:14). The call (i.e. invitation) goes out to everyone, but God has chosen to appoint/name as his own people only those who accept the call and trust in Christ for the covering of their sins. It is clear from the parable that the king provided the same invitation to all the people; they were all called in the same way. What was different was how they responded, not how they were called.

The fact that all people are “invited” by God but only those who trust in him are “appointed”/“named” as one of his own people would further suggest that Paul’s use of the word ‘called’ to refer to believers in verse 24 is in the “appointed”/“named” sense, as only this sense properly distinguishes believers from non-believers. For consistency, it would seem appropriate to apply this meaning to the word ‘called’/‘calls’ in verses 7 and 11 as well.

Returning to Romans 9:

“[27] And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: “Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will be saved, [28] for the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth fully and without delay.” [29] And as Isaiah predicted, “If the Lord of hosts had not left us offspring, we would have been like Sodom and become like Gomorrah.””

Paul turns from the Gentiles to the ethnic Israelites. Verse 27 is quoting from Isaiah 10:22-23, and verse 28 is quoting from Isaiah 1:9. The references to the ‘sons of Israel’ and ‘offspring’ (i.e. ‘seed’) match with similar references in the corresponding part of the structure, Romans 9:6-9. The main point being made is the same too – not all ethnic Israelites will be saved; only some of them will be saved. Those ethnic Israelites who will be saved are those who have faith in Jesus (see Romans 9:32, Romans 11:7 and Romans 11:23).

The ‘remnant’ is also referred to in the corresponding part of the structure of Romans 9-11, in Romans 11:5.

The quote in verse 29 shows that no one in ethnic Israel deserves to be saved. It is only through God’s mercy that anyone is saved, as all have sinned (Romans 3:23) and are deserving of God’s punishment. As Paul concludes in Romans 11:32, ‘God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all’.

For those who have followed this article in order, that’s the end of our review of Romans 9-11! I’ve done this section of Romans 9 last as it can be the most difficult section to understand, and doing the rest first helps to make sure this bit is interpreted in a way that is consistent with the rest of chapters 9-11. In particular, chapter 11 answers some questions that are not addressed by Paul in chapter 9. Knowing where Paul is going helps us to understand the points he begins to make in chapter 9.

For those who haven’t followed this article in order, you can carry on from Romans 9:30 here.

In the next section, we will consider Romans 8:28-30. A particular interpretation of these verses is used by some people as a key to interpret Romans 9. We will consider different interpretations of these verses and whether the verses should be used in this way to determine our understanding of Romans 9.

Romans 8:28-30 and Its Relevance to Romans 9

A significant number of Christians do not interpret Romans 9:6-29 in the way that I have set out in this article. Very often, Romans 8:28-30 is used to support an argument for a different interpretation of Romans 9. It is therefore important that we consider these verses, to see whether the interpretation I have put forward is consistent with them. Before considering these verses in detail, I would like to note a few things:

First, as we have seen from the structure of the whole of Romans, Romans 9-11 forms a single section of the letter. When interpreting Romans 9, it therefore makes sense first to ensure that Romans 9 is interpreted in a manner that is consistent with chapters 10 and 11, before considering chapter 8. Of course, the correct interpretation of Romans 9 will be consistent with all of Romans, but considering the immediate context before parts of the letter that are less closely related is a good procedure to ensure proper interpretation.

Second, we have also seen that Romans 9-11 has a parallel section earlier in Romans, which is Romans 3:1 to 4:25. After making sure our interpretation of Romans 9 fits with chapters 10 and 11, we should then make sure it fits with this earlier section in Romans, as Paul addresses similar concepts in the two sections.

Third, once we have an interpretation of Romans 9 that fits with these closely related parts of Romans (which I believe is where we have got to), we can check that our interpretation fits with the rest of the letter, including Romans 8. We will do this now, and I hope you will agree that these verses from Romans 8 do not conflict with the proposed interpretation of Romans 9.

It is understandable that people would refer to Romans 8:28-30 in relation to Romans 9, as it does appear soon before it in the text. However, as the structural analysis has shown, it is in a different section of the letter, so it should not take priority over parts of the letter in the same section (chapters 9-11) or the parallel section (3:1-4:25).

Sadly, some people tend to read more into these verses than what they actually say, and draw conclusions about non-Christians or about how people become Christians or who will become a Christian. As I will demonstrate, these verses are not addressing these issues. They are explaining that God causes all things to work together for good for people who are already believers. The verses are not speaking of God determining who will love him, but are speaking of God determining what happens to those who do love him.

We will first consider my preferred understanding of Romans 8:28-30. We will then consider some translation decisions that were made, and then some alternative understandings.

Preferred understanding

As shown in the structural overview of Romans 8, the central verse of the chapter is verse 18: ‘For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us’. On either side of this verse (in verses 12-17 and 19-30) is a consideration of what I have summarised as “glory through suffering for the children of God”. Verses 12-17 focus mainly on the present, while verses 19-30 focus mainly on the future. Verse 18 acts as a transition between these. The outermost parts of the chapter (verses 1-11 and 31-39) explain that there is ‘no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus’ (verse 1, see also verse 34).

Here is Romans 8:28:

“[28] And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.”

The people whom Paul is talking about are ‘those who love God’. He is talking about Christians. This fits with what Paul has been saying throughout chapter 8. The chapter begins with ‘there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus’. The chapter also ends with another use of the term ‘in Christ Jesus’ (8:39).

Just before verses 28-30, Paul refers to ‘us’ and ‘we’ (verse 26), who are ‘the saints’ (verse 27) – i.e. Christians. Verse 28 is similar to Romans 1:7, when Paul addresses the audience of his letter: ‘To all who are in Rome, loved by God, called as saints’. All of the underlined words appear in verse 28, and ‘saints’ appears at the end of verse 27.

The reference to ‘those who are called according to [God’s] purpose’ (verse 28) is also a reference to Christians. ‘Called’ in this verse is best understood as “appointed”, i.e. Christians are “appointed according to God’s purpose”. (An example from outside the Bible is how a barrister/attorney is said to have been “called to the bar”, which refers to their appointment to their role.) This is consistent with Romans 1:7 (as referred to above), in which Paul’s audience is said to be ‘called as saints’, and Romans 1:6, in which Paul states that ‘you also are the called of Jesus Christ’. 1 Corinthians 7:17-24 also shows that a person being ‘called’ by God refers to the time when they became a Christian. The phrase ‘called according to [God’s] purpose’ does not give us any information about how God decides whom he will call, or what the process of someone being ‘called’ involves. (The word ‘called’ is discussed further with reference to Romans 9:24-29.) While the ‘purpose’ to which these Christians are called is not defined explicitly, it is likely to be in line with what follows in verses 29-30, i.e. that these Christians who love God will (eventually) be ‘conformed to the image of [God’s] Son’ and ‘glorified’ (see discussion of these verses below).

Just after verses 28-30, Paul again refers to ‘us’ and ‘we’ (verses 31 and 32). Verse 33 then states ‘who shall bring any charge against God’s elect?’ The elect are the same people Paul has been speaking about, i.e. Christians. We have seen from chapter 11 that God’s elect are all who are currently trusting in Christ. The “elect” does not include those who will trust in Christ in the future but are not yet doing so. When an individual person puts their faith in Christ and becomes a Christian, they become ‘in Christ’, they become a ‘saint’, they become ‘called’, and they become ‘elect’ (as they have joined the elect (chosen) people of God, sharing in the chosenness of God’s Son). Before they trusted Christ, they were not ‘in Christ’, they were not a ‘saint’, they were not ‘called’, and they were not ‘elect’. (If your understanding of the term “elect” is different from this, please see the important discussion from chapter 11 linked earlier in this paragraph.)

Having established whom Paul is talking about, we can see that in verse 28, Paul is giving assurance to his Christian audience (those who love God) that things will work out for good for them. This would have provided great comfort to his original audience. The context is that his Christian audience can expect to go through suffering (verses 17 and 18). All things will work together for their good as they will ultimately share in Christ’s glory (verse 17).

The next verse (29) starts with the word ‘for’. It is beginning an explanation of why Paul’s audience can have assurance that all things will work out for good for those who love God. How can his audience be confident that suffering will result in glory for those who love God? What evidence does Paul have of this? The evidence Paul refers to is the past generations of those who have loved God, who have completed their life-journeys through suffering:

“[29] For those whom he knew before he also destined before to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.”

Verse 29 is looking back at God’s dealings with faithful believers in the past. The context is those who love God (verse 28), so those whom God ‘knew before’ are those who loved God in the past (see translation discussion below). These verses therefore provide assurance that what Paul said in verse 28 is true. Paul’s audience can be confident that all things will work out for good for those who love God, because that is what has already happened to those who loved God in the past.

Regarding the faithful believers of the past, God destined for them before that something would happen to them: that they would be ‘conformed to the image of his Son’. The reason for this was to get a family of brothers and sisters ready in advance for Jesus, so that Jesus would (in the future from their perspective – hence the future orientation) be ‘the firstborn among many brothers and sisters’. I take this as referring to Jesus being the first to be born into resurrection life. After his resurrection, Jesus is referred to as being the ‘firstborn from among the dead’ (Col 1:18) and the ‘firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep’ (1 Cor 15:20). At the time of Jesus’ resurrection, although he was the first to be “born”, he already had many brothers and sisters because there already were many faithful believers already “asleep” (i.e. who had already died before the time of Jesus’ resurrection). This is why Jesus was ‘the firstborn among many brothers and sisters’. The number of faithful believers who are “asleep” is increasing as more Christians reach the end of their lives. When Jesus returns, all of these people together – Jesus’ brothers and sisters – will be “born” into resurrection life.

“[30] And those whom he destined before he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.”

Verse 30 continues to speak of the faithful believers who died in the past, to show that all things worked out for good for them: they were ‘called’ (i.e. “appointed” – see above regarding verse 28) by God as his own people, they were ‘justified’ and they were ‘glorified’. Jesus said: ‘Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?’ (Luke 24:26). The pattern is suffering in life and then glory through death. This pattern is repeated by present believers, as Paul states in Romans 8:17: ‘provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him’. Present believers can look back to believers from the past who have already completed their time of suffering and have reached glory with Christ (having held firm in their faith until death), while those present believers are still undergoing present sufferings and are still looking forward to their future glory. Paul uses the same tense for every verb in verse 30, and these are consistently translated as past tense in English, including the final verb, ‘glorified’, because he is looking back to past generations who have already reached glory. Glory is a future reality for those currently still alive (8:17). The people from past generations have reached glory through suffering in a way that mirrors what Jesus did, which is why they have been ‘conformed to the image of his Son’ (verse 29). The fact they have reached glory shows that all things did indeed ‘work together for good’ for them (verse 28).

Glorification (brief discussion)

There are other verses in the Bible that link suffering and death with glory, which helps to explain why a believer who has died can be considered to have been glorified, even before they are raised from the dead themselves.

For example, Hebrews 2:9-10 speaks of suffering and glory:

“But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honour because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. In bringing many sons and daughters to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through what he suffered.”

In Mark 10:37-40, James and John ask Jesus if they may sit ‘one on your right and one on your left, in your glory’. Jesus declines, saying that the places at his right and his left ‘belong to those for whom they have been prepared’. Mark 15:27 states that ‘they crucified two criminals with him, one on his right and one on his left’. This is the moment of Jesus’ glory that he is referring to when he replies to James and John. James and John did not realise they were actually asking to be crucified next to Jesus, which is why Jesus replied in Mark 10:38 that ‘you don’t know what you’re asking. Are you able to drink the cup I drink or to be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?’. This is therefore an example of the term “glory” being associated with death after suffering (as in Romans 8:17-18).

Other mentions of glory following suffering are in 1 Peter 1:11, 4:13, 5:1 and 5:10.

Translation decisions

I will now explain some of the translation decisions involved in the translation used above.

“Knew before” / “foreknew”

The phrase “knew before” I have used above in Romans 8:29 is often translated as “foreknew” in modern translations of this verse. These modern translations follow the King James Version (KJV) in translating it that way. However, prior to the KJV, other translations were used for this term. Both William Tyndale and John Wycliffe’s Bible translations use “knew before”. The Jubilee Bible, which translates into English an early Spanish translation by Casiodoro de Reina, a contemporary of William Tyndale, uses “knew beforehand”. The reference to those whom God “knew before” in verse 29 fits with the view that verse 28 is about present believers (from Paul’s perspective), and verses 29-30 are about past believers.

The significance of this difference is that the English word “foreknew” refers to knowledge of something before it happens/exists – knowledge that looks ahead into the future from sometime in the past, whereas “knew before” does not carry this implication. For example, I can say that my grandfather (who passed away a few years ago) is someone I “knew before” – I knew him in the past while he was still alive. It would be very different for me to say that I “foreknew” my grandfather – that I knew him in advance from before he existed!

The usage of this term in Romans 8:29 to refer specifically to believers (from the past) is consistent with the use of the term “known” in the Bible – for a person to be “known” by God refers to more than his mere knowledge about them, but includes a relational aspect as well.

The same Greek word is used in Romans 11:2. Similarly, many modern translations follow the King James Version in using the word “foreknew” instead of “knew before” (as I have proposed). However, the translation “knew before” appears in the Tyndale Bible and in Young’s Literal Translation (from 1862). John Wycliffe has “before-knew”, and the The Jubilee Bible has “knew beforehand”. In this verse, the reference to God’s people whom he “knew before”/“foreknew” is immediately followed by a reference to God’s people in the past – the ethnic Israelites of Elijah’s generation, so the meaning “knew before” fits perfectly with that. Paul is looking back to God’s dealings with these people in the past, and there is no reason to add in an element of God’s knowledge of these people from a point in time even further in the past, with God looking into the future from a time before they existed.

The relevant Greek word appears in other places in the New Testament as well, for example in Paul’s speech in Acts 26:5, where it is not translated as “foreknew” (including by the KJV and popular modern translations). Acts 26:4-5 states:

“[4] The Jewish people all know the way I have lived ever since I was a child, from the beginning of my life in my own country, and also in Jerusalem. [5] They have known me for a long time and can testify, if they are willing, that I conformed to the strictest sect of our religion, living as a Pharisee.”

The knowledge that these Jewish people had about Paul was not foreknowledge (knowledge of Paul in advance of his existence). It was knowledge from the past, because they knew Paul in the past. Their knowledge of Paul coincided with the existence of Paul.

The relevant Greek word therefore does not necessarily imply a future-knowing element, but the English word “foreknew” does imply this, which makes the word “foreknew” a flawed translation as it brings in a meaning not present in the original Greek and not apparent from the context of this word in Romans 8:29.

In theology, God’s “foreknowledge” refers to his knowledge of the future. This creates a further issue, as when people read the word “foreknew”, they tend to read-in their theological understanding of God’s “foreknowledge” into the text. I believe that God does have this kind of knowledge, but that it is not in view in Romans 8:29 (or the other verses discussed above).

“Destined before” / “predestined”

The Greek word translated as “destined before” has a similar form to the word translated as “knew before”, and I have translated it in a similar way for consistency. Tyndale translated it as “ordained before” and Wycliffe has “before-ordained”. The Jubilee Bible has ‘for unto those who he knew beforehand, he also marked out beforehand the way that they might be conformed to the image of his Son’. The word does not give any detail as to exactly when the destining/ordaining/marking-out took place, other than that it was in the past. It may simply be referring to what God did during the lives of the believers from the past in order to ensure they became conformed to the image of his Son.

Many modern translations use “predestined” (again following the KJV), which again carries theological baggage that is not necessarily present in the original text. The situation is therefore similar to that discussed above regarding “knew before”/“foreknew”.

Alternative interpretations

The “corporate” interpretation

I will now explain the “corporate” interpretation of these verses. This interpretation does not use the same translation decisions as the above interpretation. Although I prefer the interpretation above, I consider the corporate interpretation also to be reasonable.

In Romans 8:28-30 (and throughout the chapter), Paul is speaking of those who are currently trusting in Christ. Of those people who are not currently trusting in Christ, some of them will come to trust in Christ later and some of them will not, but Paul is not speaking of those people. This will help us in understanding Romans 8:28-30.

Looking at verse 28 in more detail, it says ‘and we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose’. As we have seen, in these verses Paul is speaking of ‘those who love God’ – those who are currently Christians. He states that these people are ‘called according to his purpose’, and his purpose is a good purpose. God’s purpose for them is described in verse 29:

“For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.”

The purpose God has for Christians is that they will be ‘brothers and sisters’ of Jesus. Jesus is the ‘firstborn’ because he has already risen from the dead.

Verse 29 begins with ‘those whom he foreknew’. In this interpretation, these are the same people as those being spoken of in verse 28 – people who are Christians. Verse 29 tells us that Christians have been foreknown by God. No details of this foreknowledge are given here. Paul does not say on what basis Christians have been foreknown by God, or whether this foreknowledge has anything to do with the process of a person becoming a Christian.

This verse does not conflict with the understanding that God ‘foreknew’ the church primarily as a corporate group, with the focus of these verses being on the blessings that apply to the church. The individuals in the church (who correspond to ‘those’) get these blessings as a result of their membership of the church. Whether an individual person is a member of the church depends on whether or not he/she trusts in Christ. However, the status and future of the church as a corporate entity is fixed and is independent of the actions of individuals within it. The church was “foreknown” by God, and when a person becomes a Christian, he/she becomes a member of the group of those “foreknown” by God. This corresponds to the “corporate election” view, which I have discussed in more detail with respect to Romans 11:7-10. (Another possibility not ruled out by this verse is that Christians are “foreknown” by God because God looked into the future and foresaw that they will trust in Christ.)

These verses do not give enough information to determine which of these understandings of God’s foreknowledge is correct (or if another view is correct instead). The main point is that these verses do not rule out such understandings, and therefore cannot be used to disprove these views.

Verse 29 goes on to state that Christians, who have been foreknown by God, have been ‘predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son’. The predestination refers to a “what” rather than a “who”. The “who” has been set out already, and is “Christians”. The “what” that has been predestined is that they will be conformed to the image of Jesus. The “why” is to give brothers and sisters for Jesus. This verse therefore does not say that God has predestined who will become a Christian; it only says that those who are Christians have been predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son.

Verse 30 continues with ‘and those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified’. The beginning of the verse refers to ‘those whom he predestined’. We know from the discussion above that this is referring to Christians. So verse 30 sets out a list of blessings that apply to Christians. Christians have been predestined, called, justified and glorified.

Although the word ‘glorified’ is translated in the past tense in English, it is commonly considered to be a reference to the future glory to be received by Christians in the resurrection. The argument is that Paul can speak of it in the past tense because he is so certain that it will happen. Another possibility is that it refers to the glory that Christians have received already (hence the past tense) due to the fact that Christ has already been glorified, and Christians are “in Christ” and therefore share in his blessings. (I prefer the second of these two options for this interpretation.)

The links between the items in verse 30 show that all Christians get to enjoy the whole package of blessings. There are no Christians for whom God withholds certain items from the list. This gives great assurance to those who are trusting in Christ that God ‘will freely give us [i.e. Christians] all things’ (verse 32).

I hope you have seen that these verses from Romans 8 do not conflict with the interpretation of the sections of Romans that we have considered already. All of the interpretations discussed so far are consistent with this article.

Another common understanding

There are some who believe that, before God created the world, he determined the future such that there would be some specific individuals in the future whom he would cause to trust in him and be saved, while there would be other specific individuals whom he would not cause to trust in him and who would therefore not be saved. The individuals determined in advance by God to trust in him and be saved are considered to have been specially loved in advance by God from before God made the world – they are considered to have been “foreloved”, i.e. “foreknown”. All individuals who eventually are caused to trust in God are considered to have always been “foreknown” by God, while the individuals who are not caused to do this are not considered to be “foreknown” by God (God knew that they would exist, but his special “foreknowing” love was not intended for them).

In this understanding, Romans 8:29-30 is considered to be describing the people God chose to save from before he made the world, i.e. those he ‘foreknew’. These verses therefore relate to all of God’s chosen people as individuals throughout past, present and future. Although all of the items in the list of verse 30 are in the same tense (translated into the past tense in English), the verse has to be interpreted in a more complex way to fit this understanding with respect to present believers, who have not yet been “glorified”. The typical way in which this issue is attempted to be resolved is that the past tense of “glorified” is considered to reflect the certainty that it will take place in the future (as discussed for one of the interpretations above). However, this conflicts with Romans 8:17, in which the reference to being “glorified” is in a future perspective, and the same people are considered to be in view on both occasions in this understanding. In contrast, the preferred interpretation put forward above has different people in view in these two instances of the word “glorified”. The future perspective is used with respect to believers who are still alive, while the past perspective is used for believers who have died. That is a much simpler explanation.

This problem with “glorified” being in the past perspective gets even worse when future believers are considered (i.e. those who had not yet started believing at Paul’s time of writing, but who had been chosen by God to become believers in the future). While individual believers of the past and present can be said to have been “called” and “justified”, this is not true for people who have not yet started to trust in Christ but who will do so in the future. Adherents of this view would usually acknowledge that a person is not “called” or “justified” until they become a believer. However, such persons must be included in the past perspective wording of having been “called” and “justified” (as well as “glorified”) because the verse is considered to be referring to God’s chosen people throughout all time.

People with this view tend to understand the term “called” to refer to an “effectual call”, which irresistibly causes the chosen recipient of the call to respond in faith. This understanding is not apparent from the text.

Another problem with this view is that, while the people God “foreknew” in Romans 8:29 are considered to be all of God’s chosen people throughout time (who receive God’s special love and are justified etc.), in Romans 11:2 Paul states that God “foreknew” the ethnic Israelites (not all of whom were true believers, therefore not all of whom were justified). The definition of “foreknew” does not fit comfortably with both verses. In contrast, the “knew before” interpretation put forward above does not have this problem – there is no inconsistency with God “knowing before” both ethnic Israelites and believers from the past.

None of these problems exists for the preferred interpretation that was discussed first in this section.

Conclusion

I have shown that there are a number of different possible interpretations of Romans 8:28-30. It would therefore be unwise for someone to use their preferred interpretation of Romans 8:28-30 to dictate how Romans 9 should be understood. We should instead initially focus our interpretation of Romans 9 on how it fits with the rest of its section (Romans 9-11) and how it fits with its parallel section (Romans 1:16 to 4:25). After doing this, we can consider how Romans 9 fits with Romans 8:28-30.

Of all the interpretations put forward above, only the last one does not fit with our analysis of Romans 9-11 in this article. This interpretation also has more problems than the others, as explained above. It is therefore reasonable to dismiss the last interpretation of these verses, leaving the remaining interpretations as plausible options.

It would not be reasonable to take the position that the last interpretation is correct and then to use this to force a corresponding understanding of Romans 9-11. An important reason for this is that Romans 8 does not address questions such as “how does God decide whom to save?”, “how does someone become a Christian?”, and “why are some saved and not others?”. It would therefore be unwise to use three verses from a passage that is not about these questions as a key to understanding chapters 9-11, which directly address these questions in detail. It makes more sense to let the chapters that address these questions be our primary source for answering them. That is why Romans 9-11 was considered before these verses of Romans 8 in this series.

Romans 9-11 Bible Study Questions

Here are some questions for a Bible Study doing an overview of Romans 9-11. Underneath are some suggested answers. The questions are grouped into four sections (see the four headings below). One way to do the study is for everyone to do the first section together, then split into three groups doing one of the remaining sections each, then come back together with each group taking turns to talk through their answers.

Romans 9:1-5

1. Why is Paul so upset?
2. What is it that Paul has taught earlier in Romans that shows these ethnic Israelites are in this situation?

Romans 9:6-29

3. What does Paul have to say to people who don’t like his teaching that God saves those who have faith, and who think that God should save ethnic Israelites because of their ethnicity and/or their works of the law instead?

Romans 9:30-10:21

4. Whose fault is it that these ethnic Israelites are not currently in a right-standing with God? (see Romans 9:30-10:3 and 10:14-21)
5. Paul repeats his earlier teaching about who God saves – what is this teaching? Why is this good news for us? (see Romans 10:4-13)

Romans 11:1-36

6. Is there any hope for ethnic Israelites to be saved, or has God rejected them? (see Romans 11:1-32)
7. Why is Paul so happy in Romans 11:33-36?

Suggested Answers

Romans 9:1-5

1. Paul is upset because many of his fellow ethnic Israelites are not in a right-standing with God.
2. Justification/salvation is based on who has faith, not ethnicity/works, so unbelieving ethnic Israelites aren’t included.

Romans 9:6-29

3. God is under no obligation to save ethnic Israelites – he chooses who he wants to save.

Romans 9:30-10:21

4. It’s their fault – they didn’t seek righteousness by faith and did not believe.
5. God saves all who believe. This is good news for us because Gentiles are allowed in.

Romans 11:1-36

6. Yes, God hasn’t rejected them and they can be grafted back in.
7. The ethnic Israelites he cares about can still be saved (see the verses just before 11:33-36).