It's Not Who You Are or What You've Done.

As stated in a previous article, Now Paul has, in this passage so far given to us two hermeneutical (interpretive) principles as to how to read and understand the Old Testament. 

Principle #1: Everything culminates in the Messiah, Jesus Christ.  Everything!

Principle #2: The saving promises to Israel apply ONLY to believing Israel.

Now Paul's point is that this ought to be no surprise.  Rather than claim some new revelation as if this had never come up before, he takes the reader right back to the Old Testament.  Thus we read in Romans 9:6–13 (ESV),

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 are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring 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 offspring. ⁹ For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.” 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 continue, 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.”

Paul now intends to prove this idea that God never intended that all Israel could claim these redemptive promises, but only a part within the whole.  He takes us back to Genesis 21.  There we read: “But God said to Abraham, “Be not displeased because of the boy and because of your slave woman. Whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” (Genesis 21:12, ESV).  The comparison is between Ishmael and Isaac.  Ishmael who was the offspring of Abraham according to the flesh did receive material blessings (cf: Genesis 17:20; 21:13) but not the spiritual blessings promised through Isaac.

What is unique about Isaac is emphasized here: "Isaac was unique in that he was the child who was promised. God's purpose was centered in him before he was born. It was God, in fact, not man, who set the time of his birth. Apart from divine enablement to the parents, Isaac would never have been born, for Abraham was impotent and Sarah was no longer able to bear children."[1]  Christians ought to immediately start to see what is been presented here: Isaac was (as it were) "born from above"[2] and apart from the "new birth", nobody can claim redemptive blessings.  Thus Jesus could say to Nicodemus when discussing this topic:  “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things?” (John 3:10, ESV).

Now an opponent might suggest: "OK, that's a no brainer.  Ishmael and Isaac may have had the same father, Abraham, but they had different mothers and Ishmael's mother was an Egyptian slave. So Ishmael never did count in the line of covenant blessing."  So Paul then takes a different example.  Now the father is Isaac and it’s the same mother, Rebekah.  The sons are Jacob and Esau and they are both twins!  [how much more similar is that?]  But there's another problem that Paul needs to overcome with the Ishmael/Isaac.  They were both young teens when the separation occurred.  Perhaps someone would say that God's choice of blessing is based upon what they did.  So Paul provides a clearer example:

“though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls— she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”” (Romans 9:11–13, ESV) [emphasis mine]

 "Yet Paul advances that God, in His sovereignty, supersedes the process of natural primogenitureship and chooses Jacob the younger to be served by Esau the elder."^[3]  " The birth of Esau and Jacob is further evidence that God did not promise that every person of Jewish descent would be saved, for they had the same father and mother and were even twins, and yet God chose Jacob and not Esau."^[4]

Please do not miss the stress of Paul:  One of these twins receives the promises of redemption and it has absolutely nothing to do with what they have or have not done.  It has nothing to do with "works". Paul makes his case decisively by quoting Malachi 1:2, that says:  ² “I have loved you,” says the Lord. But you say, “How have you loved us?” “Is not Esau Jacob’s brother?” declares the Lord. “Yet I have loved Jacob. 

Remember the main thrust of this part of Paul's letter: the Word of God has not failed.  His answer is that it has not failed in those whom God has made His promise with.  And those whom God has made His promise with do not include all of national Israel, but only a portion within.  On what basis did God make His promise with these few?  On the basis of election.  " Election is not based on foreseen actions, deeds, or faith. Rather, it is based on God’s sovereign predestinating grace.^[5]

In the next article I will try to discuss clearly the controversial statement: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

_____________________________________________

Previous Blogs on this topic:

1	The Truth. The Whole Truth. And Nothing But The Truth	Romans 9:1-2
2	How They Have Fallen!	Romans 9:3-5
3	Proceeding From or Belong To. The Difference is Life and Death.	Romans 9:6–9
4
5
6

---

[1] Expositor's Bible Commentary, The, Pradis CD-ROM:Romans/Exposition of Romans/VI. The Problem of Israel: God's Righteousness Vindicated (9:1-11:36)/B. God's Choice of Israel Based on Election, Not on Natural Generation or Works of Merit (9:6-13), Book Version: 4.0.2

[2] “But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.” (John 1:12–13, ESV) 

^[3] Hindson, E. E., & Kroll, W. M. (Eds.). (1994). KJV Bible Commentary (p. 2247). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

^[4] Crossway Bibles. (2008). The ESV Study Bible (p. 2173). Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles.

^[5] Whitlock, L. G., Sproul, R. C., Waltke, B. K., & Silva, M. (1995). The Reformation study Bible: bringing the light of the Reformation to Scripture: New King James Version (Ro 9:11). Nashville: T. Nelson.