I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,
Coming off of the emotional high in Romans 8:38-39, we have a completely new thought, and much different in tone beginning here in chapter 9. In this verse we are told that this thing coming up is emphatically true. Paul is speaking the truth in Christ, also saying that the Holy Ghost bears witness with his thoughts. With this type of an introduction, we would do well to heed what is coming up. This thought will actually take a couple of chapters to get fully out, but is so utterly important for the Christian today to understand.
The Greek is just slightly different after "I say the truth in Christ, I lie not." I'm going to put a literal translation with the case and articles since I feel the articles are important. It says "bearing witness with (Genitive) me (Dative) the conscience (Genitive) of me (Genitive) in the Holy Spirit (Dative)." Now putting the like cases together, it says, "I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience bearing witness with me in the Holy Spirit." It is just a slight difference, but does change the meaning.
That words for "conscience" and "bearing witness with" are the same words back in chapter 2 and verse 15.
Romans 9:2
That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.
Very clearly, Paul is distressed and in anguish over something. We'll find out what and who soon. The translation here is quite good, as it typically is, but by now it should be expected to see some Greek from me anyway. The verse literally says
That grief to me is great, and unceasing sorrow to the heart of me.
The word for "heaviness" in the English is lupe, which means distress or vexation [1]. The word for "continual" is "adialeiptos," which is a compound word of a (opposite or no) and dialeipo (an interval). I feel this gives us a better picture of what the apostle Paul was going through. He was clearly filled with grief and every day, without fail, endured sorrow in his heart.
Aren't each of us that way? Don't we all have loved ones that we wish would understand who we are in Christ and the good news that we believe? Don't we wish that they would desire to be in Christ with us and enjoy all the spiritual blessings in the heavenlies as we do (Eph 1:3)? Sadly, this fight of good versus evil will continue until that beautiful day when Christ calls us home to Heaven (1 Thess 4:16-17). Even so, I will continue to pray for my loved ones to understand the truth of God's Word, and be liberated from sin and death by placing their faith in what Jesus Christ did on the cross.
Romans 9:3
For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
The apostle Paul was a very compassionate man. It would be hard to guess that while reading about him when he was known as Saul of Tarsus in Acts 7 and 8, but he was radically changed when he encountered Jesus Christ. Jesus has that effect on people. We see that Paul would go through anything, even so far as sacrificing himself away from Christ if his kinsmen according to the flesh would be changed. Who are these kinsmen according to the flesh? The answer is in the next verse, but I'll give the spoiler: Israel. Paul is an Israelite and even call himself a Hebrew of Hebrews (Phil 3:5). Paul emphatically states, calling witness to Christ Himself (verse 1) that he would go to any length to save Israel to show how much he cares for his native countrymen.
Greek time. The phrase "I could wish" comes from the Greek euchomai, which means to offer a request. It's not as strong as the Greek proseuchomai (pros = toward, euchomai = offer request), which is always translated as pray in one form or another. Paul is admitting that he was willing to give up his salvation so that Israel would attain it as a nation. What's interesting is that euchomai is in the imperfect tense here, so a more accurate translation may be "For I was wishing myself to be a curse..." Remember what he just said in verse 2? This is continuously causing him sorrow.
The word for accursed here is "anathema" which only occurs six times: Acts 23:14, Rom 9:3, 1 Cor 12:3, 1 Cor 16:22, Gal 1:8, Gal 1:9. The term itself literally means to "up place" - Ana means up and tithemi means to place or set. Thayer gives this definition:
A thing set up or laid by in order to be kept; specifically a votive offering, which after being consecrated to a god was hung upon the walls or columns of his temple, or put in some other conspicuous place [2]
From looking at these words, it seems like Paul was wishing that he would be offered up from Christ, or used in such a way that brought them all to repentance. I get that because that word "for" is huper, which means on behalf of or from above. Here's a literal translation:
Was wishing indeed an offering (anathema) to be myself, I from the Christ on behalf (huper) of the brothers of me, of the kinsmen of me, according to the flesh.
What I don't see in this verse is Paul wishing he would be doomed to Hell in order to save Israel. From looking at these Greek lexicons, I'm getting the idea that anathema doesn't mean cursed as in destined for Hell, but rather being offered to God to be dealt with. Even when anathema is used in Galatians 1, it seems as though Paul wants any false gospel to stand out, or for God to shot it to be so conspicuous, so that the truth of the gospel might continue with the saints of God's dispensation of grace (Gal 2:5). In Acts 23:14, it's the offer made to God, a vow, that the particular band of Jews made, which they could in no wise break without severe consequence. In that sense I can see the concept of a curse, but here in Romans 9:3, Paul wants to be the thing offered up. He was willing to give everything for his fellow countrymen.
Romans 9:4
Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
If there was any mystery as to who Paul's brothers and kinsmen were according to the flesh, he makes it very clear here as Israelites. It should be no wonder why he would want them all saved. He gives plenty of reasons here. They were given everything and every opportunity to come to faith. They had the adoption, glory, covenants, law, services, and promises at their fingertips. They had the history and miracles that were witnessed and talked of throughout the world. Yet as a nation, they rejected their Messiah and crucified Jesus Christ. Then it was apparent that Christ was real, appearing to many by many infallible proofs (Acts 1:3), yet they still rejected the offer of the kingdom. Compare Acts 3:11-26 with Peter's offer to the sad reaction of the leaders in Acts 4.
It is so very interesting that the word adoption is the same word we encountered in chapter 8 of Romans. It is the compound word of huios (son or rightful heir) and tithemi (set or place). We saw tithemi used in verse 4 in the word anathema, now we see it here as part of adoption. Israel had their placement of adoption as well, as promised through Abraham IF they obeyed God's voice indeed and kept the Law (Ex 19:5-6). Today under the gospel of grace, we inherit all spiritual blessings in the heavenlies IF we place our faith in the finished work of Christ on the cross. Same God, same Christ, but we live by different rules right now and have a different expectation or hope right now (heavenly versus earthly), in order to provoke Israel to jealousy and come back to the faith to play out the rest of prophecy (Rom 11:11-12, 25, 32). I'll cover more of that in chapter 11.
I think it's worth pointing out that this verse is word for word with the Greek except the "of God" is not there. It just says, "and the service, and the promises."
Romans 9:5
Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
Paul concludes his list of things that Israel had, culminating in the ultimate: the Christ. Jesus came through Israel according to the flesh and walked upon this earth among them. The promise began with Abraham, then it passed to Isaac, then to Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel. They were the fathers according to the flesh, and why God is referred to as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex 3:6, Matt 22:32). Israel was blessed to be the nation through which the prophecy in Genesis 3:15 was fulfilled. Jesus is the Christ, and this verse in the Greek shows that He is also God.
It is my opinion that the English deviates from the original too much in this verse when it talks about Christ. First, the phrase "and of whom" is really "and out of whom" as the preposition "ek" is there. The word "concerning" is really "according to" as the preposition kata is there. Then we get to the rest of the verse. We run into difficulty because in the original Greek language, there is no punctuation so the sentence structure is completely defined in the context. I'll put the literal translation, then talk about it:
Of whom are the fathers and out of whom the Christ the according to flesh the is upon (Greek epi) all God blessed to the (Greek eis) ages (Greek aionas) amen.
Once you get passed the headache of reading the word order in the English, I have to point this out. It certainly can help to see the verse with no punctuation as it is written in the Greek, but there's further meaning in the parsing which makes it far easier to understand. Keep in mind that word order doesn't matter in the Greek nearly so much as the parsing. To my understanding, word order shows more emphasis than it does sentence structure. As we look at the latter half of this verse, the following words are in the nominative, meaning they are the main subject: the (noun), Christ (noun), God (noun), blessed (adjective), and is (verb). The following are in the accusative, meaning they are the direct object of the verbs: the (noun), flesh (noun), the (noun), ages (noun). The verse could then be arranged this way in English. I will highlight the words with similar parsing: yellow will be the nominative. blue will be the accusative
Of whom are the fathers, and out of whom the Christ, according to the flesh, the blessed God, is upon all to the ages, amen.
That to me is a significant difference. The Christ is being equated with the blessed (The Greek word means worthy to be praised) God. It should be understood that the Christ was not given simply for Israel, but for all. That includes both Jews and Gentiles. God addressed that in Romans 3:29. However, for the sake of argument, we can arrange it this way also:
Of whom are the fathers, and out of whom the Christ according to the flesh is the God upon all, blessed (referring potentially back to Israel) to the ages, amen.
I will say I don't buy into this translation at all. The context does go back to verses 3 and 4 where Paul is focusing on Israel, who are his brothers and kinsmen according to the flesh. They are the main subject of this whole thought covered in these first 5 verses of Romans 9, so a nominative adjective could be referring back to Israel. In that defense, Israel was to be a blessed nation through which all other nations would be blessed (Gen 22:17-18). That being said, though, the immediate context goes into a praise of God Almighty who gave us the Christ. The word "blessed" here is eulogetos, where we get our word eulogy from, and means "speak well of" or "to celebrate by praising" [1]. It should be noted that this word is ONLY used referring to God in the New Testament (Mark 14:61, Luke 1:68, Rom 1:25, Rom 9:5, 2 Cor 1:3, Eph 1:3, 1 Pet 1:3). The same phrase here is found in Rom 1:25. Therefore, I stand by that Romans 9:5 is referring to Christ's deity, and that Jesus Christ is fully God, fully man, and is worthy of our praise to the ages.
Romans 9:6
Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
After just saying that Israel is not being saved and Paul was willing to be offered up so that they would, the Holy Spirit inspired Paul to be quick to tell us that the Word of God has not failed. Then we are told why: Israel was meant to be more than just flesh and blood. Those that God is calling Israel aren't just the ones born in a plot of land or of certain fathers. God will expound on this concept in the ensuing verses.
We run into another partial headache when reading the Greek here. I could say that this verse is translated well in the English, because it is what the Greek implies. But I can't just take the easy way out and leave it at that. Here's a literal translation so my pain can be shared:
Not in the manner of now that has failed the word of the God, not indeed all the ones out of Israel to those Israel
Note that there is a definite article denoting the God here. There is also an untranslated "de" which I translated as "now" above. This verse has a lot of articles and not many verbs which makes English a bit tricky, but again the KJV gets the point across. Of further note is the word "taken none effect" which is the word ekpipto. That is a compound word of ek (out of) and pipto (to fall). What is being said there is that it isn't like God's word to fall down. It isn't like God's word to have no effect. I think of the phrase in 1 Samuel 3:19 when it is said that "the LORD was with [Samuel], and did let none of his words fall to the ground." No, God's word is always true. God covered that in Rom 3:4. The Greek for word here is logos.
The fault, then, lies with those who aren't completely filling the profile of Israel under God's definition. Let's see that that is in the next several verses.
Romans 9:7
Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
Here is further evidence that simply being born doesn't grant a promise of God to anybody. The verse ends with a hint of what God means, and He will tell us in the next verse and expound from there. In the last verse, we were told that just being in the land doesn't make one an Israelite. Here we are told that just being born from someone that descended from Abraham doesn't cut it either. There is something more to be had before one was called an Israelite in God's eyes.
Finally, a verse that is spot on with the Greek! Paul is quoting from Gen 21:12, which is also quoted in Heb 11:18. The word "Neither" here is oude, literally "now not" or really an emphatic "neither indeed."
Romans 9:8
That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
God showed us in verse 7 that to really be a part of Israel, we need to understand the words "in Isaac shall thy seed be called." God made a promise to Abraham, that he would have a child of his own with his wife in his and her old age. That child was Isaac. In order to be a child of Israel, one does not need to be born in the land with boundaries under the name of Israel. Nor does one need to be born from a direct descendant of Abraham. No, the true child of Israel is a child of the promise. What does that mean? God is going to use this chapter to explain it, but those true children of Israel needed to be like Abraham. They need to have faith and keep the Law, because that is what they were told to do to be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Ex 19:5-6). They kept the Law well, but it was faith they lacked, as God will show by the time we get to verse 32.
This verse is pretty spot on with the Greek. The only thing I would like to point out is the definite article denoting the God.
Romans 9:9
For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.
Now we have light of what the promise is which is mentioned in verse 8. I don't think God can be clearer by saying "this is the word of promise." Interesting to see that God personally visited Abraham and Sarah at the time appointed to have the child, isn't it? Read Genesis 18:10-14 to confirm that this promise was made (twice) and Genesis 21:1 that it took place. God had a very special plan here, but we should note how much God cares for His people and that He would personally visit them.
There are very minor differences in the Greek. The word "at" is the preposition "kata" and the phrase "this time" could be translated "this season" or "fitting time" as it is the Greek kairos. What "fitting time" would that be? The gestation of a baby boy of course. More literally it says this, "According to the fitting time, I will come and there will be to the Sara a son (huios)."
Romans 9:10
And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;
I'm not sure why verses were decided to interrupt full thoughts, but here we have one of those. Keep in mind that chapter and verse numbers are not part of the inspiration of God. We read that the promised child of Isaac to Sara was not only the word of promise, but that it extended to the child of Issac and Rebecca. We won't find out the conclusion to this until verse 12 because of the aside in verse 11.
The Greek reads interestingly here. The same concept is there, but I it just comes across a little differently. Here's a more literal translation:
Now (de) not only, but also Rebecca out of one marriage bed (koite), having of Isaac, the father of us,
Romans 9:11
(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
The aside here is to prove God's sovereignty. Before Jacob and Esau were born, God told them what we will read in the next verse. Look at Genesis 25:19-26 for the account.
I've got to point out here that the Greek stops after the word "stand" in this verse. It also doesn't include "the children" though it is implied. The phrase "having done" is from the Greek "prasso" which means to practice or the active process in performing a deed [1]. Lastly, the Greek for "stand" is "meno" which means to remain, abide, or stay. Rendering it "stand" here is suitable, because God said what was going to happen, and His word always remains, not returning to Him void.
The phrase "not of works" is more accurately "not out of works" since the preposition "ek" is used. The rest is completely accurate with the Greek. Clearly, God wants us to understand that it isn't the working out on our part that brings the promise, but rather God knew ahead of time what choices would be made and what would happen. This is not to say that God controls everything we do and our free will is of no effect. God tells us things ahead of time so we know we can trust His word, to prove He knows the end from the beginning, and that we can trust Him when He speaks of anything in the bible.
Romans 9:12
It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
God quotes Himself from Genesis 25:23. Going back to Romans 9:10, we see that this is a continuation of the promise of interest in this chapter. God promised a son to Abraham in his old age. God promised a son to Isaac and Rebecca, and that his older brother would serve him.
In this short verse, there are a few words of interest. First, "elder" is "megas" in the Greek, meaning great or large. The word for "serve" is of the root douleuo, which has the idea of slaving or being subjecting to. Finally, the word for "younger" is "elasson" which means "less, smaller, or inferior." [3]
Romans 9:13
As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
The quote here is from Malachi 1:2-3 but made plain also in Gen 25:23. God spoke in Gen 25:23 to let us know what was going to take place. Esau would not trust in God, but Jacob would. Anyone can go back on the account of Esau and Jacob in the book of Genesis and see what happened. Because of where their faith was, the elder would serve the younger, just like God said. Now, out of context, this verse looks like God is being partial at first glance, doesn't it? If God was really picking Jacob over Esau simply because He wanted to, that would go against the character of God that was reiterated several times in Romans chapter 2. Don't worry, God will explain in the next few verses.
The Greek is a bit more emphatic here. The words "loved" and "hated" are in the Aorist tense, again showing that the emphasis is on the meaning and not the timing. These actions happened in the past and continue to the present. There aren't any difficult words to ascertain, so here is the literal translation with the definite articles:
Exactly according as (kathos) it has been written: The Jacob I have loved, now (de) the Esau I have hated.
Romans 9:14
What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
God answers quickly the natural question that may arise from reading verse 13. One may ask if God had preference of Jacob over Esau and so let the younger have authority over the elder. Wouldn't that make God unrighteous? Shouldn't the younger serve the elder instead? We have the familiar answer to the questions posed in verse 14 of "May it never be!" Of course there is no unrighteousness with God. The rest of chapter 9 will help us understand that He is certainly still righteous.
The words "is there" are supplied in the English to help us make sense of the question here. The question literally asks, "Not unrighteousness close beside the God?" Yes, the definite article is there again, and the word "para" is translated "with". Para along with the Dative has the idea of close beside or alongside.
Romans 9:15
For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
Now we have the argument posed that there is no unrighteousness with God, even though what we see may be taken as partiality in verse 14. So God quotes Himself here from Ex 33:19 to set up the point of what His words mean. Further explanation comes in the next verses and the conclusion in verse 18.
There are a couple of things to point out in the Greek. First the word "mercy" is "eleeho", which does mean mercy or to have pity on. It has the idea of the English word succor. Second, the word for "compassion" is oiktiro, and means to respond with deep sensitivity (compassion, sympathy) [1]. Oiktiro is only used two times in the entire New Testament, and both times are right here in this verse. But now we have an interesting untranslatable Greek word that also occurs twice in this verse. It doesn't just say, "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy." In this statement, and the one about compassion, there is a word "an" in the Greek that appears after "whom" in the English. Here's a definition of that word.
an - a conditional particle expressing possibility, based on a preexisting condition (stipulation, prerequisite) [1]
an - indicates what can (could) occur – but only on certain conditions, or by the combination of certain fortuitous causes [2]
There are certain conditions on which God will show mercy or compassion. Before we jump to any conclusions on that, let's review some things we know of God. It is His desire that all are saved and come to the complete and accurate knowledge of the truth (1 Tim 2:4), and that while we were yet enemies and sinners to Him, Christ died for the ungodly (Rom 5:6-10). Yet we see here certain conditions may apply to experience His mercy and compassion. What does that mean? I don't want any confusion to come from that little word "an." It is used many times and often translated "whomever", "whatever", or can mean "in any way" or "anyhow." You see, God goes to such great lengths to have mankind saved and come to the complete and accurate knowledge of the truth, that in any way possible He will show mercy and compassion on us. That is what is displayed on the cross of Calvary. That is the point being made here and Exodus 33:19. It is man's will to have his own heart hardened if he rejects the love, compassion, and mercy of God. We see that clearly in the account of Pharaoh during the Exodus, which God will touch on in verse 17.
Romans 9:16
So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
Logically following what we read in verse 15, all things begin with God. It isn't how much we desire something that it is granted to us. I think of the adage "where there is a will, there is a way." The question we should ask, though, is it man's will or God's will? The next point is that it isn't how hard we work to earn something that it is granted to us. Ever work your hands to the bone and not get a proper payout? But the end of this verse says it is of God who will show mercy, and in His mercy, He will grant something to us.
To me it looks like a faith issue is on display here. If faith is in our own heart's desire, which is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked (Jer 17:9), would God not prevent hurtful desires to those whom He loves? If faith is in the work of our own hands, would God not prevent hurtful rewards from that work? We don't know the end from the beginning, but we do know that God cares so much for mankind, that He stopped at nothing to reconcile to world to Himself (2 Cor 5:19). We know that God does know the end from the beginning (Isa 46:10), and works all things for good to those that love Him (Rom 8:28). So then, all things are of God to grant us in His mercy and His compassion.
This is a fine translation here, but I do enjoy seeing the literal interpretation. I think it shows more emphasis than the English in the beginning, because the first words are "ara oun". It could be translated "therefore therefore," but it's a bit clearer when we explore the definitions:
ara - an inferential particle meaning "it follows that" [2]
oun - therefore, now then, accordingly so [1]
With that in mind, here is a literal translation, showing the definite article that is present:
It follows therefore, not of the desiring, nor of the running, but of the God showing mercy
Romans 9:17
For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
Taking this scripture out of context may make one think that Pharaoh had it pretty good. God was going to show His power in Pharaoh and bring glory to God. However, when we read the entire account God is referring in the quote of Exodus 9:16, we see that the way in which God shows His power is through the hardness of Pharaoh. It would do the bible student well to examine the Exodus account and note that at first Pharaoh hardened his own heart (Ex 7:22-23, 8:15, 19, 32, 9:7, 34-35). It was only after that where God would do the hardening (Ex 9:12, 10:1, 20, 27, 11:10, 14:8). Pharaoh had ample chances to change his heart toward the truth, but chose not to do so. God just gave him his heart's desire.
Some may argue with me on this because of Exodus 7:13 which would indicate that God is doing the hardening. I completely agree that that is what Exodus 7:13 is saying. However, Moses had the tendency to write a complete overview thought, and then fill in the details. God said He would harden the heart of Pharaoh, which He did, yet we see Pharaoh choosing to do so on his own in several verses that I listed above. I would argue that Exodus 7;13 is a summary statement of what happened in chapters 7 through 14, ending in the demise of Pharaoh. I base this on the context of how we read that Pharaoh hardens his heart in the beginning, then the LORD hardens his heart after that.
Take a look at Genesis 2:1-3. It's a summary statement of the creation account of Genesis 1. Then down in verse 7, we see a more detailed account of the creation of man than we saw in Genesis 1:27. In fact, all of the rest of chapter 2 is an expansion on what was done on their respective days in chapter 1. It has to be, otherwise God was creating past day 7. Consider Genesis 2:8. It's a summary statement. Verses 9-14 give us more details and verse 15 brings us back to what was said in verse 8 with the added information that Adam was to dress and keep this garden. Then look at Genesis 2:19. While it is possible that these animals were created from the dust in front of Adam, I would think it makes more sense that the fowls were made on day 5 of creation, and the land animals on day 6. God then brought them before Adam after Adam was created on day 6 or after day 7. There are other statements like this, but I encourage the bible student to search them out and always consider the context.
While this verse is again a good translation, the Greek sheds even more light on what is going on here. There is no "even" in the quotation. rather, it's very blunt and to the point. It literally says, "Says indeed the scripture to Pharaoh that to the point of this, I have raised up the you..." It may look a bit funny in the English, but there are two definite articles in a row that are present, yet in different cases. The one article is just translated as "that" or "this thing." The other correlates with the word Pharaoh. God is very pointed here and will explain why in Romans 9:20-23
Romans 9:18
Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
So we can conclude from verses 16 and 17 the same thing stated in verse 15. God is sovereign. Nothing is hidden from Him. He knows the intents of the heart and will grant mercy through His sovereign choice.
Some may think that these verses say God pre-selects those who will go to Heaven and those who will suffer in Hell. I would just like to say that this verse doesn't say anything on salvation from sin and death. What is prevalent in these verses is choice or free will. God's will is clear, in that He wants all saved and with Him in Heaven (1 Tim 2:4). He will have mercy or harden mankind based on mankind's choice.
Here, like in verse 16, we have the verse start off with "ara oun." We could translate this verse this way:
It follows therefore, to whom He desires, He shows mercy, to whom now (de) He desires, He hardens.
I must say there is quite the emphasis going on in verses 14-18. Even so, there will be questions, and God will address an important one in the next verse.
Romans 9:19
Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
This is logical, right? After reading the last 5 verses it seems that God has a handle on everything. It appears that He will make hard the hearts of some because He wants to and will show mercy on some because He wants to. If that's the case, how can He condemn anyone? Aren't we all following His will, whether through mercy or stubborn refusal? Rest assured, God will make plain the answer to this.
The only thing to point out from the Greek is that there is a second "oun" not translated. It should say, "Thou wilt say then (oun) unto me, Why therefore (oun) doth He yet find fault?" God has been quite emphatic in these last few verses with all the "therefore's" hasn't He?
Romans 9:20
Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
The simple answer is in the first few words here. No, God doesn't force anyone to do anything. Not all act according to His will and He is just in His judgment. There is a righteous standard that God has established, and all have fallen short of it (Rom 3:23). So praise be to God for freely sharing His righteousness in exchange for our sin the moment we trust what He did for us through Jesus Christ on the cross of Calvary (2 Cor 5:21, 1 Cor 15:1-4)!
The question posed here is suggesting the questions in verse 19 are going against what God has said. There is a blunt reminder of who God is in relation to us here, that He is our creator. It's almost comical when this thought of the thing formed asking the creator the question, "Why did you make me this way?" is carried through. Can you imagine making a piece of art full of colors and shapes, so that it was wonderfully satisfying, and then that piece of art question why you made it? That's a bit sassy, don't you think? And yet God tolerates that billions of times over every day. God will use a similar analogy in verse 21.
Once more, we find powerful emphasis in the original language. The verse here starts off with "Oh, man," but then there's the Greek word "menounge." Take a look at this definition and see the strong reply of God.
menoúnge (from 3303 /mén, "indeed"; 3767 /oún, "therefore"; and 1065 /gé, "really") – properly, therefore really indeed. 3304 (menoúnge) is often translated, yea rather, indeed on the contrary. [1]
It gets better. There are definite articles here, so the verse says this:
Oh man, therefore really indeed, who are the you that replies against the God?
Want more emphasis? God has it. That word for "repliest against" is antapokrinomai This is a compound word of anti (opposite), apo (away from), and krinomai (judging). While "repliest against" is an accurate translation, this isn't just a simple reply. This is a strong, countering judgment that is completely opposite of what was posed. The word antapokrinomai is used only 2 times in the New Testament: here and Luke 14:6 (answer again). Can you get the sense that God does not want His people to ever think He is manipulating them to the point of making choices for them? He will work all things out for good. But, He does that knowing our hearts ahead of time, and has power over His creation to push us in the right direction. Even so, God will absolutely never force our choices.
I can only imagine how much faster God's salvation work through Christ would have come to be had people been more obedient to Him in the past. I can also only imagine how much faster Jesus Christ will call His church, which is His Body, home in the clouds if all His saints would strive to be obedient now.
Romans 9:21
Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
Building off of the latter half of verse 20, God gives us an analogy of a potter forming a vessel out of clay. Considering verse 20, should we expect the clay to talk back to the potter on how it was made? That doesn't make much sense. In the same way, we shouldn't expect to talk back to God on how each of us were made. God, in His sovereignty knows who will choose life and who will choose death. God will make Himself and the truth known through both kinds of vessels.
This verse happens to be spot on, word for word with the Greek.
Romans 9:22
What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
This is the beginning of a three-verse question. Here we get a look into God's character. He desires to show forth His wrath and to make His power known. So He patiently endures the disobedient. Why? Remember, God's will is that all mankind is saved from His wrath. Think about this: Godly parents give plenty of warning to their children if they're going down the wrong path, but what happens when the children deliberately disobey? There is punishment issued from those parents. Why? To show the child who is in authority. Do godly parents do this for themselves? No it is for the child's sake to maintain order and to show them what is right. The punishment is temporary, and simply to show consequences to poor behavior. Godly parents are an image of what God does for the whole of mankind.
Even in this life, things come and things go. We live in poverty or we live in plenty, but that status can change in an instant. Is it because of the works of our hands? No, not really. God is the one who gives and takes away (Job 1:21). He will use whatever it takes to show every single person in this world what is right and what is wrong. He will even continue to care for the ones that will never turn to Him, in order to reveal Himself and truth to those that will.
This verse starts off with the Greek "ei" which is if-factually. I like to translate it as "since" as long as it fits in the English. There's also a definite article denoting the God and an untranslated "de." Of interest to the bible student is that word "known" since there are a few words translated that way in the Greek. It is of the root gnorizo the verb, which is the knowledge by experience and where we get our word gnostic from. With that in mind, the verse starts off like this: "Since now (de) the God, desiring to show the wrath, and to make known the power of Him..."
The last part of this verse is of interest in the original language as well. First, the word for longsuffering has the idea of a long-temperament. Most people are familiar with people who are short-tempered, meaning they get angry quickly. Well, this is like the opposite of that. God is long-tempered in the sense that He is slow to anger and full of compassion (Ex 34:6, Psalm 103:8, 145:8). By looking at how long this age of grace has continued, it should be very easy to see this attribute. Continuing with the analogy of pottery, these "vessels" of wrath, or the people who choose to reject God, are exactly fitted (katartizo) for destruction. The word for destruction is apoleia, which has this definition:
apoleia - causing someone (something) to be completely severed – cut off (entirely) from what could or should have been [1]
In part one of three here, we see that God is willing to put up with those who choose to be His enemies in order to show Himself to those who choose to trust in Him.
Romans 9:23
And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
God not only wants to show His wrath and power through those that reject Him, but also wants to show of His glory, and chooses to do so through the "vessels of mercy," which would be those who would trust in Him. These vessels of mercy are not pre-selected by God. Rather, God had already prepared that any who would trust in Him would come into His glory. We're told several times in scripture how God doesn't want anyone to die, but much rather all mankind be saved. It is man's choice to choose death and separation from God in Hell instead of life in the presence of God in Heaven.
There are just a couple of things to point out in the Greek here. First the word "on" is the Greek "epi" and can be more accurately understood as "upon." Second, there is one word in the Greek for "afore prepared" and it is proetoimazo. This is a compound word of pro (before) and hetoimos (prepare/make ready). So it is indeed an accurate translation, but again I point out that God is saying here the vessels of mercy, or those who choose to believe, will be made ready for glory. God is not saying that people He chose before hand will experience it. That choice lies with every man and woman on earth. Choose either God, life, and glory through belief in what Jesus Christ did for you on the cross of Calvary by exhanging your sin for His righteousness (1 Cor 15:1-4, 2 Cor 5:21), or choose Satan, death, and torment through any other means. Everyone will take part in a resurrection (Acts 24:15, Rev 20:4-6, 11-15), but only those that truly trust in God and what He says will be resurrected to eternal life with Him.
Romans 9:24
Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
Who is the "us" here? All the saints, including the apostle Paul. Remember the address of this letter in 1:7 referring to the saints at Rome. This doctrine is to the Body of Christ, which are all saints in the dispensation given to the apostle Paul, where there is no Jew or Gentile, but all are one in Christ (Eph 3:1-9, Gal 3:28). All who trust in the sacrifice and shed blood of Jesus Christ on the cross for their sins become "the called" or saints in this age. We then, in this analogy, are the vessels of mercy, and can look forward to that glory that will be revealed one day.
The more I look at verses 22-24 here, it's almost difficult to see the question that has been translated in the English. While it does make sense, I see more of a statement instead. There is no punctuation in the Greek, so really it is up to interpretation of the context. Right after verse 21 introduces the pottery analogy, we have this:
Since now the God, desiring to show the wrath and to make known the power of Him, bore in much long-temperament the vessels of wrath having been exactly fitted for destruction, and to the end that He might make known the abundance of the glory of Him upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared before to glory, whom also He has called us not only out of Jews, but out of Gentiles.
The only thing to point out in the Greek of verse 24 is the word "ek" appearing both times we see "of." It more accurately reads "out of," but the translation is still quite clear.
Romans 9:25
As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.
Continuing the concept that God will have mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth (verse 18), God quotes Himself in the prophet Hosea. The verse is Hosea 2:23. Think about these words for a moment. Who were not God's people? Those who are dead in sins and trespasses and follow Satan (Eph 2:1-3). How did they become God's people? When they put their faith in Him. God prepared glory beforehand for those who would come to put their faith in Him (Eph 2:4-9). All of mankind start out in the category of "not God's people" since all have sinned (Rom 3:23), but God wants us all to become His people. He loves us all so dearly that He gave His Son for us while still dead in trespasses and sins (Rom 5:6-11), in order that we may live with Him forever when we put our trust in Him (Rom 8:38-39).
The only thing I see to point out in this verse is that God specifies the Hosea. It starts off saying, "As also in the Hosea He says..."
Romans 9:26
And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.
Now God is quoting from Hosea 1:9 and 1:10. The same concept still applies as in verse 25, but God is further calling Himself witness to help us understand the truth being presented here. This verse is quite accurate to the Greek.
Romans 9:27
Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:
Reading through these last few verses really makes me sad like the apostle Paul. It's hard to imagine why, but many people will choose to reject God and suffer eternal damnation instead of turning to the truth and accepting God's free gift of life. Look at what this is saying with the example of Israel. Even if there are millions of children in Israel, only a remnant will be saved. That's a hard, factual statement. Now, was this God's choice? No, by no means. It has always been up to mankind because God created us with a free will. We know today that God reconciled the world to Himself (2 Cor 5:19), but He started the good news with the promise back in Genesis 3:15. If only people would have faith in Him! The quote is from Isaiah 10:22.
The Greek is more emphatic here. The word "also" is "de" and could be translated "now." There is a definite article for the Israel. The word for "though" is "ean" which is if-conditionally. With this in mind, a more literal interpretation is this:
Isaiah now cries on behalf of (huper) the Israel, "If it is the number of the sons (huios) of Israel as the sand of the sea, the remnant will be saved."
Romans 9:28
For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.
This verse is pretty much a verbatim quote of Isaiah 10:23 of the Septuagint. Even with that in mind, this is a very interesting statement, but of course fits within the context of Israel here. This verse is talking of the conclusion that God details in the book of The Revelation. Think back to Romans 9:27 that only a remnant of Israel will be saved out of the millions. What must Israel go through? One more week, or 7-year period, of tribulation known as the time of Jacob's trouble (Jer 30:7, Dan 9:27). Jesus Christ said while on the earth, "And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened." (Matt 24:22, Mark 13:20, Luke 21:22). During that time, true faith will most certainly be made manifest.
What's more interesting is that some of the Greek texts don't contain the words "in righteousness" for this verse. The received text and majority text do, so I would think that it belongs here. The word order does shed light on what God is emphasizing as well. The first word in the Greek here is logos. The English "work" is not found here in the Greek. It more accurately says that God is concluding and cutting short, and will make the word upon the earth. What does that mean? Simply that God has the authority to carry out what He said He would do. The gifts of God are without repentance (Rom 11:29) and His word will not return to Him void (Isa 55:11). These things will happen because God says so.
Praise the Lord that those who trust in the finished work of Christ on the cross of Calvary can skip out on that period of time! God did not appoint believers of this age to that pouring out of His wrath, but to be with Him forever before it happens (1 Thess 1:10, 4:13-18).
Romans 9:29
And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.
This quote comes from Isaiah 1:9 and happens to be spot on with the Greek. The only thing to point out here is that the word "except" in the English is literally "if not" in the Greek (ei me). The Greek "ei" is the if-factually condition, so we get the idea that if it were true that God had not left Israel descendants, they would have come to be like Sodom and made just like Gomorrha. What were the fates of those cities? We need only to look to Genesis 19:24-25 to see that they were destroyed by fire and brimstone because of the grievous sins committed there. Israel could have had that fate too, but God continued to work with them and there was and is a faithful remnant there. It's sad that mankind's heart is so prone to evil that only few will end up being saved to eternal life with God.
Romans 9:30
What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
Here is the first part of a 2 verse point. We just looked at the poor state of Israel throughout the chapter. Paul is mourning for them, desiring that they would be saved even if it meant for him to be cursed (verse 3). In the last few verses we see that only a remnant of the millions will be saved. Now we're taking a look at things from a dispensational point of view. In this verse, God is saying that the nations which didn't follow after righteousness now have it, being the righteousness out of (ek) faith. Did you see the dispensational context there? This is righteousness out of faith and not of the Law. The contrast is found in the next verse.
On interesting thing to note is that the words "followed after" in the English is dioko in the Greek. That word is translated "persecute" in several other places. I mean to say that this isn't just some casual following, but rather a pursuit.
Romans 9:31
But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
It is essential to look at this verse and verse 30 together to see the dispensational difference. In verse 30 we see and know that the nations today attain righteousness through the gospel and doctrine given to the apostle Paul. That is, we are saved today by faith in the finished work of Christ on the cross (1 Cor 15:1-4). Here we see that Israel was persecuting (dioko as verse 30) the Law of righteousness did not attain it. How can this be? they were given the oracles of God (Rom 3:2). They had everything at their fingertips, so what stopped them from attaining righteousness? God will answer that in the next verse.
The words "of righteousness" only appear once in the Greek. They don't appear at the end of the verse even though it is implied.
Romans 9:32
Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
The reason that Israel had not attained to righteousness is because they lacked faith. They sought righteousness, but they sought their own righteousness through working out of the Law. That is why the Gentiles have obtained righteousness through faith in this dispensation. Faith has always been required to restore relationship to God. God made known His plan to Adam and Even in Genesis 3:15 and gradually gave mankind the details. It was always up to mankind to believe in Him, what He said to do, and what He was Himself doing.
The question in the Greek more literally is asking "On account of why?" or "Through why?" since it's the word "dia". Interesting too, that the Greek doesn't have "sought" at all. It literally says, "because not out of faith, but just as out of works."
What stone did Israel stumble over? God will specify in the next verse. Because this stone is not just any stone. God calls it the stone of the stumbling.
Romans 9:33
As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
The stone of the stumbling in verse 32 we're told was laid in Zion and also known as a rock of offense. This same rock should clearly be the focal point of faith because whosoever believes on this rock will not be ashamed. I hope it's painfully obvious that this rock is Jesus Christ. The quote is from Isaiah 28:16. Sadly, Israel, as a nation, just didn't seek righteousness through faith, or they would have realized that Jesus was and is the Messiah. Jesus came just as He said He would. He came exactly when He said He would. And Israel was given all those words through the Law and the Prophets. God will be pointing that out in the next chapter.
This verse is spot on with the Greek. It may be of interest to see that the word for "ashamed" here has more emphasis in the original language. The Greek word is "aischunomai" which means "to be ashamed," but here in Romans 9:33 the word is "kataischuno". The prefix "kata" typically means "according to", or "down against." Perhaps here we could more accurately end the verse this way, "and the [one] believing upon Him will not be downright ashamed." Another definition is kataischuno can mean putting to disappointment [2]. Jesus will certainly not disappoint any who believe in Him.
References
HELPS Word-studies [1]
Thayer's Greek Lexicon [2]
Strong's Concordance [3]
