1 Corinthians - Verse by Verse Study - Chapter 9

1 Corinthians 9:1
Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?

Are these not challenging questions for the believers at Corinth? Of course the answer to all of these questions are a resounding "Yes!" Yet, the church at Corinth was clearly out of line, and some were questioning Paul as an apostle. They weren't convinced that he was given authority from God as an apostle. A passage comes to mind when I get to this verse, reminding the "carnal" believers (1 Cor 3:4), the "babes in Christ" (1 Cor 3:1) about where they came from:

1 Cor 4:14-16
14 I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.
15 For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.

Paul preached unto them the gospel that was committed to him (1 Cor 1:6, 17-18, 15:1-4). It was this gospel that prodded them into salvation when they believed and trusted in what God did for them on the cross of Calvary. Paul was not quiet about the fact that his gospel came from Jesus Christ Himself (Gal 1:11-12), and in no subtle way does he remind these saints that they are saints because Paul delivered the message of reconciliation to them, and they believed it.

How sad, then, that we read down in verse 3 the reason for this sudden change of subject from chapter 8 into chapter 9. There were those in the church questioning the authority and apostleship of Paul. We can see the love that Paul had for these saints in the chapter 4 reference cited above, and we can also see it here at the beginning of chapter 9. He was just talking about sacrifices to idols and what it means to the believer to partake in that. We just came off a verse where Paul said he wouldn't eat flesh "while the world standeth" if it would offend a brother. That's quite the strong statement, and we can see his compassion there as well. Now he's reminding the Corinthian saints that they they are his work in the Lord, i.e. part of the good work that God is working through Paul. That should be evidence that Paul is a called apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God (1 Cor 1:1).

As a side note, Paul always credited God with the glory in his epistles (1 Cor 15:10, Gal 2:8 etc.), and here the saints at Corinth are his "work in the Lord." We would do well to note this and emulate his behavior (1 Cor 4:16), not succumbing to pride and walking in the flesh, but giving glory to where it is due.

1 Corinthians 9:2
If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you: for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord.

Once more, Paul points to the clear reality of the changes in the Corinthian believers. Sure, the church as a whole was not conducting itself properly and had much behavior to correct, yet these believers must have stood out in Corinth anyway because of the hope of glory in them. They were his "seal", which we may understand with the idea of a signet ring. These believers proved that Paul was an apostle. Those that don't believe he is an apostle are about to get a divine rebuke.

1 Corinthians 9:3
Mine answer to them that do examine me is this,

Of note in this verse is that the word "answer" is the Greek apologia (English apology). Apologia is only used 8 times in the New Testament and has the meaning of a speech given in defense: Acts 22:1 (defense), Acts 25:16 (to answer for himself - note that "answer" at the beginning of this verse is apokrinomai, a reply), 1 Cor 9:3 (answer), 2 Cor 7:11 (clearing of yourselves), Phil 1:7 (in the defense), Phil 1:16 (for the defense), 2 Tim 4:16 (answer), 1 Pet 3:15 (an answer). It isn't like what we may understand apology today as mostly saying "I'm sorry." This is a defending argument. Paul is going to lay this out over the next several verses to clearly reveal his apostleship to the church at Corinth.

Some may be wondering about the verses in Romans where the unbelievers are "without excuse" (Rom 1:20, 2:1). That Greek word is anapologetos, so we do see the root apologia in there, but with the prefix ana gives the idea of inexcusable, unanswerable, or indefensible.

1 Corinthians 9:4
Have we not power to eat and to drink?

Isn't it interesting that Paul's defense begins with this question? He asks if he has the authority, or right (Gr exousian) to eat and to drink. This may seem silly to talk about apart from the other questions that are coming, but it will become clear by the end of the chapter. As we go through the next several verses, Paul is really addressing what authority an apostle has when presenting the word of God. This will get those that "examine" Paul to start thinking about what they believe about Paul.

1 Corinthians 9:5
Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

This question sure has some meat to it. Look carefully at what this is saying. The term "sister" in the Greek can mean blood relative or female believer in Christ, much like we use it in English. The word "wife" could mean simply "woman", but I'll address this later. I think the KJV translators have this right as "wife." We know that Paul admonishes that marriages should begin between believers (2 Cor 6:14), and also shared his thoughts and the Lord's commands in 1 Corinthans 7. The pronoun is "we" here, but who makes up the "we?" Paul is being challenged as his role as an apostle, so I would think the "we" refers to apostles. With that in mind, I see that this question can be said like this:

Does an apostle have the authority to marry a woman in Christ just like some other apostles, brothers of Jesus, and Peter?

Now I can imagine some gawking that are taking a closer look at this verse for the first time. The question comes to mind, was Peter married? Absolutely he was. Look at Mark 1:29-31

29 And forthwith, when they were come out of the synagogue, they entered into the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John.
30 But Simon's wife's mother lay sick of a fever, and anon they tell him of her.
31 And he came and took her by the hand, and lifted her up; and immediately the fever left her, and she ministered unto them.

See that in verse 30? Simon, who was later renamed Peter, was married. We can infer from 1 Cor 9:5 that he wasn't the only apostle that was married either. So then, do apostles have the authority to eat, drink, and be married? Yes, they do.

I know there are some that believe Peter was never married or that the lack of Peter's wife's name or actions prove she was dead before he was called as an apostle. The lack of record of anything is weak evidence or proof of an argument. Let's remind ourselves: what is the bible about? The wives and children of the apostles and the details of their day-to-day lives? Or is it about Jesus Christ, the redemptive grace of God, and how God worked through certain individuals? All of scripture is God-breathed and is given to us for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness (2 Tim 3:16). It isn't a biography of many individuals, but the account of how God created, man rebelled, and God made a way of salvation through Christ Jesus. So just because the bible doesn't mention Peter's wife's name doesn't mean she was dead, nor does the lack of Peter's mother-in-law's name mean she didn't have a name. That's absurd. God was having us focus on the miracle of healing Jesus performed at that time and the impact it had.

There's another argument that the interpretation of "wife" should be "woman" here instead. There are some that say that this "sister woman" would be an assistant to the apostles, ministering to their needs and doesn't indicate "wife". Some also say these "sister women" would perform water baptisms due to the issue of modesty, meaning they would administer the rite to the women instead of the male apostles. Those that say this err greatly in the scriptures, not knowing what water baptism actually is. I encourage all readers to examine Exodus 19:5-6, 29:1-9 (especially verse 4), and 30:17-21 to see what water baptism was for the priesthood. Not to mention that there were diverse water baptisms (Heb 9:9-10), noting that they were "imposed on them until the time of reformation". These diverse baptisms would be including cleansing rituals to be ceremonially clean (read Leviticus 15 e.g.). Being immersed in water to show the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus is not found anywhere in the bible.

My questions to those that believe a "sister woman" is meant here instead of a believing female to have as a wife is: What is being addressed here in this verse? Is it not the authority that an apostle possesses? Why would this verse specifically call out Peter in addition to the other apostles and "brothers of the Lord" (which also shows that Mary and Joseph had other children)? Every inspired word of God is there for a reason, and though Paul chose not to marry as we saw in 1 Cor 7, he surely had the authority to do so, as there was precedence. That's the point here. Anyone of wealth could have had a "sister woman" as an assistant as it was common to have menservants and maidservants in those days. Yet Peter and those apostles didn't have monetary wealth because all the kingdom believers at that time sold all possessions to have all things common, so that none lacked (Acts 3:6, 4:32-35). Lastly, the Greek has both "sister" and "wife/woman" as accusative singular nouns. It isn't a "sister woman", but rather as the KJV has it, as "sister, wife/woman". I believe the context defines that an apostle "leading about" a woman would indicate wife, or at the very least a betrothal to be married to a believing woman.

1 Corinthians 9:6
Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?

Taking a bit of a turn here, instead of including all the other apostles, Paul just selects himself and Barnabas to discuss. Barnabas is shown many times to be Paul's travelling companion, so it should be no stretch of the imagination that the Corinthian saints would have known that name. More of the issue here is the question posed that Paul and Barnabas have the authority not to work or do physical labor to supply their own needs. Why? It is a biblical principal that those that the apostle is servicing would give wages and rations to the apostle. I think it best to let Paul explain in the next three verses.

1 Corinthians 9:7
Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?

All three of these analogies should help anyone understand the point being brought by Paul. Let's take them one at a time. Who goes to warfare at any time using his own money or substance? That would be no one. A soldier is compensated for his service to the country he's fighting for. He doesn't pay the country he's protecting in order that he may fight for that country. We could even sum it up in the question: Who would pay to give their own services? That just doesn't make sense.

Next is the planting of a vineyard and then not eating what grows. Another absurd notion, is it not? How many farmers out there never eat what is grown in their fields? Sure, some or even most is given away, but a wise farmer would take part in what he planted. Such it is with an apostle. The apostle plants and waters, but God brings the increase (1 Cor 3:6). The apostle should take part in the fruit of what was planted and watered. It is biblical for those being ministered to to support the minister.

Lastly we have the one feeding a flock, that it only makes sense to eat the milk of the flock. It is important to note here that "feedeth" is the Greek poimaino, meaning to shepherd or tend to a flock. With that idea comes everything the shepherd would do, as in guard from predators, guiding, and provide ample feeding ground. Is it not right that the shepherd would be compensated for his labor from the flock? Even with these three analogies from nature, God gives us more in the next few verses to prove the authority given to those sent to preach and teach the word of God.

1 Corinthians 9:8
Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?

Paul wasn't just making this up with fluffy pictures for people to get swept away with. While it should be clearly seen from nature, the word of God does have more to say on the matter.

1 Corinthians 9:9
For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?

This verse comes from Deuteronomy 25:4. Taken literally, this should make sense. An ox working on treading out grain ought to be able to eat some. It would be cruel to prevent the animal from doing all that work around food and not being able to eat any of it. However, Paul brings up something with the question at the end of this verse. Is God really talking about oxen here? Or is God about to make a spiritual application to a physical thing we could understand? He answers this in the next verse.

1 Corinthians 9:10
Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.

Ah, so now we have the spiritual application. Those that are in ministry ought to be fed by the work they do. Those that teach and preach God's word should plow in hope. Hope of what? To partake of the fruit of the labor. The same goes for the thresher. The same goes for the ox that is treading out grain.

Keep in mind that all of this is being said because of the question in verse 6. Doesn't Paul and Barnabas have the right, or the authority, not to labor with their hands in addition to laboring in the word of God and doctrine, teaching and leading the people? It's a generally accepted practice today that the teaching elder of a church is compensated for his labor. The arguments put forth in verse 7 show the practicality, that this idea isn't just in preaching and teaching God's word. Then Paul backs this up by quoting scripture that it is God's way as well.

1 Corinthians 9:11
If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?

Compensation for the one laboring in word and doctrine is biblical. The teaching elder has the right to "reap...carnal things." Now, he may choose to waive the right as Paul did, or accept it, but either choice is viable. It's not a "great thing" to be compensated. Paul reiterates this to Timothy:

1 Tim 5:17-18
17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.
18 For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

Paying a pastor and/or elder is most certainly biblical, whether monetary or otherwise. Those that say it isn't right or don't agree with it must examine themselves and see why they believe so, as the bible clearly teaches compensating ministers of the word of God. More on that in the next verse.

1 Corinthians 9:12
If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ.

Note well how this verse begins. Others are already partaking of this authority in the Corinthian church ("power" is from the Greek root exousia). The word "if" here in the Greek is "ei" meaning a given fact. I often like to see if our word "since" fits for "ei", and here it does beautifully. The question literally reads:

Since others of the authority over you are partaking, not more we?

As we have seen in several examples, ministering, teaching, and preaching the word of God is a job. It's a vocation like any other, and it is a gift of God unto men. See what God says in Ephesians omitting the parenthesis:

Eph 4:8, 11-15
8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ

God's gifts unto men include apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers. Why did He give these gifts? Verse 12 in that passage should make it clear: for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, and for the edifying, or building up, of the body of Christ. God designated some members of the body of Christ to build up the entire body upon the truth of the word of God. His purpose for that? See again in verse 13 to 15: unification of the faith, knowledge of the Son of God, building each member of the body of Christ to maturity in Christ that they may act like Christ. Further, it is to stand upon the word of God as absolute authority, not giving heed to "every wind of doctrine," but staying true to what God is saying in God's word.

Bringing us back to our verse in 1 Corinthians, we see that Paul and Barnabas certainly would have the authority to partake in the "carnal things" of the Corinthian church. Why? First, because Paul labored to found the church (Acts 18:1-4, 11). Second, because he was still in contact with them to build up the body of Christ. Recall that they had written him questions in chapter 7 that he is addressing in this letter. An elder is on call 24/7 to be ready to minister to the spiritual needs of his local assembly. That's both part of the heart of the elder and part of the calling of the position.

Now take a look at the latter half of this verse. Paul and Barnabas chose not to partake of this authority. We see here that Paul wanted nothing to get in the way of the gospel of Christ. He will explain why in verses 15-17 where he makes it clear that he is the apostle to the Gentiles, as the dispensation of the grace of God was committed to Paul. He is different from the 12, something the body of Christ needs to recognize to understand the fullness of the scriptures.

There are some that do some gymnastics with this verse to say that preachers should not have a salary. They say things like "Paul was a missionary, not a pastor." They believe missionaries should be compensated, but not on a salary basis, while preachers of the gospel should live without a salary. How sad, that these misunderstand the teaching of the scriptures! How cruel is it to muzzle an ox that treadeth out the corn? How cruel is it to not allow a husbandman to partake of his husbandry? Who goes to warefare on his own wages? The concept that pastors should not be compensated in some way flies in the face of so much scripture, it's hard for me to understand why some believe this. Paul had his reasons not to exercise his authority to reap the carnal things of the churches, because he wanted an unblemished testimony since he was entrusted with a dispensation from God.

1 Corinthians 9:13
Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?

God gives us the reminder of those under the law in this verse. We should really pay attention when God uses words like "Do ye not know?" or "I would not have you to be ignorant." The word "know" here is "eido" in the Greek, having the idea of intuitive understanding or perceiving. For this verse, if we would go back and examine Exodus through Deuteronomy, we see that the priests under the law lived off of those things in the temple. The nation of Israel brought in tithes to the temple storehouses to support the priests (Deut 14:22-29, 26:1-15, Neh 10:34-39, 13:10-12, Mal 3:10). The Levites didn't have a land of inheritance because the LORD was their inheritance (Deut 18:1-2). They also received a portion of the sacrifices at the altar (Deut 18:3-5).

From the example of those living under the Law, we should understand that those who were ministering for the people partook of the things of the people. This again is a biblical standard set in place by God. Let us look to the conclusion of this example in the next verse.

1 Corinthians 9:14
Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.

It's difficult to understand how those that hold to the belief that preachers should not have a salary or be compensated deal with this verse. In its context, the verse so obviously teaches that those preaching the gospel of the grace of God should be supported through their work in preaching the gospel of the grace of God. We have seen so many examples given in this chapter, so let us let God say what He says and honor those who labor in word and doctrine by compensating them for their efforts.

Note well that God does not prescribe how much to compensate. Every man will be different in that regard. However, to have the pastor living in incredibly luxury while his congregation is poor does not show good leadership. A wise pastor will live by what Agur the son of Jakeh declares in Proverbs 30:7-9

7 Two things have I required of thee; deny me them not before I die:
8 Remove far from me vanity and lies: give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me:
9 Lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is the LORD? or lest I be poor, and steal, and take the name of my God in vain.

Also recall the example of Israel gathering manna in the wilderness.

16 This is the thing which the LORD hath commanded, Gather of it every man according to his eating, an omer for every man, according to the number of your persons; take ye every man for them which are in his tents.
17 And the children of Israel did so, and gathered, some more, some less.
18 And when they did mete it with an omer, he that gathered much had nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack; they gathered every man according to his eating.

Not too much, and not too little. Everyone according to what is right for them. It may take some time to find a balance, but it will be found if the heart is focused on Christ and the things above rather than on the earth.

1 Corinthians 9:15
But I have used none of these things: neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me: for it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void.

Paul wants us to know that he did not use this authority to partake of the members of those he ministered to. Even when writing letters filled with doctrine and exhortation for the body of Christ, he does not ask to be compensated for his time. He chose to waive this right that he had, being a minister of God, as he says he wanted nothing to get in the way of him preaching the gospel. If he had started asking or even requiring these things, it may get in the way of the glory of the cross, which Paul constantly boasted about (1 Cor 1:31, 2:2, 2 Cor 10:17). Again, this was because he was God's "chosen vessel" for the dispensation of the grace of God (Acts 9:15).

Paul uses such strong language here. It would be better for him to die than anybody would make Paul's glorying void. What again is he talking of that he is glorying? The gospel of the grace of God! Imagine if Paul lived in such a way that discredited the dispensation given to him. Indeed, he was unique among the apostles. He was the exception to the rule that "they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel." In several verses, we find Paul working with his own hands to supply his needs in order not to be a burden to those he was ministering to (Acts 18:1-4, 1 Thess 2:9, 2: Thess 3:7-13). So then, Paul is the exception and not the norm.

1 Corinthians 9:16
For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!

Again, a powerful statement from Paul for us to consider. If (conditional) he preached the gospel, he himself had nothing to glory of. Did Paul do the work? Was Paul crucified or was anyone baptized in Paul's name (cf 1 Cor 1:13)? Of course not. Paul was adamant to boast in Christ and Him crucified everywhere he went (1 Cor 1:23. 2:2). He would glory only in the Lord and what He did for us through the shed blood of Christ on the cross 1 Cor 1:31, 2 Cor 10:17). Paul was clear from the beginning of this epistle that he, as well as any other believer, would only plant or water, but glory to God who brings the increase (1 Cor 3:5-8). Now note what is said after this.

Necessity is upon Paul? Why was it a necessity for him to preach the gospel? Why would he go so far to say "woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel?" The answer is clear in the next verse.

1 Corinthians 9:17
For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.

A dispensation of the gospel was committed to the apostle Paul. What does that mean? A special revelation, called the mystery (Eph 3:3, Col 1:26), was committed to the apostle Paul for him to dispense to the nations. Believers need to recognize this if they will "rightly divide" the word of truth and understand all the scriptures as God has written them (2 Tim 2:15). Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, makes the claim that he is the apostle to the Gentiles (Rom 11:13). What was this dispensation that was committed to him? What is the mystery? It is known as the gospel of the grace of God (Acts 20:24), and the ministry of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:18), the details of which can be seen throughout the epistles written by Paul and in the book of Acts. The mystery began to be preached in Acts 9 after Paul was saved by Jesus Christ and given the revelation, but is recorded in 13:2 where we see this:

Acts 13:2
As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.

Let's look briefly at the mystery, then come back to the first part of verse 17 here in 1 Corinthians. Here is the passage in 2 Corinthians concerning the message of reconciliation.

2 Corinthians 5:11-19
11 Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.
12 For we commend not ourselves again unto you, but give you occasion to glory on our behalf, that ye may have somewhat to answer them which glory in appearance, and not in heart.
13 For whether we be beside ourselves, it is to God: or whether we be sober, it is for your cause.
14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:
15 And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.
16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.
17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

I had to include several verses before it for context, but intended to focus on verses 18 and 19. This gospel of grace, or ministry of reconciliation, came from God, who dispensed it to Paul to give to the nations (Gal 1:11-12, Rom 11:13). What was dispensed? To proclaim that God reconciled all of us, ungodly sinful mankind, unto Himself, by Jesus Christ and Christ's shed blood on the cross of Calvary. It wasn't just for the Jews. We see similar wording in Romans 5.

Romans 5:10
For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

This verse shows why we were reconciled to God. We were enemies against God. Don't forget that all of mankind starts off dead in trespasses and sins because of what Adam did in the Garden of Eden (Eph 2:1-3). We are born "in Adam" and are subjugated to the punishment of a sinner, which is death (Gen 2:16-17, 3:6-7, Rom 5: 12-21, 1 Cor 15:22). We needed to be reconciled to God, not God to us. How glorious this gospel is, that while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God! The verse right before this shows how we were reconciled:

Romans 5:9
Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

God showed His love toward mankind in Christ's death, burial and resurrection. We understand the mystery to be unique to the apostle Paul, the dispensation committed to him to fill up full the word of God (Col 1:25). This can only be understood by "rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Tim 2:15). Keep God's word in its context and let Him do the talking while we do the listening. The moment man imposes his own ideas into God's word is where problems arise in interpretation, resulting in denominations and divisions.

As we see in 2 Corinthians 5:18, God has given us the ministry of reconciliation. He allows us to play a role in His great story of the redemption of His creation. How the love of God should constrain us to share this ministry, "to wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them." Those that trust that Christ died for them to save them from sin do not have their sins imputed to them any longer. They are saved in that moment of faith in the shed blood of Christ as payment for their sin. Glorious news! We should echo the words of Paul that the love of Christ constrains us to share this message so that others can partake in the spiritual blessings in the heavenlies in Christ (Eph 1:3)!

Now, this is the dispensation committed to Paul. Let's revisit what he says at the beginning of this verse. If Paul shares this message of reconciliation with the world willingly, he has a reward. If he doesn't do it willingly, the fact remains that God commissioned Paul personally.


1 Corinthians 9:18
What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.

Paul mentioned a reward in 1 Corinthians 9:17. The natural question that comes to mind when we read verse 17 is asked here in verse 18. What was Pauls' reward? He answers that he may make the gospel, or good news, of Christ without charge. What good news is Paul referring to? It was the dispensation committed to him. Why do I make a deal of this? Because some view the word "gospel" as meaning the same good news throughout the bible, when that is certainly not the case. Paul is not preaching the coming kingdom for Israel here, which was what Jesus preached in His earthly ministry and gave to the 12 to proclaim (Mark 1:14, 16:14-16, Acts 1:6-8). Paul is preaching what was revealed to him by Jesus Christ, which is the gospel of the grace of God. The word "gospel" simply means "good news". As we know all good news isn't the same good news, we should not view the word "gospel" as always the same when we read it in the bible. Always ask, "What is the good news spoken of here?"

Paul goes on to say that he may make the gospel of Christ without charge for this reason: that he doesn't abuse his power, or authority (Greek exousia), in it. It was a privilege for Paul to be able to simply preach the word wherever he went. He worked for his own needs so that he could not be accused of abusing his God-given authority (Acts 18:1-3, 20:31-35). That was his custom, to work for his own needs as we see in Acts and also in the Corinthian epistles, where he seemingly sarcastically reminds them in 2 Corinthians 12:13-15

13 For what is it wherein ye were inferior to other churches, except it be that I myself was not burdensome to you? forgive me this wrong.
14 Behold, the third time I am ready to come to you; and I will not be burdensome to you: for I seek not yours, but you: for the children ought not to lay up for the parents, but the parents for the children.
15 And I will very gladly spend and be spent for you; though the more abundantly I love you, the less I be loved.

Even though it went unnoticed by these carnal Christians, Paul would not change his ways in order to maintain a clean conscience and be pure from the blood of all men (Acts 20:26). Paul desired to conduct himself in such a way so that he would be holy, just, and without blame in behavior each time he shared the dispensation committed to him (1 Thess 2:9-12). How did he do this? He was willfully obedient and strong in faith. Don't lose sight that Paul was a man just like we are today, but because of his obedience and faith, God was working through him mightily (Gal 2:1-10, Col 1:27-29).

1 Corinthians 9:19
For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.

Paul expresses his motivation for his custom to work for his own needs here: to "gain the more". By keeping his conduct in the way he did, others would focus more on the message than on him. People really would have only two options: 1) Believe what Paul preached as it was in truth, the word of God (1 Thess 2:13) and be saved by his gospel, or 2) Don't believe it as the word of God, remain under some doctrine of the devils (1 Tim 4:1-7, 2 Tim 4:1-5) and ultimately blaspheme the name of God by standing upon "another gospel", resulting in damnation (Gal 1:6-9). That may sound harsh, but that's the way it is. One is either for God or against God (Matt 12:30, Luke 11:23). One is either "in Christ" or "in Adam". Clearly stated in 1 Corinthians 15:22 when defending the reality of the resurrection of the dead, Paul writes:

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

Knowing that the eternity of souls was at stake, nothing would move Paul away from sharing the good news committed to him in what is called "the mystery" (Acts 20:24). We should be followers of Paul in this, as there is but a "short" time left before God will come back in judgement and wrath (2 Thess 1:6-10). Short is relative, since we're on God's timeline, who desires all to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Tim 2:4). He has been exceeding gracious, offering this message of reconciliation for nearly 2,000 years. The love of Christ compelled Paul to share it so that he "might gain the more," knowing that only believers of the gospel committed to Paul are saved from the wrath to come (1 Thess 1:10).


1 Corinthians 9:20
And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;

Paul expounds on the idea of the previous verse of what it looks like to be servant of all. Note the metaphors used here, that Paul became "as a Jew". What is that? Wasn't Paul a Jew? Surely he was. But in the gospel committed unto Paul, there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female, all are one in Christ Jesus (Gal 3:28, Col 3:14). So then, being under a different dispensation, he became as a Jew, meaning he came alongside them in their customs to show them to the grace of God. He became "as under the law", meaning he would subject himself to the Law of Moses to show those that were zealous for it how the Law ultimately pointed to the needed righteousness of God through Christ.

Isn't it interesting that Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, differentiates between Jew and those under the Law? We would do well to remember the problem most of the nation Israel suffered, that many were seeking the righteousness of the Law apart from faith (Rom 9:31-33). Though they were called Jews, they were only one outwardly, not expressing the true Israelite God intended them to be (Rom 2:28-29). It is a heart condition, not an outward show, as it is even today. Good works by themselves never saved anyone from sin and death, so I constantly challenge: Where is your heart at? Do you trust God at His word, that He forgave the sin of the world through the shed blood of Jesus Christ on the cross of Calvary? That all who believe in the shed blood of Christ as payment for their sins are then reconciled to God and are baptized in the Holy Spirit to the Body of Christ (no water involved)? Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved today!

1 Corinthians 9:21
To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.

Continuing the thought on Paul's conduct, he now brings up the group that are "without law." Who would these be? It must be the Gentiles that did not yet proselytize to Judaism. These would be the group described in Ephesians 2:

Ephesians 2:11-12
11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world

It was a bleak outlook for those that rejected God in the dispensation of Law. They had no covenants of promise, no hope, and were separate from the one true God. But what good news was given us by God through the apostle Paul! He goes on to say:

Ephesians 2:13-18
13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.

And here we get a better understanding of what Paul is saying in 1 Corinthians 9:21. To those without law, those described in Ephesians 2:11-12, Paul became like one of them, with a clear exception. He didn't conduct himself unlawfully, as those outside the Law might. Paul still knew who he was in Christ, but would come alongside those that didn't have or know the Law of Moses and present to them the good news of Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 9:22
To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

Paul considered himself debtor to all (Rom 1:14), knowing this dispensation was committed to him and how the world desperately needed to hear it. He concludes here that he would even abase himself to come alongside those that were abased to share the gospel with them. Finally, to sum up, he says he would do whatever it takes to get the word of God out to the world so that they would choose to be reconciled to God.

That word "some" in the English is the Greek "tinas." It is an indefinite pronoun and can mean a certain one or really any one. It occurs here in the plural, so "some" is an acceptable rendering. However, I would think to go with the immediate context, it could be rendered "any". Paul would become all things to all mankind in order that he might save any. I wouldn't want anyone to read "some" here and thinking that this is some pre-selected group. Paul, like God, wanted every soul saved from God's wrath and brought into the kingdom of His Dear Son (1 Thess 1:10, Col 1:13). He wouldn't pick and choose, and neither should we. May we all share this compassion for our fellow man and share the message of reconciliation at any opportunity to any one God brings to us so that they may make the choice to be reconciled to God and be saved (2 Cor 6:1-2).

1 Corinthians 9:23
And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you.

We can see the zeal and compassion of Paul in these last few verses that he would do whatever it takes to get the dispensation committed to him out into the world. Why would he do it? Because of what the gospel is according to this verse. He owed it to the world to share the message of reconciliation, that God was offering grace and peace to the world and showing His love toward us in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us, and we have received atonement for our sin through faith in Christ's shed blood (Rom 5:6-12). This good news is really that good! All believers today should strive to live according to it as well, that we may partake of the gospel together, knowing we have a heavenly citizenship and blessed hope in Christ to be with Christ and all believers for eternity (Phil 3:20-21, 1 Thess 4:16-18, Titus 2:11-14).

1 Corinthians 9:24
Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain.

After hearing of Paul's personal drive and inner feelings on sharing the gospel, he now turns the tables to these Corinthian believers to encourage them. Surely they were familiar with the foot races of those days, and it isn't much of a stretch for us to understand what God is saying here today. We know that all runners in a race compete to get the winning prize. Only one person will get the prize. Paul is telling these believers to act in the same way.

In the context, clearly this means to preach the good news and live it out every day. Think about the difference it is to be a knowledgeable Christian. We have no fear of death because to be absent from this body is to be present with the Lord (2 Cor 5:8). Whether we're alive in this body or this body stops working (physical death), one day we will be with Jesus Christ since that is our blessed hope (1 Thess 4:16-17, 5:9-10). We will live in a brand new body that won't die, get sick, or sin in any way, since it will be like Jesus' body (Phil 3:20-21). We have all the spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ (Eph 1:3). Once trusting in the shed blood of Christ on the cross, we are sealed with God's Holy Spirit unto that day where the Body of Christ is called home (Eph 1:12-14), and nothing can separate us from God again (Rom 8:38-39). That really should affect our daily life and outlook on life. When we know all of that is ours because it is written in scripture, which is inspired of God (2 Tim 3:16-17), how can we not be zealous to so run that we may receive that prize?

I do like to point out which kind of "knowledge" the Greek has each time, and this is the intuitive, understood knowledge from the Greek "eido". These Corinthians saints would be very familiar with games and competitions being a 2 port city in that day.

1 Corinthians 9:25
And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.

Now this statement must have really struck home with the Corinthian church. Paul has written to them about fornication and a specific fornicator before in this epistle, chastising them for their lack of self control (see chapters 5 and 6). In this verse, still continuing the analogy to running the race, he reminds them that the true athlete will be temperate in all things, which is to say, they will exercise complete self control. Why? In order that they may so run to obtain that prize. A true athlete is one who will constantly discipline themselves in their sport, one who is dedicated. I think the idea becomes clearer by looking at the Greek here, because the word translated "striveth for the mastery" is agonizomenos, where we would say "agonizing" in English.

Note the second part of this verse, that the runners of a race put themselves through that much effort only to receive something that is perishable. This "crown" here is the Greek "stephanos", which is more like a garland or even a medal that would get hung around the neck for the winner. This is much different than the other Greek word translated as "crown", which is "diadem". A diadem we understand as a crown of royalty, something of great value or showing authority. Paul is speaking that the runners of a race receive a perishable prize, or crown, but we receive one that is incorruptible.

Pronouns are very important when understanding what the bible says. Who is the "they?" It is those who run a race on foot to see who can cross the finish line first. Who is the "we?" Those who trust the gospel of the grace of God and are secure in the Body of Christ. Fellow believers, don't lose focus! We have an eternal inheritance that can never be taken from us. Wouldn't you like to have all your friends and family there with you to worship God forever? So run to obtain the incorruptible prize!

1 Corinthians 9:26
I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air:

Paul knew clearly his position in Christ. Yes, he was the apostle to the Gentiles and committed this gospel, where he did have many revelations with Jesus Christ Himself (Rom 11:13, 1 Cor 9:17, 2 Cor 12:1, 7). Still, he considered himself the least of all saints, and strove to preach Christ and Him crucified with simple speech, becoming like all men that by all means he might bring some to trust in the shed blood of Christ for salvation (Eph 3:8, 1 Cor 1:17, 2:1-2, 9:22). With this knowledge, he was compelled to share the love of God through Christ no matter the consequences, desiring that all mankind would trust the gospel and then live for Christ (2 Cor 5:14-15).

I'm reminded of the late J.C. O'Hair, that he would encourage believers not to be a "hope-so" Christian, in the idea that one may say, "Well, I hope I will go to Heaven," indicating they are unsure. Much rather, he would say to them to be a "know-so" Christian. Know what the bible says. Know who you are in Christ and what it means to be in Christ. Run with certainty, fight, not as one that beats the air. Know your identity in Christ by reading, studying, and discussing God's word with fellow believers as often as possible. Know that the basis of truth is God's word and our theology should match what it says. There is no greater thing this side of Heaven than the excellency of the knowledge of Jesus Christ (Phil 3:8).

It may be of interest to note the Greek word for "fight I" is pukteuo, which is verb form for the English "pugilist". This is the only place in scripture the Greek word is found.

1 Corinthians 9:27
But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

Rather than run uncertainly or beat the air, Paul clearly says here that he disciplines himself to make sure he preaches the true gospel to all. What shame he would endure if he preached not the gospel, as he states in verse 16 and 17 of this chapter. He is doing everything he can to share the message committed to him, and twice in this epistles, he calls on the saints to be followers of him (1 Cor 4:16, 11:1). So that brings the challenge to believers today, how are we living for Christ? Are we following after Paul in this regard?

Clearly, not every believer needs to be a circuit preacher or even fill a pulpit. As Paul will detail by inspiration of the Holy Spirit in chapter 12 of this epistle, believers are all members of the Body of Christ, and each member has its own office. So, wherever each believer fits within the Body of Christ, fill that role to its fullest potential. Even so, all believers should strive to know God through Jesus Christ, that we may be well equipped with the sword of truth, which is the word of God, to fight the good fight of faith in this present evil world (Eph 6:17).

Romans - Verse by Verse Study - Chapter 9

Romans 9:1
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]