Chapter 9
To this and the tenth chapter, Dr. Taylor has prefixed the following judicious
summary:
The apostle has largely proved in the preceding chapters, that the grace of God extends to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews; and that the dispensation of Gods mercy was absolutely, and in itself, free to all who believe, whether Jews or Gentiles, in opposition to the merit of any works, or of conformity to any law whatever; and that the Gentiles have, by faith, a good title to the blessings of Gods covenant, to which blessings the Jews cannot have a title any other way. Hitherto the apostle has not considered the Jews as rejected, except in an indirect way, but that they had the possibility of continuing in the Church, from entering into which they should not attempt to prevent the Gentiles, but allow them to be sharers in the mercies of God; and hence his language is in sum this: Why may not believing Gentiles be admitted, pardoned, and saved, as well as you?
But in this chapter, and the two following, the apostle considers the reception of the Gentiles into the kingdom and covenant of God under the notion of calling or invitation, and of election or choice: which shows that he views the two parties in a light different to that in which he had before placed them. The Gentiles he considers as invited into the kingdom of God, and as chosen to be his people; and the Jews he considers as left out and rejected; for as the main body of them had now rejected the Gospel of Christ, he saw that God was about to unchurch them, overturn their polity, destroy their temple, and disperse them over the face of the earth. Thus he knew they would be accursed, or anathematized from Christ, and reduced to a level with the heathen nations of the world. And the event has proved that his declarations were dictated by the Spirit of truth.
It is observable that, agreeably to his delicate manner of writing, and his nice and tender treatment of his countrymen, he never mentions their rejection-a subject extremely painful to his thoughts-otherwise than in a wish that he himself were accursed from Christ for them, or to prevent them from being accursed from Christ, (Romans 9:3,) till he comes to Rom. 11, where he has much to say in their favor, even considered, as at present, rejected. But it is very evident that his arguments in this chapter rest on the supposition that the main body of the Jewish nation would be cast out of the visible kingdom of God; and it is for this reason that in this and the two following chapters he considers the reception of any people into the kingdom and covenant of God under the relative notion of inviting and choosing, or of calling and election. The Jews were rejected and reprobated; the Gentiles were chosen and called, or elected. As this is most obviously the apostles meaning, it is strange that any should apply his doctrine to the particular and unconditional reprobation and election of individuals.
It is upon this rejection of the Jews that the calling and election of the Gentiles rest. If the Jews be not rejected, but are still the visible Church and kingdom of God, then the Gentiles, according to the most proper inference from the apostles doctrine, have no right to the blessings of the kingdom. Instead of being invited or called, they are intruders at the heavenly feast; and this the unbelieving Jews labored to prove, and thus unhinge the believing Gentiles by persuading them that they were not duly taken into the Church of God; that the Jews were, and ever must continue to be, the only Church and kingdom of God, and that they could not be cast off so long as God was faithful to his promise to Abraham; and that the Gentiles were most miserably deceived when they supposed they were brought into that kingdom by faith in Christ, whereas there was no way of entering it, or of being entitled to its privileges, but by submitting to the law of Moses. This being the fixed opinion of the Jews, and the ground on which they opposed the Gentiles and endeavored to sap the foundation of their hope of salvation from the Gospel of Christ, it was therefore a matter of the utmost importance to be able to prove that the Jews, by rejecting Christ and his Gospel, were themselves cast out of the Church, and this in a way perfectly consistent with the truth of the promise made to Abraham. He had slightly touched on this subject at the beginning of the third chapter; but it would have broken in too much on the thread of his discourse to have pursued the argument there, for which reason he appears to have reserved it to this place, where he (1) solemnly declares his tenderest affection for his countrymen, and his real grief of heart for their infidelity and consequent rejection, Romans 9:1-5; (2) Answers objections against this rejection, Romans 9:6-23; (3) Proves the calling of the Gentiles from their own Scriptures, Romans 9:24-30; (4) Gives the true state and reasons of the rejection of the Jews and the calling of the Gentiles, Romans 9:30 to Romans 10:14; (5) Proves the necessity of the apostolic mission to the Gentiles in order to their salvation, Romans 10:14-21.
And all this was intended at once to vindicate the Divine dispensations; to convince the infidel Jew; to satisfy the believing Gentile that his calling or invitation into the Church of God was valid; to arm him against the cavils and objections of the unbelieving Jews, and to dispose the Christian Jew to receive and own the believing Gentile as a member of the family and kingdom of God, by Divine right, equal to any to which he himself could pretend. See Taylors notes, p. 321, etc.
Verse 1. I say the truth in Christ, I lie not This is one of the
most solemn oaths any man can possibly take. He appeals to Christ as the
searcher of hearts that he tells the truth; asserts that his conscience was
free from all guile in this matter, and that the Holy Ghost bore him testimony
that what he said was true. Hence we find that the testimony of a mans own
conscience, and the testimony of the Holy Ghost, are two distinct things,
and that the apostle had both at the same time.
As the apostle had still remaining a very awful part of his commission to
execute, namely, to declare to the Jews not only that God had chosen the
Gentiles, but had rejected them because they had rejected Christ and his
Gospel, it was necessary that he should assure them that however he had been
persecuted by them because he had embraced the Gospel, yet it was so far
from being a gratification to him that they had now fallen under the displeasure
of God, that it was a subject of continual distress to his mind, and that
it produced in him great heaviness and continual sorrow.
Verse 3. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ This
and the two preceding verses are thus paraphrased by Dr. Taylor: I am so
far from insisting on the doctrine (of the rejection of the Jews) out of
any ill-will to my countrymen, that I solemnly declare, in the sincerity
of my heart, without the least fiction or dissimulation-and herein I have
the testimony of my own conscience, enlightened and directed by the Spirit
of God-that I am so far from taking pleasure in the rejection of the Jewish
nation, that, contrariwise, it gives me continual pain and uneasiness, insomuch
that, as Moses formerly (when God proposed to cut them off, and in their
stead to make him a great nation, Exodus 32:10) begged that he himself should
rather die than that the children of Israel should be destroyed, Exodus 32:32,
so I could even wish that the exclusion from the visible Church, which will
happen to the Jewish nation, might fall to my own share, if hereby they might
be kept in it and to this I am inclined by natural affection, for the Jews
are my dear brethren and kindred.
Very few passages in the New Testament have puzzled critics and commentators
more than this. Every person saw the perfect absurdity of understanding it
in a literal sense, as no man in his right mind could wish himself eternally
damned in order to save another, or to save even the whole world. And the
supposition that such an effect could be produced by such a sacrifice, was
equally absurd and monstrous. Therefore various translations have been made
of the place, and different solutions offered. Mr. Wakefieid says: I see
no method of solving the difficulty in this verse, which has so exercised
the learning and ingenuity of commentators, but by the eucomai einai of Homer,
I profess myself to be; and he translates the passage in a parenthesis, thus:
(for I also was once an alien from Christ) on account of my brethren, etc.
But how it does appear that Saul of Tarsus was ever an alien from Christ
on account of his kinsmen, is to me perfectly indiscernible. Let us examine
the Greek text. hucomhn gar autov egw anaqema einai apo tou cristou upertwn
adelfwn mou, For I did wish myself to be an anathema FROM Christ (upo,
BY Christ, as some ancient MSS. read) for my brethren. As hucomhn is the
1st per. sing. of the imperfect tense, some have been led to think that St.
Paul is here mentioning what had passed through his own mind when filled
with the love of God, he learned the rejection of the Jews; and that he only
mentions it here as a thing which, in the effusions of his loving zeal, had
been felt by him inconsiderately, and without any Divine afflatus leading
him to it; but that he does not intimate that now he felt any such unreasonable
and preposterous wish. I am afraid this is but ill calculated to solve the
difficulty.
The Greek word anaqema, anathema, properly signifies any thing devoted to
God, so as to be destroyed: it answers to the Hebrew rj cherem, which the
Septuagint translate by it, and means either a thing or person separated
from its former state or condition, and devoted to destruction. In this sense
it is used, Deuteronomy 7:25, 26; Joshua 6:17, 18; 7:12.
It is certain that the word, both among the Hebrews and Greeks, was used
to express a person devoted to destruction for the public safety. In Midrash
hanneelam, in Sohar Chadash, fol. 15, Rabbi Chaijah the elder said: There
is no shepherd found like unto Moses, who was willing to lay down his life
for the sheep; for Moses said, Exodus 32:32, If thou wilt not pardon their
sin, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written. Such
anathemas, or persons devoted to destruction for the public good, were common
among all ancient nations. See the case of M. Curtius and Decius among the
Romans. When a plague took place, or any public calamity, it was customary
to take one of the lowest or most execrable of the people, and devote him
to the Dii Manes or infernal gods. See proofs in Schleusner, and see the
observations at the end of the chapter. This one circumstance is sufficient
to explain the word in this place. Paul desired to be devoted to destruction,
as the Jews then were, in order to redeem his countrymen from this most terrible
excision. He was willing to become a sacrifice for the public safety, and
to give his life to redeem theirs. And, as Christ may be considered as devoting
them to destruction, (see Matthew 24,) Paul is willing that in their place
Christ should devote him: for I could wish myself, anaqema eimai apo (or,
as some excellent MSS. have it, upo) tou cristou, to be devoted BY Christ,
to that temporal destruction to which he has adjudged the disobedient Jews,
if by doing so I might redeem them. This, and this alone, seems to be the
meaning of the apostles wish.
Verse 4. Who are Israelites Descendants of Jacob, a man so highly favored
of God, and from whom he received his name Israel-a prince of God, Genesis
32:28; from which name his descendants were called Israelites, and separated
unto God for his glory and praise. Their very name of Israelites implied
their very high dignity; they were a royal nation; princes of the most high
God.
The adoption The Israelites were all taken into the family of God, and were called his sons and first-born, Exodus 4:22; Deuteronomy 14:1; Jeremiah 31:9; Hosea 11:1; and this adoption took place when God made the covenant with them at Horeb.
The glory The manifestation of God among them; principally by the cloud and pillar, and the Shekinah, or Divine presence, appearing between the cherubim over the mercy-seat. These were peculiar to the Jews; no other nation was ever thus favored.
The covenants The covenants made with Abraham, both that which relates
to the spiritual seed, and that which was peculiar to his natural descendants,
Galatians 3:16, 17; which covenants were afterwards renewed by Moses, Deuteronomy
29:1. Some suppose that the singular is here put for the plural, and that
by covenants we are to understand the decalogue, which is termed tyrb berith,
or covenant, Deuteronomy 4:13. But it is more likely that the apostle alludes
to the great covenant made with Abraham, and to its various renewals and
extensions at different times afterwards, as well as to its twofold design-the
grant of the land of Canaan, and the rest that remains for the people of
God. The giving of the law The revelation of God by God himself, containing
a system of moral and political precepts. This was also peculiar to the Jews;
for to no other nation had he ever given a revelation of his will.
The service latreia. The particular ordinances, rites, and ceremonies
of their religious worship, and especially the sacrificial system, so expressive
of the sinfulness of sin and the holiness of God.
The promises The land of Canaan, and the blessings of the Messiah
and his kingdom; which promises had been made and often repeated to the
patriarchs and to the prophets.
Verse 5. Whose are the fathers Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, the
twelve patriarchs, Moses, Joshua, Samuel, David, etc., etc., without controversy,
the greatest and most eminent men that ever flourished under heaven. From
these, is an uninterrupted and unpolluted line, the Jewish people had descended;
and it was no small glory to be able to reckon, in their genealogy, persons
of such incomparable merit and excellency. And of whom, as concerning
the flesh Christ came These ancestors were the more renowned, as being
the progenitors of the human nature of the MESSIAH. Christ, the Messiah,
kata sarka, according to the flesh, sprang from them. But this Messiah was
more than man, he is God over all; the very Being who gave them being, though
he appeared to receive a being from them.
Here the apostle most distinctly points out the twofold nature of our Lord-his
eternal Godhead and his humanity; and all the transpositions of particles,
and alterations of points in the universe, will not explain away this doctrine.
As this verse contains such an eminent proof of the deity of Christ, no wonder
that the opposers of his divinity should strive with their utmost skill and
cunning to destroy its force. And it must be truly painful to a mind that
has nothing in view but truth, to see the mean and hypocritical methods used
to elude the force of this text. Few have met it in that honest and manly
way in which Dr. Taylor, who was a conscientious Arian, has considered the
subject. Christ, says he, is God over all, as he is by the Father appointed
Lord, King, and Governor of all. The Father hath committed all judgement
to the Son, John 5:22; has given all things into his hands, Matthew 28:18;
he is Lord of all, Acts 10:36. God has given him a name above every name,
Philippians 2:9; above every name that is named, not only in this world,
but also in that which is to come; and has put all things (himself excepted,
1 Corinthians 15:27) under his feet and given him to be head over all things,
Ephesians 1:21, 22. This is our Lords supreme Godhead. And that he is euloghtov,
blessed for ever, or the object of everlasting blessing, is evident from
Revelation 5:12, 13: Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power-and
blessing and honor be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the
Lamb for ever and ever. Thus it appears the words may be justly applied to
our blessed Lord. Notes, p. 329. Yes, and when we take other scriptures into
the account, where his essential Godhead is particularly expressed, such
as Colossians 1:16, 17: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven,
and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or
dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created BY him,
and FOR him: and he is BEFORE all things, and BY him do all things consist;
we shall find that he is not God by investiture or office, but properly and
essentially such; for it is impossible to convey in human language, to human
apprehension, a more complete and finished display of what is essential to
Godhead, indivisible from it, and incommunicable to any created nature, than
what is contained in the above verses. And while these words are allowed
to make a part of Divine revelation, the essential Godhead of Jesus Christ
will continue to be a doctrine of that revelation.
I pass by the groundless and endless conjectures about reversing some of
the particles and placing points in different positions, as they have been
all invented to get rid of the doctrine of Christs divinity, which is so
obviously acknowledged by the simple text; it is enough to state that there
is no omission of these important words in any MS. or version yet
discovered.
Verse 6. Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. A Jew
might have objected, as in Romans 3:3: Is not God bound by his faithfulness
to continue the Jews as his peculiar Church and people, notwithstanding the
infidelity of the major part of them? If they are brought to a level with
the Gentiles, will it not follow that God hath failed in the performance
of his promise to Abraham? Genesis 17:7, 8: I will establish my covenant
between me and thee for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and
thy seed after thee. To which it may be answered: This awful dispensation
of God towards the Jews is not inconsistent with the veracity of the Divine
promise; for even the whole body of natural born Jews are not the whole of
the Israelites comprehended in the promise. Abraham is the father of many
nations; and his seed is not only that which is of the law, but that also
which is of the faith of Abraham, Romans 4:16, 17. The Gentiles were included
in the Abrahamic covenant as well as the Jews; and therefore the Jews have
no exclusive right to the blessings of Gods kingdom.
Verse 7. Neither because they are the seed of Abraham, etc. Nor can
they conclude, because they are the natural descendants of Abraham, that
therefore they are all of them, without exception, the children in whom the
promise is to be fulfilled.
But, in Isaac shall thy seed be called. The promise is not confined
to immediate natural descent, but may be accomplished in any part of Abrahams
posterity. For Abraham had several sons besides Isaac, Genesis 25:1, 2,
particularly Ishmael, who was circumcised before Isaac was born, and in whom
Abraham was desirous that the promise should be fulfilled, Genesis 17:18,
and in him God might have fulfilled the promise, had he so pleased; and yet
he said to Abraham, Genesis 21:12: Not in Ishmael, but in Isaac, shall thy
seed be called.
Verse 8. That is, They which are the children of the flesh Whence
it appears that not the children who descend from Abrahams loins, nor those
who were circumcised as he was, nor even those whom he might expect and desire,
are therefore the Church and people of God; but those who are made children
by the good pleasure and promise of God, as Isaac was, are alone to be accounted
for the seed with whom the covenant was established.
Verse 9. For this is the word of promise, etc. That is, this is evidently
implied in the promise recorded Genesis 18:10: At this time I will come,
saith God, and exert my Divine power, and Sarah, though fourscore and ten
years old, shall have a son; which shows that it is the sovereign will and
act of God alone, which singles out and constitutes the peculiar seed that
was to inherit the promise made to Abraham.
It should be considered that the apostle, in this and the following quotations,
does not give us the whole of the text which he intends should be taken into
his argument, but only a hint or reference to the passages to which they
belong; directing us to recollect or peruse the whole passage, and there
view and judge of the argument.
That he is so to be understood appears from the conclusion he draws, Romans
9:16: So then, it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but
of God that showeth mercy. In his arguments, Romans 9:7, 8, etc., he says
not one word of Abrahams willing Ishmael to be the seed in whom the promise
might be fulfilled; nor of Isaacs willing Esau; nor of Moses willing and
interceding that the Israelites might be spared; nor of Esaus running for
venison; but by introducing these particulars into his conclusion, he gives
us to understand that his quotations are to be taken in connection with the
whole story, of which they are a part; and without this the apostles meaning
cannot be apprehended.
The same may be said of his conclusion, Romans 9:18: Whom he will he hardeneth:
hardeneth is not in his argument, but it is in the conclusion. Therefore
hardening is understood in the argument, and he evidently refers to the case
of Pharaoh. The generality of the Jews were well acquainted with the Scripture,
and a hint was sufficient to revive the memory of a whole passage. Taylor,
p. 330.
Verse 10. And not only this A Jew might object: Ishmael was rejected,
not by the sovereign will of God, but because he was the son of the handmaid,
or bond-woman, and therefore unworthy to be the peculiar seed; but observe,
this was not the only limitation of the seed of Abraham with regard to inheriting
the promise, for when Rebecca was with child by that one person of Abrahams
issue to whom the promise was made, namely, our father Isaac, she went to
inquire of the Lord, Genesis 25:22, 23: And the Lord said unto her, Two nations
are in thy womb, and two manner of PEOPLE shall be separated from thy bowels;
and the one PEOPLE shall be stronger than the other PEOPLE; and the elder
shall serve the younger. That is, the posterity of the younger shall be a
nation much more prosperous and happy than the posterity of the elder.
Verse 11. For the children being not yet born As the word children
is not in the text, the word nations would be more proper; for it is of nations
that the apostle speaks, as the following verses show, as well as the history
to which he refers. Neither having done any good To merit the distinction
of being made the peculiar people of God; nor evil, to deserve to be left
out of this covenant, and the distinguishing national blessings which it
conferred; that the purpose of God according to election might stand-that
such distinctions might appear to depend on nothing but Gods free choice,
not of works, or any desert in the people or nations thus chosen; but of
the mere purpose of him who calleth any people he pleases, to make them the
depositories of his especial blessings, and thus to distinguish them from
all others.
Verse 12. The elder shall serve the younger These words, with those
of Malachi, Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated, are cited by
the apostle to prove, according to their typical signification, that the
purpose of God, according to election, does and will stand, not of works,
but of him that calleth; that is, that the purpose of God, which is the ground
of that election which he makes among men, unto the honor of being Abrahams
seed, might appear to remain unchangeable in him; and to be even the same
which he had declared unto Abraham. That these words are used in a national
and not in a personal sense, is evident from this: that,
taken in the latter sense they are not true, for Jacob never did exercise
any power over Esau, nor was Esau ever subject to him. Jacob, on the contrary,
was rather subject to Esau, and was sorely afraid of him; and, first,
by his messengers, and afterwards personally, acknowledged his brother to
be his lord, and himself to be his servant; see Genesis 32:4; 33:8, 13. And
hence it appears that neither Esau nor Jacob, nor even their posterities,
are brought here by the apostle as instances of any personal reprobation
from eternity: for, it is very certain that very many, if not the far greatest
part, of Jacobs posterity were wicked, and rejected by God; and it is not
less certain that some of Esaus posterity were partakers of the faith of
their father Abraham.
From these premises the true sense of the words immediately following, Jacob
have I loved, and Esau have I hated, Malachi 1:2, 3, fully appears; that
is, that what he had already cited from Moses concerning the two nations,
styled by the names of their respective heads, Jacob and Esau, was but the
same in substance with what was spoken many years after by the Prophet Malachi.
The unthankful Jews had, in Malachis time, either in words or in their heart,
expostulated with God, and demanded of him wherein he had loved them? I
have loved you, saith the Lord: yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us?
Malachi 1:2-5. To this the Lord answers: Was not Esau Jacobs brother?
Yet I loved Jacob and hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage
waste for the dragons of the wilderness. Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished,
but we will return and build the desolate places; thus saith the Lord of
hosts, They shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them,
The border of wickedness, and, The people against whom the Lord hath indignation
for ever. And your eyes shall see, and ye shall say, The Lord will be magnified
from the border of Israel.
Verse 14. What shall we say then? To what conclusion shall we come
on the facts before us? Shall we suggest that Gods bestowing peculiar privileges
in this unequal manner, on those who otherwise are in equal circumstances,
is inconsistent with justice and equity? By no means.
Whatever God does is right, and he may dispense his blessings to whom and
or what terms he pleases. (editor's note: See Finney's article on
"Is God's Sovereign Will the foundation of Moral
Obligation?" for an examination of what sense we may declare that
"whatever God does is right".)
Verse 15. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy, etc. The words
of God to Moses, Exodus 33:19, show that God has a right to dispense his
blessings as he pleases; for, after he had declared that he would spare the
Jews of old, and continue them in the relation of his peculiar people, when
they had deserved to have been cut off for their idolatry, he said: I will
make all my goodness pass before thee; and I will proclaim the name of the
Lord before thee; and I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy; and I
will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. As if he had said: I
will make such a display of my perfections as shall convince you that my
nature is kind and beneficent; but know, that I am a debtor to none of my
creatures. My benefits and blessings are merely from my own good will: nor
can any people, much less a rebellious people, challenge them as their due
in justice or equity. And therefore I now spare the Jews; not because either
you, who intercede for them or they themselves have any claim upon my favor,
but of my own free and sovereign grace I choose to show them mercy and
compassion. I will give my salvation in my own way and on my own terms. He
that believeth on my Son Jesus shall be saved; and he that believeth not
shall be damned. This is Gods ultimate design; this purpose he will never
change; and this he has fully declared in the everlasting Gospel. This is
the grand DECREE of reprobation and election.
Verse 16. So then it is not of him that willeth, etc. I conclude,
therefore, from these several instances, that the making or continuing any
body of men the peculiar people of God, is righteously determined; not by
the judgment, hopes, or wishes of men, but by the will and wisdom of God
alone. For Abraham judged that the blessing ought, and he willed, desired,
that it might be given to Ishmael; and Isaac also willed, designed, it for
his first-born, Esau: and Esau, wishing and hoping that it might be his,
readily went, ran a hunting for venison, that he might have the blessing
regularly conveyed to him: but they were all disappointed - Abraham and Isaac,
who willed, and Esau who ran: for God had originally intended that the blessing
of being a great nation and distinguished people should, of his mere good
pleasure, be given to Isaac and Jacob, and be confirmed in their posterity;
and to them it was given. And when by their apostasy they had forfeited this
privilege, it was not Moses willing, nor any prior obligation God was under,
but his own sovereign mercy, which continued it to them.
Verse 17. For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh Instead of showing
the Israelites mercy he might justly have suffered them to have gone on in
sin, till he should have signalized his wisdom and justice in their destruction;
as appears from what God in his word declares concerning his dealings with
Pharaoh and the Egyptians, Exodus 9:15, 16: For now, saith the Lord, I
had stretched forth my hand, (in the plague of boils and blains,) and I had
smitten thee and thy people with the pestilence; and thou hadst (by this
plague) been cut off from the earth; (as thy cattle were by the murrain;)
but in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up-I have restored thee
to health by removing the boils and blains, and by respiting thy deserved
destruction to a longer day, that I may, in thy instance, give such a
demonstration of my power in thy final overthrow, that all mankind may learn
that I am God, the righteous Judge of all the earth, the avenger of
wickedness. See this translation of the original vindicated in my notes
on Exodus 9:15, 16; and, about the hardening of Pharaoh, see the notes on
those places where the words occur in the same book.
Verse 18. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will This is the apostles
conclusion from the facts already laid down: that God, according to his own
will and wisdom, in perfect righteousness, bestows mercy; that is to say,
his blessings upon one part of mankind, (the Jews of old, and the Gentiles
of the present time,) while he suffers another part (the Egyptians of old,
and the Jews of the present day) to go on in the abuse of his goodness and
forbearance, hardening themselves in sin, till he brings upon them a most
just and exemplary punishment, unless this be prevented by their deep repentance
and general return to God through Jesus the promised, the real Messiah.
Verse 19. Why doth he yet find fault? The apostle here introduces
the Jew making an objection similar to that in Romans 3:7: If the truth
of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory, that is, if Gods
faithfulness is glorified by my wickedness, why yet am I also judged as a
sinner? Why am I condemned for that which brings so much glory to him?
The question here is: If Gods glory be so highly promoted and manifested
by our obstinacy, and he suffers us to proceed in our hardness and infidelity,
why does he find fault with us, or punish us for that which is according
to his good pleasure?
Verse 20. Nay but, O man, who art thou As if he had said: Weak,
ignorant man, darest thou retort on the infinitely good and righteous GOD?
Reflect on thyself; and tell me, after thou hast abused the grace of God,
and transgressed his laws, wilt thou cavil at his dispensations? God
hath made, created, formed the Jewish nation; and shall the thing formed,
when it hath corrupted itself, pretend to correct the wise and gracious Author
of its being, and say, Why hast thou made me thus? Why hast thou constituted
me in this manner? Thou hast done me wrong in giving me my being under such
and such conditions.
Old John Goodwins note on this passage is at least curious: I scarce (says
he) know any passage of the Scripture more frequently abused than this. When
men, in the great questions of predestination and reprobation, bring forth
any text of Scripture which they conceive makes for their notion, though
the sense which they put upon it be ever so uncouth and dissonant from the
true meaning of the Holy Ghost, yet, if any man contradict, they frequently
fall upon him with-Nay but, O man; who art thou? As if St. Paul had left
them his heirs and successors in the infallibility of his spirit! But when
men shall call a solid answer to their groundless conceits about the meaning
of the Scriptures, a replying against God, it savours more of the spirit
who was seen falling like lightning from heaven, than of His, who saw him
in this his fall.
Verse 21. Hath not the potter power over the clay The apostle continues
his answer to the Jew. Hath not God shown, by the parable of the potter,
Jeremiah 18:1, etc., that he may justly dispose of nations, and of the Jews
in particular, according as he in his infinite wisdom may judge most right
and fitting; even as the potter has a right, out of the same lump of clay,
to make one vessel to a more honorable and another to a less honorable use,
as his own judgment and skill may direct; for no potter will take pains to
make a vessel merely that he may show that he has power to dash it to pieces?
For the word came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying, Arise, and go down
to the potters house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words. Then
I went down to the potters house, and, behold, he wrought a work upon the
wheels. And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hands of the
potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter
to make it. It was not fit for the more honorable place in the mansion, and
therefore he made it for a less honorable place, but as necessary for the
masters use there, as it could have been in a more honorable situation. Then
the word of the Lord came to me, saying, O house of Israel, cannot I do with
you as this potter? Behold, as the clay is in the potters hand, so are ye
in mine hand, O house of Israel. At what instant I shall speak concerning
a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to
destroy it; if that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their
evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And
at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation-to build and to plant it;
is it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent
of the good wherewith I said I would benefit them. The reference
to this parable shows most positively that the apostle is speaking of men,
not individually, but nationally; and it is strange that men should have
given his words any other application with this scripture before their
eyes.
Verse 22. What if God, willing to show his wrath The apostle refers
here to the case of Pharaoh and the Egyptians, and to which he applies Jeremiahs
parable of the potter, and, from them, to the then state of the Jews. Pharaoh
and the Egyptians were vessels of wrath-persons deeply guilty before God;
and by their obstinate refusal of his grace, and abuse of his goodness, they
had fitted themselves for that destruction which the wrath, the vindictive
justice of God, inflicted, after he had endured their obstinate rebellion
with much long-suffering; which is a most absolute proof that the hardening
of their hearts, and their ultimate punishment, were the consequences of
their obstinate refusal of his grace and abuse of his goodness; as the history
in Exodus sufficiently shows. As the Jews of the apostles time had sinned
after the similitude of the Egyptians, hardening their hearts and abusing
his goodness, after every display of his long-suffering kindness, being now
fitted for destruction, they were ripe for punishment; and that power, which
God was making known for their salvation, having been so long and so much
abused and provoked, was now about to show itself in their destruction as
a nation. But even in this case there is not a word of their final damnation;
much less that either they or any others were, by a sovereign decree, reprobated
from all eternity; and that their very sins, the proximate cause of their
punishment, were the necessary effect of that decree which had from all eternity
doomed them to endless torments. As such a doctrine could never come from
God, so it never can be found in the words of his apostle.
Verse 23. And that he might make known God endured with much
long-suffering the vessels of wrath:
Which he had afore prepared unto glory The Jews were fitted for
destruction long before; but the fittest time to destroy them was after he
had prepared the believing Gentiles unto glory. For the rod of the Messiahs
strength was to be sent out of Zion, Psalm 110:2. The Jewish nation was to
supply the first preachers of the Gospel, and from Jerusalem their sound
was to go forth into all the earth. Therefore the Jewish state, notwithstanding
its corruptions, was to be preserved till the Messiah came, and even till
the Gospel preached by the apostles had taken deep root in the Gentile world.
Another thing which rendered the time when the Jewish polity was overthrown
the most proper, was this, because then the immediate occasion of it was
the extensiveness of the Divine grace. They would not have the Gentiles admitted
into the Church of God; but contradicted, and blasphemed, and rejected the
Lord that bought them: thus, then, the extensiveness of the Divine grace
occasioned their infidelity, Romans 9:33; 10:3; 11:11, 12, 15, 28, 30. Thus
the Jews were diminished by that abundance of grace which has enriched the
Gentiles. And so the grace of God was illustrated; or, so God made known
the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy-the apostles and primitive
believers among the Jews, and the Gentile world, which received the Gospel
by the preaching of the apostles and their successors.
Verse 24. Even us, whom he hath called All the Jews and Gentiles who
have been invited by the preaching of the Gospel to receive justification
by faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, and have come to the Gospel feast on this
invitation.
Verse 25. As he saith also in Osee It is a cause of not a little
confusion, that a uniformity in the orthography of the proper names of the
Old and New Testaments has not been preserved. What stranger to our sacred
books would suppose that the Osee above meant the Prophet Hosea, from whom,
Hosea 2:23, this quotation is taken: I will have mercy on her that had
not obtained mercy; and I will say to them which were not my people, Thou
art my people. The apostle shows that this calling of the Gentiles was
no fortuitous thing, but a firm purpose in the Divine mind, which he had
largely revealed to the prophets; and by opposing the calling of the Gentiles,
the Jews in effect renounced their prophets, and fought against God.
Verse 26. And it shall come to pass, etc. These quotations are taken
out of Hosea, Hosea 1:10, where (immediately after God had rejected the ten
tribes, or kingdom of Israel, Hosea 1:9, then saith God, Call his name Lo-ammi;
for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God,) he adds, yet the number
of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be
measured nor numbered: and it shall come to pass, that in the place in which
it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there it shall be said unto
them, Ye are the sons of the living God. As if he had said: The decrease
of numbers in the Church, by Gods utterly taking away the ten tribes, (Hosea
1:6,) shall be well supplied by what shall afterwards come to pass, by calling
the Gentiles into it. They, the rejected Jews, which had been the people
of God, should become a Lo-ammi-not my people. On the contrary, they, the
Gentiles, who had been a Lo-ammi-not my people, should become the children
of the living God. Again, Hosea 2:23: I will sow her (the Jewish Church)
unto me in the earth, (alluding probably to the dispersion of the Jews over
all the Roman empire; which proved a fruitful cause of preparing the Gentiles
for the reception of the Gospel,) and, or moreover, I will have mercy upon
her, the body of the believing Gentiles, that had not obtained mercy. See
Taylor.
Verse 27. Esaias also crieth The apostle pursues his argument, which
had for its object the proof that God, for their infidelity, had rejected
the great body of the Jews, and that but a few of them would embrace the
Gospel, and be saved from that besom of destruction which was now coming
to sweep them and their state away. Dr. Taylor paraphrases this and the following
verses thus: And that but a small remnant of the Jews shall now be taken
into the Church, is agreeable to former dispensations; for the Prophet Isaiah
expressly declares concerning the Israelites, Isaiah 10:22, 23: Though the
number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, (for the promise
to Abraham has been amply fulfilled,) only a remnant shall be saved; the
consumption decreed shall overflow in righteousness. For the Lord God of
hosts shall make a consumption, even determined in the midst of all the
land.
Verse 28. For he will finish the work, and cut it short, etc. These
appear to be forensic terms, and refer to the conclusion of a judicial
proceeding; the Lord has tried and found them guilty, and will immediately
execute upon them the punishment due to their transgressions.
Verse 29. And as Esaias said before What God designs to do with the
Jews at present, because of their obstinacy and rebellion, is similar to
what he has done before, to which the same prophet refers, Isaiah 1:9:
Except the Lord of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should
have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah: i.e.
had not God, who commands and overrules all the powers in heaven and earth,
in mercy preserved a very small remnant, to keep up the name and being of
the nation, it had been quite cut off and extinct, as Sodom and Gomorrah
were. Thus we learn that it is no new thing with God to abandon the greatest
part of the Jewish nation, when corrupt, and to confine his favor and blessing
to a righteous, believing few.
Instead of remnant, sarid, both the Septuagint and the apostle have sperma,
a seed, intimating that there were left just enough of the righteous to be
a seed for a future harvest of true believers. So the godly were not destroyed
from the land; some remained, and the harvest was in the days of the
apostles.
Verse 30. What shall we say then? What is the final conclusion to
be drawn from all these prophecies, facts, and reasonings? This: That the
Gentiles which followed not after righteousness, etc. This, with the succeeding
verses, together with what belongs to the same subject in the beginning of
the following chapter, I have explained at large in the notes on Romans 1:17,
to which I must refer the reader; and shall content myself in this place
with Dr. Taylors general paraphrase. We may suppose the apostle to express
himself to the following effect. Thus I have vindicated the rejection of
the Jews and the calling of the Gentiles, with regard to the Divine veracity
and justice. Now let us turn our thoughts to the true reason and state of
the affair considered in itself. And, in the first place, what just notion
ought we to have of the calling of the Gentiles and the rejection of the
Jews? I answer: The true notion of the calling or inviting of the Gentiles
is this: whereas they had no apprehension of being reinstated in the privileges
of Gods peculiar kingdom, and consequently used no endeavors to obtain that
blessing, yet, notwithstanding, they have attained to justification, to the
remission of sins, and the privileges of Gods people: not on account of their
prior worthiness and obedience, but purely by the grace and mercy of God,
received by faith on their part. And so, by embracing the scheme of life
published by the Gospel, they are adopted into the family and Church of God.
Thus the Gentiles are called or invited.
Verse 31. But Israel, which followed after But the Jews, who have
hitherto been the people of God, though they have been industrious in observing
a rule by which they supposed they could secure the blessings of Gods peculiar
kingdom, yet have not come up to the true and only rule by which those blessings
can be secured.
Verse 32. Wherefore? And where lies their mistake? Being ignorant
of Gods righteousness-of his method of saving sinners by faith in Christ,
they went about to establish their own righteousness-their own method of
obtaining everlasting salvation. They attend not to the Abrahamic covenant,
which stands on the extensive principles of grace and faith; but they turn
all their regards to the law of Moses. They imagine that their obedience
to that law gives them a right to the blessings of the Messiahs kingdom.
But, finding that the Gospel sets our special interest in God and the privileges
of his Church on a different footing, they are offended, and refuse to come
into it.
Verse 33. As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion Christ, the Messiah,
is become a stone of stumbling to them: and thus what is written in the prophecy
of Isaiah is verified in their case, Isaiah 8:14; 28:16: Behold, I lay in
Sion, i.e. I shall bring in my Messiah; but he shall be a widely different
person from him whom the Jews expect; for, whereas they expect the Messiah
to be a mighty secular prince, and to set up a secular kingdom, he shall
appear a man of sorrows and acquainted with griefs; and redeem mankind, not
by his sword or secular power, but by his humiliation, passion, and death.
Therefore they will be offended at him and reject him, and think it would
be reproachful to trust in such a person for salvation.
And whosoever believeth on him But so far shall any be from confusion or
disappointment who believes in Christ; that on the contrary, every genuine
believer shall find salvation-the remission of sins here, and eternal glory
hereafter. See the notes on Romans 1:16, 17, and Dr. Taylors paraphrase and
notes.
1. ON the subject of vicarious punishment, or rather the case of one becoming
an anathema or sacrifice for the public good, in illustration of Romans 9:3,
I shall make no apology for the following extracts, taken from an author
whose learning is vast, and whose piety is unblemished.
When mankind lost sight of a beneficent Creator, the God of purity, and
consecrated altars to the sun, the moon, the stars; to demons; and to hero
gods, under the names of Moloch, Ashtaroth and Baalim; these objects of their
worship led them to the most horrid acts of cruelty, and to every species
of obscenity; even their sons and their daughters they burnt in the fire
to their gods, more especially in seasons of distress. Such was the conduct
of the king of Moab; for, when he was besieged in his capital, and expected
he should fall into the hands of his enemies, he took his eldest son, who
should have reigned in his stead, and offered him for a burnt offering on
the wall.
With these facts thus related from the Scriptures, all accounts, ancient
and modern, exactly correspond. Homer, who it must be recollected wrote more
than nine hundred years before the Christian era, although he describes chiefly
the common sacrifices of quadrupeds, yet gives one account of human victims.
But in succeeding generations, when it was conceived that one great and most
malignant spirit was the proper object of their fear, or that subordinate
provincial gods, equally malignant, nesciaque humanis precibus mansuescere
corda, disposed of all things in our world, men bound their own species to
the altar, and in circumstances of national distress presented such as they
valued most, either their children or themselves. Herodotus informs us that,
when the army of Xerxes came to the Strymon, the magi offered a sacrifice
of white horses to that river. On his arrival at the Scamander, the king
ascended the citadel of Priam; and having surveyed it, he ordered a thousand
oxen to be sacrificed to the Trojan Minerva. But on other occasions he chose
human victims; for we are informed that, when, having passed the Strymon,
he reached the nine ways, he buried alive nine young men and as many virgins,
natives of the country. In this he followed the example of his wife, for
she commanded fourteen Persian children, of illustrious birth, to be offered
in that manner to the deity who reigns beneath the earth. Thus, in the infancy
of Rome we see Curtius, for the salvation of his country, devoting himself
to the infernal gods, when, as it appears, an earthquake occasioned a deep
and extensive chasm in the forum, and the augurs had declared that the portentous
opening would never close until what contributed most to the strength and
power of the Romans should be cast into it; but that by such a sacrifice
they would obtain immortality for their republic. When all men were at a
loss how to understand this oracle, M. Curtius, armed as for battle, presented
himself in the forum, and explained it thus: What is more valuable to Rome
than her courage and her arms? So saying, he urged forward his impetuous
steed, and buried himself in the abyss. His grateful countrymen admired his
fortitude, and attributed the increasing splendor of their state to the sacrifice
he made. Animated by this example, Decius, in the war between Rome and Latium,
having solemnly offered himself as an expiatory sacrifice, rushed single
into the thickest ranks of the astonished Latins, that by his death he might
appease the anger of the gods, transfer their indignation to the enemy, and
secure the victory to Rome. Conspectus ab utroque acie aliquanto augustior
humano visu, sicut Caelo missus, piaculum omnis deorum irae, qui pestem ab
suis aversam in hostes ferret.
Here we see distinctly marked the notion of vicarious suffering, and the
opinion that the punishment of guilt may be transferred from the guilty to
the innocent. The gods call for sacrifice-the victim bleeds-atonement is
made-and the wrath of the infernal powers falls in its full force upon the
enemy. Thus, while Themistocles at Salamine was offering sacrifice, three
captives, the sons of Sandance, and nephews to Xerxes, all distinguished
for their beauty, elegantly dressed and decked, as became their birth, with
ornaments of gold, being brought on board his galley, the augur, Euphrantides,
observing at the very instant a bright flame ascending from the altar, whilst
one was sneezing on the right, which he regarded as a propitious omen, he
seized the hand of Themistocles, and commanded that they should all be sacrificed
to Bacchus, (wmhsth dionusw-cruel and relentless Bacchus! Homer has the same
expression,) predicting, on this occasion, safety and conquests to the Greeks.
Immediately the multitude with united voices called on the god, and led the
captive princes to the altar, and compelled Themistocles to sacrifice them.
So when AEneas was to perform the last kind office for his friend Pallas,
he sacrificed (besides numerous oxen, sheep, and swine) eight captives to
the infernal gods. In this he followed the example of Achilles, who had caused
twelve Trojans of high birth to bleed by the sacerdotal knife, over the ashes
of his friend Patroclus.
A hundred feet in length, a hundred wide,
The glowing structure spreads on every side,
High on the top the manly course they lay,
And well-fed sheep and sable oxen slay;
Achilles covered with their fat the dead,
And the piled victims round the body spread;
Then jars of honey and of fragrant oil
Suspends around, low bending oer the pile.
Four sprightly coursers with a deadly groan
Pour forth their lives, and on the pyre are thrown
Of nine large dogs, domestic at his board,
Fell two, selected to attend their lord:
The last of all, and horrible to tell,
Sad sacrifice! twelve Trojan captives fell;
On these the rage of fire victorious preys,
Involves and joins them in one common blaze.
Smeared with the bloody rites, he stands on high,
And calls the spirit with a cheerful cry,
All hail, Patroclus! let thy vengeful ghost
Hear, and exult on Plutos dreary coast.
POPES Homer, IL. xxiii. ver. 203
How much was it to be lamented, that even civilized natures should forget
the intention for which sacrifices were originally instituted! The bad effects,
however, would not have been either so extensive or so great, had they not
wholly lost the knowledge of Jehovah; and taken, as the object of their fear,
that evil and apostate spirit whose name, with the utmost propriety is called
Apollyon, or the destroyer, and whose worship has been universally diffused
at different periods among all the nations of the earth.
The practice of shedding human blood before the altars of their gods was
not peculiar to the Trojans and the Greeks; the Romans followed their example.
In the first ages of their republic they sacrificed children to the goddess
Mania; in later periods, numerous gladiators bled at the tombs of the patricians,
to appease the manes of the deceased. And it is particularly noticed of Augustus,
that, after the taking of Perusia, he sacrificed on the ides of March, three
hundred senators and knights to the divinity of Julius Caesar.
(Editor's Note: I have omitted several paragraphs in which Dr. Clarke
presents cases from various countries to illustrate the point of the above
paragraph. Those interested may see the complete discussion in his
Commentary on th eNew Testament.)
Though in the preceding notes I have endeavored to make every point as clear
and plain as possible; yet it may be necessary, in order to see the scope
of the apostles design more distinctly, to take a general survey of the whole.
No man has written with more judgment on this epistle than Dr. Taylor, and
from his notes I borrow the principal part of the following observations.
The principal thing that requires to be settled in this chapter is, what
kind of election and reprobation the apostle is arguing about: whether election,
by the absolute decree and purpose of God, to eternal life; and reprobation,
by a like absolute decree, to eternal misery; or only election to the present
privileges and external advantages of the kingdom of God in this world; and
reprobation, or rejection, as it signifies the not being favored with those
privileges and advantages. I think it demonstrably clear that it is the latter
election and rejection the apostle is discoursing on, and not the former;
as the following considerations appear to me to demonstrate.
I. The subject of the apostles argument is manifestly such privileges as
are enumerated, Romans 9:4, 5: Who are Israelites, to whom pertains the adoption,
etc. From these privileges he supposes the Jews had fallen, or would fall;
or, that for a long time they would be deprived of the benefit of them. For
it is with regard to the loss of those privileges that he was so much concerned
for his brethren, his kinsmen according to the flesh, Romans 9:2, 3. And
it is with reference to their being stripped of these privileges that he
vindicates the word and righteousness of God, Romans 9:24. Not as though
the word of God had taken no effect, or failed, etc.; proving that God, according
to his purpose of election, was free to confer them upon any branch of Abrahams
family: consequently, those privileges were the singular blessings which
by the purpose of God according to election, not of works, but of him that
calleth, were conferred upon Jacobs posterity. But those privileges were
only such as the whole body of the Israelites enjoyed in this world, while
they were the Church and people of God, and such privileges as they might
afterwards lose, or of which they might be deprived; therefore the election
of Jacobs posterity to those privileges was not an absolute election to eternal
life.
II. Agreeably to the purpose of God according to election, it was said unto
Rebecca, The elder shall serve the younger, meaning the posterity of the
elder and the younger; Genesis 25:23: The Lord said unto her, two NATIONS
are in thy womb, and two manner of PEOPLE shall be separated from thy bowels;
and the one PEOPLE shall be stronger than the other PEOPLE; and the elder
shall serve the younger. These are the words which signify the purpose of
God according to election: therefore the election refers to Jacobs posterity,
or the whole nation of Israel. But all the nation of Israel were not absolutely
elected to eternal life: therefore the purpose of God according to election
referred to temporal and not to eternal blessings, and was a privilege of
which they might be deprived.
III. Agreeably to the purpose of God according to election, it was said to
Rebecca, The elder shall serve the younger; but to serve, in Scripture, never
meant to be eternally damned in the world to come: consequently the opposite
blessing, bestowed upon the posterity of the younger, could not be eternal
salvation, but certain privileges in this life; therefore the purpose according
to election refers to those privileges, and the servitude does not imply
everlasting perdition.
IV. The election the apostle speaks of is not of works, Romans 9:11, but
of the mere will of God, who calls and invites, and refers to no qualifications
in the persons thus elected and called. But in no part of the sacred writings
is final salvation said to be given to any who are not qualified by holiness
to receive and enjoy it; therefore election to eternal glory cannot be what
the apostle speaks of in this epistle.
V. The election of which the apostle speaks took place, first in Abraham
and his seed, before his seed was born; and then (secluding Ishmael and all
his posterity) in Isaac and his seed before they were born. And then, secluding
Esau and all his posterity, in Jacob and his seed before they were born.
But the Scripture no where represents eternal life as bestowed upon any family
or race of men in this manner; therefore this election mentioned by the apostle
cannot be an election unto eternal life.
VI. Vessels of mercy, Romans 9:23, are manifestly opposed to vessels of wrath,
Romans 9:22. The vessels of mercy are the whole body of the Jews and Gentiles,
who were called or invited into the kingdom of God under the Gospel, Romans
9:24; consequently, the vessels of wrath are the whole body of the unbelieving
Jews. So in Romans 9:30, 31, the whole body of believing Gentiles, who, according
to Gods purpose of election, had attained justification, are opposed to the
whole body of the Israelites, who came short of it. But men shall not be
received into eternal life or subjected to eternal damnation at the last
day in collective bodies, but according as particular persons in those bodies
have acted well or ill; therefore, this election is not of these particular
bodies unto eternal life, etc.
VII. Whoever carefully peruses the ninth, tenth, and eleventh chapters, will
find that those who have not believed, Romans 11:31, are the present rejected
Jews, or that Israel to whom blindness hath happened in part, Romans 11:25;
the same who fell, and on whom God hath shown severity, Romans 11:22; the
same with the natural branches whom God spared not, Romans 11:21; who were
broken off from the olive tree, Romans 11:20, 19, 17; who were cast away,
Romans 11:15; who were diminished and fallen, Romans 11:12; who had stumbled,
Romans 11:11; who were a disobedient and, gainsaying people, Romans 10:21;
who, being ignorant of Gods righteousness, went about to establish their
own, Romans 10:3; because they sought righteousness, not by faith, but as
it were by the works of the law, Romans 9:32, and therefore had not attained
to the law of righteousness, Romans 9:31; the same people spoken of in all
these places, are the vessels of wrath fitted for destruction, Romans 9:22,
and the same for whom Paul had great heaviness and continual sorrow of heart,
Romans 9:2, 3; -in short, they are the unbelieving nation, or people of Israel;
and it is with regard to the reprobation or rejection of this people that
he is arguing and vindicating the truth, justice, and wisdom of God in this
ninth chapter.
Now, if we turn back and review those three chapters, we shall find that
the apostle, Romans 11:1, heartily desired and prayed that those same reprobated
and rejected people of Israel might be saved; he affirms that they had not
stumbled so as to fall finally and irrecoverably, Romans 11:11; that they
should have again a fullness, Romans 11:12; that they should be received
again into the Church, Romans 11:16; that a holiness still belonged to them,
Romans 11:16; that if they did not still abide in unbelief, they should be
graffed into their own olive tree again, Romans 11:23, 24; that blindness
had happened unto them only for a time, till the fullness of the Gentiles
be come in, Romans 11:25; and then he proves from Scripture, that all Israel-all
those nations at present under blindness, shall be saved, Romans 11:26, 27;
that, as touching the (original) election, they were still beloved for the
fathers, the patriarchs, sake, Romans 11:28; that, in their case, the gifts
and calling of God were without repentance, Romans 11:29; that through our
(the believing Gentiles) mercy, they shall at length obtain mercy, Romans
11:31. All these several things are spoken of that Israel, or the body of
people concerning whose rejection the apostle argues in the ninth chapter.
And therefore the rejection which he there argues about cannot be absolute
reprobation to eternal damnation, but to their being, as a nation, stripped
of those honors and privileges of Gods peculiar Church and kingdom in this
world, to which, at a certain future period, they shall again be restored.
VIII. Once more: whoever carefully peruses those three chapters will find
that the people who in times past believed not God, but have NOW obtained
mercy through the unbelief of the Jews, Romans 11:30, are the whole body
of the believing Gentiles; the same who were cut out of the olive tree which
is wild by nature, and were graffed, contrary to nature, into the good olive
tree, Romans 11:24, 17; the same to whom God hath shown goodness, Romans
11:22; the WORLD that was reconciled, Romans 11:15; the GENTILES who were
enriched by the diminishing of the Jews, Romans 11:12; to whom salvation
came through their fall, Romans 11:11; the Gentiles who had attained to
righteousness, (justification,) Romans 9:30; who had not been Gods people,
nor believed; but now were his people, beloved, and children of the living
God, Romans 9:25, 26; even US whom he hath called, not of the Jews only,
out also of the Gentiles, Romans 9:24, who are the vessels of mercy, on whom
God has made known the riches of his glory, Romans 9:23; the vessels made
unto honor, Romans 9:21. He speaks of the same body of men in all these places;
namely, of the believing Gentiles principally, but not excluding the small
remnant of the believing Jews, who were incorporated with them. And it is
this body of men, whose calling and election he is proving, in whose case
the purpose of God according to election stands good, Romans 9:11, and who
are the children of the promise that are counted for the seed, Romans 9:8:
these are the election, or the elect.
Now, concerning this called or elect body of people, or any particular person
belonging to this body, the apostle writes thus, Romans 11:20-22: Well, because
of unbelief, they (the Jews) were broken off, (reprobated, rejected,) and
thou standest (in the Church among Gods called and elect) by faith; be not
high minded, but fear. For if God spared not the natural branches, (the Jews,)
take heed, lest he also spare not thee, (the Gentiles.) Behold therefore
the goodness and severity of God: on them (the Jews) which fell, severity;
but towards thee (believing Gentiles) goodness, if thou continue in his goodness;
otherwise thou also shalt be cut off, rejected, reprobated. This proves that
the calling, and election, for which the apostle is arguing in the ninth
chapter, is not absolute election unto eternal life, but to the present
privileges of the Church-the honors and advantages of Gods peculiar people;
which election, through unbelief and misimprovement, may be rendered void
and come to nothing. See Dr. Taylor, p. 330, etc.
From thus carefully considering the apostles discourse, and taking in his
scope and design, and weighing the different expressions he uses, in connection
with the Scripture facts and Scripture phrases employed in describing those
facts, we must be fully convinced that the doctrines of eternal, absolute,
unconditional election and reprobation have no place here, and that nothing
but a pre-established creed, and a total inattention to the apostles scope
and design, could ever have induced men to bend these scriptures to the above
purpose, and thus to endeavor to establish as articles of faith, doctrines
which, far from producing glory to God in the highest, and peace and good
will among men, have filled the Church of God with contention, set every
mans sword against his brother, and thus done the work of Apollyon in the
name of Christ. If men will maintain these and such like for Scriptural
doctrines, it is but reasonable to request that it be done in the spirit
of the Gospel.