Down an Unfamiliar Road

Recently, on a daily talk show hosted by a group of women, one of them suggested that she was worried over Vice President Mike Pence’s statement that he talks to God and God talks to him. She left no doubt that she considered this a sign of mental illness. A few days later, the Vice President was shown on TV News responding to her remarks, referring to them as a form of, “religious intolerance.” In his words, “It is just simply wrong for major TV network to have a television program that expresses that kind of religious intolerance,”

I was reminded of the words of the eminent Motivational Pastor, Norman Vincent Peale who said, “Never react emotionally to criticism. Analyze yourself to determine whether it is justified. If it is, correct yourself. Otherwise, go on about your business.”¹ But my mind also went to the Scripture where Peter says, “If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you.”²

I thought of what I might say if put in the same situation. Here is what I would have loved for the Vice President to say: “I have just been given the greatest honor a Christian can receive. My faith and trust in God has just been ridiculed and called a mental illness. Nothing could please me more than to made fun of and laughed at for the sake of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Thank you, Miss _______, for making my day brighter and filled with joy.” – Dr. Robert R Seyda

YOU HAVE A TICKET TO WHERE?

In January 2000, leaders in Charlotte, North Carolina, invited their favorite son, Billy Graham, to a luncheon in his honor. Billy initially hesitated to accept the invitation because he struggles with Parkinson’s disease. But the Charlotte leaders said, “We don’t expect a major address. Just come and let us honor you.” So he agreed.

After wonderful things were said about him, Dr. Graham stepped to the rostrum, looked at the crowd, and said, “I’m reminded today of Albert Einstein, the great physicist who this month has been honored by Time Magazine as the ‘Man of the Century.’

Einstein was once traveling from Princeton on a train when the conductor came down the aisle, punching the tickets of every passenger. When he came to Einstein, Einstein reached in his vest pocket. He couldn’t find his ticket, so he reached into his trouser pockets. It wasn’t there, so he looked in his briefcase but couldn’t find it. Then he looked in the seat beside him. He still couldn’t find it.

The conductor said, ‘Dr. Einstein, I know who you are. We all know who you are. I’m sure you bought a ticket. Don’t worry about it.’

Einstein nodded appreciatively. The conductor continued down the aisle punching tickets. As he was ready to move to the next car, he turned around and saw the great physicist down on his hands and knees looking under his seat for his ticket.

The conductor rushed back and said, ‘Dr. Einstein, Dr. Einstein, don’t worry, I know who you are No problem. You don’t need a ticket. I’m sure you bought one.’ Einstein looked at him and said, ‘Young man, I too, know who I am. What I don’t know is where I’m going.’”

Having said that, Billy Graham continued, “See the suit I’m wearing? It’s a brand new suit. My children and my grandchildren are telling me I’ve gotten a little untidy in my old age. I used to be a bit more choosy. So I went out and bought a new suit for this luncheon and one more occasion. You know what that occasion is? This is the suit in which I’ll be buried. But when you hear I’m dead, I don’t want you to immediately remember the suit I’m wearing. I want you to remember this: ‘I not only know who I am… I also know where I’m going.’”

Many of us like Albert Einstein and Billy Graham, believe we have a ticket to our final destination. But if the Holy Spirit were to stop you today and ask to see your ticket, would you be able to find it? Furthermore, are you more like Einstein who didn’t know where he was going, or more like Billy Graham was sure of his destination. Don’t wait until God’s conductor asks for your ticket before you are sure you know where it is and where you are going. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

PS: I wrote this Serendipity two weeks before Billy Graham died. God’s has impeccable timing.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XXXII)

So Stern now offers a second way of looking at it. He says that verses 31–32a must be taken to mean that the people of Israel were actively pursuing the perfect guidelines based on solid principles of divine righteousness contained in the Law of Moses. However, they failed to see that God’s offer of righteousness was a gift, they were convinced they had to work for it.

Then, in the end, Stern gives his third interpretation of what Paul expressed in verse 31. To him, when Paul spoke of the Law, he was speaking of the Torah, the Law of Moses. Anyone studying the Torah will find that God’s righteousness is expressed in four ways: Its source. Its method. Its demands. and its offer. When read in context, what should be stressed is that it offers the same righteousness obtained by the Gentiles. The problem was, although the Israelites kept pursuing the right goal by understanding the Torah and the righteousness it offers, yet did not reach their goal because they either failed to see or didn’t want to see that true righteousness is grounded in trusting God to do what man is incapable of doing. That is, they did not accept the fact that the Torah said righteousness was a gift, they were convinced they had to earn it.¹

Verse 32: Why? Because they did not pursue righteousness as being grounded in trusting but as if it were grounded in meeting legalistic requirements. They tripped over the stone that makes some people stumble.²

Here Paul puts the focus on the Jews who were quite critical of the Gentiles, even those who were given the privilege to become part of God’s kingdom through grace because they did not also adhere to Jewish customs and traditions. Yet, they themselves, were, for all their efforts, failures in meeting the demands of the Law. But Paul makes this very clear to the Galatians: “Does this mean that the legal part of the Torah stands in opposition to God’s promises? Heaven forbid! For if the legal part of the Torah which God gave had possessed in itself the power to give life, then righteousness really would have come by legalistically following such a Torah.”³ Paul goes on to say: “Consequently, it is clear that no one can ever win God’s favor by trying to keep the Jewish laws because God has said that the only way we can be right in His sight is by faith.”⁴ Paul would then point out the impossibility of such an attempt, because it did not require just converting to Judaism, but in keeping every law on the books.⁵

We have the story of a young man who came to Jesus seeking to become part of the Kingdom of God. He too felt secure because he had obediently kept all the commandments. But when Jesus told him to do one more thing, and that was sell everything he had and give the proceeds to the poor, then come and follow Him, the man felt that was too high a price to pay.⁶ Paul knew what he was talking about here. We find his own story in the letter to the Corinthians: “God in His wisdom saw to it that the world would never find Him through human brilliance, and then He stepped in and saved all those who believed His message, which the world calls foolish and silly. It seems foolish to the Jews because they want a sign from heaven as proof that what is preached is true, and it is foolish to the Gentiles because they believe only what agrees with their philosophy and seems wise to them. So when we preach about Christ dying to save them, the Jews are offended and the Gentiles say it’s all nonsense. But God has opened the eyes of those called to salvation, both Jews and Gentiles, to see that Christ is the mighty power of God to save them; Christ Himself is the center of God’s wise plan for their salvation.”⁷

When it comes to the Jews failing to be made right with God through their own efforts, early church scholar Ambrosiaster notes that when Paul talks about Gentiles fulfilling of the law by faith, it was because of their faith in Christ who fulfilled the Law for them. Meanwhile, the Jews who claimed to have the righteousness required by the law, such as observing the Sabbath, being circumcised, the rites, rituals, ceremonies, feasts, etc., did not come near to fulfilling the law because of their envy and rejection of the Savior. In other words, those who thought they were fulfilling the Law on their own were not, and those who were not fulfilling the Law on their own were doing so through Christ.⁸

Pelagius puts it another way by saying that Paul was explaining once again why the Jews did not find righteousness. They spent so much time glorying their works that they refused to believe and rejected grace on the grounds they didn’t need it, they were already righteous.⁹ In other words, God placed a stepping-stone in front of the Jews but they ended up making it a stumbling-block because of their lack of faith in the One who came to save them.

Reformer John Calvin is direct and straight-forward in his denouncing works over grace. For him, while the Jew’s false zeal seems to be a good excused, nevertheless, Paul shows that they are deservedly rejected because of their attempt to attain salvation by trusting in their own works. In doing so they abolished faith as a method of attaining salvation. Had they been able to gain their object, such success would have been the annihilation of true righteousness.¹⁰ Calvin then asserts that the Jews put too much trust in their works to make them right with God. However, that would be the chief hindrance in their obtaining righteousness which is a gift. That’s because there was a stumbling-block in their way to obtain righteousness through self-effort. Since God spoke by the Prophets that Christ was a cornerstone, it is clear that righteousness can only achieved with His help.

Calvin goes on to say that by calling Christ a stumbling-block, he’s telling us that we shouldn’t be surprised that the Jews made no progress on the road they chose to become righteous. It was through their willful stubbornness that Christ became a rock of offence, in spite of the fact that God showed to them the Way, the Truth, and the Life so plainly. We must never think of the term stumbling-block as defining Christ. To the contrary, it is when sinful people try to get around Him, go over Him, get by Him, or push Him out of the way to get to God that their actions become a stumbling-block to them getting true righteousness.¹¹ In other words, any person who tries to fulfill God’s requirements for salvation because they stumble over the fact that Christ is the only way to achieve it, it is not Christ’s fault, it’s their own fault because they made Christ as a stumbling-block instead of a stepping-stone.

Adam Clarke follows the same line of thinking when he asks if we can we spot the mistake that Judah and Israel made? First of all, they did not understand what God‘s righteousness meant. They didn’t see that it was His method of saving sinners by faith in Christ. So with closed minds and closed eyes, they went about trying to establish their own righteousness. They wanted to create their own method for obtaining everlasting salvation. They did not go back and read the covenant God made with Abraham. Had they done so, they would have clearly seen that it was backed by the principles of grace and faith. Instead, they turned all their attention to the Law of Moses. They imagined that their obedience to that Law gave them a right to the blessings of the Messiah‘s kingdom. But when they were told that they must seek to enter the Messiah’s kingdom through the instructions found in the Gospel, they rebelled. The Gospel elevates a believer’s interest in seeking and knowing God, and the privileges of His Church on a higher level. Since they were offended by this and refused to come into the kingdom that way, it became a stumbling-block to them.¹² And just as ignoring the Gospel was a stumbling-block back in Paul’s day, it is as big an obstacle to receiving salvation today.

As Robert Haldane sees it, the Apostle Paul is asking why the people of Israel did not attain the righteousness they were seeking? He asked that question to get people excited about the answer that was coming. And that answer was that the Jews missed the mark because they were looking for it in the wrong place. They were looking for it in themselves when it can only be found in Christ. Instead of putting their faith in the righteous work of Christ, they chose to put faith in their own righteous works. It wasn’t because they didn’t try, but because trying was not enough. The complete fulfillment of the demands of each and every law had to be completed perfectly. No one was up to such a task. It was impossible to attain the righteousness God required in that manner. Had they succeeded, then Christ would have come in vain. But God would make no such mistake. It is that Christ must be Lord of all or He is not Lord at all.¹³

Albert Barnes explains that while we understand that a stumbling-block is a stone or impediment in a person’s path over which they may fall, Paul uses it here to mean “that obstacle which prevented the Jews from attaining the righteousness of faith.” This became the obstacle that led to Judah and Israel’s fall, rejection, and ruin. It was caused by their rejection and the crucifixion of their own Messiah. It showed their unwillingness to be saved by Him because of their contempt for Him and His message. As a result, they could not reach the place where the blessings of justification were available because God refused to compromise His plan of salvation. So as the Church marched out of Jerusalem, into Samaria, and then into the world they were left behind.¹⁴ Since God had made exceptions before, such as in the wilderness when He saved all those under the age of 21 instead of getting rid of them all,¹⁵ they may have felt that God would make an exclusion again.

Charles Hodge makes the note that in light of all that Paul said in a previous portion of this chapter, and the overall theme of Scriptures on the subject, the ground of the distinction between the saved and the unsaved is not found in what people do, but in what God has done. He has mercy on whom He will have mercy. But it is different when it comes finding the reason for condemnation. God condemns no one, just as Jesus refused to condemn the woman caught in the act of adultery,¹⁶ people bring condemnation on themselves.

It seems strange that the Jews would not accept becoming right with God a gift. They felt they had to work for it to make it worth something. In fact, they really wanted to get credit for earning it because it’s easier to brag about it that way. Believe it or not, there are people today who feel the same way about love. They just can’t understand that love is a gift. They are prepared to do anything to earn the love of someone else, that way it becomes a trophy for them. It doesn’t work with God, and it won’t work with other’s as well. As the Apostle John made it clear, once you find out that you are in love with God you’ll also discover it was because He loved you first.¹⁷

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XXXI)

Spurgeon believes that by this, God’s electing love is clearly seen in Gentile converts. Meanwhile, the Jews who seemed very sincere and devout as to outward ritual, have completely missed the way, the truth, and the life, and never found read righteousness? So the sovereignty of God can be seen in the choosing of those who are willing to follow the way of faith and then rejecting those who went through the motions of following the way while displaying outward righteousness. But the question still remains, why did Israel miss the way? Paul is quick to answer: By their rejection of the light brought by the Messiah and His Gospel.¹

Charles Ellicott looks for a way to meld predestination with freewill. He begins by saying that the Apostle Paul has concluded with his justification for the rejection of Israel, and finished with His line of argument which bears a strong resemblance to the doctrine of predestination. Perhaps a better term would be “predeterminism.” Now he begins to explain the direct opposite of this. While talking about the causes which led to Israel’s rejection, those he puts forward all depend for their validity on the freedom of a person’s freewill. This is not the only place Paul presents such a case. This does not invalidate the previous argument of predeterminism, in fact, it qualifies it.

For Ellicott, the freedom of our flawed freewill and the absolute sovereignty of God’s will are two propositions which, though apparently contradictory, can both exist and operate at the same. If examined by themselves, each appears to be one-sided. But that is only on the surface. Underneath, in ways mystifying to us, both rest on evidence that is itself indisputable. The main reason for Israel’s rejection and for the Gentile’s admission to the new covenant with God is both what the Gentiles did and what they did not do. First, what they did do was to base their justification on faith. What they did not do was try to earn it on their own. Let’s put it this way: The Gentiles, without seeking, were found; the Jews, while seeking, were lost.²

Professor F. F. Bruce also addresses these factors. For him, Paul was considering Israel’s rejection and the Gentiles acceptance from the standpoint of divine election. While that is God’s responsibility to initiate, he now considers it as every called-person’s responsibility. The Gospel, in proclaiming God’s righteousness being bestowed on believers went to the Jews first. However, they rejected it. Then it was sent to the Gentiles. Miraculously, they were the first to accept it. Upon hearing the Gospel message Gentiles responded gratefully to God’s calling which assured them that they would be accepted by God based on their faith. Remember, this was someone they could not see, unlike their idols, and someone they had never heard of. But the Jews continued pursuing self-righteousness by way of the Law. They did this without any assurance from the Law that they would be accepted by God on that basis. So as Bruce sees it, the reasons are simple. The Jews followed the wrong path, one of their own making. The Gentiles followed the right path, the one Jesus opened for them. After all, didn’t He make it clear that He was the only Way, the Truth, and the Life?³

Acceptance by God is only assured by having faith, not by substituting works in its place. It was a hard lesson for everyone to learn that. Despite all the privileges and the light given to the Jews, the divine gift of righteousness could only be attained by going through the same door that was opened to those who lived utter darkness. Gentiles, who had been for ages shut out from really knowing God and His ways, were much more open then those who grew up knowing the Law, the Prophets, and Words of Wisdom bible. No wonder the Gospel turned out to be a stumbling-block to them. But, believe it or not, the very fact it would become a stumbling-block had been forecast. To establish this, Paul quotes from Isaiah again. By blending two oracles which have the common theme of a “stone” divinely laid in times of disaster and judgment, provides refuge for those who entrust themselves to it but proves the downfall of those who stumble against it⁴.⁵

Theologian Karl Barth has much to say about this subject, but one of the things he points out is that people cannot comprehend the issues they must contend with in their lives without understanding something about God and how He works in this world. It is by this understanding that people get to know the standards God has set by which they get to know themselves and how they will be judged. This is what people must wrestle with each day. It could be said that the misery people go through is brought on by the knowledge God gives them that reveals who and what they really are. This often causes them to be embarrassed, troubled, and in Krisis.⁶ What makes matters even worse is when they discover that they cannot escape their sense of guilt and responsibility for what caused the whole mess in the first place. The real riddle is that while everything in this world is under God’s control, yet it all takes place within the sphere of human freedom and responsibility.⁷

John Stott has a very enlightening interpretation of what Paul is saying here. First, he says that even by Paul describing the Gentiles as not interested in practicing morality, it was giving them more credit than they deserved. Most of them were idol worshipers, and pursued self-centered, immoral lives. They were lovers of themselves, of money, and pleasure, rather than lovers of God and goodness.⁸ They had their pagan code of conduct and abided by what their consciences told them was right and wrong. But as far as having a holy standard of living in order to please God and avoid punishment, of this they knew nothing. Paul found that out when he went to Athens and saw streets lined with statues to all kinds of gods. But even they had enough sense to erect one to the Unknown God.

Verses 30-31: So what does all this mean? It means that people who are not Jews were made right with God because they grabbed hold of faith, they were not trying to make themselves right. And the people of Israel, who tried to make themselves right with God by following the Law, did not really seek it with the anticipation of finding anything.

So how was it that the Gentiles end up obtaining what they made no effort to seek for? It all came about when they heard the Gospel message of justification by faith. In fact, the Holy Spirit convinced them so thoroughly that they grabbed hold of it with intensity. Paul uses the Greek word katalambanō to describe this act of faith. It means: “to seize upon, take possession of, to make one’s own.” Israel, meanwhile, sought after the same thing with equal vigor but came away empty-handed. Why? Paul tells us. They were on the wrong path using the wrong method. Stott asks: “Israel’s pursuit of righteousness was almost proverbial. They were imbued with a religious and moral zeal which some would call fanaticism. Why, then, did they not ‘attain’ it? Paul gives us a clue in the text. uses a different Greek verb to describe their action. Their effort is defined as phthanō, which means: “to go after at with anticipation.” So the reason they did not arrive where they expected to be was that they were on the wrong road, pursuing an impossible goal.

Paul anticipates what he will say in the next verse by comparing the route the Gentiles took to obtain Justification and that of the Jews. One was led by faith in the Spirit, the other driven by works of the Law. Both the Gentiles and the Jews had their laws. The Gentiles followed the laws of nature and their conscience, while the Jews followed the laws of the Torah and the Talmud.⁹ In a way, Paul was describing a somewhat upside-down religious situation of his day. The Jews who thought they had righteousness in their hand, to begin with, ended up with nothing, while the Gentiles who started out empty-handed ended up with their hands full of righteousness.¹⁰

Douglas Moo also combines the first and second causes in defining the case of Gentiles replacing Jews in God’s plan for the church. In this instance, Paul explained how in his day God brought different ethnic groups together to develop the composition of chosen people as a result of divine election. On the one hand, God selected those He wanted from the house of Israel to follow the Messiah by coming out from among their brethren and declare themselves followers of Jesus the Messiah. God also selected those from nations existing in that day to also be part of the kingdom of heaven and family of God. They believed and follow Jesus the Savior. His true people would no longer be known as Israelites but as Christians.

But here Paul explains the other side of the story by explaining that even though it was God who elected those He wanted, He left it up to those who were called to accept by faith His predestination and believe in His Son as their Lord. Gentiles were seen as the most fortunate ones. They had spent little time, if any, in pursuit of righteous living according to God’s will. They were ignorant of God’s promises, had no part in the First Covenant with the children of Israel. They also had no concept of what it meant to be right with God. But when God offered it to them by His grace and through the preaching of the Gospel, they responded in faith and so received it. The Jews, on the other hand, by and in large, refused to respond to the Gospel, even when it was delivered by God’s Son. However, many did, a point Paul will make in the next stage of his argument. But the contrast between the wonderful promises made to Israel and the few who openly accepted His gift of salvation was an insult to the Father in Heaven. It was such a rejection of the message of salvation, that Paul considered it fair to say that Israel as a nation had rejected their Messiah.¹¹

Jewish theologian David Stern says there are three possible interpretations of what Paul is saying here about the juxtaposition between the Gentile, Jews, and God. First, when some Christians read verse 31 and understand that the Last Covenant offers a righteousness not found in the First Covenant, it becomes clear that Israel pursued God’s righteousness through the Law of Moses, a Law that defines God’s righteousness, demands God’s righteousness, but does not offer the righteousness of the Last Covenant. However, Stern says that this understanding would make what Paul says next in verse 32 pointless. If God gave Israel a law that did not offer His righteousness, it’s obvious why they didn’t arrive at it. This would have been putting Israel through a useless and pointless charade.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XXX)

We can see why the Apostle Paul feels that those believers who practice such bias are not living up to God’s expectations. In fact, they are wasting God’s grace. How could they expect the world to do what was right when they were not being righteous themselves? Even though Paul does not use it here, the words Isaiah spoke would certainly be apropos: “Listen to me, all who hope for deliverance, who seek the Lord! Consider the quarry from which you were mined, the rock from which you were cut!”¹ This no doubt may have prompted Paul to tell young Timothy: “You are God’s man. Run from all these atrocious things, and work instead at what is right and good, learning to trust Him and love others and to be patient and gentle.”²

But even more harmful was the fact that everyday etiquette, tact, virtues, and integrity were being trampled underfoot; even the expected Christ-like characteristics they gained through their new birth and sanctification were either being ignored or misused. And sadly, Paul saw this as being even more harmful to the Roman church when it came to how Jewish believers were treating Gentile believers. He addressed this same problem in Galatia: “The Scriptures looked forward to this time when God would save the Gentiles also, through their faith. God told Abraham about this long ago when he said, ‘I will bless those in every nation who trust in me as you do.’ And so it is: all who trust in Christ share the same blessing Abraham received.”³ Paul then goes on to offer his list of the righteous things a sanctified believer should exhibit in his character and actions and calls them the fruit of the Spirit.⁴

I’m sure the Apostle Paul was aware that his argument and rationale may have been somewhat puzzling to the church in Rome. So he asks a rhetorical question for them, “What does all this mean?” Early church scholar Origen feels we can find the answer when we understand that it’s one thing to pursue righteousness and another thing to have it implanted within. We know that when someone studies and follows one reference source to another they are said to be pursuing the subject. When we use this same analogy with Gentiles who did not have the tablets of the Law, it is clear that they were not in pursuit of righteousness. Nevertheless, they derived some concept of right and wrong from the natural laws revealed to them. Therefore, they were much more disposed to accept something told to them by faith. So when they heard the message of Christ through the Gospel they accepted it with fewer obstacles than did the Jews.⁵ Some would argue with Origen’s idea; natural law cannot come close to producing what the Law God gave to Moses achieved.

Perhaps that’s why Pelagius gives a different point of view. He says that Paul is imagining here what a Jewish critic might say: If the fact, if it is true that it does not depend on the one who wills or the one who runs, then why is it that the Gentiles found righteousness? How was it that they who never sought it before found it, while Israel who sought it all along could not find it? The Apostle might reply to such a question by saying: the Gentiles believed as soon as they heard the Gospel, but the Jews refused to believe even though they heard it first. This is even more remarkable since they were “the called” through Abraham. You see, righteousness is acquired through faith, and you Jews have refused to believe.⁶

John Calvin sees Paul here begging the question of why did all this happen. Why was Israel, who had the Law given to them by God through Moses, now removed from their place as the firstborn in the family of God, and the Gentiles, who had no laws to follow place ahead of them by God’s favor? Was it the case of Jacob and Esau repeating itself? The way Calvin sees it, it was the result of God’s predestination process. Calvin feels that Paul sees predestination as God’s way of sorting out from the Jews every one who murmured against Him, just as He did in the wilderness. He wants them to know that the reasons for this are easy to understand. But what did Paul’s opponents do, they developed their own plans and then tried to put them ahead of the predestination of God. Paul had previously taught that predestination was to be counted as the first cause. And the fact that this is superior to all other causes, we can see how the corrupt and wicked minds of the ungodly caused them to question the judgment of God.⁷ Calvin goes on to explain that it was Paul’s objective to exalt the grace of God alone, that no other reason might be sought for in the calling of the Gentiles but this, – He moved to embrace them while they were still unworthy of His favor.

As to the second cause, nothing appeared more senseless, or less appropriate than to believe that the Gentiles, who, having no interest in righteousness, who rolled in the passions of the flesh, should be the first to partake of salvation, and to obtain righteousness. Just as illogical would be to say that because the Jews labored so hard to obtain righteousness through the works of the law, they should be excluded from the reward of righteousness. Paul wants to give a straight answer. So he says very plainly that the righteousness which the Gentiles attained was by faith. As such, it depended on the Lord’s grace and mercy, and not on man’s own merit. And the reason the Jews missed the righteousness they sought for was because they wanted to get credit for obtaining it. They wanted to be justified by what they did, not what God did. What they either didn’t realize or refused to accept is that no person can completely satisfy the Law enough to acquire the salvation they need. That’s why Christ’s fulfillment of the Law became their stumbling-block, while for the Gentiles, He became their steppingstone.⁸

Adam Clarke says that we may speculate that the Apostle could have expressed himself in answering these questions in the following manner: I have already vindicated the rejection of the Jews and the election of the Gentiles. It was solely dependent upon Divine truthfulness and justice. So let’s turn our attention to what caused all of this to happen. In the first place, what might be the reason for the calling of the Gentiles and the rejection of the Jews? Paul’s answer could be: My true opinion on the calling or inviting of the Gentiles is this: they had no expectation of becoming part of those who enjoyed the privileges of God‘s in His kingdom. Consequently, they spent no time searching for or trying to obtain such blessings on their own. But in spite of this, they have been justified and counted worthy to receive the remission of sins, and enjoy the privileges of God‘s people. Not because of anything they did to make themselves worthy in obedience to the Law. It was purely by the grace and mercy of God that they were given enough faith to believe. So by embracing the plan of salvation found in the pages of the Gospel, they were adopted into the family of God. To make it as clear as possible, the Gentiles were called to salvation, they did not find it on their own.⁹

Robert Haldane asks a rhetorical question: What is this discussion all about? He then draws the following conclusion: Those Gentiles called by God, of whom the Apostle spoke about in verse 24, who were not living righteous lives, but had yielded their passions to every kind of wickedness, still ended up obtaining true righteousness. We must call this an astonishing instance of divine grace and mercy. For how else could people who were God-haters and guilty of all sorts of abominations, as Paul outlined them in the first chapter of this Epistle, become God-lovers and partakers of that righteousness which corresponds to all the demands of the law? What makes it so astounding is that the nation of Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, thereby ended up having attained nothing. Whatever objection someone may raise to this doctrine the Apostle Paul is teaching here, he offered clear evidence in the case of the Gentiles by using the example of Jacob and Esau, with which he pointed out the purpose of God according to election. Once made, it is unchangeable. It has been and always will be that salvation is by Him who calls, not those who ask to be called.¹⁰

Albert Barnes feels that the Apostle Paul has no intention of suggesting that Gentiles had no concerns about right and wrong. Nor would he eliminate any chance that they had discussions among themselves about them. But when compared to the Jews, they were far behind. One reason is that they did not see it as a reason to justify themselves before God. They were also not driven by prejudice and pride to prove they were better than others as the Jews did. They had no code of conduct such as the Law of Moses to subscribe to with the intention of justifying themselves through obedience and performance. Oh yes, they were excessively sinful, and one missing characteristic among them was righteousness based on law.

Yet they did have their set of moral laws, such as was common to most societies. These forbid stealing, lying, cheating, murder, false witness, etc.¹¹ This was their attempt at weaving righteousness of their own making. Regardless of how immoral a person may be, they still have a set of standards to govern their own version of righteousness, much like any moral person. As such, they are both confident in their standards of righteousness. But it is just such self-composed righteousness that keeps them from coming to the cross of Christ. They must renounce their improvised righteousness and be willing to approach the cross as lost, stained sinners, and throw themselves upon the mercy of God in Christ in order to be justified by Christ’s righteousness and receive the gift of forgiveness and eternal life.¹²

Charles Hodge points out some doctrinal aspects of what Paul is describing here. He says that going against one’s conscience is often a greater obstacle to salvation than carelessness or habits. In other words, being a hypocrite. Christ said that publicans and harlots would enter the kingdom of God before the Pharisees. Because of that, even thoughtless and sensual Gentiles proved susceptible to the Gospel and were more frequently converts to Christ than the Jews who were wedded to inaccurate views of the plan of salvation.¹³ Hodge goes on to say that no man should think that error in doctrine is a slight practical evil. No road to perdition has ever been more thronged than that of false doctrine. Error is a shield over one’s conscience and a blindfold over one’s eyes.

Charles Spurgeon advised his congregation that for thousands of years Gentiles worshiped idols that looked like animals made from blocks of stone and granite. Their philosophy of life was planned immortality. The way they lived was offensive to God, yet even they attained righteousness by faith. When the Gospel was being preached among the Gentiles they believed in Jesus and were saved. Meanwhile, Israel kept striving for righteousness through the Law. So they used many ceremonies and external washings, and wearings of phylacteries (Scriptures in a box tied to their foreheads or wrists) and robes bordered with pomegranates. Does this seem strange then that Gentiles who were so outwardly sinful, who were utterly ignorant of God’s righteousness, perhaps even indifferent to it, were led by the grace of God to seek righteousness in the right way, namely, by faith in Christ? No! That’s the only it can be received as a gift.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XXIX)

Bible scholar John Stott offers his advice on how to understand Paul’s use of this text from Hosea. We start by noting that according to the way they are viewed in the Last Covenant, these First Covenant prophecies can be taken three ways: First, they must be seen in their historical context as literal. In other words, what was said would happen to the people of Israel. Secondly, they were given a spiritual meaning and interpretation. In this case, the opening of the door to the Gentiles to become part of Christ and His church. And thirdly, they pointed prophetically to when the consummation of the Kingdom of God would occur and usher in eternity’s forecast. Here, the prophecy takes the form of God’s promise that in love and mercy he would overturn a hopeless situation. He was ready to embrace again those He had declared as no longer worthy of His love because they had rejected it. The immediate application was to Israel in the eighth century BC, repudiated and repelled by Yahweh for apostasy, but promised a reconciliation and reinstatement.¹

Then Stott continues by saying that it can be applied to the future when the Gentiles who knew nothing of His love responded when He loved them enough to send His only Son with the Gospel and to be their Redeemer, Lord and Savior. They had been “separated from Christ,” and excluded from citizenship in Israel and had no part in the covenant of promise.² As such, they were without hope and without God in the world. But Paul was only too happy to tell them: “But now you have been united with Christ Jesus. Once you were far away from God, but now you have been brought near to Him through the blood of Christ.”³ “Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow-citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household.”⁴ The Apostle Peter also applied Hosea’s prophecy to the Gentiles.⁵ Paul’s inclusion of this message in Hosea shows a marvelous reversal of how all that could have gone wrong could end up with all going so right because of God’s love, grace, and mercy. Those who stood outside the Tabernacle looking in have been welcomed inside. Those who were considered aliens and foreigners have become citizens of God’s kingdom. And strangers and wanderers have now become part of the beloved family of God.⁶

Verse 29: It is just as Isaiah said: “The Lord All-Powerful allowed some of our people to live. If he had not done that, we would now be like Sodom, and we would be like Gomorrah.”⁷

Again, Paul employs the words of a prophet to make another point, and that is, had God not acted, even though He may use force, the outcome will be much worse than what happens when He gets involved. These words were spoken during a time when God was fed-up with Israel’s habitual sinning without contrition. They are described as carrying such a load of guilt that they are bent over because the weight is so heavy. Even though God tried to discipline them, they would not change. This forced God to punish them over and over again. But God was not finished. Instead of throwing them away as damaged goods, He issued this invitation: “Come now, says Adonai, let’s talk this over together. Even if your sins are like scarlet, they will be white as snow; even if they are red as crimson, they will be like wool. If you are willing and obedient, you will eat the good of the land.”⁸

Robert Haldane focuses on the Doctrine of Election and says that by quoting from Isaiah, Paul proves that the doctrine of the unconditional election of individuals to eternal life is not contrary to the ideas we should think of when considering God’s goodness. In fact, it is so consistent with it, that had it not been for this election not one child of Israel would have been saved. There are some who misunderstand and think that the doctrine of election is prejudicial and discriminatory, but we see here it is a glorious demonstration of Divine goodness and love. Without this election, through which God prepared vessels of mercy to bring Him glory, neither Jew nor Gentile would have escaped the destruction prepared for the flawed and rejected vessels.⁹

Charles Hodge also comments on Paul’s use of Isaiah. The Apostle’s object by using Isaiah is the same as that of using Hosea. He’s trying to show that being an Israelite was not enough to escape the grief of God’s wrath or secure the enjoyment of God’s favor. Although Isaiah is speaking of the national punishment people brought upon themselves by sinning, which cost almost every one of them to be left out of God’s plan of salvation, yet it was necessary to get rid of those who worshiped idols and practiced immorality so they did not end up in the kingdom of God. By doing so, Paul also proved that the Jews, just because they were Jews, were as culpable for God’s judgment as were the Gentiles. This kept them from claiming special privileges and favor for admission into the kingdom of heaven.¹⁰

In John Stott’s summation of Paul’s quoting from the two prophets, it served as a bulwark for his argument that God had gotten rid of exclusivity for the Jews and total rejection of the Gentiles. By bringing the Hosea and Isaiah texts together, Paul provides First Covenant endorsement for his vision of what the Last Covenant promised. On the one hand, God called some from the Jews and some from the Gentiles (verse 24). This provides for the idea of a fundamental Jewish-Gentile solidarity and equality in God’s new society. After all, there was going to be many more Gentiles than Jews participating in the redeemed Christian community.

As Paul saw it, this is what Hosea prophesied, that multitudes of disenfranchised Gentiles would be welcomed as the people of God. As Isaiah prophesied, however, the Jewish membership would consist only of a small remnant of the nation. Their number was so small that it could not be used to prove that their inclusion represented the whole nation of Israel. In fact, the number was so minuscule that it could be interpreted as the rejection of all Israelites as a people.¹¹ Jesus foretold this when He prophesied: “I tell you this, that many Gentiles will come from all over the world – from east and west – and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob at the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven. But many Israelites – those for whom the Kingdom was prepared – prepared will be thrown into outer darkness, where there will be weeping and remorse.¹²”¹³

Hebrew scholar David Stern makes a point from a Jewish point of view. He says that as Isaiah stated: “If Adonai-Tzva’ot (Lord of Hosts) had not left us a tiny, tiny remnant, we would have become like S’dom, we would have resembled ‘Amora.”¹⁴ By referring back to concepts presented by Paul in verses 6–7, and verses 27–29, it gives closure to Chapters 9–11, concerning Israel’s apostasy (see 9:1–11). No one can blame God for Israel’s failure to accept Yeshua as the Messiah. In fact, they should thank God for showing enough mercy to preserve a “seed” or a “remnant” who did accept Him. From then until today this remnant is known as Messianic Jews.¹⁵

In the Messianic Bible Study, we read about Paul’s quote from Isaiah.¹⁶ It concerned the fact that although the number of Israelites will be like the sand on the seashore, yet only a few of them will survive and become part of God’s elect. This will all come about, not because He wanted to exclude anyone but He wanted to include people from every tribe and nation as part of His redemption plan.¹⁷ The writer says that Paul will go on to state in chapters 10 and 11, that God is not finished with Israel yet This is only a stage in their relationship that they must go through together¹⁸.¹⁹

Verses 30-31: So what does all this mean? It means that people who are not Jews were made right with God because they grabbed hold of faith, they were not trying to make themselves right. And the people of Israel, who tried to make themselves right with God by following the law, did not really seek it with anticipation.

After making his case, Paul now summarizes the point he has been trying to make. He wanted the leaders of the congregation in Rome to know that the Gentiles who turned to Jesus as their Messiah, were just as valid in their claim to the promises of Abraham as the Jews. This may have stunned some of the Jewish scholars. After all, the Jews were the ones waiting for Messiah to come, not the Gentiles. Not only that, but the Messiah had been promised through the bloodline of Abraham and David, not through some heathen wise man or king. Paul wanted them to see it wasn’t the Gentile’s decision, it was God’s decision.

This should not have come as a surprise to the Jewish people. God used the prophet Isaiah a long time ago to make this clear: “The Lord says, People who never before inquired about me are now seeking me out. Nations who never before searched for me are finding me.”²⁰ But, as the highly respected American radio commentator, Paul Harvey, used to say, “And now you know the rest of the story.” God made this statement because even though He spread out His arms all day to welcome them, His own people turned away. Not only did they reject His offer of reconciliation, but the insulted God to His face by worshiping idols, speaking to evil spirits in graves and caves, while all along pretending to be too pure to associate with Gentiles, many of whom were worshiping the same idols. In this, Paul saw a repeat of this same hypocrisy by the Jews in that they rejected Jesus as the Messiah, but still felt holy enough to dismiss Gentiles as impure and untouchable.

We see this thinking in what Paul told the Corinthians because he was upset when they had multiple disagreements among themselves they went to heathen courts to settle their disputes.²¹ These Gentiles practiced a lifestyle that was abhorrent to God, so why were they seeking their advice. Yet, they too dismissed the unconverted Gentiles as nonredeemable and not worthy of their time or effort. Paul may have heard that some converted Gentiles in Rome had tried to join the congregation but were rebuffed because they were not considered eligible. Paul sent a similar message to counter any possible discrimination by believers in Ephesus.²² This same thing happens today when a person is not considered intelligent enough, wealthy enough, or suitable enough to become a member of some prestigious congregation. Forgive them, Father, they know not what they do.

1 John Stott: On Romans, op. cit., loc. cit.

2 Ephesians 2:12

3 Ibid. 2:13

4 Ibid. 2:19

5 1 Peter 2:10

6 Stott: ibid.

7 Isaiah 1:9

8 Ibid. 1:18-19

9 Robert Haldane: On Romans, op. cit., loc. cit., pp. 492-493

10 Charles Hodge: On Romans, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 509

11 Romans 11:15

12 Matthew 8:11-12

13 John Stott: On Romans, op. cit., loc. cit.

14 Isaiah 1:9 – Complete Jewish Bible; See Genesis 19

15 David H. Stern: On Romans, op. cit., loc. cit.

16 Ibid. 1:9; 10:22-23

17 See Revelation 7:9

18 See Psalm 44:20-23

19 Messianic Bible: On Romans, op. cit., loc. cit.

20 Ibid. 65:1-2

21 1 Corinthians 6:1

22 Ephesians 2:1-14

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XXVIII)

Some Bible scholars feel that the words in Hosea are misused by Paul since there they were meant to identify the ten tribes of Israel, some of who are later identified as Samaritans. The tribes of Judah and Benjamin became known as Jews. But Paul is using these words as an illustration of how God did the same for Gentiles as He did for the Jews. Adam Clarke sees this working out in line with what the prophet Hosea heard about how the rejected Jews, who had been Lo-Ruhamah – “You are my people,” but would now become Lo-Ammi – “You are not my people.” To the contrary, the Gentiles, who had been a Lo-Ammi – “You are not my people,” would become Lo-Ruhamah – “You are my people.”¹ So when God said: “I will plant her for myself in the land,” Clarke believes this to be an allusion to the dispersion of the Jews over all the Greek, Persian, and Roman empires. The Jews then proved to be the seed planted among the Gentiles in order to bring forth fruit for the Gospel seed in Gentile fields.²

Robert Haldane states that the Jewish nation had traditionally been seen as the spouse of God. After all, did God not say: “I will make you my wife forever, showing you righteousness and justice, unfailing love and compassion?”³ But when Messiah came, the Gentiles were destined to be His spouse. He would be the one who would say to Lo-Ammi, Lo-Ruhamah. Now we can better understand why Paul would see how the Gentiles, who were vessels of wrath, would become vessels of mercy because of the divine Potter’s own decision in accordance with His own sovereign will. This was all meant to be part of the reason for sending Christ into the world.”⁴

So from among the nations which formerly served idols, and of whom it was usually and truly said that they were not God’s people, there will be those of whom it would be said, you are the children of the Most High God.⁵ They would serve a Living God, not the dead idols or gods of their own imagination, which they formerly worshiped. This proves that, in their former state, they were without God in the world.⁶ Consequently, the Scriptures hold out no hope for those Gentiles who are left uncalled by the Gospel.

Charles Hodge, therefore, declares that no external circumstance, no descent from pious parents, no connection with the true church, can secure admission for people into the kingdom of Christ (see verses 6-12). As such, Hodge contends that Paul teaches clearly the doctrine of Personal Election to eternal life, an election founded not on works, but on the good pleasure of God. The choice is to eternal life, and not merely to temporal privileges. So also Hodge sees two leading objections against the doctrine of election, namely, that it is inconsistent with God’s divine character, and incompatible with human responsibility. Both of these are addressed by the Apostle Paul. Whoever God decides in favor of cannot be unfair, because God has the right to exercise the privilege of sovereign choice. Whoever God decides against, cannot be considered as unfair because it is consistent with human responsibility. It is not God who makes them wicked. As their Sovereign, He has a right to dispose of the righteous and the wicked as He pleases. So out of the same clump of clay, He will be able to use some for His honor, and others will end up in dishonor because of how they were used.⁷

On the question as to why Paul chose these two First Covenant quotes in defense of his argument about the Gentiles being included in God’s salvation plan, Henry Alford says that it is difficult to know for certain how the Apostle Paul intended to use these passages from Hosea so that he could prove that they were written as prophecy that the Gentiles would one day be called the people of God. Paul’s words themselves bear witness to the fact that this was his intent as we see in verse 27. When we read these words in the context of what is spoken of Israel throughout Hosea, we see that after being rejected and put away, they were again to be received into God’s favor.

Alford says there are two ways to keep in mind when trying to understand what the Apostle Paul meant by quoting them. First, he presents them as a way to show that it is consistent with what we know of about God’s dealings. That He is willing to receive as His people, those who were formerly not His people. In this case, it was the Gentiles who fit this description. However, in a way, we can see that God often used Israel as a lesson on how He planned to deal with all mankind in the future. On the other hand, Paul may be using these quotes from Hosea as an illustration of the subject he is talking about at the moment. Remember he is writing to the church in Rome that was having trouble with the assimilation of the Gentiles into what was earlier a Jewish Messianic body of believers. Perhaps it was meant to be a warning to the Jewish members and an encouragement to the Gentile members. Alford takes the first option, and says that Chrysostom holds the same opinion.”⁸

F. F. Bruce sees it this way: What Paul does here is to take this promise of God that referred to a prepared plan that would first happen within Israel, and then would be repeated as divine action worldwide. We see that the church began in Jerusalem, then spread to Samaria, then to Antioch and out into the rest of the world. Paul may have also felt that in his own apostolic ministry and missionary endeavors that a great number of Gentiles, who had never been called “the people of God” and had no part in the first covenant through Moses, were daily being enrolled among Christian Jews to become recipients God’s grace and mercy. It was not unusual in Hosea’s day to find converted Gentiles worshiping in Jewish synagogues. So the idea was not new. But the scale of the implementation of this divine action was to be far wider than Hosea saw. Through the Gentile mission, in lands where the people of God had only been represented by the Jews, there were now many Gentile believers who were being acknowledged as children of the living God. So it may have been on a different scale, but the same pattern and principle were recognizable.⁹

Verses 27-28: And Isaiah cries out about Israel: “There are so many people of Israel, they are like the grains of sand by the sea. But only a few of them will be saved. Yes, the Lord will quickly finish judging the people on the earth.”¹⁰

With the help of the prophet Isaiah, Paul now sends out a warning to his own people, the Jews. Yes, the promise given to Abraham included all of his progeny. Not by default, but by choice. This quote from Isaiah involved a situation where the people living in Jerusalem were fearful that the Assyrian army would come and destroy them. But they are told to trust in the Lord to save them. In this instance, Paul sees a similarity in what believers both in his day and in days to come would endure. Not because of the army of the Assyrians, but the army of those opposed to the Gospel of Jesus the Christ. We see the same warning given by Jesus in His words: “You will be arrested, persecuted, and killed. You will be hated all over the world because you are my followers. And many will turn away from me and betray and hate each other. And many false prophets will appear and will deceive many people. Sin will be rampant everywhere, and the love of many will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.”¹¹

Puritan preacher Jonathan Edwards does not feel that we should look back to Paul’s day and consider all the time that has passed as a period of rejection and scattering of the Jews because they were replaced by the Gentiles and so the fulfillment of God’s promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob has been suspended in relation to the promised seed and all the mercies and blessings that were to come with it. As Edwards sees it, those promises are now in actual accomplishment in the grace bestowed on the Christian church, as well as before, in His mercy bestowed on the Jewish church, but in a much greater full and glorious manner. God has not pushed away the descendants of Abraham and Israel during this dispensation of grace. Instead, He has brought them nearer to Himself, and has, according to frequent prophecies of the Gospel period, abundantly increased their blessings and the manifestations of His favor to them. [I must interject that this was written before the holocaust of WWII]. Edwards feels that up to his day the nation of Israel was not treated any differently than when they were carried off into Babylonian captivity. For even if the greater part of that nation were forever removed from being God’s people in their own land, yet there was a remnant that was preserved and would be returned. So we can say what God promised the Jews through Abraham has been mostly fulfilled through the Christian church.¹²

On what Paul says here in verse 28, Robert Haldane comments that this refers to God’s judgments poured out upon the Jews for rejecting the Messiah. This basically eliminated them from being thought of as God’s people. It would be less than 40 years later that the Temple would lie in ruins, and the people of Jerusalem driven out like unwanted foreigners. Only a small remnant would remain. As to the question of whether what Hosea said could have been that which happened to send the House of Israel and the House of Judah into exile, and then the re-establishment of the Jews after their Babylonian captivity, must be dismissed since it fits better in the time frame of what happened after Christ’s death and resurrection.

What God is saying here has more to do with Israel’s spiritual relationship with God than their national relationship. Just think, from the time of the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, the Jews have had no sacrificial altars to make payment for their sins; no Holy of Holies where the blood is sprinkled on the Mercy Seat; no Passover Lambs being slain, no Scapegoats used to carry their sins away into the wilderness. It appears that the whole house of Israel was rejected from the covenant of God, and scattered around the world because of His displeasure. Even worse, up until then, God had patiently tolerated their sacrifices, rites, rituals, and festivals. But now, they had heard the Gospel, brought by God’s only Son, and rejected it. Clearly, this is the stark reality that the First Covenant had expired and the Last Covenant was being instituted. Furthermore, verses 27 & 28 confirm what is said in the 22nd verse, that although God endures the wicked for a season, they had become the objects of His wrath, being prepared for destruction.¹³

One of the earliest Motivational Preachers of the 20^th Century was Rev. Norman Vincent Peale (1898-1993), whose most famous book, “The Power of Positive Thinking,” made him a household name. As pastor of the Marble Collegiate Church, he was President Donald J. Trump’s pastor for almost 50 years, and many today compare Pastor Joel Osteen, Senior Minister of Lakewood Church, America’s largest congregation in Houston, Texas, to Peale’s positive thinking ministry and writings.

In one of his articles, Peale made this statement: “Action is a great restorer and builder of confidence. Inaction is not only the result but the cause, of fear. Perhaps the action you take will be successful; perhaps different action or adjustments will have to follow. But any action is better than no action at all.”¹ This is in complete contrast to those who say, “Wait! Don’t do anything! Everything will work out alright in the end.” I’m sure glad Noah didn’t have that attitude. Nor was Abraham inclined to think the same way. Neither was David motivated to consider saying to the giant Goliath, “Let me go home and think about what you said about our God and when I come back you may have changed your mind.” And what about Joshua? How do you think things would have turned out if he had said to God, “We don’t need to walk around these walls of Jericho, they already look old and crumbly. Just give us some more time, and I’m sure they’ll fall down on their own.” No need to go on, I’m sure you get the point.

One of the most salient points Dr. Peale makes is his conclusion is this: inaction causes fear. A contemporary of Dr. Peale’s, Dale Carnegie (1888-1955) expressed the same thought, “Inaction breeds doubt and fear. Action breeds confidence and courage.” So it isn’t so much that a person is too busy to respond to a growing crisis, nor is it that they have some magic formula that heals everything over time. It is fear that stops them in their tracks. And the only way to overcome fear is to face it head-on. If this is not done, then our natural instinct to run and hide will kick in. Not only that, but the longer one waits, the more time the brain has to manufacture doubts and fears, piling them one on top of the other.

The best way out is to look for a plan. If we don’t have one ourselves, look for one that has been known to work. Then modify it to fit your situation. Once you put it into action, if it doesn’t quite work out as planned the first time, tinker with it, make some changes and try again. Eventually, you’ll find the right formula. How long will this take? Until you break through and conquer your fears and go on to bigger and better things.

So as a Christian, what should we do when fear and doubt paralyzes us into doing nothing. Do we close our eyes, pray, and then hope for the best? Let the words God gave the Prophet Jeremiah to put in his letter to those Jews who had been carried off into Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar and who now faced a bleak future as God’s children. First, he warned them not to let prophets of doom and the fortune-tellers to begin influencing them in what they did. Rather, listen to what God gave Jeremiah to tell His people: “For I know the plans I have for you,” says the Eternal, “plans for peace, not turmoil, to give you a future and hope – never forget that when the right time comes, you will call out for Me, and I will hear. You will pray, and I will listen. You will intently look for Me, and you will find Me.”²

As a child of God, you are not alone in this world. First of all, you have a loving, caring, compassionate, heavenly Father looking down on you at all times. Secondly, you have your Savior, Jesus Christ, standing next to the Father interceding for you. Thirdly, you have the Holy Spirit living in you and continuously on-call to guide you, inform you, and to carry your prayers directly to God. Fourthly, there are dozens of ministers and counselors just waiting for you to give them a call. And fifthly, you have hundreds of brothers and sisters right in your neighborhood who would be more than happy to stand with you in prayer. Sixth, you have God’s Word right in front of you to read and search for direction in navigating through your uncharted waters, And seventh, you have God’s angels assigned to you to pick you up in case you stumble and fall.

The Apostle Paul had a young protégé named Timothy who was also facing his own fears. But the great Apostle had these words for him, and they are valid for you as well. He wrote, “You see, God did not give us a cowardly spirit but a powerful, loving, and disciplined spirit.”³ So whatever fears or doubts you may be dealing with. Look them straight in the eye and tell them, “I will not be intimidated! I am not afraid of you! I am a child of the Most High God. I have a Divine Spirit in me, above me, and around me, that will fight for me. So out of my way, fear! I’m moving forward toward God’s destiny for my life.” – Dr. Robert R Seyda

TWEETS AS TREATS

Many folks want to serve God, but only as advisers.

It is easier to preach ten sermons than it is to live just one.

When you get to the end of your road, you’ll find God living there.

Opportunity may knock once, but temptation bangs on your door day and night.

Quit griping about your church; if it was perfect, you wouldn’t be allowed to join.

If the church wants a better preacher, it only needs to pray for the one they’ve got.

God has chosen not to judge any person until Judgment Day. Why should you start any earlier?

Peace may begin with a smile.

A lot of church members who are singing “Standing on the Promises” are just sitting on the premises.

We were called to be witnesses, not lawyers or judges.

Don’t put a question mark where God puts a period.

Forbidden fruit makes terrible jelly.

God doesn’t call the qualified, He qualifies the called.

God promises a safe landing, not a smooth sailing.

Those who can anger you will end up controlling you!

Why always make God your Copilot? Let Him drive sometimes!

Prayer: Don’t give God instructions – just report for duty!

The task ahead of us is never as great as the Power behind us.

The Will of God will never take you to where the Grace of God will not go with you.

We don’t change the message, the message changes us.

You can tell how big a person is by the small things that discourage them.

Don’t keep the faith… spread it around!!!

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XXVII)

John Stott recognizes the need for context in understanding what Paul is saying here about God’s desire to let people know both His power to permit punishment and His power to protect against punishment. He tells us that verses 22 and 23, which are parallel to each other, express this theme plainly. The word that is common to both is the verb “make known.” Verse 22 speaks of God using wrath to demonstrate His authority. Then in verse 23, Paul says that this same demonstration of God’s wrath that displays the riches of His glory for those chosen as vessels of mercy. The NIV also makes both verses begin with the same rhetorical question (What if God …? What if He …?), which in both cases is left unanswered. It is not difficult to understand what this suggests. However, behind it all is the fact that Paul is trying to prove that if what God did imply was that He acted in accordance with the purpose of His wrath and mercy, who is so blind to reality that they could possibly object?

Stott then goes on to say that although the verse structure is the same in both, there are significant differences to make note of. First, it points out that God waits patiently for the objects of punishment to come to their senses, instead of sending down his wrath immediately upon all evildoers. This can suggest two things: that by delaying the hour of judgment the door of opportunity for salvation will remain open longer with the hope that more will accept His invitation of grace, as well as making it known that the longer He waits the ultimate outpouring of His wrath will be all the more dreadful. Secondly, although Paul describes the objects of God’s mercy as those He selected for glory, he finds that the objects headed for punishment are merely standing in line. And, like grapes, the longer they stand there, the riper they become for the winepress of destruction. Paul does not point to any one agency responsible for their preparation, or another way of putting it, getting them all lined up. Perhaps it’s because God Himself has never prepared anybody for destruction so it may be a case of them preparing themselves through procrastination and stubbornness.

Finally, Stott wonders if God’s revelation of His coming wrath to those who choose to be the objects of such punishment was part of the disclosure of His glory to the objects of His mercy. The preeminent revelation will be the riches of God’s glory which will allow the glory of His grace to shine even brighter against the dark background of His wrath. When we look at the word “Glory,” it can be taken as shorthand for the final destiny of the redeemed. There, the splendor of God will be shown to and in those He redeemed. As such, their transformation on earth will end up transforming the universe.¹

Douglas Moo also adds his insights to this discussion by suggesting that before we come to the conclusion that punishment of the rebellious and promotion of the righteous are two acts that run parallel to each other, let’s put this into consideration: Paul teaches that all people were affected by Adam’s sin and are, therefore, under a sentence of death because of that sin.² So it isn’t so much that God decided to destine some people to His coming wrath, it is more reasonable that He decided to let them stay under the death penalty with the expectation of their being set free.³ God’s hardening, then, is not a case of Him making them spiritually insensitivity; people are simply maintaining the state of sin they decided to stay in. So when God chooses whom He will save, He is acting out of pure grace, granting a blessing to people who in no way deserve it. But when He allows His wrath to fall, He is simply carrying out the sentence they chose for themselves.

Moo thinks that it is perhaps for just this very reason that we find the shift in construction in 9:22–23, and that Paul never uses the words “call” or “election” to refer to God’s decision to leave people in their sins and the wrath they deserve. Moo wants to avoid anyone thinking that he is talking about double predestination, namely, predestined for wrath and predestined for glory. This would mean that both of God’s acts of predestination are alike. Also, the objects of His wrath – prepared for destruction, and the objects of His mercy – prepared to advance into glory, it is clear that those who receive His mercy and attain glory have been prepared by Him in advance. The question is, how far in advance? Some contend that it was even before they were born. If so, did their freewill have anything to do with them accepting the call or rejecting it? Others say that it comes at their calling, by which they are put on the path to glory. Another thing to consider is that when Paul describes the “object of wrath,” he uses the Greek participle prokatartizo (See Strong’s Concordance #G4294) that is middle or passive in form. When used in middle form it might mean that these people “prepared themselves” for destruction. And when used as a passive participle it could mean that they were “prepared” for destruction by their own sins.⁴

Dr. Moo then admits that most of us instinctively feel there is something unfair about God’s choosing to rescue some from sin and destining others to their fate. But at some point, we must look carefully at that reaction and decide whether it is justified. He tells about teaching a seminar some years ago in which he brought up this doctrine. As is always the case, the idea met a lot of resistance. One student, in particular, was very vocal, insisting that “God just couldn’t be like that.” Moo feels that such a response is certainly justified, especially when someone grows up under the preaching and teaching of those who find that their faith and view are incompatible with this doctrine. Moo admits that he too had some of the same problems and questions with this, but when examined, it ultimately fits well into the biblical picture of God, not the picture that formed in our minds. It must be remembered that the Bible presents God as sovereign, the One, and the Only One who plants and uproots nation,⁵ whose very word determines the fate of battles. As such, He determines the outcome of every event in human history. Sometimes openly, and ofttimes behind the scenes.

Moo feels that with all this in mind we should consider that whether or not God covers both good and evil happenings. For instance, the Scriptures teach us that God sent His Son to be crucified by sinful people.⁶ We also read that God determined that Judas would sinfully betray Jesus.⁷ So together, what Paul says in these verses about God’s sovereignty in election, especially in Romans 9:20–21, gives us the biblical view that God can act with absolute freedom toward all His creatures.⁸

Verses 24-26: We are those people, the ones God chose not only from the Jews but also from those who are not Jews. As the Scriptures say in the book of Hosea, “The people who are not mine – I will say they are my people. And the people I did not love – I will say they are the people I love.⁹ And, where God said in the past, “You are not my people – there they will be called children of the living God.¹⁰”

Now Paul makes a defining statement that puts his statements about predestination in a clearer light and then calls on the prophet Hosea to verify it for him. In Hebrew poetry, it is called a synonymous parallelism, which is a repetition of the same thought only in different words. The Orthodox Jewish Bible renders it this way: “And I will call the ‘not my people’ my people, and the ‘not loved’ my loved.” The “not my people” are the Gentiles, and the “not loved” are the Jews who turned away from God. Out of these two groups, God called one body of believers, the body of Christ.

Speaking of the potter and the clay, Augustine says that God did not call all the Jews but only some of them. To this, we might answer that He said whosoever will, but only a few answered the call.¹¹ Nor did He call all the Gentiles but only some of them. By the time Paul finished his missionary journeys there were more Gentiles in the church than Jews. Adam was the fountain from whom the mass of sinners and godless people sprang. Both Jews and Gentiles were part of this one big lump. Even though the Jews had the Law and the Gentiles their conscience, both were far from God’s grace. If the potter makes one vessel for honor and another for dishonor out of the same clump of clay, it is clear that God made some of the Jews vessels for honor and some for dishonor. He did the same with the Gentiles.¹²

As we can see, sometimes the line between metaphor and reality is blurred so that it no longer serves as an illustration, but is taken literally. In such cases, the tension between what God wills and what mankind wills are less clear. All of us who are parents know that as our children grew up, we exercised our will, not only to encourage but to ensure that they would become what we wanted them to be. However, once they got out from under our parental authority, they followed their own will to become the person they wanted to be. Sometimes we were glad and sometimes we were sad. We could say, that God has also experienced this same thing.

John Calvin believes that these three verses have to do with the freedom of divine selection. From this, says Calvin, two things follow, — that the grace of God is not restricted to the Jewish people, it was also meant to flow to other nations throughout the whole world, — and, that it is not tied to the Jews in such a way that it comes without exception to all the children of Abraham. Since God’s election is based on His own good pleasure, then wherever His will is exercised, there His election is apparent. Having established election in such a way, it is now set up for Him to proceed to those things He designed with respect to calling of the Gentiles, and also respecting the rejection of the Jews. He says then, that the vessels of God’s mercy, whom He selects for the glory of His name, are taken from every people, from the Gentiles (the unloved) as well as from the Jews (the loved).¹³

John Bengel also notes that Paul was addressing what he saw as a problem of finding out who was eligible for God’s unmerited favor. He writes that the gnome¹⁴ that Paul uses, leads to a proposition involving grace which is laid open to Jews and Gentiles alike. Paul then proceeds to refute the Jewish “Particularism,” and to defend the “Universalism” of grace. The believing Jew is not called just because he is a Jew, but he is called from the Jews. This is the root of the Greek word ἐκκλησία (“ecclesia” – church), [“the called-out ones”]. The Epistle to the Ephesians corresponds to this whole section, as well as to the exhortation.¹⁵ So none of God’s children got into the body of Christ by accident or good luck. They are all there because He adopted them so they could be there.