Featured Romans 9 and Reformed Error

“But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.” And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy” (verses 6-16)

This is a much used passage by “reformed” theology, to try to prove “election to salvation”. In the first place, no where in this passage, is there any reference to “salvation”, as in saving of anyones soul. This has been forced into this passage by those who wish to promote their “theology”, which is not found here.

Paul is here describing God's “choosing” of Jacob, the younger brother of Easu, for His purposes, not for salvation. The Greek noun used here, “ἐκλογή”, is for “the act of picking out, choosing”, and not as suggested by versions like the KJV, “election”, as though it means “to salvation”. This no doubt was so translated to further this teaching. Clearly here Paul is speaking of God's “preference” of Jacob, over Easu, which is His Divine prerogative. This “choice” is seen from the words that follow, “The older will serve the younger”. This, and this alone is what Paul here means by using “ἐκλογή”, and not what some would force it to mean. Context is very important for a correct understanding.

Another word that has been misused and misapplied by “reformed” theology, is Paul's quoting of Malachi 1:2-3, “I have loved you,” says the Lord. But you say, “How have you loved us?” “Is not Esau Jacob's brother?” declares the Lord. “Yet I have loved Jacob but Esau I have hated. I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert.” Following on from telling us that Easu will serve his younger brother, Jacob, Paul justifies this by quoting from this passage in Malachi, “As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”. This has been used, or rather abused in its meaning by some “reformed”, who say this is evidence that God does not “love” everyone in the human race, and actually God “hates” those who are “non elect”. When asked why this would be, they cannot find any Biblical answer, so they invent one from these passages! As I have said, Paul here is showing God's “preference” of Jacob, over Easu, for His service, and follows on by saying, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”. The verb “ἀγαπάω”, is one of “affection”, “to be fond of”. Then we have “μισέω”, where its meaning is not in the literal sense, “to detest”, as our English would mean, but, contextually, and where it is used, it is clear that it means “less preference”. This is very clear in passages like Genesis 29:30-31; Deuteronomy 21:15-16, and in what Jesus means in passages like, Luke 14:26, “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brothers and sisters, and besides, even his own life, he cannot be My disciple”, where it is obvious that Jesus does not mean that we are to “detest” our own families, but, rather, that we must “prefer” Him to all others. This is very clear from John 21:15, and following, where Jesus says to Peter, “Therefore when they broke fast, Jesus says to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me more than these? He says to Him, Yes, Lord, You know that I love You. He says to him, Feed My lambs!”. It is interesting, that those who think that God actually “detests” the “non elect”, never quote Psalm 106:40, which is speaking of God's own People, “Therefore the anger of the LORD was kindled against His people, And He loathed His inheritance ” (NASB). And, “Therefore the anger of the LORD was kindled against His people And He detested His own inheritance.” (Amplified Bible), And, “Therefore the wrath of the LORD was kindled against His people, So that He abhorred His own inheritance” (NKJV). The Hebrew word “taʻâb”, used here, is much stronger than, “sânêʼ” used in Malachi for Easu!

Paul, in arguing for God's “preference” of Jacob over Easu, asks the question in relation to this, “What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part?”, and asnwers, “By no means!”. And the begins verse 15, by giving the reason (γάρ, for), “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.””. Again, in the context, is about God's “preference” of Jacob over Easu, and has nothing to do with salvation, or the “elect”, as some would have us think!

As are the words in verse 19, “Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?”, which again has nothing to do with “election to salvation”, but “service to the Lord”. Nor are the words in verse 22 considered, “endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction”. If as it is assumed, that God has no interest in the “non elect”, and has abandoned them all eternal destruction, then why would God “endured with much longsuffering”, which these “vessels of wrath prepared for destruction”? For what purpose is God “enduring with much longsuffering”, which these who are destined to “destruction”? This “longsuffering” of the Lord towards the “vessels of wrath”, is made clear from 2 Peter 3:9, “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering towards you, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance”

 

how about showing this from the passage, rather than your personal theology?

 

then prove this from the chapter, IF you can!

 

the context in chapter 9 is God's preferring of Jacob over Esau, and nothing more than this. then comes along the reformed bunch, who see "electing to salvation" in every verse of the Bible!

 

How does have anything to do with election to salvation

 

show what this has got to do with the OP? Show from this entire chapter, any hint of "election to salvation"!

 

I mentioned this in the OP did you bother to read it

 

Speak for yourself

 

Typical response from a Reformed person who cannot really deal with the OP

 

I am adding a couple of points to respond to comments that have been made. Firstly, I have been asked what it means to be a "child of God". the answer to this is very simple, if people care to read the passage from Romans that I have quoted in the OP. This passage shows God's preference for the line of Jacob, over that of of Easu. This passage shows clearly that it is the purpose of God to bless Jacob and his seed, and to curse that of Easu. There is NO mention anywhere, as the Reformed assume, about God "electing Jacob to salvation", as this is not in this passage. It is to show, that God's "choice" stands, in that "the older shall serve the younger". The Second point is to address the mention of verse 23 and 24, which again has been used to try to force its meaning to show "election to salvation", which it is NOT. Interesting is the fact that verse 22 is not quoted, as mentioned in the OP, which is, " What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction". Again I ask, WHY is God "enduring with much patience" with these, if, as suggested, they are the "non elect"? WHY even bother with those who are not "of God"? I have shown that the language of Paul in this verse, is what Peter writes in 2 Peter 3:9. This chapter, indeed, chapters 9-11 have been misused by those who are trying to force Scripture to support their theology, rather then let the Word speak for itself. These three chapters show God's dealing with the Jews and Gentiles, and how He has brought salvation to the Gentiles, and in doing so, to provoke the Jews, so that they too might be "grafted in". It has NOTHING to do with "election" as the Reformed take it to mean!