Holy Bible

I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost. Romans 9:1-5 The truth J. Lyth, D.D. I. Should be SPOKEN ALWAYS, and under all circumstances. II. Should be spoken in CHRIST. 1. As a Christian duty. 2. As in Christ's presence. 3. In Christ's Spirit. 4. For Christ's honour. III. Should be ATTENDED BY CONSCIENCE. 1. Enlightened. 2. Influenced. 3. Approved by the Holy Spirit. IV. May only be CONFIRMED by direct appeal to God under very solemn and extraordinary circumstances. ( J. Lyth, D.D. )

Benson Commentary Romans 9:1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, Romans 9:1-2 . The apostle having insinuated, Romans 3:3 , that God would cast off the Jews for their unbelief, a Jew is there supposed to object, that their rejection would destroy the faithfulness of God. To this the apostle answered, that the faithfulness of God would be established rather than destroyed, by the rejection of the Jews for their unbelief; because God had expressly declared, Genesis 18:19 , that Abraham’s children were to keep the way of the Lord, in order to their obtaining the promised blessings; and had thereby insinuated, that if they did not keep that way they would lose blessings, of which their being made the visible Church of God was one. This was all the answer the apostle thought proper to make in that part of his epistle. But the objection being specious, and, it seems, much insisted on by the unbelieving Jews, he introduces it a second time in this place, that he might reply to it more fully: this then is the subject of this chapter. The apostle shows therein, in answer to the objection of his countrymen, that the rejection of the unbelieving Jews from being the Church of God, and the reception of the believing Gentiles to be his people in their stead, was not contrary to the word of God. That the apostle had not here the least thought of personal election or reprobation, is manifest, 1st, Because it lay quite wide of his design, which, as has been just observed, was merely to show that God’s rejecting the Jews, and receiving the Gentiles, was consistent with his word: 2d, Because such a doctrine would not only have had no tendency to convince, but would have evidently tended to harden the Jews: 3d, Because when he sums up his argument, in the close of the chapter, he says not one word, nor gives the least intimation about it. I say the truth in Christ — This being a solemn appeal to Christ and the Holy Ghost, as knowing the apostle’s heart, for the truth of what he affirmed, it is of the nature of an oath. I lie not — That which he had in the former clause expressed in the affirmative, he in this emphatically confirms in the negative, according to the manner of the Hebrews, who were wont to deliver, as well negatively as affirmatively, what they judged to be worthy of special observation. My conscience also bearing me witness — As to the truth of what I say; in the Holy Ghost — Who searches all hearts, and perfectly knows whether the soul on which he operates be sincere. That I have great heaviness, &c. — Greek, ??? ???? ??? ???? ?????? , ??? ??????????? ????? ?? ?????? ??? , that I have great grief, and unceasing anguish in my heart — This is the fact, the belief of which the apostle desired to procure by that solemnity of attestation expressed in the preceding verse: he does not here mention the cause of his grief and anguish, but it is evident from the first verse that the cause was their obduracy, and rejection as a nation, and the many miseries which he foresaw to be coming upon them. By thus declaring his sorrow for the unbelieving Jews, who excluded themselves from all the blessings he had enumerated in the former part of his epistle, he shows that what he was now about to say, he did not speak from any prejudice to them. Romans 9:2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. Romans 9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: Romans 9:3 . For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ ( The word ??????? , here rendered accursed, answers to the Hebrew word ??? , cherem, which signifies what is devoted to destruction. And, as the Jewish nation was now an anathema, destined to destruction, Mr. Locke supposes that Paul, to express his affection for them, here says that he could wish, provided he could thereby save them from it, to become an anathema, or to be devoted to destruction himself, in their stead. In other words, that he could be content “that Christ should give him up to such calamities as these, to which the Jewish people were doomed for rejecting him; so that if they could all be centred in one person, he would be willing they should unite in him, could he thereby be a means of saving his countrymen. This is the interpretation of Dr. Samuel Clarke, (see his Seventeen Sermons, p. 340.) To the same purpose nearly is Goodwin’s exposition of the passage: “It seems,” says he, “to mean, that he was willing to be looked upon, and in every respect dealt with in the world, as if he were accursed by Christ, and so worthy of all ignominy, punishment, tortures, and death, that could be inflicted on him: such as were wont to be inflicted on persons, who, for some hateful crime, were devoted to utter destruction. The Greek word is indifferently applied either to persons or things, and in Scripture commonly signifies such, in either kind, as were consigned, either by God himself, or men, or both, to destruction, in the nature of piacular sacrifices.” Such a sacrifice Paul was willing to become for his brethren’s sake, supposing that he could thereby “procure deliverance for them from that most heavy curse of an eternal separation from God, which he certainly knew hung over their heads, for their obstinate refusal of the gospel.” According to these interpretations, ??????? ??? ??????? , must be rendered, made an anathema by, or from Christ. But Dr. Waterland observing, as ??? ???????? , 2 Timothy 3:3 , signifies, after the example of my forefathers, ??? ??? ??????? , in this passage, may signify, after the example of Christ. This exposition is adopted by Dr. Doddridge as the most probable, who thus paraphrases the verse: “I could even wish, that as Christ subjected himself to the curse, that he might deliver us from it, so I myself, likewise, were made an anathema after his example; like him exposed to all the execrations of an enraged people, and even to the infamous and accursed death of crucifixion itself, for the sake of my brethren: &c., that they might thereby be delivered from the guilt they have brought upon their own heads, and become entitled to the forfeited and rejected blessings of the Messiah’s kingdom.” Many commentators have shown how very absurd it would be to suppose the apostle meant, that he could be content to be delivered over to everlasting misery for the good of others. The apostle here mentions his near relation to the Jews, in order that what he had expressed concerning the greatness of his affection for them, might be the more easily believed by them. Romans 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God , and the promises; Romans 9:4 . Who are Israelites — The seed of Jacob, that eminent patriarch, who, as a prince, had power with God and prevailed. The apostle, with great address, enumerates these privileges of the Jews, both that he might show how honourably he thought of them, and that he might awaken their solicitude, not to sacrifice that divine favour, by which they had been so eminently and so long distinguished. To whom pertaineth the adoption — That is whom God hath taken into a special covenant with himself, whereby he stands engaged ever to act the part of a God and Father to them, and to own them for his children. It is true, this adoption of the Jews was but a shadow of the heavenly adoption of believers in Christ; yet was it, simply considered, a prerogative of a very sacred import. And the glory — The visible symbol of the divine presence which rested above the ark, was called the glory, 1 Samuel 4:21 , and the glory of the Lord. Hence the introduction of the ark into the temple, is called the entrance of the King of glory, Psalm 24:7 ; and upon the carrying away of the ark by the Philistines, the wife of Phineas, now at the point of death, said, The glory is departed from Israel. But God himself was the glory of his people Israel, and by many visible testimonies of his presence with them, shed a glory upon them, and caused their brightness to shine throughout the world. So Isaiah, The Lord shall be unto thee an everlasting light, and thy God thy glory. These two last-mentioned particulars are relative to each other: Israel is the firstborn son of God, and the God of glory is his God. And the covenants — That with Abraham, Genesis 15:8 ; Genesis 17:2 ; Genesis 17:7 ; and that with the Jewish nation by the ministry of Moses, Exodus 24:7-8 ; Exodus 34:27 ; including the seals of these covenants, namely, circumcision, the seal of the former, Genesis 17:10 ; and the sprinkling of blood the seal of the latter, Exodus 24:8 . He says covenants, in the plural, also, because God’s covenant with his people was often and variously repeated. And the giving of the law — The glorious promulgation of the moral law by God himself, by the mediation of his angels upon mount Horeb; not excluding the more private delivery of the various judicial and political laws appointed for the government of that commonwealth. The covenant, in the first dispensation of it, was given long before the law. And the worship of God — The way of worshipping God according to his will, prescribed in the ceremonial law for the people, till Christ should come in the flesh: and the promises — Of the Messiah, and of spiritual and eternal blessings by him. By enumerating these privileges of the Jews, the apostle, as above observed, not only meant to show them that he respected them on account of these advantages, but to make them sensible of the loss they were about to sustain by God’s casting them off. “They were to be excluded from the better privileges of the gospel church, of which their ancient privileges were but the types. For their relation to God as his people, signified by the name Israelites, prefigured the more honourable relation which believers, the true Israel, stand in to God. Their adoption as the sons of God, and the privileges they were entitled to thereby, were types of believers being made partakers of the divine nature by the renewing of the Holy Ghost, and of their title to the inheritance of heaven. The residence of the glory, first in the tabernacle and then in the temple, was a figure of the residence of God, by his Spirit, in the Christian Church, his temple on earth, and of his eternal residence in that church, brought to its perfect form in heaven. The covenant with Abraham was the new, or gospel covenant, the blessings of which were typified by the temporal blessings promised to him and to his natural seed: and the covenant of Sinai, whereby the Israelites, as the worshippers of the true God, were separated from the idolatrous nations, was an emblem of the final separation of the righteous from the wicked for ever. In the giving of the law, and the formation of the Israelites into a nation, or community, the formation of the city of the living God, and of the general assembly and church of the firstborn, was represented. Lastly, the heavenly country, the habitation of the righteous, was typified by Canaan, a country given to the Israelites by God’s promise.” — Macknight. Romans 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came , who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Romans 9:5 . Whose, &c. — To the preceding the apostle now adds two more prerogatives: theirs are the fathers — They are the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the ancient patriarchs, and other holy men, who were great in the sight of God, and to whom he made many great and precious promises, in which their children also and children’s children were interested. And of whom — Of which Israelites; as concerning the flesh — That is, in respect of his human nature; Christ — The expected Messiah; — came. This plainly supposes another nature in Christ, according to which he came not from the Israelites. And this can be none other but the divine nature; which, in the sequel of the verse, is expressly attributed to him. The apostle reserves the mention of Christ’s descent from the Jews for the last of their prerogatives, as being the greatest of them all: who is over all, God, &c. — The apostle gives this, so highly honourable a testimony to Christ, because he was so vilified by the Jews; thus making up that great breach, so to speak, which they had made on his name and honour by their unbelief, and wicked rejection of him. He is said to be over all, 1st, Because, as he was God-Man and Mediator, all power was given unto him in heaven and on earth, Matthew 28:18 ; all things delivered into his hands, and put under his feet, John 3:35 ; 1 Corinthians 15:27 ; the Father giving him a name above every name, Php 2:9 ; and constituting him his great plenipotentiary, to transact all things relating to the whole creation, especially angels and men; to settle the affairs of heaven and earth for eternity. And more especially, 2d, Because as God, possessed of true, essential deity, he was in union with his Father and the Holy Spirit, supreme over all, and consequently blessed for ever — Which words he adds to show, that a far different measure from that which the Jews had hitherto measured out unto Christ, was due to him from them, as from all other men. No words can more clearly express his divine, supreme majesty, and his gracious sovereignty over both Jews and Gentiles. The apostle closes all with the word, amen — An expression commonly used for a serious confirmation of what is said immediately before, together with an approbation of it; sometimes also importing a desire for the performance thereof. Some would persuade us that the true reading of this clause is, ?? ? ??? ?????? ???? , whose is the God over all; because by this reading, they say, the climax is completed; and the privilege in which the Jews gloried above all others, (namely, that of having the true God for their God,) is not omitted. “But as this reading,” says Macknight, “is found in no copy whatever, it ought not to be admitted on conjecture.” Thus also Doddridge: “How ingenious soever that conjecture may be thought, by which some would read this, whose is the God over all, to answer to, whose are the fathers, I think it would be extremely dangerous to follow this reading, unsupported as it is by any critical authority of manuscripts or ancient quotations. Nor can I find any authority for rendering ???? ????????? ??? ???? ?????? , God be blessed for ever. I must, therefore, consider this memorable text as a proof of Christ’s proper deity, which, I think, the opposers of that doctrine have never been able, nor will ever be able to answer. Though common sense must teach, what Christians have always believed, that it is not with respect to the Father, but to the created world that this august title is given to him:” that is, that he is said to be God over all. Romans 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Romans 9:6-8 . Not as though — The original expression, ??? ???? ?? ??? , is rather obscure; but Erasmus supplying, after the Greek scholiast, the words ????? ?? ???? , seems to have given the sense of it thus; I do not say this, that the word of God hath fallen, namely, to the ground, without effect. The apostle’s meaning is, that nothing he had now said concerning the rejection of the greater part of the Jews, drew any such consequence after it, as that the word of God (that is, his promises made to Abraham and his seed) should miscarry, or fall to the ground; the Jews imagining that the word of God must fail, if all their nation were not saved. This sentiment Paul now refutes, showing, 1st, That the word itself had foretold their rejection: and, 2d, That though the body of the nation was rejected, God’s promises were already fulfilled to the true Israelites, and hereafter all Israel should be saved: which is the sum of the ninth, tenth, and eleventh chapters. For — Here he enters upon the proof of it; they are not all Israel — True spiritual Israelites, to whom the promises belong; which are of Israel — The natural posterity of Jacob, and Israelites by birth, and so visible members of the church. The Jews vehemently maintained the contrary; namely, that all who were born Israelites, and they only, were the people of God. The former part of this assertion is refuted here, the latter, Romans 9:24 , &c. The sum is, God accepts all believers, and them only; and this is no way contrary to his word. Nay, he hath declared in his word, both by types and by express testimonies, that believers are accepted as the children of the promise, while unbelievers are rejected, though they are children after the flesh. It is true the great promise, that Jehovah would be their God, was delivered to all the posterity of Israel without exception; but it was intended to be understood in a conditional sense, as what would not be fulfilled to them, unless they imitated the faith of Abraham. And in this sense it was made to the Gentiles, and to the whole world, as well as to the Jews. Neither because they are the seed of Abraham — According to the flesh; will it follow, that they are all children of God. This did not hold even in Abraham’s own family, and much less in his remote descendants. But, God then said, in Isaac shall thy seed be called — Isaac’s posterity, not Ishmael’s, shall be spoken of as thy seed, by way of eminence; that seed to which the promises are made. That is, they who are the children of the flesh — The carnal seed of Abraham; are not — Purely upon that account; the children of God — In the true sense; namely, spiritual children. But the children of the promise — Those whom God hath promised to acknowledge for his children; namely, such as are born again by the supernatural power of God’s Spirit, (as Isaac was conceived and born by a power above the course of nature,) and who by faith lay hold on the promise of salvation made in Christ; these are they who are intended in the covenant with Abraham, the persons whose God Jehovah promised to be, and to whom the spiritual blessings and the inheritance belong. In quoting these words, in Isaac shall thy seed be called, and inferring therefrom that the children of the promise shall be counted for the seed, the apostle does not intend to give the literal sense of the words, but the typical only; and by his interpretation signifies that they were spoken by God in a typical and allegorical, as well as in a literal sense, and that God there declared his counsel concerning those persons whom he purposed to own as his children, and make partakers of the blessings of righteousness and salvation. As if he had said, This is a clear type of things to come; showing us, that in all succeeding generations, not the lineal descendants of Abraham, but they to whom the promise is made, that is, believers, are the true children of God. Romans 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. Romans 9:8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. Romans 9:9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son. Romans 9:9-13 . For this is the word of promise — To show that Isaac was a son of promise, (and so a meet type of those that should be begotten of God by the promise of the gospel through faith,) he cites the words of the promise in substance, by which Isaac was begotten and born. See Genesis 17:20 ; Genesis 18:10 ; in which places two circumstances are mentioned, the one of God’s coming to fulfil his promise, in causing Sarah to have a son; the other of the set time when he would thus come; which plainly evince Isaac to have been a son of promise, conceived and born by virtue of that peculiar promise, which Abraham and Sarah believed, in order to his conception. At this time — As if he had said, Even now, though thy body and Sarah’s are dead, or at the time which I now appoint; I will come — Will manifest my power, and she shall conceive, and have a son — And he only shall inherit the blessing, and not whosoever is born of thee. Observe, reader, Isaac is not brought forward in this chapter as a type, or example, of persons personally elected by God from eternity, but as a type of those, how few or how many soever they may be, that shall be counted God’s children, and judged meet to inherit his kingdom. And not only this, &c. — And that God’s blessing does not belong to all the descendants of Abraham, appears not only by this instance, but by that of Esau and Jacob, the latter of whom was chosen to inherit the blessing of being the progenitor of the Messiah, and other blessings connected therewith, before either of them had done good or evil — The apostle mentions this to show, that neither did their ancestors receive their advantages through any merit of their own; that the purpose of God according to election might stand — Whose purpose was to elect to superior blessings, particularly to church privileges; not of works — Not for any preceding merit in him he chose; but of him that calleth — Of his own good pleasure, who calls to the enjoyment of particular privileges whom he sees good. “Nothing can be more evident,” says Mr. Sellon, “to any one that considers the beginning and end of this chapter, than that the apostle is not speaking of the election of particular persons to eternal life, but of particular nations to outward church privileges, which duly used, through Christ, should be the means of bringing men to eternal life, and to higher degrees of glory therein than others should enjoy, who were not favoured with these privileges. Nor is God, the great Governor of the world, on this account, any more to be deemed a respecter of persons, than an earthly king, who takes some of his subjects for lords of his bed- chamber, and others for lower employments; since he will make them all, that behave well in their station, completely happy.” See his Works, vol. 2. p. 134. It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger — Not in person, for Esau never served Jacob; but in his posterity. Accordingly the Edomites were often brought into subjection by the Israelites. But though Esau had served Jacob personally, and had been inferior to him in worldly greatness, it would have been no proof at all of Jacob’s election to eternal life, nor of Esau’s reprobation: as little was the subjection of the Edomites to the Israelites, in David’s days, a proof of the election and reprobation of their progenitors. Add to this, that the circumstance of Esau’s being elder than Jacob was very properly taken notice of to show that Jacob’s election was contrary to the right of primogeniture, because this circumstance proved it to be from pure favour: but if his election had been to eternal life, the circumstance of his age ought not to have been mentioned, because it had no relation to that matter whatever. As it is written — With which word in Genesis, spoken so long before, that of Malachi agrees; I have loved Jacob — With a peculiar love; that is, the Israelites, the posterity of Jacob; and I have comparatively hated Esau — That is, the Edomites, the posterity of Esau. But observe, 1st, This does not relate to the person of Jacob or Esau: 2d, Nor does it relate to the eternal state either of them or their posterity. Thus far the apostle has been proving his proposition, namely, that the exclusion of a great part of the seed of Abraham, yea, and of Isaac, from the special promises of God, was so far from being impossible, that, according to the Scriptures themselves, it had actually happened. And his intent herein, as appears from Romans 9:30-33 , (which passage is a key to the whole chapter,) is evidently to show, that as God before chose Jacob, who represented the Jews, and admitted him and his posterity to peculiar privileges, above the Gentiles, without any merit in him or them to deserve it; so now, (the Jews through their unbelief having rejected the Messiah, and being justly therefore themselves rejected of God,) he had chosen the Gentiles, represented by Esau, to be his peculiar people; according to the prediction of Hosea, I will call them my people, &c., cited Romans 9:25 , where see the note; and that without any thing on their part to deserve this favour. It was entirely free with respect both to them and Jacob, God’s mercy and goodness preventing, not the endeavour only, but even the will of both. As, before Jacob either willed or strove for it, the blessing was designed of God for him; so, before ever the Gentiles sought after God, the blessings of Christ’s kingdom were designed for them. Yet it does not follow that all who are called Christians, and enjoy outward church privileges, shall be finally saved, any more than it is to be concluded that all the Jews were saved before Christ came in the flesh, on account of their privileges. Romans 9:10 And not only this ; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; Romans 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) Romans 9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. Romans 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Romans 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. Romans 9:14-16 . What shall we say then? — To this. The apostle now introduces and refutes an objection. Is there unrighteousness, or injustice, with God? — In the distribution of his providential blessings, in this or any other instance that can be produced? Was it unjust in God to choose Jacob and his posterity to be the members of his visible church on earth, and to inherit the promises in their literal meaning, rather than Esau and his posterity? Or to accept believers who imitate the faith of Jacob, and them only? God forbid — In no wise: this is well consistent with justice. For he saith to Moses, &c. — For he has a right to fix the terms on which he will show mercy; according to his declaration to Moses, petitioning for all the people, after they had been guilty of idolatry in worshipping the golden calf; I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy — According to the terms I myself have fixed; and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion — Namely, on those only who submit to my terms; who accept of it in the way that I have appointed. So then — The inference to be drawn is; It — The blessing; therefore is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth — It is not the effect either of the will or the works of man, but of the grace and power of God. The will of man is here opposed to the grace of God, and man’s running, to the divine operation. And this general declaration respects not only Isaac and Jacob, and the Israelites in the time of Moses, but likewise all the spiritual children of Abraham, even to the end of the world. Romans 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. Romans 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. Romans 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Romans 9:17-18 . For — Or, moreover, rather, as it seems ??? ought to be translated, (the passage here quoted being no proof of what immediately goes before,) God has an indisputable right to reject those who will not accept his blessings on his own terms. And this he exercised in the case of Pharaoh; to whom, after many instances of stubbornness and rebellion, he said, as it is recorded in Scripture; For this very thing have I raised thee up — That is, unless thou repent, this will surely be the consequence of my raising thee up, making thee a great and glorious king; that my power will be shown upon thee — As, indeed, it was, by the terrible judgments brought on Egypt, and overwhelming him and his army in the sea; and my name declared through all the earth — As it is at this day. Perhaps this may have a still further meaning. It seems that God was resolved to show his power over the river, the insects, other animals, (with the natural causes of their health, diseases, life, and death,) over meteors, the air, the sun, (all of which were worshipped by the Egyptians, from whom other nations learned their idolatry,) and, at once, over all their gods, by that terrible stroke, of slaying all their priests and their choicest victims, the firstborn of man and beast: and all this with a design, not only to deliver his people Israel, (for which a single act of omnipotence would have sufficed,) but to convince the Egyptians, that the objects of their worship were but the creatures of Jehovah, and entirely in his power; and to draw them and the neighbouring nations who should hear of all these wonders, from their idolatry, to worship the one God. For the execution of this design, (in order to the display of the divine power over the various objects of their worship, in a variety of wonderful acts, which were, at the same time, just punishments for their cruel oppression of the Israelites,) God was pleased to raise to the throne of an absolute monarchy, a man, not whom he had made wicked on purpose, but whom he found so, the proudest, the most daring, and obstinate, of all the Egyptian princes: and who, being incorrigible, well deserved to be set up in that situation, where the divine judgments fell the heaviest. Therefore — Or, so then, upon the whole, we may conclude; he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy — Namely, on those that comply with his terms, on them that repent and believe in Christ; and whom he will — Namely, them that remain in impenitence and unbelief, and who reject his counsel against themselves; he hardeneth — Leaves to the hardness of their hearts. Romans 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy , and whom he will he hardeneth. Romans 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Romans 9:19 . Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault — As if he had said, Because I affirm concerning God, that whom he will he hardeneth, thou wilt say, Why then doth he yet find fault with, or complain of, such persons, that they continue disobedient! For who hath resisted his will — Who hath been, is, or ever will be, able to hinder that from coming to pass which God willeth shall come to pass? Here it must be observed, that when the apostle saith, Whom he will he hardeneth, he doth not suppose any purpose or decree to be formed by God to harden any man, without his having previously committed those sins which he might not have committed: and having resisted the strivings of God’s Spirit, and abused the light and grace whereby he might both have known and complied with the divine will; but, at the most, only a purpose to harden those who first voluntarily harden themselves. Nor do his words suppose that they, who are actually hardened by God, have no capacity or possibility left them, by means of that grace which is yet vouchsafed to them, of recovering themselves from the state of hardness in which they are, and yet of turning to God in true repentance and reformation of life. Although then the will of God be, in a sense, irresistible, yet if this will be, 1st, To harden none but those who first voluntarily harden themselves, by known and wilful sin; and, 2d, To leave those whom he doth harden in a capacity of relenting and returning to him, being furnished with sufficient helps for that purpose, so that if they do it not, it becomes a high aggravation of their former sins; certainly he hath reason to reprove and complain of those who are, at any time, thus hardened by it. Romans 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it , Why hast thou made me thus? Romans 9:20-21 . Nay but, O man — Little, impotent, ignorant man; Who art thou — In all thy boasted wisdom and penetration; that repliest against God? — That accusest God of injustice, for himself fixing the terms on which he will show mercy? or for leaving those to the hardness of their hearts who obstinately and perseveringly refuse or neglect to comply with those terms? Or, (which may be rather intended,) who impiously formest arguments agai

Expositor's Bible Commentary Romans 9:1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, Chapter 20 THE SORROWFUL PROBLEM: JEWISH UNBELIEF; DIVINE SOVEREIGNTY Romans 9:1-33 WE may well think that again there was silence awhile in that Corinthian chamber, when Tertius had duly inscribed the last words we have studied. A "silence in heaven" follows, in the Apocalypse, { Revelation 8:1 } the vision of the white hosts of the redeemed, gathered at last, in their eternal jubilation, before the throne of the Lamb. A silence in the soul is the fittest immediate sequel to such a revelation of grace and glory as has passed before us here. And did not the man whose work it was to utter it, and whose personal experience was as it were the informing soul of the whole argument of the Epistle from the first, and not least in this last sacred paean of faith, keep silence when he had done, hushed and tired by this "exceeding weight" of grace and glory? But he has a great deal more to say to the Romans, and in due time the pen obeys the voice again. What will the next theme be? It will be a pathetic and significant contrast to the last; a lament, a discussion, an instruction, and then a prophecy, about not himself and his happy fellow saints, but poor self-blinded unbelieving Israel. The occurrence of that subject exactly, here is true to the inmost nature of the Gospel. The Apostle has just been counting up the wealth of salvation, and claiming it all, as present and eternal property, for himself and his brethren in the Lord. Justifying Righteousness, Liberty from sin in Christ, the Indwelling Spirit, electing Love, coming and certain Glory, all have been recounted, and asserted, and embraced. "Is it selfish," this great joy of possession and prospect? Let those say so who see these things only from outside. Make proof of what they are in their interior, enter into them, learn yourself what it is to have peace with God, to receive the Spirit, to expect the eternal glory; and you will find that nothing is so sure to expand the heart towards other men as the personal reception into it of the Truth and Life of God in Christ. It is possible to hold a true creed-and to be spiritually hard anal selfish. But is it possible so to be-when not only the creed is held, but the Lord of it, its Heart and Life, is received with wonder and great joy? The man whose certainties, whose riches, whose freedom, are all consciously "in Him," cannot but love his neighbour, and long that he too should come into "the secret of the Lord." So St. Paul, just at this point of the Epistle, turns with a peculiar intensity of grief and yearning towards the Israel which he had once led, and now had left, because they would not come with him to Christ. His natural and his spiritual sympathies all alike go out to this self-afflicting people, so privileged, so divinely loved, and now so blind. Oh, that he could offer any sacrifice that would bring them reconciled, humbled, happy, to the feet of the true Christ! Oh, that they might see the fallacy of their own way of salvation, and submit to the way of Christ, taking His yoke, and finding rest to their souls! Why do they not do it? Why does not the light which convinced him shine on them! Why should not the whole Sanhedrin say, "Lord, what wouldst Thou have us to do?" Why does not the fair beauty of the Son of God make them too "count all things but loss" for Him? Why do not the voices of the Prophets prove to them, as they do now to Paul, absolutely convincing of the historical as well as spiritual claims of the Man of Calvary? Has the promise failed? Has God done with the race to which He guaranteed such a perpetuity of blessing? No, that cannot be. He looks again, and he sees in the whole past a long warning that, while an outer circle of benefits might affect the nation, the inner circle, the light and life of God indeed, embraced "a remnant" only; even from the day when Isaac and not Ishmael was made heir of Abraham. And then he ponders the impenetrable mystery of the relation of the Infinite Will to human wills; he remembers how, in a way whose full reasons are unknowable, (but they are good, for they are in God,) the Infinite Will has to do with our willing; genuine and responsible though our willing is. And before that opaque veil he rests. He knows that only righteousness and love are behind it; but he knows that it is a veil, and that in front of it man’s thought must cease and be silent. Sin is altogether man’s fault. But when man turns from sin it is all God’s mercy, free, special, distinguishing. Be silent, and trust Him, O man whom He has made. Remember, He has made thee. It is not only that He is greater than thou, or stronger; but He has made thee. Be reasonably willing to trust, out of sight, the reasons of thy Maker. Then he turns again with new regrets and yearnings to the thought of that wonderful Gospel which was meant for Israel and for the world, but which Israel rejected, and now would fain check on its way to the world. Lastly, he recalls the future, still full of eternal promises for the chosen race, and through them full of blessings for the world; till he rises at length from perplexity and anguish, and the wreck of once eager expectations, into that great Doxology in which he blesses the Eternal Sovereign for the very mystery of His ways, and adores Him because He is His own eternal End. Truth I speak in Christ, speaking as the member of the All-Truthful; I do not lie, my conscience, in the Holy Ghost, informed and governed by Him, bearing me concurrent witness-the soul within affirming to itself the word spoken without to others-that I have great grief, and my heart has incessant pain, yes, the heart in which { Romans 5:5 } the Spirit has "poured out" God’s love and joy; there is room for both experiences in its human depths. For I was wishing, I myself, to be anathema from Christ, to be devoted to eternal separation from Him; awful dream of uttermost sacrifice, made impossible only because it would mean self-robbery from the Lord who had bought him; a spiritual suicide by sin-for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen flesh-wise. For they are ( ??????? ????? ) Israelites, bearers of the glorious theocratic name, sons of the "Prince with" Genesis 32:28 ; theirs is the adoption, the call to be Jehovah’s own filial race, "His son, His firstborn" { Exodus 4:22 } of the peoples; and the glory, the Shechinah of the Eternal Presence, sacramentally seen in Tabernacle and Temple, spiritually spread over the race; and the covenants, with Abraham, and Isaac, and Levi, and Moses, and Aaron, and Phinehas, and David; and the Legislation, the Holy Moral Code, and the Ritual, with its divinely ordered symbolism, that vast Parable of Christ, and the Promises, of "the pleasant land," and the perpetual favour, and the coming Lord; theirs are the Fathers, patriarchs, and priests, and kings; and out of them, as to what is flesh-wise, is the Christ, -He who is over all things, God, blessed to all eternity. Amen. It is indeed a splendid roll of honours, recited over this race "separate among the nations," a race which today as much as ever remains the enigma of history, to be solved only by Revelation. "The Jews, your Majesty," was the reply of Frederick the Great’s old believing courtier, when asked with a smile for the credentials of the Bible; the short answer silenced the Encyclopaedist King. It is indeed a riddle, made of indissoluble facts, this people everywhere dispersed, yet everywhere individual; scribes of a Book which has profoundly influenced mankind, and which is recognised by the most various races as an august and lawful claimant to be divine, yet themselves, in so many aspects, provincial to the heart; historians of their own glories, but at least equally of their own unworthiness and disgrace; transmitters of predictions which may be slighted, but can never, as a whole, be explained away, yet obstinate deniers of their majestic fulfilment in the Lord of Christendom; human in every fault and imperfection, yet so concerned in bringing to man the message of the Divine that Jesus Himself said of them, "Salvation { John 4:22 } comes from the Jews." On this wonderful race this its most illustrious member (after his Lord) here fixes his eyes, full of tears. He sees their glories pass before him-and then realises the spiritual squalor and misery of their rejection of the Christ of God. He groans, and in real agony asks how it can be. One thing only cannot be; the promises have not failed; there has been no failure in the Promiser. What may seem such is rather man’s misreading of the promise. But it is not as though the word of God has been thrown out, that "word" whose divine honour was dearer to him than even that of his people. For not all who come from Israel constitute Israel; nor, because they are seed of Abraham, are they all his children, in the sense of family life and rights; but "In Isaac shall a seed be called thee"; { Genesis 21:12 } Isaac, and not any son of thy body begotten, is father of those whom thou shalt claim as thy covenant race. That is to say, not the children of his flesh are the children of his ( ??? ) God; no, the children of the promise, indicated and limited by its developed terms, are reckoned as seed. For of the promise this was the word. { Genesis 18:10 ; Genesis 18:14 } "According to this time I will come, and Sarah, she and not any spouse of thine; no Hagar, no Keturah, but Sarah, shall have a son." And the law of limitations did not stop there, but contracted yet again the stream of even physical filiation: Nor only so, but Rebecca too-being with child, with twin children, of one husband-no problem of complex parentage, as with Abraham, occurring here-even of Isaac our father, just named as the selected heir-(for it was while they were not yet born, while they had not yet shown any conduct good or bad, that the choice-wise purpose of God might remain, sole and sovereign, not based on works, but wholly on the Caller)-it was said to her, { Genesis 25:23 } "The greater shall be bondman to the less." As it stands written, in the prophet’s message a millennium later, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated," I repudiated him as heir. So the limit has run always along with the promise. Ishmael is Abraham’s son, yet not his son. Esau is Isaac’s son, yet not his son. And though we trace in Ishmael and in Esau, as they grow, characteristics which may seem to explain the limitation, this will not really do. For the chosen one in each case has his conspicuous unfavourable characteristics too. And the whole tone of the record (not to speak of this its apostolic interpretation) looks towards mystery, not explanation. Esau’s "profanity" was the concurrent occasion, not the cause, of the choice of Jacob. The reason of the choice lay in the depths of God, that World "dark with excess of bright." All is well there, but not the less all is unknown. So we are led up to the shut door of the sanctuary of God’s Choice. Touch it; it is adamantine, and it is fast locked. No blind Destiny has turned the key, and lost it. No inaccessible Tyrant sits within, playing to himself both sides of a game of fate, and indifferent to the cry of the soul. The Key Bearer, whose Name is engraved on the portal, is "He that liveth, and was dead, and is alive for evermore". { Revelation 1:18 } And if you listen you will hear words within, like the soft deep voice of many waters, yet of an eternal Heart; "I am that I am; I will that I will; trust Me." But the door is locked; and the Voice is mystery. Ah, what agonies have been felt in human souls, as men have looked at that gate, and pondered the unknown interior! The Eternal knows, with infinite kindness and sympathy, the pain unspeakable which can beset the creature when it wrestles with His Eternity, and tries to clasp it with both hands, and to say that "that is all!" We do not find in Scripture, surely, anything like an anthema for that awful sense of the unknown which can gather on the soul drawn-irresistibly as it sometimes seems to be-into the problems of the Choice of God, and oppressed as with "the weight of all the seas upon it," by the very questions stated presently here by the Apostle. The Lord knoweth, not only His will, but our heart, in these matters. And where He entirely declines to explain (surely because we are not yet of age to understand Him if He did) He yet shows us Jesus, and bids us meet the silence of the mystery with the silence of a personal trust in the personal Character revealed in Him. In something of such stillness shall we approach the paragraph now to follow? Shall we listen, not to explain away, not even over much to explain, but to submit, with a submission which is not a suppressed resentment but an entire reliance? We shall find that the whole matter, in its practical aspect, has a voice articulate enough for the soul which sees Christ, and believes on Him. It says to that soul, "Who maketh thee to differ? Who hath fashioned thee to honour? Why art thou not now, as once, guiltily rejecting Christ, or, what is the same, postponing Him? Thank Him who has ‘compelled thee,’ yet without violation of thyself, ‘to come in.’ See in thy choice of Him His mercy on thee. And now, fall at His feet, to bless Him, to serve Him, and to trust Him. Think ill of thyself. Think reverently of others. And remember (the Infinite, who has chosen thee, says it), He willeth not the death of a sinner, He loved the world, He bids thee to tell it that He loves it, to tell it that He is Love." Now we listen. With a look which speaks awe, but not misgiving, disclosing past tempests of doubt, but now a rest of faith, the Apostle dictates again: What therefore shall we say? Is there injustice at God’s bar? Away with the thought. The thing is, in the deepest sense, unthinkable. God, the God of Revelation, the God of Christ, is a Being who, if unjust-"ceases to be," "denies Himself." But the thought that His reasons for some given action should be, at least to us now, absolute mystery, He being the Infinite Personality, is not unthinkable at all. And in such a case it is not unreasonable, but the deepest reason, to ask for no more than His articulate guarantee, so to speak, that the mystery is fact; that He is conscious of it, alive to it (speaking humanly); and that He avows it as His will. For when God, the God of Christ, bids us "take His will for it," it is a different thing from an attempt, however powerful, to frighten us into silence. It is a reminder Who He is who speaks; the Being who is kindred to us, who is in relations with us, who loved us, but who also has absolutely made us, and cannot (because we are sheer products of His will) make us so much His equals as to tell us all. So the Apostle proceeds with a "for" whose bearing we have thus already indicated: For to Moses he says, { Exodus 34:19 } in the dark sanctuary of Sinai, "I shall pity whomsoever I do pity, and compassionate whomsoever I do compassionate"; My account of My saving action shall stop there: It appears therefore that it, the ultimate account of salvation, is not of (as the effect is "of" the first cause) the wilier, nor of the runner, the carrier of willing into work, but of the Pitier - God. For the Scripture says { Exodus 10:16 } to Pharaoh, that large example of defiant human sin, real and guilty, but also, concurrently, of the sovereign Choice which sentenced him to go his own way, and used him as a beacon at its end, "For this very purpose I raised thee up, made thee stand, even beneath the Plagues, that I might display in thee My power, and that My Name, as of the just God who strikes down the proud, might be told far and wide in all the earth." Pharaoh’s was a case of concurrent phenomena. A man was there on the one hand, willingly, deliberately, and most guiltily, battling with right, and rightly bringing ruin on his own head, wholly of himself. God was there on the other hand, making that man a monument not of grace but of judgment. And that side, that line, is isolated here, and treated as if it were all. It appears then that whom He pleases, He pities, and whom He pleases, He hardens, in that sense in which He "hardened Pharaoh’s heart," "made it stiff," "made it heavy," "made it harsh"-by sentencing it to have its own way. Yes, thus "it appears." And beyond that inference we can take no step of thought but this-that the Subject of that mysterious "will," He who thus "pleases," and "pities," and "hardens," is no other than the God of Jesus Christ. He may be, not only submitted to, but trusted, in that unknowable sovereignty of His will. Yet listen to the question which speaks out the problem of all hearts: "You will say to Me therefore, Why does He still, after such an avowal of His sovereignty, softening this heart, hardening that, why does He still find fault?" Ah, why? For His act of will who has withstood? (Nay, you have withstood His will, and so have I Not one word of the argument has contradicted the primary fact of our will, nor therefore our responsibility. But this he does not bring in here.) Nay, rather, rather than take such an attitude of narrow and helpless logic, think deeper; nay, rather, O man, O mere human being, you-who are you, who are answering back to your God? Shall the thing formed say to its Former, Why did you make me like this? Has not the potter authority over his clay, out of the same kneaded mass to make this vessel for honour, but that for dishonour? But if God, being pleased to demonstrate His wrath, and to evidence what He can do-what will St. Paul go on to say? That the Eternal, being thus "pleased," created responsible beings on purpose to destroy them, gave them personality, and then compelled them to transgress? No, he does not say so. The sternly simple illustration, in itself one of the least relieved utterances in the whole Scripture-that dread Potter and his kneaded Clay!-gives way, in its application, to a statement of the work of God on man full of significance in its variation. Here are indeed the "vessels" still; and the vessels "for honour" are such because of "mercy," and His own hand has "prepared them for glory." And there are the vessels "for dishonour," and in a sense of awful mystery they are such because of "wrath." But the "wrath" of the Holy One can fall only upon demerit; so these "vessels" have merited His displeasure of themselves. And they are "prepared for ruin"; but where is any mention of His hand preparing them? And meanwhile He "bears them in much longsuffering." The mystery is there, impenetrable as ever, when we try to pierce behind "His will." But on every side it is limited and qualified by facts which witness to the compassions of the Infinite Sovereign even in His judgments, and remind us that sin is altogether "of" the creature. So we take up the words where we dropped them above: What if He bore, (the tense throws us forward into eternity, to look back thence on His ways in time,) in much longsuffering, vessels of wrath, adjusted for ruin? And acted otherwise with others, that He might evidence the wealth of His glory, the resources of His inmost Character, poured upon vessels of pity, which He prepared in advance for glory, by the processes of justifying and hallowing grace-whom in fact He called, effectually, in their conversion, even us, not only from the Jews, but also from the Gentiles? For while the lineal Israel, with its privilege and its apparent failure, is here first in view, there lies behind it the phenomenon of "the Israel of God," the heaven-born heirs of the Fathers, a race not of blood, but of the Spirit. The great Promise, all the while, had set towards that Israel as its final scope; and now he gives proof from the Prophets that this intention was at least half revealed all along the line of revelation. As actually in our Hosea { Hosea 2:23 , Hebrews 2:5 } in the book we know as such, He says, "I will call what was not My people, My people; and the not-beloved one, beloved. And [another Hosean oracle, in line with the first] it shall be, in the place where it was said to them, Not My people are ye, there they shall be called sons of the living God." In both places the first incidence of the words is on the restoration of the Ten Tribes to covenant blessings. But the Apostle, in the Spirit, sees an ultimate and satisfying reference to a vaster application of the same principle; the bringing of the rebelling and banished ones of all mankind into covenant and blessing. Meanwhile the Prophets who foretell that great ingathering indicate with equal solemnity the spiritual failure of all but a fraction of the lineal heirs of promise. But Isaiah cries over Israel, "If the number of the sons of Israel should be as the sand of the sea, the remnant only shall be saved; for as one who completes and cuts short will the Lord do His work upon the earth." Here again is a first and second incidence of the prophecy. In every stage of the history of Sin and Redemption the Apostle, in the Spirit, sees an embryo of the great Development. So, in the woefully limited numbers of the Exiles who returned from the old captivity he sees an embodied prophecy of the fewness of the sons of Israel who shall return from the exile of incredulity to their, true Messiah. And as Isaiah { Isaiah 1:9 } has foretold, so it is; "Unless the Lord of Hosts had left us a seed, like Sodom we had become, and to Gomorrah we had been resembled." Such was the mystery of the facts, alike in the older and in the later story of Israel. A remnant, still a remnant, not the masses, entered upon an inheritance of such ample provision, and so sincerely offered. And behind this lay the insoluble shadow within which is concealed the relation of the Infinite Will to the wills of men. But also, in front of the phenomenon, concealed by no shadow save that which is cast by human sin, the Apostle sees and records the reasons, as they reside in the human will, of this "salvation of a remnant." The promises of God, all along, and supremely now in Christ, had been conditioned (it was in the nature of spiritual things that it should be so) by submission to His way of fulfilment. The golden gift was there, in the most generous of hands, stretched out to give. But it could be put only into a recipient hand open and empty. It could be taken only by submissive and self-forgetting faith. And man, in his fall, had twisted his will out of gear for such an action. Was it wonderful that, by his own fault, he failed to receive? What therefore shall we say? Why, that the Gentiles, though they did not pursue righteousness, though no Oracle had set them on the track of a true divine acceptance and salvation, achieved righteousness, grasped it when once revealed, but the righteousness that results on faith; but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, aiming at what is, for fallen man, the impossible goal, a perfect meeting of the Law’s one principle of acceptance, "This do and thou shalt live," did not attain that law; that is to say, practically, as we now review their story of vain efforts in the line of self, did not attain the acceptance to which that law was to be the avenue. The Pharisee as such, the Pharisee Saul of Tarsus for example, neither had peace with God, nor dared to think he had, in the depth of his soul. He knew enough of the divine ideal to be hopelessly uneasy about his realisation of it. He could say, stiffly enough, "God, I thank Thee"; { Luke 18:11 ; Luke 18:14 } but he "went down to his house" unhappy, unsatisfied, unjustified. On what account? Because it was not of faith, but as of works; in the unquiet dream that man must, and could, work up the score of merit to a valid claim. They stumbled on the Stone of their stumbling; as it stands written, { Isaiah 8:14 ; Isaiah 28:16 } in a passage where the great perpetual Promise is in view, and where the blind people are seen rejecting it as their foothold in favour of policy, or of formalism, Behold, I place in Sion, in the very centre of light and privilege, a Stone of stumbling, and a Rock of upsetting; and he who confides in Him, (or, perhaps, in it,) he who rests on it, on Him, shall not be put to shame. One great Rabbi at least, Rashi, of the twelfth century, bears witness to the mind of the Jewish Church upon the significance of that mystic Rock. "Behold," so runs his interpretation, "I have established a King, a Messiah, who shall be in Zion a stone of proving." Was ever prophecy more profoundly verified in event? Not for the lineal Israel only, but for Man, the King Messiah is, as ever, the Stone of either stumbling or foundation. He is, as ever, "a Sign spoken against." He is, as ever, the Rock of Ages, where the believing sinner hides, and rests, and builds, "Below the storm-mark of the sky, Above the flood-mark of the deep." Have we known what it is to stumble over Him? "We will not have this Man to reign over us"; "We were never in bondage to any man; who is He that He should set us free?" And are we now lifted by a Hand of omnipotent kindness to a place deep in His clefts, safe on His summit, "knowing nothing" for the peace of conscience, the satisfaction of thought, the liberation of the will, the abolition of death, "but Jesus Christ, and Him crucified"? Then let us think with always humbled sympathy of those who, for whatever reason, still "forsake their, own mercy". { Jonah 2:8 } And let us inform them where we are, and how we are here, and that "the ground is good." And for ourselves, that we may do this the better, let us often read again the simple, strong assurance which closes this chapter of mysteries; "He who confides in Him shall not be put to shame"; "shall not be disappointed"; "shall not," in the vivid phrase of the Hebrew itself, "make haste." No, we shall not "make haste." From that safe Place no hurried retreat shall ever need to be beaten. That Fortress cannot be stormed; it cannot be surprised; it cannot crumble. For "IT is HE"; the Son, the Lamb, of God; the sinner’s everlasting Righteousness, the believer’s unfailing Source of peace, of purity, and of power. DETACHED NOTE TO Romans 9:5 THE following is transcribed, with a few modifications, from the writer’s Commentary on the Epistle in "The Cambridge Bible": "[Who is over all, God blessed forever.] The Greek may, with more or less facility, be translated (1) as in A.V; or (2) ‘who is God over all,’ etc.; or (3) ‘blessed forever be He who is God over all’ (i.e., the Eternal Father) If we adopt (3) we take the Apostle to be led, by the mention of the Incarnation, to utter a sudden and solemn doxology to the God who gave that crowning mercy. In favour of this it is urged (by some entirely orthodox commentators, as H.A.W. Meyer) that St. Paul nowhere else styles the Lord simply ‘God,’ but rather ‘the Son of God,’ etc. By this they do not mean to detract from the Lord’s Deity; but they maintain that St. Paul always so states that Deity, under Divine guidance, as to mark the ‘Subordination of the Son’-that Subordination which is not a difference of Nature, Power, or Eternity, but of Order; just such as is marked by the simple but profound words Father and Son." "But on the other hand there is Titus 2:13 , where the Greek is (at least) perfectly capable of the rendering, ‘our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ.’ There is Acts 20:28 , where the evidence is very strong for the reading, retained by the R.V (text) ‘the Church of God, which He purchased with His own blood.’ And if St. John is to be taken to report words exactly, in his narrative of the Resurrection, in an incident whose point is deeply connected with verbal precision, we have one of the first Apostles, within eight days of the Resurrection, addressing the Risen Lord { John 20:28 } as ‘my God.’ (We call attention to this as against the contention that only the latest developments of inspiration, represented in, e.g., St. John’s Preamble to his Gospel, show us Christ called explicitly God.)" "If it is divinely true that ‘the Word is God,’ it is surely far from wonderful if here and there, in peculiar connections, [St. Paul] should so speak of Christ, even though guided to keep another phase of the truth habitually in view." "Now, beyond all fair question, the Greek here is quite naturally rendered as in the A.V; had it not been for historical controversy, probably, no other rendering would have been suggested. And lastly, and what is important, the context far rather suggests a lament (over the fall of Israel) than an ascription of praise. And what is most significant of all, it pointedly suggests some explicit allusion to the super-human Nature of Christ, by the words, ‘according to the flesh.’ But if there is such an allusion, then it must lie in the words, over all, God."’ The Expositor's Bible Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com . Used by Permission.