Romans

9:1-5

Arguments in support of the proposition, 1:18-11:36

4. God's true Israel consists of the children of promise, not the children of law, 9:1-11:36

i] The tragic riddle of Israel's unbelief, 9:1-5

Paul now turns his attention in chapters 9 to 11 to "the place of Israel in God's purposes", Davies. Our passage for study serves as an introduction to chapters 9-11 by describing "the plight, v1-3, and the privileges of Israel, v4-5", Dumbrell.

The function of chapters 9 to 11, within Paul's letter to the Romans, has prompted ongoing debate. Some commentators treat these chapters as an "excursus", "a kind of postscript", an appendix dealing with the "Jewish question", (Augustine, Sanday and Headlam, Dodd, Lloyd-Jones, Beker, ...). On the other hand, most modern commentators argue that these chapters are either "the climax of Romans", Stendahl (Ellison, Sanders, Beker, Moo, Johnson, ...), or an integral element of Paul's advancing argument (Dunn, Barrett, Morris, Fitzmyer [3rd and last element in the doctrinal section of the letter, 1 to 11, "justification and salvation through faith do not contradict God's promises to Israel of old"], Schreiner, Cranfield, Jewett [the 3rd proof, of four proofs, of the gospel as the embodiment of the righteousness of God, namely, "the triumph of divine righteousness in the gospel's mission to Israel and the Gentiles"]), or even the key to understanding the letter as a whole; "if we can understand Romans 9-11 correctly, we shall be better able to understand the rest of the letter", O'Neill (Baur, who argued that these chapters were the hermeneutical center of the whole epistle). Cranfield argues that "many features of chapters 1 to 8 ... are not understood in full depth until they are seen in the light of chapters 9 to 11". In fact Morris argues that "Paul's whole argument demands an examination of the Jewish question". Yet, it does seem that these chapters stand in their own right.

So then, what prompts this clarification, or step in Paul's advancing argument? A number of possibilities have been suggested:

i] Theological. a) It is possible that Paul wants to underscore the faithfulness of God to his promises (answering the question "has God's word failed?", Dunn), which promises seem not to have worked out with regard to Israel; b) Paul may wish to provide a "more precise identification" of God's new covenant community, the "remnant chosen by grace", which community will indeed include many Jews like Paul, cf. Dumbrell.

ii] Pastoral. Paul may well be prompted more by pastoral concerns than theological ones; the "equality of Jew and Gentile in God's plan", Dumbrell, occasioning a proper regard for Israel and an acceptance of the "weak" (Jewish believers / law-bound believers) by the "strong" (faith-bound believers - mainly Gentiles), cf., ch.14-15.

iii] Personal. Paul may well be emoting, such that his "reflections of the place of Israel in God's purposes", Davies, are driven by his desire that Israel be saved; a problem that was for Paul "of intense personal concern", Bruce. "He came to his own home and his own people received him not. This is the problem Paul wrestles with in chapters 9-11", Hunter.

iv] Apologetic. Jeremias argued that in these chapters Paul is responding to the criticism that he is anti-Jewish. To convince Jews (Jewish believers?) "that his ministry was pro-Jewish as well as pro-Gentile", Osborne, Paul sets out to establish two positive truths, first, "the Gentiles owe their salvation to the rejection of Israel" and second, "in the long term, God's purposes embrace His own people", Black.

It is not hard to imagine that Paul was motivated by all of the above. He is clearly not wanting to increase the divide between "the weak" (nomist believers, most of Jewish stock with some Gentile disciples) and "the strong" (most being Gentiles). He is clearly distressed that his fellow Jews have, for the most part, rejected the gospel. He is also sensitive to the criticism that he is now anti-Jewish. Yet, it is likely that chapters 9-11 serve to advance his argument and that therefore is theological in nature.

The most commonly accepted approach is that having detailed the consequential blessings of justification, Paul now addresses an obvious question. How can we be sure of these promises when the divine Abrahamic promises seem unfulfilled? Has not God abandoned national Israel? If God's covenant promises to Israel are unfulfilled, how can we be sure they will be fulfilled for us, the children of faith? Has not the Abrahamic covenant failed, 9:6a? There is much to commend this approach.

None-the-less, it does seem more likely that these chapters serve as Paul's final argument against the nomist believers ("the weak") in Rome. Paul sets out to define the true nature of the children of God, those who rightly appropriate the promised Abrahamic blessings, 9:8. Identification with the children of the Sinai covenant is a worthless quest for it is the children of promise who inherit the fullness of God's promised blessings, not the children of flesh.

alhqeian legw "what I say is true" - I speak truth. "What I say is true."

en Cristw/ "in Christ" - Obviously with a local sense, "in union with Christ." "As a man who has his being in Christ", Cassirer.

thV suneidhsewV moi "my conscience" - the conscience of me. The prefix sun probably gives the sense, "together with my conscience."

summarturoushV (summarturew) gen. pres. part. "confirms" - bearing witness with. The genitive participle phrase "my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit", functions within a parenthesis, "- I am not lying ...... -", as NIV. As a genitive absolute, the phrase would usually be treated as temporal, but here possibly causal, "I am not lying, because .....". "I am speaking in Christ, without pretence, as my conscience testifies for me in the Holy Spirit", NJB.

moi dat. pro. "it" - The dative is probably local, "testifies in support of / witnesses along with", Cranfield.

en pneumati aJgiw/ "in the Holy Spirit" - Usually taken as instrumental; "under the direction of the Holy Spirit", Barclay. The Holy Spirit has touched Paul's conscience and so bears witness that he is speaking the truth.

oJti "-" - that. Introducing a dependent statement of stating, ie., what Paul speaks in Christ.

adialeiptoV adj. "unceasing [anguish]" - incessant, continual, increasing. There is no distinction between the two phrases "great sorrow" and "unceasing anguish", rather Paul is just using "rhetorically effective doubled expressions", Moo. Paul's anguish for his people is constant, ongoing, and increasing. Obviously the anguish concerns the rejection of Christ as Messiah by the majority of Paul's fellow countryman.

th/ kardia mou "in my heart" - "My heart is broken ("a pain that never leaves me", Phillips) and I am in great sorrow", CEV.

gar "for" - Expressing reason, or at least a connection with v2, even "explanation of", Cranfield. The reason for Paul's anguish is obviously the damnation ("anathema") facing his fellow Israelites, a damnation which, if it were possible, he would willing turn upon himself.

hucomhn (eucomai) imperf. "I could wish" - I was praying, wishing. The sense is debatable since it is very unlikely that Paul would actually wish for / pray for his cursing (note parallel with Moses). The imperfect is best taken as an impossible wish; "I could wish to be cursed from Christ if that were possible, but of course such a wish is impossible", Schreiner.

anaqema (a) "cursed" - something devoted to destruction, accursed. Devoted to God in the negative sense of being set apart for destruction, and particularly here, of separated from Christ. Paul's desire, if it were possible, namely, to be cursed in place of his fellow Israelites, indicates that his concern is for their salvation, not the future restoration of a historical Israel. See Moo for this issue.

apo + gen. "cut off from [Christ]" - from, away from. In the sense of separated from a source. What Paul is theoretically willing to have happen to himself is obviously the situation facing Israel. Yet, why is israel cut off? The separation of Israel from the divine is usually expressed in terms of Israel's failure to accept Christ as messiah, which indeed it is. Yet, Paul defines Israel's problem in the same terms as the problem facing the law-bound Jewish believers he addresses in chapters 1 to 8, ie., Israel's failure to recognize that salvation "depends not on human exertion, but on God who shows mercy", 9:16, cf. 9:30-10:21. It is this heresy that blinds Israel to the presence of God's messiah, Jesus.

uJper + gen. "for the sake of" - for the sake of, on behalf of.

twn adelfwn (oV) "[my] brothers" - brothers [kinsmen of me according to flesh who are Israelites]. This word usually indicates believers and if that is intended here, then Paul has in mind believing Jews. Certainly, up to this point, his references to Jews have been to believing Jews (although this is disputed by many). His "sorrow" and "anguish" would then be for those believing Jews who have slipped into nomism (law-obedience) and have thus undermined their standing before God, a standing which is by faith and not works of the law. Yet, it is more likely, given the context, that "brother Jews" refers to "ethnic Israel." In fact, Paul actually qualifies ("clarifies", Dunn) his unusual use of "brothers" with "my kindred according to the flesh." Paul's anguish is for his "ethnic brothers" ie. "unbelieving Jews" and the judgment they face having rejected Christ as their messiah.

hJ uiJoqesia (a) "the adoption as sons" - adoption, sonship. Probably of national Israel's special relationship with the Creator, although as with "brothers" it is a term usually reserved in the NT for believers. This again supports those who argue that Paul is thinking of Jewish believers. God treats them as his sons; "he made them his sons", TEV.

hJ doxa "the divine glory" - the visible presence of an invisible God. God's presence with his people. "God showed them his glory", CEV.

aiJ diaqhkai (h) "the covenants" - agreement, treaty, covenant. This could be the law, but is most probably the agreements made with Israel through Moses, Abraham, etc. "They have the glory of God and the agreements", NCV.

hJ nomoqesia (a) "the receiving of the law" - legislation = making or giving law, the body of law. Paul probably means the gift of and possession of, the Mosaic law.

hJ latreia "the temple worship" - service. "Temple" is not in the Gk. Although the English word "worship" is often used to translate this Greek word, it does not mean worship, ie. worship in the sense of adoration. It is better translated "service", here in the sense of service to God's ordinances. It is true that the Levitical cult is included in these ordinances, but it is service to the ordinance that is implied, and not cultic observances, temple worship, adoration.... The confusion of this "service" word with proskunew (worship, adoration, obeisance) has done a great disservice to the meaning of Christian worship - ie. what we are to do when we gather together with Christ in a Christian service. We have tended to replace adoration with celebration. "They have lived to serve God under the umbrella of his promises", Junkins.

aiJ epaggeliai "the promises" - not just the promises made to Abraham etc., but the full range of prophetic promises made to the people of Israel.

oiJ patereV (hr roV) "the patriarchs" - Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, although probably including all those with whom God made a covenant agreement.

to sarka (sarx oV) - "the human ancestry" - [out of whom the Christ] according to the flesh, physical. "The addition of the article strongly emphasizes the limitation", BDF, of Christ's association with Israel - only a fleshly link, not spiritual. Speaking of Christ's physical ancestry through the Patriarchs. "The patriarchs are theirs (Israel's), and so too, as far as human descent goes, is Christ himself", Phillips.

oJ wn "who" - the one being [over all God blessed ...] Participle of the verb to-be as a substantive. See Sandy and Headlam for an over-the-top dissertation on this tricky clause. Who is "the one being", is it Christ or God? Have we a statement of Christ's deity, as NIV, or at least his divine rule "he who rules as God over all things", Cassirer, or even something like "Christ is God-blessed forever, Amen", or have we here a doxology to God, "may God, supreme over all, be blessed forever", REB? Cranfield takes the view that it refers to Christ, his lordship. The grammar certainly supports the NIV, although many modern commentators lean more toward a doxology. See Turner p15 for some thoughts on the Greek. He concludes that Paul is saying that "the Messiah is God." Still, as Dodd notes, "even though Paul ascribes to Christ functions and dignities which are consistent with nothing less than deity, yet he pointedly avoids calling him `God'". The messiah "who is greater than us all, praised by God forever, may it be so!", Junkins.

Romans Introduction.

lectionarystudies.com