I know its a lot of reading,but read this passage for me and then tell me what you think please.
�AT THIS TIME I WILL COME, AND SARAH SHALL HAVE A SON.� 10 And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; 11 for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God�s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, 12 it was said to her, �THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER.� 13 Just as it is written, �JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED.�
14 What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! 15 For He says to Moses, �I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.� 16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, �FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH.� 18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.
19 You will say to me then, �Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?� 20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, �Why did you make me like this,� will it? 21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? 22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory,
Very insightful. I always felt that coming along and death was my choice as well, if you want to call that a choice. I honestly believe I would have died physically had I chosen not to follow. I fought it, but always gave in when things got really bad.
Then maybe I'm just confusing words here. To me...a man's will is his power to make choices. If man is not in control of his choices then God is responsible for sin. However, if you're saying that "will" is just "God's plan"...then I suppose I can go with that. But in the context of salvation, I hear you saying that "we have no choice". That even if we don't want to be saved, God is going to save us(only some of us)...but then you enter the realm of puppets and the bible ceases to make sense. Why go through all this? "For God's glory"? Is God self-serving? What do we know about God's character? The character that we saw in Jesus? Just doesn't make sense to me I suppose. I do believe God has a plan that we can't change, I do believe God knows who will be saved, I just don't believe God forces anything. It's not that He "makes" us be saved...He just knows who will hear Him and be loyal to Him...because if God forces stuff, this whole mess doesn't make sense compared to the character of Christ/God...to me at least...I'll keep looking...
BTW, no one is discussing this passage as Steve has posted. So maybe, just maybe if this passage is explained as to what it means, there will be understanding and no confusion.
The topic asked a question Waht Do YOU think this passageMEANS... So what does it mean? why not break this down and explain the meaning of this passage, so those who don't understand it will, and those who think they know its meaning will be able to teach us a little sum'sum... and we ALL will come into an understanding and knowledge of what God is saying up in herrrrrr....:dancingp:
The thing about the old testament is that God is establishing the nation of Israel. he is chosing jacab over esau for his kingdom. It was his choice to set jacob up as the son of promise. The line of Christ was going to come from the chosen people. He, being God picked Jacob for the job of being a witness of god to the world.
He - being God decided to who would be his people.:peace:
�THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER.� 13 Just as it is written, �JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED.�
First, the older will serve the younger is symbolized throughout the scriptures. Cain was cast out, the youngest brother Seth was the only heir left. Isaac was the true son of promise and the older Ishmael was sent off. Jacob received the inheritance and blessing, not the older Esau.
All of this points at a larger picture...
I think that the Gentiles are symbolically the younger brother, Israel is symbolized the older brother who had the inheritance taken from them and given to us.
Mat. 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
I think all these stories of the older and younger brothers were there for a distinct purpose.
Gal. 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
When the Bible speaks of predestination, it speaks of God's sovereign involvement in certain things before they happen. He chooses in advance certain things to take place. For example, he predestined creation. Before God created the world, he decided to do it.
Usually when people think of predestination, they think about whether or not somebody was hit by an automobile on a given day because God had decided ahead of time that that should happen on that day.
Theologically, the principal issue of predestination in the Bible has to do with God selecting people for salvation beforehand. The Bible clearly does teach that somehow God chooses people for salvation before they're even born. Virtually every Christian church believes that, because this concept is so clearly taught in Scripture.
Paul refers to Jacob and Esau. Before they were even born, before they had done any good or evil, God decreed in advance that the elder would serve the younger: "Jacob have I loved; Esau have I hated." The point there is that God had chosen certain benefits for one of those two before they were even born.
The real debate is, On what basis does God predestine? We know that he predestines, but why does he predestine, and what is the basis for his choices? Many Christians believe that God knows in advance what people are going to do, what choices they're going to make, and what activities they're going to be involved in. As he looks through the corridor of time and knows what choices you will make, for example, he knows that you will hear the gospel. He knows whether you will say yes or no. If he knows that you are going to say yes, then he chooses you for salvation on the basis of his prior knowledge. I don't hold that position. I think that God does this sovereignly, not arbitrarily, not whimsically. The only basis I see for predestination in the Bible is the good pleasure of his own will. The only other reason is to honor his only begotten Son. The reason for his selection is not in me and not in you and not in some foreseen good or evil, but in his own sovereignty.
"At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son."
I found interesting, and years back I did a little studying.
_____________
_____________
It all starts with Isaac.
Gen 17:19 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall BEAR thee a SON indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant WITH HIM for an everlasting covenant, [and] with his SEED after him.
Gen 17:21 But my covenant will I establish WITH ISAAC, which Sarah SHALL BEAR unto thee at this set time in the next year.
Abraham�s son (Isaac) is symbolized as the seed, the son, and the child in which the covenant was to be established and to whom the inheritance would go.
All three of these references are also symbolic of Christ.
1.Gal. 3:16,19; 2. John 3:16; 3.Mat.1:18
The Bread
Sarah was the only one of three women that Abraham had children with, yet only Sarah gave birth to who was called the seed.
This being the case, there is obviously some importance in knowing significance of Sarah, Hagar, and Keturah.
Mat 13:33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a WOMAN took, and HID in THREE MEASURES OF MEAL, till the whole was leavened.
Luk 13:21 It is like leaven, which a WOMAN took and HID in THREE MEASURES OF MEAL, till the whole was leavened.
The "kingdom of heaven"(the inheritance) is compared to as leaven.
These two verses might not seem relevant until one considers that the phrase "three measures of meal" appears only three times in the Bible.
The two New Testament (parable)verses above and one Old Testament verse, that is very similar.
Gen 18:6 And Abraham hastened into the tent unto SARAH, and said, Make ready quickly THREE MEASURES OF fine MEAL, knead [it], and make CAKES upon the HEARTH.
Interesting to notice above in Matt. 13:33 that the "kingdom of heaven" is likened to leaven.
Then 5 chapters later...
Mat 18:4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
Also in Mark...
Mar 10:15 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
We can start to see a pattern developing, Christ is also called the "bread"(John 6:35) and the "child"
The symbolism surrounding the "bread" is clearly references to the "resurrection".
Remember, Christ is also called "the resurrection".(John 11:25)
Job 28:5 [As for] the EARTH, out of it cometh BREAD: and under it is turned up as it were FIRE.
Isa 30:23 Then shall he give the rain of thy SEED, that thou shalt SOW THE GROUND withal; and BREAD of the increase of the EARTH, and it shall be fat and plenteous: in that day shall thy cattle feed in large pastures.
The leaven(seed) was "hid" in Sarah.
The three mothers of Abraham�s children are symbolic of the three measures of meal.
The leavened bread(Isaac) coming out of the Earth(Sarah) after it has been fired, is the resurrection.
Sarah is symbolized as the Earth, giving birth to the inheritors.
Rom 9:9 For this [is] the word of PROMISE, At this time WILL I COME, and SARA shall have a SON.
The delivery of Isaac, is symbolized as the resurrection.
Gal 4:28 Now we, brethren, as ISAAC was, are the CHILDREN.
I think it means that God has a plan. That He knows the heart and the future of every person and that He will execute His plan for the good of every created being. I don't think we're very far off topic though, because every time this verse comes up someone is using it to prove God makes us be saved. I guarantee it was no coincidence that Mr. Manny decided to start a forum thread about this chapter, lol. I just believe that the bible says God spreads His truth, His word, His love, His mercy, His seed...everywhere, but only the ones that "hear and believe" the truth about God's character will be saved. That's what this is all about. God's character was called into question by Satan, and God proved to the universe that He has our best interests at heart by selflessly dying on the cross for all sin. This idea that there is only one special class of people that God is planning to save sounds a lot like the view the Jews had of God's character when they expected Jesus to save them from the Romans. God wants everyone to be saved, and He is giving everyone a chance even though He knows most won't choose Him. I believe that to say otherwise is a misrepresentation of God's character. Jesus didn't die just for the "chosen people". He died for all men everywhere...the chosen and the outcasts. I just think we need to really study what the character of God is...it might answer a lot of questions we're having now. Would Jesus only die for/allow a few people to come to Him? Or would He die for everyone and want everyone to come to Him? Anyway...it answers a lot of questions for me...at least I hope it does...I'll keep looking. Yes, God is supreme and His Will will be done...but He operates within His character and His true character was shown in Christ.
@Adam- In response to your first post, I would personally take that a bit deeper... The "larger picture" ought always to relate directly to God's redemption of mankind through Christ's work on the cross. Keeping that in mind, I would venture to say that "the older will serve the younger" is more of a foreshadowing of Christ coming to serve...
Lemme explain what is running through my mind here that causes me to arrive at that conclusion... First of all, God is sovereign, but humans like to establish traditions, institutions, etc. that don't account for that... And, our expectations and ideas often arise from that which is man-made, v. from a belief in God's sovereignty. An example of this is the tradition referred to in Genesis 25 of the younger sibling serving the older one. In verse 23, where God says to Rebekah that, in fact, the oldest sibling will be serving the younger one, I think that this is a larger statement about HIS sovereignty v. a statement amount Jews and Gentiles. I believe that God is saying that His means are different than ours... Ultimately, that salvation will not come in the expected way or through man's effort.
Flash-forwarding to the New Testament, we see that one of the reasons Christ was rejected is because He wasn't what the people were expecting or what they thought tradition lent itself to. They expected the Messiah to be an earthly king, and redemption was misunderstood in light of that. Christ was Jesus... who has always been, who is older than any man or any Nation. But He was not recognized as such by some, because they expected their salvation to be something different or to come through different means. They heralded their man-man misconceptions over what their Saviour, in the flesh, was right in front of them saying.
In Romans 9, Paul is discussing the role of God's sovereignty in man's salvation. He explains that election is not a matter of being a biological descendant of Abraham or of being an observer of the law. God's people, that is, those who are saved, are rather beckoned through Christ's work on the cross. God, in His sovereignty, determined a way of salvation that goes far deeper than biology and a legalistic following of the law; it's far better than whatever man thinks merits him having any relationship or fellowship w/ God.
So, when Paul discusses the Genesis account, he is using it to support the truth that God's sovereign election trumps whatever man has to say about becoming/being a child of God. I think he draws from those words in particular to especially highlight the fact that election is not a matter of race or anything of the like. In verses 14 and 15, he goes on to dispel the thought that God is unjust because He made a sovereign choice to elect people through the cross, v. electing people through race or through their following of the law. Man is not elected because of anything that he is or is not or has done or has not done; he is elected because God sovereignly chose to redeem mankind even before the foundations of the world were laid. We can't bypass God's sovereign plan for redemption because we think we're part of a special group or because we think we have so much to offer God or have served Him so precisely and religiously.
And so, I would hesitate to interpret Romans 9:12 as having anything literally to do with Jews serving Gentiles.
___________________
As to the original post, I would also add that:
In verse 16, Paul is making a statement that salvation is only possible through God's sovereign choice for election through Christ's work on the cross. It is not possible through any other means, such as being part of a race, or observing the law.
In verse 17, Paul references God's sovereignty being revealed through an ungodly leader... In other words, God is always sovereign, and always in control, even when the circumstances may initially indicate otherwise. God's purposes are not thwarted by man's disregard of God or hatred towards Him.
In verse 18, Paul explains that because God is sovereign and, in that sovereignty, decided to redeem people through Christ, that it is He alone who decides how individuals will be saved and shown mercy. In other words, God will not show mercy towards those who continue on in unbelief; their hearts will remain hard. He will not show them mercy based upon their incorrect following of how man can have a relationship w/ God and fellowship w/ God. Basically, it is God's way or the highway, and those who choose the highway, will not be shown mercy.
In verse 19, the popular question is raised of why God judges people for sin when He is sovereign and controls everything anyway.
In verses 20-21, Paul kinda harshly (?) replies that because God is God, we shouldn't question Him (the doubting/unbelief/disrespectful kind of questioning, not the, "Can I have some wisdom, God? kind of questioning). He brings in the analogy of the potter and clay, saying that it is the potter who makes the decisions regarding the clay. In keeping with the rest of the chapter, I would lean more toward saying that this means we may not argue w/ God's plan for redemption v. that we may not argue w/ his plans for us individually (not the the latter is not true).
In verse 22-23+, Paul is referring to the Nation of Israel again, stating that God's purpose in putting up w/ them and displaying His glory through them, was not so much because of who the Israelites were or because they have more value to God than anyone else or because they are saved based on some kind of merit, but rather because of who God is and of His desire to display His sovereignty for all mankind, that His character and plan of redemption would be understood.
The error that Paul is addressing in Romans 9 is the belief that it is all about us v. all about God. He's attempting to combat the egocentric view of the Gospel that many held, that is, the view that God chooses us, desires us, or needs us, because of some merit that we have... Because we follow the rules better or go to church more, etc. He's emphasizing that it has nothing to do w/ any of that. A true decision to accept Christ is one that brings glory to God, not one that accompanies a sense of entitlement and says, "Look at me. I'm so great. God picked me because of A, B, and C." If we don't humble ourselves and correctly see ourselves as having absolutely no worth apart from God, then we are unable to truly repent and respond to what Christ did for us. Redemption showcases God's glory, not man's (not that man has any glory in the first place!). The Israelites (and lots people) though just the opposite: that it's about God making people look good instead of people pointing towards God.
That's what I think it all means, for what it's worth....
___________________
@Steve- Regarding your bit from Sproul... I certainly don't deny God's sovereignty or think that He just makes random, whimsical choices, but I do NOT think that He chooses certain people to NOT be saved. Yes, I do think that God knew who would respond positively to His Son's work on the cross and who wouldn't. And I do believe that those who reject Christ will not be covered under the atonement. BUT, I don't think that it is correct for us to link the dots together there and say that Christ only died for those who he knew would not reject Him and to then interpret that to mean that God only elected certain people. There are MANY verses throughout the Bible that express that ALL who accept Christ will be saved... not just a particular group of people who were preselected.
I agree w/ what DontHit said: "This idea that there is only one special class of people that God is planning to save sounds a lot like the view the Jews had of God's character when they expected Jesus to save them from the Romans."
I believe that it is something like this: Let's say that a mother has a child who is a picky eater who just doesn't want to come to dinner 1/2 the time or eat what is on his plate on the occasion that he does come to dinner. That doesn't mean that the mother will stop cooking dinner for that child or that she'll refuse to serve the child dinner if he actually comes to the table. The mother desires that the child accept proper nutrition and continues to cook enough dinner for him to have some, even though she can be fairly sure that the child may not eat. Just because the child does not answer his mother's call to come to dinner or to eat what's on his plate, does not negate the fact that his mother DID call him to dinner and put food on his plate.
Likewise, just because someone chooses to not answer God's call, through Christ's work on the cross, does not mean that God has no desire for that person to be saved, or didn't elect that person. Quite simply, I think that election means that God, in knowing that man would sin, chose to call people back to Him through Christ's work on the cross, and that this plan was put into motion long before the birth of Christ. Christ's work on the cross was not just some random, spur of the moment thing; it was the result of an eternity of God loving us and not desiring that any of us should not have a relationship w/ Him and be in fellowship w/ Him.
