Chapter 9

Chapter 9 – Israel in part is selected; chapter 10 – Israel at present is rejected; chapter 11 – Israel in the future is accepted.

The outline of chapter nine

Chapter 9 outline:

The uniqueness of Israel – verses 1-5.

The premise: All Israel is not Israel – verse 6.

The premise is illustrated by the formation of the Jewish nation – verses 7-18.

The premise is illustrated by the essence of God – verses 19-29.

The premise is illustrated by the salvation of the Gentiles – verses 30-33.

Verse 1 — Paul’s triple oath. It begins with a positive affirmation, he starts out on a very positive note. “I say the truth in Christ.” This begins with a present active indicative of the verb legw — to speak, to talk, to communicate. Here it means to communicate. The present tense is a perfective present denoting the continuation of existing results, a past fact emphasised as a present reality, the existence and the creation of the New Testament scriptures. The active voice: Paul produces the action of the verb as a part of his triple oath. The triple oath indicates Paul’s honour, integrity, which he has indicated in so many ways. But in addition to his honour and integrity it now indicates his emotion. Paul is emotionally related to the Jews. When he uses this triple oath it isn’t accidental, it is to indicate that everything that he has taught in such a magnificent way from his genius is nothing compared to his emotional involvement with the subject. So that Romans chapters 9,10,11 are not only elliptical but because of the grammatical construction necessary to indicate one’s emotions related to the subject we have some of the more difficult Greek. This is not the type of thing that a first, second, third, or even fourth-year Greek student can handle because it involves many unusual idioms, many hapax legomenas, many phrases and clauses which are related in a most unusual way, many unusual uses of the post positive and other categories of particles, conjunctions, and so on. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. “I communicate.”

Then he adds the accusative singular direct object from the noun a)lhqeia, and while the word mean truth it also means doctrine, and that is the translation here. It is used here for the content of Christianity as an absolute truth, therefore doctrine. The absence of the definite article emphasises the high quality of the noun and it is translated simply as a part of the positive affirmation of a triple oath, “I communicate doctrine.”

To emphasise that he has not lost the mentality concept he deals with his own relationship to the Lord. In one prepositional phrase he emphasises the very purpose of the Church Age — in the baptism of the Spirit, the concept of the formation of the royal family of God beginning with the baptism of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, and concluding with the Rapture of the Church when the royal family is called out; and he relates all of this to the fact that even though all of us carry burdens and sorrows and face undeserved suffering and face many adversities in life we still have a stabiliser — the prepositional phrase e)n plus the locative singular of Xristoj.

So far we have the phrase, “I communicate doctrine in Christ,” or “I am communicating doctrine in Christ.” In this phrase Paul separates himself from the Old Testament writers and their gift of prophecy. Paul writes with the gift of apostleship rather than that of an Old Testament prophet.

Next we have the negative affirmation which deals with his own personal integrity. This is something that is very important. When anyone is dealing with God’s Word, with Bible doctrine, with those things that God has used and has chosen to reveal Himself to man, integrity is the order of the day.

“I lie not” — two words, the present middle indicative from the verb yeudomai plus the negative o)u (the negative which is used with the indicative) — “I am not lying.” The progressive present tense denotes linear aktionsart or the maintenance of academic integrity, intellectual honesty. It denotes the persistence of honour code integrity in Paul’s communication of Bible doctrine. The middle voice is the indirect middle which emphasises the agent as producing the action rather than participating in its results. The indirect middle is very similar to the active voice except that it produces a closer link between the subject and the verb. The indicative mood plus the negative is for the historical reality that Paul was not only a man of great genius but, unlike most men of great genius, he was able to make the practical application of his genius to reality.

“my conscience also bearing me witness” — this is a genitive absolute. The purpose of the genitive absolute — which has a noun, a pronoun, and a participle all in the genitive case but are not connected grammatically with the rest of the sentence — is to separate this affirmation of a co-witness completely from the other two affirmations and to make it unique. The genitive absolute used here is not Koine Greek, it is Attic Greek. So unusual is the third part of this oath that he actually goes back to the Classical and the Attic Greek construction for a genitive absolute. The genitive absolute include the following: a genitive singular from a noun, suneidhsij. The noun is in the genitive case but in the genitive case it is the subject of the participle. The word is “conscience.” With this is the instrumental of association singular from the personal pronoun e)gw. In the instrumental of association the personal pronoun is translated “with me.” Also we have a genitive singular from the definite article used as a possessive pronoun, translated “my.” Then the genitive singular, present active participle from the compound verb summarturew [sum = with; marturew = to testify, support, bear witness] which means to make a joint testimony, to bear witness with. The corrected translation of the Attic Greek genitive absolute is “my conscience nearing witness with me,” or “my conscience bearing joint testimony with me.” Everything that he says is compatible with him conscience and, as we will see in the rest of the oath, compatible with the ministry of God the Holy Spirit. The customary present tense of the participle is for what habitually occurs or what may be reasonably expected to occur when one is under the ministry of the Holy Spirit writing scripture. The active voice: Paul as the human writer of Romans produces the action of the verb. The participle is circumstantial for the formation of the canon of the New Testament, God the Holy Spirit being the author using human beings who are properly qualified.

“in the Holy Spirit” — e)n plus the locative singular of pneuma and a(gioj.

Translation: “I am communicating doctrine [positive affirmation], I am not lying [negative affirmation], my conscience bearing witness with me in the Holy Spirit.” It is God the Holy Spirit who is ultimately the source of scripture.

Next we have the word “conscience” which was a part of the genitive absolute — suneidhsij [sun = with; eidhsij is from o)ida] means to know with, which is a norm or a standard.

Principle

1. Note that the conscience is under the authority of the Holy Spirit for guaranteed accuracy in the communication and writing of scripture.

2. This triple-compound oath is especially necessary because what Paul has to say condemns the Jewish unbeliever. It excludes the Jewish unbeliever from the unconditional covenants and the future Millennial reign of Messiah and eternal heaven.

3. Paul will first express great sorrow that so many of his race, the Jews, and so many of the nation of Israel will be excluded from salvation because they have rejected Christ as Messiah.

4. The fact that many Jews are going to hell because they have rejected Christ as saviour does not void the unconditional promises made to Abraham, reiterated to Isaac and Jacob, to David, and to Jeremiah. All a part of the same covenant but categorically divided into Abrahamic, Palestinian, Davidic, and New covenants to Israel.

5. The only way to be included in the unconditional promises/covenants is to believe in Adonai Elohim — Jesus Christ the revealed God of the Old Testament. This is their only hope.]

6. The justice of God is totally fair, which means every Jew, every person, in history has a chance to be saved.

7. The exclusion for Israel is the same exclusion that pertains throughout history. Any exclusion is based upon negative volition at God-consciousness, rejection of Jesus Christ at gospel hearing.

8. Because some Jews have rejected Christ it does not abrogate the unconditional promises as given in the covenants. It doesn’t change the plan of God for those Jews who believe in Christ.

9. Nor does the rejection of some change the future of Israel. Israel has a future and all Jews who follow the spiritual heritage of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, being born again, will be in that future.

10. The promises of God to Israel or the unconditional covenants will be fulfilled to the election of grace, except for the Church Age where believing Jews merge will believing Gentiles to become something unique — the royal family of God forever.

11. Self-determination is a great issue in this parenthesis (Romans 9-11) because the unbelieving Jews despise the grace way of salvation and reject faith-righteousness, the imputed righteousness of God, and substitute their own righteousness. They have in effect reinvented the wheel and it disturbs Paul that the Jews of his own generation (and many generations since) have reinvented the wheel. The wheel is the plan of God and it runs upon the axle of imputed righteousness of God. Nothing in the plan of God runs on human righteousness or human ability or human works.

12. Because of the rejection of some Jews God does not cast off or abandon His people. As an Israelite and a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ Paul in the next verse expresses his burden of sorrow for those who have excluded themselves by not appropriating eternal salvation.

Verse 2 — the beginning of the expression of his burden. “That” — the conjunction o(ti, used after the transmission of an oath to indicate the content of his burden. This is actually a continuation of the sentence begun in verse 1 with the oath. With it are words luph moi e)stin megalh — “there is to me a great sorrow.” First is the present active indicative of the verb e)imi which is literally translated “there is.” The present tense is a present of duration, it denotes what was begun in the past and continues into the present time. The active voice: Paul produces the action of the verb as his burden for Israel. The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of concern — concern without fear, burden without panic. He is a man of honour, a man of maximum doctrine resident in his soul, therefore he can clearly and lucidly see the fall of Israel. He can understand that Israel is about to be destroyed under the fifth cycle of discipline.

Then we have the dative singular of possession from the personal pronoun e)gw — “to me.” It forms a part of a Greek idiom. There is no exact equivalent for this idiom in the English and therefore while it is literally, “There is to me a great sorrow,” we say in English, recognising the idiom, “I have a great sorrow.”

Next we have the predicate nominative feminine singular from the adjective megaj and the noun luph — “great sorrow.” The absence of the definite article before megaj indicates the fact that this is the highest quality of sorrow, a sorrow which is legitimate, honourable. It is honourable to carry such a burden at such a time in history. And the burden is not crushing him personally. Because he has doctrine he has flexibility and he continues to carry on and to fulfill his responsibility even with this great sorrow.

Principle: a) No believer who lives in a client nation to God can watch the disintegration of that nation without carrying the burden and having a great sorrow. b) The royal family honour code demands patriotism. For those citizens in a client nation, born in a client nation under God, patriotism is the order of the day.

“and” — the connective use of the conjunction kai, indicating that this is intensified at this moment but it does not destroy his personal happiness, his personal relationship with the Lord. He is still occupied with Christ.

“continual sorrow” — the nominative singular from the adjective a)dialeiptoj which means unceasing, constant, something you live with but something that does not change your happiness or blessing.

“sorrow” — o)dunh which means pain. “I have constant pain.”

“in my heart” — he has pain in his body but that is nothing compared to the pain that he has in his soul. This is the locative of sphere from kardia and it means heart, the right lobe of the soul, plus the possessive genitive singular from the personal pronoun e)gw, translated “my.”

Translation: “That I have a great sorrow and constant pain in my right lobe.”

Principle

1. In this verse Paul states the fact of his great burden without revealing its content. The burden is stated without revealing the content. The content will come in the next four verses.

2. In the next three verses Paul will specify Israel as the subject of his grief and pain in his right lobe. Paul has to carry this burden alone. Only Paul can hurt for Paul. Yet, even though he hurts and goes it alone he can handle it because of doctrine.

3. While these same Jews were unrelenting in their maligning and persecuting of Paul he was unrelenting in his concern and burden for them.

4. Being a Jew and a believer in Christ Paul understands the failure of Israel. He also understands the solution to the problem and he knows that the solution is still available.

5. Understanding the issue and having the burden intensifies his concern for them but does not erase his honour code function. He doesn’t change, get on a crusade, a soap box. He carries on and never loses his honour. He moves on with doctrine.

6. Even though Paul is an apostle to the Gentiles he never abandons his concern for the Jews and his desire for their salvation.

Verse 3 — the subject of Paul’s burden. It begins with the explanatory use of the particle gar — “For.” With it is the imperfect middle indicative of the verb e)uxomai which means to pray, to wish for something. Here it means to wish. “For I could wish.” The voluntative imperfect tense expresses a wish or desire which cannot be realised because of an intervening obstacle. Hence, a quasi optative is actually present in the voluntative imperfect. The imperfect expresses a thought which is unattainable. It means if effect, I would like to pray but I cannot, I can only wish for the impossible. Paul is stating what he recognises because of the great principle of the omniscience of God which knew all of the facts before they happen. All of these were placed in the computer of divine decrees and then printed out of the decrees in terms of the believer — election, foreknowledge, predestination; in terms of the unbeliever such concepts as condemnation. God knew in eternity past what free will decisions would be made. The voluntative imperfect tense indicates Paul recognising that he faces a hopeless situation as far as Israel is concerned. He is aware of the negative volition toward the gospel and the negative volition toward Bible doctrine as expressed by his own people. He understands thoroughly and completely their problem, their difficulty. He is so burdened for them, knowing that they are destroying themselves. Over 20 years after Paul was writing they would be destroyed. This was his terrible burden, he could see it coming. We have a reciprocal middle voice or a redundant middle in which the middle voice, accompanied by the pronoun e)gw, emphasises the reflexive force of the middle voice. “I myself” is the way it is translated. This idiom is based on the fact that the reflexive force is inserted to aid the function performed by the middle voice. “I myself would like to pray.” The indicative mood is potential, it is a potential indicative of impulse.

With this is the attributive use of the intensive pronoun a)utoj, which is where we get “myself.” This is followed by the present active infinitive of the verb e)imi, translated “to be.” The tendencial present is used for an action which is desired but is not actually taking place. The active voice: Paul would like to produce the action of the verb, it’s quasi optative. The infinitive is the infinitive of conceived result which follows the nature of a case or is assumed to be as a consequence.

Next we have the predicate nominative singular from a)naqema, the Greek word for “curse.” This is a very technical word, however, because it is used in the Septuagint for a very strange noun called cherem. When cherem was translated from the Hebrew to the Greek the a)naqema was used, and it means actually the object of a curse. With this we have to insert the inferential particle o)un which demands a conclusion from what precedes. It is translated “consequently.” Then the prepositional phrase a)po plus the ablative of separation from the proper noun Xristoj — “consequently [separated] from Christ.”

Because Paul is a believer this is impossible. It is impossible for any believer, now matter how apostate or how evil, to be separated from Christ. There is nothing the believer can do to separate himself from the Lord Jesus Christ. Once the believer is in union with Christ to be cursed is impossible.

Principle

1. This is just another illustration of the fact that there are certain things which prayer cannot change and which prayer cannot accomplish. Prayer cannot take away the believer’s salvation or his relationship with the Lord. Therefore there is no imprecatory prayer that anyone could utter that would change God’s mind about a single believer.

2. Therefore to pray effectively you must understand doctrine so as not to waste your shots on impossible targets.

3. As an unbeliever Paul trued to keep the Jews away from Christ, as Saul of Tarsus. Now as a believer he is burdened for the Jews, that they will come to Christ.

4. These two extremes demonstrate Paul’s great love for the Jews. He had a great love before he was saved and doctrine only intensified his love for Israel.

5. In his burden for Israel Paul has gone as far as he can go to demonstrate his love and his concern for the Jews. He has expressed an unattainable wish, an impossible desire to be cursed so that his brethren the Jews will believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.

6. In the pain of his soul Paul could wish no more than this. It is the perfect and most lucid expression of pain in the soul.

7. The obstacle, then, to fulfilling the wish or prayer is the fact of Paul’s eternal salvation which cannot be canceled even by his own intense wish, his own burden for the salvation of the Jews. Therefore it expresses his burden even though it cannot be fulfilled.

8. Under the principle of individual self-determination there is no sacrifice Paul can make by which the Jews will be saved.

9. Under the principle of free will, the principle of self-determination, each Jew must make that decision for himself. He must decide for himself whether he will believe in the Lord Jesus Christ or not.

10. Self-determination is the volitional issue in the angelic conflict.

11. That a)naqema should be used for cherem is the Septuagint is not surprising. Therefore the principle of the a)naqema or cherem:

Cherem

1. Cherem means what was consecrated to God without capability of being ransomed, something that is given to God, consecrated to God, and it cannot be redeemed. The meaning of cherem is found in Leviticus 27:28,29 — “Nevertheless, any cherem thing [any proscribed thing, any banned thing, any cursed thing], which a man puts under a ban [to set apart] to the Lord out of all that he has, whether of man or of animals, or of the fields, or of his own property, shall not be sold and shall not be redeemed: for every cherem thing is most holy to the Lord. No cherem person, who may have been banned [cheremed] shall be ransomed, he shall be put to death.”

Jericho is a perfect illustration. God said that when the walls of Jericho fell, as inevitably they would, everything inside was cherem with the exception of Rahab the prostitute and her family — the only believers. This means that all of the people had been dedicated to the Lord and were to be killed. They could not be redeemed, they could not be saved. Therefore the army had to go in and execute every man, woman, child, and even baby, because they were under cherem. They were dedicated to the Lord. Jesus Christ controls history and they had now reached a place of madness where the hydrophobia would spread throughout history. They had to be destroyed, except Rahab and her family. Cherem also applies to things, and it means that every materialistic thing that was found was to be dedicated to the Lord and put in the treasury.

This is the very same word that Paul is using. He could wish himself to be accursed. Paul would like to cherem himself, or become anathema so that Israel could be saved.

2. But such a prayer violates the principle of self-determination in the angelic conflict. Free will is the order of the day and therefore because each person must determine for himself this cannot be.

3. The firstborn of Israel were redeemed by the death of another. The children as well as the animals were automatically under cherem. Every firstborn belonged to the Lord but cherem in the case of children was redeemable by the death of an animal. This is illustrated by Galatians 3:13. In other words, the firstborn of Israel were redeemed by the death of another. Because of that they were not cherem, but anything that was under cherem had to be redeemed. So the firstborn was an exception to cherem. In Galatians 3:13 Christ is said to be cherem. He is the ban for our sins. Translation: “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse [cherem] for us; for it stands written, Cursed is everyone who hangs on the wood.” When our Lord Jesus Christ was on the cross He could not be brought down from the cross. He could not be redeemed, He was under cherem. He had to die, He was cherem for the sins of the world.

Joshua 6:17-19 — the cherem put on Jericho. That means that nothing could be redeemed whether it was human, animal or material. The exception was born-again Rahab and her family. Jericho was dedicated to the Lord as the first city in the land to be attacked and therefore it was dedicated to the Lord in an unredeemable manner. “And the city shall be under the ban [cherem].” Achan violated the ban — Joshua 7:1.

“for my brethren” — the preposition u(per plus the ablative plural from a)delfoj, used here for the Jews. With it is the possessive genitive singular from e)gw — “my brethren.” Paul is a Jew. It is translated “on behalf of” or “for the sake of my brethren.” “Brethren” or a)delfoj is used here for the racial Jew plus the national Jew. Paul would like to be cherem, a substitute for the entire Jewish race and Jewish nation as a guarantee of their salvation.

Principle

1. The Jew is the youngest and greatest of all races in history.

2. Gentile Abraham became a Jew at age 100, after reaching maturity and being circumcised.

3. Abraham had several sons but the Jewish race is perpetuated through only one — Isaac. By self-determination Ishmael was eliminated from the perpetuation of the Jewish race. Isaac was a believer and the Jewish race was perpetuated through him.

4. Isaac had twin sons, one a Jew and one a Gentile. The eldest should have been the source of perpetuating the Jewish race — Esau. But Esau was an unbeliever and remains a Gentile, whereas Jacob the youngest of the twins was a believer and the perpetuation of Israel goes through him. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is the Lord Jesus Christ.

5. Jacob’s twelve sons formed the nucleus.

6. Therefore Abraham is known as the father of the Jewish race. Moses is known as the father of the Jewish nation.

7. Anyone who has the genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is a Jew — but that is Jew in the sense of the race of Jews. There is a religious Jew who is an adherent to Judaism but this includes Gentiles by race who adhere to Judaism. Therefore a Jew is used here for the race only, the progeny of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The true Jew is a believer.

“my kinsmen” — we have the appositional genitive plural from the compound suggenhj [sun = with; genoj = race] a race of people. It refers here to Paul’s fellow countrymen, fellow citizens, members of the same race, members of the same nation; plus the possessive genitive of e)gw — “my fellow countrymen.” “according to the flesh” — here is the great gap between them, they are still in the flesh and not in Christ. We have kata plus the accusative of sarc — “according to earthly descent” would be a good translation. The nation of Israel begins with Moses and the Exodus. There is no Jewish nation or Jews functioning under national standards until the Mosaic law. They were the first client nation in history.

Translation: “For I could wish that I myself would be accursed [cherem], consequently separated from the Christ for the sake of my brethren [racial Jews], my fellow countrymen [national Jews] according to earthly descent [Abraham, Isaac and Jacob].”

Principle

1. The more Paul was separated from Israel through his perception of doctrine and his spiritual advance the more sensitive he became to the tragedy of Israel. You cannot advance spiritually without becoming sensitive to the tragedy of life and the people who live it.

2. To have such a fantastic spiritual heritage as the Jews and miss the boat of salvation was almost more than Paul could bear.

3. Both the formation of the Jewish race and the origin of the Jewish nation of Israel emphasises Jesus Christ as the God of Israel.

4. Therefore to be a Jew and not to believe in Christ, the God of Israel, is overwhelming to the apostle who sees the Jews as being so close and yet so far. In the very sacrifices that they offer they have the answer in their hands, but they fail to see that Jesus Christ is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.

5. Paul’s burden existed in proportion to the number of Jews who had rejected Christ as saviour, the number of contemporary Jews who in self-determination had said no to the gospel.

6. Once Paul as Saul of Tarsus had tried to destroy Christianity. But now Paul the believer sees Christianity as the natural, logical result, as the perpetuation of the spiritual heritage of Israel. He sees Christianity also as the logical result of Messiah’s first advent.

7. The need to call out a royal family of both Jew and Gentile is apparent to Paul. The royal family is made up of Jew and Gentile. While Gentiles might not have the background or the frame of reference to the Church Age, every Jew by spiritual heritage and by their own dispensation [dispensation of Israel] have the background. Therefore Paul has the desire that they might link their spiritual heritage with the work of Christ on the cross. The relationship between Israel’s spiritual heritage and the doctrine of the Church Age is so obvious to Paul that he desires the impossible.

Verse 4 begins with a relative pronoun, and with it we have the spiritual heritage of Israel. It begins with the nominative masculine plural from the indefinite relative pronoun o(stij. It refers to category. It is different from the ordinary relative pronoun because it is a categorical word. It refers to a specific category in the human race — the Jew only. Hence, the indefinite relative pronoun is used for a specific category, it refers to believers and unbelievers, race and nation; it refers to the Jews, to their background, their heritage, their origin as a nation. With this is the present active indicative of the verb e)imi — “who are.” Then we have the historical present tense which views a past event with the vividness of a present occurrence. The active voice: the Jews produce the action. This is the declarative indicative for historical reality. Next is the predicate nominative plural from I)srahlithj used for the descendants of Jacob in contrast to Esau. Esau is a Gentile; Jacob is a Jew. They are twins but of two different races. So the word is used for the Jews as a covenant people, as a client nation to God known as Israel, for Hebrew-speaking Jews in contrast to Hellenistic Jews. Technically, the word “Israelites” refers to the Jews of the twelve tribes from the Exodus to the death of Saul — 2 Samuel 2:9,10,17,28. Hence, “Israelites” refers to the client nation from the Exodus to the divided kingdom. Jacob’s name was changed to Israel which means “prince of God.” The first client nation in history was given a title of honour to indicate that it had an honour code. Its honour code was something that believer and unbeliever alike could accomplish — the laws of divine establishment. But its honour code went into the spiritual realm which only the believer Jew could actually accomplish or attain. Paul refers here in using this word as it is brought into the Greek — I)srahlithj — for Jews as both a race and a client nation of God under the title Israel. “Who are Israelites.”

Principle

1. When you start with a spiritual heritage you start with salvation. Spiritual heritage must start at the point of regeneration.

2. It refers in the second place to spiritual heritage advance to maturity as over against reversionism.

3. Paul is not here distinguishing between the northern kingdom and the southern kingdom but to the entire Jewish race wherever it is found. Paul is referring to the Jew as a sacred league of thirteen tribes (Joseph had the double portion, Ephraim and Mannaseh).

Israel was the first client nation to God. It was called the priest nation because every believer in the nation and every citizen was regarded as a priest to God. A client nation is a a national entity operating under divine institution #4, responsible for custodianship of Bible doctrine as it exists in any period of history. The first client nation had the Torah, the five books of Moses, and that is the spiritual heritage of the first client nation. In the five books of Moses is everything necessary for the function of a client nation. A client nation is not only a nation that has on the temporal side the laws of divine establishment, but on the spiritual side it has the freedom from the laws of divine establishment providing true evangelism, the opportunity for spiritual growth, and missionary function. Then, in our dispensation, with the Jews scattered under the fifth cycle of discipline we must add a haven for the Jews — no anti-Semitism. The word “client” wasn’t used until we get to the times of the Gentiles. Instead we have the words “priestly nation” — Exodus 19:6. That is in contrast to the fact that they had the Levitical priesthood. The entire nation was considered to be a priest nation and their spiritual function was under a specialised priesthood, the Levitical priesthood. In Hosea 4:6 what happened to Israel as a client nation is clearly presented — the fall of the client nation. The success was spiritual, the failure was spiritual — lack of doctrine. The restoration of Israel as a priest nation is given in Isaiah 49:5-8. This will occur at the second advent and the Millennial reign of our Lord, and it will go on into eternity.

In Isaiah 61:5-7 — in the future we are going right back to that same client nation under the principle that God is faithful, under the principle that what God starts God finishes. God started Israel as a client nation and He is going to finish Israel as a client nation forever.

“to whom pertaineth the adoption” — the genitive of reference plural from the relative pronoun o(j, translated “to whom.” Israelites are the antecedent and adoption is another chink in this marvelous spiritual heritage. We have the predicate nominative from u(ioqesia, which means to place as an adult son. It is translated here “adoption” but the translation has nothing to do with the custom where a couple do not have children and they adopt children. This has to do with recognising someone as an adult son. The word is taken from the practice of the Romans. U(ioqesia is taken from two Greek words: u(ioj = an adult son; tiqhmi = the verb to place — to place as an adult son. This was a Roman custom conferred at the time of adulthood on a natural child, not on what we call today an adopted child. It means to recognise a son as an adult and to legally declare him as such under Roman law.

The promises of God are all related to eternity and therefore in order to be qualified for the heritage they had to be adopted, which is flipping over the coin and is the other side of election. Therefore by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, the God of Israel, they are adopted, they are elected, they are participants in the heritage of Israel forever.

“and the glory” — the connective use of the conjunction kai setting up a list, correctly translated “and.” Kai can be translated other ways depending on whether it is adjunctive or ascensive. Ascensive is translated “even,” adjunctive is translated “also,” and the intensive kai is translated “in fact.” Then we have the predicate nominative singular from doca — “and the glory.” No form of human glory is involved here. The simplest explanation for doca here is the Hebrew word Shekinah. The word means residence. It is a word not found in the scriptures but the verb is found there — shakan, which means to dwell. The noun is Shekinah and this describes the glory that we have here because this glory is Jewish heritage. There is a word in the Old Testament which is the exact equivalent, and that is kabodh which is used for the essence of Jehovah in 1 Chronicles 29:11. It is also used for the glory of God which came down to the tabernacle. God resided between the cherubs. So the Shekinah glory is the presence of the second person of the Trinity, the God of Israel, between the cherubs. This is found in Exodus 25:22 cf. Leviticus 16:2. You have to have the two verses side by side to get the picture.

The Shekinah glory is also connected with the second advent of Christ in Isaiah 60:2 — “For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the LORD shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee.” This is the darkness which will cover the earth immediately prior to the second advent of Christ. The second advent: “Behold every eye shall see him” — everyone is in a supernatural darkness. So the glory mentioned here is this same glory, the personal presence of the Lord Jesus Christ. No nation ever had a greater heritage than the personal presence of the Lord Jesus Christ between the cherubs over the mercy seat — the Shekinah glory.

This is also related, then, to the second advent where the adoption occurs. Only believers can be adopted and at the second advent only believers of Israel will be there to see it. In Hebrews 9:5 we have the cherubs on each side of the mercy seat mentioned in connection with doca. The cherubs are merely representations of the highest form of angelic creatures. Glory refers to the personal presence of God the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. The very presence of God overshadows the mercy seat. The glory therefore refers to the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ as the God of Israel. There is a reference to this in James 2:1. Christ is mentioned as the Shekinah glory by implication — “the glory.”

Only the elect are adopted; only the adopted are elect. To be a Jew and to have the physical heritage — the genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob — and not to be elected, and not to be adopted, and not to be foreordained, and not to be foreknown — a recognition of the foreordination of the decrees — is the burden that Paul carried in the only mind that could carry it. He was the only one who understood it.

The Shekinah glory doesn’t refer to the entire essence of God but it refers to and emphasises specifically two attributes of God — righteousness and justice, which combine to be called in old English the holiness of God, and in modern English the integrity of God.

The failure of some Jews to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and relate their physical birth to their adoption [the new birth] does not abrogate the integrity of God nor the magnificent spiritual heritage. The heritage is still there, it will be there in every generation, it will be open to any Jew who believes in Christ, minus the Church Age where we have a different election, an inserted election; the Church is elected royal family of God, and that is the exception.

Israel was a client nation to God, the agent for missionary activity abroad and Bible teaching at home — God’s first client nation. In arrogance racial Jews had been emphasising their physical heritage — Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and their physical relationship to these noble men. Therefore they emphasised physical birth and they distorted the doctrines which are found in the unconditional covenants, they distorted and misunderstood the promises with regard to Israel’s glorious future. And, to add to it, they personally were not able to recognise that the thing that made Israel great is not the physical relationship, not the racial relationship, but the spiritual seed of Abraham. In order to understand it Paul uses the great doctrine of adoption where a natural son of a Roman is like a slave in the home until such time as he reaches maturity the father would take the son aside in the presence of all the family and friends and pronounce the magic words of maturity — u(ioj Romanouj. Adoption means u(ioj qeou, a son of God, and adult son. So the Jewish heritage is not the physical seed of Abraham, being a racial Jew, having the genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but it is the adoption whereby having faith in the Lord Jesus Christ — Adonai Jehovah Elohim, the God of Israel; by believing in Him they enter into the new birth (regeneration), recognising that all of the promises of God, divided into the covenants. For the future of Israel as a nation and the future of every individual Jew in that nation is dependent upon regeneration; being not the physical seed by the spiritual seed of Abraham. Therefore, Paul in expressing this point is developing the fantastic spiritual heritage of Israel, the greatest spiritual heritage in history.

The Shekinah glory is mentioned in several passages. A word that was used in the past was Ichabod — 1 Samuel 4:21-22, “And she called the boy Ichabod, [Ichabod simply means “no glory”] saying, the glory has departed from Israel” — a reference to the Shekinah glory — “because the ark of God was taken.” This means that a boy was named on he basis of an historical event. When the ark was removed from the holy of holies the glory, the personal presence of the Lord Jesus Christ, was no longer there. The presence of the Lord Jesus Christ between the cherubs on top of the ark was the Shekinah glory. This glory was a part of the heritage of Israel and this same Jesus, the God of Israel, came back as the glory of Israel in another way, expressed in John 1:14 — “And the word became flesh and tabernacled among us.” This means that the Shekinah glory which dwelt between the cherubs came into a human body, so that we have the God-Man or the hypostatic union. “And we beheld his glory.” The word “tabernacled” plus the word doca means the Shekinah glory. This is John’s message, another Jew speaking to his own people. The Shekinah glory took human form, became true humanity — “ … the glory as of the uniquely-born one from the father, full of grace and doctrine.” While the Jews had the Shekinah glory in the past they cannot have it in the future forever apart from believing in the Lord Jesus Christ.

“and the covenants” — kai a(i diaqhkai. This is the predicate nominative plural from the noun diaqhkh, referring to the covenants, the unconditional covenants to Israel in contrast to the conditional covenant which is called the law. This is referring primarily to the Abrahamic covenant, though others are included as well. The Abrahamic covenant was the beginning of the Jews and the beginning of God’s promises to Israel. The whole issue in these covenants is very simple: God is faithful; God keeps His word. The only Jews to whom these promises are pertinent are the spiritual rather than the natural or physical seed of Abraham because only those Jews who receive the imputation of divine righteousness, as did Abraham. So diaqhkh, the covenant, is a disposition made by God to Abraham in this case. We are dealing with the heritage of Israel. Like all the covenants this is a part of the divine decrees. Abraham is a beneficiary without merit. God promised certain things unconditionally certain things to Abraham and his seed. But not his physical seed, his spiritual seed. “All Israel is not Israel.” Starting in Genesis 12:1-3 Abraham received promises. Then for the rest of his life — chapters 13, 15, 16,22 — promises were added together and we simply call them the Abrahamic covenant, it is merely a summary of everything that God promised to Abraham and to his seed, his spiritual seed.

Genesis 12:1 emphasises the isolation and separation necessary for the development of the new race. Verse 2 — the great nation is made up of two categories. This does not refer to the seed of Ishmael or the five sons Keturah. The great nation is the nation Israel, called the Jews, called Hebrews, synonymous terms. This great nation is elected but not adopted until the second advent, because while Israel has been great in he past it is nothing compared to what will happen in the Millennial reign of the Lord Jesus Christ. Israel will be the source of blessing for the entire world. Israel in the Millennium is the great nation. Israel in eternity after the Millennium is the great nation. And the only ones who can be in that nation who are racial or physical Jews are those who are qualified by having +R and by having eternal life. Verse 3 — anti-Semitism is one of the most vicious things in life.

Genesis 13:14-16 — the Palestinian covenant. Verse 15 — “and to your seed,” not the Jewish race, not to the physical seed but to the spiritual seed, those Jews who are born again. Genesis 15:18-21 — “to your seed,” born again Jews. This covenant was confirmed to Isaac — Genesis 26:3,4. The Abrahamic covenant was confirmed one more time: to Moses, Exodus 6:2-8. Until Moses there was no nation Israel. They were in their infancy with no army, police force, or establishment laws to protect them, and God would take care of them until they became a nation. This is what El Shaddai means — the “God of many breasts.” In other words, the Jews did not operate under the laws of divine establishment until the Exodus.

The heritage of Israel is our present possession because so many things from the Old Testament have direct application and have many wonderful advantages spiritually in our growth. So a study of Romans 9 has to be justified in two ways. The obvious one is that it is in the Word of God, but secondly, the content deals with the Jew. We are never going to be very far removed from Israel for while Israel is out under the fifth cycle of discipline today we must remember constantly that it is Israel who has, in effect, passed the gauntlet on to us in order that we might carry on as a client nation. Therefore, if we are smart we will profit by the failures of Israel. Obviously the Jews at the time that Paul wrote were missing the boat with regard to their heritage, they failed to see it in the light of doctrine and instead they saw it in terms of history. Often this results in the human viewpoint rather than the divine viewpoint of life.

Putting verse 4 together

1. God is holy. This means that God has integrity. Holiness is the integrity of God, both His righteousness and His justice.

2. The integrity or holiness of God is not attained by God or some sort of divine achievement. God has integrity but it was not attained, it wasn’t developed. 3. The integrity of God is eternal, absolute, infinite. It has always been a part of His perfect essence.

4. The integrity of God is not the mere absence of evil, it is the sum total of His perfection.

5. Therefore the integrity or the holiness of God is neither maintained nor attained, it is God’s immutable, eternal self.

6. The being of God cannot be better or worse for God is eternal, immutable, unalterable, an absolute being who is eternally consistent.

7. The holiness or integrity of God is composed of those two important attributes, justice and righteousness.

8. God’s righteousness is perfect, therefore not only does God’s righteousness reject sin, human good and evil but it also provides varying systems of condemnation in administering punishment to sin, human good and evil.

9. The principle on which man observes the justice of God: God’s righteousness demands perfect righteousness, and what the righteousness of God demands the justice of God executes. God’s righteousness can only demand perfect righteousness; God’s justice can only demand perfect justice.

10. Therefore the spiritual heritage of Israel in the past dispensation was designed for their justification through faith in Christ, not for their arrogance, not for their self-righteousness, and not for their rejection of the God of Israel. Arrogance plus self-righteousness rejects the plan of God not only with Jews but even with believers.

11. Human self-righteousness is actually an arrogant rationalisation. It is the fantasy of comparing one’s strength against the weakness of another.

12. Righteousness cannot be built or constructed on unrighteousness. Therefore justification is built on the imputed righteousness of God. Everything that God does to bless us inevitably is on the foundation of His imputed righteousness and not on any system of self-righteousness which we have developed. Self-righteousness is the wrong axle on which the plan of God turns, God’s righteousness imputed is the basis for it all.

13. The self-righteous type is trying to compete with God, and this is tantamount to blasphemous arrogance.

14. The grace of God provides all that the integrity of God demands for the human race through the God of Israel, Jesus Christ. That is the basis for the spiritual heritage of Israel and, furthermore, that is the basis for the spiritual heritage of the Church as the royal family of God.

The divine integrity and the Shekinah glory

1. Jesus Christ, the God of Israel, became humanity and the son of David for the express purpose of fulfilling the Levitical offerings and bearing our sins on the cross. The ritual shadows of the Old Testament were all fulfilled in the work of Christ on the cross. The Shekinah glory became flesh — “The Word became flesh and tabernacled amongst us.” Jesus Christ, the God of Israel became true humanity so that the Shekinah glory would not only be apparent and seen by the Jews, for acceptance or rejection, but so that the Shekinah glory could actually do what the Shekinah glory had been doing in fact since Israel began.

2. The justice of God judged our sins which had to be imputed to Christ on the cross so that the justice of God could give the righteousness of God to anyone who would believe in Christ — to the Jew first and also to the Gentile. Why the Jew first? Because the one who hung upon the cross was the son of David. He was the fulfilment of the Davidic covenant. He was a Jew. He was the Shekinah glory now visible. The Lord Jesus Christ in hypostatic union is the visible Shekinah glory. The Jew is first because the prince ruler of the Church is a Jew. The greatest theologian the Church has ever seen, Paul, is a Jew. The writers of the New Testament were Jews. The heritage of the Jews is given to the Church to give us motivation and momentum in our advance to maturity. So it is always the Jew first.

3. At the cross God condemned our sins in Christ so that He could commend doctrine to the soul, to the Jew first and also to the Gentile. Psalm 85:10 — “Grace and doctrine have met together; righteousness and reconciliation have kissed each other.” When grace and doctrine meet it is the presentation of the gospel.

4. There is nothing man can do to destroy or compromise the integrity of God.

5. Man’s self-righteousness does not glorify God, but God’s righteousness justifies man when imputed at salvation.

6. The integrity of God gains nothing from man’s righteousness, but man gains everything from the integrity of God when God imputes His very own righteousness at the moment of salvation.

7. The pattern for this and the heritage of Israel began in Genesis 15:6. The Jewish race was not founded upon Abraham’s physical genes, it has a spiritual origin.

8. God does not gain from man, man gains from God. The very birth of the Jewish race portrays that principle. The Jewish race originated with a spiritual factor — Abraham cracking the maturity barrier.

9. There is no point in angelic or human history where the integrity of God is compromised or gains anything from man’s self-righteousness.

10. God’s righteousness is not established by man, but man’s integrity is established by God.

11. Therefore God does not need our help, we need God’s help.

12. Therefore the imputed righteousness of God at salvation is not only the key to divine blessing but the basis for the royal family honour code.

13. Therefore the principle emerges: The integrity of God advances the glory of God in both angelic and human history.

14. Under divine provision man can glorify God but man cannot advance the glory of God. The glory of God pre-existed man and all creatures, including angels.

15. The unbeliever Jew distorted the law which is both spiritual and establishment in the heritage of Israel. No one was ever saved by keeping the law. It delineated principles of establishment and freedom, it portrayed the person of Christ, but it was not an instrument of salvation.

16. Put another way, the law is incapable of making the Jew righteous before the integrity of God. The law demands a capability of perfection and absolute standard beyond man’s ability.

17. Therefore the law cannot produce righteousness in the Jew, it cannot produce anything equivalent to the perfect and eternal righteousness of God. The law can only condemn the Jew and demonstrate his inadequacy to save himself. The law is an instrument of condemnation, only the judgement of Christ on the cross is the instrument of salvation.

Verse 5 is not correctly translated in the King James version. In fact the incorrect translation is extremely devastating to a concept here regarding the second advent. This is actually a continuation of the spiritual heritage of Israel with some other things added.

It begins with the genitive possessive plural from the relative pronoun o(j, whose antecedent is found at the end of verse 3 — “of whom.” This is the generally accepted interpretation, but much better is the ablative of source plural here — “from whom.” Then we insert the present active indicative because of Pauline ellipsis in which the verb is implied, though omitted. “From whom are.”

Next is a predicate nominative plural plus the generic use of the definite article which comprehends a category as a single whole — “the fathers,” pathr. This is a reference to the regenerate ancestry of Israel. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are the line of the Jewish race, the line of the seed of Abraham because each one was born again and each one reached maturity. The emphasis on the origin of the Jew and which separates the Jew from the Gentile forever is the fact that he originates from regeneration.

The concept

1. The secret to the foundation of the Jewish race is regeneration, therefore it is very difficult for Paul to see his fellow countrymen reject Christ as saviour. For while they are Jews by physical seed of Abraham they are not Jews by regeneration. They have not followed the pattern of Abraham — Genesis 15:6.

2. While Isaac had a stepbrother, Ishmael, Isaac is the chosen one through regeneration. The same thing is true of Jacob and Esau. The difference is always regeneration.

“and” is an intensive use of the conjunction kai, translated “in fact.” Add to this the prepositional phrase e)k plus the ablative plural from the relative pronoun o(j — “from whom.” Then, again, because of ellipsis we insert the verb “is,” present active indicative of e)imi. And finally we have a predicate nominative, o( Xristoj — “the Christ.” “In fact from whom is the Christ.” The generic use of the definite article emphasises the uniqueness of the person of the Lord Jesus Christ.

With this is an accusative neuter singular from the definite article to. This is an accusative of general reference and demands the insertion of a pertinent infinitive. It is translated “the one coming.” Then we have kata plus the accusative singular from sarc — “in the flesh.” “who is — e)imi, articular present active participle — “the one who is.” The static present tense represents a conditions perpetually existing — the hypostatic union. The active voice: Jesus Christ produces the action, becoming visible. No longer do we have the Shekinah glory between the cherubs. Eternal God becomes true humanity, and once He becomes true humanity He is visible to Israel with the same results as existed under the principle of the Shekinah glory. With the cloud over the tabernacle by day and with the pillar of fire by night they knew that the Shekinah glory was dwelling between the cherubs, but it did not make any difference to too many in Israel. And again, people being what they are, unstable, unpredictable in every possible way; total depravity still applies ands there was still negative volition. So the old story! “If I could just see the Lord. If He would just come and touch me on the head. If I could just follow Him or walk around with Him a little while, everything would be all right.” Of course, that is 100 per cent wrong. It is doctrine that makes the difference, doctrine is the reality. If you are positive to doctrine then you do not need the Lord Jesus Christ holding your hand. The participle here is circumstantial for the deity of Christ. Then we have the predicate nominative singular qeoj — “God.”

Finally, we have a preposition — e)pi plus the genitive plural of paj, translated “over all.” “ … one who is God,” and again this is elliptical, it means “ruler over all” and refers to the second advent of Christ. The incarnation and resultant humanity of Christ demonstrated two things: a) It was the means by which the sins of the world were literally imputed to the Lord and judged; b) But it has a relationship to Israel. Israel would always have an excuse that they could not see the Shekinah glory, all they could see was the cloud or the pillar of fire which was above the tabernacle. And since they couldn’t actually see it there was a stumbling block to their faith. So the Shekinah glory comes and it visible, and the same negative volition that existed in the Old Testament existed in the coming of our Lord so that actually being face to face with the Lord did not make any difference. The incarnation and resultant humanity of Christ does not in any way demote the second person of the Trinity. Christ, although true humanity, continues to be eternal God forever and as God He still has all of the attributes of God as well as the attributes of perfect humanity. He is, then, the last Adam. “From whom are the fathers [the regenerate ancestors Abraham, Isaac and Jacob], in fact from whom is the Christ, the one who came in the flesh, the one who is God, ruler over all.”

The rest of the verse is a command to praise, to recognise and to fulfill the very purpose for which the God founded the Jews. It starts with a verbal adjective, e)uleghtoj. This is never used of men, it is only used of God. It is a verbal adjective, it is derived from the adverb e)u plus the verb legw which means to speak well, to praise, to extol, to eulogise. A transliteration is eulogise. _E)uleghtoj is equivalent to baruk [the verb is barak], “being praised” or “being blessed.” So it is used as liturgical formula, it becomes doxological for the eternal glory of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Israel had it all. Never in all of history. Until the Exodus and the formation of the nation, and until the construction of the tabernacle, never did anyone have the personal presence of God in their midst as a nation. That is because Israel was a client nation and because they were a priest nation. This was to be to their advantage because this is the only race, the only nation, the only people who were ever founded or originated on a spiritual basis. The Jews had everything going for them. But here is the principle: You can have everything in the world going for you and still destroy it all with negative volition. There are two opportunities for negative volition. The first is at salvation and the second is a persistent negative volition toward doctrine after salvation. You can be aggressive about anything in the world but if you are passive toward doctrine you’ve had it. The exploitation of advantage is the exploitation of spiritual advantage. It is the spiritual advantage that counts.

Then we have e)ij plus the accusative plural of a)iwn — “forever.” While it means “to the ages” it is simply an idiom meaning forever. This is followed by the liturgical conclusion, a)mhn, emphasising the function of GAP, converting gnwsij resident in the left lobe into e)pignwsisj resident in the right lobe. Only e)pignwsij doctrine resident in the right lobe can be converted into growth, to momentum, to motivation, to capacity for life, making life meaningful and worthwhile.

Translation: “From whom are the fathers [the regenerate ancestors Abraham, Isaac and Jacob], in fact from whom is the Christ, the one who came in the flesh, the one who is God, ruler over all, extolled [praised, eulogised] forever. Amen.”

Principle

1. Paul’s ellipsis reveals his excitement and his concern for Israel.

2. We have inserted into the verse a liturgical doxology, but it is an elliptical liturgical doxology reminding the unbelieving Jew that Jesus Christ is the God of Israel, that He is the Shekinah glory, that His personal presence with Israel was without precedent and without parallel in any nation in history, and that it was climaxed by making Himself visible by coming in the flesh — the hypostatic union.

3. Since Jesus Christ is the God of Israel Paul’s concern for the unbelieving Jew is intensified, and the intensity of his concern is expressed in ellipsis.

Principle

1. The Jews of the dispensation of Israel had the Shekinah glory, the personal presence of the Lord Jesus Christ dwelling in the holy of holies between the cherubs.

2. In spite of this, in every generation there were Jews who rejected Christ as saviour.

3. This negative volition is dramatised by the incarnation in which the Shekinah glory becomes visible to the Jews through the hypostatic union — John 1:14. They actually saw Him, the Shekinah glory. The saw His grace, they heard His doctrine, they were face to face with Him, and they still rejected Him. That is why you have to have first advent and second advent. There has to be a demonstration to Israel, which in effect becomes a demonstration to the entire world, that even though the Lord personally comes to visit you and talks to you personally, performs miracles for you, does everything so that you can actually see grace and doctrine, man still has free will. Man still has self-determination, man is still a free agent, a free agent rejecting the Lord Jesus Christ. There is the tragedy. What a ghastly thing it is to realise how evil man is. Man is at his worst at the cross; God is at His best at the cross. The one who was hanging on the cross was not only the Shekinah glory, the God of Israel, the son of David, the future ruler of Israel, God, ruler over all, but at the same time He was the only saviour. Who said no? Dumb Gentiles? No, smart Jews!

Reality with regard to God is what you think; that God not only invented the world that you see, but He invented thought, vocabulary, philology. He invented something where reality is in your thought. Principle: Guts are not found in the bowels but in the mind. Intestinal fortitude is incorrect; guts are in the soul. It is what you think that counts.

4. The metamorphism of the Shekinah glory into the hypostatic union dramatises the negative volition of Israel into their rejection of Christ as Messiah. But it does more than that for Israel is a photograph of the individual soul of Gentiles and therefore it dramatises what the human nature is like.

5. The Jews were never permitted to enter the holy of holies where the Shekinah glory dwelt, except the high priest once a year who entered twice on the day of atonement — once for himself and once for the people. And when he came out the people would want to know what the Lord looked like. A smart priest would open a scroll and say, “Here is what he looks like right here!” That is what is wrong with people, they want to see it with their eyes instead of understand it with their mentality.

6. But no Jew has an excuse for his negative volition because the Shekinah glory became visible to Israel with the incarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ.

7. The first advent of Christ allowed Israel to see the Shekinah glory. But Israel rejected the Shekinah glory in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ — Adonai Elohim, the God of Israel.

8. Seeing the Shekinah glory in person only intensified negative volition. So that all Jews of every generation who reject Christ are without excuse.

The unique origin of the Jewish race

1. The origin of the Jewish race is totally spiritual in contrast to the origin of all other races. All Gentile races originate through physical birth. The Jewish race is absolutely unique; it originates through spiritual birth and the momentum there after related to maturity.

2. All Gentile races are descendants of Noah through Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

3. But the Jewish race is descended from Abraham through Isaac and Jacob.

4. The question arises as to what precisely does this imply.

5. The Jewish race originated when Abraham was 100 years old; but more important, a mature believer.

6. The Jewish race originates from the spiritual birth and resultant spiritual growth of Abraham.

7. Therefore the origin of the Jews and the origin of the Gentiles are entirely different.

8. Paul’s burden is related to the fact that negative volition has blinded the Jews to their origin. Their origin is spiritual; they are not great because of their physical genes. It is their origin to which they are blinded, so that having the genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and being very proud of their descent, they have selected self-righteousness rather than God’s righteousness, and therefore missed the boat.

9. The true Jew can never be a Jew by simply possessing the genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The true Jew must possess the spiritual heritage of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The spiritual heritage is the new birth.

10. There is no way for any physical seed of Abraham to inherit the promises to Israel — the unconditional covenants. Only the spiritual seed of Abraham is qualified to inherit through the imputation of divine righteousness and eternal life at salvation.

Verse 6 – the premise regarding Israel. The Greek sentence actually begins o)ux o)ion de o(ti, which is literally, “But it is not such as that.” We have the post positive conjunctive particle de, translated “But.” It emphasizes a contrast with what was just said. Next is the strong negative o)u which is preceded by an insertion in order to render into English the elliptical concept here. We precede with the insertion of the present active indicative of e)imi and translate, “But it is not.”

Next comes the predicate nominative neuter singular from the correlative relative pronoun o(ioj. This is what warrants the insertion of e)imi. In the predicate nominative o(ioj demands the verb to be. With the negative o(ioj means “not such as” or “not as implying.” We can translate, “But it is not as implying that.” The verse actually begins, “However, this is not to imply that.”

“the word of God hath taken none effect” – we have the nominative singular subject o( logoj. Logoj is more than just “word,” logoj means thought. Thought is impossible apart from vocabulary. To have thought you have to put words together. Then the possessive genitive singular from qeoj with the generic use of the definite article. Literally, “the word of the God,” but the generic use of the definite article to denote that the canon of scripture is absolutely unique means that you do not have to translate the article, so we simply translate it “the word of God.”

The principle behind this is very important. The entire Old Testament is the spiritual heritage of Israel. It contains the unconditional covenants, the promises to Israel regarding the future of that race and that nation. Put together they add up to something very wonderful for Israel. In other words, they are going to have something that is absolutely beyond the imagination. Reduced to temporal language it spells out a nation forever, a people of God forever, a people under a theocracy forever. But not only in eternity but in time as well, time referring to the millennial reign of Christ. The problem is that because of the insertion of the Church Age and the administration of the fifth cycle of discipline to the nation of Judah it does not follow that Israel has no future. The insertion of the Church Age is known to the unbelieving Jew as the times of the Gentiles. The Jews were always the client nation to God in the Old Testament. The times of the Gentiles means the Jews are excluded from being a client nation. This is very discouraging to the Jews for it appears as though by calling out a royal family, the Church, that God is not going to keep His word and is not going to fulfill His promises to the Jews as a nation, as well as individuals. The insertion of the Church Age has complicated the problem for the Jews.

Now we have a verb, the perfect active indicative of e)kpiptw [e)k = from; piptw = to fall], which means to fall from or to fall off. It comes to mean to fail. It was used by sailors as a nautical expression for drifting off course, or to run aground on something, but here in this context it means to be in vain, to lose force and validity, and therefore to fail. “However this is not to imply that the word of God has failed.” The perfect tense is a consummative perfect it emphasises the process presenting the past act and the present apparent result. The active voice: the Word of God alleges to have produced the action in the thinking of the unbeliever Jew, in the thinking of the believing Jew who is in reversionism. In other words, the majority of contemporary Jews in Paul’s time. The indicative mood is a potential indicative since the Word of God has never failed. The potential indicative indicates this is an allegation without foundation. Israel’s present discipline and the failure of the individual Jew does not and cannot neutralize the promises of God or the plan of God as revealed in the Word. The failure of any individual or the failure of any nation does not in anyway cancel anything in the Word of God.

Principle

1. Individual and collective failure does not hinder the plan of God, nor the validity of the Word of God.

2. The plan of God and the Word of God moves on with or without us. God does not need us to fulfill His plan, but we need Him.

3. Collective or individual failure of the Jew does not abrogate the promises of God for Israel – and specifically for the regenerate of Israel.

4. Human failure simply cannot hinder the advance of the plan of God.

5. The failure of the unbeliever or believer does not imply the failure of the Word of God which reveals the plan of God.

6. Rejection of Jesus Christ, the God of Israel, puts the Jews outside of the plan of God and the unconditional covenants to Israel.

7. Human rejection of Christ does not imply that the Word of God has failed but simply the Jew has failed to use his free will and his self-determination to believe in Christ.

8. The alternative of divine judgment is just as clearly presented in the Word of God as the blessings of grace. The fact that many Jews are under divine judgment in every generation does not hinder the promises of God to the Jews. It just means that some through the function of their own free will missed the boat.

9. The Word of God promises judgment in time as well as in eternity to the Jew who rejects the God of Israel. To the Jew who rejects Jehovah Elohim or Jesus Christ that has always been true – in any generation, Old Testament or New.

10. The Word of God has not failed the Jew; the Jew has failed the Word of God.

11. God’s promises have not become untrue to the exclusion of a portion of the Jews, for God’s promises can only be valid to Jew or Gentile who has +R and eternal life. Therefore God’s promises are valid only to the believing Jew who is the true Israel.

12. Scripture defines true and false Israel on the basis of attitude toward the Lord Jesus Christ. That has always been true since Jehovah, the Adonai of the Old Testament is the Lord Jesus Christ, and we are just dealing with a different language.

13. True Israel believes in the God of Israel, Jesus Christ, just as Abraham their father in Genesis 15:6.

14. True Israel follows the pattern of Abraham by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ. The promises of God are always valid to true Israel.

“For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel” – o)u gar pantej o(i e)c I)srahl, o(utoi I)srahl. This is quite different from what is in the King James version. Literally, “For not all of those from Israel, are Israel.” This may not help much because the literal translation follows the word order, but this is not the correct order in English. Still using the literal translation but rendering the real meaning of the phrase, “For not all who are descended from Israel are really Israel.”

This begins with the explanatory use of the conjunctive particle gar. Next is the negative adverb o)u, denying the reality of an alleged fact. What is the alleged fact? That if you have the genes of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the twelve patriarchs you are Israel. You are Israel as far as your physical birth and descent is concerned, as far as the imputation of human life at birth, that is true. But Abraham was regenerate, Isaac was regenerate, Jacob was regenerate. The origin of the Jewish race is regeneration. This all adds up to the fact that it is the spiritual seed of Abraham who is the true Israel.

This is followed by the nominative masculine plural subject from paj, referring to the physical seed of Abraham, the imputation of human life to the soul at birth – those who have the physical genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. So paj refers to racial Jews. Next is the nominative plural from the definite article o(i. It is used for a relative pronoun. The antecedent is paj which is also nominative plural. “For not all who.”

Now we must insert a verb because we are talking about, from the prepositional phrase that follows, antecedents – the preposition e)k plus the indeclinable proper noun I)srahl. Now we must insert again, this is very elliptical. We have the nominative masculine plural from the demonstrative pronoun o(utoj for the subject, and it emphasises the true Israel composed of all believers in Christ, the spiritual seed rather than the physical seed. The demonstrative force of o(utoj should be translated “really.” With it is a second use of the indeclinable pronoun I)srahl, referring to the true Israel composed of born again believers.

Translation: “However this is not to imply that the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are really Israel.”

Principle

1. Having the genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is not automatic salvation.

2. The promises of God contained in the Abrahamic, Palestinian, Davidic, and New covenants to Israel do not apply to racial Jews who have rejected Christ as saviour.

3. To qualify under the unconditional promises of the Jewish covenants the racial Jew must become a regenerate Jew. That means faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as the only saviour. He was revealed both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament.

4. The real Israel, then, is the regenerate Israel. This is why Jesus emphasised to Nicodemus, the ruler of the Jews, “You must be born again.”

5. The unconditional promises of God contained in the covenants to Israel are not the birthright of every racial Jew. They belong to true Israel, the born again Jew only. The Jew who rejects Christ as saviour has the birthright of divine punishment only. The precedent was set at the fifth cycle of discipline administered in AD 70.

6. Divine blessings to Israel, including salvation, do not come to Israel through the first birth but through the second birth.

7. In this phrase, “For not all who are descended from Israel are really Israel,” is the distinction between the racial and the regenerate Jew, for there is nothing in physical birth which provides prerequisites for blessing. You must have imputed righteousness and you must have eternal life.

Principle

1. God’s plan for the Jew is the same as God’s plan for the Gentile – salvation adjustment to the justice of God through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. And 1 John 3:23 tells us what the will of God is for all He imputes human life plus Adam’s original sin. It is God’s will that you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. That is the will of God for Jew and Gentile.

2. Until the Jew has believed in Christ his spiritual condition is no better than the Gentile.

3. The only issue is “What think ye of Christ?”

4. It is only after salvation through faith in Christ that the plan of God and the promises of God for Israel take effect.

5. Abraham as an unbeliever was a Gentile. As a mature believer he became a Jew. He lived the first one hundred years of his life as a Gentile. He became a Jew at his circumcision which was the moment of his maturity adjustment to the justice of God.

6. The fulfillment of the Abrahamic, Palestinian, Davidic and New covenants to Israel demand eternal life and a resurrection body – the eternal part. They demand in time the imputation of +R.

7. The problem of Israel, then, is compounded and intensified when they reject Christ as saviour.

8. Therefore the real Jew is not the racial Jew, the real Jew is the born again Jew.

Principle

1. God’s plan for the Jew is the same as God’s plan for the Gentile, namely freedom to hear the gospel, freedom to accept or reject the gospel. The plan of God goes on with the principle of salvation adjustment to the justice of God through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, who is not only the saviour but also the God of Israel.

2. Until the Jews have believed in Christ the spiritual condition of the individual Jew is no better than a Gentile.

3. Therefore the only issue is, “What think ye of Christ?” This issue applies to the Jew and to the Gentile.

4. It is only after salvation through faith in Christ that the plan of God and the promises of God for Israel take effect. This is because after faith in Christ the individual Jew receives the imputation of divine righteousness and the imputation of eternal life, and therefore is qualified for blessing from God.

5. Remember that Abraham became a Jew at 99. At that time he had already been a believer in Christ for some time, and he was at that time a mature believer. Abraham was a Gentile for the first 99 years of his life and from 100 onward he was a Jew.

6. Abraham as an unbeliever was a Gentile. He was descended from Noah through Shem; he was a Semitic Gentile. But Abraham as a mature believer became a Jew; he was a Jew at the point of his circumcision.

7. Consequently the fulfilment of the Abrahamic, Palestinian, Davidic and New covenants to Israel demand imputation of divine righteousness first, eternal life imputed first, and eventually in eternity a resurrection body.

8. The problem of Israel is compounded and intensified by rejection of Christ as saviour.

9. Therefore the real Jew is not the racial Jew, the real Jew is the born again Jew, the Jew who believes in the Shekinah glory, the Lord Jesus Christ.

10. In physical birth the Jew possesses the genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But being the physical seed of Abraham does not save him.

11. In regeneration the Jew possesses the imputation of divine righteousness, the imputation of eternal life. This anticipates a resurrection body, and a combination of these things sets up the potential for blessing in time and blessing in eternity.

The concept of the true Jew

1. True Israel is composed of the children of God rather than the children of Abraham – Galatians 3:26.

2. Therefore the divine election of Israel is limited to those racial Jews who have been born again through faith in Christ.

3. It was Isaac rather than Ishmael, Jacob rather than Esau, who is true Israel.

4. Therefore election cannot be disassociated from eternal salvation. In other words, this means that the omniscience of God in eternity past knew the actual and the probable. Only the actual was fed into the computer of divine decrees. Into the computer goes Esau – unbeliever; Jacob – believer. Therefore the election of Israel goes through the line of regeneration. Jacob was elected; Esau was condemned.

5. Salvation adjustment to the justice of God through faith in Jesus Christ is the qualification for the election of Israel.

6. The promises of the Word of God are only valid to the regenerate of Israel, not to the racial Jew.

7. Isaac, therefore, is distinguished from Ishmael and Jacob is distinguished from Esau through regeneration.

8. Regeneration, not primogeniture [exclusive right of inheritance to the firstborn] is the issue. The true Jew through physical birth has the genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and through regeneration possesses the God of Abraham, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Shekinah glory.

The premise illustrated in the formation of the Jewish race and nation, verses 7-18.

In verses 7-9 we have the first case history, the case history of Isaac and Ishmael.

Verse 7 – “Neither” is the negative conjunction o)ude. It means not even or neither. Plus the conjunction o(ti used as a causal conjunction and therefore used to introduce a subordinate causal clause. This is translated “not even because” or “neither because.”

Next is the present active indicative of the verb e)imi. The present tense of duration denotes what has begun in the past and continues into present time. It began in the past with Abraham’s circumcision – the origin of the Jewish race – and continues into the present time – the formation of the race through Isaac and Jacob, and then the twelve patriarchs. The active voice: the racial Jew who possesses the genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob produces the action of the verb. The declarative indicative mood is for the historical reality of the existence of the Jewish race.

We also have a predicate nominative singular from the noun sperma – “seed.” It is a reference to the physical seed of Abraham. It refers to the racial Jew. “Neither because they are the seed.” Plus the indeclinable proper noun A)braam. In other words, being of the seed of Abraham is not enough for being a true Jew.

Next we have the nominative plural from the adjective paj, referring to all racial Jews, plus the predicate nominative plural from teknon, meaning “children,” referring to believers in Christ. Teknon is used here for children in the sense of inheritance. In other words, all racial Jews are not true Jews. “Neither because they are Abraham’s seed [posterity] are they all children of the inheritance.”

Principle

1. Both Isaac and Ishmael had self-determination through the function of their own free will.

2. The omniscience of God knew in eternity past, before creation, that the firstborn, Ishmael, would use his free will to say no, to reject Christ; while the second-born Isaac would use his free will to believe in Christ.

3. To be a child of inheritance one must possess both imputed righteousness from God and eternal life. Genesis 15:6. Righteousness becomes the home or the target for the blessing of God.

4. The righteousness of God and eternal life are only imputed as salvation adjustment to the justice of God through faith in Christ.

5. Since the omniscience of God knew that Isaac would believe in Adonai Elohim and Ishmael would reject Christ He put the facts of history into the computer of the divine decrees before time began.

(Remember that the decrees only contain facts. Alternatives always exist. Probability is never fed into the computer though probability can be a reality by finding out in eternity from God exactly what would have happened. God knows the alternatives but He never enters them into the divine decrees)

6. Election, foreknowledge and predestination merely acknowledge what is in the computer of divine decrees.

7. Take foreknowledge. It is not the same as omniscience. The foreknowledge of God makes nothing certain but merely acknowledges what is in the decrees, therefore what is certain. Foreknowledge only can acknowledge what is certain but foreknowledge makes nothing certain.

8. Likewise, election and predestination merely recognises what is in the computer of divine decrees. But neither election nor predestination makes anything certain in themselves.

9. Election, foreknowledge and predestination are theological categories to describe what is in the decrees, while the omniscience of God knows beforehand what decisions would be made and what decisions would not be made. Therefore in eternity past the omniscience of God simultaneously entered all reality into the decrees.

10. The omniscience of God knows the free will of every person and every decision and every alternative that will occur in every moment of history. It is all in the decrees.

11. The omniscience of God even knows what would have happened down to the last generation of history if alternate decisions had been made by you.

12. But only Isaac’s decision to believe in Christ is fed into the computer of divine decrees, resulting in Isaac being the one who is elected. Genesis 17:21; 21:12; Hebrews 11:18.

13. This is why Jesus Christ is called the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Hence, the title for then God of the Jews is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

14. Ishmael was the firstborn, the natural but not the spiritual seed of Abraham.

15. Ishmael did not possess either the imputed righteousness of God or eternal life.

16. While Ishmael and his stepbrothers through Keturah are the source of many Arab nations they are not the children of the inheritance.

17. Only Isaac was the natural and spiritual seed of Abraham, qualified through regeneration to be the heir of the promises and of the Abrahamic covenant.

18. The Word of God has not failed the Jews but the Jews have failed the Word of God by rejecting the Lord Jesus Christ who is the Shekinah glory.

“but” is the adversative conjunction a)lla, it sets up a contrast between Isaac and all of the other children of Abraham. Isaac is unique and therefore the whole of Israel becomes unique. The concept is to introduce Genesis 21:12. This passage is quoted in Romans 9:7 as well as Hebrews 11:18. The principle: to be an heir of the promises of God one must possess the righteousness of God as well as the life of God. Next is the preposition e)n plus the indeclinable noun I)saak. Then we have the nominative singular subject, sperma, and with it the dative singular indirect object from the personal pronoun su. This personal pronoun means literally, “a seed to you.” “In Isaac a seed to you.” This is an idiom for “your seed.” Then the future passive indicative of the verb kalew, used here for election. This is a gnomic future tense in the Greek for a statement of absolute fact. The passive voice: Abraham’s racial seed, the Jews or the descendants, produce the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative for historical reality. Literally, “In Isaac your seed shall be elected [designated].”

Translation: “Neither because they are Abraham’s seed are all racial Jews the children of the inheritance: but, in Isaac your seed shall be elected.”

Principle

1. The Jewish race began with Abraham’s attainment of maturity and is represented by his circumcision when he was about 100 years old.

2. The foundation of the Jewish race, therefore, is unique and it forms one of the two elections of human history, the other being the church – that is, two elections specified by dispensations. There are actually four elections altogether: the election of the Gentiles, the election of the Jews in the dispensation of Israel, there is the election of the Church, and there is the election of the millennial saints.

3. This is illustrated by the fact that the Jewish race originated from those who believed in Jehovah Elohim or the Shekinah glory, Jesus Christ.

4. Abraham is the first Jew while his brother Nahor remained a Gentile.

5. Abraham was a believer, therefore under the categories of election, foreknowledge and predestination there is a printout under those categories in the decrees.

6. The omniscience of God knew all the knowable, whether actual or possible. God knows every decision every human being will ever make.

7. God knows the result of every decision in history and also knows what would be the result had free will determined to select another alternative. Therefore the omniscience of God knows what happens in history, or could have happened, or would have happened under different circumstances. So omniscience fed all of this into the giant computer, which we call the divine decrees, and only what actually happens is contained in those decrees. In turn, the content of the decrees is revealed or printed out under certain categories – election, foreknowledge, and foreordination. These categories merely acknowledge what is reality before reality occurs historically. Therefore in the decrees we have Abraham and Isaac as the origin of the Jewish race. Since Israel is an election of God it must originate with regeneration for the possession of eternal life and the potentiality of divine blessing.

The unique origin of the Jewish race

1. The origin of the Jewish race is totally spiritual, based on regeneration, in contrast to the origin of all Gentile races based upon physical birth.

2. All Gentile races are the descendants of Noah through Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

3. The Jewish race originated with Abraham after both salvation adjustment to the justice of God followed by maturity adjustment to the justice of God – maximum doctrine in the soul before Gentile Abraham became Jewish Abraham.

4. Since the Gentiles originate from physical birth and the Jews originate from spiritual birth no racial Jew can be a real or true Jew until he personally believes in the Lord Jesus Christ, the Shekinah glory, the God of Israel.

5. At the moment of faith in Christ the real Jew receives that is necessary for blessing in time and the fulfilment of the divine promise to Israel in eternity – the imputation of divine righteousness and eternal life.

6. Paul’s burden is related to the fact that negative volition has blinded contemporary Jews to their spiritual origin.

7. The contemporary Jews in Paul’s day are suffering from terminal self-righteousness having failed to equate the Lord Jesus Christ with the invisible Shekinah glory.

8. So the true Jew can never be a true Jew by simply possessing the genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. He can only be a true Jew by possessing the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

9. There is no way for any physical seed of Abraham to inherit the promises of Israel. Only the spiritual seed of Abraham is qualified to inherit through regeneration and resultant imputation of divine righteousness and eternal life.

Verse 8 begins with the nominative neuter singular from the demonstrative pronoun o(utoj. It is used with reference to what precedes and is used with the present active indicative from the verb e)imi. It expresses a statement of doctrine pertinent to the argument. It is translated “That is,” but it is simply idiomatic for “This means.”

Next is the negative adverb o)u, it denies the reality of an alleged fact – “not.” The objective negative adverb demands another present active indicative of e)imi, and we translate this “these are not.” This is followed by the nominative plural subject from the noun teknon for “children,” emphasising inheritance, children as being heirs. Then we have the possessive genitive singular from the noun sarc, which refers to the racial Jew.

Then we have another nominative neuter plural subject, a demonstrative pronoun again, o(utoj. This time it refers to the racial Jews, those who have the genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. This means the descendants of the flesh. Here again we insert the present active indicative of e)imi which goes with the negative o)u – “these are not.” This means that the descendants of the flesh [the racial Jews] are not.”

Next is the predicate nominative plural from teknon, used for children who are heirs. And finally, the possessive genitive singular from qeoj with the generic use of the definite article to indicate God as unique – the God of Israel. “This means the descendants of the flesh [racial Jews], these ones are not children of God.” That means being a Jew does not mean automatic salvation, automatic heirship, automatically becoming the heir of Abraham.

Principle

1. Being a Jew does not imply automatic salvation. The racial Jew is like all human beings; he must be born again.

2. Unbelieving Jews are racial but not regenerate.

3. To be an heir, a child of the promise to Abraham, the racial Jew must believe in Christ and become the regenerate Jew.

4. The racial Jew may have self-righteousness by keeping the law but this is not good enough. He must have imputed righteousness from God, following the pattern of Abraham – Genesis 15:6.

“but” is the adversative conjunction a)lla. This sets up a contrast between the racial Jew who is physically descended from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the regenerate Jew who follows the spiritual pattern of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; plus the nominative plural subject, teknon, referring to an heir, a child who is the heir. With it is a possessive genitive singular from the noun e)paggelia, and it refers to the content of the Abrahamic, Palestinian, Davidic and New covenants to Israel – “the children of the promise.”

“are counted” – present passive indicative from the verb logizomai for imputation. It means to impute, to calculate, to count. The static present tense here represents a condition which is assumed as perpetually existing. It takes for granted that it is a forever situation. The passive voice: the regenerate Jews received the action of the verb, they have believed in Christ and are qualified for the promises. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of fact.

Plus the preposition phrase, e)ij plus the accusative singular of sperma – “for the seed.” There is no definite article here, and that calls attention to the qualitative aspect of Abraham’s seed. The qualitative aspect is that Abraham was born again.

Translation: “This means that the descendants of the flesh [racial Jews], there are not the children of God: but the children of promise are imputed for seed.”

Principle behind verse 8

1. The promises of the Abrahamic covenant were not confirmed to Ishmael, nor to the sons of Keturah, but to Isaac. This emphasises the fact that the line of Israel was based not only on the physical progeny of Abraham but, more important, his spiritual progeny.

2. In other words, Isaac was a believer; Ishmael was not. The omniscience of God knew in eternity past that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob would believe in Christ, whereas Nahor, Ishmael and Esau would not believe.

3. When omniscience fed Abraham, Isaac and Jacob into the computer they printed out under the principle of election, foreknowledge and foreordination.

4. However, when the omniscience of God fed Nahor, Ishmael and Esau into the computer they printed out reprobation and condemnation.

5. The origin of the race of Israel is election, foreknowledge and foreordination.

6. Therefore the apostle Paul was concerned for the racial Jew who, though the physical posterity of Abraham, is the not the spiritual seed of Abraham.

7. Paul sees the tragedy of being a racial Jew without being a regenerate Jew.

8. Only the regenerate of Israel are the children of the promise or the heirs of the unconditional covenants.

9. To benefit both in the Millennium and in eternity the Jew must be born again to receive the promises of the Abrahamic, Palestinian, Davidic and New covenants.

a) The Jew must be in the divine decrees under election, foreknowledge and foreordination to qualify.

b) Such qualification depends on believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, the God of Israel and the Shekinah glory.

c) For the Jew who rejects the Lord Jesus Christ as saviour he can only print out under condemnation. He does it from his own free will.

d) The condemnation cannot possibly receive the promises of God without compromising divine attributes.

e) To be a Jew physically, then, is of no benefit unless one is a Jew spiritually through faith in Christ.

f) Election is not made conditional through descent from physical birth, or the heritage of the racial Jew, or by keeping the Mosaic law. Election is God’s free exercise of grace toward those who believe in Christ.

g) Therefore the hereditary people of God in the Old Testament are not the racial Jews but the born again Jews.

h) Furthermore the rejection of the majority of Jews does not abrogate the promises of God. God’s word does not fail to Abraham and to his seed but to receive the promises of God to Abraham’s seed the racial Jew is not qualified. He must be qualified the same way his father Abraham was qualified – faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

i) Only faith in Christ qualifies for reception of divine promises. The prerequisites are only found through faith in Christ – imputed righteousness and eternal life. Therefore, in the race and nation of Israel only the elect, the foreordained, the foreknown are beneficiaries of God’s promises. Therefore the remnant of Israel according the election of grace is always the true Israel, those who have believed in the Lord Jesus Christ. Remember, the promises of God have not been cancelled because some Jews have refused to believe in Christ. God unconditional and eternal promises are for the elect of Israel, not for the race of Israel.

Verse 9 – “For” is the explanatory use of the postpositive conjunctive particle gar. This means an additional explanation is forthcoming. With it is the nominative singular subject o( logoj, referring to the content of God’s specifics communicated to certain people in the human race, i.e. Abraham; plus the possessive genitive singular from the noun e)aggelia, referring to unconditional promises, guarantees from the integrity of God. We have an ellipsis again and therefore the insertion of the present active indicative of e)imi is demanded by the next word, the predicate nominative singular from the demonstrative pronoun o(utoj. “For the word of the promise is this.”

Now follows a quotation from Genesis 18, verse 10. The Lord Jesus Christ had come to visit Abraham to encourage him and to add to his repertoire of divine promises to be fulfilled in the future. “And he [Jesus Christ] said, I will surely return to you when the time revives next year; and behold, Sarah, your wife, shall have a son. Verse 12 – “And Sarah laughed within herself.” When she heard the promise she laughed. Isaac means laughter. The Greek says literally, “According to this time I will come, and there will be to Sarah a son.” The prepositional phrase kata plus the accusative singular from the demonstrative pronoun o(utoj and then the noun kairoj – “at this time” or “during this time.” At the time promised. At this time Abraham attained maturity adjustment to the justice of God and the resultant blessing imputed was the resultant resuscitation of his sexual function.

The future active indicative of the verb e)rxomai – I will come.” This means to come with the purpose of imputing blessing. The predictive future indicates an event which is expected to occur in future time. The active voice: Jesus Christ who is speaking with Abraham as the angel of Jehovah promises to fulfil the action. The indicative mood is declarative – the reality of the imputation of divine blessing to mature Abraham, the revival of his sexual function.

Next we have the connective kai in which the concept of the blessing is given. With it is the present active indicative of e)imi – “and there will be. The future tense, again, is predictive. The active voice: Sarah is going to produce the action in her pregnancy from Abraham. The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of divine imputation to Sarah; she is included in the promise. The verb e)imi plus the dative case is an idiom meaning to have. We have the dative singular from the proper noun Sarra. The dative of indirect object means that Sarah is going to benefit from this – “there will be to Sarah” or “Sarah will have.” Then the predicate nominative of u(ioj indicating that this one is the child of the promise.

The omniscience of God knew in eternity past that Abraham would attain spiritual maturity, that he would be circumcised in preparation for the new race – an indication that God intended to keep His word and provide for Abraham the heir from his own loins. And so a year later through the imputation of sexual prosperity Abraham would have a son who would perpetuate the new and unique race. The omniscience of God knew that Isaac would believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and that Ishmael would not, that Jacob would believe in Christ and that Esau would not. The printout is based upon the fact that God knew in eternity past what each free will would decide. God did not determine this; the free agency of each individual determined it.

Translation: “For the word of the promise is this, At this time [maturity adjustment to the justice of God] I will come to impute blessing, and Sarah will have a son.”

Principle

1. The foundation of the Jewish race and the nation should alert every Jew to the fact that natural generation is not enough. The true Jew is both the natural and spiritual seed of Abraham.

2. It is true that the racial origin descends through Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The question arises, But why not through the firstborn, like Nahor who was the firstborn in Abraham’s generation, Ishmael and Esau. Here we have the whole connotation of primogeniture or the inheritance of the eldest son set aside. So we have the principle that there is no advantage in primogeniture. The concept is that the elder will serve the younger because doctrine takes precedence in life and in eternity.

God’s purposes relating to all events of every kind constitute one single all-comprehensive intention, perceiving all events in omniscience, the free as free, the necessary as necessary together with all causes, conditions and relations as one indivisible system of things, every link of which is essential to the integrity of the whole. This means that all cause and effect was known to God and all of it was perfectly related. The decree of God, then, is His eternal, holy, wise and sovereign purpose, comprehending at once all things which ever were, or will be, in their causes, conditions, successions and relations, and determining their certain futurition. The decrees of God are His eternal and immutable will regarding the future existence of events which will happen in time, and of the precise manner of their occurrence. By the decrees of God, then, we mean the eternal plan of God by which God has rendered all things certain, whether past events, present events, or future events of human history. This means not only human history but the angelic conflict as well. So the omniscience of God has the good sense to know everything that ever would occur by way of a thought. The omniscience of God has placed in the computer of human events everything that would be thought, every decision that every free will would ever make, and every action or deed. Not only that but they are all interrelated just as they occur in history. So they are known to us as they occur in history but they were known to God in eternity past.

The decrees, then, are the perception of God’s omniscience, the eternal purpose of God, the councils of His will, the promotion of His glory; but not just His glory, His pleasure. Once this information is in the computer it is called foreordination or predestination dealing with future events. That simply means certain futurition of decisions, thoughts and actions of all people. The decrees deal only with what will happen, not with what will not occur. Infinite intelligence knows what will happen regarding every creature – like who will believe in Christ, who will reject Christ as saviour, what believer will retrogress into reversionism and what believer will be positive.

Man with the old sin nature within himself is incapable of pleasing God – not only the factor of sin which was judged on the cross but, worse than that, human good. Human good is just as evil as sin. Therefore the ministry of the Holy Spirit is designed to actually sustain mankind in his relationship with God. This is illustrated by both common and efficacious grace as well as the indwelling and the filling of the Spirit. The principle then: No event or occurrence fed into the computer is directly affected or caused by the decree. Omniscience distinguishes between the actual – what is fed into the decree – and the possible which is not fed into the computer. Only what is actual, what actually will occur in history, is fed into the computer. Events in the decrees are affected by causes acting in a manner consistent with reality, cause and event or thoughts and decisions of free agents.

The decrees of God are efficacious in that they determine all that ever was or ever will be, and at the same time efficacious in relationship to what is directly wrought by God, in contrast to the permissive will of God. The execution of any thought or any decision or any action on the part of a creature is not the decree. The omniscience of God anticipated the thought, the decision, or the action and fed it into the decree.

6. The foreknowledge of God. No decree ever arises from the foreknowledge of God. Foreknowledge makes nothing certain, it simply acknowledges what is actually decreed. Foreknowledge is not synonymous with self-knowledge or with omniscience. It is an entirely different category, a category that does not exist until the decrees exist. Being omniscient God knows all that would have been involved had He adopted any one of an infinite number of plans of action. But the plans of action are all related to actuality – what is actually fed into the computer. Foreknowledge is a knowledge of what occurs in history, but omniscience includes knowledge of what did not occur. The omniscience of God fed reality only into the computer and what He fed into the computer is only related to omniscience, never to foreknowledge. Foreknowledge is not knowledge of future events, it is merely the acknowledging of what is in the decrees. It is cognisance of what is in the divine decrees. God’s foreknowledge does not produce or cause any events, it simply recognises what is fed into the computer, and foreknowledge is a printout. Foreknowledge is not foresight. God does not learn or obtain knowledge. God knows instantly everything that is ever knowable. God knows all events as certainly future because in eternity past He decreed them. He fed reality into the computer from His omniscience. The printout is foreknowledge, the feeding of information is omniscience.

God’s decrees relate equally to all future events of every kind -- to the free actions of moral agents as well as the actions of necessary agents, to the sinful, the human good, the evil as well as the morally correct and gracious action. Since the divine decrees alone establish certainty nothing can be foreknown until it is first decreed. Omniscience only decreed what would happen and therefore omniscience only fed reality into the computer. Foreknowledge is related only to what is decreed. Again, foreknowledge acknowledges what is in the decrees. So omniscience precedes the decrees; foreknowledge is technically simultaneous with the decrees but logically it follows. Foreknowledge cannot be placed before the decrees, this would be a blasphemous implication that God was not aware and was not the original cause.

7. The will of God. The will of God must be consistent with His own perfect attributes and His own eternal essence for there can be no compromise of His attributes. Immutability tells us this; His integrity tells us this. It is impossible for God to compromise His attributes. Because of this, therefore, we have to understand the will of God in relationship to man’s free will, man’s function as a free agent. God cannot compromise His essence. God is one in essence, three in personality. Both the essence and personality connote self-consciousness and self-determination. God did not decree Himself to be. God decreed from His own omniscience. In other words, all the was fed into the decrees was fed from an eternal being who never ceased to exist at any time, who never came into existence at any time, who has always existed in the perfect state in which He finds Himself. The will of God is manifest in the decrees because the decrees cover everything in history. a) God’s will is the divine decree. Not the slightest uncertainty could exist as to one of the smallest events without confusion to all. Hence, all of the events are interwoven and they are interdependent. b) The will of God is eternal. The will of God existed in eternity past, long before time and space existed.

God not only fed facts of history into the computer as thought, decision, and action, but He also fed into the computer solution available under the principle of your volition. In other words, God is still a gentleman and the volition of God which always existed created the volition of man and gave alternatives which always have a solution. The solution is always preparation on a daily basis. Principle: The crisis in life which is personal and the crisis in life which is national is something you are never prepared for except on a daily basis. God has a plan in the decree, and God’s plan moves on with you or without you. There is only one way to move on with the plan of God. You have to make daily decisions. As soon as you begin to make daily decisions you are going to face real problems in the sense of distractions from listening to doctrine, problems in the sense of discouragement in listening to doctrine.

So God’s will is God’s policy. God’s policy for dealing with the believer is grace. The divine outline of human history as dispensations is a part of the will of God, part of the policy of God. The divine objective is the preservation and the deliverance of the believer. Again, providence is a part of the picture, the system by which God moulds all events into the fulfilment of His eternal purpose and His eternal pleasure. Preservation continues the existence of things; providence directs their progress. Therefore the will of God for this study is: Directive: God has a plan for our lives; determinative: God has permitted non-meritorious volition to bring us to the place of either blessing or cursing; permissive: negative volition toward doctrine is permitted but divine justice deals with that negative volition and the consequences are awesome. The fourth concept of the will of God is preventative, and that is the provision of doctrine, the provision of the laws of divine establishment, the function of the royal family honour code, divine discipline, to keep the volition inside the will of God.

9) The extent of divine decree. God has decreed ends as well as means, causes as well as effects, conditions as well as instrumentalities, events and everything that depends on them. Some things God has decreed to do Himself – called immediate. This is creation. Other things God accomplishes through the actions of secondary causes acting under the law of necessity. Other things God has decreed to promote or permit free agents to do in the exercise of their free will. And all of these categories of events in the computer of decrees are certainly future from this time, and tomorrow from that time, etc.

10) Divine decrees must be related to the glory of God. The decrees unite in one all-inclusive final objective the glory of God and the pleasure of God. Being alone before all creation as the Father, the Son, and the Spirit the decrees of God concern no one but the members of the Trinity. Therefore, whoever pre-existed the decrees is the one who will be glorified in them.

The divine decrees and the glory of God

* Being alone before all creation the decrees of God concerned no one but the members of the Trinity, therefore the glory of God and the pleasure of God.

* Being eternal, being infinite, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are worthy of glory. God’s glory is what He is in His essence and in His person.

* As the subject of the divine decrees it is logical and inevitable that God will be glorified in what He is and in what He has decreed.

* Inasmuch as manifestation of His glory secures the highest glory for His creatures – maturity adjustment to the justice of God – and their greatest

good it is inevitable that attainment of spiritual maturity and resultant blessing from the justice of God brings glory to God. He is glorified in such action and because of His integrity there is imputation as a result.

* God is pleased and God is glorified both in momentum and in advance in the plan of God.

* The divine decrees are executed through imputations from the justice of God. The whole plan of God is structured on the doctrine of divine imputations.

* There are seven imputations which glorify God in both time and eternity, and these seven imputations become the tactical victory of the angelic conflict.

* Each advance in the plan of God provides divine blessing which glorifies God. Blessing of God and glorification of God are potentials based on positive volition toward Christ at salvation and positive volition toward doctrine after salvation.

* Only what really happens goes into the decrees.

* Omniscience knew the actual which was put into the computer and the potential which was not put into the computer. So you have to say omniscience knows potential and actual, foreknowledge merely recognises what is decreed or foreordained.

* God had the good sense to know in eternity past what thoughts, motives, actions, decisions would carry one believer to maturity and another believer into reversionism.

* Omniscience knows the factual and the potential while foreknowledge knows only the factual which is fed into the computer decrees. Foreknowledge is a printout; omniscience feeds the computer.

* The plan of God is consistent with human volition and freedom. God is the inventor of freedom. He is the inventor of freedom and the author of human volition. He does not tamper with His own invention. God is coerce or limited self-determination. However, distinction should be made between what God causes directly – such as the cross – and what God permits indirectly – such as sin, human good, and evil.

11) The principle of election. The omniscience of God feeds the computer of divine decrees facts, only what is actual. Election is a part of the decrees related to believers only, and election is a printout from the computer. Omniscience in eternity past knew everyone who would believe in Christ throughout all history. Election is that part of the decrees dealing with the thoughts, decisions, actions of believers who are related to the plan of God. All election is related to the Lord Jesus Christ – Isaiah 42:1; 1 Peter 2:4-6. The written Word deals with two general elections: Israel (Matthew 24:1-25:46; Romans 11:1-7) and the Church (Ephesians 1:3-6; 1 Thessalonians 1:4; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; Titus 1:1).

12) The principle of predestination. Predestination runs under three words: predestination, foreordination, predetermination. Foreordination is God’s preconceived and predesigned plan for the believer. It is synonymous with the decrees, except that it includes logistics. In other words, God’s plan for every believer includes logistical grace. Predestination is that part of the divine decrees which relates believers in Christ permanently to the plan of God. It has nothing to do with the unbeliever. There is not one scripture that ever says the unbeliever is foreordained, predestined or predetermined. The Father predetermined the grace concept of propitiation, as per Romans 3:25, so that election, foreknowledge and predestination would always be a printout in this connection.

13) The integrity of God is that part of His essence which combines two characteristics: divine justice and perfect righteousness.

14. The computer and condemnation.

a) Election, foreknowledge and predestination is information fed into the computer of divine decrees, dealing with the believer only. The unbeliever is never said to be predestined or foreknown or elected. These are terms which apply to the believer only.

b) The omniscience of God also feeds into the computer information regarding the unbeliever.

c) This information can be categorised many ways but a simple way is condemnation. The printout is condemnation.

d) The justice of God condemns the unbeliever both in time as well as in eternity.

e) The unbeliever is excluded from the plan of God for believers known as election, predestination and foreknowledge.

f) This means that racial Jews who reject Christ as saviour are not under election, foreknowledge and predestination, but under the principle of condemnation. And under condemnation they are not the people of God.

g) While condemnation information exists in the computer it is never classified with election, foreknowledge and predestination.

h) Therefore the racial Jew without faith in Christ is under that condemnation, as noted in Romans 9:8.

15. The ultimate issue for the believer.

a) No believer is ever commanded to reinvent the wheel. The wheel is God’s plan which has existed from eternity past. God’s plan keeps rolling no matter what. The wheel must turn on an axle and the axle is divine righteousness – God’s righteousness imputed.

b) Every believer must choose his axle.

c) The wheel of the Christian life must turn or spin on the axle of his choice.

d) You must decide which axle you will use – the one that God has provided, which is +R; or invent your own which is some form of self-righteousness. If you choose self-righteousness you reinvent the wheel, you dictate to God the course of action.

So much then for the perfect plan of God which excludes the ability of man, the personality of man, the morality of man, the works of man, the ideas of man, the schemes of man. There is nothing you can do to ever receive blessing from God. God set it up for you. When you believed in Christ God did the same thing that He did for Abraham. He imputed His own divine righteousness and that becomes the home or the target for blessing in time; that sets up the potential for the plan of God. So obviously, any function of our righteousness is never going to impress God – Isaiah 64:6.

Verse 10 – “And” is the post positive conjunctive particle de. With it is the negative adverb o)u, and the adverb monon – “And not only.”

a) This is a reference to the previous case history of Ishmael and Isaac.

b) Human viewpoint might object to the first case history. It might object on the basis of the fact that Ishmael, the firstborn under primogeniture, was also a bastard.

c) The issue is not really legitimate versus illegitimate birth, good mother versus bad mother. Neither physical birth nor the character of the mothers, nor any other human factor is the issue. This is confirmed by the second case history now brought into focus.

d) In this second illustration twins are born to Rebecca.

e) The eldest twin is a Gentile; the youngest twin is a Jew. Obviously primogeniture is set aside.

f) The difference between them was not in their natural birth, their personality, or anything related to their human birth. Their difference was in their spiritual birth or lack of it.

g) In eternity past the omniscience of God knew that the firstborn, Esau, would reject Christ as saviour. This means that his printout includes condemnation for all eternity, many types of discipline for time. But the thing that is in focus here is that he was not a Jew, he was not born again. So omniscience fed into the computer of divine decrees information, resulting in the election of Jacob and the condemnation of Esau.

1) Physical descent, natural birth, is worthless in the transmission of divine promises and the imputation of divine blessing.

2) Only regeneration through faith in Christ can qualify the racial Jew to be an elect Jew.

3) Without salvation there is no imputation of divine righteousness and eternal life. Therefore the prerequisites for fulfilling the unconditional covenants are not there.

4) The twin boys had a common physical origin – the same father and the same mother. The differences between them are not in the physical realm, although some existed. Jacob is a Jew, Esau is a Gentile, and the difference between them is spiritual, not physical.

5) Consequently the true Jew is not in the physical descent from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but in the spiritual seed – regeneration.

6) This explains Paul. No wonder Paul was concerned about the racial Jew who in rejecting Christ as saviour has rejected the true Israel, the spiritual seed.

Election, foreknowledge and predestination describe Jacob only, they never describe any unbeliever. The difference between the twins is not simply Jew and Gentile, it is far more important than that; it is the difference between a believer and an unbeliever.

Principle: “And not only”

1. Physical descent in natural birth is absolutely worthless in the transmission of divine promises and the imputation of divine blessing.

2. Only regeneration or salvation adjustment to the justice of God through faith in Christ can qualify the racial Jew to become the elect Jew.

3. Without salvation, then, there is no imputation of divine righteousness or eternal life. These are the prerequisites for the fulfilment of all of the promises contained in the Abrahamic, Palestinian, Davidic and New covenants to Israel.

4. The twins, Jacob and Esau, had a common origin. They had the same father and the same mother. But the difference between Jewish Jacob and Gentile Esau was salvation – regeneration.

“but” is the adversative conjunction a)lla which is used to provide an additional case to the previous one; and with it is the ascensive use of the conjunction kai. While kai is a conjunction, in its ascensive use it acts as an adverb. This means that we are going to make a point now and from this will come even a more shocking point later on in the passage. Then we have the nominative singular subject from the proper noun R(ebekka – Rebecca. This refers to the wife of Isaac. “And not only [the previous case history]; but also Rebecca.”

Next comes the present active participle of the verb e)xw which means to have. It is the customary present here which denotes what habitually occurs. Also to the reader this is a historical present viewing a past event with the vividness of a present occurrence. It is brought right out of the past to be used as a spiritual illustration. The active voice: Rebecca produces the action of the verb. This is a temporal participle, we translate it “when she had.”

Then we have the accusative singular direct object from koith, the Greek word for copulation. It is usually translated “when she became pregnant” because most Greek scholars of the past had a strong tendency toward asceticism. This is followed by the prepositional phrase e)k plus ablative from e(ij – “from one.” That is, Isaac, her husband. The words “from one” is important; plus the proper noun I)saak. Then we have a genitive of relationship, pathr, plus a possessive genitive plural from the personal pronoun e)gw – “our father,” for all Jews, racial and regenerate.

Translation: “And not only [previous case history]; but also Rebecca when she had become pregnant from one, Isaac our father.”

Verse 11 -- We begin with the explanatory use of the post positive conjunctive particle gar. This particle indicates that this is going to be a parenthesis to explain the case history of the twins. After the word gar we insert the twins, Esau and Jacob, who are the subject of this verse. Next comes the adverb mepw, translated “not yet.” It is a negative adverb. Then follows the genitive absolute with the aorist passive participle from the verb ginnaw which means to be born. The genitive absolute is a group of words, including a participle, in the genitive case. Usually there is a noun and a participle in the genitive case. They are not grammatically connected with the rest of the sentence. In this genitive absolute we have the participle which is ginnaw, we have a noun but the noun is missing in this case and therefore we have to insert the subject, the twins, Esau and Jacob. They are a part of the genitive absolute. This is understood from the previous verse. What we have in corrected translation is: “For the twins [Esau and Jacob] though not yet having been born.” The aorist tense of the participle is a constantive aorist, it refers to a momentary action of the existence of the foetus in the womb. This is before birth, before life. The passive voice: the unborn twins receive the action of the verb. Before human life is imputed, before the twins had life, they had done neither good nor evil. They had done nothing to distinguish one from the other; one could not be said to be better than the other. This is the first issue. The genitive absolute is used in the Greek in order to indicate that this is the principle being illustrated, and it must be emphasised. This is a concessive participle recognising an historical fact before the fact actually occurred, which is why we have to add the word “though” in the translation.

Principle

1. Esau and Jacob were a foetus in the womb but the omniscience of God had known for billions of years that Jacob would believe and Esau would reject Jehovah Elohim, the God of Israel, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Shekinah glory.

2. Esau and Jacob were not yet human beings but the omniscience of God had known for billions of years that one would be a believer and one would be an unbeliever. He knew exactly how the free will of each one would function. Therefore only facts were fed into the computer of divine decrees. Esau was fed into the computer: “unbeliever”. It was known that he would reject Christ as saviour; Jacob was fed into the computer: “believer.” He would believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. That is why the printout of Esau is condemnation and the printout from the computer of Jacob is election, foreknowledge, predestination or foreordination. These printouts have nothing to do with the function of freewill; they do not coerce freewill, they merely acknowledge what free will would accomplish in time.

3. Therefore the omniscience of God fed these facts into the computer of divine decrees.

4. In the printout the foreknowledge of God acknowledged that Jacob would believe, and therefore he was elected and foreordained.

5. Election, foreknowledge and predestination apply to the believer only. They are never used in connection with the unbeliever. This is an extremely important point and this is where many of the followers of John Calvin in his theology have become very confused, for Calvin himself did not go this far. The principle is based upon human viewpoint thinking, upon the Hegelian fallacy that for every thesis there must be an antithesis and when you put thesis and antithesis together you have synthesis. That’s fine when you are dealing with human factors but it will never work with the Word of God. For example, thesis: the believer in the Lord Jesus Christ is said to be foreordained, predestined, or predetermined. That is true. The Bible teaches that as a printout of the divine decrees. Some go on and start to deduce from that the antithesis, i.e. the unbeliever is predestined to Hell. It is true that the unbeliever will spend eternity in the lake of fire, but it is untrue, it is erroneous, incorrect, to say that the unbeliever is predestined to eternal Hell. He goes to eternal Hell from his own negative volition, therefore predestination is never used in connection with the unbeliever. So the synthesis would be wrong if you say that the believer is predestined to eternal life and the unbeliever is predestined to eternal Hell. That is incorrect all the way. It is true that the unbeliever goes to the lake of fire, that is a part of condemnation. It is true that the believer is said to be predestined, foreordained, and predetermined. But this is a printout: election, foreknowledge, predestination. These are for the believer only, these are categories and they are restricted to the believer. Never in the Bible does it say the unbeliever is predicted to the lake of fire. The unbeliever is a printout called condemnation, called judgement, but the printout merely deals with what is in the computer categorically, so that you cannot ever say that the unbeliever is predestined to the lake of fire. The unbeliever is never predestined to anything. The unbeliever determines from his own free will, self-determine. He is an agent of free will and therefore he has the right to determine for himself, and he is never in the category of election, foreknowledge or foreordination.

6. Esau prints out from the computer, firstborn. He was the one who was born first through physical birth. But he was rejected from the origin of the race of Israel.

7. Election acknowledges what is in the decrees, therefore election acknowledges all decisions to believe in Christ and relates them to the plan of God. It is not connected with the unbeliever in any way.

8. The omniscience of God knew every thought, every decision, every action of the twins. Furthermore, there never was a time when the omniscience of God did not know these things. The omniscience of God knew billions of years ago in eternity past and the decrees deal with time, with space, with mankind. But the omniscience of God always knew these things and the omniscience of God only fed historical facts into the computer. The alternatives, the probabilities, the possibilities, were not fed into the computer.

9. The omniscience of God fed only facts of reality in history into the computer of divine decrees.

Fact a: Jacob would believe in Christ, therefore Jacob was foreknown, elected, and predestined.

Fact b: Esau would reject Jesus Christ as saviour, therefore Esau would be condemned, rejected for the line of Israel. Regeneration set aside the order of primogeniture - the eldest son becoming the heir. The order of physical birth was set aside, therefore the first born twin remained a Gentile and the younger twin became a Jew, the line for the origin of Israel. The Jewish race, then, was formed by regeneration rather than by natural generation.

We now have a negative disjunctive particle mhdh, it is translated “and had not.” Then we have the genitive absolute aorist active participle from the verb prassw, a verb which is in contrast usually to poiew. Poiew means to do; prassw means to practice. It also means to accomplish. We translate it, since it is going to be a concessive participle and a part of the genitive absolute, “and though they had not accomplished.” The culminative aorist views the action of the verb in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of existing results. They were not yet born, they had done absolutely nothing. The active voice: the twins, Esau and Jacob, produce the action of the verb which is negative.

Now we have an object of the participle, the accusative neuter singular from the indefinite pronoun tij — “anything” — “and though they had not accomplished anything.” Then we have two words: the accusative singular direct object a)gaqoj which refers here to divine good — Romans 8:28; then the rest of the disjunctive particle, “or,” then the accusative direct object from fauloj, “evil” — “and though they had not accomplished anything, good or evil.”

Long before Jacob received the imputation of human life at birth and long before his salvation through faith in Christ the omniscience of God knew these things and fed them into the computer of divine decrees and the printout is simply election. Since the verb prassw is translated “accomplish” it implies attainment. Therefore the Holy Spirit through the dictation of the apostle Paul would use two words of great significance — a)gaqoj which describes momentum in the plan of God, and fauloj which describes the inevitable reversion which results from rejecting Christ as saviour.

Next we have a purpose clause, a final clause which is used to express a purpose, a name, or an objective. It is introduced with the conjunction i(na, and a final clause not only uses this conjunction but the verb will be in the subjunctive mood indicating it is a future purpose — “in order that.” With this we have a subject, the nominative singular subject from proqesij. We know that proqesij means the predetermined plan. It is used in Ephesians chapter one for the plan of God. Then we have a possessive genitive from the noun for God, qeoj, and that means “the predetermined plan of God .” Translation: “in order that the predetermined plan of God.”

Remember that proqesij is defined in Ephesians 1:11 where it is related to the verb proorizw for foreordination: “In whom Christ we have received an inheritance [or a destiny], having been foreordained” - the aorist passive participle of proorizw — “according to a proqesij [predetermined plan] from the one [God the Father] putting into operation the all things according to the decree from his own will.” In Ephesians 1:11 we have all of the printouts for the believer. A “predetermined plan of God” is the divine decrees.

Next we have “might stand.” We have the preposition kata plus the accusative singular from the noun e)klogh. Kata plus the accusative denotes an extension is space, so it can be translated “over, through, in, upon.” It also denotes relationship to something, as it does here. So it is translated “in relationship to e)klogh [election].” Then we have the verb, the present active subjunctive of menw, which means to remain, to abide. This is a present active subjunctive and it means “might remain in status quo.” We get that translation from the static present tense which represents a condition as perpetually existing — the decrees of God. The active voice: the divine decrees or the predetermined plan of God produce the action of the verb. The subjunctive mood is used to indicate a purpose clause.

Corrected translation: “For though the twins [Esau and Jacob] had not yet been born, and though they had not yet accomplished anything, good or evil, in order that the predetermined plan of God might remain in status quo in relationship to election.”

The doctrine of election

A. Orientation

1. Election is always a readout dealing with the believer only. Election orientation, then, begins with the divine attributes of God, and it deals with a specific attribute which is omniscience: God knows eternally, perfectly and simultaneously all that is knowable, whether actual or possible. Omniscience is God’s knowledge related to creatures. (There is also God’s self-knowledge) In relationship to creatures He not only knows eternally, He knows perfectly and He knows simultaneously. Remember that God fed all of the facts of history simultaneously into the computer of divine decrees. Foreknowledge is a third category of God’s knowledge. It has nothing to do with omniscience. Foreknowledge is merely acknowledging what is in the decrees. Foreknowledge makes nothing certain, it merely acknowledges what is in the decrees.

Psalm 139:1-6

Verse 1 — “O Jehovah, you have searched me and you know me.” The search existed in eternity past before any of us existed.

Verse 2 — “You have known when I sit down and when I get up.”

Verse 3 — “You have computed my journey [through life], my lying down, in fact you are intimately acquainted with all my ways.”

Verse 4 — “Even before there is a word on my tongue, behold, Lord, you know it all.”

Verse 5 — “You have surrounded me behind and before, and laid your hand on me.” God has protected us so that we can fill out our time.

Verse 6 — “Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is too high, I cannot attain to it.”

Every minute detail of thought, every decision and every action is completely known and perfectly understood at all times. That is the omniscience of God.

2. Every detail of life is in the mind of God at all times. Therefore, to God the future is as clearly perceived as the past.

3. God’s perfect and eternal knowledge is not subject to development, to reasoning, to regretting or foreboding.

4. The decrees of God therefore are illustrative of this principle. The decrees are simply a giant computer. God knew all of the facts and fed them simultaneously into the computer. The omniscience of God knew everything that has ever happened and ever will happen, and He knew them simultaneously in eternity past.

5. However, one category was not fed into the computer: the probable. The actual or the facts of human history were fed into the computer of divine decrees.

6. The facts fed into the computer are described in Isaiah 46:9,10 — “Remember the former things long past, for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, there is no one like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying ‘My decrees will be established, and I will accomplish my good pleasure’.” We must remember that God is not in heaven for our pleasure, we are on earth for His pleasure.

7. What is fed into the computer of divine decrees by the omniscience of God falls into several classifications — i.e. facts concerning believers and facts concerning unbelievers. Everything related to the believer falls into one category; everything related to the unbeliever falls into another category.

8. Therefore the computer gives out information regarding believers under at least three categories: election, foreknowledge, predestination. Again, these are printouts for the believer only.

9. The computer decrees also give out information regarding the unbeliever, under such things as degeneration, condemnation, judgement.

10. The omniscience of God feeds facts into the computer known as the divine decrees. The facts related to the believer in Christ are categorised in a printout either by election, foreknowledge, or predestination. In other words, you feed facts into the computer and you receive facts out of the computer. Facts are fed into the computer by the omniscience of God; facts are received out of the computer pertaining to believers under the category of election. Facts received out of the computer pertaining to the unbeliever can be called and summarised condemnation. But we are dealing with the believer only in this doctrine, the doctrine of election.

B. Definition and description

1. By definition election is the plan of God for believers only. Furthermore, election is the plan of God for believers related to a specific category. In other words, election is a categorical subject.

2. Election is that part of the divine decrees which relate the believer to the plan of God in a specific period of history.

3. Election always relates to those who are believers, those who have trusted in Christ as saviour - 2 Thessalonians 2:13, “God has elected you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit, and faith in the truth.”

4. This election is also related to foreknowledge in 1 Peter 1:1,2 — “… who are elected according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit [baptism of the Spirit], unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Christ [the work of the Son, the basis for salvation].”

5. By comparing Ephesians 1:4 with 1:5 we see election related to predestination — “just as he has elected us in him before the foundation of the world … so he predestinated us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ.”

6. Election, therefore, is one of the three categories of facts in the divine decrees regarding the believer.

7. Election emphasises the plan of God for the believer.

8. Foreknowledge emphasises the divine cognisance of what is in the computer.

9. Predestination establishes certainty, therefore predestination or foreknowledge becomes synonymous with the decrees — synonymous in the sense that there is a definite relationship. What is in the computer must come out.

10. The divine decrees or predestination alone establish certainty. Therefore nothing could be foreknown until it was first decreed.

11. Omniscience places the facts into the computer while foreknowledge merely acknowledges what is in the computer regarding the elect.

12. Therefore election, foreknowledge, predestination, are all dealing with the same facts: the content of the decrees regarding believers. But they cover these facts from a different viewpoint.

13. Various words are used for election. In the Hebrew, bachir — Isaiah 42:1; 45:4; 65:9,22. In the New Testament we have two Greek nouns: e)klektoj and e)klogh. E)klektoj is used for election in such references and representative passages as Matthew 24:22, 24, 31; Romans 8:33; Colossians 3:12; 1 Timothy 5:21; 1 Peter 1:2. E)klogh is used in Romans 11:5, 7, 28; 1 Thessalonians 1:4. Very rare, but is does occur, is a compound noun suneklektoj used in 1 Peter 5:13. In addition there are also some Greek verbs: kalew which means to call or elect. From it we get another noun sometimes used for election klhsij.

Election, then, is the plan of God for the believer designed in eternity past, entered into the divine decrees by the omniscience of God in eternity past. While not a part of our subject, God has a predetermined plan for the elect angelic creatures. Those involved are called elect angels in 1 Timothy 5:21. Election always takes a believer in the decrees and relates him to his time in history. For example, if we had lived in the dispensation of the Age of Israel then we would be in the election called Israel. We live in the Church Age; our election is the royal family of God. Jesus Christ is said to be in election also, so there are different elections depending upon the dispensation in which you live.

C. The election of the Lord Jesus Christ

In eternity past the omniscience of God not only fed facts about believers into the computer but He also fed facts about unbelievers, and then He fed facts about the unique Person of all human history - the shekinah glory becoming visible, the Lord Jesus Christ. Isaiah 42:1 — “Behold my Servant,” a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ. He is called the servant because He has come to fulfil the ministry of God the Father — “whom I sustain; my elected one in whom my soul delights. I have put my Spirit upon him.” It is the word “elected one” that is important here. The Lord Jesus Christ is called an election. Election is related to the cross also; not only to His birth, His first advent, but in Acts 2:23 — “this one, delivered up by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to the cross.” In other words, fed into the computer was the cross, and therefore foreknowledge acknowledges simply what is in the computer. The omniscience of God knew this in eternity past. Foreknowledge and omniscience are not the same. 1 Peter 2:4 — “And coming to him as to a living stone, rejected by men, but elected and precious in the sight of God.” Again, Christ is called “elected.”

1 Peter 2:6 — “For contained in the scripture: ‘Behold I lay in Zion a chief corner stone, elected, also he who believes in him will not be put to shame.”

Principle

1. The election of the Lord Jesus Christ is the foundation for all other elections. All elections are composed of believers only.

a. The dispensation of the Gentiles, a period of time in which there were only Gentiles on the earth.

b. The Age of Israel in which a new race is added, the Jewish race.

c. The Church Age, the calling out of the royal family, the pre and the post-canon periods.

d. The Age of the King, the Millennium which last for 1000 years.

Each one of these dispensations has an election in it. The election is not all the population, only the believers. There is the election of the Gentiles. The basis for that election is faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, even though Christ had not yet died on the cross. He is the only saviour and He was revealed prior to the cross. Then in the Age of Israel we have the election of Israel. It is made up of believers only. Then in the Church Age we have a lot of unbelievers but we also have believers, and this is the election called the Church. The same thing is true in the Millennium: the believers are all gathered up into an election. So every election includes believers only except one election, and that is the Lord Jesus Christ. This is a unique election in that it involves one person who is not a believer, Christ does not have to believe in Himself. The election of the Lord Jesus Christ is the foundation for all of the other elections in history.

2. Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, which is a free will function, a function of self-determination, non-meritorious self-determination, is the key to any election. It is the key to the election of Israel, it is the key to the election of the Church.

3. Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ is the key to the election of the royal family of God forever - the Church Age group. So the Lord Jesus Christ is called “the elect one,” and the key to all elections is faith in Christ as He was revealed in the past, as He is revealed in the present.

D. The election of the royal family of God.

1. The basis for the election of the Church - royal family of God - is the baptism of the Holy Spirit which occurs at the moment of faith in Christ. At the moment we believe in the Lord Jesus Christ God the Holy Spirit enters us into union with Christ as He is seated at the right hand of the Father. That is current positional truth. We are also entered into union with Christ as he died on the cross, and that is retroactive positional truth or the big divorce from the old sin nature.

2. No Church Age believer can understand God’s plan for his life or the significance of his royal status until he understands the election of the Church. 1 Thessalonians 1:4 — “Knowing, brethren beloved of God, his election for you.” The participle is incorrectly translated. It should not be translated “knowing”, it is an imperative participle, and it says, “You know [now].” You can’t learn enough about your election. It is a command to learn about your election as orientation to the plan of God for your life. You will never understand God’s plan for your life until you understand your election. You are elected royal family with a purpose on earth and a purpose in eternity. The purpose in eternity is not as important now as understanding the purpose on earth. 2 Thessalonians 2:13 — “But we are obligated to give thanks for you [royal family], beloved by the Lord, because God has elected you from the beginning’ — from eternity past. No election apart from faith in Christ — “to salvation through sanctification from the Spirit” — the baptism of the Holy Spirit that enters us into union with Christ and forms the royal family of God — “and faith in doctrine” — you are royal family you have to get with it: doctrine, more doctrine, and more doctrine. 1 Corinthians 1:2 approaches it from a slightly different angle — “To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus [the baptism of the Spirit], saints [royal family] by election, with all who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours.” There’s the story; you have to be a believer to be elected. Election is a printout of the divine decrees for believers only, just as predestination is a printout for believer only, just as foreknowledge is a printout for believers only. Colossians 3:12 — “As elected ones of God, holy and beloved, put on the affections of grace compassion.” 2 Timothy 1:9 — “The one having saved us, and having elected us into a holy station of life [royal family], not according to our works but according to his predetermined plan, even grace [the name of the plan], which has been given to us in Christ Jesus before human history.” Ephesians 1:3-6 - “Worthy of praise and glorification is the God even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the one having provided us benefits by every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ [our election], even as he has elected us for himself in Him before the world began … in love having foreordained us to the adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, resulting in recognition of glory from the source of his grace, from which he has pursued us in grace in the beloved one.” Verse 11 goes onto say, “In whom Christ we have received an inheritance [destiny], having been foreordained according to a predetermined plan [divine decrees] from the one [God the Father] putting into operation all things according to the decree from his own will.”

One of the greatest passages on election relates it to the plan of God and to the believers in the Lord Jesus Christ in Romans 8:28-34 — “We know in fact that to those who love God all things work together for the purpose of the good [a)gaqoj], to those who are the elected ones according to a predetermined plan.” Omniscience knew the actual and distinguished it from the probable. Omniscience knows the probable — what would have happened if you had made different decisions — but only the actual was fed into the decrees as facts. The “predetermined plan” takes cognisance of human volition. “We know that whom he foreknew [foreknowledge], he also foreordained as conformed ones to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren [royal family of God];” — foreknowledge is a printout about believers only; “and whom he foreordained [or decreed], these same one he also elected; and whom he elected these same ones he also imputed righteousness [justification]; and whom he justified, these same ones he glorified [glorification is the imputation of divine blessing to imputed righteousness].” “Therefore, face to face with these things, to what conclusion are we forced? If the God is for us, who is against us? The God who did not even spare his own Son, but on behalf of us all he delivered him over to judgement; how shall he not with him in grace give to us the all things? Who will bring accusation against the elect of God? God is the one who justifies; who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is the one having died, yes, rather having been raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.”

The application of doctrine, then, to election is the motive for the royal family of God to advance to maturity, and therefore motivation becomes momentum. For example, Ephesians 4:1 — “Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, continue to encourage you to walk in a manner worthy of your station of life [royal family], to which station you have been elected.” Election is for the believer only. Titus 1:1 — “”Paul, a slave of God, and an apostle of Christ Jesus, according to the doctrine of God’s elected ones and the full knowledge of doctrine according to the norm of godliness.”

E. The election of Israel.

The election of Israel — Romans 9:4-13. Verse 7 — “but [quotation from Genesis 21:12] in Isaac your posterity [your seed] shall be elected.” Romans 11:2 — “God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew.” In other words, every believer in Israel who is in the divine decrees as a believer is also elected. Election, then, has always been the basis of appeal to Israel. In Isaiah 45:4 — “For the sake of Jacob my servant, and Israel my elected one, I have also called you by your name; I have given you a title of honour though you [unbelieving Jews] do not even know me.” Nevertheless, the principle: Israel will always have an elect, and that elect formed the pivot that kept the Jewish nation in great prosperity during the time they were functioning as a priest nation. Now that that has been discontinued (70 AD) the Jews who reach maturity in every generation determine the prosperity of Israel during the period of being scattered — the Church Age and the Tribulation. Isaiah 65:9 — “Therefore I will bring forth from Jacob a seed [the elect of Israel], out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains, even my elected ones will inherit it, and my servants will dwell there.” So the elect or believing Jews have a glorious future in the Millennium. There is a pivot of mature believers in Israel during the Tribulation — Matthew 24:21,22: “but because of the elected ones.” This pivot determines blessing to the Jews scattered throughout the earth. They will bring safety to Jews in the land of Israel.

Election is the content of the divine decrees related to believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, assigned to their various dispensations. Election is a category of divine decrees which explains the omniscient viewpoint of God. Each dispensation has its own election which is related to the divine policy for that dispensation, and as goes the elect in any dispensation so goes the client nation to which that elected one is attached.

Back to Romans 9:11 — “For though the twins [Esau and Jacob] had not yet been born, and though they had not accomplished anything good or evil, in order that the predetermined plan of God [the divine decrees] might remain in status quo in relationship to election, not of works, but of him that calleth.”`

We have the objective negative adverb o)u, denying the reality of the allegation. With it is a prepositional phrase, e)k plus the ablative plural of e)rgon — “not from works” or “not by works.” Election excludes all human works. Election forms a circle around you and excludes your human personality as the basis of pleasing God. Election cuts out the nonsense about blessing. You cannot be blessed because of your works, you cannot be blessed because of your personality, you cannot be blessed because you have become a very moral, upright pillar of society. Election is a printout designed to say that there is only one thing that attracts divine blessing: your imputed righteousness or justification. That is the only thing.

We have started verse 13, “As it stands written”, used to indicate a quotation from the Old Testament — Malachi 1:2,3. We begin with the concept of the principle which is found. We have an accusative singular definite article used with the proper name “Jacob.” It starts out ton I)akob. The definite article in the accusative case plus the indeclinable proper noun, Jacob, whose identity is well known to the reader and therefore the definite article. However, the definite article is really used here as a demonstrative pronoun to call special attention to this person who was no better or no worse than his twin brother but turned out to be one of the great people of history through the grace of God. Because the definite article is in the accusative case it is also assumed therefore that Jacob, an indeclinable proper noun, is also in the accusative case and therefore the direct object. This means that God is the subject. The corrected translation: “that Jacob.”

Next we have the aorist active indicative from the verb a)gapaw — “I loved that Jacob.” The constantive aorist contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety. It refers to a fact which extends over a long period of time, from the time that Jacob believed in the Lord and received the imputation of divine righteousness. The justice of God and the righteousness of God form the holiness or the integrity of God. The justice of God imputed to Jacob at the moment he believed in Christ: divine righteousness. Therefore the love of God which in eternity past always loved His own righteousness now loves Jacob who is the possessor of His righteousness. The active voice: God produces the action of the verb as an anthropopathism which indicates divine approbation and includes the idea of propitiation. This is a translation, by the way, of the qal active participle of the Hebrew ahab, which is the verb to love. In the qal active participle it means a continuous thing. With this we have the post positive conjunctive particle de used as an adversative conjunction emphasising the contrast between an attitude toward Jacob and the attitude toward Esau.

Next we have another accusative singular direct object from the definite article used as a demonstrative pronoun as well as the proper noun Esau. So we have “that Esau.” Notice that the direct object comes first because it emphasises the person and the difference between the twins. Then we have the aorist active indicative from the verb misew which is a mental attitude sin of hatred and is correctly translated, “but I hated that Esau.” That aorist tense again is a constantive aorist which contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety, and refers to the fact that Esau refused to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ; whereas, eventually have his twin Jacob believing in the Lord and he became the origin of the Jewish race. The active voice: God produces the action of the verb as an anthropopathism which indicates the divine attitude toward Esau in terms of language of accommodation. Hatred is a sin; God is not a sinner. God is perfect and cannot sin. God does not actually hate Esau but in order to explain His divine policy in terms of language of accommodation, divine policy toward unbelievers, the anthropopathism is used. We can understand hatred and therefore we can understand that Esau as an unbeliever was under a principle or policy of disapprobation. The indicative mood is declarative for language of reality and anthropopathism. This is not the actual attitude of God, this is the attitude that we can understand .

Principles

1. The omniscience of God fed only facts into the computer of divine decrees. Only the actual was fed into the computer and the actual finds Esau, unbeliever; Jacob, believer. They are twins: one is a Jew; one is a Gentile. The difference between them: one was born again; one was not.

2. The printout for Jacob was election, foreknowledge, predestination; whereas the printout for Esau was reprobation, condemnation, retribution or judgement.

3. Both Jacob and Esau had the same free will, had the same opportunity for salvation.

4. When Jesus Christ was nailed to the cross the sins of both Esau and Jacob were imputed to Christ and judged by the justice of the Father. Again, the same opportunity. One used his free will to believe in Christ; one used his free will to reject Christ.

5. It was the will of God that both Esau and Jacob be saved. That was the directive will of God: He wanted both of them to be saved.

6. The fact that Jacob believed in Christ and Esau rejected Christ indicates the reality of human volition acting independently of the sovereignty of God.

7. This emphasises the fact that the divine decrees do not coerce or tamper with human volition. The divine decrees merely record what happens in history before it happens.

8. The divine decree of foreordination establishes certainty with regard to the believer.

9. God’s decrees do not originate from His foreknowledge, they originate from His omniscience which feeds the facts into the computer. To put foreknowledge before omniscience or on a par with omniscience is the beginning of a series of confusions that result in a total and complete blackout with regard to the Christian way of life. These doctrines have a great deal to do with what constitutes the Christian way of life and to put foreknowledge on a par with omniscience, even though both are functions of God, is one of the most disastrous things that could happen.

10. The foreknowledge of God makes nothing certain, it merely perceives what is certain. What is certain is the fact that you have free will. What is certain is the fact that your free will is going to make X number of decisions. What is certain is the fact that God knew what your freewill would do. He doesn’t coerce it. There is always the idiot who comes along and says, “Well if God knew I was going to sin why didn’t He stop me?” That is the mentality of an ant! It is almost unbelievable that people could be so stupid as not to understand how great God is. Obviously He knows and obviously He created us free will. If He created us with free will obviously the one thing He is not going to do is to tamper with it because if He does it isn’t free will, it is God’s will. And if it isn’t free will but God’s will, then what are we doing here? The answer is: Not a thing, we are simply robots, and the angelic conflict is not resolved.

11. God’s decrees determine only the certain futurition of events but the decrees do not directly affect or cause any event. Cause and effect is the interrelationship of innumerable volitions.

12. The decree itself provides in every case that the event shall be affected by its own causes, acting in a manner consistent with the nature of the event in question. God knew that Esau would reject Christ and that Jacob would believe in the Lord.

13. Again, in the case of every free act of a moral or responsible agent the decree itself provides that at the same time the agent [you] shall be a free agent. His antecedents and all of the antecedents of the act in question shall be what they are. All the present conditions of the acts shall be what they are and the act shall be perfectly spontaneous and free on the part of the agent.

Illustration: Until a lady gets married she is a totally free agent. Then one day she makes a free will decision in which she accepts some man and he is her husband. Once she does that she has surrendered a part of her volition to him and therefore he makes decisions. One day she might want to stay in bed and catch up on sleep but the husband says she is going to get out of bed and come to church. Then you have exactly what we have here. She surrendered her free will to him and he makes the final decisions. That is cause and effect. She accepted of her own free will the authority of the husband. Probably the greatest issue in marriage is that the woman surrenders her volition to the husband so that the husband can overrule her at any time. But you still have the interaction of volitions. You have the female challenge; you have the male veto. The doctrine of decrees recognises all of these interacting functions of free will.

Everyone in the world cannot use his free will to do the same thing at the same time. So God has put order in the human race. He set up rules. Rule #1: Your soul and your volition in your soul is the first authority. If your soul said to you, for example, it is time to exercise. Your body objects. Your soul overruled it, so you exercised. That is called self-discipline but it is really a system of authority. Rule #2 is just as simple: When you have two souls — one male and one female type — the male must call the shots. He takes additional responsibility. Then when you have two or more — “or more” being children — then both the male and the female have authority over the children, so that the children must be subordinated to the volition of their parents. Authority makes it possible for all of us to live together and so authority becomes a tremendous issue in life. Authority makes it possible for a maximum number of free people to follow the principles of freedom to their state of inequality.

A moral agent is not someone who keeps the ten commandments, a moral agent is someone who recognises the authority principles of divine establishment.

14. God foreknows all events as certainly future. He knows this because He has decreed them and foreknowledge is merely the printout. Omniscience feeds the facts.

15. God’s decrees relate equally to all future events of every kind, to the free actions of moral agents as well as the actions of necessary agents (There’s the relationship between free will and authority), to the sinful as well as the honourable actions.

16. This means that God has decreed ends as well as means, but it also means that God has decreed means as well as ends.

You had nothing to say, you had no free will choice with regard to your parents. Only God knew who your parents would be and He knew it billions of years ago. You had nothing to say about it, but once you came into the world as a child of parents eventually your own volition began to function. The omniscience of God fed into the computer of divine decrees a Gentile by the name of Abraham. God knew that this man would have eight children. He also knew the law of primogeniture. But He knew that not the first born but one by the name of Isaac, the second born, would be Israel. He also knew that Isaac would have twins and that one would be a Jew [Jacob] and that one would be a Gentile [Esau]. He knew that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob would be the origin of a new race, an elected race, God’s chosen people. What does that mean? It became necessary in the course of human history to have a special nation to represent God, to become the recipients of divine revelation to be put in writing — the canon of the Old Testament. It became necessary for one nation to become the missionary nation, and to also set a precedent for all national function in the areas of freedom and establishment. Then it became necessary for this freedom to become the basis for evangelism, and from the evangelism to the advance to maturity. There had not been in history, in its first two thousand years [the Age of the Gentiles] such a nation. Internationalism inevitably occurred. Internationalism really is a system whereby Satan rules the world, gains control of the world. That is what is wrong with the United Nations or any system of internationalism, religious or political. Therefore God started a new dispensation, the dispensation of Israel, and God’s chosen people is simply a way of saying election.

For what purpose? So that there would be starting with the Exodus a national entity who would represent God in evangelism, in spiritual growth, in missionary activity. That continued throughout the dispensation of Israel until the Jewish Age came to a screeching halt after the ascension and session of Jesus Christ. Then the Church Age began as the formation of the royal family and some forty years after the Church Age began Israel went out for the last time under the fifth cycle of discipline — 70 AD. In August of 70 AD when Jerusalem fell the times of the Gentiles began. The times of the Gentiles is a phrase used by Paul in the New testament to indicate the fact that no Jewish nation from that time on until the second advent would be or could be or is qualified to be a client nation to God; that, in fact, Israel would be scattered throughout the earth. While occasionally in history many of the Jews would come together to form a nation in the land which had been promised to them they could not be a client nation to God and will not be a client nation to God. Their concentration in the land merely incites Satan to seek to destroy them. During the times of the Gentiles Gentile nations would become client nations to God. And above all, in the times of the Gentiles the client nation to God must be a haven for the Jews. The Jews must be protected not only from the usual tyrannies of history but for the abnormal tyranny of history which has always existed. Satan’s primary objective has been, a will continue to be until he is cast into prison at the second advent, to destroy the Jew. Therefore, it becomes absolutely necessary that a client nation provide a haven for the Jews, to give them the same rights as we have as citizens, and to make sure that anti-Semitism never rears its ugly head. Anti-Semitism is like a grenade with the pin out, it is the quickest way to destroy a nation and pro-Semitism is the quickest way for a nation to have blessing.

17. Therefore God’s purposes relating to all events of every kind constitute one single all-comprehensive intention, comprehending all events, the free as free, the necessary as necessary, together with all their causes, conditions, relations, as one indivisible system of things, every link of which is essential to the whole.

18. The decrees do not oppose the human freedom of Esau and Jacob; they guarantee certainty.

19. No decree opposes human freedom. Decrees do not coerce human volition, even as the foreknowledge of God does not coerce human self-determination.

20. These only have to do with the certainty of the action. The decrees guarantee the certainty: guarantee that you would dissent, that you would reject certain doctrines, that you would be come a liberal bleeding-heart do-gooder, that you would do this, that you would do that, etc.

21. Human freedom exists in the sphere of and on the plane of human experience.

22. No human being ever acted outside of the divine decrees. The decrees are merely all the facts of history in their sequence, in their relationship and interrelationship, in their cause and effect, the free functioning as the free and the necessary functioning as the necessary. To say that someone could act outside of the divine decrees would be a denial of the omniscience of God.

23. It is important to distinguish between what God causes and what got permits. God does not decree man to sin but He decrees that man may have a free choice to sin. While God permits sin He does not sponsor sin. The omniscience of God fed the facts of sin into the computer, so it is a fact and it is a part of the decrees, but such sins or actions or functions of human good and evil God does not approve, God does not sponsor. In other words, God decreed that human volition would eventuate in acts of sin, acts of human good, that sin would eventuate as a result of freedom — free thought, free decisions, free actions. Sin is a reality anticipated by the omniscience of God, and not only anticipated but in reality God took all of the sins [knowing them all ahead of time] and saved them all up. Here is how important the omniscience of God is. If it were not for the omniscience of God we wouldn’t be saved. For salvation the omniscience of God knew billions of years ago that our free will would be involved in X number of sins, and He took those sins and imputed them to Christ on the cross. In other words, the omniscience of God had to know ahead of time every sin we have ever committed so that it could be judged, so that when the gospel is presented to you you could believe and have eternal life because the omniscience of God already had fed into the computer all of your sins, and they were all collected and imputed to Christ. So without the omniscience of God salvation would be impossible.

Jacob and Esau both committed a certain number of sins and all of their sins were judged on the cross. So the message to Esau and Jacob was, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ as thou shalt be saved.” Esau kept saying no, and Jacob one time said yes, he believed on the Lord following the pattern of Abraham and in that moment he had eternal life. The line and the origin of Israel is regeneration, not physical birth. Esau said no to regeneration, Jacob said yes. The decree of God removes no man from what within the sphere of his own experience is the outworking of his own choice. One used his free will and said yes; one used his free will and said no. All of these factors are combined in the computer of divine decrees so that what man thinks, what man decides, what man does, is simply the execution of the divine decrees: facts fed into the computer by the omniscience of God.

Principles

1. The members of the Holy Trinity — God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit — who eternally existed alone before any creature existed the omniscience of God, having complete knowledge of everything that would ever happen in history, fed these facts into the computer.

2. It should also be emphasised that what God did not feed into the computer, namely what did not happen but could have happened, is known to Him. Once a person believes in the Lord Jesus Christ and is born again he could die in the next few minutes. How can God reward or not reward, impute eternal blessing or not impute eternal blessing? The omniscience of God now takes a probability. What if that person had lived to be 100 years old. The omniscience of God knows exactly what would have happened. So the omniscience of God projects a period of time necessary for determination, knowing this probability, and the reward or lack of reward is based on that projection. This is the only case of where the omniscience of God takes a probability and uses it as a determining factor. So God is fair when it comes to the judgement seat of Christ and the imputation of blessing in time.

3. The decrees do not deal with probabilities or possibilities but only with realities or actualities.

4. The omniscience of God only fed into the computer what would happen, which in turn would be the cause of other happenings. God fed into the computer of divine decrees the decisions of Esau and Jacob regarding Christ.

5. This became the cause for perpetuating the Jewish line, the Jewish race, through Jacob, which had the effect of determining the true Israel on the basis of regeneration rather than natural generation. The omniscience of God knew billions of years ago that Abraham would believe. God chose Abraham to be the father of the Jewish race. For 99 years Abraham was a Gentile; at age 100 he became a Jew. Then Isaac would follow the pattern, and then Jacob. So the readout for Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is election: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and their progeny are elected. This is why the Jews are called God’s chosen people. Chosen means elected. They are elected on the basis of regeneration — Foreknowledge, predetermination, foreordination, predestination. Only believers are said to be predestined. The alternatives: Nahor remained a Gentile, Ishmael, remained a Gentile, Esau remained a Gentile, and they are under the principle of condemnation. That is the printout. So true Israel always prints out election, foreknowledge and predestination on the basis of believing in Christ.

Verse 14 — the rhetorical question. Is this really fair? This is Paul using a debater’s technique to anticipate the objections to the anthropopathisms. How can you be fair if you love and hate? Hatred implies bias even as love implies bias. How can God be God and how can God be just and give all to one twin and nothing to the other?

We start out with the nominative neuter singular from the interrogative pronoun tij — “What.” We also have the inferential post positive conjunctive particle o)un which is translated “therefore.” It is used in the form of a question as an idiom of conclusion. We are going to draw a conclusion from the origin on the Jewish race.

Next we have the future active indicative of the verb legw. The deliberative future is used where questions of uncertainty follow this pattern. We have a rhetorical question, a debater’s question, anticipating those who object. The active voice: Paul uses the rhetorical debater’s idiom to force a correct conclusion rather than a false one. This is the interrogative indicative in which the indicative assumes that there is an actual fact which may be stated in answer to the question. The idiom is translated literally, “What therefore shall we say?” But the correct translation is, “Therefore, to what conclusion are we forced?” It is an idiom. The rhetorical question introduces debater’s technique to emphasise the perfection of divine attributes. The question is taken from the anthropopathism of hate. God does not hate, this is a policy statement. The statement that God hates Esau raises the question of God’s integrity, especially as related to His righteousness. It also raises the question regarding the fullness of the justice of God in loving Jacob and hating Esau.

Then we have, “Is there unrighteousness with God?” The predicate nominative singular a)dikia — “unrighteousness,” demands the insertion of a verb. So we put in the present active subjunctive. There is the actual negative here and the reason we know it is the present active subjunctive from e)imi rather than the indicative is because we are told by what Paul wrote. He wrote mh instead of o)u. O)u takes the indicative; mh takes the subjunctive. So we know exactly what to insert in this ellipsis. The word a)dikia really means injustice. “There is not injustice, is there?” is the correct translation. Then we have the prepositional phrase, para plus the dative singular of the definite article plus the noun qeoj — “There is not injustice with God, is there?” The negative mh in a question demands a negative answer. The negative o)u would demand a positive answer.

There is more than an implication here because this is debater’s technique. We have the strongest of all negatives which as it stands in the Greek is simply mh genoitw, translated “God forbid.” Obviously, there is no word for God here. The word for God is qeoj but it isn’t found here in the original. We have another negative mh plus the aorist optative of ginomai. so we translate it, “Let it not be so” or “Emphatically no.” The gnomic aorist tense of ginomai is for a strong denial. The active voice is a strong negative producing the action of the verb. The optative mood is a deliberative optative, a debater’s optative, used for a doubtful attitude on the part of the hearer but not the writer. The writer assumes the doubt of the hearers in order to answer that doubt.

Translation: “Therefore to what conclusion are we forced? There is no injustice with God, is there? Emphatically no.”

Principle A

1. It is blasphemous to impugn the integrity of God, both His perfect righteousness and justice are beyond such blasphemy.

2. Anthropopathisms [love and hate] express divine policy in language of accommodation. God neither loves from His attribute nor does He hate from His essence. Hatred is a sin; God cannot sin.

3. The anthropopathisms do not imply that God is prejudiced, they merely state language of accommodation, human frame of reference, so that the issue can be understood.

4. The anthropopathisms of love and hate indicate that the omniscience of God knew that the free will of Esau would reject Christ and the free will of Jacob would believe in Christ.

5. Furthermore, God has the right to bless and judge on the basis of His justice.

6. Since God’s righteousness demands equivalent righteousness and God’s justice can only execute what the righteousness of God demands, any judicial decision from the justice of God cannot be unrighteousness. It follows that any judicial decision from the justice of God could not be, is not, unrighteous.

7. When the unbeliever rejects Christ as saviour he also rejects the righteousness of God. The alternative is judgement, always.

8. This also becomes a problem with the believer who actually possesses the righteousness of God imputed at salvation.

9. No believer is ever commanded to reinvent the wheel [analogous to the plan of God from eternity past].

10. The wheel must turn on its axle and every believer must choose the axle: the righteousness of God imputed or his own self-righteousness.

11. Therefore the believer must decided between the axle of divine righteousness or his own self-righteousness. Choosing one’s own self-righteousness is tantamount to blasphemy, it impugns the character of God. God has given us what we need for His plan — imputed righteousness — and by going to our own self-righteousness we have impugned the character of God.

Principle B

1. The doctrine of divine essence resolves the apparent [but not real] contradiction between the sovereignty of God and the free will of man. It resolves it in the sphere of the divine decrees, the content of the computer.

2. Man was given free will in order to resolve the angelic conflict.

3. Therefore man’s free will in resolving the angelic conflict must be tested. It was tested from the beginning in perfect environment. In the garden one tree was forbidden and to say no, just about one thing, becomes an instant test for volition.

4. Innocent man in the garden could only sin through the function of his own free will in opposition to God’s prohibition. God’s prohibition came from His sovereignty, so it was the free will of man versus the sovereignty of God.

5. When man’s negative volition originated the first sin the result was spiritual death — first the woman, then the man — God provided another tree, the cross, for the test of volition. So with the original tree, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, there was a negative prohibition; but the second tree, the cross, there was a positive command: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.”

6. Divine omniscience had the good sense to know in eternity past that Esau would reject Christ as saviour; Jacob would believe in Christ.

7. In fact, in eternity past the omniscience of God fed only facts into the computer: such facts as who would believe and who would reject Christ as saviour.

8. Eternity plus the omniscience of God means that there never was a time when God did not know everyone who would believe and everyone who would reject Christ as saviour.

9. The unconditional promise to Abraham was given to a mature believer. These unconditional promises could only be fulfilled to a believer in the progeny of Abraham for only believers have the imputed righteousness of God. Abraham’s physical seed could never receive the promise, only his spiritual seed. That is why God only reiterated the promises regarding Israel to Isaac in the second generation, and Jacob in the third, though there were half brothers and full brothers involved. God could only give to Jacob the promise that he gave to Abraham and Isaac — the chosen people promises, the land promises, the unconditional promises for the Millennium and eternity.

10. Even though the sins of Esau were imputed to Christ on the cross and judged Esau rejected Christ as saviour. From his own free will he said no. He had the same opportunity as his twin brother but he said no.

11. Esau’s negative volition placed him outside of the Abrahamic covenant for the promises of God to Abraham could never apply to Esau, they could only apply to Jacob. God is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, He is not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Esau. Now we have Jews in every generation who have the genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is not their God. They really follow the pattern of Esau. If you do not believe in Christ you do not have His imputed righteousness, and if you do not have His righteousness imputed these promises of being the elect and God’s people, and occupying a land forever, are impossible. They can only apply to the spiritual seed of Abraham, never to the physical seed.

12. When salvation is rejected God has the sovereign right to condemn, to judge, just as when salvation is accepted God has the sovereign right to impute His righteousness, and then at a future time to provide blessing to that imputation. God has rights that are compatible with His character.

13. God did not save Jacob because he was moral and good and self-righteous. Furthermore, He did not condemn and judge Esau because he was bad, evil, or sinful.

14. The key to the adjustment to the justice of God is attitude toward the Lord Jesus Christ, the only saviour — John 3:36.

Verse 15 – now Paul suddenly makes a turn in the road. This is sanctified sarcasm. He now compares the best of self-righteous Jews, like the rich young ruler, to a Gentile who is execrated by Israel. That Gentile is Pharaoh Amenhotep II. When we get through this will see that Paul has used the final and last appeal. He realises that the Jews racially are smart, that they are quite quick when it comes to some system of sarcasm. In fact, they have used their sarcasm on others because of their great mentality. Now the greatest genius of history, a Jew himself, absolutely floors and shocks He He Hhhhhthe entire Jewish nation by his comment that the unbelieving Jew is no better than the Pharaoh who hardened his heart and who in turn was the beneficiary of one of the most unusual experiments in history – God hardened his heart.

We begin in this verse with Moses who apart from the apostle Paul is the greatest genius in history. In the Old Testament the greatest of all people is Moses; in the New Testament the greatest of all people is Paul. This, of course, excludes the Lord Jesus Christ who as the God-Man is absolutely unique.

Verse 15 is the beginning of a dissertation on the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart. But we do not start with Pharaoh; we start with the greatest man of his own generation and one of the two greatest men of history. “For” is the explanatory use of the postpositive conjunctive particle gar, an explanation relating the problem of the Jews to the time when the Jewish nation began. Next comes the present active indicative from the verb legw, which means to speak, to say, to communicate. The aoristic present is for punctiliar action in present time. The aorist tense only presents punctiliar action in past time and occasionally in the Greek it is necessary to demonstrate it in the present, therefore the aoristic present tense. The active voice: God produces the action of the verb in His dialogue with Moses in Exodus 33:19. The indicative mood is declarative for the historical reality of this dialogue and its quotation here as introducing the principle and the problem of Israel: “All Israel is not Israel.” There is also a dative singular indirect object from the proper noun Mwusej – “Moses.”

Because of the golden calf incident God had threatened to destroy all Israel. Exodus 33:19 – “All of my good [attributes revealed] I will cause to pass before your face, and I will proclaim the person of Jehovah before you.” How is He going to do it? By letting him see some form? No, finite man cannot see infinite God. Then He adds how it is all going to be done – “and furthermore I will be gracious.” That is the way you see the glory of God. The glory of God is revealed to man through grace. But this grace is not the grace that we have understood in the past, as God giving something we do not deserve; this is that same doctrine of grace in its more complicated form, the doctrine of divine decrees. For in the divine decrees all the facts of history are entered, including every thought, every decision, and every action. And where the category of individual has believed in the Lord grace is the policy and that is the revelation from God.

The part quoted begins with the word “Furthermore I will be gracious.” In the Hebrew of Exodus 33 this is in the qal perfect, which means, “I was always gracious.” This is in the perfect tense; He was gracious in the divine decrees. He provided for Israel always knowing how Israel would turn into reversionistic rejectors of Himself. Then He adds another verb: “and I will have mercy” – the piel perfect of racham, this is really the application of grace. He is saying not only is He gracious [the divine decrees] but He will have mercy. Racham in the qal stem means to love but in the piel stem is means to have compassion or to have mercy.

“on whom I will have mercy” – again we have the piel stem but the imperfect tense this time of racham. This is love intensified. Compassion is the intensification of then application of love. The first use of this word here is in the piel perfect; that is for the divine decrees. The second use it is the piel imperfect which is for the actual function in history, the printout. “I have been gracious to whom I will be gracious, and I have had mercy on whom I will have mercy.” In other words, in eternity past in the divine decrees God demonstrated His grace. That is His glory. But that is only part of His glory. Perfect God provides a perfect plan for imperfect persons. Until we get to heaven that is the glory of God.

Translation of Exodus 33:19: “And he [God] said, all of my good [tob] I will cause to pass in front of you [doctrine of divine decrees related to history], therefore I will proclaim the name of Jehovah before you [you never learn the glory of God until you learn the person]; furthermore, I have been gracious [qal perfect of chanan; the divine decrees] to whom I will be gracious [qal imperfect of chanan], and I have had mercy [piel perfect of racham] on whom I will have mercy [piel imperfect of racham].” In eternity past God fed this into the computer; He has been gracious. It is going to come out of the computer: the application of grace to life – grace in action is mercy.

Verse 20 – “But he said, You cannot see my face; for man [lit. son of earth. This is finite man] cannot see me and live.” In other words, ‘You can see me but you can’t see me. You can’t see my form while you are a son of earth, while you have a human body.’ To see God with the eye is beyond the possibility of finite man, but to see God with the soul is what you are doing every time you learn Bible doctrine. The soul contains thought; thought is the secret to life. What you really are is what you think.

Paul quotes this verse because Paul is one of the few men of genius in history who understood the real implications of this passage. This passage was never understood from generation to generation of Jews. Why does he quote it? He is saying in effect that what was in the decrees has become history. The golden calf incident is now history but God knew in eternity past it was going to occur. Moses wanted to see His glory and he was one of the few who did. He understood the decrees -- the divine attributes and how they relate to decrees. He saw the glory of God every day with the doctrine that was in his soul. That was the glory of God for this life. So God answers the request of Moses on the basis of who and what God is and not on the basis of who and what Moses is.

We have the opportunity of seeing that same glory of God, but it requires learning doctrine. The secret to life is the content of the soul, not the shape of the body, the pleasantness of the personality, or the various functions of life. The secret is in the soul – what you think.

Exodus 33:18 – “And he said, I beseech thee, show me thy glory.” This is toward the end of the dialogue between our Lord and Moses after the golden calf incident, after the administration of divine discipline, and after our Lord had threatened to remove Israel entirely and leave only Moses, and to start all over again with Moses. And Moses interceded on behalf of Israel and won his point. Having done so asks the Lord to show him His glory. The qal imperfect from amar indicates Moses as the speaker. This is the result of Moses entering into the tabernacle in Exodus 33:9.

“I beseech thee” is an interjection of respectful entreaty – na, translated ‘beseech’ in the KJV indicates respect for authority. A modern translation would be closer to something like “Please sir.” Then we have the hiphil imperative from the verb ra’ah which means to see. In the hiphil stem it means to cause to see. The first person singular suffix refers to Moses – “cause me to see.” Next is a masculine singular noun from kabod, which means “glory,” a reference to the Shekinah glory. With the noun we have the second masculine singular suffix, referring to God.

Translation: “And he [Moses] said, Please sir, cause me to see your glory.”

God answers in letting Moses see His glory in the only way the finite mind can possibly perceive, and that is through Bible doctrine. Bible doctrine for us must be transferred from the page of the Word to our souls, and for Moses from the teaching of God face to face into his soul.

In verse 19 the corrected translation of the part that was not quoted in Romans 9:15 says, “Therefore he [God] replied, I will cause all my good [the divine plan] to pass before you, and I will proclaim by the name of Jehovah to your face.” This means that to understand the glory of God you must understand the plan of God. In other words, “Before you are through you will know all of my plan.” And Moses did. Moses would get his doctrine face to face with God. Others in times to come would hear the voice of God, would see a vision, in some cases by angelic teaching; but no one had face to face teaching from God directly except Moses. Moses is therefore the unique prophet. So “to your face” is a compliment given to one man and never repeated to anyone else.

Verse 20 – “But you cannot see my face; for man cannot see my face and live.” In other words, finite mankind cannot see infinite God with the empirical functions of the body. Man’s empirical faculties are incapable of seeing God. Infinite God can only be seen by means of maximum doctrine resident in the soul. God permitted Moses to see His glory the same way that Paul saw His glory, through Bible doctrine resident in the soul – through understanding the omniscience of God feeding the computer of divine decrees facts only, and the printouts such as election, foreknowledge and predestination. Furthermore, we as believers in Christ also can only understand, can only see, the glory of God through perception of pertinent doctrine, the daily function of GAP. Mankind could no more see the face of God than our physical eyes could stare directly into the sun and see the sun. And just as looking directly into the sun would destroy our vision, so man in his physical body would die by looking directly into the face of God. We see Him through doctrine; we see His glory through doctrine.

Romans 9:15 – “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy.” This is the future active indicative of e)leew which means to have mercy, but it is used for chanan which means grace. It means to have mercy or to show mercy. The future tense is a predictive future and it is used to predict an event in future time. The imputation of divine blessing to the mature believer who has maximum doctrine in the soul.

Paul now shows us something. He is not going to go back and reteach what Moses has taught. He is going to pick up where Moses left off. Therefore he starts right out with a future tense – “I will show mercy.” In other words, Moses taught the perfect tense in the divine decrees -- imperfect tense, the printout in history. Moses starts out with the printout in history and shows that one act of mercy leads to another act of mercy. And of God has been gracious to the Jews in the days of Moses God will be gracious to us, royal family, in the day in which we live. The active voice: the justice of God is gracious by imputing blessing to anyone who cracks the maturity barrier. In other words, the printout of the decrees is in view here. In the computer you have the failure of the majority of the Jews in the Exodus generation, but that does not stop the justice of God from imputing blessing down the line in the days of Paul nor in the day in which we live.

Next we have the accusative singular from the relative pronoun o(j, whose antecedent is the mature believer, and with it is a very unusual particle, an indefinite particle, a)n, which causes o(j to become an indefinite relative pronoun. An indefinite pronoun is very specific; it refers to a specific category. It refers to the believer who has cracked the maturity barrier. It is translated here, “whoever.” With it is the present active subjunctive of e)leew showing that Paul is picking up where Moses left off – “on whoever I show mercy.” But this time he uses the customary present tense for what habitually occurs to the mature believer. The active voice: God produces the action – the justice of God. The subjunctive mood is potential; it implies a future reference and is qualified by the element of contingency. It all depends on whether you see the glory of God. If you see the glory of God you receive blessing. How do you see it? Maximum doctrine in the soul. In the case of Moses, who saw the glory of God? The believer with maximum doctrine in the soul. So we have the future active indicative for the fact that Moses saw it in his day, Paul saw it in his day, and we can have it in our day.

Principle

1. Moses asked for all of us. When Moses said, “Cause me to see your glory” God answered Moses. Paul picked up on the answer and answers it for us. You can see the glory of God in time by cracking the maturity barrier.

2. However, this requires the use of your volition. Maturity adjustment to the justice of God is not a one-shot decision but a continual series of decisions – positive volition toward doctrine.

3. Needless to say the decisions involved are totally non-meritorious in compatibility with God’s grace policy.

4. This statement is directed toward believers from the divine decrees. It emphasises the fact that what God does cannot be unrighteous or incompatible with His perfect divine attributes.

5. Therefore God knew billions of years ago in His omniscience who would believe and who would not, and then what believer would be positive consistently enough to reach maturity and what believer would be negative and so inconsistent that he could only fall into reversionism. Therefore these are facts which God always knew, and God fed into the computer for the believer. Election, foreknowledge and predestination will not cover the details of these facts, now we are dealing with, Do you grow up spiritually or not? The objective is fulfilled in only one way, by saying yes to doctrine every day.

The various imputations which occur to the believer during the various stages of growth, plus the a fortiori principle, indicate that God is going to parlay whatever blessings are imputed to you in time forever. The blessings that you have now confirm the fact that you have seen the glory of God, but they are nothing compared to the eternal future.

“and” – the connective kai shows that this is a continuation of the quotation with variations by Paul. Plus the future active indicative o)iktirw, which is used for Racham but here it means to have emotional compassion, to have sympathy, it was used for grief and lamentation, it means to be sympathetic, to have a sympathy that is ready to help. The predictive future tense anticipates the function of logistical grace after salvation adjustment to the justice of God. God will provide everything necessary; all you bring is your volition that says yes or no. The active voice: God provided logistical grace support; He produces the action. The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of logistical grace. We also have, again, the accusative singular from the relative pronoun o(j with the particle a)n denoting that the action of the verb is dependent on some circumstance or some condition, which, of course, is faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, salvation adjustment to the justice of God.

Next we have the present active subjunctive o)iktirw again – “on whomever I have compassion.” The customary present is for what habitually occurs to believers. The active voice: God produces the action. The subjunctive mood is potential implying a future reference qualified by the element of contingency, which is your volition. It is a reference to the potential of eternal salvation, salvation adjustment to the justice of God through faith in Christ.

Principle

1. Note first that compassion is an anthropopathism ascribing to God a human characteristic which God does not really possess but explains in language of accommodation divine policy in terms of human frame of reference.

2. The anthropopathism describes logistical grace after salvation.

Translation: “For he communicates to Moses [Ex. 33:19], I will have mercy [imputation of divine blessing at maturity] on whomever I show mercy [salvation], and I will have compassion [logistical grace] on whomever I show compassion [salvation adjustment to the justice of God].”

This means

1. The quotation answers the rhetorical question of the previous verse which does not need or require an answer. In other words, a rhetorical question is simply a debater’s technique anticipating resistance of doctrine and shows that resistance of doctrine is a disaster. So the quotation answers the rhetorical question by going back to an historical disaster, the golden calf incident, and bringing forward from that motivation, new material about the importance of seeing the glory of God through persistence in the perception of Bible doctrine.

2. This also answers and replies to the request of Moses to see the glory of God, and at the same time answers our action or desire in the same vein.

3. The glory of God is not seen visibly, empirically, but through the doctrines of grace, the doctrine of imputation, therefore momentum in the plan of God.

4. In the imputation of blessing God cannot be unrighteous. God is perfect; His attributes are perfect and uncompromiseable, immutable, infinite, eternal.

5. God, however, has designed a perfect plan for imperfect persons so that imperfect persons can be blessed in time without compromising the attributes of God, and be blessed in eternity through the glory of God.

6. God through His plan has provided meaning, purpose and definition for life. God through His doctrine has provided motivation, momentum and blessing in life.

7. God has not only provided, then, the blessing but the capacity for the blessing. The capacity for blessing is doctrine, which is also the ability to see the glory of God.

Verse 16 – we have an inferential particle combined with an inferential particle: a)ra o)un — they both mean “therefore.” When you combine at the beginning of a sentence two inferential particles immediately you have a very strange organization, it means a double conclusion. The reason we have a double conclusion is because of the quotation from Exodus 33:19 combined with the previous verse, Romans 9:15. The first one takes us back to Exodus 33. The conclusion from that: the omniscience of God fed into the computer of divine decrees the facts only – the actual, not the probable. So what was in the decrees actually happened. That calls for a conclusion. Then when this was quoted in Romans 9:15 we have the printout, the objective which is maturity. But to get to maturity you have to get to logistical grace, and you can’t have logistical grace until you are saved. So you have salvation, logistical grace, maturity adjustment to the justice of God, the imputation of divine blessing that brings glorification to the Lord Jesus Christ. That calls for a double conclusion and therefore we have two inferential particles combined to introduce what might be called a double conclusion. We will translate them as “So then.”

Next comes a negative, and our conclusion is a negative conclusion, a)ra, o)un o)u. This demands the use of the present active indicative from the verb e)imi inserted. This is an ellipsis – “So that it is not.” The articular present active participle of the verb qelw is found in the passage. The definite article is the ablative of source singular, used as a personal pronoun and translated “from him.” The definite article used as a personal pronoun emphasises in a negative way the source of divine blessing.

Then we have a pictorial present tense which presents to the mind a picture of events in the process of occurrence – the millions of desires for blessing from God. The active voice: either the believer, and in some cases even unbelievers, could produce the action of the verb, but here is it s specific reference to the unbeliever Esau. He is described as missing the blessing. He missed the blessing because he refused to accept Christ as saviour, therefore he could not have +R. He had to be justified, he had to follow the pattern of his grandfather, Abraham – Genesis 15:6. In Hebrews 12:16,17 we have a little picture of Esau which helps us to understand Romans 9:16. Esau would not believe in Christ but he would cry and wallow in his tears in front of God, and expect God to feel sorry for him and give him blessing anyway. This is typical of so many people; they want everyone else to feel sorry for them. They feel sorry for themselves and to the extent that you feel sorry for yourself you are already a weak person. God does not fall for the cry-baby routine, the system of hustling through self-pity – “we know that afterward, when he kept desiring to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he did not find opportunity for change of mind, though he sought the same [blessing] with tears.” He tried to cry his way into blessing. “So that it is not from him who desires.” People sincerely desire to glorify God, they sincerely desire to do the right thing, they sincerely desire to help God, and there is no way that sincerity is ever going to be a virtue and that the desire to glorify God is ever going to be the reality of glorifying God. There is a vast difference between desire and reality. Desire is like arrogance, it takes you farther and farther away from reality. Only grace will do it, but grace calls for continual positive volition toward Bible doctrine.

Principle

1. The function of human volition in desire is not the source of blessing from God. You can wish for blessing, desire blessing, beg for blessing, and be sincere for blessing, and you are farther from blessing than when you started.

2. The source of all blessing from God is the attribute of divine justice, and justice functions only through imputation. Outside of two judicial imputations there must always be a target, and that target only come through grace.

3. Moses did not see the glory of God. He wanted to, he desired to see the glory of God, but he didn’t see it. He saw the back parts of God. Because his capacity through doctrine resident in his soul was compatible with the function of the grace of God he saw what in reality on the mature believer can see – the glory of God, not face to face but through doctrine.

4. The justice of God is the source of blessing. Two adjustments to the justice of God are necessary for blessing and Esau had neither. He did not have salvation adjustment, he did not have maturity adjustment to the justice of God.

5. Esau hustled, cried, wept, was sincere, reformed, did everything but believe in Christ. Desire resident in the soul is no substitute for doctrine resident in the soul. Sincere desire only complicates the desire. God has a plan, He has revealed His plan, and you must follow God’s plan which is simple because it is a grace policy. Desire resident in the soul is meaningless.

“nor of him that runneth” – a negative conjunction o)ude, literally “and not” but it is used for joining sentences and can be translated “nor.” Then we have the articular present active participle from the verb trexw – giving to get blessing from God is what “running” means here. We have the definite article, the ablative of source singular, used as a personal pronoun to emphasise a second negative source of divine blessing. If desire represents thought running represents the action of the body. Neither the thought of the soul nor the activity of the body will bring blessing from God – “and not from him who runs.” The pictorial present tense presents to the mind a picture of events in the process of occurrence – actions and productions from the body, the burning of human energy in seeking blessing from God. The active voice: while either the believer or unbeliever can produce the action of the verb Esau is an unbeliever. The active voice also means that many believers, by application, try to work for blessing from God. “So then it is not from him who desires [blessing], and not for him who runs [after blessing].” That is the negative side brought into focus because of Esau.

“but” – the adversative conjunction a)lla sets up a contrast – “but in contrast to this,” a contrast between the false source of blessing and the true source of blessing. Then we have the ablative absolute of source. Paul is trying to make a point. He is concerned for people he knows who are going to hell on the one hand or failing to accomplish the plan of God as believers on the other hand. We have the ablative of source from qeoj, and this is the subject which is always in the nominative. And when you have a participle in the ablative form you have an ablative absolute. So this is not only set aside from the rest of the sentence but it is emphasised – “but from God.”

Next we have an articular present active participle. The participle is in the ablative case and the verb is e)leew which means to show mercy, to demonstrate mercy, and here it means to have mercy – “who has mercy.”

There is a way to see the glory of God: maximum doctrine resident in the soul – the have the justice of God imputed divine blessing to the righteousness of God at maturity and thereafter. You not only see the glory of God but you experience the accoutrements that accompany the glory of God.

“but from God who has mercy” – the definite article in the ablative singular is used as a relative pronoun whose antecedent is qeoj. The perfective present tense denotes a continuation of existing results. It refers to a fact which has come to be in the past and is emphasised as a present reality. The active voice: the justice of God produces the action of the verb at two points: salvation adjustment to the justice of God, resulting in the imputation of righteousness and eternal life; and maturity adjustment to the justice of God resulting in the imputation of blessing. God tells us that He has a plan for us by imputing life to us at the moment we were born; that is the first imputation. Plus Adam’s original sin, and this second imputation is always the basis for the potential. The potential is salvation because condemnation precedes salvation. Condemnation comes from the imputation of Adam’s sin and therefore the potential is set up immediately. The potential then shows how God has mercy for the potential means the provision of doctrine, the gospel, and that means the first hope which is absolute confidence that when you believe in Christ you have eternal life and the plus is salvation adjustment to the justice of God through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; God has had mercy. God has provided a potential to go with a hopeless situation – human life imputed plus Adam’s original sin, simultaneous imputations that put man in a totally hopeless situation. But the potential from the second imputation plus the doctrine [the gospel], plus the hope, is the mercy of God. So three factors form the mercy of God.

Principle

1. Neither human thought nor human action can extract blessing from God.

2. There is nothing man can do, think, devise to bring blessing from God since in eternity past God devised the system.

3. Divine blessing is an imputation from the justice of God to the righteousness of God at the point of maturity and thereafter.

4. God can only provide blessing for capacity for blessing.

5. God’s imputed blessing is designed to glorify God as the tactical victory of the angelic conflict.

6. The tactical victory compliments the strategical victory of our Lord in His death, burial, resurrection, ascension and session.

Translation: “So then it is not from who desires [blessing], and not from him who runs [after blessing], but from God who has mercy.”

Verse 17 – “For” is an explanatory use of the postpositive conjunctive particle gar. The nominative singular from the noun grafh, meaning “writing,”

is used here for the Old Testament scripture. With it is the generic use of the definite article setting apart the scriptures as being sacred and the Word of God, plus the present active indicative of legw, meaning to say, to speak, to communicate. The present tense is a historical present employed when a past event is used with the vividness of a present occurrence. The active voice: the Old Testament canon, specifically Exodus 9:16, produces the action of the verb here. The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of the fact that this is the part of the canon of scripture that Exodus is, and that this is a part of the story of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart which actually begins in Exodus 9:12.

The dative singular indirect object from the definite article plus the indeclinable noun Faraw follows. The Hebrew has the suffix “h” but there is no “h” for a suffix in the Greek. Pharaoh is the official title for the kings of Egypt.

Exodus 9:16 – the verse starts out with a waw in the Hebrew, plus an adverb olam – “But on the contrary.” Then we have a preposition, be, which should be translated “because.” The object of the preposition is abur which is a conjunction which means simply “this” – “because of this [purpose].” “But on the contrary, for this purpose.”

“have I raised thee up” – the hiphil perfect singular from the verb amad with the second person singular suffix referring to Amenhotep II. The principle: Jesus Christ controls history. God raised up. This means that God permitted this young man to reach maturity, to succeed his father, to fulfil a certain principle in history. Amad means to stand, to establish, to appoint, to maintain, to preserve. The hiphil stem is the causative stem. In the hiphil this can be translated “I have established you, I have caused you to stand.” This means, in effect, “I have permitted to continue in history.”

Next we have a prepositional phrase, the same preposition be abur again, meaning “for this purpose.” God had a reason for raising up a very contrary, contradictory type of person. That means he was going to make a slash in history. You never make a slash in history by being all things to all men, by being a politician. Then we have the hiphil infinitive from raah. This means to cause to see. It also has a second masculine singular suffix referring to Pharaoh Amenhotep II, and it should be translated “for the purpose of showing you” or “in order that I might show you.”

Then we have the sign of the accusative case and with it a noun in the masculine singular, koach, referring to God. It means “power” the suffix means “my” – “my power.”

Translation so far: “But on the contrary for this purpose I have established you, in order that I might show you my power.” The rest of it says, “and in order that my name may be declared throughout all the earth.”

“name” – shem, which means person, fame or name. Here it is translated “reputation” or “name” -- “and in order that my reputation.” Then we have a qal active participle from saphar which means to engrave, to print, to write; plus a prepositional phrase which expresses a purpose, be meaning “in,” then kal which is “all,” and then ha eretz – “in all the world.”

Translation: “But on the contrary for this purpose I have established you, in order that I might show you my power; and in order that my name may be engraved [be celebrated] in all the world.”

This verse is in a context where there is a sort of a pause between the sixth plague of the boils and the seventh plague of the hail. Between these two plagues our Lord has a special message for Pharaoh Amenhotep II, a message which the genius of Paul converts into a very special message for us. Note Exodus 9:12-16. Up until this time Pharaoh had always hardened his own heart – simply negative volition. Then there was pressure from the plague and this caused him to say yes, and as soon as the pressure was off he said no. So what he has really said all the way down is 18 major no’s. That is called Pharaoh hardening his heart from his own free will because this is exactly what he wanted to do. But when we get to the seventh plague we suddenly read in verse 12, “And Jehovah hardened Pharaoh’s heart and he did not listen to them [Moses and Aaron].”

Verse 14 – these plagues are going to be sent to Pharaoh’s right lobe. Pharaoh is personally not only going to feel the pressure but he will link up his thinking with his emotion and his volition, and he is going to have the privilege of saying no and holding the all-time record for saying no. God did not reach into Pharaoh’s heart and just put him on negative. All He did was to give him greater opportunity to say no to God than anyone in history.

Verse 15 – the omniscience of God in eternity past knew all of the facts, the actual; he also knew the probable. The probable is never fed into the computer, only the actual. The probable is verse 15, “if I had destroyed you.” So the printout is this passage, Exodus 9-12. God is keeping all of them alive so that Pharaoh can do the will of God by saying no to God. God will take his no’s from now on to demonstrate His power, not simply to the Egyptians but to the entire world. And in this way a whole generation of people scattered throughout the earth who have positive volition at God-consciousness are going to respond. They are going to be positive at God-consciousness and positive at gospel hearing.

This verse, then, records from the omniscience of God the alternatives which did not occur and therefore was not fed into the computer.

Verse 16 – “In contrast to what I did not do, this is what I am going to do.” So this demonstration of divine power has already been mentioned in Romans 1:20 – “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes—His eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made. So that [the human race] is without excuse.”

The hardness of Pharaoh’s heart

1. Until the 6^th plague the Bible is consistent in saying Pharaoh hardened his own heart. In other words, as a free agent he utilised his own sovereign volition as the ruler of the Egyptian empire to say no. He hardened his own heart through negative volition, negative self-determination.

2. But no one up to this time in history had ever been able to say no as many times as Pharaoh would from this time on. At this point God hardened Pharaoh’s heart – which means He gives him the opportunity to carry his negative volition to the maximum.

3. We understand now that we are discussing a part of the soul, invisible yet real, the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart or right lobe. This man has developed remarkable scar tissue of the soul. He has been exposed to the truth, he has rejected it time and time again.

4. The hardening of Pharaoh’s right lobe in BC 1441 becomes the means of evangelising the world.

5. This is illustrated by the fact that 45 years later Rahab the prostitute was saved through the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart – Joshua 2:10,11.

6. The justice of God gave Pharaoh numerous opportunities to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as Jehovah Elohim. He rejected them all.

7. Pharaoh saw many demonstrations of divine power, designed to evangelise him personally, but he refused in the pattern of Exodus 7:13.

8. When our Lord Jesus Christ was hanging on the cross Pharaoh’s sins were imputed to Christ and judged, along with everyone else’s. Therefore we can say that Christ died for Pharaoh’s sins.

9. Furthermore, God was not willing that Pharaoh should perish – 2 Peter 3:9.

10. Pharaoh had many opportunities for positive volition, as per Exodus 7:22; 8:15, 32; 9:34,35. In other words, the free will of Pharaoh was negative. Each No added scar tissue to his soul and gave him strength to say No the next time and to a greater extent than anyone who has ever lived.

11. With great scar tissue of the soul from saying no repeatedly God provided more opportunities to intensify the manifestation of His power.

12. This is the context in which God hardened the heart of Pharaoh, after the 6^th plague.

13. Unbeliever reversionism has resulted in scar tissue of the soul, great maladjustment to the justice of God.

14. Therefore beginning in Exodus 9:12 we have it for the first time, “The Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart.”

15. The justice of God gave Pharaoh maximum opportunity to express negative volition by keeping him alive and exposing him to plagues 7,8,9 and 10.

16. This is recorded under the title, “The Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart” – Exodus 9:12; 10:1, 20, 27; 11:10; 14:8.

17. God hardened Pharaoh’s heart by giving Amenhotep II more opportunity to say no than are ordinarily permitted.

18. Again, God preserved Pharaoh alive in great human power, in great sovereignty to demonstrate that divine power is infinitely greater than human power and human authority. In fact, legitimate authority is an extension of divine authority, a delegation of divine authority.

19. To keep Pharaoh alive to say no as many times God impressed upon the entire world the greatness of His power both to condemn Pharaoh and to deliver His own people.

20. Therefore the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart or the extension of his negative volition, the expression of the scar tissue of his soul was the mean of evangelising the world of that day.

21. While others were being impressed with the power of God Pharaoh was being impressed with his own power, his ability to say no and live, his negative volition, his self-determination. His will to resist only increased his arrogance.

22. Little did Pharaoh realise that the expression of human arrogance and power revealed to the entire world the omnipotence of God. This became a factor in both God-consciousness as well as gospel hearing. And not only for the Egyptians but for Jews and Ethiopians as well.

23. Therefore we have the pattern of Romans 2:5 which becomes perfect description of Pharaoh – “But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath for yourselves in the day of wrath, when God’s righteous judgment is revealed!”

24. Not until, then, the 6^th plague did God harden Pharaoh’s right lobe, which God did by removing all restraint from the expression of his negative volition.

25. After God hardened Pharaoh’s heart he still had several opportunities for repentance or a change of mind about the Lord Jesus Christ – e.g. Exodus 9:27; 10:16,17.

26. The divine purpose in the hardening of Pharaoh’s right lobe is stated in Exodus 7:3-5 – the prophecy of it.

27. A second divine purpose, Exodus 9:16, the evangelisation of the world.

28. The purpose is reiterated in Paul’s quotation of Exodus 9:16 in Romans 9:17.

“Even” – the conjunction o(ti is used here for quotation arks. Often this conjunction is simply used to translate a purpose clause, a final clause, a clause to denote some aim or objective. But in many case it is simply used for quotation marks, and in that case it does not have to be translated, or if it is translated you simply say, “quote.” With it is a prepositional phrase – e)ij is used here to express a short purpose clause. We have e)ij plus the accusative neuter singular from the attributive use of the intensive pronoun a)utoj. This is a rather rare use of a)utoj because it is generally used as a third person personal pronoun in Greek. It is translated “same.” With that is the accusative neuter singular from the immediate demonstrative pronoun o(utoj. “For this same purpose” or “For this very purpose.”

Next is the aorist active indicative of the verb e)cegeirw, and it means to raise up, to bring into being in Attic Greek, but in the Koine Greek it means to cause to appear in history or to call into existence. It should be correctly translated, “I have caused you to continue in history.” The Lord permitted Pharaoh to remain in history and permitted him to say no, and no, and no (plagues 7,8,9,10) – four times above the record book he said no. Each time there was a greater manifestation of divine power, and each manifestation of divine power not only triggered divine consciousness but also opened up things for gospel hearing so that when the Jews left Egypt many Ethiopians and Egyptians also left with them. They believed in the Lord Jesus Christ. The culminative aorist tense views the historical existence of Amenhotep II in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of its existing results, namely the glorification of God through the overruling of the deceitfulness and lack of integrity in Pharaoh. The active voice: Jesus Christ produces the action of the verb by controlling history. The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of God’s preservation of Pharaoh. It was the power of God that was keeping Pharaoh in power.

With this we have the accusative singular direct object from the personal pronoun su – “you.” This is a reminder of Psalm 76:10 – “For the wraths [plural] of man shall praise you.” The principle should be quite obvious. God uses the tyranny of man to demonstrate His power and to evangelise the human race. Therefore, Pharaoh’s rejection of Christ and subsequent lack of integrity is used to advance the plan of God. Pharaoh thought that because he had all of that power and all of that sovereignty that by saying no he was hindering God’s plan. It is an arrogant thought that many people have.

So far we have: “For the scripture says to Pharaoh [Exodus 9:16], ‘I have caused you to continue in history.’

Principle

1. Like Ishmael and Esau, Pharaoh Amenhotep II was an unbeliever who had the opportunity to be saved many times, but rejected Christ as frequently as he rejected God’s demand to release Israel.

2. The justice of God was not arbitrary in blessing Moses and cursing Pharaoh. The justice of God gave Pharaoh extra time but Pharaoh used the extra time to reject God’s plan.

3. Blessing was imputed to Moses at maturity adjustment to the justice of God through maximum doctrine resident in the soul.

4. But Pharaoh was an unbeliever. He used his great power and lack of integrity to perpetuate tyranny and slavery to the Jews.

5. The plan of God is never hindered by negative volition. God used the wrath of Pharaoh to praise Him.

6. Pharaoh’s negative volition and his deceptive hypocrisy did not frustrate the plan or the purposes of God.

7. Pharaoh’s resistance only fulfilled the plan of God by leading to world-wide evangelism.

8. We must remember that Amenhotep II was a great man from the standpoint of power and authority, an absolute monarch at the peak of his career.

9. God’s power [omnipotence] is infinitely greater than the power of any tyrant or dictator, infinitely more powerful than the concentrated evil of any of our modern powers.

10. There is no evil that Satan can inspire, no power, no authority, no tyranny that man can devise, which can compete with the power of God. 1 John 4:4.

11. Rejecting the allegation of supralapsarianism, God did not create evil in Pharaoh but Pharaoh by his own self-determination became what he was. God recognised it in the decrees but God did not originate it.

12. In fact, Pharaoh from his own free will rejected divine restraints as well as resisted doctrine.

13. While God did not make Pharaoh evil He used Pharaoh’s self-made evil to further His own plan. Therefore the integrity of God remains the issue.

14. The righteousness of God cannot do wrong; the justice of God cannot be unfair.

“and that” – o)pwj. This conjunction is used to indicate a divine purpose. It is translated “that” or “in order that.” With this, forming the final purpose clause, is the aorist middle subjunctive of the verb e)ndeiknumi which means to show, to manifest, to demonstrate. The correct translation” “In order that I might demonstrate.” God is invisible but there are manifestations of His great character and these manifestations all come from power – His omnipotence. The aorist tense is a culminative aorist, it views the demonstration of God’s power [the ten plagues] in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of existing results which is evangelism both in Egypt and throughout the entire world. All ten confrontations are in view, but we look at the results of these confrontations. The middle voice is the indirect middle emphasising the agent, God, as producing the action of the verb. This use signifies that the action is totally related to the subject in a special and a unique way. God used all of those no’s from Pharaoh as a means of allowing the world to see His power, and every time that Pharaoh said no great segments of the kingdom began to say yes – in effect, believing in the Lord Jesus Christ. The subjunctive mood implies a future reference here because it is potential, and therefore it is used with o(pwj to introduce the divine purpose. The subjunctive mood means a purpose clause. “In order that I might demonstrate.”

Next comes e)n plus the instrumental from the personal pronoun su, and it means “by means of you.” Then comes the accusative singular direct object from the noun dunamij for “power,” and with it the possessive genitive from the personal pronoun e)gw – God was using His own power.

Principle

1. God used Pharaoh’s negative volition and his arrogant resistance to demonstrate His omnipotence.

2. The ten confrontations which are called the ten plagues (and sometimes are called the ten miracles) demonstrate divine power in an empirical way. Empiricism cannot see God but empiricism can very definitely understand the power of God in these manifestations.

3. Each miracle or plague was constructed in the deceitfulness, the vacillation, the instability, the lack of honour in Amenhotep II.

4. The break comes after the first six confrontations (plagues). When you get to plague #7 we read that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, which simply means He permitted him to continue to live and to continue to say no.

5. Many Egyptians had directly responded to the demonstration of divine power in the first 6 plagues. So when we get to Exodus 9:20, before beginning the 7^th, “He that feared the word of the LORD among the servants of Pharaoh made his servants and his cattle flee into the houses.” Here in Pharaoh’s court one of his administrators, one of those who ruled under him, had already become a believer. The word “fear” really means respect produced from faith.

Principle

1. The demonstration of divine power became the means of releasing the Jews from slavery. This was the birth of the first priest/client nation in history. The evangelisation of Egypt was another result, plus the evangelisation of the entire world.

2. Any Jew, any Egyptian, Ethiopian or Canaanite who wanted salvation had a clear picture of the source of salvation from the manifest power revealed by means of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart. If God had not permitted him to live he could not have said no in those final four confrontations.

3. It was not until the 6^th plague, however, that we read the phrase “God hardened Pharaoh’s heart.” The mechanics, again, of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart was the removal of all restraints on his negative volition plus keeping him alive.

4. Pharaoh’s free will moved him, without any restraint from God, on a collision course with historical disaster.

5. Just as God turned the heathen over to their vile lusts, affections, and reprobate minds in Romans 1:24-28, so God turned Pharaoh over to his negative volition, his arrogance, his jealousy, his pettiness. And this was the means of evangelising that generation of history around 1441-1440 BC.

6. The impact of all of this is obvious. Paul is comparing the Jews of his day, the contemporary Jews, with Pharaoh. This was the greatest insult of all.

7. As Pharaoh hardened his heart through maximum negative volition at the time of the Exodus, so the legalistic Jews of Paul’s day had hardened their hearts through maximum negative volition toward doctrine.

The application to contemporary history

1. To be compared to Pharaoh Amenhotep II was as insulting to the Jews as their negative volition was insulting to God.

2. The Jews of Paul’s day had violated their magnificent spiritual heritage.

3. The unique origin of the race of the Jews through positive volition toward Christ, and doctrine resident in the soul on the part of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, had not alerted the Jews to their failure; a failure stated in the promise of verse 6 – “All Israel is not really Israel.”

4. The unique origin of the nation with the contrast between the positive volition of Moses and the negative volition of Pharaoh, plus the fact that Israel was the first client nation to God in history, should have alerted the Jews in Paul’s time to the importance of positive volition toward Christ – believing in Him for salvation.

5. The hereditary people of God had become heretical – heretical in the pattern of Ishmael, Esau and Pharaoh, three Gentiles they detested.

6. Note that the function of God does not rob man of his free will; he is still a creature of self-determination.

7. But God uses the free will of Pharaoh to advance His own plan and to liberate His people from slavery.

8. Man is not robbed of his self-determination by the omnipotence of God but actually provided with greater historical opportunity to express non-meritorious free will to enter the plan of God.

9. Paul’s dialectical genius makes a grace appeal to Israel in this chapter and in chapter 10.

10. God the Holy Spirit, then, uses the dialectical genius of Paul to relate obvious historical disaster to a skilful presentation of the panacea of the Jewish problem – rejection of Jesus Christ who is the God of Israel, Jehovah Elohim, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the Shekinah glory.

“and” is the connective use of the conjunction kai. Then there is the repetition of the conjunction o(pwj plus the subjunctive to indicate the continuation of the purpose clause – “and in order that.” The subject in this final clause is the nominative singular of the noun o)noma which means “reputation, fame, person or name.” Plus the possessive genitive singular from the personal pronoun e)gw.

Then we have the aorist passive subjunctive of diaggelw which means to proclaim everywhere, far and wide – “in order that my person might be proclaimed far and wide (everywhere).” The constative aorist contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety. This means the evangelism of the entire world. The passive voice: the person of Christ receives the action of the verb – worldwide evangelism. The subjunctive mood is used for the formation of the purpose clause. Here is the stated purpose of worldwide evangelism which would result from the hardness of Pharaoh’s heart and use of his great power and authority to try to frustrate the plan of God.

Translation: “”For the scripture says to Pharaoh [Exodus 9:16], I have caused you to continue in history in order that I might demonstrate my power by means of you, and in order that my person might be proclaimed throughout the entire earth [everywhere].”

Principle

1. Pharaoh in his opposition to God becomes a monument to the power of God.

2. The more he resisted God by saying no from his free will the greater became the manifestation of divine power.

3. The fact that God permitted the free will operation of the fall of Adam so that He might redeem mankind through the work of Christ on the cross is a similar principle. God permitted Adam’s sin in order that He might present to the world the redeemer of mankind in the person of Christ – His work on the cross in receiving the imputation of our sins. So also now God permits the free will of Pharaoh to operate to the maximum in a negative way so that the people of Egypt and the entire world in that generation might have the opportunity to receive Christ as saviour.

4. God permits the worst so that the best can come from it – which means the plan of God continues whether it is a negative period of history or a positive period of history.

5. There was once a theologian by the name of Forbes who said, “All good originates from God; all evil originates from the creature … election originates in the free grace of God; reprobation originates in the free will of man. To God belongs the whole glory of salvation of the elect; to God belongs the whole responsibility of the ruin of the reprobate.”

6. The fact of the divine decrees and resultant election, foreknowledge and predestination of the believer in Christ describes all the glory of eternal salvation to the person, to the plan, to the grace of God.

7. This principle of doctrine does not detract from the fact that mankind is a free agent, responsible for his own actions and his own decisions.

8. The highest freedom of man is the utilisation of the grace of God to completely triumph over evil.

9. There no divine foreordination of sin, human good and evil, although it was known by the omniscience of God in eternity past. Remember that the word “predestination” is a printout of the decrees and it applies to the believer only.

10. While sin, human good and evil are permitted they are constantly being overruled by the sovereign omnipotence and divine integrity of God. Therefore, Jesus Christ controls both history and the devil’s world. This is the overruling will of God.

11. Only believers are adopted at salvation as the adult sons and heirs of God.

12. There are several categories of such adoption depending on what dispensation you live in. a) The election of the Gentile family of God composed of all believers in the dispensation of the Gentiles – from Adam to Abraham; b) The election of the Jews or Israel composed of all Jewish believers in the dispensation of Israel – from Abraham to Christ and the Tribulation; c) The election of the royal family of God composed of all believers of the Church Age – AD 30 to the Rapture; d) The election of the Millennial population composed of all believers during the Millennial reign of Jesus Christ – 2^nd advent to the Gog revolution.

13. Each one of these categories demand adoption, therefore Paul’s great burden for Israel. The Jews do not inherit from God through natural birth even though they are the legitimate sons of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. They possess the genes of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob but they do not possess the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob who is the Lord Jesus Christ.

Verse 18 – the theological conclusion. This begins with the combination of two inferential particles, the first of which is a)pa, and the second is o)un. These two particles give a very strong conclusion, they means we are in for a major conclusion from all that we have seen about the hardness of Pharaoh’s heart. It is translated “So then” or “Consequently therefore.”

Next comes the present active indicative of the verb e)leew which means to have mercy. We have the perfective present tense referring to a fact which has come to be in the past and is now emphasised as a present reality, and therefore it denotes the continuation of existing results. With it is the accusative singular direct object from the relative pronoun o(j, translated “on whom.” So then he demonstrates or shows mercy on whom.” Then we have the present active indicative of the verb qelw, which means to will or to desire, to choose, to intend, to design. This is the static present tense for doctrine which is taken for granted as a fact. The active voice: God produces the action. The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of an absolute and dogmatic statement of doctrine, one which can be applied right now.

Principle

1. In this statement God is not arbitrary. He functions in compatibility of his perfect integrity plus His perfect plan of grace.

2. Man, however, continues to be a free agent in history, responsible for his own decisions, his thoughts, his actions, his motives.

3. God in grace has found a way to take to take the non-meritorious modus operandi of man, known from His omniscience in eternity past and related positive volition to the function of His grace.

4. God desires to show mercy to those believers who appropriate grace blessing through non-meritorious perception and the accumulation of doctrine in the soul. In other words, every printout which is to your advantage is based upon the fact that you learned a long time ago that doctrine was the most important thing in your life, and therefore you persisted on a daily basis taking in this doctrine. This eventually ended up as maturity adjustment to the justice of God. Once you have attained that particular stage then God is free to start pouring blessings to you and prepares you for historical disaster which occurs in every generation.

5. To the grace qualified there is grace blessing from the justice of God.

6. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were qualified under grace and the printout is very simple: election, justification, foreordination, and adoption. In this case God is showing mercy on whom He will. In other words, He knew their cases in eternity past, therefore knowing all of these things He is qualified to have mercy. But if He wants to harden someone, let them live with their own negative volition in time, in Hades, and eventually in the lake of fire.

7. Their faith in Christ and/or regeneration was fed into the decrees in eternity past by the omniscience of God, resulting in foreordination. Foreordination is really synonymous with the decree itself – it is the tape being played in eternity past. The tape is played one more time, in time as you live it out – election, justification, adoption.

8. The racial Jew has a great spiritual heritage but the great heritage has no meaning until he is justified, he is adopted as the heir and an adult son through faith in Jesus Christ, the Shekinah glory, the God of Israel.

9. To be a son of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is nothing until a Jew becomes a son of God through faith in Christ Jesus – Galatians 3:26.

10. Israel has an eternal future but the Jew must be adopted as an adult son.

11. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob believed in Jehovah Elohim, and therefore God wills to have mercy on them.

12. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob advanced to spiritual maturity, therefore God desired to show them mercy by imputation of blessing from the justice of God.

“and” is the postpositive conjunctive particle de. Sometimes it is transition and translated “now” or “and,” sometimes it is adversative and is translated “but.” But occasionally this conjunctive particle is intensive and can be translated, then, “in fact.” We have the intensive use here.

Then follows the accusative singular from the relative pronoun o(j – “In fact on whom,” followed by the present active indicative from qelw – “he wishes or desires.” The static present tense is for a doctrine taken for granted as a fact. That is, the omniscience of God feeding actuality of history into the computer of divine decrees simultaneously resulting in a printout of condemnation on negative volition. The active voice: the essence of God produces the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of doctrine. Then we have the present active indicative of the verb sklhrunw which means to harden, to calcify. The perfective present here refers to a fact which has come to be in the past and is emphasised as a present reality.

Principle

1. God uses the free will of man to accomplish His will or purpose.

2. God knew billions of years ago that man was going to do certain things. He knew all about Pharaoh and his scar tissue. All scar tissue is developed from free will.

3. Remember that first of all Pharaoh hardened his own heart – Exodus 7:13,22; 8:15,32; 9:34,35. He had maximum scar tissue in his soul by the time he came to plague seven. At that time God would have normally removed him from life because he was so removed from reality that he was dangerous to the survival of his nation Egypt. In 7,8,9,10 we now read that God hardened his heart – by letting him live and exercising his free will to keep on saying no.

4. Pharaoh faced the issue with full information and from his own free will he kept saying no. In fact, no one had more information to say yes than Pharaoh, but he always said no. God was not willing that Pharaoh should perish – 2 Peter 3:9. The decision was Pharaoh’s, not God’s.

5. Furthermore, Pharaoh’s sins were imputed to Christ on the cross and judged.

6. The scar tissue of the soul or the hardness of Pharaoh’s heart actually originated with his own negative volition.

7. Pharaoh had said no repeatedly. Then the Lord gave him the opportunity of saying no beyond the world’s record. That is called hardening Pharaoh’s heart – Exodus 9:12; 10:1,20,27; 11:10; 14:8. God hardened Pharaoh’s heart by giving him more opportunity to say no in the face of more facts. And God sustained his life so that he would totally divorce from reality. And when we read that “Israel in part was blinded” it must be remembered that it was nothing more than scar tissue of the soul. Scar tissue means that you still have your freedom but it is now totally disassociated from reality.

8. God hardened Pharaoh’s heart by giving him more opportunity to say no in the face of more and more facts.

9. God preserved Pharaoh alive with great power and authority to say no to an infinitely greater power and authority than he possessed. The continued negative volition from the scar tissue of Pharaoh’s soul resulted in worldwide evangelism; it also resulted in more scar tissue than anyone else in history.

Translation: “Consequently therefore, he shows mercy on whom he desires, in fact whom he desires he hardens.”

Principle

1. The understanding of history from the divine viewpoint demands understanding the attributes of God. We should understand now that God never tampers with human freedom.

2. Certain attributes are pertinent to the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart and/or scar tissue of his soul. The attributes include omniscience, foreordination related to omniscience, foreknowledge.

3. Omniscience knew in eternity past that Pharaoh would not only say no six times but would persist in negative volition as the scar tissue of his soul or the blindness of his heart developed.

4. God had the good sense to know which way the free will of Pharaoh would function throughout his entire life. God did not coerce or tamper with his volition.

5. Therefore the sovereignty of God made a decision to afford maximum opportunity for Pharaoh to experience the omnipotence of God in action and to continue to refuse from his free will and arrogance. Scar tissue of the soul always means inflation, increase, expansion of human arrogance.

6. God had the eternal and infinite power to perform those miracles which would intensify and increase the stubbornness of Pharaoh.

7. Pharaoh’s negative volition combined with his scar tissue persisted in refusal to free Israel so that the greater and greater manifestation of the omnipotence of God occurred. And the greater the function of omnipotence, the greater the evangelism in the land.

8. Greater manifestations of divine omnipotence resulted on both local worldwide evangelism in the generation of Moses.

9. The integrity or holiness of God includes both His perfect righteousness and absolute justice. In judging Pharaoh God was fair, completely compatible with His own righteousness and the plan of grace.

Verses 19-29 – the premise illustrated by the essence of God.

Verse 19 – two debater’s questions. Paul anticipates. He understands perfectly the concepts that the unbelieving Jews are now up in arms about and are antagonistic to. Now, in order to anticipate their next question Paul, as it were, beats them to the punch. Part of debaters’ technique is to anticipate reaction to a point during a debate and therefore in anticipation to ask a question before the opposition does so, and then answer the question within the framework of the context and using one’s own logical reasoning demonstrate the fallacy of even thinking such a thing. Therefore Paul uses this particular system as a debater’s technique.

It begins with the future active indicative from an obsolete verb e)irw. This was an ancient Attic word which had become obsolete and we can simply say that this is the future active indicative of the verb legw. The future tense is a predictive future. Paul is predicting their thoughts and what questions they have. The future predicts an event which is to occur in future time, it is a part of debaters’ technique to anticipate a question from the opposition. That active voice: Paul attributes the question to the thinking of the opposition and therefore makes them the subject of the verb. The opposition produces the action by thinking and the words are put into their mouths. Actually, Paul is quoting their thinking and they know it, they recognise this man’s genius. Why is it recorded here? Because it is a part of our understanding of the Word of God and Bible doctrine. It is also an application to our own life. Whenever you are under pressure, as Paul was, you must be able to think. The indicative mood is potential; it indicates an expression of an impulse. The dative of indirect object from e)gw – Paul is referring to himself. It is correctly translated “to me.” Next comes the inferential postpositive conjunction which denotes the question it introduces is an inference from what Paul has previously said – o)un.

Translation so far: “Therefore you will say to me.”

And now we have the first debater’s question: “Why doth he yet find fault?” This begins with the nominative neuter singular from the interrogative pronoun tij which is correctly translated “Why?” The adverb of time e)ti means “yet” or “still.” After the presentation of these things why is there any opposition. Opposition is almost ludicrous. The tremendous logic and ability of presentation of Paul begs the question as to why anyone would say no to these things. It is because each doctrine is resisted individually, and as scar tissue is built up, and blindness to the next thought, arrogance is increased. Now they are totally implacable so that they are thinking exactly the content of this debater’s question. Then we have the verb, the present active indicative of the verb memfomai which means to find fault. It is an onomatopoetic word because it indicates, from the very way in which it is described, faultfinding concepts.

Principle

1. It is obvious that this debater’s question anticipates objection to the doctrine of divine integrity, the doctrine of divine decrees, as well as other doctrines – decrees, election, adoption, and foreordination.

2. The objection is obviously irrelevant because it is blasphemous. It blasphemously assumes that God does not know what He is doing and that, furthermore, God is unfair in what He is doing.

3. Paul anticipates the antagonism of the racial Jew against the true spiritual heritage of Israel.

4. The racial Jew emphasises physical birth and natural descent from Abraham while the spiritual Jew emphasises the new birth and spiritual descent from Abraham.

5. This becomes, then, a conflict of the natural and the spiritual seed of Abraham.

6. Furthermore, it proves the principle that irrelevance becomes irreverence by blasphemously maligning the character of God.

7. Scar tissue of the soul always finds fault with God and becomes critical of divine policy.

8. In fact, scar tissue of the soul or hardness of the heart moves and enters where angels fear to tread.

9. Self-righteousness and legalism of the Jews results in distortion of doctrine. This is tantamount to denial of the spiritual heritage of Israel.

10. This first debaters’ question anticipates a distortion of doctrine – distortion on the part of Jewish reversionists who follow the same pattern as Pharaoh Amenhotep II. They see the power and glory of God and they reject the same.

11. It is inevitable that the perfect character of God will find fault with imperfect and sinful mankind.

“Why does he still find fault?”

Principle

1. The anticipation of omniscience, the reality of divine decrees and foreordination, the adoption of the elected ones, does not preclude or hinder or even contradict the function of the justice of God when HeHe He condemns and when He judges.

2. After all, foreordination or predestination does not hinder, coerce or abrogate the function of the free will of man. God never tampers with man’s free will and neither does man tamper with God’s judgements.

3. In fact, omniscience, foreordination and predestination acknowledged the free will of man and the principle of self-determination in human history.

4. On the basis of the imputation of divine righteousness to those who believe in Christ the justice of God has the right to condemn those who do not believe in Christ. Just as free will of man is freedom to reject Christ so God is free to judge those who reject Christ.

5. On the basis of the potential of the imputation of blessing in time to the target of imputed righteousness God also has the right to administer punishment and discipline to those believers who do not attain maturity, who reject doctrine, who are distracted from doctrine, and who resist doctrine.

6. On the basis, then, of the perfect character of God the integrity of God has the right to find fault with sin, human good, and evil, and to punish with strict justice all three categories in the old sin nature’s modus operandi.

7. The integrity of God and the entire essence of God can never be compromised by finding fault or judging or condemning or disciplining or punishing any portion or any individual in the human race. The reality of judgement always elicits the reaction of “unfair” – “How can God be fair and do this and that?” As soon as people are in a reality situation where they know they are being discipline or being judged then the old sin nature instinctively screams out “Unfair!” Therefore the profit from the administration of discipline and punishment is lost to that individual.

8. The concatenation of divine judgement or divine blessing is not subject to critical scrutiny on the part of mankind -- mankind who possesses neither the facts nor the doctrine to be critical.

The Jews found fault with Paul. They had a habit of finding fault because they had resisted truth. The less you know of the truth the more critical you are of the truth. They had resisted, just like Pharaoh, and they had all of this scar tissue in their souls. Therefore the more the scar tissue the greater the arrogance. Critical people, when they are ignorant of the facts, are always arrogant. So because they had the habit of finding fault they did not want anyone else to find fault and they even criticised God for finding fault. “Why does He still find fault?”

The second debater’s question: “For who hath resisted his will?” It begins with the inferential use of the postpositive conjunctive particle gar – “then” is used here in order to bring out the inferential concept. This is an inference from the previous debater’s question. Next is the nominative masculine singular from the interrogative pronoun tij which is correctly translated “who,” followed by the perfect active indicative of the verb a)nqisthmi [a)nti = against; i(sthmi = to stand], which means to stand against, to oppose, to resist – “Then who has resisted.” The dramatic perfect tense emphasises the results of the action. It is therefore the rhetorical use the intensive perfect. The action is completed in the past and the results continue. The active voice: the human race in general is regarded as producing or attempting to produce the action of the verb. The indicative mood is interrogative; it assumes that there is a definite and actual fact which can be used in answer to the question. With this is the dative singular indirect object from the noun boulhma, which refers to will. It also connotes plan or project or purpose, goal or intention, and is sometimes used for tendency. Here it means purpose or intention. With it is the possessive genitive singular from the intensive pronoun a)utoj, which in the Koine Greek is used for the third person singular personal pronoun. This is a possessive genitive and it is translated, “For who has resisted his purpose [or, intention]?” His purpose or intention includes the concept of His mercy or severity, which we have seen in verse 18.

Principle

1. Paul anticipates from these two debater’s questions the blasphemous attitude of the racial Jew. Their attitude: They picked up on the fact that if God had hardened Pharaoh’s heart how can God blame Pharaoh or condemn Pharaoh for what Pharaoh has done?

2. Paul actually anticipates the view of supralapsarianism, a system of theology for blaming God for Pharaoh’s decision, for Adam’s decision. Supralapsarianism makes God the author of Adam’s sin and the supralapsarianist would also make God the author of Pharaoh’s erroneous decisions.

3. The blasphemy further implies that God is using Pharaoh as a patsy, that it is God who has made the mistake and not Pharaoh.

4. All of this ignores the fact of Pharaoh’s free will. Pharaoh had the right of self-determination and was a free agent responsible for his own decisions.

5. God merely used Pharaoh’s negative volition to evangelise Egypt and the entire world.

6. Every time Pharaoh said no from his own free will a greater function of omnipotence in the miracles or the plagues impressed Pharaoh’s subjects resulting in the fact that the reality of God and the necessity for having a personal relationship with God through faith in Christ became apparent.

7. Pharaoh’s continued and stubborn rejection of divine grace increased his scar tissue of the soul while sending out fresh waves of evangelism from his free will decisions.

8. The more Pharaoh said no the more the people of his empire said yes. God used the “no” of Pharaoh to evangelise the world. God uses the wrath of man to praise Him.

9. God uses Pharaoh’s negative volition to reveal Himself to positive volition throughout the empire, throughout the world.

10. Therefore Pharaoh must take the responsibility for his own decisions. God hardening of Pharaoh’s heart had nothing whatever to do with tampering of Pharaoh’s volition, He merely gave him more opportunity. The fact that God used Pharaoh’s negative volition to reveal Himself to the world did not cause Pharaoh to cease to be a free agent.

The principle behind all of this

1. The omniscience of God anticipated from eternity past that only the overruling omnipotence of God would deliver the Jews from their slavery. The Jews had been selected by God to form the first client or priest nation in history and only divine power would pry them loose. But even divine power must not be coercive, and therefore divine power had to be used in such a way that Pharaoh was always a free agent in saying no.

2. The omniscience of God plus the omnipotence of God combined to overrule the tyrannical arrogance, the great power and abuse of authority of Amenhotep II.

3. Had the matter been left to the sovereign will of Pharaoh Amenhotep II the Jews would still be slaves in the Egyptian empire. But in grace the sovereign will of God vetoes the power of Pharaoh by freeing the Jews from slavery. It was accomplished through the negative volition of Pharaoh. (Whether you say yes or no to God you are not going to stop the plan of God)

4. In other words, the purpose or intention of God was accomplished without destroying or abrogating the free will of Pharaoh. The momentum of the plan of God continues through success and failure of human beings, through negative and positive volition in human beings.

5. Pharaoh did not lose his free will or sovereign self-determination but used it against God’s will.

6. By hardening Pharaoh’s heart God merely kept Pharaoh alive, which gave him greater opportunity to express to the maximum his free will in opposition to God.

7. The greater the opposition the greater the manifest power from God used by God to overcome the opposition without in any way tampering with Pharaoh’s free will. A perfect demonstration of the coexistence of divine sovereignty and free will is found in the total confrontation between God and Pharaoh, Moses being the divine representative.

8. Throughout human history this coexistence is necessary to resolve the angelic conflict.

9. God did not tamper with Pharaoh’s free will but He had the genius to utilise the opposition as well as positive volition to fulfil His perfect plan in human history.

10. As Pharaoh’s free will expression of his negative volition gathered momentum God used that momentum of opposition to accomplish His purpose and His intention.

Translation: “”Therefore you will say to me, Why does he still find fault? For who has resisted his purpose?”

Concept

1. It should be noted that the omniscience of God and the divine decrees were applied to the twins, Esau and Jacob, before they made any decisions or before their self-determination was crystallised in historical action.

2. On the other hand the omniscience of God and the computer of divine decrees deals with Moses and Pharaoh after their birth and the imputation of human life.

3. Moses and Pharaoh as free agents had established their pattern of life in relationship to God. Moses, by believing in Egypt, by leaving Egypt, and by spending 40 years in the desert where he grew up spiritually. On the other hand, the Pharaoh of the Exodus was not only in Egypt, had the same opportunities for salvation as Moses, but he rejected them and constantly built up scar tissue of the soul so that by the time of the confrontation he already had maximum scar tissue, maximum arrogance, maximum distortion of his power, maximum pettiness and implacability.

4. Moses demonstrated maximum positive volition while Pharaoh demonstrated maximum negative volition.

5. God used the maximum positive volition of Moses in one way and the maximum negative volition of Pharaoh in another way, but the free will of both men accomplished the will of God.

6. This is a reminder that Jesus Christ controls history.

7. This is also a reminder that the justice of God can bless or curse, depending on positive volition at salvation through faith in Christ, and after salvation positive or negative volition toward Bible doctrine.

8. This is also a reminder again that God uses the wrath of man to praise Him – Psalm 76:10.

9. No matter which way it goes in history, history is always and inevitably going to glorify God. No disaster in history ever slows the momentum of the divine plan.

10. Human failure and human success does not hinder or frustrate the plan of God.

11. Human failure and opposition to God does not abrogate the faithfulness of God, nor does it hinder the advance of the plan of God. Furthermore, human failure and opposition to the plan of God does not abrogate or destroy free will and self-determination in the human race. Mankind continues to function as a free agent under the principle of self-determination.

Principle

1. The two debater’s questions combine to form two answers directed toward the opposition. The first answer is found in vv. 20-21, the second in vv. 22-23.

2. Inevitably the key to all answers is found in the perfect essence of God. If you understand the divine attributes you have the key to the answer for everything in life.

3. Every divine attribute is perfect, incorruptible, not subject to sin or human good or evil, not contaminated by arrogance or jealousy or pettiness, not subject to human power and human authority.

4. The integrity of God is perfect and makes no bad or unfair decisions in dealing with mankind.

5. The perfect righteousness of God is always the key to understanding. God’s righteousness is maintained at all times and no one can besmirch the integrity of God.

6. The perfect righteousness of God is imputed to mankind at salvation through faith in Christ, and that imputation, even though it resides in each one of us, it is still incorruptible.

7. The possession of divine righteousness makes it possible for God to deal in grace with the believer and eventually to bless him.

8. The justice of God can impute blessing without compromising divine essence where the righteousness of God is imputed.

9. The only way for the believer to miss blessing is to try to reinvent the wheel – self-righteousness, legalism. The wheel is God’s plan which operates on the perfect axle of divine righteousness imputed and when the believer attempts to use his own self-righteousness as the axle he reinvents the wheel by substituting his own plan for God’s plan, hence failing to exploit the imputation of divine righteousness.

The first half of the book of Romans tells us how righteousness is imputed. The last half of the book of Romans tells us how to exploit the imputation of divine righteousness. The parenthesis or the transition becomes the motivation, the encouragement, the understanding, getting back to reality by facing the facts of doctrine.

The first answer to these questions: verses 20,21.

Verse 20 starts out with a combined series of particles, three particles combined into one word – men o)un ge. Put together these words are used in answer to questions to emphasises a correct and an erroneous notion. This was a debater’s word used by Paul and when he used it he meant, “What I have just said is inaccurate; it is what you are thinking and what you are thinking is wrong. Now hear this. This is correct, accurate, true.” The best translation is “On the contrary.”

We have an interjection to follow it, and when an interjection follows a triple compound Pauline conjunction we know that we are in for something. It is the interject w with a circumflex accent. We would simply transliterate it by the English “O” which, of course, is inadequate. This interjection is used before a vocative as a Koine following a Semitic usage. This is not Attic Greek. So we have Paul taking Attic Greek and coining new words, and then adding an interjectory vocative before a vocative. Furthermore, the interjection is never used when addressing someone who is perfect, or who thinks he is perfect, or who is right. It is an interjection only used to address people who are wrong. In the English language we have nothing comparable. We simply say “wrong” or “no.”

Next is an interrogative tij – “who,” then the present active indicative of e)imi – “are.” Really this is, “You are wrong stupid. Who are you?” The static present tense represents a fact, the existence of a stupid person or two in mankind. When people are stupid someone must have the courage to straighten them out – and that is Paul. The active voice: mankind produces the action of the verb, existing as a stupid creature, irrational, imbecilic. The indicative mood is the interrogative indicative in which reality is implied as a fact enquired about. With this is the predicate nominative from the personal pronoun su which, by the way, is in the proleptic position which means “You” or “Hey, you there.” The personal pronoun in the proleptic position is very similar to a vocative.

“who art thou that repliest against God?” Paul is bringing out the fact that these people are stupid when they become impudent to God. We have the present middle participle from the compound a)ntapokrinomai. The word means to be impudent, to answer back against, to contradict, and sometimes it means to make unjustifiable accusation against someone – “who answers back” or “who contradicts.” The descriptive present is for what is going on at the time that Paul writes. In arrogance people do not know what they are and therefore they do not know what God is, they do not know who and what they are, and therefore they answer God back. They contradict, are impudent, and therefore blasphemous. The indirect middle emphasises the agent producing the action of the verb who in this case is the unbelieving Jew who is both arrogant and legalistic. He overestimates himself while at the same time underestimates God. In fact, anyone who underestimates God overestimates himself. This is a circumstantial participle plus the dative singular indirect object from qeoj. The definite article is used in the generic sense for the uniqueness of God. He contradicts, he answers back, he is impudent to the eternal God.

“You on the contrary O man, who are you who answers back [contradicts] to the God.” The creature has no more right to challenge the creator than a pot has to challenge the potter. So Isaiah 45:8-12 states the case:

Verse 8 – “Cause to trickle down, you heavens above, and let the blue skies rain down righteousness” -- they were having a drought, and in this drought there was a shortage of righteousness – divine righteousness imputed; “let the earth open, and let salvation blossom” – imputed righteousness causes salvation to blossom, “and righteousness, let them sprout together; I, Jehovah, have created it.”

Verse 9 – “Woe to the one who quarrels with his Maker!” There it is, impudence toward God – blasphemy, contradiction, arguing against God. It is inevitable that when the arrogance it too great there is no respect for authority. “A pot among the pots of earthenware.” The person who quarrels with God, the person who contradicts God, is a pot among the pots. “Will the clay say to the potter, What are you making? Or the thing you are making say, He has no hands?” Impudence to the maximum.

Verse 10 – “Woe to him who says to his father, What are you begetting? Or to his mother, To what are you giving birth?” This is ludicrous, but it is far more ludicrous to contradict God.

Verse 11 – “This says Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker: Ask me about things to come that my sons, or the work of my hands, be committed to me.”

Verse 12 – “It is I who made the earth [I know what I am doing], and I created mankind upon it” -- When He created mankind He created mankind with a free will – “I stretched out the heavens with my hands [all of space was created by God], and I commanded all their armies [angels].”

Jeremiah 18:6 – O house of Israel, cannot I deal with you as the potter does with the clay? communicated Jehovah. Behold, like the clay in the potter’s hand, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel.” Jesus Christ controls history and He was warning them.

Principle

1. When God created man He placed in his soul volition, free will, self-determination, in order to resolve the angelic conflict. Along with that man has to be aware of his own existence and the meaning of his existence in relation to life in general, so he has self-consciousness. There are two frontal lobes which are the mentality of the soul. The left lobe is called gnwsij; it is simply a processing area for information. The right lobe, which in the Bible is called the heart, is actually the place where permanent knowledge resides. It is the source of all wisdom if wisdom exists in the individual. There is a frame of reference, memory centre, vocabulary and categorical storage, norms and standards which are simply called conscience, and the launching pad for application. There is also an emotion which is sometimes called “reins” or “kidneys” in the Bible, and this is a responder to what a person has in his right lobe. The volition is the basis for self-determination with its positive and negative poles. The real you, which is your soul and what you think, has privacy because every attribute of the soul, while real, is invisible. Therefore you have perfect privacy to think what you want to think, to decide what you want to decide, and in the normal soul through self-consciousness to relate this to life as well as even to emotion.

2. Furthermore, God created everything in His matchless grace and provided everything necessary for man’s free will to be positive toward God, both at God-consciousness and gospel hearing. So that while man has the opportunity of being negative as he so desires he also has the opportunity to be positive. There never was a person in the human race who did not have that opportunity.

3. Pharaoh did not instantly develop scar tissue of the soul. Scar tissue is not an instant development; it is like maturity which develops over a period of time. His hardness of heart originated from a long series of free will decisions, all negative, including God-consciousness, gospel hearing, and the challenge of Moses to release the Jews from slavery.

4. God could have instantly destroyed Pharaoh and had the Jews out of Egypt instantly.

5. But there were others to consider. There were some who needed to come out of Egypt with the Jews as believers, and therefore a series of disciplinary miracles were instituted to demonstrate that scar tissue of the soul is consistent and never changes. But such evil negative volition can be used by God to reveal himself to the entire Egyptian empire plus the entire world.

6. Pharaoh always hardened himself with a fortification of negative volition as soon as he recovered from the disciplinary miracles. He would give in when the plague was administered and then, when the pressure was off, he would say no.

7. Therefore God hardened his heart in the true sense of supplying more miracles in the administration of discipline so that Pharaoh could say no more than anyone in history. God simply kept him alive so that he could say no.

8. Each no intensified the administration of disciplinary miracles or plagues resulting in greater manifestation of divine power. Each plague was greater than the previous one.

9. Greater manifestation of divine power resulted in greater evangelism both in Egypt and throughout the world.

10. While Pharaoh was saying no from the scar tissue of his soul many Egyptians, Ethiopians and Jews who were under his authority were saying yes to the gospel. But at the same time Pharaoh’s hardness of heart produced arrogance, and arrogance produced impudence, and impudence became rejection of divine authority.

When a person becomes so arrogant from scar tissue of then soul that he is divorced from reality, inevitably being divorced from reality means rejection of authority. Rejection of authority is the first sign of national disintegration and degeneration.

Principle

1. If God chooses to harden Pharaoh’s heart He has a just and righteous reason compatible with His own perfect integrity. He has perfect integrity and therefore from His perfect integrity He is fair; He is just; He always gives a fair shake.

2. Consequently, no one has a right to make unjust accusations against God. Impudence forces the hand of God.

3. Pharaoh used his own volition to build scar tissue of the soul which the Lord used to demonstrate His power to evangelise the world.

4. The free will of Pharaoh expressed negative volition on numerous occasions prior to the statement “God hardened his heart.”

5. Pharaoh had individual freedom from his own self-determination. He was not only a free agent but as a king he was a sovereign free agent, therefore he had unlimited self-determination.

6. Paul finds himself facing similar opposition from the Jews in his own generation. In effect, Paul is comparing the Jews of his own generation to the Gentile ruler of the Egyptian empire in the 18^th dynasty.

7. The physical or racial seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob erroneously assume that the spiritual heritage is theirs on the basis of physical birth. Their error is seen in the fact that there must be a spiritual birth to enjoy spiritual heritage.

8. Therefore it is the spiritual seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, those who believe in Christ, who are the recipients of the unconditional promises and the covenants to Israel.

9. To enjoy the spiritual heritage of Israel requires the imputation of divine blessing and possession of eternal life.

10. Only those Jews who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, the God of Israel, will have the promised heritage of Israel.

11. Only the arrogance of the unregenerate Jew would answer back and contradict the perfect plan of God.

12. Therefore Paul directly challenges the Judaisers, the legalistic Jewish unbeliever, the physical seed of Abraham.

“Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it.”

Paul in his quotation starts with the negative adverb mh, used in a question which expects a negative answer. The other negative is o)u; it denies the fact. The negative adverb mh denies the idea behind the fact. We have the future active indicative of legw plus the negative mh. Legw is a word which is used for conversation, shouting, screaming, giving orders, communicating, talking, many things. We will translated it, “shall not say.” We have a deliberative future tense where a question of uncertainty is expressed occasionally by the future. The active voice: the creature produces the action of the verb. The interrogative indicative is that in which the viewpoint of reality is implied in a fact enquired about when the indicative is used for asking a question. The negative mh indicates that the question is rhetorical, it is a part of Paul’s debater’s technique used in this passage.

Now we have a subject after the verb, the nominative singular from the noun plasma. It means what is formed, want is moulded. Plasma is commonly used for the product of the artisan, like the potter making a pot or a vessel. We translate this, “Can what is moulded say.”

Next we have the aorist active participle from plassw, the ascriptive use of the participle. It denotes a noun as belonging to a general category, such as potters. The definite article in the dative singular is an indirect object used as a possessive pronoun, and therefore we translate it “to its moulder.”

“Why hast thou made me thus?” This begins with the nominative neuter singular from the interrogative pronoun tij – “Why.” This is called the interrogative of impudence. The aorist active indicative of poiew means to make – create sometimes – to manufacture. “Why have you made me like this?” The constative aorist contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety. The active voice: the subject by analogy refers to the arrogant and unbelieving Jew of Paul’s time as producing the action of the verb by questioning the integrity of God. The indicative mood is interrogative again, it assumes that there is an actual fact which may be used in answer to this question. The accusative singular direct object is e)gw which is correctly translated “me.” The adverb which in the KJV is “thus,” o(utoj. It refers to something which precedes it and it is translated “like this.” Principle: Arrogance plus impudence equals blasphemy. Now we can add the negative mh which is simply translated “no.”

Translation: “On the contrary, O mankind, you, who are you who answers back to the God? Can what is moulded say to its moulder, Why have you made me like this?” No, of course not.

Principle

1. The rhetorical question is a debater’s technique to emphasise the blasphemy of the Jew who relies on his own ability from natural birth, and his physical relationship to Abraham, rather than the grace blessings of spiritual birth and his eternal relationship to God.

2. The thing that made Abraham, Isaac and Jacob great was the grace of God, not the racial or physical perpetuation of the seed.

3. The integrity of God is not subject to contradiction or impudence.

4. God is totally, eternally, and infinitely fair.

5. It is impossible for God to be unfair or arbitrary, or even inconsistent with His own character.

6. Therefore in perfect righteousness the justice of God provided man with a free will, so that man is a free agent in determining his own destiny. And he must take the responsibility for his own decisions. That is the basic norm for establishing maturity.

7. Therefore man cannot blame the mistakes and errors of his own decisions on perfect and incorruptible God.

8. If God chooses and reject, pardons and punishes whom He pleases, He does so on the basis of His perfect integrity which includes His righteousness and His justice.

9. Arbitrary and prejudiced mankind assumes that God is prejudiced and arbitrary. But mankind cannot superimpose his own weaknesses and unfairnesses on God.

10. Man’s objection to the inequalities of time as well as eternity is really an objection to the possession of freedom and the right of self-determination which produces these inequalities.

11. Furthermore, man objects to the printout of election, foreordination and foreknowledge. He fails to realise that his own volition determines his exclusion from election, foreknowledge and predestination.

12. Negative volition seeks to circumvent the condemnation from the justice of God by blaming the omniscience of God for entering only facts into the computer of divine decrees in eternity past.

13. Man’s irresponsibility and depravity is never more dramatically portrayed than when he seeks to blame God for his own thoughts, his own decisions, and his own actions.

14. God is not obligated to save the unbeliever. God is not obligated to bless the reversionistic believer, that is a matter of momentum under the plan of grace.

15. God is not obligated to impute blessing to the reversionistic believer in time, nor to impute rewards to him at the judgement seat of Christ.

16. However, God’s obligation is to Himself. God’s obligation is to His policy – grace. God does not make an exception for the nicest person who ever live, the sweetest personality, the most sincere, the kindest, etc.

17. God’s attitude toward Christ, the living Word, and after salvation, attitude toward Bible doctrine, the written Word, is the issue.

18. An attitude which comes from man’s volition rather than God’s sovereign desire is to blame God.

19. God must be consistent with Himself. Therefore He must punish the unbeliever and save the believer. He must bless the mature believer and discipline the reversionistic believer. Everyone has a fair shake from God.

Principle

1. No one can say to God, Why have you made me this way? because mankind has his own free will. Man is a free agent, he has self-determination. So the answers to the rhetorical question is an obvious no.

2. Mankind under the influence of Satanic thinking is always trying to conform God to his human thinking rather than accepting God in terms of divine revelation. Man is always trying to bend God to his own thinking and then saying, “This is God’s will.”

3. The quotation from Isaiah 29:16, which Isaiah applied to the nation, Paul applies to then individual Jew.

4. In this context Paul has combined the doctrine of God’s perfect integrity with the reality of man’s arrogance and his ignorance to establish the true issue of omniscience feeding facts into the computer of divine decrees.

5. It is not the elect or the foreordained who attains spiritual maturity to whom Paul directs these remarks, but in context he is speaking to the condemned Jew who has rejected Christ as saviour, who has refused the Shekinah glory and is now grasping at straws in an attempt to justify his error.

6. To blaspheme and malign the perfect wisdom and justice of God is the irrational act of a desperate person.

7. Irrational because of after having made hundreds of free will decisions, culminating in judgement, God is blamed and maligned for thus shifting the responsibility from their erroneous decisions and blaming it on the sovereignty of God. Paul uses debater’s technique to refute this blasphemy and to shift the responsibility right back to human free will where negative volition has manufactured its own hardness of heart.

Verse 21 begins with a disjunctive conjunction h). It is used in interrogative sentences to introduce and present a rhetorical question, and while it is simply translated “or” it actually introduces an interrogative debater’s finesse. It takes the principle of the previous verse and illustrates the verse from the obvious. Even the dumbest person is aware of the fact that the pot doesn’t argue with the potter. The nominative singular subject is kerameuj – “potter.” This was a person who in the ancient world was very important in the ancient world.

The next word is the negative adverb o)uk, used in rhetorical questions expecting a positive answer of yes. Mh expects a negative answer; o)u expects a positive answer, and in answer to this question a single word, “yes,” is thrown in because of the word o)u. You do not translate it “no,” you translate it “yes.” Only the Greeks would have such a system of exegesis. We have so far: “Or does not the potter.”

We have a verb in the present active indicative of e)xw which means to have or possess. The customary present denotes what habitually occurs or may be reasonably expected to occur. The active voice: the potter produces the action. The indicative mood is the interrogative indicative which assumes that there is an actual fact which may be stated in answer to the question, fact which has escaped the brilliant Jews who are objecting to Paul and opposing him in debater’s style. So Paul is going to finesse them right out of their minds.

The next word is very important because it may be a word you understand but it is a word that demands orientation to life, and without it you’ve had it. The word is not “power,” as translated in the KJV, it is the accusative singular direct object from e)cousia which means “authority.” “Or does not the potter possess authority.” Then we have the genitive of relationship from phloj meaning “wet clay.” In the analogy the potter is God; the clay is mankind. Mankind compared to God is totally, completely, utterly stupid. The rhetorical question expects a positive answer and focuses attention on the authority of God, the creator of mankind, the creation. What is not mentioned, because Paul is not going to insult their intelligence any more than he has by his finesse innuendo, is that he does give some hope in that he says “Of course, you understand that when our Lord made the pot He put inside of it volition.” Everyone has a soul with freedom for self-determination.

Next in the Greek sentence comes the prepositional phrase e)k tou a)utou furamatoj, which is correctly translated “from the same lump.” We start out with the preposition e)k plus the ablative from the attributive use of the intensive pronoun a)uotoj – “from the same.” This is followed by the ablative singular from the noun furama. It is derived from the verb furaw which means to mix. What was mixed or mingled was called furama. Furaw came first; the mixture came before what is mixed. The potter came before the pot. To mix and to mould and to manufacture takes something more than being manufactured. It takes more to make than it does to be made. With this is the aorist active infinitive of the verb poiew, which means to make or to manufacture. The constative aorist tense is for a fact or action extended over a period of time. The constative aorist contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety, therefore the entire history of the human race. The active voice: God produces the action of the verb by creating the soul of mankind where free will and self-determination reside as a free agent. The infinitive is the infinitive of intended result. When the result is indicated as fulfilling a deliberate objective in the creation of man it therefore becomes a blending of purpose and result.

Again, phloj indicates what all members of the human race have in common. We all have something in common: we all came from the same lump. We all have a lump called a body which is the home for the soul. A pot is a container, and it is sued because it represents the body. The body contains the soul, and the soul determines whether you are a pot of honour or a pot of dishonour. From man’s self-determination comes honour or dishonour, not from God. God puts volition into each pot, and each pot determines from his own volition whether he is a pot of honour or a pot of dishonour.

Next we have classical Greek, o( men, o( de – “on the one hand, on the other hand.” This is composed of the nominative masculine singular from the definite article, meaning “the one,” and the second time the definite article occurs it means “the other.” It means the one vessel and then the other. With this we have the affirmative particle men used correlatively with the particle de – “on the one hand a vessel, on the other hand another vessel.” With this is the nominative singular subject of skeuoj which means a pot, a container.

Then we have the prepositional phrase for the first category, e)ij plus the accusative of timh – “for honour” or “for the purpose of honour.” E)ij is often used to make a purpose clause. “On the one hand a vessel for the purpose, on the other hand another for the purpose of dishonour.” This time it is e)ij plus a)timia.

Translation: “Or does not the potter possess authority over the clay, from the same lump to make on the one hand a vessel for the purpose of honour, and on the other hand another for the purpose of dishonour? [of course, he does].”

Paul says that if God wants to make a pot of honour and a pot of dishonour from the same lump of clay, does He have the right to do so? Yes. But that is not the issue, that merely sets a way of finessing into the issue. The issue is free will, not what right God has. God has the authority but that isn’t the issue. The issue is, does the individual pot recognise divine authority? make decisions compatible with divine authority? That is the issue.

This is not the only passage in which vessels are used. In Acts 9:15 we have the doctrine of election related to a vessel. The word “vessel” always means a container. It is empty until it is filled and once Paul was filled with doctrine then he became the Lord’s representative in a very unique way. In Romans 9 vessels are used extensively. We see vessels used in connection with the plan of God. In 2 Corinthians 4:7 vessels were used to provide an analogy between Bible doctrine resident in the soul and capacity for life among those who are mature believers – “we have this treasure in clay vessels…” Containing something which is the greatest of all treasures is doctrine resident in the soul and from this doctrine comes great capacity for life. In 2 Timothy 2:20,21 vessels are used to set up a contrast between the believer who is mature and the believer who is in reversionism. In Proverbs 25:4 God is the smith and the believer is the one mentioned as the pure silver – “… there comes out a vessel for the smith.” Vessels are related to category #2 love. 1 Thessalonians 4:4 – “That each one of you know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honour.” The woman is an empty pot. There is a great field for learning how to possess a woman, how to be the ruler over a woman and to do it in a way which is honourable – 1 Peter 3:7. The reason for this is because the woman is said to be the weaker vessel. “Weaker vessel” has to do with the function of the soul. When a person is designed by God to be a responder it means that in being a responder you are weaker and you depend upon someone else to whom you can respond.

Then, shattered vessels are used to describe personal judgements from God. For example, when David was in reversionism (Psalm 31:12) he wrote: “I am forgotten as a dead man; I am out of mind; I am like a shattered vessel.” In other words, he felt completely and totally deserted, which is what happens when you get into intensive discipline, that stage of reversionism. In Jeremiah 22:28 king Coniah was also a reversionist” “Is this man Coniah a despised, shattered vessel? or is he an undesirable vessel? Why has he and his descendants been cast out and thrown into a land they did not know?” They were taken into captivity and the reason was because they were shattered vessels.

A shattered vessel holds nothing; it is no longer a container. Shattered vessel means yo had every opportunity to learn doctrine, to be filled up with doctrine, to have more doctrine than you’ve ever had before. But once you are shattered it means you are on the way to the sin unto death, the final and last stage.

Apostate communicators of doctrine can also be reversionistic and be described that way – Jeremiah 25:34: “Wail, you shepherds, and cry; wallow in ashes” – this is an emotionally unstable person who is trying to rebound by wallowing in ashes -- “you masters of the flock; for the day of your slaughter and your dispersion has come, and you shall be shattered like a broken but choice vessel.” The shattered vessel is used for personal discipline; it usually indicates the proximity of the sin unto death, the last stage of discipline for reversionism.

The shattered vessel is also used for the fifth cycle of discipline. The northern kingdom – Hosea 8:8,9: “Israel is swallowed up; they are now among the nations like a vessel in which no one delights [it doesn’t hold anything]. For they have gone up to Assyria [5^th cycle of discipline] like a wild ass all alone; Ephraim his hired lover [description of spiritual fornication which comes from being saturated with evil].” The southern kingdom is also described in their 5^th cycle of discipline – Jeremiah 51:34. The Gentile nations in the Tribulation are also so described – Psalm 2:9.

These references merely demonstrate the fact that this is not an isolated type of analogy but is one that was easily understood since the most common type of furniture in the ancient world was the vessel, the container, the pot.

Principle

1. The lump of clay is human volition, human self-determination. The lump of clay in effect is the body containing self-determination.

2. The issue, then, becomes obvious. The justice of God imputes eternal and divine righteousness to positive volition in the lump while imputing condemnation and punishment to the negative volition in the lump. The point of reference is the justice of God.

Principle

1. The descendants of Abraham, Isaac And Jacob only become true Jews by believing in Christ. All Israel is not really Israel.

2. There no way for the physical seed of Abraham to be a vessel of honour. To be a vessel of honour he must from his own free will believe in Jesus Christ who is the Shekinah glory, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

3. Therefore in this context a vessel of honour is the Jew who has believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, while the vessel of dishonour is the Jew who has rejected the Lord Jesus Christ and has done so from his own free will. Therefore the justice of God can only condemn the one who has rejected. The issue is not what we do; the issue is what Christ has done on the cross. Therefore believing in the Lord Jesus Christ becomes the issue.

4. The lump, again, is the free will of mankind to believe in Christ or to reject Christ. Man is free to go either way.

5. The vessel of dishonour, then, is the unbeliever; the vessel of honour is the believer in Christ who possesses at salvation imputation of divine righteousness. Receiving the righteousness of God through imputation is tantamount to honour.

6. Therefore the honour is possessing the righteousness of God and eternal life, while dishonour is possessing or depending on one’s own self-righteousness sand function in human life.

7. God is free to bless the vessel of honour possessing God’s righteousness, and likewise God is free to judge the vessel of dishonour possessing human self-righteousness.

Principle

1. This verse by analogy answers the question of the previous verse, “Why have you made me like this?”

2. The answer is found in that the lump of clay is human volition – free will, self-determination. All people are created with free will.

3. Man is a free agent to function under his own self-determination for better or for worse.

4. This is a part of the angelic conflict, why man was created. God permits mankind to use free will to determine the issue of whether he is going to be a vessel of honour or dishonour.

5. From the same function of human volition comes a vessel of honour and a vessel of dishonour in this context.

6. One person is a vessel of honour because of what God does for him at salvation and thereafter.

7. Another person is the vessel of dishonour because the justice of God must condemn him. This means rejection of Christ as saviour. For the believer it means rejection of doctrine which ultimately leads to reversionism.

8. Honour or dishonour, then, is not a behaviour patter, not a system of morals, not a system of self-improvement; it is an attitude, first toward Christ the living Word and then toward Bible doctrine, the written Word.

9. The believer is a vessel of honour because of what God does for him while the unbeliever is a vessel of dishonour because of what he is doing for himself. The unbeliever superimposes his volition over the sovereignty of God; he substitutes his own self-righteousness for divine righteousness.

10. God is just, therefore, in moulding the believer into a vessel of honour and the unbeliever into a vessel of dishonour.

11. The believer’s failure in sinfulness, human good, and evil, does not detract from what God has done for him.

Principle

1. The omniscience of God knew in eternity past who would say no and who would say yes to the gospel, who would be positive toward doctrine and who would be negative.

2. Therefore when this information was fed into the computer of divine decrees it fell into many categories for the printout.

3. For the one who believes in Jesus Christ the printout includes election, foreknowledge, predestination or foreordination.

4. For the unbeliever the printout includes condemnation and judgement.

5. The emphasis on the lump of clay is always, inevitably, free will, volition, self-determination. So that the vessel of dishonour is actually moulded by one’s own volition.

6. The vessel of honour is the believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. The honour comes from the fact that God gives the believer 36 things at salvation, including divine righteousness and eternal life. With divine righteousness and eternal life there is a potentiality of blessing for time and eternity, but it is only a potentiality.

7. The vessel of honour is designed by grace the fulfil the royal family honour code, to advance to maturity, to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ in this tactical victory of the angelic conflict.

8. The vessel of dishonour, as the unbeliever, makes negative decisions. Negative at God-consciousness, negative at gospel hearing. This means the substitution of self-righteousness for divine righteousness and the substitution of eternal condemnation for eternal life. He chooses his own righteousness.

9. Therefore there is no conflict between the function of divine sovereignty and the function of human volition. For human volition is mankind, the lump of clay. Human volition in mankind is the factor in resolving the angelic conflict. The only conflict which exists is when God’s authority is rejected by man.

Verse 22

1. The second answer in the context of verses 22 and 23 is a theological profile of Pharaoh Amenhotep II and the reason why God hardened Pharaoh’s heart in the face of overwhelming evidence.

2. While the first answer in the context (verses 20,21) emphasises the coexistence of free will and divine sovereignty in history the second answer emphasises negative volition expressed to the maximum as Pharaoh did in the confrontation with Moses. By the way, this becomes an illustration of Jewish negative volition throughout the entire history of Israel.

3. The grace of God gives every opportunity for repentance -- change of mind. Negative volition has the opportunity to become positive volition for Jesus Christ is presented in His saving work. After one believes in Christ there is the opportunity to learn doctrine, and wherever there is the demand there is always the supply.

4. Therefore to understand verses 22 and 23 the interpreter has to keep in mind Pharaoh who is being described as a vessel of dishonour.

5. Pharaoh, in contrast to Moses who as a believer in Christ advances to maturity, is a vessel of dishonour.

6. The genius of this paragraph, which includes verses 22-24, is that so brilliant and dramatic is Paul’s explanation in the protasis that the apodosis is unnecessary and never stated – which is called “aposiopesis.”[1] So dramatic is Paul’s explanation in the protasis that you do not need an apodosis. Only a genius can give you a protasis and you can actually fill in the apodosis for yourself. Paul is going to give us this beautiful protasis and then shut up. This means the finesse of the last verse is thoroughly understood by his audience. He had a smart audience.

7. In effect, verses 22-24 also form an anacoluthon.[2] Vessels of honour and dishonour are fashioned in every generation, and this is the point we will learn.

8. Paul is concerned for contemporary Israel that instead of becoming the spiritual seed of Abraham through faith in Christ they will reject Christ as saviour and be no better than Gentiles – like Ishmael, Esau, and Pharaoh. The Jews who reject Christ as saviour are no better than an anacoluthon; they are off the main track of life, they are off the main thrust of God’s plan, they have lost out completely.

9. A Jewish vessel of dishonour is the unbeliever who has rejected Christ, rejected Bible doctrine, therefore a demonstration of divine wrath and a revelation of divine power whom God has endured with much patience and appointed for destruction.

10. Such a Jew is no better than a Gentile because being so close by physical relationship with Abraham and yet like Ishmael he failed. So Jews who reject Christ are just exactly like Gentiles in spite of the fact that they have such a great spiritual heritage -- which takes us back to Paul’s premise in verse 6: “All Israel is not Israel.”

11. Therefore the conclusion of the anacoluthon: God’s purpose is that He might reveal the riches of His glory which He works on the vessels of mercy which He prepared before hand for His glory, and to which He has called us not only from among the Jews but also from among the Gentiles.

12. Paul does not want contemporary history to follow the pattern of Ishmael, Esau and Pharaoh. He wants the Jews to fulfil their heritage.

13. Anacoluthon is a popular Greek idiom. This anacoluthon contains hyperbaton,[3] an artificial misplacement of words as opposed to their natural order. The artificial misplacement is to give an emphasis that ordinarily could not be given in normal exegetical structure.

14. This hyperbaton is also known as a special type of hyperbaton; it is chiasmus in which the words are arranged according to a scheme of rhetorical reasoning/design. This is the ultimate in debater’s technique. The only language it can be done is in the Classical Greek and in the next two verses we have pure Classical Greek.

15. This anacoluthon, which is an aposiopesis, is an incomplete sentence. It starts out with a protasis in the first class condition – if and it is true – but there is no apodosis.

16. The sentence in verses 22-24 have the protasis but no apodosis, and in verse 25 we go on from a protasis to a comparative analogy but no apodosis, and furthermore, it is also a chiasmus in hyperbaton. The words are arranged in a very difficult manner but they are arranged in order to make a point in the concept of debater’s technique.

17. We just have to conclude, then, that verses 22-24 is a digression type debater’s technique. This paragraph, then, is an aposiopesis, a form of ellipsis in which the protasis is given without the apodosis but the protasis is definitely understood, and the one who is listening says, I agree. That, in effect, becomes the apodosis.

Verse 22 – there is no “What” at the beginning of the sentence. It begins with the conditional particle e)i with the indicative. It introduces the protasis of a first class condition, a supposition from the viewpoint of reality. Next in the sentence is the postpositive conjunctive particle de, used as a transitional particle but it is translated before the word “if.” Therefore, since it is transitional we translate it correctly in aposiopesis style in order to prepare for hyperbaton – “Moreover, if.” The reality has already been stated – the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart.

Next is the subject in the nominative case, o( qeoj – “the God.” You do not have to translate o,( simply because the definite article is used here to make a reference to someone who is already mentioned in the passage several times and therefore well-known. To show that it is the same person it is simply a definite article. Then comes the present active participle. And by bringing in this verb at this time we are conceding with Paul that God has a right to use His volition. This is the quintessence of debater’s sarcasm. “Do you mean to tell me that you are free to run around and do what you want to do from your own volition and God doesn’t have the right to use His?” There is a reason for this. When people get crowded into a corner and they don’t like it they immediately make an irrational assumption. They assume that they are the only ones who have the right to use their own free will. Paul is being sarcastic. “Moreover if, as is the case, the God willing.”

“willing” [or wishing] – qelw. The present tense is a historical present for a past event viewed with the vividness of a present occurrence. The active voice: God produces the action of the verb. The participle is circumstantial expressing the attended circumstances. This is neither causal nor conceptive as so many interpreters think. (That is what happens when you do not know aposiopesis)

Next is something to support a wish, and a wish is supported by an infinitive in the Greek, so we have the aorist middle infinitive of e)ndeiknumi, which means to demonstrate. Moreover if, [as is the case] God willing to demonstrate.” He is stating it in such a way as to indicate that they are saying God doesn’t have a right to do anything that makes them uncomfortable. The culminative aorist views the event in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of existing results. God demonstrates His power and the result is great evangelism in Egypt and throughout the world. The middle voice is the indirect middle emphasising God as the agent as producing the action. It differs from the active voice in that there is a very close relationship between subject and verb. The infinitive is an infinitive of purpose.

With this we now have an object of the verb, the accusative singular direct object from o)rgh – “anger” or “wrath.” This is an anthropopathism and simply a way of expressing in human frame of reference to someone a policy of God, and to express it in such a way that they can understand it. So the anthropopathism is used for a divine reaction toward evil, and therefore a function of divine integrity. The righteousness of God rejects evil and the justice of God condemns evil. The anthropopathism represents judgement from the justice of God. We have also the accusative singular of the definite article used as a personal pronoun, and we translate it “his indignation.” This means, in effect, His judgement.

“and to make his power known” – a connective use of the conjunction kai, plus the aorist active infinitive of the verb gnwrizw which means to make known, to reveal, to declare. This is a culminative aorist viewing the event in its entirety but regarding it from the viewpoint of existing results – judgement. The active voice: God produces the action. It is an infinitive of purpose. Then we have an accusative singular direct object from dunatoj, meaning “power.”

Translation so far: “Moreover, [as is the case] God willing to demonstrate his indignation [divine judgement] and to reveal his omnipotence [power].”

“endured” – aorist active indicative from the verb ferw which means to carry a heavy load, to press, to push, but also to endure. This is a constative aorist, it refers to an action extended over a period of time. It actually refers to the time of the ten plagues. They are all gathered up into one entirety, says the constative aorist. This refers to Exodus 6-12. The constative aorist, then, gathers up into one entirety God’s patience and endurance with Israel during this time. The active voice: God produces the action of the verb which is this great demonstration of His grace. In other words, He kept pushing – “Let my people go.” The indicative mood is declarative for reality, the reality of God’s patience, of the fact that God did not kill Pharaoh outright and march the people out over his corpse, which He could have done. This verb is the one that goes with the conditional particle e)i to form the aposiopesis. It is the indicative of Pharaoh that sets up the protasis of the first class condition.

We have in support of this a prepositional phrase, e)n plus the instrumental of manner which expresses the methods by which the function is performed, plus the adjective polluj, plus makroqumia – patience or forbearance. Corrected translation: “with great patience.”

Principle

1. God in His matchless and perfect policy of grace gave Pharaoh every chance.

2. God demonstrated His justice and revealed His omnipotence by enduring with great patience this negative volition of Pharaoh.

3. The omnipotence of God is all-powerful, infinitely able to do all things which are the object of His power and within the range of His perfect integrity. However, God does not use His power to make right wrong. Hence, as in the case of Pharaoh, God used His power to make wrong right.

“vessels” – the nominative plural of the noun skeuoj, used for containers in the ancient world. The noun here is without a definite article, and the absence here of the definite article does not emphasise the qualitative aspect of the noun but the high price that God sets on all unbelievers. God paid a great price for all unbelievers. This is followed by the descriptive genitive singular from the noun o)rgh, an anthropopathism referring to divine judgement and condemnation in terms of human language of accommodation. Divine condemnation, as per John 3:18. It is the vessel of wrath, which from his own decision makes a decision. He fits himself by his own volition for destruction. And the printout: God simply knew in eternity past that this person would reject Christ as saviour and therefore would be a vessel of wrath. “Wrath” and “destruction” merely indicate the printout from the standpoint of the unbeliever. Again, God does not prepare the vessel of wrath but the vessel of wrath prepares himself through his own free will decision. He is a free agent, he has the opportunity of saying yes or no, and in self-determination he rejects Christ as saviour.

“fitted” – perfect passive participle from the verb katartizw. In the perfect tense this is a very meaningful word. Man’s free will can become the equipment for eternal blessing or eternal condemnation. It depends upon man’s self-determination, which is the basis for either blessing or cursing from God. This is a very unusual word and is used at least four ways in the scriptures. For example, it is used in a mechanical sense in Greek tragedy for tuning up the machine that always lowered the deities onto the stage, as in 1 Corinthians 1:10. It also was a military term for equipping an army, as in 2 Corinthians 13:11, or a naval term for supplying a fleet going into action, as in 1 Thessalonians 3:10. It was used as a fishing term for mending broken nets – 1 Peter 5:10. It was used in Galatians 6:1 for a medical term, mending broken bones. The translation has to emphasise the fact there that the volition of mankind determines the nature of the vessel. The lump of clay in verse 21 is human volition. God does not prepare the vessel of wrath; the free will of the unbeliever prepares the vessel for wrath. Remember that rejection of salvation is rejection of grace. Rejection of doctrine is tantamount to rejection of grace. With the perfect tense here we have a dramatic perfect and we will translate it, “having been prepared” or “having been equipped.” The dramatic perfect tense: the action of the verb is completed. That is, the negative volition at God-consciousness and negative volition at gospel hearing. This resolves the existing state. The status quo is an unbeliever, and this dramatic perfect emphasises the results of the action, that from one’s own free will a certain person has rejected Christ and remained in that status as an unbeliever. The passive voice: the vessel of wrath (the unbeliever) receives the action of the verb through his own negative volition. He receives the equipment for destruction from his own negative volition only. It is his decision and that is what makes him prepared or equipped for destruction. The participle is circumstantial.

With this is a prepositional phrase, e)ij plus the accusative singular of a)poleia which means literally “for destruction.” It refers to the last judgement.

Translation: “Moreover, if as is the case, God willing to demonstrate his indignation, and to reveal his omnipotence, has endured with great patience vessels of wrath [unbelievers] having been equipped for destruction [the last judgement].”

Principle

1. Man’s free will or self-determination can be equipment for eternal blessing or eternal judgement. Free will and self-determination must be coordinated with thought. When you have coordination with thought then you have equipment for eternal blessing or eternal judgement.

2. When man expresses positive volition through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ his non-meritorious expression of free will equips him as a vessel of mercy. He is prepared for the glory of God. He has done through his own volition related to his own mentality.

3. However, when man expresses negative volition, as did Pharaoh Amenhotep II, his free will prepares him for destruction, and the destruction in this verse is the great white throne judgement.

4. Either man will adjust to the justice of God by believing in Jesus Christ or he will maladjust to the justice of God and reject Christ. The justice of God will always adjust to either situation.

5. The principle also works the other way. In antithesis, when a person rejects Jesus Christ as his personal saviour then there is maladjustment to the justice of God, and this is followed by the justice of God providing what is necessary and compatible with His own attributes for that person. That would be discipline in time and eternal judgement.

Principle

1. When mankind from his own free will chooses the work of Christ on the cross for salvation he becomes a vessel of mercy. God has mercy on his soul and immediately provides 36 things. From then on, depending on his attitude toward doctrine, mercy intensifies and increases until a person can have the greatest possible happiness in this life.

2. When mankind from his own free will chooses his own works and his own self-righteousness he has become a vessel of wrath equipped and prepared for the last judgement.

3. Therefore only man’s rejection of the Lord Jesus Christ can bring about his destruction in the lake of fire. God in His patience is longsuffering and in His forbearance permits the unbeliever to live, always to demonstrate His power, always to give another chance.

4. God’s power was demonstrated in the plagues so that many in Egypt and throughout the world were evangelised through the negative volition of Pharaoh, the vessel of wrath.

5. In spite of opposition to God’s vessels of wrath or unbelievers, the unbelievers are kept alive by the mercy of God and used to fulfil His plan. Principle: God’s plan does not depend on you; it only depends upon God.

6. Ishmael, Esau and Pharaoh were all vessels of wrath. God endured with great patience these vessels so that each one revealed the power of God and the dynamics of God in moving His plan through, over and around these people. In other words, the principle: Nothing can stop the advance of the plan of God.

Principle

1. The vessels of wrath or unbelievers have been prepared for destruction through negative volition, first at God-consciousness. Then from there it branches out into many things – gospel hearing, and in the case of dialogue with God the confrontation with Moses, various ways.

2. Therefore it is the function of free will which equips or prepares a vessel of wrath for the last judgement. Pharaoh was a vessel of wrath prepared for destruction by means of his own free will – persistent, continual negative volition. Even though he had demonstrations of divine power which overwhelmed him completely he still said no.

Verse 23 – this is the continuation of the first class condition protasis. The protasis will go for three verses and there is no apodosis. This verse begins with the connective use of the conjunction kai – “and.” It is followed by i(na, and i(na plus the subjunctive is used for a purpose clause – “in order that.” With it is the verb, the aorist active subjunctive of the verb gnwrizw which means to know, to understand. It refers to perception, inculcation. It is one of the stronger Greek words for learning something so that you have words in your soul. And the words are put together with other words to form concepts and principles. And you have all of this as the greatest value in the world -- the thoughts that you have in your soul. Doctrine is your greatest value. “And in order that he might make known [inculcate, reveal].” The aorist tense is a culminative aorist; it views the event in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of existing results. The result of understanding the purpose of God gives these people another chance to get with the purpose of God, to believe in Jesus Christ. That is the purpose of making known His purpose. The active voice: God produces the action of the verb. The subjunctive mood is a potential subjunctive, which implies a future reference and is used here to express that category of purpose clause known as a final clause in the Greek. A pure final clause expresses a distinct purpose conceived as the aim of the action of the verb or the action indicated in the principle verb.

With this, this verb has an object, the accusative singular direct object of plutoj – “wealth” or “riches,” plus the accusative singular direct object from the definite article, the generic use for a unique category. This means in context, true wealth. What is the most important thing in life? Doctrine resident in the soul. Next is the possessive genitive singular from doca which means the attributes of God, the riches which belong to Him, plus the possessive genitive singular from the intensive pronoun a)utoj. A)utoj is not used as an intensive pronoun most of the time; it is used as the third person singular personal pronoun. So we translate this simply, “the riches of his glory.” This connotes the results of possessing the most important thing in life, and as a result of possessing that you are rich or wealthy. What is it that you possess here? Doctrine resident in your soul. By possessing doctrine in the soul and possessing one other factor, God’s perfect righteousness, God makes you rich. The “riches of his glory” indicates the imputation of divine blessing to the mature believer. God’s righteousness is imputed at salvation to all believers, but that is only the potential. Until there is capacity that will always remain a potential.

“on the vessels” – the preposition e)pi plus the accusative from skeuoj. The problem with e)pi is that it can mean different things. E)pi plus the genitive always emphasises contact; e)pi plus the accusative always emphasises motion or direction; e)pi plus the locative emphasises position. We have here e)pi plus the genitive which means contact, which is why it is translated “on.” Then we have the descriptive genitive from e)leoj, which means “mercy,” but mercy is grace in action. The justice of God imputes blessing to the righteousness of God, that is grace in action, and “mercy” here actually refers to the imputation of divine blessing to the mature believer. The anarthrous construction of the phrase indicates the high quality of the vessel. This is the mature believer and there is no definite article – no “the.”

“which [vessel]” -- the accusative neuter plural from the relative pronoun o(j, plus the aorist active indicative from the compound verb proetoimazw [pro = before; etoimazw = prepare] which means to prepare beforehand. It also means to appoint beforehand, to prepare previously, prepare ahead of time. How did He previously prepare? He simply knew ahead of time every decision you would ever make and He entered that decision into the divine decrees. And then, having entered it into the decrees, He entered logistical support for your decision. The constative aorist tense gathers up into one entirety the action of the verb. Here is the momentary action of the omniscience of God feeding facts about the believer into the computer of divine decrees, resulting in the printout. The active voice: the decrees of God produce the action of the verb in eternity past when God provided your needs. The indicative mood is declarative regarding the action of the verb from the viewpoint of absolute reality.

With this is a prepositional phrase, e)ij, a preposition used to indicate a purpose, plus the accusative singular from doca – “glory.” This prepositional phrase stands out in vivid contrast to the prepositional phrase at the close of the previous verse -- “for destruction.” Now it is “for glory.”

Translation: “And in order that he might make known the riches of his glory on vessels of mercy, which he previously prepared for glory.”

Only vessels of mercy or believers qualified have the potential for glory. The qualified believer is the one who takes in doctrine. The riches of glory includes the imputation of blessing in time to the righteousness of God – the first imputation, blessing in time imputed to its divinely prepared home (divine righteousness) which sets up the a fortiori for blessing in eternity imputed to a resurrection body.

Principle

1. While God has provided many wonderful things for the believer as a vessel of mercy the unbeliever or vessel of wrath has created his own miserable destiny. He did it through his own negative volition.

2. This protasis without an apodosis emphasises that being the physical seed of Abraham merely qualifies the Jew for being a vessel of wrath.

3. On the other hand the Jew who believes in Christ becomes a vessel of mercy, previously prepared for glory.

4. The contrast between destruction and glory summarises again the burden which Paul has for the Jew. Instead of depending on Christ for salvation his contemporary Jewish friends were dependent on keeping the law, plus the fact that they were physically related to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

5. Therefore the Jew without Christ becomes a vessel of wrath prepared for destruction by his own negative volition.

6. In eternity past God prepared the riches of glory (divine blessing) for those believers like Abraham, Moses, and Paul.

7. There is no divine blessing, only cursing, for the Jew who rejects Christ as saviour, for he, like Gentile Pharaoh, is a vessel of wrath prepared for destruction.

8. God originated the Jewish race for His glory but racial Jews had missed the divine purpose through the rejection of the Shekinah glory.

Verse 24 – the identification of the vessels of mercy. It begins with the masculine accusative plural from the relative pronoun o(j whose antecedent is “vessel” -- “Even us whom,” the ascensive use of kai which is “even,” then the accusative plural of first person personal pronoun e)gw – “even us.” This is a reference to all believers who in the previous verse are classified as vessels of mercy in contrast to the unbeliever who is a vessel of dishonour and prepared for destruction. The plural is for all believers of the Church Age, the dispensation of the royal family of God. This includes, therefore, Jew and Gentile.

Next is the aorist active indicative of the verb kalew, one of the verbs for the doctrine of election; it also is related to the doctrine of decrees. The constative aorist contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety, it means the formation of believers under the principle of the divine decree, and the printout of election. “Even us whom he has elected” is a better translation. The active voice: God produces the action of the verb in eternity past when His omniscience knew everyone who would believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. The indicative mood is declarative for the dogmatic statement of doctrine. Both decrees and election are a part of it.

Principle

1. The printout of believers includes election -- all free agents in the human race who would exercise non-meritorious volition at God-consciousness and gospel hearing.

2. Omniscience knew which ones who would believe in Christ, therefore these were fed into the computer of divine decrees as foreordained as well as elect.

3. The printout of believers therefore reads “election.”

We have the objective negative o)u plus the neuter monon as a limiting adverb, translated “not only.” Then the preposition e)k plus the ablative plural from I)oudaioj which is translated “not only from among the Jews,” plus the adversative conjunction that indicates that this principle is not limited to any particular race, it includes the entire human race, “but,” a)lla, in contrast to the Jews; then “also” which is the adjunctive use of the conjunction kai, and then e)k plus the ablative plural of e)qnoj, referring to the Gentiles.

Translation: “Even us, whom he has elected, not only from among Jews, but also from among Gentiles.”

Principle

1. Vessels of mercy or believers include both Jews and Gentiles who are born again through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

2. The context deals with a principle. Only those Jews who believe in Christ will be the recipients of the promises of God for Israel.

3. The promises apply only to the spiritual seed of Abraham, those who receive at salvation the imputed righteousness of God as well as eternal life.

4. In the dispensation of Israel not only many Jews but also many Gentiles executed salvation adjustment of the justice of God, the actually believed in Christ. But many more went through the great blot-out in which you can actually blank out of the mind the implications of the first advent.

5. The aposiopesis terminates at the end these three verses – 22,23,24. The protasis of the first class condition is presented but there is no apodosis. The apodosis can only mean one thing. If a Jew, after that protasis of three verses, fills in the apodosis in his mind then he cannot do anything but believe in Christ. But of he refuses to finish the sentence then he is a victim of the great blot-out, the blotting out of the first advent of the Lord Jesus Christ.

6. This ellipsis also indicates Paul’s emotional involvement with the Jews. Paul had a great burden for the Jews.

7. Instead of the apodosis Paul immediately starts quoting from Old Testament scripture to document the point. In other words, he uses the protasis of a first class condition (aposiopesis) and then skips altogether the apodosis because if you are following the protasis the Jewish unbeliever has to make his own decision. If he believes he will finish the apodosis; if he does not believe, if he rejects Christ as saviour, he never will. But he goes right on, then, to Old Testament documentation to take the scriptures which they themselves regard as sacred and demonstrate his point.

8. Along with the elect remnant of Israel God’s purpose was to call out also and elect body of Gentiles as people for His name. So this is not wasted on the Gentiles. A Gentile can also follow the reasoning here and fill in the blank, or refuse to. To fill in the blank as a Gentile you believe in Jesus Christ, but if as a Gentile you reject Jesus Christ then you do not complete the sentence. So this is for the Jew and the Gentile, he says, at the end of the protasis.

9. One of the responsibilities of Israel in the past as a priest and client nation was to function as a missionary nation to the Gentiles. In every generation of the dispensation of Israel Gentiles were saved. They were saved by seeing the Jewish animal sacrifices, the function of the Jewish Levitical priesthood, the observation of the holy days. All of these things made sense to them and they believed. So Gentiles were saved by using Jewish symbols as the means of understanding and therefore Gentiles can understand something far greater, this great protasis which is aposiopesis in the first class condition.

10. Paul as an apostle to the Gentiles continues this function in the dispensation of the Church, indicating once again that this is for the Jew and for the Gentile.

11. In fact, shortly after Paul’s death the Jewish nation of Judea was no longer to serve as a client nation to God but would be punished with the fifth cycle of discipline which introduces the times of the Gentiles. The first Gentile nation will be the Roman empire. Paul himself, therefore, is the transitional person.

12. In the times of the Gentiles only Gentile nations can qualify as a client nation to God. No Jewish nation will serve as such until the second advent of Christ.

13. Paul is the last and greatest of all the Jewish missionaries. He became a missionary to the Gentiles as preparation for the times of the Gentiles.

In verses 25-29 there is a series of documentary systems from the Old Testament. Each reference brings out something that every Gentile should know as well as every Jew. This is Old Testament documentation regarding vessels of mercy. In this we see the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction. The first reference is in verse 25 and it begins with a quotation from Hosea 2:23.

Verse 25 quotes from Hosea 2:23, “And I will sow her unto me in the earth; and I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy; and I will say to them which were not my people, Thou art my people; and they shall say, Thou art my God.” In verse 25 the word “Osee” is simply the Greek way of presenting Hosea. There is no “h” in the Greek, just a rough breathing, so we have a transliteration leaving out the rough breathing. The recorded message of Hosea deals with Israel as an unfaithful wife running away from God.

The Greek begins with a comparative particle o(j, which indicates the manner in which something precedes. It is correctly translated “as.” Then the adjunctive use of the conjunction kai, translated “also,” followed by the present active indicative of the verb legw which means to communicate, to say. “As he has also communicated.” The present tense of duration denotes what was begun in the past and continues into the present time. The active voice: God [verse 22] produces the action of the verb through Hosea. The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of the written canon of scripture, Old Testament. Then we have the prepositional phrase which identifies the portion of the Old Testament scripture, e)n plus the indeclinable proper noun W(she – “Hosea.” It refers to Hosea 2:23 but only part of that verse is quoted by Paul in beginning the subject of the great dropout. “And I will say to those who are not my people [the Gentiles], you are my people…” In other words, it is a prophetical passage dealing with the fact that the time will come in history when the Jews will no longer be a client nation to God, when they will no longer have the privilege and the opportunity of presenting the gospel, of enjoying the freedom which comes from Codex #3, of teaching doctrine to believers, of fulfilling missionary function. The time is coming when this will be turned over to the Gentiles. “… and they will say, You are my God.” This is the part that Paul quotes from Hosea 2:23, but there is a phrase before and a phrase after which he did not quote. The first part: “Therefore I sow her for myself in the land.” This is a Millennial reference which is why he did not quote it. It is dealing with the Jews in the land after the Second Advent, the restoration of Israel at the Second Advent when the Jews will again have the privilege of being a client nation to God during the Millennium and forever. The sentence indicates, “I have to restore you [first phrase] because of the great blot-out. You are going to come to the place where I am going to have to cancel you as a client nation” – fifth cycle of discipline which would come after the first advent. But they would again be restored, the times of the Gentiles terminates with the Second Advent. The second left-out phrase is found at the end of the verse: “I will love tenderly the one not being loved [literally from the Hebrew].” This is a reference to the restoration of Israel at the Second Advent. So on each side of what Paul quoted we have a Second Advent reference. No Jewish nation at the present time can be a client nation to God. There will be a Jewish client nation to God in the future, for out of the Tribulation will come believing Jews who will form a nation. But they will recognise in the Second Advent that this is He who came in the first advent, there are four chapters in Zechariah on this very thing. They will look on Him whom they have pierced. Who are they? These are Jews who believe during the Tribulation and they are going into the Millennium as the client nation to God.

Hosea 2:23 is one of those rare prophecies that includes both Jew and Gentile together, and therefore it is Paul’s first documentation of salvation for both Gentile. And more than that, that the Gentiles are going to be a client nation to God.

In the Greek of Romans 9 it says, “I will call them my people, which are not my people.” In the Greek we have the future active indicative of kalew which as we have already seen is used to connote election. It means “I will elect.” It is used here to indicate we are now past the first advent, the first advent is historical.

Then we have ton o)u laon mou laon mou, which is literally, “the not my people, my people. However, the accusative singular definite article ton is used here as a demonstrative pronoun. Being used as a demonstrative pronoun it combines with the relative pronoun to refer to Gentiles and we translate it, therefore, “those who are not my people.” That is, Gentiles. The possessive genitive singular from the personal pronoun e)gw refers to God, “my.” God possesses us as of the moment we believe in Jesus Christ. We have also the accusative singular direct object laoj. Referring to the Gentiles the Jews called them in the Hebrew goi. In the Greek they used e)qnh [from e)qnoj], the word usually used for Gentiles. Why call them laoj? Because they are also going to act as client nations as well as individuals.

Then dealing with the Jews, “[I will call] he beloved, which was not beloved.” This becomes a double accusative in which we have a direct and predicate object of the verb. The accusative singular with the definite article, this time thn in the feminine form of the accusative because the words being used are in the feminine, and therefore it is still translated as a demonstrative pronoun whose antecedent is the Jews scattered throughout the fifth cycle of discipline.

Then we have a negative o)u plus the prefect passive participle of a)gapaw – “those who have not been loved.” The perfect tense is the intensive perfect, it finds the action completed and the results emphasised. The completed action is the administration of the fifth cycle of discipline to Israel in 70 AD because of an accumulation of the great blot-out and forty years to change their mind. But during those forty years, even though they had intensified evangelism, they rejected. The existing results include the times of the Gentiles with no Jewish nation as a client nation to God. The passive voice: the Jewish nation receives the action of the verb which is negative during the times of the Gentiles. The partciple is circumstantial designed to express the attendant circumstances of the times of the Gentiles and to reveal the subject of the great blot-out. Again the perfect passive participle from the verb a)gapaw. This time it is repeated, only in the passive voice as having been loved. The dramatic perfect is used this time, which is the rhetorical use of the intensive perfect, emphasising the results of the second advent and the restoration of Israel in the Millennium. The passive voice: restored Israel in the Millennium receives the action of the verb. The participle is called a modal participle, signifying the manner in which the action is accomplished, and it is translated by a comparative particle o(j indicating the manner in which something proceeds.

Translation: “As he has also communicated in Hosea [Hos. 2:23], I will call those who are not my people [Gentiles], my people [Gentiles become the client nations]; and those who have not been loved [Jewish nations in the times of the Gentiles] as those who have been loved [they will be restored at the second advent].”

The reverse in the order of Hosea 2:23 by Paul becomes apparent when one realises that Paul gives the historical order while Hosea gives the order of importance. Furthermore “those who have not been loved” refers to racial but not to regenerate Jews. Those Jews who have believed in Jesus Christ are totally excluded from the concept of the great blot-out. Those who have not been loved are racial Jews. Guilty of the great blot-out they have not actually received Christ as saviour. Those who have not been loved are the physical seed of Abraham; those who have been loved are the spiritual seed. The difference between them is attitude toward the first advent of Christ.

Principle

1. Paul uses the Old Testament quotation to verify the fact of salvation of the Gentiles -- the fact that they would be saved, the fact that there would come a time in history in a different dispensation when only Gentile nations would be client nations to God.

2. Even though the Jews are the centre of God’s plan they are set aside in divine discipline. But the plan of God moves right on – through Gentiles.

3. Jewish apostasy and reversionism neither hinders the plan of God nor does it hinder the faithfulness of God to Israel. The great failure of the Jews is the complete rejection of the first advent of Christ – the great blot-out, literally blotting it out of the mind. Or perhaps a more subtle and sophisticated form of blot-out – recognition without qualification.

4. God’s promises to Israel are not abrogated and God’s plan for Israel is not hindered by the great blot-out or by any form of Jewish reversionism or Jewish apostasy or by any form of divine punishment to the Jew.

5. In every generation there will be a Jewish remnant. This is illustrated by Paul’s quotation from Isaiah in verse 27 where he quotes Isaiah 10:27.

6. No one’s failure can hinder the plan of God and no one’s sinfulness or apostasy can destroy the faithfulness of God. God’s character is incorruptible; God’s integrity is immutable; and God’s wisdom is beyond genius.

7. The Jewish nation of Israel has been set aside as the client nation to God but the plan of God moves on with Gentile client nations.

8. Individual believers fail but the faithfulness of God never fails. The integrity of God overcomes human failure.

Verse 26 – this time we have a quotation from the first chapter of Hosea, verse 10. A literal translation from the Hebrew of verses 9,10: “And the Lord said, name him Lo-ammi [Lo = not; am = people; mi = first person singular suffix referring to God, but with the negative: ‘not my people’] …” This was to be the illustration of how Israel would be set aside because for 400 years in every generation, with increasing tempo, they practiced the great blot-out. They practiced it eschatologically; today the Jews practice it historically. “… for you are not my people, and I am not your God.” This is a prophecy anticipating the day when the Jews would be set aside. “Yet the number of the sons of Israel will be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured …” No matter how many times God eliminates the cancer in Israel which is the blot-out of the first advent there is no lack of Jews on the earth. They are still here because of God’s faithfulness. Not only will there be a remnant but there is a repopulation. Satan has never been able to eradicate the Jews. Anti-Semitism is Satan’s program to remove the Jew from the earth, and even though Satan has tried with all of his power and genius we have Jews everywhere today. This is God’s faithfulness. “… and it shall come to pass, in the place where it was said unto them [referring to Hosea 2]. You are not my people, it will be said to them, You are the sons of the living God.” In other words, God may say to certain Jews as the cancer is blotted out, “You are not my people.” But there are always those who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and recognise Him as the only saviour, the God of Israel. They will multiply and exist in every generation and when the second advent occurs He will say to them, “You are my people.”

Lo-ammi refers by interpretation to the northern kingdom to whom Hosea ministered. But, of course, it refers to Israel in general as the apostle Paul quotes it, for the principle applies to all of Israel just as it applied in Hosea to a specific part of Israel. Though the ten tribes of the northern kingdom were to be removed as a client nation to God the promise of God to true Israel – anyone who would believe – would be fulfilled. Even though some of it could not be fulfilled until the Second Advent God keeps His word. The elapse of time does not hinder God keeping His word to true Israel. These are promises which are mentioned in Genesis 15:5; 22:17; 26:4; Jeremiah 33:22; Hosea 1:10. The divine discipline of the ten tribes of the northern kingdom does not abolish or abrogate any of God’s promises or evangelism to the Jews. So we have the phrase, “in the place where” they were destroyed in the northern kingdom, in that same place they will find blessing. It refers to the land which was overrun by the Assyrians in the administration of the 5^th cycle of discipline in BC 721. In that same place at the second advent of Christ those who believe in Him, those not guilty of this intensified negative volition – the great blot-out, will be called the sons of the living God. So just as the quotation in Hosea 2:23 documents the salvation of Gentiles in the Old Testament this second quotation from Hosea 1:10 documents the salvation of Jews in the Old Testament.

Now for the Greek exegesis of verse 26. It begins with the connective use of the conjunction kai plus the future active indicative of e)imi. The future tense is predictive for the second advent of Christ and the restoration of Israel. The active voice: the second advent of Christ produces the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative for the fulfilment of the prophecy of the Second Advent.

“in the place” – e)n plus the locative of topoj. “And it shall be, in the place.” Then we have the adverb of place, o(u, which means “where.” It is a specific reference to the land of Israel.

“it was said to them” – ‘it was said’ is the aorist passive indicative from rew, a word which originally means to flow, and from flowing it means to speak because some people speak that way. The flow of words is the idea. The flow of words is merely a way of saying this is a quotation. The constative aorist contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety, the last half of Hosea 1:10. The passive voice: the tens tribes of the northern kingdom receive the action of the verb by interpretation, but obviously it is a message to any group of Jews in any period of time who are guilty of the great blot-out. The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of divine renunciation of those Jews who reject Jesus Christ as saviour and therefore form the great blot-out. Then there is the dative plural indirect object from the intensive pronoun a)utoj used as a third person singular personal pronoun. It is correctly translated “to them.” So, “And it shall be in the place where it was said to them.” And where was it said to them, the Jews? Hosea 1:10.

Next is the nominative plural subject from the personal pronoun su, which is here proleptic – “you” specific people, the Jews. Hosea was talking to the 10 tribes in the northern kingdom but Paul in this quotation from Hosea flows another thought. Now it includes Jews everywhere who are guilty of the great blot-out. In Paul’s day it was Jews everywhere. Then we have to insert the present active indicative of the verb e)imi because next we have the predicate nominative of laoj. With it is the negative o)u, the possessive genitive of e)gw – “you are not my people.”

“there” is the adverb e)kei, referring to what is now called the ‘holy land.’ In that very same place where there once existed the great blot-out so that they had to be completely destroyed by the Assyrians there will be Jews that God will be able to call “My people.”

“they shall be called” – the future is referring to the second advent. The passive voice: true Israel will receive the action of the verb, as per Hosea 1:10 which documents the fact that this is expanded to include all Jewish believers. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of Bible doctrine.

Then we have the nominative of appellation from u(ioj with the possessive genitive of qeoj – “sons of the living God.” The descriptive genitive singular, present active participle of zaw – “living.” God lives; God is eternal; Jesus Christ is God.

Translation: “And it shall be in the place [Israel] where it was said [Hosea 1:10], You are not my people; in that same place [Israel] they shall be called the sons of the living God.”

Verses 27 & 28 is the third documentation, a quotation from Isaiah 10:22,23. The context in the Hebrew is a prophecy regarding the restoration of Israel at the Second Advent. Paul does not quote Isaiah 10:21 which says, “A remnant will return, a remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God.” This is the group of people who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ and were not guilty of the great blot-out which occurred when the Assyrians took the northern kingdom, was repeated when the Chaldeans under Nebuchadnezzar too the southern kingdom, was repeated periodically in the fourth cycle of discipline, and finally concluded with the 5^th cycle of discipline administered by the Romans in AD 70. In each case there was a tremendous build-up of this spiritual cancer, the great blot-out which is a concentration of people who have maximum hardness of heart. This blot-out is a complete ignoring of the first advent as the expression of maximum negative volition. Even in the Tribulation there will be a great blot-out but there will also be those who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, beginning with the 144,000 Jews scattered throughout the entire earth from twelve of the thirteen tribes. Only the tribe of Dan will be excluded. From the tribe of Dan will come the Jewish antichrist. They in turn will have a great evangelistic push so that when Christ returns to the earth there will be those who are there to greet Him, who recognise Him as saviour. They were not guilty of the great blot-out, they believed in Him, and they will be the remnant of Jacob who will be there to welcome the Lord Jesus Christ as the Mighty God of Israel.

Isaiah 10:22 – “For though your people, Israel, shall be like the sand of the sea, only a remnant within them will return …” The great population explosion which historically has occurred where Israel is concerned, their people are like the sand of the sea, but only a remnant are actually going to be there because of the big blot-out. “… a destruction is decreed bringing in justice like a flood.” Here is one passage that lays it very clearly on the line. Why were 5-million Jews destroyed by the Nazis? “A destruction is decreed bringing in justice like a flood.”

Verse 23 – “For a complete annihilation, one that is decreed, my Lord Jehovah of the armies will execute in the midst of the entire land.” This is referring specifically to a judgement which occurred in the land. The 5th cycle of discipline occurs three times historically; the 4th cycle of discipline many, many times historically. All of this was because of the big blot-out which is today, right up to this moment, the greatest problem and the greatest failure of the Jewish people – their maximum negative volition expressing itself in a total rejection of then first advent, a total rejection of Jesus Christ as the Messiah, a total rejection of the salvation first portrayed in the blood offerings which the Jews practiced, beginning with the Exodus generation. These Levitical offerings were given to Moses by the Lord Jesus Christ on Mount Sinai, and yet these very same blood offerings were rejected and ignored. They went through the ritual; they rejected the reality. The great failure of Israel is always ritual without reality.

These two verses are quoted in Romans chapter nine, verses 27 & 28. Both of these quotations are made from the Septuagint, rather than from the Hebrew. Verse 22 is quoted in Romans 9:27; Isaiah 10:23 is quoted in Romans 9:28. The quotation distinguishes between the innumerable physical seed of Abraham and the remnant of true Jews or those who did not make the fatal error of ignoring the first advent.

Romans 9:27 – “Esaias” is a transliteration of the Greek. E)saiaj, plus the postpositive conjunction de; the ascensive use of gar should be translated “in fact.”

“crieth” – the present active indicative of krazw means to cry, among other things. It covers the whole gamut of both intensive and urgent speaking. It is translated here, therefore, “speaking [preaching] in an emergency.” This is when Sennacherib invaded. This was the great crisis which came to Israel because of a large blot-out of the first advent. This is why Isaiah overcame it with all of his great messages about the first advent of Christ. The present tense is a pictorial present which presents to the mind a picture of Isaiah’s message in the process of occurrence. The Assyrians under Sennacherib were knocking at the gates of Jerusalem. The active voice: Isaiah gave the message, producing the action of the verb in a dramatic speech in a time of national crisis. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality.

The emergency is found in the prepositional phrase, the preposition u(per plus the genitive of reference from the definite article plus the indeclinable proper noun I)srahl. “In fact, Isaiah speaking in an emergency with reference to Israel.” Quote: Isaiah 10:22,23.

Verse 28 – it begins with the explanatory use of the postpositive conjunctive particle gar. The subject in the nominative singular is the noun kurioj, referring to the Lord Jesus Christ, not only here but also throughout the rest of this chapter and the next – the Greek word for deity, for God. It indicates the Lord Jesus Christ with emphasis on His first advent. The anarthrous construction emphasises the uniqueness of the person of Christ at the Second Advent, the uniqueness which came as a result of the first advent. The big blot-out with regard to the first advent has devastated not only the Jews but countless Gentile nations and empires who have been and formed the function of client nations only to be destroyed by the big blot-out.

Next comes a verb, the future active indicative of poiew – to do, make, manufacture, accomplish, execute. Here it means to execute, not to finish anything. The predictive future refers to the second advent of Jesus Christ when the Lord Jesus Christ will terminate any possibility of the big blot-out. The active voice: the Lord Jesus Christ produces the action of the verb in the delivering of true Israel, regenerate Jews scattered throughout the world. There will be a big blot-out but it will be removed, it will be the judgement of the Jews mentioned in Ezekiel chapter 20. But in spite of the big blot-out -- we have noted in every generation there is some blot-out, sometimes so big that it calls for special divine discipline and great historical disaster -- there will always be a remnant of Jews who are believers in the Lord Jesus Christ and they will be there to welcome the Lord Jesus Christ back to the earth, and they are the ones to whom the Lord Jesus Christ will fulfil the Abrahamic, Palestinian, Davidic and New covenants to Israel. The indicative mood is declarative for a future reality. It also acts as the main verb for two participles. “For the Lord will execute.”

And where is He going to execute His word? – e)pi plus the genitive of gh, “on the earth.” This is the second advent of Christ, termination of Jewish troubles from the big blot-out. Israel will be restored as the client nation of God and never again will it be plagued by the big blot-out. “For the Lord will execute his word on the earth” is the correct translation, and it refers to the Second Advent.

Then there are two participles. First of all, a complementary participle and secondly a modal participle. The present active participle of suntelew is the complementary participle. The word means to complete, to bring about, to finish, to consummate. Here we will translate it “completing.” The static present tense is for a fact of doctrine being taken for granted as a fact – the Second Advent with the restoration of Israel as a client nation and the total termination of any possibility of any more great blot-outs. The active voice: Jesus Christ produces the action of the verb at the Second Advent. The complementary participle is one in which the participle complements the idea of the action expressed in the main verb. The main verb: “he will execute his word.” Then the second participle which is present active, and the verb is suntemnw – it means to cut short, to execute speedily, but these are not even close to what it actually means here. What it really means it to decree. This is a historical present viewing the divine decrees in eternity past with the vividness of a present occurrence. The active voice: God did the decreeing in eternity past when the omniscience of God separated fact from fiction and entered the actual into the computer. He decreed for Israel certain things. Of course, the big blot-out was there and the printout was holocaust, judgement. But the printout involved here is the fulfilment of Israel as a permanent client nation under the unconditional covenants, beginning at the second advent, continuing throughout the Millennium and then in to eternity forever. The modal participle signifies the manner in which the action of the main verb is accomplished. And this is why with a complimentary and a modal participle this is the way you must translate this verse, no other translation will do: “For the Lord will execute his word on the earth, completing what he also decreed.”

Principle

1. The adjunctive use of the conjunction kai indicates the fact that the decrees existed in eternity past. Long before space, time or creatures existed the decrees existed. That is why we have the word “also,” the adjunctive use of kai. It goes with the modal participle, not the complementary participle.

2. Christ is often called Alpha and Omega, which, of course, is the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet.

3. As Alpha God’s omniscience fed into the computer of divine decrees the actual. Jesus Christ was there in eternity past. He knew as Alpha, existing in eternity past, every thought of every person who would ever live plus every decision of every person who would ever live; and, furthermore, every action of every person who would ever live. God possessed perfect glory in eternity past when He decreed, and when He possessed the same glory in Omega in eternal future. The glory He had when He programmed the computer is the same glory He will have when the believing Jews welcome Him back at the Second Advent. When He comes back He not only has that perfect essence which He has always had, but true humanity – true Jewish humanity, line of David forever. That is His Omega glory.

What makes His Omega glory? The first advent makes His Omega glory. There is no Omega glory without a virgin giving birth to a son and His name is called Emmanuel – God with us. The Omega glory of the Lord Jesus Christ is the fact that He came into the world through virgin birth, minus the imputation of Adam’s sin, minus the old sin nature. He lived a life of perfection even though He was tempted far beyond anything we will ever know or understand. The Omega glory is related to the first advent, and every Jew that has blotted out the first advent in his soul with his negative volition rejects the Omega glory and removes them from this life. You can’t have Alpha glory without Omega glory.

So this verse refers to a moment in history, the Second Advent, when Omega glory is revealed to Israel.

4. At the Second Advent Christ will execute His word to the Jews through deliverance of the Armageddon campaign, restoration of the believing Jews to form the new client nation, and fulfilment of the unconditional covenants to Israel.

5. In this way God will have completed what He decreed regarding the future of the true Jew, the regenerate remnant of Israel, both in time [Millennium] and eternity – forever.

6. There will be a remnant of true Jews, those who did not blot out the first advent; believers in Christ scattered throughout the world during the Tribulation. They will be regathered as the last and eternal client nation. These born-again Jews will be delivered at the Second Advent.

The principle behind all of this is what God decrees, God executes; what God promises, God fulfils. He keeps His word. Sodom and Gomorrah is a perfect illustration of a Gentile big blot-out, and this is coming up in the next verse.

Translation: “For the Lord will execute his word on the earth, completing what he also decreed.”

He decreed it as Alpha; He completes it as Omega.

Principle

1. The omniscience of Jesus Christ who is God fed reality into the computer of divine decrees.

2. This reality includes every human thought, decision, and action in history.

3. On a personal basis the programming of the computer in eternity past includes every person in history from Adam and the woman down to the last person of the last day of the Millennium.

4. God will complete what He has decreed.

5. God the Son will bring about and finish human history so that every thought, every decision, every action known by His omniscience in eternity past will actually occur.

Every Jew who has ever been involved in the big blot-out is a world record holder, making Amenhotep II look like a little boy. They all break his record. Therefore, when they blot the first advent out of their minds through their own free will then God blots them out of human history. In that way He eliminates the cancer so that others can be evangelised.

6. To all the free will decisions and free agent functions God will be glorified whether man’s decisions are compatible with divine policy or antagonistic to divine policy.

7. The plan of God moves on with or without you.

8. Furthermore, the plan of God does not depend on man; actually, man depends on the plan of God.

9. In spite of all Satanic antagonisms and human negative volition the plan of God with its stated objectives moves on to completion, unhindered by any form of opposition, human or angelic. And the greatest form of opposition in the inner circle of the plan of God is Israel’s big blot-out.

10. Jesus Christ controls history. Jesus Christ has provided from His Word solutions to every disaster of life but all solutions are bound up in the implications of the first advent – common grace, efficacious grace and, after salvation, persistence in the perception of the Word. For the believer who persists in the perception of doctrine there is no problem or difficulty for which there is not a perfect solution in the doctrinal content of the Word as it is transferred to the individual soul.

Isaiah 29:9 – “Be shocked, and amazed…” A perfect way to introduce the subject of the big blot-out from the standpoint of the Jews because of the terrible things that have happened to the Jews throughout history that have shocked us perhaps the most. The big blot-out is a shocking thing when it comes to the resultant judgments which occur periodically throughout history. There are several ways to become aware of the big blot-out and one of them is to see the shocking results in history. The next two imperatives in this verse actually describe in one short phrase the big blot-out. “… blind yourselves, and be blind …” This is a short definition of the big blot-out, the complete ignoring of the first advent of Christ; blotting it completely out of the mind through the maximum use of negative volition, a negative volition which every time it is expressed in the big blot-out is a world record, formerly held by the Pharaoh of the Exodus. “… they stagger, but not from strong drink …” They are not drunk, they are staggering from something far greater than inebriation, they are staggering from judgment. God judges the big blot-out.

Verse 10 – “For the Lord has poured over you a spirit of deep sleep …” If you want a description of the Jews today and in every generation when the big blot-out exists, here it is. They actually have in their spiritual heritage a detailed account of the first advent. “… he has shut your eyes, O prophets …” They were completely blind to the first advent. “… he has covered your heads, O seers.”

Verse 11 – “Therefore the entire vision [first advent] shall be to you like the words of a sealed book…” absolutely obscured by their negative volition “which, when they give it to one who is literate, saying, Please read this, he will reply, I cannot read.” He can’t read it because it is sealed.

Verse 12 – “When the book is given to one who is literate, saying, Please read this, he will reply, I cannot read.” The literate can’t read it because it is sealed – the big blot-out; the illiterate cannot read it because he cannot read. These areas of the big blot-out, of the classifications of negative volition involved: those who understood it thoroughly and rejected it – the literate; those who came up to it and didn’t want to understand it -- analogous to the illiterate.

Verse 13 – “Then the Lord said, Because this people draw near with their mouth, and honour me with their lips” – taking Codex #2 which reveals Christ, first advent, in the greatest of detail, and honour with their lips, and yet at the very same time reject the things that they were saying in their souls. “… but they remove their right lobes [hearts] from me [first advent], and their respect for me [Jesus Christ, first advent], and [instead of believing in me] their respect is the commandments [Codex #1 & #3, rather than #2], learned by memorising.” They keep the commandments, producing a self-righteousness, and they go through the ritual of Codex #2 without the reality, which is believing in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Verse 14 – “Therefore, behold, I will once again deal wonderfully with this people” – there is always a pivot; there is always a remnant of believers in every generation. God’s faithfulness to Israel never ceases. Even though they fail in certain generations with the big blot-out He is still faithful to them and provides for them eternal salvation – “doing wonderfully a wonderful thing” – the restoration of Israel in spite of the big blot-out in any generation: in spite of the judgment which destroys so many of them, they are still like the dust of the earth and the sand of the sea, and the stars of the heavens – “therefore the wisdom of their wise men will perish” – the Jews are very smart, but no matter how brilliant they are they are blind toward the first advent, which completely neutralises their great intelligence -- “and the intelligence of their intelligence shall vanish” – any time there is a holocaust as a result of the big blot-out. This anticipates Romans 11:8-10.

Romans 9:29 – a quotation from Isaiah 1:9. The purpose of this analogy can only really be explained in detail by the Alpha and Omega passages of Romans as they relate to the big drop-out. It begins with the connected use of kai to introduce the result which comes from what precedes – “And so.” Then we have the comparative particle kaqwj which is translated “just as.” This is followed by the nominative singular subject of the proper noun H)saioj – Isaiah, and the verb, the perfect active indicative of prolegw, a synonym for prophesying – “And so, just as Isaiah has prophesied.” The intensive perfect tense indicates a completed action with continuous results. When special attention is directed to the results of the action emphasis on the existing act is always intensified. Isaiah’s prophecy is written with the result that it stands written forever in the Old Testament canon; it is all there; it is all written by one man. The active voice: Isaiah under the ministry of God the Holy Spirit is that one man who produces the action of rhe verb. The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of Isaiah’s eschatological ministry.

Then Paul quotes Isaiah 1:9. In the original context this is a reference to the administration of the 4^th cycle of discipline to the southern kingdom – BC 701, the Sennacherib invasion of the southern kingdom. The immediate context includes Isaiah chapter one, verses 7 & 8, which describes the devastation, the holocaust that came as a result of the big blot-out. Isaiah 1:9 – “Unless the Lord of the armies [Jesus Christ] had caused to remain to us a remnant of a few” – that was the pivot that made it possible for Israel to only go as far as the 4^th cycle of discipline and not to be destroyed under the 5^th cycle of discipline in the days of Sennacherib – “like Sodom, we should have resembled Gomorrah.” We have a comforting verse about the remnant or the pivot of mature believers in history. Under the principle that Jesus Christ controls history it is the pivot of mature believers who deliver the nation in time of historical disaster by their very presence in that client kingdom. This is why the Jews continued as a client kingdom in the time of Isaiah, in the time of Hezekiah – believers responded in positive volition to the teaching of the Word.

We have the protasis of a second class condition introduced by the conditional particle e)i, plus the negative mh which denies the idea. It is translated literally, “If not.” It should be translated in the sense of its idiom, “Except that” or “Except.” Then we have the subject in the nominative, kurioj, used here for the Lord Jesus Christ under His Omega power. Omega refers to Christ in hypostatic union, beginning with the virgin birth, continuing with the incarnation, impeccability, His ministry, His work on the cross, after which His physical death, resurrection, ascension, session, return. Part of the big blot-out is the fact that the Jew who is on negative volition always recognises the God of Israel under the title of Adonai Elohim, the Alpha glory of Jesus Christ, but he blots out completely the first advent and its implications, and therefore rejects the Omega glory of the Lord Jesus Christ. The word that follows is sabawq, which is a transliteration of the Hebrew word Sa-ba-oth. It means “armies,” large groups of people. “Except the Lord of the armies,” and it refers to the Lord Jesus Christ, the Shekinah glory of Israel, the one who controls history.

Then the verb, the aorist active indicative e)gkataleipw. It means to leave in a place or situation, to leave behind, to forsake, to abandon. To leave as a remnant or a pivot for the preservation of a client nation is what is meant here – “had allowed to remain.” In other words, this Greek word tells us that even in the great holocaust it is always the Jew who is negative and a part of the big blot-out who is removed. And even believers of all states, from babyhood to maturity, are permitted to continue. They are left on the earth during one of these great divine judgements so that no believer is involved in a holocaust. The culminative aorist tense views the action of the Lord in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of existing results, which is, at certain periods of judgment in history very few people in the Jewish race are preserved except those who are believers. The active voice: Jesus Christ as Jehovah of the armies, the God of Israel, produces the action. The indicative mood is declarative for historical reality and the perpetuation of the seed of Abraham throughout history.

Next we have a dative plural indirect object from the personal pronoun e)gw – “to us.” The dative of indirect object indicates the ones in whose interest the act is performed. It is in the interest of the Jews to be perpetuated and it is in the interest of the Gentiles to exist on the earth because there are Jews. No Jews; no Gentiles! It all depends on the survival of the Jew. The accusative singular direct object from the noun sperma is used for the spiritual seed of Abraham here, the racial Jew who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ – “a seed.”

Now to the apodosis. We have the particle a)n which signifies the apodosis of a second class condition. The second class condition contains the supposition based on information in the protasis, and therefore the apodosis is determined as unfulfilled. There never will be a generation when there are not Jews who believe in Christ.

The people of Sodom and Gomorrah have completely disappeared from history; the Jew continues in history. In every generation of history certain Jesus believe in Christ, forming the basis for a remnant, a pivot, a spiritual seed of Abraham.

We have an aorist passive indicative of the verb ginomai which means to be or to become, plus the particle a)n to denote unreality. Furthermore, a)n denotes that the action of the verb is dependent upon some circumstance – the existence of a pivot, a remnant of born-again Jews, the spiritual seed of Abraham. This should be “we would have become [but we won’t].” The a)n means it was a potential but it will never become a reality. The culminative aorist tense of ginomai views the preservation of Israel as a race in its entirety but it regards it from the viewpoint of existing results – a pivot of Jews will always exist, right down to the second advent of Christ where the pivot there will greet the Lord Jesus Christ when His feet shall stand on that day on the mount of Olives. The passive voice: while Paul writes as a regenerate Jew, racial Jews also receive the action of the verb. You have to be a racial Jew before you are a regenerate Jew. The indicative mood is the potential indicative of condition.

“as” – comparative particle w(j, “like,” plus the nominative of appellation Sodoma.

“and” – kai begins the phrase “and be made like unto Gomorrah.” We have the aorist passive indicative of o(moiow and it means to be made like something, to resemble, to be compared to, or even under some conditions to assimilate. The culminative aorist tense views the unreality in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of existing results. The passive voice: the racial Jew receives the action of he verb. The indicative mood is potential; it has a contingent element. It all depends on whether people who are believers turn around and start to respond to the teaching of doctrine, and whether or not there is any form of evangelism in that that particular country. Then the comparative particle o(j, meaning “like,” with the nominative of appellation which is Gomorrah. No one survived the destruction of Gomorrah; there were only three survivors from Sodom. This is what happens in a nation whenever the 5^th cycle of discipline is administered.

Translation: “And so, just as Isaiah had prophesied [Isaiah 1:9], Except the Lord of the armies [the Lord Jesus Christ] had left to us a seed [a spiritual seed, a pivot of mature believers], we would have become like Sodom, we would have been made like unto Gomorrah.”

Principle

1. Just as a pivot of mature believers delivers a client nation to God from the administration of the 5^th cycle of discipline [annihilation], so a regenerate remnant of Jews, the spiritual seed of Abraham, perpetuates the Jewish race in every generation in the times of the Gentiles. This emphasises the fact that there will never be a time when there are no Jews on the earth. This is a monument to the faithfulness of God.

2. Between the 5^th cycle of discipline in AD 70 and the second advent of Christ – this includes the Church Age and the Tribulation – there will always be Jews in every generation, and there never will be a time when Satan can destroy them.

3. The racial Jew will never become extinct like the Canaanites of Sodom and Gomorrah.

4. Every generation will have a spiritual seed of Abraham which is composed of racial Jews who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.

5. Consequently, when Christ returns to the earth at the Second Advent there will be a remnant of regenerate Jews to deliver, to regather, to restore to the client nation status quo.

6. There will always be in resurrection body that remnant of regenerate Jews from every generation in history – sperma, the born-again seed of Abraham.

Pivot

1. Definition: It is a remnant of mature believers who live in a client nation during a time of historical catastrophe. There is also defined a spin-off: believers who have entered into reversionism through negative volition toward Bible doctrine.

2. When divine judgement falls on a nation the pivot of mature believers is secure; they are always preserved. They may have subsequent difficulties, as illustrated by the pivot in the days of Jeremiah but they are preserved from historical catastrophe. It is the reversionistic believers and the unbelievers who are annihilated.

3. This pivot, if large enough, is the means of delivering a nation under discipline. The nation is under discipline through five cycles and if the pivot is large enough it will be the means of delivering that nation.

4. While the pivot or the remnant of mature believers is secure the spin-off of believers in reversionism are always destroyed by historical catastrophe. This is the means of administering the sin unto death to reversionistic believers.

5. Negative volition toward doctrine and resultant reversionism produces the spin-off.

6. Historical disaster separates the remnant or the pivot from the spin-off of reversionists.

7. Historical disaster destroys the spin-off while preserving the pivot.

A. When the nation is destroyed

1. If the pivot is too small and the spin-off of reversionism is too large the nation is destroyed under the 5^th cycle of discipline.

2. However, when the nation is destroyed under the 5^th cycle of discipline the pivot of mature believers is preserved.

3. Like Jeremiah and the mature remnant in the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC.

4. Under the 5^th cycle of discipline the Lord destroys the great spin-off and therefore protects future generations of history from evil, reversionism, apostasy and tyranny. When the cancer grows and becomes too great the Lord always removes it.

B. When a nation is delivered

1. If the pivot is large enough the nation is delivered either from or through historical disaster. Sometimes it is from; generally it is through historical disaster.

2. For example, Judah in BC 701 during the crisis of the Sennacherib invasion.

3. Consistent ministry of Isaiah turned the tide, and that is always the last resort in historical catastrophe. When all divine establishment means have failed Bible teaching is the last resort.

4. However, the spin-off of reversionism and evil is destroyed so that the nation will have breathing room and freedom for future generations.

C. Conclusion

1. Historical crisis and disaster becomes the means of cleansing of the nation. It cleanses the nation from the great spin-off of evil.

2. The great spin-off is composed of a maximum number of believers who are negative toward doctrine and in some phase of reversionism.

3. The great spin-off will destroy a nation unless God intervenes with historical disaster to eliminate that cancer.

4. In other words, either the great spin-off must go or the nation must go.

5. The divine destruction of the great spin-off through historical disaster is therefore comparable to national rebound. With the infection of reversionism destroyed the nation takes on new life and continues.

This brings us to the 5^th sand last paragraph in Romans 9, verses 30-33. The premise is illustrated by the salvation of the Gentiles. One of the most confusing things to the Jews in Paul’s day was the phenomenal evangelism and salvation among the Gentiles.

Verse 30 – the Gentiles as vessels of mercy. It begins with the nominative neuter singular from the interrogative pronoun tij, translated literally, “What.” It is followed by the future active indicative from the verb legw which means here to “say.” It forms a rhetorical question as a part of debater’s technique. Paul uses it seven times in Romans. The future tense of the verb legw is a deliberative future used for a rhetorical question taking the place of a deliberate assertion. Instead of making a dogmatic statement which would irritate the opposition he makes a humble question.

Next is the inferential postpositive conjunctive particle o)un – “therefore.” The literal translation is: “Therefore, what shall we say?” But that is not the correct translation at all. This is a debater’s idiom and it does not mean what it says literally. The correct translation is, “Therefore to what conclusion are we forced?” or “What is the conclusion we are forced to make from all of this?”

Principle

1. The conclusion is forced by the content of Romans 9:24-26 in which Gentiles are included in the remnant.

2. The salvation of Gentiles means that Gentiles are classified in the category of “vessels of mercy.”

3. Paul uses the debater’s idiom to avoid any false conclusion and to deduce the historical results of these prophecies, especially Hosea 2:23 & 1:10.

4. The omniscience God fed into the computer of divine decrees the rejection of the greater part of Israel in contrast to the salvation of the Gentiles.

5. In every case human volition was involved, and in every case the printout falls into one of several categories.

6. The Gentiles who believe in Jesus Christ: their printout is election. The Jews who rejected Jesus Christ as saviour: their printout is condemnation.

7. God can bless the regenerate Gentiles because they received the imputation of divine righteousness at salvation. God can only condemn the unsaved Jews because they have in salvation approach rejected Christ, rejected His righteousness, and accepted their own in keeping the law.

8. The Jews guilty of the big blot-out do not possess the imputed righteousness of God because from their own free will, from self-determination, they have rejected Christ and have built up the scar tissue of the soul that results from that big blot-out.

9. On the other hand, Gentiles from their own self-determination have believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, they have received the imputation of divine righteousness. Therefore the potential for blessing in time is parlayed into potential for blessing in eternity.

The statement in verses 30-31 is not a summary of the previous paragraph; it is a conclusion from the Old Testament documentation.

Principle

1. God’s rejection of the racial Jew who is only the physical seed of Abraham is neither arbitrary nor unfair.

2. The racial Jew is a free agent, a creature of his own self-determination.

3. The racial Jew was the beneficiary of doctrine taught by the prophets and recorded in the Old Testament canon. And always it was the first advent which was emphasised.

4. The racial Jew rejects Christ and the resultant imputation of divine righteousness, and they accept instead self-righteousness by keeping the law. By blotting out the first advent they have rejected the imputation of divine righteousness.

5. Faith is non-meritorious volition; therefore faith in the Lord Jesus Christ is the function of free will.

6. Keeping the law is meritorious volition, therefore tantamount to rejection of God’s plan and God’s grace.

7. Verse 30 emphasises man’s freedom of choice, both the non-meritorious expression of volition and the meritorious expression of free will.

8. Man is a free agent, he must choose between his own self-righteousness or God’s righteousness. This becomes a major issue in the human race.

9. The issue is arrogance versus grace. The person who chooses his own self-righteousness does so out of motivation of arrogance. The person who chooses God’s righteousness does so from motivation of grace.

“That the Gentiles” – begins with the conjunction o(ti, used after Paul’s rhetorical question to indicate that the content of the conclusion is demanded. The word is simply translated “that” but it is much more meaningful, it means “all right, we are going to give you a conclusion.” The nominative plural e)qnoj introduces the subject to the Jews. When the Jew develops self-righteousness and the basis for being justified by God he also develops arrogance – he feels himself totally superior to the Gentiles. This arrogance is carried into a realm of unreality rather than reality so that when he discovers that the Gentile is going to heaven it only increases his arrogance. And he develops more scar tissue to contribute to his big blot-out. The absence of the definite article in front of e)qnoj – anarthrous construction – emphasises the high quality of certain Gentiles who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ in Old Testament times.

Next is the articular present active participle from the verb diwkw which means to pursue or to strive for, and with it is the negative mh – “did not strive for.” The Jews were keeping the law to strive for righteousness and they produced a nice brand of self-righteousness. Then a Gentile comes along and says that is doing it the hard way, that he is going to believe in Christ and get perfect righteousness. And so he passes the Jew right on by. The definite article here is used as a relative pronoun. The historical present tense with the negative mh views the past [Old Testament times] with the vividness of a present occurrence. The active voice: the negative mh plus the active voice indicates that Gentiles as free agents did not choose self-righteousness. The participle is circumstantial to present the status quo of certain Gentiles in Old Testament times.

Then we have the accusative singular direct object from dikaiosunh – “righteousness.” Here it refers to self-righteousness. The Gentiles just ignored trying to get into heaven by self-righteousness and thereby were able to get into heaven by believing in Christ who gave them His righteousness.

Principle

1. Self-righteousness in any form is unacceptable to God.

2. Self-righteousness is any form of works-righteousness for salvation.

3. Arrogance is the motivation for self-righteousness; negative volition is the momentum for self-righteousness; disorientation to reality is the result of self-righteousness.

4. God cannot bless self-righteousness any more than God can provide salvation for the self-righteous person.

5. The Jewish unbeliever striving for salvation through keeping the law is simply another case of trying to reinvent the wheel.

6. The wheel of God’s plan has existed in eternity past – Alpha time. It is sustained in human history by the integrity of God. That means that in Omega time it is the integrity of God and the uniqueness of God the Son (hypostatic union) that forms the axle.

7. The wheel of God’s plan rotates on the axle of divine righteousness which is imputed through faith in Jesus Christ. So you have to recognise the Omega glory of Christ in order to have the right axle -- +R.

8. The superficial and legalistic Jew invents his own axle of self-righteousness and tries make the wheel of the divine plan rotate on his own arrogance rather than rotate on the integrity of God.

9. No one can reinvent the wheel; no one can substitute the axle of self-righteousness for the axle of divine righteousness. The Gentiles who were saved in the Old Testament did not seek salvation through the invention of their own righteousness; they did not try to reinvent the wheel by pursuing after and striving for self-righteousness.

“have attained to righteousness” – aorist active indicative from the verb katalambanw. It means to seize, to win, to attain, to catch, to overtake, to grasp. Here it means to overtake without effort, hence to attain through grace. The culminative aorist views salvation through faith in Christ in its entirety but emphasises the existing results. The result in view here is the imputation of divine righteousness. The active voice: the Gentile who believes in Jesus Christ produces the action of the verb by not pursuing self-righteousness through keeping the law but by overtaking without effort the righteousness of God through faith in Christ. The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of Gentile salvation in he Old Testament.

Then we have, again, the accusative singular direct object from dikaiosunh, minus the definite article to emphasise that this is God’s righteousness.

“even” – the intensive use of the postpositive conjunctive particle de which is translated “in fact.”

“the righteousness” – this time there is the definite article, the generic use in the accusative case comprehending divine righteousness as a unique category set off in distinction from all categories of creature righteousness.

Finally, there is a prepositional phrase, e)k plus the ablative of pistij – “from the source of faith.” The ablative is used for source only when the origin of that source is implied.

Translation: “Therefore to what conclusion are we forced? That the Gentiles, who did not strive for righteousness, have attained divine righteousness, that is, the righteousness which is from the source of faith [in Christ].”

In Old Testament times many Gentiles were saved through faith in Christ because they did not try to be saved by their works, by their human merit, by production of self-righteousness. They believed in the Lord Jesus Christ and received Him as their personal saviour.

Verse 31 – the Jews as a vessel of wrath. The very heritage of Israel is the perfect righteousness of God offered as a potential. But when that offer is rejected arrogance always takes the rejector on some kind of an ego trip and he goes for another righteousness with which he expects to get to heaven – his own self-righteousness. Therefore, since he has gone in that direction he has moved away from his heritage. Then along comes the Gentile who does not have his background, the law and the prophets, and therefore he by believing in Christ receives what the Jew bypassed in arrogance. He takes it; the Jew leaves it, and therefore he establishes the principle of judgment by reversionism. Having only self-righteousness there is terrible judgment in time but greater judgment in the lake of fire forever. Having believed in Christ there is the potential for great blessing in time, and eternity spent with God.

Some of the words found in the KJV are not found in the Greek text, e.g. “righteousness.” The verse begins with the postpositive conjunctive particle de used as a mild adversative conjunction to set up a contrast between Old Testament Gentiles who believed in Christ and Old Testament Jews who rejected Christ. By their own self-determination they entered into system of inversion and God uses that system of inversion to discipline Israel.

Next is the nominative singular subject from the proper noun I)srahl, referring to the racial nut not to the regenerate Jew of the previous dispensation. So we have “But Israel.”

The present active participle of diwkw means to pursue, to run after. The present tense is the historical present, it is used for Jewish negative volition in the dispensation of Israel with the vividness of a present occurrence. In fact, the pattern was the same in Paul’s generation but he is looking at the past. The active voice: the racial Jew in the dispensation of Israel produces the action of the verb – negative volition toward Jesus Christ the God of Israel. The circumstantial participle is used to express the historical circumstances of Jews trying to be saved by keeping the law. They wind up with inversion. What they sought they do not have and what they thought they would have when they got there turns out to be discipline.

“righteousness” – the ablative of means singular from the noun dikaiosunh, used here for Jewish self-righteousness in contrast to divine righteousness, plus the accusative singular direct object from nomoj, minus the definite article. The anarthrous construction calls attention to the high quality of the law. There is nothing wrong with the law. Nomoj indicates the greatness of the Mosaic law. Only the ablative of means in the singular from dikaiosunh distorts the law. The origin is human self-righteousness from keeping the law rather than believing in Christ for imputed righteousness from God. The Jews who were negative toward the gospel distorted the Mosaic Law into a system of salvation by works. This self-righteousness was the result of the big blot-out. The big blot-out of total negative volition toward the first advent destroys all client nation function, including establishment freedom.

Principle

1. The racial Jew did not become a regenerate Jew in the dispensation of Israel -- that is a general statement; there are always exceptions – because they rejected everything that was taught about Christ. And when you reject the first advent – Christ the God of Israel – you have to accept something else, and they accepted the law as a system of self-righteousness. They put self-righteousness above God’s righteousness.

2. From their own free will and self-determination they preferred a righteousness based on keeping the law rather than righteousness from God based on faith in Christ.

3. Therefore the issue was God’s righteousness imputed at faith in Christ versus self-righteousness acquired through keeping the law.

4. The negative Jew suffered from that fatal legalistic disease known as seminal self-righteousness.

The word “righteousness does not occur again in the verse, we simply have the aorist active indicative of the verb fqanw with the negative. It means here to be first, to do first, to come first. In the Attic Greek it meant to overtake. “But Israel has not accomplished.” The culminative aorist tense views the attempt at salvation by keeping the law in its entirety but it regards it from the viewpoint of existing results – not accomplishing the purpose of the law in salvation. The active voice: racial Jews who elected to use their own self-righteousness in keeping the law for salvation are the ones producing the action. The declarative indicative plus the negative o)u emphasises the reality of failing to accomplish their purpose and entering into not only the big blot-out but a system of the worst type of discipline -- inversion discipline. Inversion discipline always takes something you want and gives it to someone you don’t like.

Principle

1. Faith in Christ is the end of self-righteousness.

2. There is no way that self or works-righteousness can improve on imputed righteousness.

3. Christ is the end of any system of self or human righteousness since salvation by faith in Christ substitutes God’s perfect righteousness for any system of human righteousness.

4. Faith in Christ results in the imputation of divine righteousness from the justice of God, a new foundation for a new modus vivendi. This means based on learning doctrine to receive blessing in time rather than doing something or being something.

5. Imputed divine righteousness cannot be improved. All the believer can do is to build on it with the materials of Bible doctrine inculcated.

6. Once the superstructure of maximum doctrine resident in the soul is completed at maturity then God blesses that building because the foundation is God’s righteousness.

7. No system of self or works-righteousness can receive blessing from God or can glorify God.

8. Therefore all systems of self-righteousness have been excluded from both salvation and the Christian way of life.

The last phrase is e)ij plus the accusative from nomoj – “the purpose of the law.”

Translation: “But Israel who ran after the law with [human] self-righteousness, has not accomplished the purpose of the law.”

Principle

1. While this passage is discussing the Jewish unbeliever in relationship to the big blot-out we do have the same conflict in the life of the believer.

2. The believer who rejects Bible doctrine always seeks to establish some system of his own rather than build on the imputed righteousness of God. To build on God’s righteousness it is a matter of learning doctrine.

3. Daily perception of doctrine builds on the foundation of God’s righteousness.

4. Because of that foundation no personal righteousness has to be established, only the daily perception of doctrine which builds on God’s righteousness.

5. The legalistic attempt to establish human righteousness through a system of morality and works results in the failure in the Christian life on earth during phase two.

6. So every believer must settle in his own mind the question” Whose righteousness do you acknowledge?

7. Building on the righteousness of God fulfils the plan of God; building on self-righteousness becomes a part of the great blackout, which is failure to use the faith-rest technique and failure to advance with the faith-rest technique to where you can develop something else.

Principle

1. The purpose of the Mosaic law is salvation through faith in Christ – Codex #2.

2. The purpose of the law is the function of freedom in a client nation to God – Codex #1 plus many parts of Codex #2.

3. The purpose of the law is to provide the basis for evangelism, advance to maturity, missionary action from a priest nation to God.

4. The purpose of the law is to demonstrate the fallacy of self-righteousness for salvation and to demonstrate the fallacy of self-righteousness for receiving blessing from God. So works-righteousness or self-righteousness cannot refrain either blessing from God or salvation.

5. The purpose of the law is completely nullified by any system of self-righteousness or works righteousness in keeping the law.

6. While Gentiles were being saved by faith in Christ racial Jews were electing their own self-righteousness – they were keeping the law, the tens commandments to gain salvation.

7. When the vessels of wrath work for salvation God does not change them, but when vessels of wrath believe in Christ God changes them into vessels of honour.

Verse 32 – the reason for Jewish failure. It begins with a debater’s rhetorical question. The rhetoric is designed to bring the Jew around to seeing the true issue. It is the preposition dia plus the accusative neuter singular from the interrogative pronoun tij which is literally translated “Because why.” Sometimes it is translated simply “Why?” because that is idiomatically what it means. The question asks why the Jews did not accomplish the true purpose of the law. Paul is asking the question, not because he doesn’t understand it; it is rhetorical to bring to the Jews their problem and their failure. The true purpose of the law is to demonstrate that human self-righteousness can never save and that divine righteousness imputed is the only way to go to heaven, and the only way to receive divine righteousness is to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.

The answer is much simpler. It starts with the causal use of the conjunction o(ti. It goes with dia plus the accusative, “Because.” Then we have, “not by means of faith but by means of works” – the negative o)u, and with it an ellipsis which demands the present active indicative of diwkw: “because they did not pursue.” The Jews failed because they did not pursue the law. And then we have the prepositional phrase of explanation – e)k plus the ablative of means from pistij, which is correctly translated, “because they did not pursue it by means of faith.” They did not believe in Jesus Christ, they did not believe in the content of Codex #2; instead they went at it by sight. They saw these commandments and said they would keep them for salvation. The ablative of means here is in the singular, it is by means of faith in the singular, for just one act of faith in Christ produces eternal salvation.

“but” – a)lla, an adversative conjunction setting up a contrast between what they should have done and what they did do. Next is a comparative conjunctive particle o(j introducing the characteristic quality of the Jew in the big blot-out – “as.” This is followed by e)k plus the ablative plural of comparison with e)rgon – faith is one time and you are saved; many, many works and you never will be saved.

“For” – there is no gar here in the original text, it is simply “They have stumbled” – aorist active indicative from the verb proskoptw which means to stumble against, to stumble over, and in modern English it would probably be better to say “trip over” if you understand that to trip over something you see it and still fall over, for this is the importance of this particular illustration. The Jews see the Lord Jesus Christ and they still stumble over Him. This is another way of describing the big blot-out. The aorist tense is a culminative aorist viewing salvation by works or keeping the law in its entirety but regarding it from the viewpoint of its existing results which is the big blot-out. The active voice: the negative Jews produced the action of the verb. They were usually arrogant, self-righteous. The indicative mood is declarative for the historical reality of the big blot-out in every generation from Moses to Christ.

Then we have a quotation from Isaiah 8:14 – “the stone of the stumbling.” This is the Lord Jesus Christ in His first advent. The dative singular of the definite article is used as a demonstrative pronoun to show something unique – the Lord Jesus Christ as the God of Israel. With it is the dative singular indirect object from the noun liqoj – “stone” or “rock.” Next is the genitive of description from proskomma, a prophetical title for the Lord Jesus Christ. To the Jews, instead of being the rock, the foundation, the gigantic mountain, as it were, He is a stone over which they simply trip over, get up and go on. “The stone on which there is the stumbling which leads to a fall” would be a literal translation. The stone of salvation is the Lord Jesus Christ, and they stumble over Him while they are pursuing something else.

Translation: “Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but (as if it were possible) by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone.”

Verse 33 – the documentation of the Jewish failure and big blot-out. It begins with the adverb kaqwj, an adverb of analogy – “Just as.” Then the perfect passive indicative of the verb grafw which means to write. The intensive perfect tense emphasises the existing results of the canon of scripture, the Old Testament, as the finished product. The passive voice gives us the mechanics of inspiration. God the Holy Spirit communicates to authors, like Paul and Isaiah, and this becomes a complete and coherent divine message as a part of the sacred scripture. In the exhale the human writer wrote down in his own language and thoughts the divine message to mankind. The indicative mood becomes declarative for the reality of the Old Testament canon as verified by Paul’s quotation of it in this passage.

Phrases are now quoted from Isaiah 8:14; 28:16. Isaiah 28:16 – “Therefore, so communicates Adonai Jehovah, Behold, I am he [who was] who has laid in Zion a foundation stone [the Lord Jesus Christ as the God of Israel, the founder of Israel], a rock of testing, a cornerstone of honour, a secure foundation; the one who has believed in him will not panic.” All that is quoted by Paul is, “Behold, I laid in Zion; the one who has believed in him will not panic.” Isaiah 8:14 – “Therefore, he will become a refuge; but a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense to both houses of Israel, both a snare and a trap to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.” Paul only quotes, “a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense.”

In verse 33, “Behold” – we have a demonstrative particle i)dou which is the aorist middle imperative of o(raw. This demands perception and emphasises the importance of what follows; it means listen carefully, what follows is important. Then we have the present active indicative of the verb tiqhmi which is used to lay a foundation. The perfective present tense denotes what has come to be in the past but emphasises that past event as a present reality. The rock of salvation becomes the stone of stumbling to the Jew who rejects the first advent and blots it out. The active voice: God the Father produced the action of the verb under the title Adonai Jehovah. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality.

“in Zion” – Zion is indeclinable but it is with the preposition e)n, and it is referring to the spot which David conquered. He mentions Zion rather than Israel because Zion was David’s castle and the son of David is Jesus Christ. He is relating David’s rule to the first advent so that no Jew could miss the principle.

The ascensive use of the conjunction kai is translated “even.” Next comes the accusative singular direct object from petra, which means “rock.” This is the giant rock. Any part in that rock is petroj – in union with the rock -- the rock which arouses opposition. So the final quotation from Isaiah emphasises the importance of believing in Christ and becoming a true Jew. Furthermore, it anticipates the big blot-out as well as the great inversion – all found in the next two chapters.

“And whosoever believeth in him shall not be ashamed” – a connective kai which is translated “nevertheless.” This is a conjunction used to emphasise a fact as surprising, unexpected, and therefore noteworthy. Then the articular present active participle from the verb pisteuw which means to believe. This is the aoristic present tense used for punctiliar action in present time. This use of the present tense expresses a fact without reference to its progress and it indicates that just as it was true when Paul wrote this, that anyone could believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, so it is true right now. The active voice: Paul is speaking specifically to the racial Jew guilty of the big blot-out and about to come under the judgment of the great inversion. The participle is circumstantial expressing attendant circumstances involved in becoming a true Jew, the spiritual seed of Abraham.

Then we have the prepositional phrase, referring to Christ, e)pi plus the locative of the intensive pronoun a)utoj, used for the third person singular personal pronoun and it means to believe on Him. E)pi is used because e)pi means “over” as well as “on,” and they have stumbled over the way of salvation, they have stumbled over the rock. Next, the future passive indicative from kataisxunw which means to be disgraced, humiliated, or to be disappointed. This means disappointed in eternity or not humiliated in the sense of avoidance of the judgment at the great white throne, not be disappointed in the sense of being rewarded at the judgment seat of Christ. The futuristic present tense is predictive for the fact that no believer will be involved in the last judgment. The passive voice plus the negative means the subject, the believing Jew, will never be humiliated at the last judgment. The indicative mood plus the negative is the reality that faith in Christ eliminates condemnation in eternity as well as in time.

Translation: “Just as it stands written, Behold I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling, even a rock which arouses opposition: nevertheless, he who believes on him will not be disappointed.”

is will or purpose.

---

[1] Aposiopesis: This is a very effective figure where the sentence is moving along then there is an abrupt breaking off.

[2] Anacoluthon: This is the grammatical term for a writer failing to follow that which is the normal procedure of what comes next and breaking off for some other grammatical construction.

[3]Hyperbaton: This is the grammatical term for a word being out of its normal proper place.