Expositor's Bible Commentary Commentary Romans 9

The apostle begins on a personal note, expressing, like the prophets of old, the burden of his soul over the condition of the Jews. Since he has left Judaism behind, this sorrow might be interpreted as somewhat less than sincere. Hence the solemn introduction in which he summons two witnesses—his union with Christ who is the truth (cf. Ephesians 4:21) and his conscience as aided by the Holy Spirit (cf. 8:16). As though that were not enough, he declares himself ready to accept severance from Christ (cf. 8:39) if that would avail to bring his countrymen into the fold of the Savior (cf. Exodus 32:32). Paul could not, of course, actually become anathema from Christ (cf. ch. 8). Yet if it were possible, he would gladly make the sacrifice. This readiness takes on poignancy in light of Paul’s having suffered the loss of all things in order to gain Christ . So he would be facing a double loss.

Paul’s longing for the salvation of his people comes out in the way he speaks of them—“my brothers” (cf. Acts 2:29; 3:17; 22:1; 28:17). To avoid misunderstanding, he qualifies this by noting that the bond is one of “race” rather than of a common faith in Christ.

The apostle begins on a personal note, expressing, like the prophets of old, the burden of his soul over the condition of the Jews. Since he has left Judaism behind, this sorrow might be interpreted as somewhat less than sincere. Hence the solemn introduction in which he summons two witnesses—his union with Christ who is the truth (cf. Ephesians 4:21) and his conscience as aided by the Holy Spirit (cf. 8:16). As though that were not enough, he declares himself ready to accept severance from Christ (cf. 8:39) if that would avail to bring his countrymen into the fold of the Savior (cf. Exodus 32:32). Paul could not, of course, actually become anathema from Christ (cf. ch. 8). Yet if it were possible, he would gladly make the sacrifice. This readiness takes on poignancy in light of Paul’s having suffered the loss of all things in order to gain Christ . So he would be facing a double loss.

Paul’s longing for the salvation of his people comes out in the way he speaks of them—“my brothers” (cf. Acts 2:29; 3:17; 22:1; 28:17). To avoid misunderstanding, he qualifies this by noting that the bond is one of “race” rather than of a common faith in Christ.

The apostle begins on a personal note, expressing, like the prophets of old, the burden of his soul over the condition of the Jews. Since he has left Judaism behind, this sorrow might be interpreted as somewhat less than sincere. Hence the solemn introduction in which he summons two witnesses—his union with Christ who is the truth (cf. Ephesians 4:21) and his conscience as aided by the Holy Spirit (cf. 8:16). As though that were not enough, he declares himself ready to accept severance from Christ (cf. 8:39) if that would avail to bring his countrymen into the fold of the Savior (cf. Exodus 32:32). Paul could not, of course, actually become anathema from Christ (cf. ch. 8). Yet if it were possible, he would gladly make the sacrifice. This readiness takes on poignancy in light of Paul’s having suffered the loss of all things in order to gain Christ . So he would be facing a double loss.

Paul’s longing for the salvation of his people comes out in the way he speaks of them—“my brothers” (cf. Acts 2:29; 3:17; 22:1; 28:17). To avoid misunderstanding, he qualifies this by noting that the bond is one of “race” rather than of a common faith in Christ.

Paul goes on to cite the spiritual heritage of his nation that he shares with them. He avoids the term “Jews” in v.4, for that term ordinarily stresses the racial, political, and ritualistic aspects of his nation. By referring to his countrymen as “the people of Israel,” he is emphasizing that they are the covenant people of God, different from every other people on earth.

It is only when the distinctives of Israel are spelled out that the full implication of the word can be appreciated. Probably Paul has in mind his implied promise to enlarge on the advantages of his people (3:2). In the forefront in v.4 he puts “the adoption as sons.” Though this specific word is not used in the OT, the idea is certainly present (Hosea 11:1). This explains Israel’s enjoyment of the glory of God’s presence, symbolized by the pillar of cloud that settled over the sanctuary in the wilderness and filled the temple at its dedication.

“The covenants” (GK 1347) are either the arrangements God entered into with Abraham, with the nation of Israel at Sinai, and with David, and with Israel and Judah in the new covenant (Jeremiah 31:31–34) or else those arranged with Abraham (Genesis 15), then renewed with Isaac (Genesis 17) and with Jacob (Genesis 28). The word “covenant” used here implies divine initiative.

“The receiving of the law” refers, of course, to what was communicated through Moses to the children of Israel at Sinai. In Paul’s time the nation tended to look on this as its most prized possession (2:17), the most precious portion of the OT. A closely related item is “the temple worship” (i.e., the laws concerning sacrifices as prescribed in the law). “The promises” have a close relationship to the covenants (cf. Ephesians 2:12) and represent various aspects of the messianic salvation promised in the OT.

The importance of “the patriarchs” (v.5) can be seen in 11:28. They are the men to whom the promises were given prior to the giving of the law. God was pleased to announce himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Exodus 3:15). In “from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ” (v.5), “them” refers to the people of Israel (v.4) rather than to the patriarchs, for there were many generations between them and the advent of the Messiah (cf. Matthew 1:1–17). A subtle distinction is to be noted between “theirs” and “from them.” Israel cannot lay claim to Christ in the same way they can claim the patriarchs, even though he entered the human family through the Israelite gate (cf. 1:3). Christ is much more than the patriarchs. In his earthly origin he does belong to one nation, but by virtue of his heavenly origin and mission he cannot be claimed exclusively by any segment of the race, seeing he is “God over all.” In this final affirmation, Paul attests to the divine nature of Christ.

Looking back over vv.1–5, one is bound to conclude from the combination of Paul’s sorrow and the extended enumeration of Israel’s privileges that the subject of his nation’s spiritual condition constantly weighed on him. His statement of the advantages of Israel anticipates the fuller discussion of her election and serves to accent the element of tragedy in her current state. A double purpose is served by the culminating statement concerning the Messiah: it not only underscores the blindness of Israel but is also calculated to keep believing Gentiles from gloating over Israel’s fall (11:20), seeing that Israel has been the channel by which God gave Christ to the world.

Paul goes on to cite the spiritual heritage of his nation that he shares with them. He avoids the term “Jews” in v.4, for that term ordinarily stresses the racial, political, and ritualistic aspects of his nation. By referring to his countrymen as “the people of Israel,” he is emphasizing that they are the covenant people of God, different from every other people on earth.

It is only when the distinctives of Israel are spelled out that the full implication of the word can be appreciated. Probably Paul has in mind his implied promise to enlarge on the advantages of his people (3:2). In the forefront in v.4 he puts “the adoption as sons.” Though this specific word is not used in the OT, the idea is certainly present (Hosea 11:1). This explains Israel’s enjoyment of the glory of God’s presence, symbolized by the pillar of cloud that settled over the sanctuary in the wilderness and filled the temple at its dedication.

“The covenants” (GK 1347) are either the arrangements God entered into with Abraham, with the nation of Israel at Sinai, and with David, and with Israel and Judah in the new covenant (Jeremiah 31:31–34) or else those arranged with Abraham (Genesis 15), then renewed with Isaac (Genesis 17) and with Jacob (Genesis 28). The word “covenant” used here implies divine initiative.

“The receiving of the law” refers, of course, to what was communicated through Moses to the children of Israel at Sinai. In Paul’s time the nation tended to look on this as its most prized possession (2:17), the most precious portion of the OT. A closely related item is “the temple worship” (i.e., the laws concerning sacrifices as prescribed in the law). “The promises” have a close relationship to the covenants (cf. Ephesians 2:12) and represent various aspects of the messianic salvation promised in the OT.

The importance of “the patriarchs” (v.5) can be seen in 11:28. They are the men to whom the promises were given prior to the giving of the law. God was pleased to announce himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Exodus 3:15). In “from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ” (v.5), “them” refers to the people of Israel (v.4) rather than to the patriarchs, for there were many generations between them and the advent of the Messiah (cf. Matthew 1:1–17). A subtle distinction is to be noted between “theirs” and “from them.” Israel cannot lay claim to Christ in the same way they can claim the patriarchs, even though he entered the human family through the Israelite gate (cf. 1:3). Christ is much more than the patriarchs. In his earthly origin he does belong to one nation, but by virtue of his heavenly origin and mission he cannot be claimed exclusively by any segment of the race, seeing he is “God over all.” In this final affirmation, Paul attests to the divine nature of Christ.

Looking back over vv.1–5, one is bound to conclude from the combination of Paul’s sorrow and the extended enumeration of Israel’s privileges that the subject of his nation’s spiritual condition constantly weighed on him. His statement of the advantages of Israel anticipates the fuller discussion of her election and serves to accent the element of tragedy in her current state. A double purpose is served by the culminating statement concerning the Messiah: it not only underscores the blindness of Israel but is also calculated to keep believing Gentiles from gloating over Israel’s fall (11:20), seeing that Israel has been the channel by which God gave Christ to the world.