Does Roman 9 Support Calvinism? Often the Calvinists refer to Romans 9 as proof of their false view of election. However, to properly understand the statements of this chapter we must first consider the context and subject being addressed. The context of Romans 9 is Pauls answer to the question of Romans 3:1, What advantage then has the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? This discourse begins with this question and ends with Romans 11. Paul is addressing the misunderstanding of the Jews in which they concluded that they were in Gods favor because they were born Hebrews, Gods chosen people, and were assured of heaven and of Gods grace. John 3:1-7 is an example of this error in Jewish thinking and was the reason for Jesus response to Nicodemus. Jesus explained to this Pharisee that he must be born again. Nicodemus believed that he was going to heaven and would be a part of Gods kingdom because he was born a Jew. Jesus said, Not so. A man must be born of water (human birth) and of the Spirit (spiritual birth) to be saved. He was saying to Nicodemus, in order to be saved you must be spiritually reborn and that happens when a person believes on the Lord Jesus Christ. In John 3:15-16, Jesus continues and explains how to be saved by faith. Paul explains in Romans 3-11, that the Jew, like the Gentile, is responsible to God and the Jews only advantage is that he has been born among a people who God chose to reveal Himself through thus they had the knowledge of God. But being a Jew does not ensure salvation, because as Paul plainly states in Chapter 10:9-10 salvation is a matter of faith. Many teach that Romans 9:13-14 states that God rejected and condemned Esau to hell, but chose to save Jacob. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. However, this is not what the verse is saying. Paul is not talking about God predestining or in His sovereignty decreeing Jacob to heaven and Esau to hell. God chooses to use some in His plan, such as Jacob and others, such as Esau, to reject. The term hated used in Romans 9:13 means to love less or to choose instead of. It does not mean to condemn. Jesus in Luke 14:26 uses the same word stating, If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. Clearly, God does not require that we hate our family, but in using the term He means that we are to choose Him first or to place Him before our relatives. God is also not saying He simply hated Esau and sent him to hell. God is saying he chose to reject Esau and He had good reasons. What God is revealing is related to His plan of bringing salvation through the Jews, mainly through Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. God is to have preeminence in our lives as Colossians 1:18, instructs and those are the people He uses in His plans. The word hate means to love less, and in Romans 9, God uses the illustration of His choosing Jacob rather than Esau to illustrate the point that being born a Jew does not save a person. God says that He rejected to use Esau, the first born son, because he was not a man who loved or served God. His interests in life were worldly and did not include the Lord. Further, the promise made to Abraham would normally be through his first born son. This promise was Gods plan for the coming nation of Israel and the Messiah. However, Esau showed no interest in his birth right and the sacredness of Gods promise. He thought so little of it; he sold it for a bowl of pottage. Therefore, God rejected him as the natural heir of Abraham and Isaac and as the one through whom God would bring the Messiah who would be the Savior. The verse does not teach that God just choose to hate Esau, or that God in His sovereignty decreed to send him to hell as Calvinism teaches! God did not decree to hate Esau, but rather He rejected Esau because he rejected God. A false interpretation of Gods word always leads to confusion and false doctrine. Consider this. Suppose there are two brothers in a family. One is a rebel and always in trouble. The other is a Christian and lives for the Lord. Who would God chose then to serve Him? God being omniscient, would He choose the rebellious son who rejected God and His purpose for his life, or the faithful one who believed in God? It should also be understood that the names Jacob and Esau also refer to the progeny of both men. The Book of Obadiah makes this perfectly clear that God rejected the house of Esau, who were the enemies of the house of Jacob. God said He would destroy completely the house of Esau (also called Edom, Mt. Seir), and none of them would remain (Obadiah 17-18). The decedents of Esau hated God, and for generations they opposed Israel (Jacob) until God finally destroyed them. Hermeneutically, the passage is correctly interpreted in its context as referring to the Nation of Edom (Esau), not strictly to Esau who fathered the nation.
Posted on: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 16:43:51 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015