Verse 6. Not as though, etc. Not as though the promise of God had entirely failed. Though I grieve thus, (Romans 9:2,3) though I am deeply apprehensive for the nation, yet I do not affirm that all the nation is to be destroyed. The promise of God will not entirely fail.
Not all Israel. Not all the descendants of Jacob have the true spirit of Israelites, or are Jews in the scriptural sense of the term. See Barnes " :".
{g} "none effect" Isaiah 55:11
{h} "for they are not" Romans 2:28,29
Verse 7. Are they all children. Adopted into the true family of God. Many of the descendants of Abraham were rejected.
But in Isaac. This was the promise, Genesis 21:12.
Shall thy seed, etc. Thy true people. This implied a selection, or choice; and, therefore, the doctrine of election was illustrated in the very commencement of the history of the nation; and as God had then made such a distinction, he might still do it. As he had then rejected a part of the natural descendants of Abraham, so he might, still do it. This is the argument which the apostle is pursuing.
{i} "In Isaac" Isaiah 55:11
Verse 8. They which are the children of the flesh. The natural descendants.
These are not the children of God. Are not of necessity the adopted children of God; or are not so in virtue of their descent merely. This was in opposition to one of the most settled and deeply-cherished opinions of the Jews. They supposed that the mere fact of being a Jew entitled a man to the blessings of the covenant, and to be regarded as a child of God. But the apostle shows them that it was not by their natural descent that these spiritual privileges were granted; that they were not conferred on men simply from the fact that they were Jews; and that consequently those who were not Jews might become interested in those spiritual blessings.
But the children of the promise. The descendants of Abraham on whom the promised blessings would be bestowed. The sense is, that God at first contemplated a distinction among the descendants of Abraham, and intended to confine his blessings to such as he chose; that is, to those to whom the promise particularly appertained, to the descendants of Isaac. The argument of the apostle is, that the principle was thus established that a distinction might be made among those who were Jews; and as that distinction had been made in former times, so it might be under the Messiah.
Are counted. Are regarded, or reckoned. God reckons things as they are; and therefore designed that they should be his true children.
As the seed. The spiritual children of God; the partakers of his mercy and salvation. This refers, doubtless, to spiritual privileges and to salvation; and therefore has relation not to nations as such, but to individuals.
{k} "children of the promise" Galatians 4:28
Verse 9. For this is the word of promise. This is the promise made to Abraham. The design of the apostle, in introducing this, is doubtless to show to whom the promise appertained; and by specifying this, he shows that it had not reference to Ishmael, but to Isaac.
At this time. Greek, According to this time. See Genesis 8:10,14. Probably it means at the exact time promised; I will fulfil the prediction at the very time. Comp. 2 Kings 4:16.
{l} "At this time" Genesis 18:10,14
Verse 10. And not only this. Not only is the principle of making a distinction among the natural descendants of Abraham thus settled by the promise, but it is still further seen and illustrated in the birth of the two sons of Isaac. He had shown that the principle of thus making a distinction among the posterity of Abraham was recognized in the original promise, thus proving that all the descendants of Abraham were not of course to be saved; and he now proceeds to show that the principle was recognized in the case of his posterity in the family of Isaac. And he shows that it is not according to any natural principles that the selection was made; that he not only made a distinction between Jacob and Esau, but that he did it according to his good pleasure, choosing the younger to be the object of his favour, and rejecting the elder, who, according to the custom of the times, was supposed to be entitled to peculiar honour and rights. And, in order to prove that this was done according to his own pleasure, he shows that the distinction was made before they were born; before they had formed any character; and, consequently, in such a way that it could not be pretended that it was in consequence of any works which they had performed.
But when Rebecca. The wife of Isaac. See Genesis 25:21,23.
{m} "Rebecca" Genesis 25:21,23
Verse 11. For the children being not yet born. It was not, therefore, by any works of theirs. It was not because they had formed a character and manifested qualities which made this distinction proper. It was laid back of any such character, and therefore had its foundation in the purpose or plan of God.
Neither having done any good or evil. That is, when the declaration (Romans 9:12) was made to Rebecca. This is a very important passage in regard to the question about the purposes of God.
(1.) They had done nothing good or bad; and when that is the case, there can be, properly speaking, no moral character, for "a character is not formed when the person has not acquired stable and distinctive qualities." Webster.
(2.) That the period of moral agency had not yet commenced. Comp. Genesis 25:22,23. When that agency commences we do not know; but here is a case of which it is affirmed that it had not commenced.
(3.) The purpose of God is antecedent to the formation of character, or the performance of any actions, good or bad.
(4.) It is not a purpose formed because he sees anything in the individuals as a ground for his choice, but for some reason which he has not explained, and which in the Scripture is simply called purpose, and good pleasure, Ephesians 1:5.
(5.) If it existed in this case, it does in others. If it was right then, it is now. And if God then dispensed his favours on this principle, he will now. But
(6) this affirmation respecting Jacob and Esau does not prove that they had not a nature inclined to evil; or a corrupt and sensual propensity; or that they would not sin as soon as they became moral agents. It proves merely that they had not yet committed actual sin. That they, as well as all others, would certainly sin as soon as they committed moral acts at all, is proved everywhere in the sacred Scriptures.
The purpose of God. See Barnes " :".
According to election. To dispense his favours according to his sovereign will and pleasure. Those favours were not conferred in consequence of the merits of the individuals, but according to a wise plan lying back of the formation of their characters, and before they had done good or evil. The favours were thus conferred according to his choice, or election.
Might stand. Might be confirmed; or might be proved to be true. The case shows that God dispenses his favours as a sovereign. The purpose of God was thus proved to have been formed without respect to the merits of either.
Not of works. Not by anything which they had done either to merit his favour or to forfeit it. It was formed on other principles than a reference to their works. So it is in relation to all who shall be saved. God has good reasons for saving those who shall be saved. What the reasons are for choosing some to life he has not revealed; but he has revealed to us that it is not on account of their works, either performed or foreseen.
But of him that calleth. According to the will and purpose of him that chooses to dispense those favours in this manner. It is not by the merit of man, but it is by a purpose having its origin with God, and formed and executed according to his good pleasure. It is also implied here, that it is formed in such a way as to secure his glory as the primary consideration.
Verse 12. It was said unto her. By Jehovah. See Genesis 25:23.
The elder. The eldest son, which was Esau. By the law of primogeniture among the Hebrews, he would have been entitled to peculiar honours and privileges. But it was said that in his case this custom should be reversed, and that he should take the rank of the younger.
Should serve. Shall be subject to; shall not have the authority and priority, but should be inferior to. The passage in Genesis 25:23 shows that this had reference particularly to the posterity of Esau, and not to him as an individual. The sense is, that the descendants of Esau, who were Edomites, should be inferior to, and subject to the descendants of Jacob. Jacob was to have the priority; the promised land; the promises; and the honour of being regarded as the chosen of God. There was reference here, therefore, to the whole train of temporal and spiritual blessings which were to be connected with the two races of people. If it be asked how this bears on the argument of the apostle, we may reply,
(1.) that it settles the principle that God might make a distinction among men, in the same nation, and the same family, without reference to their works or character.
(2.) That he might confer his blessings on such as he pleased.
(3.) If this is done in regard to nations, it may be in regard to individuals. The principle is the same, and the justice the same. If it be supposed to be unjust in God to make such a distinction in regard to individuals, it is surely not less so to make a distinction in nations. The fact that numbers are thus favoured does not make it the more proper, or remove any difficulty.
(4.) If this distinction may be made in regard to temporal things, why not in regard to spiritual things? The principle must still be the same. If unjust in one case, it would be in the other. The fact that it is done in one case proves also that it will be in the other; for the same great principle will run through all the dealings of the Divine government. And as men do not and cannot complain that God makes a distinction among them in regard to talents, health, beauty, prosperity, and rank, neither can they complain if he acts also as a sovereign in the distribution of his spiritual favours. They, therefore, who regard this as referring only to temporal and national privileges, gain no relief in respect to the real difficulty in the case, for the unanswerable question would still be asked, why has not God made all men equal in everything? Why has he made any distinction among men? The only reply to all such inquiries is, "Even so, Father, for so it seemeth good in thy sight," Matthew 11:26.
No comments:
Post a Comment