Глава IX

The Apostle's grief over the rejection of Israel (1–5). This rejection does not contradict the divine promises (6-13). This rejection does not contradict the justice of God (14–29). Why Israel did not achieve righteousness (30–33). The Apostle said above (Rom. 1:16-17) that the Gospel was intended primarily for the Jews. He then pointed out that the Jews were entrusted with the divine promises of salvation in Christ (Rom. 3:1–3) and that the law, although negatively, prepared the Jews to receive gospel grace (Rom. 3:20). However, the Jews, as a nation, found themselves outside the threshold of the Kingdom of Christ - they did not accept the Gospel. This circumstance could not help but confuse the pagan Christians who made up the largest part of the Roman Church. Some of them might even have had a thought of this kind: is this unbelief of the Jews in the Gospel proof that the Gospel being preached now is not real? In order to dispel any doubts aroused by the Jews’ non-acceptance of the Gospel, the Apostle adds to the dogmatic part of his message a section, so to speak, a philosophical and historical one, in which he explains in detail the reason for the rejection of the Jews from the Kingdom of Christ and proves that the promises given to the forefathers of the Jewish people will nevertheless come to fulfillment over time (chap. IX-XI). In addition, this section has a direct connection with the end of Chapter VIII. There it was said that God, having once predestined people to salvation, then certainly calls them (v. 30). But the Jews seemed to be proof of the opposite: they were predestined or pre-elected to salvation - and yet God did not call them! The Apostle explains this difficulty in chapter 9. Rom.9:1. I speak the truth in Christ, I do not lie, my conscience bears witness to me in the Holy Spirit, Before proceeding to resolve the issue of the unbelief of the Jews, the Apostle considers it necessary to state that he is not at all an enemy of Israel, as renegades often are. He, on the contrary, loves and values ​​his people and would be glad to sacrifice his personal happiness for their salvation, since the rejection of Israel causes the greatest grief to his heart. The Apostle first of all says that everything that he says further about the Jews will be completely in accordance with the truth, because he cannot lie, being in close life communion with Christ. In addition, his conscience also testifies that the Apostle speaks on his own behalf (to me), and his conscience cannot deceive him, since it gives its voice in the Holy Spirit, that is, being guided not by any carnal interests, but by the highest impartial principle - the Holy Spirit living in believers. Although Paul’s conscience cannot communicate its testimony directly to the readers of the epistle, the very fact that the Apostle refers to it shows that it will not allow the Apostle to tell a lie. Thus, the Apostle, speaking about the testimony of conscience, wants to say that he expresses his assurances after he has experienced their truth in his conscience. Rom.9:2. that there is great sadness for me and constant torment in my heart: The apostle does not say why he is so sad, but this is understandable without words. Obviously, he mourns the rejection of the Jews from the Kingdom of Christ. Rom.9:3. I myself would like to be excommunicated from Christ for my brothers, relatives to me according to the flesh, “I would like,” that is, if it were possible to save the Jewish people through one’s own self-sacrifice, the Apostle would have made such a self-sacrifice 32. - “To be excommunicated” (αναθεμα), i.e., that object that among the Jews was doomed to destruction to satisfy the wrath of God (cf. Gal. 1:8 et seq.; 1 Cor. 12:3, 16:22). The apostle would like to die, deprived of communion with Christ, to die for eternal salvation for his brothers, so that the wrath of God would fall not on them, but on him (like Moses - cf. Exodus 32:32). Rom.9:4. that is, the Israelites, to whom belong the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the law, and the worship, and the promises; Rom.9:5. theirs are the fathers, and from them is Christ according to the flesh, who is God over all, blessed forever, amen. The Apostle lists the virtues of the Jewish people, in view of which, in his opinion, it would be worth sacrificing their personal salvation for the salvation of the people so distinguished by God. Israelis. The very name of the Jews - Israelites, given to them in memory of their great ancestor - Jacob or Israel, speaks of their dignity (Gen. 32:28 cf. John 1:47). - “Adoption”. Israel was adopted by God as a people, and God therefore calls Himself their Father (Ex 4:22, 19:5; Deut 14:1; Hos 11:1). Other nations were never called sons of Jehovah. – “Glory” is the symbolically visible presence of Jehovah in the pillar of cloud and fire (Exodus 24:16) or in the cloud that filled the Temple of Solomon during its consecration (1 Kings 8:10 et seq.). - “Covenants” - with Abraham and other patriarchs, and then with all the people (cf. Wis. 18:22; Sir 17; Eph 2:12). - “Legislation” - that is, the solemn proclamation of the law on Mount Sinai. Worship - that is, serving Jehovah in the church (which was not the case among other nations). – “Promises” are primarily messianic. – “Fathers” – again in a special sense of the word, namely, God’s chosen patriarchs who stood in direct communication with God. Although other nations descended from great and intelligent men, these men cannot compare with those who were called to close communion with Jehovah. “And from them is Christ according to the flesh.” The Apostle limits the origin of Christ from Israel to the flesh, that is, to the natural human side of His being (see Rom. 1:3). From this addition: “according to the flesh,” it is clear that the Apostle wants to further say about the other, divine, side of Christ’s being. - “God who is above all.” This passage is a stumbling block for interpreters. Who do these words refer to? To Christ or to God? Some interpreters say that these words cannot apply to Christ, because the Apostle Paul has no other place where Christ is so directly called God. Therefore, in this expression they see praise to God the Father. Others, on the contrary, argue that grammatically these words may well be a continuation of the previous expression: Christ according to the flesh, and that there is no reason to see in them a glorification of God, since nothing was said about God before this. If we see in this doxology to God gratitude for the mercies He showed to the people of Israel, about which the Apostle speaks above, then this assumption will be contradicted by the fact that the Apostle in the passage under discussion does not praise mercy, but the power of God (who is above all). Then, there is nothing to be embarrassed by such a direct confession of the Divine dignity of Christ, since Christ is already called God in 1 Timothy 3:16 (“God appeared in the flesh”), and if from the last. to Philip. The Apostle ascribes to Christ an existence equal to God (Phil. 2:6 ιθε). Finally, in all praises to God, the word blessed is at the beginning of the sentence, but here at the end (cf. 2 Cor 1:3; Eph 1:3). Taking into account the strength of the evidence given in favor of the opinion that doxology refers to Christ, as well as the unanimous voice of the ancient church interpreters (Origen, Cyprian, Epiphanius, Athanasius, Chrysostom, Theodoret, etc.), it is necessary to recognize this opinion as the only correct one. Rom.9:6. But it is not that the word of God did not come true: for not all are Israelites who are of Israel; The rejection of a large part of Israel is not in conflict with the divine promises given to the patriarchs of this people. God never said that all of Abraham's descendants would be worthy of the salvation promised to Abraham: His promise concerned only part of Abraham's descendants. This is proved by the fact that salvation was not promised to all the children of Abraham, but only to Isaac, the son of Abraham, according to the promise. This can be seen even more clearly in the fate of Rebekah’s sons. Ishmael's rejection could also be somewhat explained by the fact that his mother Hagar was a slave. But Jacob and Esau were descended from the same mother and from the same father, who was already at that time declared the heir of the promise. And yet one of them was rejected. From this last example it is clearly seen that election does not depend on our dignity (Esau was, in general, also a good man), but on the will of God, and God determined their fate even before the birth of both. “But it’s not that...” The apostle returns to his depressing thought about the rejection of Israel. Yes, as if he were saying, Israel is rejected, the people of God are excluded from the Kingdom of Christ! But this does not mean that the divine promises given to the forefathers of this people (the word of God) will not come true. - “From Israel,” that is, from Jacob, called Israel. The promises given to this patriarch do not apply to all the physical descendants of Israel. The Apostle speaks earlier about Israel than about Abraham, probably because he was prompted to do so by the fact that he had already (in verse 4) made the first advantage of the Jewish people their name Israelites. Rom.9:7. and not all the children of Abraham who are of his seed, but it is said, “Thy seed shall be called in Isaac.” More correctly, this verse should be translated as follows: “and if they (i.e., the Israelites) are the “seed of Abraham,” this does not mean that they are “children.” This expression child (τέκνα) undoubtedly has a special meaning here: it means children of God (cf. Rom. 8:16), that is, heirs of divine promises. The next, 8th verse (“children of God”) speaks for this understanding. - “In Isaac...”. Only when looking at Isaac will everyone say: “Here is a descendant of Abraham!” There will be other descendants of Abraham through Ishmael and other sons, but they will not be recognized by everyone as his true children. Rom.9:8. That is, the children of the flesh are not the children of God, but the children of the promise are recognized as the seed. “Children of promise,” that is, born by virtue of the Divine promise (Gal. 4:23), like Isaac, who was born at a time when his parents, according to the natural order, could not have children (Rom. 4:19). “The power of the promise gave birth to a child” (John Chrysostom). – “Recognized” – of course, by God. - “For the seed”, i.e. for the true descendants of Abraham, who have certain rights. Rom.9:9. And the word of promise is this: At this same time I will come, and Sarah will have a son. The Apostle bases the general position expressed in the 8th article on a well-known private historical event described in the XVIIIth chapter. book Genesis. - “At the same time”, - i.e. in a year, or: around the same time next year. - “There will be a son.” This prediction about the birth of a child by Sarah, namely a son, was proof that Isaac was indeed born through the action of a special power. Rom.9:10. And not just this; but so it was with Rebekah, when she conceived at the same time two sons from Isaac our father. The idea of ​​the independence of receiving salvation from bodily origin is further confirmed by the story of the sons of Rebekah. Both of her sons, Jacob and Esau, were completely identical in origin - both were born at the same time and from the same father and the same mother, and yet the same thing happened here (it happened) as in relation to Isaac and Ishmael, i.e., as can be seen from what follows, the election of one and the rejection of the other. - “Our Father”. The Apostle calls Isaac ours because here he is speaking primarily to Jewish Christians. Rom.9:11. For when they were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad [so that the purpose of God in election might take place Rom.9:12. not from works, but from Him who calls], it was said to her: the older will be enslaved by the younger, Before presenting God’s decree about the fate of Esau and Jacob, the Apostle considers it necessary to talk about the circumstances under which this decree was announced. This is important in the sense that this makes the above definition even more meaningful. The first circumstance is that both of Rebekah’s sons were not yet born at that time, and the second, as a result of the first, is that neither of them had yet shown their mood in any actions. However, God already then predetermined the fate of both, so that it would always be clear to everyone that He chooses and brings certain persons closer to Himself according to His will. Why does God do this? The Fathers and Doctors of the Church answer in agreement: “according to His foreknowledge” (cf. Rom 8:29). Although Jacob and Esau did not yet exist, God already knew what they would be like (John Chrysostom). - “It was told to her.” The passage from Gen. 25:23 The Apostle quotes from the text of LXX. “The “bigger” is Esau. – “Lesser” – Jacob. - “In Enslavement.” Since the descendants of Esau were subordinate to the descendants of Jacob only from the time of David to Jehoram and under the Maccabees, and here undoubtedly a constant relationship between these peoples is indicated, it is more natural to see in this enslavement an indication that Jacob will become the heir to all theocratic advantages, and Esau will be deprived of them. Thus, a slave usually did not receive an inheritance after the death of his master: all property went to the master’s sons. Rom.9:13. just as it is written: Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated. God's attitude toward Esau and Jacob remained the same throughout the Old Testament period. The last prophet, Malachi, quotes the words of Jehovah in which Jehovah speaks of His love for Jacob and His hatred for Esau (Mal. 1:2-3 freely according to LXX). Of course, hatred of Esau must be understood in the same sense in which Christ spoke about the hatred that His disciples should have for their fathers, mothers and themselves (Luke 14:26, 16:13). Just as Christians should prefer the direct demands of Christ to everything that is dear to them, in the event of a conflict between their personal interests and the benefit of the cause of Christ, so God, in order to fulfill the goals of His economy for the salvation of people, preferred Jacob to Esau. But, without receiving theocratic rights, Esau did not lose the rights to eternal salvation, which were granted to all pagans. Rom.9:14. What shall we say? Is it really not true with God? No way. The Apostle found out from examples from the history of patriarchal times that the election of a person by God depends only on the Chooser or Caller Himself. This might seem unfair to someone, and in order to resolve such doubt, the Apostle also refers to the words of God Himself spoken to Moses, and to the words of Scripture about God’s hardening of Pharaoh. Thus, with the words of Scripture, he confirms his teaching about the freedom of God in the matter of election and, in addition, finds the basis for the idea that God even hardens people according to His will (14-18). To this, the Apostle could again be objected to: “if God Himself does everything, then why will He judge people?” After all, it is not their fault that they were not among the chosen ones. The Apostle responds to this that, again, we cannot reproach God for treating us unfairly, because in general we have no rights in relation to Him. He has every right to do with His creations as He pleases! And then, God does not use His inalienable rights to the detriment of people. On the contrary, He spares them, although they, in fact, have long been ripe for destruction. He awaits their conversion in order to show them the riches of His mercy. Even those who have already found the mercy of God, who are saved, should think of themselves as useless vessels, who only by the grace of God became vessels of mercy. After all, all people were subject to the wrath of God - whether they were pagans or Jews (19-24). And wasn't this known before? The calling of the Gentiles and a remnant or some small number of Jews had long been prophesied. At the same time, it was indicated that this very remnant of the Jews would be saved again only by the grace of God (25-29). Thus, it is clear that God generally acted fairly in the matter of calling people: they should all have been rejected, but He did not do this, but called and glorified many. “God is not right,” that is, does He really prefer one to another, regardless of the merits and rights of people? - "No way" . God cannot be accused of injustice. He looks at all people as sinners, and they cannot make their demands, express any dissatisfaction, seeing that God does not call them. The choice belongs to God alone, and He, of course, in His wisdom and foreknowledge, makes such a choice. Rom.9:15. For He says to Moses: I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy; I will regret whoever I feel sorry for. Rom.9:16. So, pardon does not depend on the one who wishes and not on the one who strives, but on God who has mercy. God Himself told Moses, the lawgiver, that He rewards with His mercy whoever He wants (Ex. 33:19 - according to LXX). Here the general norm of God’s relations with people is given: this is how the Lord has always acted and will continue to act. There is no direct relation to Moses alone here. “Have mercy” and “have pity” are synonymous concepts. The Lord God with these words wants to make it clear that people can receive some benefit from God precisely as mercy, as a gift. - “Not from the one who desires and not from the one who strives.” This speaks of all people without exception - both pagans and Jews. They cannot receive the gift of God’s mercy on their own, no matter how much they desire it and no matter how hard they try. The expression “to strive” (τρέχω) was originally used about those competing on the circus lists, who strained all their strength to reach the goal as quickly as possible (cf. 1 Cor 9:24). Rom.9:17. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: For this very purpose I raised you up, that I might show My power over you, and that My name might be preached throughout all the earth. Rom.9:18. So, he has mercy on whomever he wants; and he hardens whomever he wants. In the same way, with the words of Scripture, the Apostle confirms the idea that God also hardens whomever he wants. For this, the Apostle refers to the 16th Art. Chapter IX book Exodus (Exod. 9:16), which he cites according to the LXX with some digressions. - "Scripture". Of course, it was not Scripture itself that spoke to Pharaoh, but God; but in the present case the Apostle needed to put on display precisely the testimony of the Word of God, in order to stop the mouths of all objectors. The Scripture says that this was quite sufficient for the purpose that the Apostle had. - “Put you”, i.e. in the position that the Pharaoh of the time of the Exodus occupied. This man, therefore, according to the special ways of God’s Providence, became the king of Egypt precisely at the very time when the Lord wanted to reveal His glory. - “To show above you” precisely through your complete humiliation. – The apostle here refers to the miraculous plagues sent by God to Egypt. - “That it may be preached.” So that the news of the One who so severely punished the mighty Pharaoh would spread throughout the earth. "So…" . The Apostle once again points to the conclusion that emerges from what is said in Scripture about the freedom of God in the pardon and hardening of man. This conclusion is this: God is not bound in His relationship to man by any human aspirations and deeds (v. 16). “Hardens”, that is, it makes a person unable to perceive impressions that could serve to correct him (cf. Acts 19:9; Heb. 3:8, 13–15, 4:7) 33. Rom.9:19. You will tell me: “What else are you accusing me of? For who can resist His will? Rom.9:20. And who are you, man, that you argue with God? Will the product say to the person who made it: “Why did you make me this way?” Along with indications of the complete freedom of God, with which He has mercy on some and hardens others, the Scriptures repeatedly contain speeches of Jehovah full of reproaches towards stubborn sinners. Readers of the books of the prophets, where such denunciations are most common, could, after what the Apostle said, doubt the justice of such an attitude of God towards sinners. If hardening in sin is a matter of God’s will, then no one can go against this will and everyone will sin! Does God then have the right to reproach such a person? The Apostle responds to this objection by pointing out the insignificance of man before God. Man is God’s creation and has no right to turn to the Creator with questions about why he was given this purpose and not another from God. - "Human" . This is how the Apostle calls the objector to show his insignificance before God. It is clear that this word stands in accordance with the following word: "God". "Product" - in Greek. πλάσμα - means every thing made by man, especially the works of a sculptor and sculptor. Rom.9:21. Does not the potter have power over the clay, so that from the same mixture he can make one vessel for honorable use, and another for low? Another comparison that explains the rights of God the Creator in relation to creation. The meaning of this comparison is this. Just as a potter has every right to give each vessel he prepares its own purpose, so the Creator has the right to do the same in relation to the creature, even if through this one creation finds itself in greater honor than another. But how the Creator actually uses His rights, the Apostle does not yet speak about this here. He only needs to refute the objection raised in verse 19 against the freedom of God, which the Apostle spoke about in verse 18. Rom.9:22. Well, if God, wanting to show wrath and reveal His power, with great patience spared the vessels of wrath, ready for destruction, Rom.9:23. that together we might display the riches of His glory upon the vessels of mercy, which He has prepared for glory, Rom.9:24. over us, whom He called not only from the Jews, but also from the Gentiles? "What then"? The question contained in these verses is a so-called anacoluth, that is, one subordinate clause without the main one. But this sentence obviously needs to be supplemented from verse 14, exactly like this: “What then? Do we already recognize God as unjust if…”, etc. – If in Art. 19–21 the truth of God was explained from an abstract point of view, here His actual attitude towards people is depicted, as if standing in opposition to this truth. The apostle wants to say this: God bears or spares with great longsuffering the vessels of wrath, in order to make them vessels of grace. All who have achieved glory must confess that they were originally vessels of wrath, ready for destruction, and that they owe only to the long-suffering of God that they became vessels of grace. And this truth has application to both pagans and Jews. Rom.9:25. Just as Hosea says: “I will not call my people my people, and not my beloved, beloved.” Rom.9:26. And in the place where it was said to them, “You are not my people,” there they will be called sons of the living God. Rom.9:27. And Isaiah declares concerning Israel: Though the children of Israel were as in number as the sand of the sea, only a remnant shall be saved; Rom.9:28. for the matter is finished and will soon be decided in truth; the Lord will complete the decisive work on earth. Rom.9:29. And, as Isaiah predicted: if the Lord of hosts had not left us a seed, we would have become like Sodom and would have been like Gomorrah. Here the Apostle cites evidence from the Old Testament that the vessels of mercy owe their existence only to the long-suffering of God, with which God previously spared them, although they were vessels of wrath. At the same time, the Apostle proves that these vessels of mercy are called equally from both Jews and pagans. - “As Hosea says.” The Apostle cites the prophecy of Hosea as a prediction about the future conversion of the pagans to the Church of Christ (it was put, obviously, to explain the last expression of verse 24: and from the pagans). But what reason did the Apostle have to interpret the words of Hosea as applied to the pagans? After all, there (Hosea 2:23, 1:10) we are actually talking about the appeal to God of Israel who has apostatized from the true faith? Yes, that's true. But what did this Israel who apostatized from Jehovah represent, if not the same pagans?! Naturally, the same for Ap. Paul, he was the representative of all paganism, and the salvation that Hosea promised to Israel, equated with the pagans, was rightly considered the lot of all pagans scattered throughout the world. Each pagan people, in their own country, without becoming proselytes of the people of Israel, can become the people of God. “And Isaiah declares...”. Here the Apostle gives proof of the thought he expressed at the beginning of the chapter that from the people of Israel only those who walk in the footsteps of Abraham will be saved, and untrue Israelites must be rejected (vv. 27-28). But this salvation of the remnant again, like the calling of the pagans, is a work of Divine mercy (v. 29). They are saved not because by nature they were vessels of mercy, but because the grace of God (prevenient) gave them the opportunity to hear and perceive the gospel sermon. Without this condition, people remain children of the wrath of God (cf. Rom. 1:18, 20). It can be noted that here, in this way, the doctrine of both Divine predestination and the freedom of human will is combined: God brings to faith in Christ only those who want to believe; and that there are people who can accept the gospel preaching is already the result of the influence of prevenient grace (or long-suffering) on ​​the human heart. However, this grace works on some, but not on others. The reason for this difference lies in the people themselves... Rom.9:30. What shall we say? The Gentiles, who did not seek righteousness, received righteousness, the righteousness of faith. The Apostle sufficiently clarified that God’s grace-filled election does not exclude the freedom of human will. In accordance with this position, the Apostle now proves that the Jews themselves are to blame for their rejection. They did not recognize the truth of God, revealed to them in the Gospel, and did not want to recognize it, because they believed righteousness only in the fulfillment of the works of the law. “What shall we say?” i.e. what is the result of what was said? The result is that it was not the Israelites who sought it so strenuously who received justification, but the pagans who were not counting on it. - “Righteousness comes from faith.” The expression from faith indicates the way in which justification was achieved by the pagans. Rom.9:31. But Israel, who sought the law of righteousness, did not achieve the law of righteousness. "The Law of Righteousness". The ideal to which the Jews strove was not righteousness itself, but its law - not a being, but a shadow, not a spirit, but a letter. If for them it was a matter of righteousness in itself, then the law would show them the direct path to it, namely through faith in Christ (cf. Rom. 10:4). And they, in their desire for appearance, ended up on the wrong path of affairs. – The Apostle does not at all want to say that the fall of Israel occurred as a result of its attachment to the law of Moses, but makes it clear that Israel did not understand the meaning of the law itself, which wanted to lead them to Christ. What a great tragedy for a people who were so proud of their law and yet inwardly remained completely alien to it! Rom.9:32. Why? because they sought not in faith, but in works of the law. For they stumbled over the stumbling stone, Rom.9:33. as it is written: Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a stone of offense; but whoever believes in Him will not be put to shame. The Apostle’s thought here is: why did the Jews not achieve the new law of life? Because they tried to achieve this goal not by faith, but by deeds (the word: “law”, according to the best readings, is inserted here). They (the particle “for” is also superfluous here, as most of the best codes show) stumbled upon, as an obstacle, the stone about which Isaiah warned them as a stone of extreme importance, which, according to the decision of the Divine will, was to become the subject of their faith (Isaiah 8:14, 28:16). Thus, Christ or the truth brought by Him was a true revelation of the will of God: God wanted the Jews to turn to Christ, but the Jews did not want to do this (Cf. 1 Cor 1:23; Gal 5:11). Tsang translates the word ηυχόμην - simply: desired. The Apostle had moments in his life when he really had such a desire (cf. 2 Cor 1:8, 11, 13, 7:5). The Apostle does not explain what exactly God’s hardening of Pharaoh consisted of, and interpreters understand this hardening in different senses. Most ancient Christian interpreters explained it not as produced by God Himself, but as allowed by God (propter permissionem). “God hardened Pharaoh,” says Vasily Vel. - long-suffering and abolition of executions strengthening his evil character.” Theophylact adds: “the more philanthropic a master treats a bad servant, the worse he makes him, not because he himself teaches him vice, but because the servant takes advantage of his long-suffering to increase his own depravity.” Godet adds to this that Pharaoh himself initially hardened his heart, as stated in Chapters VII, VIII and IX. book Exodus, and then, as punishment for this, God hardened him (X, XI and XIV chapters Exodus). Pharaoh first himself rejected the admonitions of God, which he received through Moses, and then God made him completely deaf to any further admonitions. And so his perseverance served as a means to glorify the power of God. Injustices here, i.e. on the part of God, was not accomplished, and Pharaoh, obviously, would have died anyway, even if he had not been on the throne, but had been a simple citizen: his character would have led him to destruction in the latter case. You might be interested in: