Romans - March 22, 2009

SECTION --- Five: Vindication of God (9:1 -- 11:36) .
(continued from previous Class Follow Up)

2. (9:6) If this is not “double talk” , and it is not, explain Paul’s statement?
a. The readers are under the impression if one is part of the nation of Israel then they are God’s special people and such is not the case — proof to follow.
3. (9:6) PONDER: Considering the way Paul begins v.6 what do you think is the problem he is addressing?
a. If the LOM is not the final word and we must accept Christ to be saved then God has failed, i.e. God’s promises to us have failed.
4. (9:6) PONDER: Do you think the targeted readers would agree with the position things mentioned in 9:4-5 is limited, i.e. not all of Israel’s descendants are Israel? Why that answer?
a. No they would disagree with vigor for their mind set is Israelites are a tribe or nation. According to the family tree all of Israel’s (aka Jacob’s) physical decedents would be Israelites, thus, receivers of the promise made to Abraham and all things noted in 9:4-5.
5. (9:7) What is the significance of “neither” or “nor” as the first word of 9:7
a. Not even, not either; Not all Israel is Israel any more than all Abraham’s is Abraham.
6. (9:7) PONDER: How does this verse refute the argument a physical family tree determines who is of Abraham, thus receiver of the Abraham’s promise and the things note in 9:4-5.
a. Abraham’s first born was name Ishmael and if family tree determines who was of Abraham the Arabians would be, based on rights of the first born, recipients of the promise to Abraham, thus, not the readers.
b. If they admit all of Abraham’s children are not Israelites, because of Ishmael they must admit it is possible more than flesh may be involved — i.e., God may make choices not based on the family tree of Jacob (Israel) who is of Israel.
7. (9:8) PONDER: This verse clearly support the doctrine God chooses who will be saved and who will be lost (TULIP). If not why not?
a. Paul is not addressing who is saved and who is lost, but correcting the position God still choose based on a family tree after Christ became King (Act 2:1)
8. (9:8) How does verse 8 build on verse 7?
a. Ishmael’s (Abraham’s first born) decedents are not part of God’s promise to Abraham for God chose sons of Isaac to receive the promise, thus, it is by promise (God’s choice) not flesh.
9. (9:7) PONDER: What is the relationship of this statement with the statement of 9:6?
a. If they admit all of Abraham’s children are not Israelites, because of Ishmael they must admit this, then they must also recognize it is possible more than flesh may be involved — i.e., God may make choices not based on the family tree of Jacob (Israel) who is of Israel.
10. (9:8) PONDER: What could the Jews say that would in their mind justify Isaac over Ishmael to support it was not of promise but the logical way things operate?
a. Ishmael was rejected on the basis of illegitimacy, not promise, thus, Isaac was the first born and had the rights of the first born. Salvation then is based on authorized family tree not promise as Paul is suggesting.
11. (9:9) How does this verse support Paul’s position salvation is based not on a family tree but on God’s promise?
a. Sarah gave birth to a man child (Isaac) in her old age as God promised her (Gen 18:10). The birth was natural but the age of Sarah and Abraham was beyond the normal age of producing a child. It was family tree but God also had some input, i.e., God made and kept a promise. It is not Family Tree alone that determines who is of Israel.
12. (9:10) If the receiving of Abraham’s promise is only family tree what is the problem with Jacob’s children being the receiver of Abraham’s promise?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A LOOK AHEAD

a.
13. PONDER: What reason could the Jew give to justify Jacob being the receiver of Abraham’s promise and not Esau.
a.
14. (9:11) What was God’s criteria for choosing Jacob over Esau?
a. .
15. (9:12) Did Esau the man serve Jacob the man, i.e., did God promise Esau the man would serve Jacob the man?
a. .
b. The nation of Esau did serve did serve the nation of Jacob (Israel) 1Ch 18:12-13.
16. (9:13) By this action did God love the man Jacob more than he love the man Esau?
a.
17. PONDER: Why did God prefers Jacob over Esau?
a.
18. PONDER: Can this passage (6-13) be used to support the position God chose certain people to be saved by the gospel or lost by rejecting the gospel? Why that answer?
a.

D. Evidence Applied [Discussion Question Answered] — What is the proof who is God’s people is a matter of God’s purpose and not what one is due because of their family tree?
1.
E. Conclusion —

III. {Rom 9:14-18} 2nd of 3 Arguments — Example of God choosing as fits God’s purpose
A. Introduction
1.