Chapter 14

The Mystery of Election and Beyond

In Romans 9, Paul begins with an arresting statement which at first glance seems to contradict his belief in the inestimable, even infinite value of the human soul. If he believes the human soul is of infinite value then wishing himself “accursed from Christ for his brethren, his countrymen according to the flesh…” would be untenable, that is, if to be accursed from Christ means eternal banishment from His presence. Of course this is clearly not what Paul means, though predominant Christian theology has supposed such. Honest intellectual reflection recoils at the idea that a man would exchange, on behalf of others, his eternal soul for never-ending pain and anguish. So what does Paul mean when he wishes himself “accursed from Christ” if it is not eternal damnation? He proceeds in the succeeding chapters of Romans to frame his doctrine of election as it pertains to Israel, the Church, and the entire human race. In a relatively brief treatise, this Christ-inspired Jewish rabbi and Christian apostle casts an elegant, all-encompassing theology-philosophy that sets his troubled mind and burdened heart to rest, indeed, all who will contemplate Paul deeply and objectively will share his peace.[1]

Romans 9-11 represents Paul’s most difficult theological challenge; the proper interpretation of God’s sovereignty in the light of human responsibility, and that in the context of accursed Israel, Paul’s countrymen, “to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God and the promises”. Furthermore, there is the problem of the Gentiles. Is there no hope for the Covenant-less ones or does God’s redemptive plan address all His children? How far, how wide, and how deep do the powers of the cross reach? The astounding, albeit, deeply satisfying answers are here in Paul.

At once pessimistic and optimistic, hopeless and hopeful, but being directed by the deeply held revelation of the almighty sovereignty of Christ, Paul ultimately and finally rests in the amen of God. “Hope that takes away shame” is an expression of the Apostle from Romans 5:5 and is offered for therapeutic effect in the face of what would otherwise be an emotional devastation playing out in fear and all of its debilitating concomitants. If God is not in control and moving in the world toward a positive resolution, then a shameful thing indeed it would be, and good reason for universal angst. This social diagnosis is prophetic reality in the modern self-made world as Jesus Himself describes the fear and dread of the masses in a world coming unhinged; a hopeless world. There is hope in Paul’s view of God’s plan; hope for Isreal, for the nations, the angelic orders, the entire heavens and earth.

But hope, like faith, is a spiritual matter. It is an energy released between previously isolated spiritual realities which sustains the hopeful one through time and change. The life of the heavenlies and the heavenly life within are connected and switched on when the spirit of Christ enters a believer through faith. Now, the thing hoped for is spiritually perceived and pursued by faith, and what in the normal human experience, tribulations, cause anger, fear and general dismay, now produces perseverance, character, and hope that releases the wide-ranging and far-reaching fruits of the love of God.

Interpreters have strained to explain these scriptures since Paul penned them in the first century. They are difficult but not impossible to explain, immediately setting would-be expositors at odds with Paul and God, whom he represents as being completely unexplainable in the dramatic and humbling doxology that concludes the covenant declarations of Romans 9-11.[2] Attempts at  explanation have resulted in two theological streams often in bitter opposition; those who believe that what happens is based on the sovereign predestined plan of God and those who believe what happens is based on God’s reaction to what he foreknew would happen as man exercised his free will. Both sides cite Paul in arguing for their doctrines and in proving the error of the opposing view.

With caution we approach the words of Paul, acknowledging the declarative tone of his homily. A declaration is to be received implicitly on the authority of the declarer. It is apparent that Paul intended for his epistles to be read in public meetings and contemplated privately by Christian believers. It probably never occurred to him that his relatively brief epistles would be expanded on endlessly and be the primary source for many opposing viewpoints and vicious, sometimes bloody wars in the Christian movement.  Libraries are bloated with commentaries on Paul and well-meaning explanations of what he declared to be so, indeed, he was slow to expand with personal opinions on his own declarations and did so with paucity. He understood the inspired and authoritative nature of his writings, presenting them as they were intended, as sacred scripture.

It is necessary to avoid the typical denominational error of constructing an adulterated grace-plus-works interpretation of Paul invariably resulting in a bold, prejudiced, provincial legalism. A careful distinction is to be made between Paul’s received revelation, that is, those things revealed exclusively to him, and that part of the body of his writings which was based on received traditions, i.e., those issues of practical living upon which all would agree. His revelations were authoritative declarations which formed the doctrinal understanding of the Church in terms of messianic and covenant truth. In practical matters Paul was careful not to impose a new “Christian Law” but to demonstrate the positive power of love, which is the fulfillment of the law and the life force of every believer in Christ.

There are five fundamental assertions in Romans 9 that forms the premise from which Paul establishes his teachings on election and rejection for Israel as well as the Gentiles:

1. It is not possible for the word of God to fail.(v.6)
2. The purpose of God cannot be thwarted. (v.11)
3. There is no unrighteousness with God. (v.14)
4. Man’s will is always subordinated to God’s will. (v.16)
5. God’s will is not informed by human logic and therefore is often difficult to understand and offensive to human intellectual and emotional sensibilities.(V 16-23)

In consideration of the above truths and the difficulty to reconciling Paul’s declarations concerning God’s prenatal hate for Esau and the raising up of Pharaoh to harden his heart with the conviction held by believers that God is love and does all things with loving purpose, it is helpful to reflect on the types of The Old Testament alluded to here. As Paul clearly understood, the types, being rooted in historical events, are the most profound demonstration of God’s predestination of all things. The idea of planning reality subsequent to knowing reality is inherently self-contradictory, but what reveals an even lower view of the Divine inspiration of scripture is the interpretation of types as fortuitous points of comparison or loose analogies between otherwise unrelated events in history.

In his classic work, The Law of Offerings, Andrew Jukes reviews the far reaching and striking typology in the life of Jacob’s son Joseph as it relates to Romans 2.

“Take another of the types of Genesis, I mean the history of Joseph. No one, I suppose, who has ever thought upon it can doubt that this history is typical. But typical of what? Of dispensational truth. Joseph is the eldest son of the younger and best-loved wife. Here, again, we get the two wives, as in a former instance, bringing out the same truth, though with some additions, Leah, the elder wife, has all her children before Rachel, the younger, has any. The Jewish dispensation had all its children before the Christian dispensation had any. Christ, the first-born from the grave, was the first son of the Rachel dispensation. This son, the beloved of his father, is cast out by his brethren, the children of the elder wife, and cast into Egypt, the constant type of the Gentile world. There, after a season of suffering and shame, he is exalted to be head over the kingdom; his wife is given to him from out of the Gentiles, and then his brethren, the children of the first wife, know him. This type, I think, needs no explanation; if explanation be needed, the eleventh of Romans will supply it. The sin of the Jews, the elder brethren, is made the riches of the Gentiles for a season, until the elder brethren in need are brought to know and worship their brother, and are reconciled to Him. But I wish merely to call attention to the fact, that here, and elsewhere in Genesis, the types are dispensational. Christ rejected by the Jewish family, and His history among the Gentiles, and again the restoration of his brethren to Him: this is the history of Joseph.”[3]

Romans 9 through 11 are parenthetically inserted between chapters 8 and 12 as a special message to Israel in the light of the unfolding gospel dispensation which was becoming more and more manifestly a time for the enlightenment and salvation for the Gentiles to the general exclusion of the Jews. But just as these three chapters are parenthetical to the whole message of salvation in Romans, so is the dispensation of Israel’s blindness. It is temporary with a marked beginning and ending, the first and Second Advent of Christ.[4]

Feel the unburdening of Paul’s heart and mind as his revelation unfolds progressively from profound grief (9:1), to his prayer of faith for Israel’s salvation (10:1), and finally his assurance of complete salvation and blessing for his people Israel (11:26).

Again, Paul’s universal vision is evident as he sets forth his explanation of the mystery of election. [5] God’s ultimate purpose in the setting aside of Israel is no less than “the reconciling of the world” (11:15). The wondrous hope of the gospel is Christ’s victory over death, not for the elect only, but also for the non-elect.[6]

So, for Israel’s trouble they not only receive “life from the dead” but are the redemptive agent for the nations through Christ.

There is no doubt that Paul listened intently to James’ response to his fervent appeal to the Jerusalem council that the Gentile converts should not come under the yoke of the law. The influence of James on Paul was profound, clearly resonating throughout his letters. A review of James’ brief discourse documented by Luke in Acts 15:13-21 is helpful in the quest to understand Paul’s grasp of God’s plan to reconcile the world to Himself and the role of the New Testament believers in the reconciliation process.[7]

This is what James said: “Men and brethren listen to me: Simon has declared how God at first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name. And with this the words of the prophets agree just as it is written: After this I will return and rebuild the tabernacle of David which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins and I will set it up; so that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord. Even all the Gentiles who are called by my name, says the Lord who does all these things, known to God from eternity are all His works.”