Romans chapter 9 verses 10 through 13, the two nations from Jacob and Esau. Verse 10," Not only that, but Rebecca's children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac." Paul is continuing to show that not every fleshly Jew is automatically a child of Abraham. Just because someone is an ethnic Jew does not necessarily mean he is part of the true Israel of God. To demonstrate this further, Paul now moves from the example of Isaac to that of Jacob and Esau.
Esau provides a particularly powerful example of the point Paul is getting across. That is because Esau was a fleshly descendant of both Abraham and Isaac. He was also born under the covenant of circumcision. Yet there is even more. But Rebecca's children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. Here I am using the rendition of the 2011 New International Version, as it seems to best capture the sense in which the early Christians were reading this passage. The complete Jewish Bible reads similarly.
And even more to the point is the case of Rivka, Rebecca. For both her children were conceived in a single act with Yitzchak, Isaac, our father. What is remarkable about Jacob and Esau is not just that they had the same father, but that they were conceived from the same act of procreation. For they were twins. Yet despite the extremely close point of conception between Jacob and Esau, God still made a division between them. He chose Jacob to be part of the promised blessing, and he rejected his twin brother Esau.
That is how little a direct bloodline to Abraham means. A man can be a twin brother and Abraham's own grandson through the promised heir, Isaac, and still be rejected. If Esau could be excluded because of future unrighteousness, obviously then any other descendant of Abraham and Isaac can be excluded as well.
Theodoret writes," Paul is saying that you may argue that Isaac was preferred over Ishmael because of his birth from Sarah his wife." And you may reason similarly concerning Abraham's other children by Keturah, but what will you say about the case of Rebecca? For here, there were the same father and the same mother. What is more, there was the same one single conception, the children being twins. For this is what he means by there having been conceived by one that is both being conceived at the same time.
Nevertheless, one brother was beloved of God, and the other was unworthy of divine regard. Romans chapter 9:11:" For the children not yet being born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to His choice might stand not of works, but of Him who calls." Not yet being born. Paul uses Jacob and Esau as an example. Before they were born, God knew what type of men these brothers would grow up to be. Jacob would become a righteous man, while Esau would become a profane man.
Theodoret writes," God did not wait for the evidence of events. Rather, while they were still in the womb, he foretold the difference between them, and he prophesied about it from foreknowing their dispositions. For God's choice is not arbitrary, but in accordance with the character of men, that the purpose of God according to His choice might stand. The King James Version and most other English translations render this clause that the purpose of God according to election eklogen might stand.
In this commentary, I have translated eklogen as his choice rather than as election. The reason is that ever since John Calvin, the word" election" has been closely intertwined with the doctrine of arbitrary predestination. By arbitrary, I mean that according to this doctrine, God's selection of persons is not based on his foreknowledge of their faith or actions. Rather, he picks people at random. However, in Greek, ekloge has no direct or implied meaning of predestination, arbitrary or otherwise.
Outside of theological context, the same is true of our English word" election." The English word" election" comes directly from the Latin word" electio," which means a choice or selection. In turn, the Latin word comes from the Greek word" ekloge", which had the same meaning. Both the Latin and Greek terms were everyday words without any special theological significance. In fact, even today, in ordinary English usage, elect means choosing someone for public office or other position.
Outside of theology, no one associates the word election with predestination. So Paul is using an ordinary Greek word to get the point across that God is free to choose whomever He wants. He is not bound to include people in His kingdom simply because they are ethnic descendants of Abraham. Nor is God prevented from choosing persons for His kingdom because they are Gentiles.
Furthermore, Paul tells us that God can choose people before they are even born, for He has perfect foreknowledge of what kind of persons they will turn out to be. God chose the Gentiles long before their spiritual birth. For He foreknew how they would respond to the gospel message. God's foreknowledge of Jacob and Esau. Likewise, God chose Jacob and Esau based on his foreknowledge of what their characters would be.
Although it has become popular today to paint Jacob as a dishonest schemer, the early Christians had no such view of him. The scriptures describe Jacob as a" simple man," Genesis 25: 27. Here, simple has the sense of innocent and upright. Origen writes," You should understand that it was because of his innocence and because of the simplicity of his soul that Jacob was prepared as a vessel of honor." See how the Holy Scriptures bear witness of his simplicity? Jacob was a simple man dwelling in a tent.
Genesis chapter 25:27. In contrast, the scriptures say concerning Esau, lest there be any sexually immoral person, or profane person like Esau, who sold his birthright for one meal. Hebrews 12:16. The first-century Jewish writer Philo writes," Esau had given up his birthright to his brother." Yet a short time afterward, he endeavored to assert his claim to what he had voluntarily abandoned, violating his agreement.
And then Esau sought to slay his brother, threatening him with death if he did not surrender what he had purchased. Not of works, but of him who calls. For centuries, certain Christians have quoted this verse to bolster their erroneous teaching that God cares little about works, or that He is even hostile to them. Such an interpretation comes from reading these words outside of the context of Paul's great argument.
One of the key points of Paul's great argument is that God has not been unfair to the Jews in extending salvation to the undeserving Gentiles. That is the point Paul is making here. The Jews objected to the fact that God allowed the Gentiles to come to salvation without embracing the law or even having any prior godly works. In the eyes of the unbelieving Jews, if Christianity were true, it would mean that God was selecting the wicked, idol-worshiping Gentiles over the righteous Jewish heirs of Abraham.
Paul adroitly silences this argument by pointing to the situation of Jacob. If it is unfair of God to choose the Gentiles before they have shown any works, what about Jacob? He is the father of the twelve tribes of Israel. But God likewise chose him before he had done any works. In fact, God selected Jacob before he was even born. If it was fair for God to choose Jacob before his birth, why is it not equally fair for God to choose the Gentiles before their spiritual birth? That is exactly what God did.
Long before the idol worshiping Gentiles believed in the true God, he had determined," I will say to those who were not my people, you are my people." Hosea chapter 2:23." Likewise, He had prophesied," From the rising of the sun, even to its going down, My name will be great among the Gentiles." Malachi 1:11: Although the 1st century Jews were finding it offensive that God was extending His call to the ungodly Gentiles. Paul says that this is no different than God choosing Jacob.
For God called Jacob to be part of Abraham's promised seed before Jacob himself had done any works. So Paul is not denigrating godly works in this passage. As we have seen, good works are essential after our initial salvation. Yet God does not require us to have good works before we receive our initial salvation. Romans chapter 9:12," It was said to her," The elder shall serve the younger. The elder shall serve the younger." Paul had described Isaac as the child of promise.
In the case of Jacob and Esau, only one of these twin brothers was the child of promise. What was that promise? It was that the elder shall serve the younger. So Paul once again demonstrates that fleshly descent is not what matters with God. As far as genetics, Jacob and Esau were much more closely related than were Ishmael and Isaac. Yet God once again chose only one of them. Jacob and Esau prefigure two peoples. Paul's argument primarily concerns two peoples fleshly Israel and spiritual Israel.
So one reason Paul has turned to Jacob and Esau is that they represent these two peoples. Genetically speaking, Jacob was the progenitor of the Israelites, and Esau was the progenitor of the Edomites. However, the early Christians recognize that these two brothers also represent two spiritual nations. These two nations are fleshly Israel and spiritual Israel, the Israel of God. Which of these two nations is older? Fleshly Israel is the older, for it was in existence for over 1,500 years before Jesus was born.
The ethnic Israelites were the first people with whom God had a special relationship. Accordingly, they were the older brother and are represented by Esau. Jacob, the younger brother, represents the Israel of God, comprised of both believing Jews and Gentiles. In the Old Testament history, Jacob supplanted his older brother, Esau, and received his blessing. Likewise, in the prophetic fulfillment, the new Israel of God, the younger brother, has supplanted the older brother, fleshly Israel.
God's blessing is on the Israel of God, made up primarily of Gentiles. Irenaeus writes," Jacob received the rights of the firstborn when his brother looked on them with contempt." Similarly, the younger nation, the Israel of God, received Christ, the first begotten, when the elder nation, the fleshly Jews, rejected him, saying," We have no king but Caesar." In Christ, every blessing is summed up. Therefore, the latter people, the Israel of God, has snatched away the blessings of the former people from the Father.
This is just as Jacob took away the blessing of Esau. Because of this, Jacob suffered the plots and persecutions of his brother. Likewise, the church suffers this persecution from the Jews. Similarly, Hippolytus writes," Esau prefigures the first people, the Jews, and Jacob prefigures the church." Cyprian confirms this, adding," Two peoples were foretold, the elder and the younger. The elder people are the Jews.
The younger one represents us." Finally, Ambrosiaster comments," Jacob and Esau are types of two peoples, believers and unbelievers." Although they are from one source, they are nevertheless different. Romans chapter 9:13." As it is written," Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated." Many Christians today misread Paul's words in this verse, and they imagine Paul is saying that God arbitrarily loved Jacob and hated Esau before they were even born.
However, the words Paul now quotes are not about the two brothers Jacob and Esau. They are about the two earthly nations, Israel and Edom. Paul is no longer quoting from Genesis, but from Malachi. In other words, Paul is showing us the before and after situation. Malachi was written over a thousand years after the prophecy in Genesis. Jacob and Esau had long since been dead. Malachi speaks about the two nations that descended from Jacob and Esau.
This is clear when we read the entire passage from Malachi:" Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated. And I have made his mountains a desolation. And I have given His heritage to the jackals of the wilderness. Malachi chapter 1 verses 2 through 3. Was God's love of Israel Jacob and his hatred for Edom, Esau, based on an arbitrary decision on his part? By no means, the Edomites, descendants of Esau, had wickedly mistreated their brothers, the Israelites. Through Obadiah, God had prophesied about Edom.
The Lord says," Will I not in that day destroy the wise men out of Edom and understanding from the mountain of Esau? Teman, your mighty men will be dismayed, to the end that everyone may be cut off from the mountain of Esau by slaughter. Because of the violence done to your brother Jacob, shame will cover you, and you will be cut off forever." Obadiah chapter 1 verses 8-10. So by quoting both Genesis and Malachi, Paul is showing first the original prophecy and then its fulfillment.
In the original prophecy to Rebekah, God had said," Two nations are in your womb. Two peoples will be separated from your body. The one people will be stronger than the other people. The elder will serve the younger," Genesis chapter 25:23. So the original prophecy was about the two nations of Israel and Edom, not about the two brothers themselves. Esau never personally served Jacob. God had prophesied good and bad about Jacob and Esau, and about the two nations descended from them.
This was long before either brother or either nation had done any works. Was this unfair on God's part? No, for his foreknowledge is infallible. God was vindicated for Jacob went on to live a godly life, and Esau an ungodly one. Similarly, the nation of Israel served God some of the time, while the Edomites always worshipped idols. So what is Paul's point? His point is that the situation of Israel and Edom is analogous to that of fleshly Israel and spiritual Israel, which is primarily composed of Gentiles.
When the Gentiles were still steeped in wickedness and the worship of demons, God had chosen them to be included in the Israel of God to be part of His people. He had prophesied," Many nations will come and say,' Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob, and He will teach us His ways, and we will walk in His paths." Micah chapter 4:2. In fact, God prophesied about the conversion of the Gentiles many times throughout the Old Testament.
If anyone doubts that Paul is discussing two nations in this passage, fleshly Israel and spiritual Israel, they only need to read the similar passage in chapter 4 of Galatians. There, Paul says that Sarah and Hagar also represent these same two people groups. For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and one by a free woman. But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, while the son of the free woman was born through promise. Now this may be interpreted allegorically.
These women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery. She is Hagar. Now, Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia. She corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother. Now you brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. But just as at that time, he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit. So also it is now.