Our Father, thank You for the day. Thank You, Lord, for this new opportunity we have to continue studying Your Word. Lord, thank You for all the blessings we have in and through the Lord Jesus Christ. And I ask Your blessing on this time together, Lord. And for the forgiveness of sins, I ask in Jesus' name. Amen. We are at Romans, the ninth chapter, continuing. verses 9 through 16. And I don't know if we'll get through all those verses today, but we'll make a run at it. Basically looking at the line, For they are not all Israel who are of Israel. We spent our last study discussing Israel, and I'm not going to go back through that again. But today's text, these verses and continuing, deal with the doctrine of God's free choice, God's sovereign choice in election. Come in, folks. We're in Romans chapter 9, verses 6-13. There have been so many volumes of books written, words preached about for and against God's sovereignty. The question that I would have for myself and anybody listening, can we simply read this word and accept what it says? I think it's overwhelming as we work our way through it. So I want to, in this exposition, just deal with the text before us. If a person has made up their mind one way or the other, then no amount of logic or human persuasion or anything is going to make any difference. There are many people, and I would, sad to say, mostly in the Southern Baptist camp, which this is a Southern Baptist church, and it's in this generation, or at least for the last 75 years or so, who reject the doctrine of God's absolute sovereignty. And they have instead, and I don't mean this to be too ugly, but they have imagined in their mind that man has a free will, and man does act freely. But what they mean by that is man is autonomous, that he operates apart from God's purpose, that man is the final arbiter of whether or not he will accept God's offer of salvation. Well, we're going to see today, if we stay with this, that that's not the way it works at all. And as we move on into chapter 10, we'll see more how this works. But either the God of the Bible has absolute free sovereign choice, or every man, man, woman in himself has the ability to frustrate God's attempt to save every individual in the human race. That's what we're looking at today, those two positions. Does God make a sovereign choice, and we'll see when He makes that choice, the scripture says, before the foundation of the world, He chose a people. Or do people just come into this world and God has made a sacrifice for sin, and there it is, and if you'll accept it, then God will save you. And that's kind of the tension that we're in. I came across something, This past week, and I added it into my notes, by Martin Luther, out of his book, The Bondage of the Will, and so I'm going to quote from Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will, under the heading of, I Don't Want Free Will, by Martin Luther. Quote, I frankly confess that for myself, even if it could be, I should not want free will to be given to me, nor anything to be left in my own hands to enable me to endeavor after salvation, not merely because in the face of so many dangers and adversities and assaults of devils I could not stand my ground, but because even were there no dangers, I should still be forced to labor with no guarantee of success. But now that God has taken my salvation out of the control of my own will, and put it under the control of His, and promised to save me, not according to my working or running, but according to His own grace and mercy, I have the comfortable certainty that He is faithful and will not lie to me, and that He is also great and powerful, so that no devils or opposition can break Him or pluck me from Him. I have the comfortable certainty that I please God, not by reason of the merit of my works, but by reason of His merciful favor promised to me, so that if I work too little or badly, He does not impute it to me, but with fatherly compassion pardons me and makes me better. This is the glorying of all the saints in their God." Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will. To me, the significant line in that quote is that if it's up to me, then I have no guarantee. But if it's God's purpose, then I can believe that. I can trust God. So, as we move through chapters 9 and 10, and we get to 11, we will see how God is not unfair. in dealing with men and women in his free choice of who are his children. And back in chapter 8, Paul has introduced God's free choice. We've read this many times, but I'll read it one more time. In Romans 8, famous verses, verses 28 through 30. And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to his purpose. For whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he predestined, these he also called. And whom he called, these he also justified. And whom he justified, these he also glorified." We will spend some time today as we get to that point about what it means to be the called of God. What does that tell us? After giving this grand assurance, Paul makes a most comprehensive statement of the final perseverance of the saints. God's promise is sure. If He's called us and justified us, and He's going to glorify us, then He's going to keep us. And this is what we continue to read in Romans 8 at verse 31. What shall we say to these things? Rather, what then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who shall bring a charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died and furthermore is also risen. who is even at the right hand of God, and who also makes intercession for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? I don't think I could add anything to that list. As it is written, for your sake we are killed all day long. We are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Yet in all these things, we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." So that is such a grand statement of assurance, and after that Then we've moved into chapter nine, and Paul then begins to discuss the subject of God's sovereign choice. In these first five verses we looked at last week, Paul expresses his anguish. He is in pure anguish over the unbelief of his kinsmen according to the flesh. Paul loved his people. He knew his people. He will make the point that I know about these people. I'm one of them. And yet, he is so distraught that they will not see who Jesus Christ is. So, at verse 6, Paul begins to deal with the accusation, or the charge, that God has failed. And we've mentioned this a number of times, but this is the way Paul writes. He will anticipate a question, and then He will answer the question for you. Somebody is going to ask this question. So I'm going to go ahead and lay it out there, and then I'm going to answer it for you. That's kind of what's going on here. Has God failed to keep His promise to Israel? God made covenants with the people, and He promised to keep them as His children. But what was obvious to Paul was that the vast majority of the Jews in past centuries and in his time were in unbelief. The vast majority of the Jews died in unbelief and they were in unbelief as a people in Paul's day. They were hardened in their rejection of Jesus Christ, Jesus of Nazareth, as their promised Messiah. So has God failed in his His covenant of promise. What Paul writes in verse 6 is the key to understanding that God's word has not failed. So if you're looking at it in verse 6, he says, For it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. Why? For they are not all Israel who are of Israel. And this is a point that many people miss. I've brought it up several times. But if you come to this passage, if you come to the Bible with the idea that Israel is always the people of God, you're going to miss something. There's an Israel, a spiritual Israel within the physical Israel. And he's going to develop that more fully as we move through these verses. It was never God's purpose to save all the Jews. of any generation, past, present, or future. God saves individuals. God justifies individuals. And you're going to see that from the beginning of human history, from Adam on, that God deals with individuals, not with races or nations of people. So, the meaning of the phrase, the Word of God, in verse 6, he says, it's not that the Word of God has taken no effect. Usually in the New Testament, the Word of God refers to the Gospel. But here, and in only one other place in the New Testament, it's referring to the Scriptures, what we call the Old Testament. In Mark 7, I'll read this to you. Mark 7, verse 9, and this is the Lord Jesus speaking. He says, He said to them, all too well you reject the commandment of God that you may keep your tradition. For Moses said, Honor your father and your mother, and he who curses father or mother, let him be put to death. But you say, if a man says to his father and mother, whatever profit you might have received from me is korban, that is, a gift to God. then you no longer let him do anything for his father or his mother, making the Word of God, that is, the Scriptures, the Old Testament, of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do. We won't go into explanation of this, but what the Lord is pointing out to these Pharisees is they had come up with this idea that if I saved my money, my belongings, or Corban, I'm dedicating them to God, then I'm off the hook as far as taking care of my parents. I don't have to help them at all, because I promised this to God. And Jesus said that by your tradition you have violated the Word of God. So, in that passage, Jesus is dealing with the hardness of heart and the unbelief of these people. And so that's why the context that we're dealing with here in chapter 9 of Romans is so important. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel. And back in, we've already read it, I'm sorry, we didn't read it yet this morning, but back in chapter 2, at verse 28-29, Paul introduced the idea of an Israel within Israel. And see how Paul will state a thing, and we've seen this before, He never seems to get through. He'll state something, and he'll go on with something else, and then he'll bring it back up again. Tremendous technique in teaching. You don't get to forget things that way. So here in chapter 9, he's already explained, back in chapter 2, who is a Jew. In chapter 2, at verse 28, And keep in mind this concept of an Israel within Israel. Here are the Jews, and within the body of this people there are true Jews. So he says in verse 28 in chapter 2, For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh, but he is a Jew who is one inwardly. And circumcision is that of the heart in the Spirit, not in the letter, whose praise is not from men, but from God. And this is a play on words. The word Jew means praise. So a true Jew, a true person who praises God is one who has been circumcised in the heart. That's regeneration. That's being born again. Not just physically, because you were born in a family, follow the law, and then all of a sudden, I mean, because of that, you're justified before God. He said, that's not what happens. The true Jew is one who is a Jew inwardly, not outwardly. That's what the Lord told Nicodemus. He said, you must be born again. We won't rehearse that in John chapter 3, but here is the master in Israel. A great Pharisee, well respected. And Jesus told him, there's something you don't have. You must be born again. And I won't go rehearse that again, but think through that story again. If religion was enough, then Nicodemus had it. He was as religious as you could get. But he meant he still lacked something. He must be born again. The Holy Spirit must do something for him. So Paul is dealing with the idea that just because a person is born a Jew or an Israelite, that he's safe from the wrath of God. And he's already dealt with that in chapter 3. But the Jew is also under the wrath of God, just like the non-Jew is. So he's dealing with this idea. The Jews believed that because they had the law, because they had circumcision, they had the covenants, they had the dietary restrictions, they had the Sabbaths, they had all of these privileges that that made them special and were exempt from God's judgment. And Paul has dealt strongly with that. The only way that anyone becomes a child of God is by God's free choice, by God calling him or her through the gospel. That's more fully explained in chapter 10, but I'll just let that lay right there. Martin Lloyd-Jones, who I studied extensively, among others, but very extensively for this study, this exposition of Romans, but he poses four questions that are based on this error, the error I'm talking about, the presumption by the Jews that they were God's special people because of their privileges, because of who they were, the family to which they were born in. That's the error, that's the thing he's dealing with. Okay, the first, he poses four questions here. And the error is one of presumption that God saved somebody based on their works or the fact of their parentage. So here's question number one. We won't answer them right now. I'm going to read the questions and then we'll come back to them. Is there such a thing as a Christian country? And by that question, is there such a thing in which all the people in that country are Christians? Number two. Are children of Christian parents, of necessity, Christians? That's the argument from the Jews. I'm born a Jew, I'm good. Question number three. Are baptized, water baptism, are baptized children of necessity Christians because they've been baptized? Number four he raises. Are all who have been baptized, whether children or adults, or are members of churches, are they of necessity Christians? Now what's going on here? Lord Jones is unfolding this, but the main theme is they're not all Israel who are of Israel. There's a body within a body. And you can make the application to the Christian community in our day. The grand, great body of people who call themselves Christians, they're not all Christians. Not really. For they're not all Christian who are of Christians. For they're not all Israel who are of Israel. I've mentioned this. There are two Israels. One is the nation as a whole, and the other Israel is made up of those who are the true spiritual descendants of Abraham. They alone are the true heirs of the promise made to Abraham. God's word has never failed, and it never will. So, Lloyd-Jones four questions, how did we answer them? Is there such a thing as a Christian country? No, there's not. The closest thing to it, and I haven't checked this lately, in the last 50 years, but the Union of South Africa, in my recollection, is the only country in the world that in their constitution claimed to be a Christian country, a Christian nation. If anybody knows different than that, bring me up to date, but that's what I do remember. But that doesn't mean because it's in their constitution that everybody in South Africa is a Christian. The United States is anything but a Christian nation. All you've got to do is look at the laws that we've passed, and I won't get on that soapbox, but everything we've done lately in this country is to deny God and to get away from God. So you couldn't call this a Christian country. Question number two, are the children of Christian parents of necessity Christian? No. You must be born again. God must deal with you. Are baptized children of necessity Christian because they've been baptized? No. Baptism doesn't do anything to you. Baptism is a declaration of what you believe. It's not that when something is done to you, then that changes you. That's one view. But that's not what happens. Baptism is symbolic of something that's happened in your heart. And then the fourth question, are all who have been baptized, whether children or adults, and they're all church members, are they of necessity Christians? Well, of course not. You don't have to be involved in the local church. a very long time until you find that there are people that profess to be Christian and, sad to say, they will show you that they're not Christians. So, it's not my job to point them out, but I've had enough experience to know that people can make a good run at something, and everything's going fine, and then the cares of the world, the things come up, Some difficulty occurs, some tragedy occurs, and they say, well, that's all I want to do with Christianity. If that's what it's all about, then I'm through with it. And that's a lot of... I see that too much. Well, Lloyd-Jones' point is that no one is a Christian because his or her parents are Christians or because of his or her baptism. And then he continues in verse 7. Nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham, but in Isaac your seed shall be called." Now, I'm going to pass out, if Asa will help me, something we're going to deal with for a few minutes. On one side of this paper is the Greek text and the English, as close as we can get, translation of these Greek words and phrases. If you've studied any Greek, you know that the syntax, the order of the words is different. So you can't just take a word for word translation of Greek to English and make much sense out of it because of the order of the words, the syntax. Well, there are two meanings of the word seed in one verse. And one meaning is the physical seed, and the other is the spiritual seed. And we're going to look at these more closely, but if you look at that first line on that Greek translation, you'll see one word, seed, is from the Greek word sperma. S-P-E-R-M-A in English transliteration. And then, down on the second line, you'll see that word, children, and the Greek word, techno. And we'll come on over to the next, down into verse 8, and I'm not going to point all these out to you, but look at where the word techno and the word sperma occur. Now, on the back of that sheet, I'm going to read you something in a few minutes, you can read along with me if you choose. But here's what's going on. There are two different Greek words, and the English translators translated the Greek words into the same English word. So where there's a distinction in the Greek language, you don't get it reading the English. And I don't know why they do things like that, Jim. It boggles me that they don't follow through the thought behind some of these words. But anyway, most theories of a future of the Jews in a millennial kingdom are refuted by this singular understanding, if you can really get this. So I'm going to read this to you. You can read along with me. This is out of a book that I've had for many years. The Children of Abraham by David Kingdom. Quote, in order to appreciate to the full the way in which the New Testament writers interpret the concept of the seed of Abraham, we need to examine their writings in more detail than we have done thus far. The term seed or descendants of Abraham is used in three senses in the New Testament. Firstly, it is used of the seed who is Christ. Paul argues in Galatians 3.16 that Christ is the seed of Abraham. The rabbinical writers, with the true spiritual insight, saw that the Christ who was promised was the true seed of Abraham. In Him, writes Lightfoot, the race was summed up as it were. In Him it fulfilled its purpose and became a blessing to the whole earth, without Him its separate existence as a peculiar people had no meaning. Thus, he was not only the representative, but the embodiment of the race. In this way, the people of Israel is the type of Christ, and in the New Testament, parallels are sought in respect to the life of the other. Secondly, there is the literal seed of Abraham. Paul, when speaking of the natural children of Abraham, that is, of his physical descendants, uniformly uses the Greek word sperma, which is translated seed in English, not techno, which should be translated children, which he always reserves for believers in Christ. If the Greek testament be consulted at Romans 9.7, The distinction can be clearly seen. Neither because they are sperma, the natural descendants of Abraham, are they called the Tekna. But in Isaac shall thy sperma be called. Out of the natural descendants he is going to call a people." Continuing to quote, the same basic distinction is to be found in John 8, 37 and 39. Our Lord says to the Jews, I know you are Abraham's sperm, but you seek to kill me because my word hath no place in you. And they answered and said to him, Abraham is our father. Jesus said unto them, if you were Abraham's techni, you would do the works of Abraham. I won't interrupt this reading, but isn't that amazing? See how clear that is when the correct Greek word is understood? And it's not just seed, seed, seed. To me it's a very important distinction that we're seeing here. If you were Abraham's Tecna, you would do the works of Abraham. We may also note Matthew 3.9, and think not to say within yourselves, we have Abraham to our father, for I say unto you, God is able of these stones to raise up Tecna unto Abraham. The same differentiation between literal seed and spiritual seed is also to be found in Galatians 4, verses 21 to 31. We're going to read that a little while later. there is the true seed or spiritual seed of Abraham. So we've got Christ the seed, the physical seed, and the spiritual seed. Paul quotes the expression, So shall thy seed be, Genesis 15, verse 18, to show that Abraham is the father of many nations, that is, of a great host of believers drawn out of every race and tribe and kindred who walk in the step of his faith. It is to this seed the true seed that the promise in Romans 4.16 is made sure. Therefore it is of faith that it might be by grace to the end the promise might be sure or established to all the seed, sperma. Not to that only which is the law, but also that which is of the faith of Abraham who is the father of us all, in case we are in any doubt, Romans 9-7 says that only some of the literal are also to be found among the spiritual. Only the children of the promise. Neither because they are the sperma of Abraham are they all children of Tecna. But in Isaac shall thy sperma be called. Out of the natural shall... Okay. So, the first meaning of seed here is the descendent after the flesh, nor are they all children, techna, because they are the seed, the sperma, of Abraham. And the other use of seed means that those who are included in the promise are made to Abraham. But in Isaac your sperma shall be called. That is, out of the sperma, the technic, the technic shall be called. And he goes further and he says the same thing when he uses the word children. And Paul explains that the seed and the children have two meanings. So, in what little of that Greek you have before you, you can see the interplay between the words sperma and tecna. But when the English translates sperma and the tecna, the seed, How can you possibly get the distinction? So I hope this was really exciting to me the first time I saw it. And I wanted to get this across as we go through this explanation. So that's the basis for the statement, They are not all Israel who are of Israel. And then in verse 8, rather. And he's explaining, and he's going to continue to explain this. That is, those who are the children of the flesh, These are not the children of God. But the children of the promise are counted as the seed. But in Isaac shall your seed be called. Now there's another word we've got to deal with, the word called. This is pretty heavy duty this morning, I realize that. But the word called has two meanings. Most of the commentators say that the word called here means the counted or the reckoned. And it means that, but it means a little more than that. Back in chapter 4, Paul introduced the called in chapter 4 verse 13. For the promise that he would be heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void, but the promise made and the promise made of no effect, because the law brings about wrath. For where there is no law there is no transgression. Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be made sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, as it is written, I have made you a father of many nations. In the presence of him whom he believed, God who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they were. He calls them into being. This is the thrust of what I'm getting at here. God who gives life to the dead calls those things which do not exist as though they did. This word here means to be called into being. When you go back to the chapters 15, 16, 17 of Genesis and you read that story of Abraham and Sarah and Hagar, what seemed to be too long a time to Abraham? God had promised Abraham he would have a son. He and Sarah would have a son. It hadn't happened. He's an old man. She's well along in her years. You don't call women old, but she was an old woman. Past the time of Calvary. And Paul's made that point already in Romans. Abraham and Sarah decided they would solve the problem. Under their culture, if Abraham had a child by another woman, it was still, of course, it was his son. So, Sarah gave Abraham Hagar, her maidservant, and Abraham had a child by Hagar. And he loved this boy, Ishmael. He loved him. And he thought, okay, Ishmael is the primal son. I've fixed this problem now. Sarah can't have children. Hagar can. And now I've got a son. God's promise has been fulfilled. Now what happened? God spoke to Abraham and told him that Sarah would have a son. And he was to be named Isaac. and that Isaac was the promised child. God called Isaac into being. Verse 9, For this is the word of promise, At this time I will come, and Sarah shall have a son. So here we are. This is God's free choice. Both Ishmael and Isaac are the sons of Abraham. Ishmael is loved by Abraham, and he is the oldest son. But he's not the child of the promise. Here's something that I've learned from Lloyd-Jones, and I hope I can get this across, because I confess my understanding was changed by this argument he makes. And probably, if you haven't thought about it too much before, you may have to spend a little while on this too. But here it is. God did not have before him two boys. Ishmael and Isaac, and then made a choice between the two boys before him. Isaac was born because of the promise. So it wasn't a matter of God choosing one and rejecting the other. He called one into being. He called Isaac into being. It's the election of Isaac that comes first, and then he is brought into being. He was not chosen after He arrived. So that's a huge distinction. I don't know if I've gotten across to you how important that is, but that is, I think, a valid point. This whole matter is explained in Galatians chapter 4. I think it's worth reading again if you want to find Galatians 4, verse 21. Because now Paul is in another place, I think I've said this before, I forgot who. Someone wrote that Romans is the commentary on the book of Galatians. So you read Galatians and, okay, how am I going to understand what Galatians is all about? Well, that's what Romans does for you. It adds to it. So in Galatians chapter 4, verse 21, You who desire to be under the law. Now let me very briefly give you the context here. There were people who were afraid, they were going back under the law system. They'd heard the gospel, they said they believed in Christ, and Hebrews warns about this too, but they were in danger of going back. So he says, tell me you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a bondwoman, the other by a free woman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the free woman through promise, which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants, the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar. Well, this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to Jerusalem, which now is. And I'm going to interrupt my reading here. He's writing about the Jews of that time. This is the Jerusalem that now is. They're of Hagar. They're under bondage. And they said, No, we're Abrahams. No, they're not. They're under bondage. For this Hagar is Mount Sinai, and Arabian corresponds to Jerusalem, which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But to Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, O barren, you who do not bear. Break forth and shout, you who are not in labor. For the desolate has many more children than she who has a husband." Isaac, and through the promise, through the spiritual children of Abraham, are going to have many, many more children. He's the father of many nations. That's his name, Abraham. Verse 28, Now we brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as he who was born according to the flesh, then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, Even so it is now. And again, a commentary here. That's what was going on. The Jews were persecuting the Christians. Ishmael is persecuting Isaac. Nevertheless, what does the scripture say? Cast out the bondwoman and her son. For the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the free woman. So then, brethren, we're not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. There's your two covenants. There's your two women. There's your two sons. There are the two seed. There are the children after the flesh. There are the children after the Spirit. And it's all there in that allegory that Paul gives. Isaac was born according to the Spirit. And what was true of Isaac is true of every child of God. Every child of God is born of the Spirit. Somebody who is going to defend man's free will. Ishmael and Isaac had the same father, but they had different mothers. And besides that, Hagar was not an Israelite. Where does that lead us? Paul anticipates this objection, and being the excellent teacher that he was, he takes the case for God's free choice one step further. Verse 10. And not only this. But when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac, Rebecca had two boys in her womb. In fact, even though Esau was born a little before the other boy, that is Jacob, it is Jacob through whom the promise is kept. In their culture, the firstborn would have had the preeminence. But it was through Jacob. Now, I see this clearly. I hope I'm getting it across. What more can be said to show someone that being a child of God is not a matter of natural descent? He said that several ways. a child of God because you're born into a Jewish family. And you're not a Christian because you're born to Christian parents. They're not all Israel who are of Israel. In Genesis 25, this is where this is coming from, in verse 21, Now Isaac pleaded with the Lord for his wife because she was barren. And the Lord granted his plea, and Rebekah, his wife, conceived. But the children struggled together within her, and she said, If all is well, why am I like this? So she went to inquire of the Lord. And the Lord said to her, Two nations are in your womb. Two people shall be separated from your body. One people shall be stronger than the other. and the older shall serve the younger." So when her days were fulfilled for her to give birth, indeed there were twins in her womb. And the first came out red. He was like a hairy garment all over, and so they called his name Esau. Afterward his brother came out, and his hand took hold of Esau's heel. So his name was called Jacob. Isaac was sixty years old. when she bore them. God's sovereign choice is emphasized by what Paul says now about the choice of Jacob over Esau. In verse 11 of our chapter, chapter 9 of Romans, For the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him who calls, it was said to her, the older shall serve the younger. This makes the case that God's choice is not based on anything foreseen in the lives of individuals. The children not yet being born, not having done good or evil, God chooses one. He calls one out. And God's free choice is certainly not based on anything they did after they were born. It was God's purpose to call the people into being and declare that they are His children. He does it because He alone is God and He alone has free choice. Back to chapter 4, it is God who justifies the ungodly. And this, going back a little bit on this principle that Lloyd-Jones makes about the election on the part of God, And he helped me on this, and I'm just going to read this quote from him. God's electing and selecting is not a matter of an arbitrary selection out of a mass of humanity. Yet I'm sure that many have always thought of it like that, including this teacher. That God is confronted by the whole humanity, and that the apostle is teaching here that God looks at all these people and says, I'm going to choose some of them and give them salvation, and I'm going to reject the others." Now, I assert that that is not what the Apostle said. It is, in fact, to misunderstand what he's saying. What God does is to produce a people for himself. Still quoting Lord Jones. It was God that produced Isaac. It was a miraculous birth. It was not the case of Ishmael and Isaac being born and God looking at the two boys and saying, I'm going to take this one and not that one. That is quite wrong. God produced Isaac because he had already decided that it was through this man through whom he was going to bring into being that the seed would be carried on. We must get rid of the notion of God looking at humanity or a collection of people having already arrived in an utterly arbitrary and unfair way, taking one and leaving the other. Although they're both equally sinners and equally hopeless, it's not that. It is a very positive process." What God does is to produce a people for himself. Back in chapter 5, we looked at how all men are represented by Adam, and there's another representative man in chapter 5. It's Christ Jesus. He's the last Adam. So it is not the selection out of an old race, but it is not a matter of some of Adam's race being forgiven and others not. It's the production of a new humanity in Christ. Look ahead just a few verses in chapter 9 at verse 22. What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? and that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom he called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles." So God's purpose, His way of salvation is positive. His children are people born of the Spirit. They are foreknown by God. They are predestined. They are called into being. So if we can accept what we've been looking at so far, we shouldn't have too much trouble with verse 13. But I bet you will. Verse 13. As it is written, Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated. Paul is quoting Malachi. And remember now, all of Paul's arguments for the Gospel are based on the Old Testament Scriptures. This is about God's sovereign choice in election, and if election of individuals is not the cause of God's calling, regeneration, and justification, then there's no gospel. The other view is that God made an effort to save every single human being, and it's left entirely up to man's free will. Be very careful. We've talked about this a number of times, but it always needs to be said. Election is not salvation. Election is unto salvation. The elect of God will come to faith in Jesus Christ. There's this terrible error out there that says that God has an elect and they're going to be in heaven whether they ever trust Jesus Christ or not. And you may find it hard to believe that people believe that, but they do. I know a bunch of them. So, Paul quotes Malachi. The burden of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi. I have loved you, says the Lord. Yet you say, in what way have you loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? Says the Lord. Yet, Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated. You won't find much agreement in the commentaries on this verse. verse 13. I didn't go back and recheck this, but my numbers are pretty close. I checked about 10 different writers on this verse, and I found 20 different explanations. And the reason is that they do it like this, on the one hand and then on the other hand. And they never really come out and say what they think. I've got this An old deacon one time prayed that God would send the church a one-armed preacher. What do you mean by one-armed? Well, on the one hand, just tell me what it is. That's what he meant. The most common explanation of this verse is that God is referring to the choice of nations and not to individuals. It's true that two nations came from these two men. And that's what God told Isaac and Rebekah. But you know that nations are made up of people. You can't just have an idea that it's the nations and not have the people that make up the nations. And certainly Paul can't mean every individual in one nation is saved and every individual in the other nation is not saved. That can't mean that at all. That just falls down. Another common explanation is the qualification of hatred to mean God loved less. God didn't really hate Esau, He just loved him less than He loved Jacob. And even Lloyd-Jones has some of this qualified hatred in that God did not love Esau to the degree that He loved Jacob. And he uses the quote where Jesus says, he who loves father and mother more than me is not worthy of me, and he who loves his son or daughter more than me. And that is a comparison. We must love Jesus supremely. And that's what that's talking about there. But Jacob have I loved, and Esau I have hated, I'm going to attempt to be a one-armed preacher. And I'll tell you where I come out after studying this. The first thing I think is that the love of God and the hatred of God is not, when you think of our human emotions, when I hate something or hate somebody, that's sin. But God can have what John calls the settled indignation of his wrath against the people. and not be sinning. So, if we soften the hatred of God, sometimes, I mean, if you're not careful, you're going to wind up with universalism, where nobody's lost. I don't know where I got this, but someone said, I can understand why God could hate Esau, but I can't understand how God could love Jacob. You read the story. You read the story of these two men, and Esau's a good old boy. You don't like him. You go hunting with him. I mean, he's a good fellow. And Jacob is a deceiver. He's a schemer. His name means a supplanter. You better not trust him too far. So which one would you rather hang out with? Well, are we Esau or are we Jacob? I'm going to run out of time here. You'll bear with me an extra minute or two. If we are, as Esau, in hunger after this world's sustenance, and our hearts are attached to the goods and amusements and women of this age, and only add on those qualities which we suppose to be necessary to be religious, just as Esau added a wife from the offspring of his uncle Ishmael, hoping therefore to placate his parents and present himself a true child of Abraham, then we may be certain we will eventually find ourselves in Esau's place, weeping bitterly but finding no place of repentance. But if we are as Jacob, who for all his many faults and shortcomings nevertheless hoped most earnestly in the blessing promised to Abraham and yearned and labored for the coming of the Christ, then we may be sure that God's grace will not only give us that which we long for, but will likewise change our very nature so that his gift will be compatible with the state of our own hearts. Thus we see that Jacob, through many difficulties and miseries, slowly grew more fitted to enter the inheritance for which he so ardently yearned, and thus the trials of this age worked in his behalf, changing his own heart so that he might prove himself an heir of the promise and deed. Even as we who have hoped in Christ, and who long for his coming again, may know that all things, trials, difficulties, not accepted, are being worked together for our good, and will soon fit us for the glorious inheritance which we in no way deserve, but yet love and hope for. I'm going to have to close here. This is from Robert Haldane, who has a classic commentary on Romans. Quote, If God's love to Jacob was a real literal love, God's hatred of Esau must be a real literal hatred. It might as well be said that the phrase, Jacob have I love, does not signify that God really loved Jacob, but that to love here signifies only to hate less. and that all that is meant by the expression is that God hated Jacob less than he hated Esau. If every man's own mind is of sufficient security against concluding the meaning to be, Jacob I have hated less, his judgment ought to be of security against the equally unwarrantable meaning, Esau I have loved less. Like Brother Walter said last Sunday, in conclusion, finally, what do you mean by that? Well, get on with it. Finally, if God did not really hate Esau, then why is the argument, God's argument for his sovereignty would fall away. Was Esau finally saved? No. Was he lost? Yes. The book of Hebrews makes that clear. He was a profane person. He was not one of God's saved children. And I won't read this to you for the sake of time, but Hebrews 12, And verse 14 through 17 gives you that. So, I hope we've made the case for God's sovereign choice. The only reason that you and I can have assurance that we will finally be saved is that God exercised His free choice before the foundation of the world and before you had done any good or evil that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not according to works but of Him who calls. who brings you, He calls you into being. But it is not that the Word of God has taken no effect, for they are not all Israel who are of Israel. And I've run over my time here. If you have questions, make a note. We'll deal with them next time, if the Lord will. Anything need to be said? Thank you.