In using the Greek grammar, we literally read from the Greek Text. (Modern Greek pronunciation) "Ee· ee· khom· een gahr ahn· ahth· ehm· ah ee· neh ahf· tos ehg· o ahpo too khrees· too eep· ehr ton ahth· ehl· phon moo ton seey· yehn· on moo kaht· ah sahrk· ah", translated "For I was wishing that I myself to be accursed from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh". As we examine the Greek word order; it is amazing that so many great men of God and this includes many for which I have great respect and some are proficient Greek scholars, yet they completely ignore the facts! So, what are the facts?

1. The Greek verb "ee· ee· khom· een", properly translated "I was wishing" is in the indicative mood. So Paul is stating a fact about something, not suppositions or a conjecture or an idle thought.

2. This verb is in the imperfect tense, which expresses continuous action in the past, not the present or the future, but it references his actions or thoughts as a point of time in the past!

3. This verb is in the first person singular, which is definitely Paul speaking of himself not some hypothetical person so this is his own personal testimony.

4. This verb is in the passive voice, which means that Paul, the subject was being acted upon by some outside agent. Now if he was wishing to be accursed from (ahpo) Christ, it certainly follows that deity did not influence him. So it clearly shows a situation in the past where in the evil one (Satan) controlled and dominated Saul of Tarsus, not the Apostle Paul.

Here in Romans 9:5, we have two additional benefits, they are the (8) "pat· ehr· ehs", rendered "fathers" who belong to his kinsmen according to the flesh, that is Israel. The three most recognized fathers of Israel were Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Matthew 8:11; Acts 3:13; 5;30). The designation, "fathers" is also used with reference to later progenitors of Israel (Acts 7:11-12,52). Also (9) out of the Jewish heritage, Christ was born according to the flesh. This lineage is through Mary, his natural mother, and Joseph, his legal father (Matthew 1;16; Luke 3:23). Now the very fact that God would choose the stock of Israel through which to give his Son a flesh and blood body is the greatest favor he could bestow upon Paul’s kinsmen according to the flesh (Genesis 3:16;4:4; II Corinthians 9:15).

Here the statement "o on ehpee · pahnd· on" translated ‘the one being over all"; is generally referred back to Christ. The nominate article "o", with which it begins; is commonly translated "who" as though it was a relative pronoun. Thus the more accurate and preference translation arrangement is this case may be ‘the one being over all"; which would be conveyed by the inclusion of the nominative article "o" in conjunction to the Greek participle "on". This grammatical construction in Romans 9:5 is substantiated by the content expressed in I Corinthians 15:28; II Corinthians 11:31 and Ephesians 4:6. Note, as we focus on the context of the latter part of this verse, we offer this feasible rendering of Romans 9:5. "To whom belong the fathers and out of whom is Christ according to the flesh. God is the one being over all, blessed forever, amen". Note the Greek preposition "eh pee", translated "over"; may also convey the idea that God is the basis, support or the one upon whom all things depend. So as the one who is the basis for all things, God is certainly over all things.

Here it is significant to observe that the Greek word "ehv· loy· ee· tos", is used eight times in the New Testament (five times in Paul’s Epistles), always with reference to God the Father (Romans 1:25; 9:5; II Corinthians 1:3; II Corinthians 11:31; Ephesians 1:3).

Now as we summarize this verse, the thought seems to be that God is the basis, hence, the one over all things, particularly all things that pertain to his relationship to his people, Israel. But even though most of the Israelites are rejecting God’s message of grace, God still uses it to provoke the Gentiles unto salvation (Romans 11:11). There is one question to be raised concerning Paul’s intended thought in this verse (Romans 9:5), and that is; is he within the context attesting to the divinity of Christ? We believe that the answer is yes. Now while there is no direct doxological attribution to Christ, there is the implied naked statement of fact that while Christ is "of the Israelite Nation, as concerning the flesh", He is in another respect "God over all, blessed forever". Note in II Corinthians 11:31 the very same Greek phrase "o on", rendered "who is" in this verse is used in the same sense thus, as a testimony to the supreme divinity of Christ (Romans 1:25).

Now with this understanding, we move to Romans 9:6, as we read first from the King James Version, "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:, and now from the Greek Text, "But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all these out of Israel, these are Israel". In this verse Paul is literally stating "oox ee on theh otee ehk· pehp· to· kehn o log· os too theh· oo", rendered "it is the kind of or sort of thing that would indicate that the word of God has failed". The Greek compound verb ‘ehk· pehp· to· kehn" is derived from the Greek preposition "ehk" prefixed to the verb "pehp· to" and basically means to fall out of or away from. As used in this verse it means to fall out of or away from. As used here it is saying that the word of God has not fallen away from its intended purpose; i.e. it has not become ineffectual and of no effect.

How can Paul affirm that the word of God has not failed when the evident indicates that it was reaching few Jews for Christ? Paul’s answer is that "oo gahr pahn· dehs ee ehx Ees· rah· eel oo tee Ees· rah· eel", rendered "not all those out of Israel, these are Israel".

Now when one looks at the total group of all those who were descendants of Abraham, the percentage of those who were believing on Jesus Christ was very small. However, when one recognizes that all descendants of Abraham are not necessarily counted as Israel, the percentage of those being saved significantly increases. So the fact is that in this case as in all other cases, the word of God has not failed, because the word of God cannot fail (Matthew 24:35; Mark 13:31; Luke 21:33). Note the meaning of the statement "oo· tee Ees· rah●eel" translated "these are Israel", it is defined in the context of the exegesis of the subsequent verses as we progress in our discourse. Remember this as we go forward, Israel consists of those who are called (Romans 9:7) according to God’s elect purpose (Romans 9:11). So those who constitute genuine Israel are the descendants of Abraham via Isaac, via Jacob, who have been called according to God’s sovereign purpose (Romans 2:28-29); 8:28-30; Galatians 6:16). Now at this point in our discourse of Romans chapter nine, we read verses 7-8 (7). "Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, in Isaac shall thy seed be called. (8) That is they that are the children of the flesh these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. And from the Greek Text, (7) "Neither because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children, but in Isaac your seed shall be called". (8) "That is, not the children of the flesh, these are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted for a seed. Now before we proceed further we herein interject an excursus to the general subject "election" as outlined in the context of these verses. Note, the difficulties which encompass this profound subject of election, do not lie in the complexities of Paul’s teaching, which by the way is plain enough, but in the varied concepts of the truths themselves. Now when these facts that Paul submits, are taken by themselves, the evidence is overwhelming, but the great source of confusion rests in the inferring that the election referred to here in this chapter is national rather than personal election. Consequently some conclude that it entails the essence of religious advantages rather than eternal salvation. So as we have conveyed in our exegesis of Romans 9:6, which is the verse wherein the subject of election opens, Paul expresses that "The choice of Abraham and his seed has not failed because God is faithful to his promise in that "all of Israel itself is not rejected, namely those whom God has chosen in the exercise of his sovereign right". God is never bound by anything except his oath or his promise, or his word, thus his choice or election is not to mere external privileges, but to eternal salvation. This will become more evident as we progress in our study.

In Romans 9:8, a distinction is made between the children of the flesh, and of the seed as we examine the Greek phrase "toot ehs· teen", translated "that is" it suggests that this verse is primarily an explanation of what was stated in Romans 9:7. There were those, such as Ishmael and Esau who had merely a flesh relationship to Abraham and this in itself does not make them children of God. Note the Greek phrase "tehk· nah too theh· oo" rendered "children of God". Here the genitive case denotes "children who belong to God" or "children who are God’s possession". It is one thing to be a child of Abraham according to the flesh, but it is a great advancement over this to be a child of God according to both promise and election. As we proceed in this context, we must keep in mind that Paul continues to limit those who are "children of God". First, they are not all of Abraham’s offspring. Ishmael, born according to the will of the flesh is passed by and thus receives no spiritual inheritance. Second, as this context unfolds, we see Esau rejected, thus he receives no spiritual blessings. On the other hand, the children of the promise, the promise that God would provide Abraham with a son through Sarah, are the true spiritual seed.

As we discourse the context of these verses, we focus on the Greek word "ehp●ahy· yehl· ee· ahs" rendered "promise". The inference denotes more than just an announcement or a statement of the will, plan and purpose. It is a pronouncement of a provision of assurance of what God not only intends, but also is determined to do. This was and is not something that may come to pass, but will come to pass.

Note the Hebrew word "leh· ome, translated "people" in this verse (Gen. 25:23), means "to gather". This "gathering or grouping" is always the exclusive work of God’s sovereignty. Here it is demonstrated that it is not according to any natural principles that the selection was made. God not only made a distinction between Jacob and Esau, but he did it according to his sovereignty. So the thought in Romans 9:10 is that not only did Sarah gave birth to a son according to the promise, but also Rebecca conceived sons (twins) by Isaac. Here we literally quote this verse from the Greek Text "ken Rehv· vehk· kah ehx eh· nos kee· teen ehk oos· ah, Ees· ahahk too pa· tros ee· mon. Here a more literal translation would be; "Also Rebecca out of one, Isaac our father, by a conjugal act was with child". The information given in this verse suggests that this was a very normal conception. However, prior to this Isaac had prayed for almost 20 years about his wife’s barren condition. His prayers were abundantly answered, his wife conceived twins who immediately began struggling in her womb even before they were born (Genesis 25:22-24).

Now reading Romans 9:11, (from the KJV) "For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;" Now from the Greek Text, "For the children not yet having been born, neither having practiced anything good or bad, in order that the purpose of God might remain according to election". Again, we make special note of the subject of the context; it is election! Here Paul is discoursing election and he is using these historical facts as evidence to corroborate the principle of election! Observe the setting of this verse is during the time when the twins Esau and Jacob were still in Rebecca’s womb. We must clearly understand the principles of election. Note closely the first phrase in this verse (9:11). Here from the Greek Text "mee· po gar yehn· nee· thehn· ton, translated "for they being not yet born" or "before they were born", before Rebecca gave birth. Notice God’s determinate choice and decision in choosing the younger to be the object of his favor and rejecting the older, who according to the tradition and custom of the times, was suppose to be entitled to special honor and rights. Note again that this distinction was made before they were born, before they had formed any character (moral or otherwise). There God’s action could not possibly be in consequence of any works, or contribution or input that they had performed. It was not therefore, by any works of theirs. It was not because they had formed a character and manifested qualities that made this distinction proper. It was not relevant of any such character and therefore had its foundation in the purpose of God.

The second phrase of this verse (Rom. 9:11), again from the Greek Text, reads "Mee· theh prahx· ahn· ton tee ahg· ahth●on ee phahv· lon" rendered, "Neither having practiced anything good or evil". It conveys the thought that it was before they had occasion to do anything good or evil. This passage provided an ideal situation for Paul to use to depict the difference between the sovereignty of God and human works.

Notice the scenario here, two viable persons are encased in a womb in which they were isolated from doing either good or evil. During this time when these potential humans were isolated in their mother’s womb, totally part from any works, the Lord said that "The elder shall serve the younger (Genesis 25:23). Here Paul uses this genuine historical event as evidence proving that God’s relation to men is determined by His sovereign elective purpose. It is not determined by what men may or may not do. This is a very important passage in regard to the question about the purpose of God. To this end we scrutinize the last phrase in this verse and we read from the Greek Text "een●ah ee keh ehk· loy· een proth· ehs· ees too theh· oo mehn· ee, translated "In order that the purpose of God might remain according to election". When we isolate this first portion it reads "proth· ehs●ees too Theh· oo", rendered "the purpose of God". This denotes that God operates according to a pre-placed, predestinated and predetermined plan. Esau was the firstborn, the one who normally would have inherited the promise, but according to God’s elective purposes it was reserved for Jacob (Genesis 25:23; Romans 9:12-13). Now we turn to the third phrase of this verse, as we again read literally from the Greek Text "een●ah ee keh ehk· loy· een pro· theh· sees too theh· oo mehn· ee", translated "in order that the purpose of God might remain according to election". Here we continue to note that the subject is election! Paul simply uses the historical workings of God with His covenant people Israel, in prior dispensations (Promise and Law) to corroborate God’s principle in His selection of those whom He chooses and again it is simply the sovereignty of God.

Now there are those who continue to insist that God’s purpose in this context was simply to make the descendants of Jacob, rather than those of Esau, His special people. So let us consider why God dealt with Esau as he did. Paul states that it was "in order that the purpose of God might remain according to election". Note the Greek verb "mehn ee", rendered "remain", was to the end that the purpose of God might continue (subjunctive mood) and that it would continue unchanged (present tense) and remain constant according to election. Here we interject a posing question; "If God’s purpose is election, then what is God’s purpose for election? To be more specific, what is God’s election to, if it is not to salvation? Paul’s entire epistle to the Romans is concerning salvation. If he is not discoursing the general theme of salvation (through election) in Romans chapters 9,10 and 11, then can one safely say that he is not espousing the theme of salvation (through imputation of righteousness) in Romans chapters three and four? Also are God’s promises to Abraham and the institution of circumcision Paul’s basic subject in Romans chapters three and four or is he discoursing salvation (through justification by faith)?

As stated earlier, some translations (including the KJV), have included the phrase "not (out) of works, but (out) of Him, (the one) that calleth", in the last portion of Romans 9:11, while others have arranged it as the first part of Romans 9:12. Here for the sake of continuous thought flow, we begin our expression with "the purpose of God"; thus we read from the King James Version "that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth". The expression "not of works" obviously refers back to the statement "that the purpose of God according to election might stand". We now read the entire expression from the Greek Text. "ee · nah ee keh ehk · loy· een ton theh· oo mehn· nee ook ehx ehr· gon alla ehk too kahl· oond· os", translated "That the purpose of God might remain according to election, not out of works".

Note when this statement is linked into one expression, we believe that it infers that any contribution or input that can be traced to the one who is called or summoned can be counted as work. In other words God’s purpose is both totally dominated by and dependent only on His sovereign call and election or His purpose is co-dependent on the actions of those to whom he makes overtures. So based on this premise, what God does is dependent upon what we do, thus His purpose in our lives is contingent upon our response. If God waited for our cooperation, he could never bring His will to pass. But if God had to rely upon the performance of men, then His plan, will and purpose would be held hostage to men. So the thought is that Jacob did not inherit the promise "eh ehr· gon", rendered "out of works" i.e., works were not the source from which his priority position came. In contrast to works, the strong adversative conjunction (alla) rendered "but" emphatically asserts that God, the one who called him is the source from whom he received the right to be Abraham’s true heir.

Here we focus on the Greek phrase "ahl· lah ehk too kah· loond· os", rendered "but out of the one calling". Note the Greek participle verb "kah●loond· os", translated "the one calling" or "the one who calls". Observe the present tense which speaks of that which is happening now or in the present time; thus continuous action. Also it is the active voice masculine-singular, which means it is exclusively God! He and He alone does the calling or summoning. Since it is in the form of a verbal adjective, we have the genitive case, which denotes that the call or summons is owned or possessed by God. So the calling is according to the will and purpose of Him that chooses to dispense these favors. It is not by the merit of man, but it is by a purpose having its origin with God and formed and executed according to His good pleasure. It is also formed in such a way as to secure His glory as the primary goal (Ephesians 1:6).

Unfortunately there are those who seek to use this verse to prove that God’s choice in this context is national and not personal. Notice the Apostle Paul quotes from the prophet Malachi, some 1400 years after the twins were born. Here we quote from the King James Version, (Malachi 1:2-3), "I have loved you, saith the Lord, Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? Saith the Lord: yet I loved Jacob, And I hated Esau and I laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness". In speaking to the Prophet Malachi, the Lord said, "I loved Jacob, but Esau I hated, and made his mountains a desolation, and gave his heritage to the jackals of the wilderness (Jeremiah 49:18). Again, let’s use the Greek grammar. Note the Greek verb "eeg· ahp· ees· ah", rendered "loved", that is associated with Jacob and "eh· mees· ees· ah", rendered "hate", which is associated with Esau. Here both verbs are in the indicative mood, which mean God’s contrasting sentiments toward both are factual, not allegorical. Also they are aorist-active first person singular, defining God’s continuous actions toward both which was concluded or completed in the past. So God’s deeds (love and hate) were not deferred but conferred immediately upon both. It is a stretch of the imagination to say that God’s declaration upon Esau was postponed; apparently those who embrace this thought are relying on Genesis 33:9, "I have enough". It is impossible to be blessed by God outside of the will of God.

Here we focus on the Greek word in this context "eh· mees· ee· sah", translated "hate" it’s reference denotes hostility or to detest or abhor or reject that which is evil. No serious exegesis can overlook the quote in Mal. 1:2-3, as an example of a very strong and offensive expression of the wrath of God. Notice the even stronger statement of Mal. 1:4, "The people against whom the Lord hath indignation forever". Thus the objection to the doctrine of personal election is also an objection to the sovereignty of God.

Turning to Romans 9:14, we read from the King James Version, "What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid". And now from the Greek Text, "What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? May it never be! Now as a consequence of the statements that the older shall serve the younger, and that God loved Jacob and hated Esau, Paul raises the question "tee oon ehr· oom ehn", translated "what therefore" or "then shall we say? Now the question is since God made this choice between Jacob and Esau before they were born, apart from them doing anything, is He unrighteous for treating them differently? To what conclusion shall we come to on the facts before us? Does God do injustice or wrong? Here we again turn to the Greek grammar and read from the Greek Text "Me ahth· ee· kee· ah pah· rah· to Theh· o", rendered "Is there unrighteousness with God? Or "unrighteousness (is) with God? Note the Greek interrogative participle "mee" rendered, "not" preceding the noun "ahth· ee· kee· ah", rendered "unrighteousness" or "wrong doing" or "disregard for what is right’ or "wrong" or even "evil". As we scrutinize the structure of this sentence, note that "unrighteousness" is in the nominative case, so it is the subject. Now closely monitor the word order "To Theh●o" or "God" which is in the dative case signifying the indirect object. Thus God is the object (indirect) of unrighteousness. But also observe the interrogative, the Greek particle "mee"; in essence the negative particle "not" which is used for assumed hesitant or indefinite denial. Here it not only denies the fact, but also the idea! The participle "mee" is generally used for all moods in the Greek language with the exception of the indicative mood, which states a fact. So here it is used to negate the supposed assumption that God is the object of unrighteousness.

The Apostle Paul further reinforces the absurdity of this question by adding the Greek grammatical construction "mee yeh· nee· to" which expresses the strongest negative reply possible namely "May it never be" or "let it never be thought or uttered" or "it is completely out of the question" or as it is rendered in the King James Version, "God forbid"! So Paul adamantly repels this notion.

Now as we move to Romans 9:15, reading first from the King James Version, "For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion". Now from the Greek Text, "For he says to Moses, I shall have mercy on whom I would have mercy, and I shall have compassion on whom I would have". This verse makes it absolutely clear that God reserves the right to be selectively merciful and compassionate. Here Paul uses what God said to Moses to substantiate the principle that it is his prerogative to choose to do good to whom he might will. We again utilize the Greek grammar, as we read literally from the Greek Text, "To Mo· ees· ee gahr lehy· ee, ehl· eh· ees· o on ahn ehl· eh· o keh eek· teer· ees· o on ahn eek· teer· o", translated "For he says to Moses I will have mercy on whom I would have mercy and, I shall have compassion on whom I would have compassion".

Note the Greek verb "ehl· eh· ees· o", translated "I shall have mercy"; it is in the indicative mood (it’s a fact) and the future tense and active voice first person singular, which denote that He is an independent God showing favor in the time to come in a positive helpful sense. Now note the ensuing Greek verb "ehl· eh· o", translated "I would have mercy"; it is in the subjective mood (it might happen) and the present tense and active voice first person singular which means He exercises His good will continuously on whom He would or might desire. Now as we move forward in this verse (Romans 9:15), we firmly assert that it is God’s prerogative to select the recipients of His mercy, favor and beneficence. Here the expression Paul references is found in Exodus 33:19, (from the King James Version). "And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy".

As we continue our exegesis, we focus on the Greek verb "eek· teer· ees o’, translated ‘I shall have compassion" as it is also in the future tense. The basic meaning of this word is pity i.e., God shall have a feeling of pity and grief or a passive feeling of sorrow. The Greek verb "eek· teer· o" rendered "I would have compassion", is in the present tense and subjective mood. What Paul is conveying in this verse is that God shall have compassion on whomever He would or might desire. It is in the sphere of God’s jurisdiction to express His feelings of compassion, pity and grief for whomever He pleases. Here the perception is that the Greek word rendered compassion (eek●teer●o) portrays God’s passive emphatic feeling for the plight of sinners. On the other hand, the Greek word ‘ehl· eh· o", rendered "mercy" expresses that which follows "compassion". Therefore because God is compassionate, He unfolds His mercy and favor toward whomever He may desire. Note, compassion involves God passively sympathizing with the grief of all sinners, whereas mercy involves God actively working on behalf of some sinners, the elect (Ephesians 2:4-5).

From the Greek Text we literally read Romans 9:16, "ahr· ah oon oo too thehl●ond· os oo· theh too trehkh· ond· os ah· lah too ehl· eh· ond· os Theh· oo". As we have conveyed this is rendered, "then, therefore, it is not of the one willing neither of the one running, but of the one showing mercy, God".

Here the negative particle "oo" rendered "not" stresses the point that the genitive case of the verb participles "thel· ond· os", rendered "willing" and trehkh· ond· os, rendered "running" both carry the inference of negative possession, i.e., they do not belong or they are not effective and they do not accomplish the effectuation of a right relationship with God. So having rejected man’s willing and running as that which effectuates a relationship with God, the Apostle Paul emphatically states "all· ah" or "but" it is owned or possessed or effectuated by the one showing mercy, which is God.

Note the construction of the Greek participle verb "ehl· eh· ond· os" rendered "mercy" and the noun "Theh· oo", rendered "God" as they both carry the genitive of positive possession or ownership or effectuation of the God-man relationship. Here in contrast to human mental and physical effort, Paul firmly answers no. Without a doubt, a relationship to God has its source in the mercy of God. According to Ephesians 2:4, the Love of God is the precursor of the mercy of God. God’s love for the Adamic Race even though in a state of rebellion; has caused Him to extend His mercy toward it selectively. Apart from the extension of God’s mercy; choosing individuals in Christ, not one of Adam’s descendants would have a relationship with God (John 6:44; Ephesians 1:4). The fact that the work of salvation originates and is motivated exclusively or solely on the part of God is that which is expressed in Philippians 2:12-13. Here Paul states (from the Greek Text), "So then my beloved, even as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, with fear and trembling work out your own salvation; for God is the one working in you both to will and to work out His good pleasure". Again as we look at the context of Romans chapter nine, we must conclude from the several instances conveyed by Paul, that the making or continuing of any group of people such as God’s elect, is righteously determined not by the judgment, hopes or wishes of men, but by the will and wisdom of God alone.

In this verse Paul personifies the scripture. Here the Greek word "grah· phee", rendered "scripture" is a noun in the nominative case; which means it is the subject of the sentence. So God, the Holy Spirit speaks and addresses the elective role of Pharaoh. According to this verse God is the one who raised up Pharaoh to the position of authority, which he occupied in Egypt. The implication is that God didn’t raise up just another Pharaoh, but one who was particularly suited to fulfilling His two-fold purpose. First it was God’s purpose to "ehv· theez· om· eh", rendered "display" or "manifest" or "demonstrate" or "declare" His power in the Pharaoh of Moses’ day.

Note apart from Pharaoh’s unrelenting refusal to let the children of Israel leave Egypt, God’s miracle working power would not have been manifested. Second, it was God’s purpose to use Pharaoh to "thee· ahyy· ehl· ee", that is to "publish abroad" or to "proclaim" and "declare" His name in all the land.

Now as we look at the contents of Exodus 9:13-16, (13) "And the Lord said unto Moses, Rise up early in the morning and stand before Pharaoh, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord God of the Hebrews, Let my people go, that they may serve me. (14) For I will at this time send all my plagues upon thine heart, and upon thy servants, and upon thy people; that thou mayest know that there is none like me in all the earth. (15) For now I will stretch out my hand, that I may smite thee and thy people with pestilence; and thou shalt be cut off from the earth. (16) And in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, for to show in thee my power; and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth". We observe here the light in which the Apostle views the scripture. Now we quote again from Romans 9:17 from the Greek Text, "That unto this very end I raised you up". Note Paul had shown God’s right to bless whom He will. Here he shows by an example that God also punishes whom He will. But God did not make Pharaoh wicked. Pharaoh, like all other men, was born depraved and wicked. God thus declined to make him good by the exercise of His special favor or His altogether unmerited grace.

Here as we focus on Romans 9:18, we read from the Greek Text, "Ahr· ah oon on theh· lee ehl· eh· ee on theh theh· lee sklee· ree· neh", translated, "Then therefore he has mercy on whom he will and he hardens whom he will. Note the Greek words "ahr· ah" rendered "then" and "oon" rendered "therefore" which indicate Paul’s conclusion in this verse as the consequence of what he had stated in the previous verses of Romans chapter 9. As we have already observed, God selectively gives mercy, favor and even help to sinners according as He wills. Now as we utilize the grammar, note the Greek conjunctive particle "theh" as it is proceeded earlier in this verse by the relative pronoun "on". In this instant the sentence structure denotes contrast. Thus on the one hand God shows mercy according to His will on the other hand; in compassion to those who receive mercy, those devoid of it are referred to as ones He "sklee· ree· neh", translated "hardens" or makes "obdurate and stubborn". We must be careful to point out that all sinners by nature exist in a state of hardness and callousness’ against God until or unless acted upon by Him. So those who refuse to acknowledge God have been, in effect given over to Satan (Romans 1:21,24,26,28). In essence it is unnecessary for God to harden totally depraved sinners who are born in this state, He merely declines to intervene on behalf of those who are already condemned in their creation (Acts 19:9). This does however imply an act of sovereignty on the part of God in leaving some sinners to their chosen course; in that he does not put forth the influence, which could save such ones from death.

As to God’s reason for choosing some and rejecting others, Paul does not address this question. Now because we are not given the reason, we should not however dispute the fact that he does. But we should have sufficient confidence in God to believe that it is in accordance with His infinite wisdom and rectitude.

In Romans 9:19, we read from the King James Version, ‘Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? From the Greek Text, "Therefore you will say to me, Why then does he still find fault? For whom has resisted his will"? Now having stated that God gives mercy to whom He desires and He leaves in a state of hardness whom He desires, Paul recognizes in this verse that some may misunderstand or pervert what he has said. Here he raises the question himself, if the aforestated is true, then why does God still find fault? In other words as the premise is stated, if God takes the initiative in extending mercy to some while leaving others in their depraved state of condition, how can He "mehm· pheh· teh", rendered "find fault"? How can God blame, or be dissatisfied with what depraved men do? To further advance the questioning of the misinformed; if God wills and determines whether men will be in the category of mercy and blessing or in the category of depravity and condemnation, then with reference to where they are categorized, it is a divine determination.

Here we must not construe God’s will and purpose in His original creation of mankind as being contradictory with His eternal purpose in the redemption of mankind. In dealing with the question posed in this verse, we focus on God’s original purpose in the creation of Adam (and Eve). In Genesis 1:26-27,31, (reading from the King James Version) "And God said, Let us make man in our image after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the foul of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. (27) So God created man in his own image, in the image God created he him; male and female created he them. (31) And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day". Observe man was created in the image and likeness of God to exist in a cooperative relationship with God. This was God’s purpose for Adam and Eve and all their progeny. Note, God created mankind to be in fellowship with the creator (God). For this fellowship to begin and continue there must exist the ingredient of man’s total harmony with God. This was God’s purpose for the imaging and likeness of mankind (Genesis 1:26-27). The sustenance of the fellowship between God and mankind was and is totally dependant on man’s conformity to the imaging of God, to both produce and perpetuate that which is required to certify harmony with Him.

As we exegete the latter portion of Romans 9:19, we examine more closely the question "For who has resisted the will of God"? To fully understand the true implications of this question, we turn to the Greek grammar as we literally read this phrase from the Greek Text, "To gahr voo· lee· maht· ee ahf· too tees ●", rendered "For who has resisted his will? There are some who feel that they have a duty to make a case of defense for God concerning this question, but God needs no defense in this matter. Note the grammatical construction of this interrogatorily expressed phrase. The Greek pronoun "tees", rendered "who", forms the basis for this interrogative. Notice the Greek case of "who" (tees), it is in the nominative case which means it is the subject or the one by whom the question is addressed. Here this interregional pronoun is used as the addressee of either a direct, indirect or rhetorical question. Note the Greek noun "voo· lee· maht· ee" rendered "will or determination or counsel"; it is in the dative case or it is the indirect object or the object of a preposition. So the object of the subject being addressed is a will or counsel or determination. But whose will determination or counsel? Here the Greek intensive pronoun "ahf· too", translated "His" in this context demonstratively emphasizes the identity and directs our attention exclusively to a particular person. The third person singular refers to an expressed or implied antecedent. In this context, He, Him or His, by implication is God. So it is God’s will, counsel or determination that is being questioned.

As we progress further into the chapter, we read from the King James Version, Romans 9:20. "Nay but O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? And from the Greek Text, "yes, rather, o man, who are you replying against God? Shall the thing formed say to the one who formed it, why have you made me thus"? In this verse, the Apostle Paul chides any man who would ask such obloquy questions in the proceeding verse. Instead of entertaining the questioning of God’s right to find fault, Paul turns the tables, by asking, who do you think you are, you who are replying against God? Here the Greek participle "ahn· dahp· ok· ree· nom· ehn· os" rendered "replying against", is derived from the Greek words "ahnd· ee" and Kreen●om· eh" and literally means "judgment from that is against", an "against-answer" or an "answer which rejects" what God has said.

Here Paul goes on to ask, "Shall the thing formed say to the one who formed it, why have you made me thus"? Note as we pointed out earlier, the use of the Greek interrogative negative participle "mee" is rendered "not". Again, it is used for assumed hesitant or indefinite denial. It not only denies the factuality but even the idea of the thought that follows the particle, so it in essence indicates that such a question is illegitimate. Now we must understand this, the thing that is made has no right to question the wisdom of its maker (Isaiah. 29:16; 45:9).

Now we turn to Romans 9:21, reading first from the King James Version, "Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? Now from the Greek Text, "or does not the potter of the clay have authority from the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor"?. This verse paints a picture for us of a potter who has absolute authority over the clay, the raw material with which he works. Here the potter represents God, who has absolute authority, whereas the clay represents men in their dead-in-trespasses-and-sins state. Out of this clay, on the basis of mercy, God makes some vessels to be used in His presence. These are vessels of "tee· meen", translated "honor", "great worth", "valuable" or "precious". On the other hand God makes out of this clay vessels of "aht· ee· mee· ahn", translated "dishonor", comparatively speaking, "without worth and value", for menial or servile use (II Timothy 2:20-21).

Moving to Romans 9:22, we read from the King James Version, "What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessel of wrath fitted to destruction". Now it is very important that we are absolutely accurate in our interpretation of this verse as well as the following verse (Romans 9;23), so we turn to the Greek grammar as we read from the Greek Text, Romans 9:22, "Ee theh then· lon o Theh· os ehn· theex· ahs· theh teen or· yeen keh gno· ree· seh to theen· ah· ton ahftoo eenehg· kehn ehn pollee mahk· roth· ee· mee· ah skehv· ee or· yees kaht· eer· tees· meh· nah ees ahp· o· lee· ahn", translated, "And if God, willing to manifest the wrath and to make known His power endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath having been fitted unto destruction". This verse speaks of that which God was willing to put up with to show wrath against sin, but also to make known or shown His power. Note the Greek conjunctive particle ‘theh" as it is used to emphasize contrast. In this context, there are two things that God demonstrates. They are wrath on the one hand and His power on the other.

Here the Greek participle verb "theh· lon" rendered "willing", has the declension, active-nominative-masculine. Note the active voice denoting God’s "working" or "willing". The thought is that God was willing in order to ", ehn· theex· ahs· theh" rendered "manifest" or "point out" and "display" both the wrath and to make known His power, to patiently endure vessels of wrath. Notice the Greek phrase "teen or· yeen, translated "the wrath" it is not rendered "His wrath", for it does not have the possessive pronoun "ahf· too" (His) associated with it. Here the emphasis is on wrath and anger against sin; a requisite in a moral universe, and not on the one who expressed His wrath. However other passages make it crystal clear that the source of this wrath is God (Romans 1:18;3:5; Ephesians 5:6). The second thing that God willed to make known is "to thee· nah· ton ahf· too", rendered "His power", "His might" and "His ability". Here, the revealing of wrath and His power is highlighted against a background of sinful vessels destined for destruction. The key verb in this verse is "ee· nehg· kehn", translated "endured", which means He "bore with" and "put up with" vessels of wrath with "mahk· ro· thee· mee· ah" rendered, "much longsuffering". Thus it required much patience on God’s part to endure the insults and blasphemy of Adam’s depraved offspring. Here Paul describes them as "skehv· ee or· yees", translated "vessels of wrath" or "vessels that belong to wrath", as indicated by the genitive of possession. Note the participle verb "kaht· eer· tees· meh· nah, rendered "fitted", is in the passive voice; thus identifying those who have been "ordered" or "thoroughly prepared" to meet certain demands or conditions.

The intention of the Apostle is to denote in this verse those who have been "mortised together" or "knitted together unto the end of "ahpo· lee· ahn", rendered "destruction", or "perishing" or those "appointed unto death" at the time of the Adamic fall. The accusative case documents the fact that utter ruin and loss was the object to which these vessels of dishonor have been assigned. But why would God allow this? Again, note the Greek infinitive verb "gno· ree· seh", rendered "to make known"; it is in the aorist tense and the active voice which means that God preplanned and pre-purposed that which would make known and magnify His power.

Now we turn to Romans 9:23, and read from the King James Version "And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore-prepared unto glory". Now from the Greek Text, "And that he might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he prepared before hand unto glory". Again, as we have stated, the key verb in verse 22 was "endured" (ee· nehg· kehn). This same verb plays a key role in verse 23, which ties together the thought in both these verses. In essence, God patiently endures vessels of wrath, in the process of pointing out wrath and His power, which is basic to making known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy. Now if we are to grasp the greatness of the riches of God’s glory, then we must also understand the wrath, which rested upon the entire sinful human race. This wrath and anger doomed all sinners unto destruction and death (Romans 6:23).

First the Apostle Paul states, that God was willing to endure patiently the awful effrontery of vessels of wrath, in order that He might make known the riches of His glory upon the vessels of mercy. The Greek phrase "ton ploo· ton tees thox· ees ahftoo, translated "the riches of His glory" conveys the idea of the wealth and rich benefits which belong to His glory. Remember this, all things, everything, which is by word or deed, has as its ultimate aim; the praise which belongs to His glory (Exodus 9:16; Colossians 3:17; Ephesians 1:6,12,14).

Notice these vessels of mercy were "prepared beforehand unto glory". The Greek verb "pro· eet· ee· mah· sehn", translated "prepared beforehand" is derived from "pro" and "eh· tee· mah· zo" and literally means (from the aorist tense) "in prior time" or "previously to make ready or prepare". Note the indicative mood verifying this factual action as indicated by the active voice. Here the thought is that in prior time God prepared certain individuals to become vessels of mercy; to become recipients of God’s elective mercy. Such ones are persons who have been predestinated unto ultimate glorification with Christ (Romans 8:17; Philippians 3:21). Observe the phrase "thox· ee ahf too", rendered "His glory". Again, all things, including that "glorious exuberance of divine mercy", was and is manifested in His choosing and eternally arranging for the salvation of some depraved sinners.

As we now turn to Romans 9:24, we read from the King James Version, "Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? Now from the Greek Text, "Even us, whom he called, not only out of the Jews but also out of the Gentiles". In keeping the context intact, Paul states regarding the vessels of mercy, "Which he prepared beforehand unto glory, even us, whom he called", notice, out of both Jews and Gentiles. Here Paul identifies us believers as the vessels of mercy, as those who were prepared beforehand, and as those whom God had called. The same thought is presented in Romans chapter 8 wherein Paul states "And whom he predestinated, these he also called. In this verse (Romans 9:24), the Greek pronoun "ee· mahs", rendered "us", is used with reference to all believers.

The Greek verb eh· kahl· eh· sehn", translated "called", represents a given stage in God’s leading of men into a relationship with Himself. It speaks of the Holy Spirit’s calling and wooing those who have previously been prepared and predestined to receive mercy. As a part of God’s sovereign soteriological program, it is naturally irresistible. It is that which the Holy Spirit does as the emissary of God the Father (John 6:44).

Here, for the first time in Romans chapter nine, the calling ("ehk· ahl· eh· sehn") of the Gentiles is introduced. Up to this point Paul had confined his illustration of election to the choice of one portion and the rejection of another of the same Israel. Here he focuses on the substitution of the called Gentiles for the rejected Jews. Had Israel’s rejection of their Messiah been total, then God’s promise to Abraham would not have been fulfilled by the substitution of the Gentiles in their place. But Israel’s rejection being only partial; there is the presentation of "a" remnant" in which the promise was made good but even it is "according to the election of grace". Here for the first time the Apostle tells us that along with this "elect remnant" of Israel it was God’s purpose to "take out of the Gentiles a people for His name" (Acts 15;14), and that had been announced in the Old Testament scriptures. So here Paul made a very significant statement "not only out of the Jews, but also out of the Gentiles". What a profound statement! What a glorious revelation, what an eternal fact for us to know that we as Gentiles were always included!

Now as we read Romans 9:25, first from the King James Version, "As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. And now from the Greek Text," As he also says in Hosea, I will call those who are not my people, my people, and her who is not beloved, beloved". To insure the complete understanding of what the Apostle is conveying as he quotes from the Prophet Hosea, we turn to the Greek grammar and read directly from the Greek Text, " Os keh ehn to o· seeeh lehy· ee, kahl· eh· so ton oo lah· on moo lah· on moo keh teen ook eeg●ahp●ee●meh● neen eeg●ahp●ee· meh· neen". Here in support of the fact confirming that God had called Gentiles to be the recipients of His mercy, Paul cites what Hosea has said on the issue (Hosea 2:23), "And I will sow her unto me in the earth; and I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy; and I will say to them which were not my people, Thou art my people; and they shall say, Thou art my God".

Now a very meticulous translation of the phrase in this verse (Romans 9:25) would be "I will call the not-people-of-mine, my people, and the not-having been-beloved, beloved. This is a predictive statement made by the Holy Spirit through the Prophet Hosea. There are several schools of thought as to exactly what Hosea is stating in this passage. They are (1) The passage is not relating immediately to pagans Gentiles, but to the Kingdom of the ten tribes of Israel. Those who are persuaded in this thinking purport that since those who were subjects of the Kingdom of Israel at this point in History had sunk to the level of the pagans; they were "not God’s people" and consequently "not beloved", therefore Paul is applying it to the Gentiles in this sense. Now this is erroneous because this would render God to be a covenant breaker (which he is not)! This would also be in total violation to the principle of election. Remember God’s elect are His not based on their actions but on God’s sovereignty. (2) Some construe this passage to outline the foretelling of the conversion of the Gentiles to salvation. Here they purport that Paul is referring to this passage to show how the rejection of the Jews and subsequent inclusion of the Gentiles was foretold in the Old Testament, and therefore is consistent with the Abrahamic promise made to the fathers under the doctrine of the Old Testament. Now this may seem logical to some, but it is very illogical if you understand dispensations and covenants. Notice some principles absolutely cannot cross-dispensational lines, while others may. God may replace a covenant with another, but He never alters the covenant itself.

The Hebrew word "Hosea" (Ho-shay-ah or oshe ah), means "salvation". The ministry or prophecy involves the restoring of one who "is unfaithful". God, who is faithful will never ultimately abandon or forsake His elect based on their actions and again, God is not a covenant breaker (Jeremiah 31:27-40).

So what is the Apostle Paul’s reasoning in discoursing the context of Romans 9:22-27, as he quotes from the Prophet Hosea in verse 25? Going to the Greek grammar, we note the Greek conjecture "os" rendered "as". It is an adverbial form of a relative pronoun, thus the thought construction is "thus so" or "in such a way" or in the same way as or "it is like this". Notice the language of the Old and New Testament writings of the scriptures, namely Hebrew and Greek respectively. Here the grammatical construction involves combining semantically a substitute in place of a substitute in expressing a comparison.

Thus the verse could open with the expression "as it were" or "it is something ●claimed or supposed. Note Paul is primarily referencing the policies of another generation wherein Hosea speaks of a future dispensation, which obviously pertains to the extension of the Messianic Kingdom’s inclusion of the Gentiles (Genesis 12:3). This is indicated by the Greek verb "kahl· eh· so", rendered "will call" which is in the future tense. So Paul does not use it in this verse to teach new Church Truth, which is not found in the Old Testament, but merely to corroborate, in a secondary sense, that which had been revealed to him. Notice the passive perfect participle verb "eeg●ahp●ee· meh· neen" rendered "beloved". Here the perfect tense denotes action that was completed or consummated in the past, with the results active in the present, thus God from eternity elected His "loved ones" or "beloved". This is borne out by this fact of the passive voice. In general, Paul often used the Old Testament to confirm like principles and as such, often apart and not directly related to contextual considerations.

As we move to Romans 9:27, we read from the King James Version, "Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:" From the Greek Text, "And Isaiah cries out on behalf of Israel, if the number of sons of Israel may be as the sand of the sea, the remnant shall be saved". The previous quotations from Hosea were cited to confirm what Paul saw actually taking place, Gentiles had been called and made vessel of mercy. Now he cites quotations (in a similar sense) from Isaiah to confirm what was taking place among the Jews, which is, they were also being called and receiving mercy. We should keep in mind that Paul is referring to God’s elect for the present grace dispensation, those who are members of the body of Christ. So Paul seems to have had no illusions about great numbers of Jews being called. In fact, the passage that he cites in this verse (Rom. 9:27), speaks of only a remnant being saved. Here the Greek noun "ee· pol· eem· mah" translated "remnant", is derived from the preposition "eepo" and the verb "lee· po" and denotes that which is "left behind" or that which is "remaining" or the "survivors". The number of the children of Israel may be as innumerable as the sand of the sea, a very great number, yet out of these, a "remnant", a few remaining ones, an insignificant number are being saved in this dispensation (grace).

Failure to accept what the Bible says about man’s depravity predisposes one to fail to comprehend the sovereignty of God in the sphere of soteriology (salvation). Now we make one further observation on the contents of this verse (Romans 9:29). Note, the Greek phrase "ee mee kee· ree· os sah· vah· oth ehg· kaht· ehl· ee· pehn ee●meen spehr· ma", rendered, "Except the Lord of the sabaoth had left us a seed". The word Sabaoth is a translation of the Hebrew word meaning "armies" or "host". Thus it is more accurately in this verse expressed "the Lord of hosts" or "the Almighty One" (James 5:4). It is a phrase properly expressive of His majesty and power and is appropriately introduced here as the "act of saving the seed". It was a signal of the "act of power" in the midst of great surrounding wicked opposition to the will of God concerning the preservation of His elect. Note the Greek phrase "ehg· kaht· ehl· ee· pehn eemeen" rendered, "had left us", "had preserve" or "kept from destruction". Here the preservation of the Jews is ascribed to God, and it is affirmed that if God had not interposed, "the whole nation" would have been cut off. Note also the reference to "the seed". In Hebrew the word "zeh· rah" or "seed" in Isaiah means "one surviving or escaping", corresponding with the word "remnant". The word "seed" in the scripture most commonly means "descendant" or "posterity".

Now as we approach the following verses (Romans 30-33) in closing out Romans chapter nine, the emphasis is on faith, which is the only way divine righteousness can be obtained. The opening question in verse 30, "What shall we say then", means that as a consequence of what he has said, what should he now say or what should be his conclusion. In the previous context, Paul had just finished positively declaring and affirming that salvation is totally of the Lord. He then switches to the faith aspect of it, clearly implying that saving faith is from the Lord (Ephesians 2:8). God’s bestowal of mercy upon hell-bound-sinners includes both the sacrificial death of Christ and the faith by which it is appropriated. Here Paul exclaims that ‘the Gentiles who were not pursuing righteousness obtained righteousness. Note the Greek participle "thee· o· kon· dah", translated "pursing it" infers that the Gentiles were not chasing after and earnestly endeavoring to acquire righteousness. Their adherence to various pagan religions could not be interpreted as pursing righteousness. In fact, it often involved pursing immorality.

So when the gospel of God’s grace was proclaimed to these pagan Gentiles, they "kaht· ehl· ah· vehn", rendered "obtained". That is they "laid hold of" and "attained" unto righteousness. Here Paul describes what they laid hold of as the out-of-faith righteousness. This means that the source of this righteousness is the faith, which God imparts to those He calls. It is an undaunted belief in God and all that He has provided for us in Jesus Christ, including His righteousness (I Corinthians 1:30). The out-of-faith righteousness involves God-given faith, which fully depends upon the perfect faithfulness of Jesus Christ instead of on the works of the Law for righteousness (Galatians 2:16; Philippians 3:9).

In this verse Paul states that Israel pursued Law righteousness, but they did not "eh· phthah· sehn", that is they did not "come up to" or "attain to" or "arrive at" keeping the law. Since all of those under the law, failed to fulfill the law, they came under the curse of the law rather than being made righteous by it (Galatians 3:10).

Now we move to Romans 9:32, as we read first from the King James Version, "Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;" Now from the Greek Text, "On account of what? because they did not pursue it out of faith, but as out of works. They stumbled at the stone of stumbling". This verse opens with the Greek phrase "thee· ah tee", translated "on account of what" or "because of what" or simply "why"? The thought is, why did Israel fail to obtain righteousness? What was the reason for this failure? Paul’s answer is that they tried to obtain it out of works, out of the source of works, by keeping the law, rather than out of faith, i.e. out of the source of faith, or out of God-given faith. In other words, Israel failed to acquire a righteous standing with God because she was depending on her flesh to keep the law, which doomed her failure. As Paul states in Romans 8:8 "Those existing in the flesh are not able to please God". While Israel had her eyes fixed on the law, she failed to see the precious stone God sent to her; hence, "they stumbled at the stone of stumbling". As we look ahead at the next verse (Romans 9:33), this "stone of stumbling" is clearly identified as being the person of Jesus Christ (Isaiah 8:14-15; I Peter 2:6-8).

As we close out the ninth chapter of Romans, we read verse 33 from the King James Version, "As it is written, Behold I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. And now from the Greek Text, "Even as it is written, behold I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense, and the one believing on Him shall not be put to shame". This quotation is similar to Isaiah 8:14 and Isaiah 28:16. It implies that God the Father is the one who set forth Jesus Christ in Zion (Matthew 1:21). The person who believes "upon" (ehp) Him shall not be "kaht· eh· skheen· thee· seh· teh", translated "put to shame". This Greek verb is in the passive voice and conveys the thought that no one shall be put to shame, disgraced or made sorry for believing on Him (Jesus Christ) and being identified with Him through faith.

"Ahth· eh· phee ee mehn ehv· thok· ee· ah tees eh· mees kahr· thee· ah keh ee theh· ee· sees pros ton Theh· on ee· pehr ahf· ton ees so· tee· ree· ahn", translated "Brethren my heart’s desire and supplication to God on behalf of Israel is unto salvation". Now the context makes it very clear that the antecedent of the Greek pronoun "ahf· ton", rendered "them" is the actual wording, not "Israel" as it is rendered in some of the English translations. But it is clear that Paul is referring to his Jewish "ahth· ehl· phee", rendered "brethren". Here Paul’s "theh· ee· sees", rendered "supplication", "entreaty" or "petition" to God was ("ees") "unto the end" or "for the purpose" that they might be saved (I Corinthians 9:19-22).

Now we scrutinize the fuller meaning of the phrase "my heart’s desire". Paul often uses the Greek word "kahr· thee· ahs", rendered "heart" to denote rational and reasonable affection, i.e. a feeling of affection conjoined with the intellect. Here the Greek word "ehv· thok· ee· ah", translated "desire" is from "ehv" and "thok· eh· o" and literally means "to think well", "good pleasure", and "good delight". The thought is that uppermost in Paul’s mind and heart, that which would please and delight him most, would be the salvation of his own people, the Jews.

Now having observed the meaning of the Greek word "theh· ee· sees", rendered "supplication", we note the fact that it is directed "pros ton Theh· on", rendered "towards God". According to the scriptures, all prayer is addressed to God the Father (Matthew 6:6,9; Romans 8:15; Ephesians 1:16-17; 3:14).

It should be in the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:26-27; Jude 20), through (thee· ah) Jesus Christ (Colossians 3:17), or "in the name of" Jesus Christ (Ephesians 5:20). Now there are some who point to the statement in this verse and say that our prayers can be the source of men being saved, purporting that Paul’s desire for his brethren’s salvation was backed up by his supplication to God unto this very end. It is true that if Paul didn’t believe that prayer makes a difference; that it was an important ingredient in the process of God saving his kinsmen according to the flesh, there would certainly be no reason for him to make the statement in this verse. But we must understand that while this, as well as other scriptures is strong evidence favoring the propriety of praying that lost men may be saved (I Timothy 2:1-4); Paul, by no means in this verse nor anywhere else in his epistles, ever directly linked the determination or receiving of salvation to anyone’s request of God. Even thought Paul knew that Israel had been hardened (Romans 11:7,25) and had stumbled and fallen with reference to the gospel of God’s grace, he still pleaded their case before God; knowing that according to God’s elective mercy, he was going to save a remnant out of them (Romans 11:5). Note it is exceedingly important to be mindful of the fact that Paul looked on all men as potential candidates for salvation, therefore bona fide subjects of prayer. Now the sovereignty of God in salvation, should be an unchallenged principle in the process of determining those who are saved. So Paul’s application of God’s sovereignty is always to those who have been saved and not to those who will be saved.

Now we turn to Romans 10:2, we read first from the King James Version "For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge". And now from the Greek Text, "For I bear witness to them that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge". Now, from his own experience as a Jew, even one that had been a zealot of Judaism, Paul certainly knew the Jewish mindset. Thus he was capable of bearing witness as formerly an insider and now as an outsider (Acts 9:1-2; 20:22-23). Here he "mahr· tee· ro", rendered "witness" "testifies" and "declares" that "they have a zeal of God". The Greek word "zee· lon", rendered "zeal" means that they are fervently jealous and ardently aspiring to do what they think God wants them to do. Paul calls this "zee· lon theh· oo", rendered "a zeal of God", i.e. a zeal that belongs to God, a zeal that should be associated with keeping the Mosaic Law. The terminology Paul is using here is approbative: that which would be very desirable in conjunction with adherence to the Law.

Note, Paul does not condemn their zeal as such, but he indicates that it is misplaced, a jealously for the wrong thing at the wrong time. Here he uses the strong adversative "ahl· lah", rendered "but" to emphasize the fact that they are off track, i.e. their zeal is not according to knowledge. The Greek noun "ehp· eeg· no· seen" is derived from the preposition "eh· pee" prefixed to the verb "yee· no· sko" and may literally be interpreted "knowledge upon" hence "added knowledge".

Now as we move to Romans 10:3, we read from the King James Version, "For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God". And now from the Greek Text, ‘For being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they have not been subjected to the righteousness of God". Here the Greek present participle "ahg· no· oon· dehs", translated "being ignorant", means that they were existing as ignorant ones, as non-knowing and non-understanding ones. This participle describes their state of being, the kind of people they were, not in a derogatory manner, but factual. Note Paul never excused ignorance, but over and over again expresses his desire that it may be replaced with knowledge (Romans 1:13; 11:25; I Corinthians 10:1).

Now that which they were ignorant of was "teen ton Theh· oo theek· eh· os· een· een", rendered "the righteousness of God’, or as expressed by the genitive of possession "the righteousness which belongs to God". This is a righteousness which is totally owned, possessed and of God’s doing (Ephesians 2:10). This divine righteousness is mentioned some eight times in this epistle of Romans. Jesus Christ is the embodiment of this righteousness. According to I Corinthians 1:30, He "was made wisdom for us from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption". In Philippians 3:9, Paul expresses his desire to have the righteousness which is "through the faithfulness of Christ", i.e. the "out of God" righteousness based on faith" (Galatians 2:16).

As we further exegete this verse (Romans 10:3), we observe that in contrast to accepting God’s righteousness as a free gift, these Jews were "zee· toon· dehs" rendered ‘seeking" or "striving" and "endeavoring to obtain" their own righteousness. Note the active voice and present participle; again, they were a seeking-your-own-righteousness people. The Greek phrase "teen ee· thee· ahn" rendered "your own", refers to that which was private and peculiar to them; a righteousness which they, themselves were trying to generate through keeping the Law (Romans 10:6). Paul once had this same kind of righteousness before he was saved, which he referred to as "eemeen theek· eh· os· een· een" translated ‘my righteousness" which he rejected when he received God’s righteousness in Christ (Philippians 3:8-9).

As we close our exegesis of this verse (Romans 10:3) we note Paul’s statement "They have not been subjected to the righteousness of God". Here the Greek verb "eep· eht· ahy· ees· ahn" translated "subjected" is in the passive voice and means that they have not been arranged or placed under nor subordinated to the righteousness of God. The literal and obvious meaning of this clause is that God has not extended His mercy to these; God, as indicated by the aorist tense, had not called them (Romans 9:23-24). Consequently, they remained in their sins, keeping the Law, but insubordinate to God’s righteousness and void of it.

As we now move to Romans 10:4, we read from the King James Version " For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. And now from the Greek Text, "For Christ is the end of the Law unto righteousness to everyone believing". Now having stated that the Jews were seeking to establish their own righteousness by keeping the Law, and were not subject to the righteousness of God which is embodied in Christ, Paul now affirms that "Christ is the end of the Law unto righteousness". Here the Greek noun "tehl· os" rendered "end" means that Christ is the consummation, fulfillment and the one who has brought the Law to an end. In essence, where the Law ends, Christ begins. The Law ends with representative sacrifices (types, shadows) whereas Christ begins with the real offering. As Paul explains in the epistle to the Galatians, the Law was a schoolmaster to lead the Jews to Christ, whereas salvation was and is never its (the Law’s) intention. Again, its defined purpose was to lead them to Christ. Christ is the ultimate atoning sacrifice for sin, He was always the grand object of the whole sacrificial code of Moses, and His death was the fulfillment of its great object and design. Now when one separates the sacrificial death of Christ from the Law; the Law had no meaning, because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats, to take away sins. Wherefore their Messiah (Jesus) is represented as stating "Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt-offering and sin offering hast thou not required: Then said I, Lo I come to do thy will; a body thou hath prepared me" (Psalms 40:6-7; Hebrews 10:4-10).

Now as we further exegete this verse (Romans 10:4), we examine the Greek phrase "ees theek· eh· os· een· een", rendered "unto righteousness". Here the Greek preposition "ees", as used with the accusative case conveys the thought that the object of Christ’s perfectly keeping the intended spirit of the Law was "unto the end of righteousness". Note again, the Law had a definite place in God’s eternal purpose, with reference to which Jesus Christ states "I did not come to destroy it but to fulfill it" (Matthew 5:17). Christ fully met the requirements of the Law by perfectly fulfilling its stipulations in spirit and act. Now whereas the Law was never perfectly kept by any and as a result rendered men cursed rather than righteousness, Jesus Christ’s fulfillment of the Law consummated its purpose in God’s plan, i.e. revealing the contrast of the exceeding sinfulness of man’s sin and the true righteousness that is found in the perfect essence of our blesseth Savior of both Jews and Gentiles (Galatians 3:10, 24-25).

Now as we close our exegesis of this verse (Romans 10:4), we note that there is a limitation placed on the giving of this righteousness embodied in Christ; it is "pahn· dee to peest· ehv· on· dee" rendered "to everyone believing". Here the Greek participle rendered "believing" is in the present tense and passive voice; pointing out the fact that Christ is the perfect fulfillment of the Law to every Jew believing, trusting and having faith in Him. Thus, Paul is addressing Jewish believers in Rome, those who were once under the Law; informing them that through their faith –identification with Christ they have fulfilled the Law. Since the Law details the standard of God’s righteousness, it can only be fulfilled by Jesus Christ. We note from the usage of the passive voice that these elect (believing) Jews were caused to believe, thus their belief was the result of God’s gift of faith to them.

Now as we turn to Romans 10:5, we read from the King James Version, "For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them". And now from the Greek Text, "For Moses writes regarding the righteousness that is out of the Law, that the man who has done it shall live by it". Now the latter part of this verse is a quote from Leviticus 18:5, which states "You shall keep my statues, and my ordinances; which if a man do, he shall live by them". Note Paul makes it clear in his epistles that where there is righteousness, there is life, and vice versa, where there is life, we have to posit righteousness (Galatians 3:21). Here Paul references that the Law; promised life on the condition that a person does the Law actually according to the aorist participle it is to the man "o pee· ees· ahs", translated "who has done it". Strictly speaking, according to the Law of Moses, no one under it could know whether or not he had life until he was beyond the state of knowing namely death.

And now from the Greek Text" But the out of faith righteousness speaks thus, Do not say in your heart, who shall ascend into heaven? That is to bring Christ down;. Now we note again the conditional aspects of Law-righteousness as identified in Romans 10:5 vs. the unconditional aspects of faith-righteousness as identified in this verse (Romans 10:6). Here Paul’s description of them in these verses emphasizes the source from which each came. Again, Law-righteousness is "ehk too no· moo" rendered "out of the Law" where a faith-righteousness is "ehk peest· eh· os rendered "out of faith". The difference between the two is law-righteousness, due to its dependants upon performance of sinful flesh, has never made anyone righteous. Faith-righteousness, which totally depends upon the substitutionary death of Jesus Christ, has made all of God’s elect righteous (II Timothy 2:10).

As we exegete the latter part of this verse (Romans 10:6), we note that Paul describes the out-of-faith righteousness as speaking "oo· tos", rendered ‘thus" or "in this way" or "in this manner"; namely "do not say in your heart, who shall ascend into heaven"? Now the background for this quotation is in (Deuteronomy 30:11-12), where God says through Moses, "For this commandment which I command you this day, it is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that you should say, who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us". Even as Moses in this passage was telling the children of Israel that the covenant God was making with them was not far off. That it was not something they had to go to Heaven for, likewise, Paul in this verse (Romans 10"4), conveys the message that out-of-faith righteousness is not far off; it is not something one needs to ascend into Heaven for, but it is present or available to the elect. In fact, to ascend into Heaven, would be to bring or lead Christ down.

Now as we further scrutinize the phrase ‘the word of faith which we preach", there is a misunderstanding by some as to its exact meaning. As a result many ministries utilize this terminology word of faith, in setting up their ministry based on healing, deliverance and prosperity. Now it is certainly within the workings of God’s power to heal, deliver and provide for His people, but Paul’s usage of this term conveys a deeper meaning. To demonstrate this we utilize the grammar. Note the Greek phrase "to ree· mah tees peest· eh· os" rendered "the word of faith" or the word, which belongs to faith, as indicated by the genitive of possession. Here the Greek noun use in this verse is "ree· mah", which denotes that which is spoken or that which is definitely being stated, hence that which is discoursed or declared. So this "word" which Paul refers to as being possessed by faith, denotes the message which Paul and his associate ministers preached. Now we pose the question, what did they preach, i.e. what was Paul’s message? Note the Greek phrase "o kee rees· so· mehn" translated "which (that) we preach", describes the gospel which Paul preached.

Now as we turn to Romans 10:9, we read from the King James Version, "That if thou shall confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved". And now from the Greek Text, "Because if ye might confess with your mouth Lord Jesus, and might believe in your heart that God raised Him out form the dead, you shall be saved". This verse opens with the adverbial conjunction "ot· ee", rendered "because" or "on account of". Here it is used to introduce a cause or a reason based on an evident fact. In the previous verse (Romans 10:8), it is established that the word of faith was and is near. So the Apostle Paul now states "If you might confess with your mouth Lord Jesus you shall be saved". Now because some theologians use this verse in an attempt to deflect or dilute or even refute the principle of God’s sovereign election to salvation; we turn to the aid of the Greek grammar in exegeting this verse.

In this regard we literally read from the Greek Text, "Ot· ee eh· ahn om· ol· oy · ees· ees ehn to stom· ah· tee soo keer· ee· on ee· ee· soon keh peest· tehv· sees ehn tee kahr· thee· ah soo ot· ee o Theh· os ahf· ton eey· ee· rehn ehk nehk· ron so· thee· see", rendered ‘Because if you might confess with your mouth Lord Jesus, and might believe in your heart that God raised him out from the dead, you shall be saved".

Now notice the Greek verb in this verse "Om· ol· oy· ees· ees", translated "confess". It is in the subjective mood. Thus the statement should read " If you might confess" or "say the same thing" or "affirm what God has said" or established in the essence of Jesus Christ, "ehn to stom· ah· tee", rendered "with your mouth"; thus one is required to admit that Jesus Christ is the only remedy for sin. So for the most part, one will openly acknowledge Him. That is, those who will accept Him will confess Him. As we further exegete this verse, we note the second aspect by the Greek phrase "peest· ehvs· ees ehn tee kahr· thec· ah". Here again notice the subjective mood or "iffy" connotation which is properly translated "and might believe in your heart". Now some point to the "iffy" aspect of the subjective mood to espouse a concept of "conditional salvation". It is a fact that confession and faith and belief are conditions of salvation, but they are not conditions to salvation. The statement "if you might confess" and "If you might believe" are conditional statements in the subjective mood.

As we move to Romans 10:10, we read from the King James Version, "For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation", and now from the Greek Text, "For the heart believes unto righteousness and the mouth confesses unto salvation". Notice in this verse the inverted order of the Greek verbs "peest· tehr· eh· teh", believes and "om· ol· oy· ee· teh" (confesses). In the preceding verse (Romans 10:9), the order was confession first and then believing. Here, this verse focuses on the operation of the heart in conjunction with the spirit, exercising divine faith that has been deposited by God, who is the author or originator unto the end of righteousness. Now as a result, the mouth confesses to God. I.e. it says the same thing God says, unto the end of salvation. Notice this places the focus squarely back on the track of faith righteousness, again it is faith in Jesus Christ; the only thing that can be counted for righteousness. We must be identified with Him for He alone is the righteousness of God (I Corinthians 1:30).

So the mouth confesses unto the end of receiving salvation. This means that the mouth says the same thing back to God, which He requires for salvation. The mouth agrees with God regarding the gospel of salvation and exercises divine faith in it. Here the combining of the faith in the message, which is faith in Christ, results in righteousness (salvation). As we turn to the Greek grammar, note the functioning characteristics of the verb "peest· ehv· eh· teh", (believes) and "om●ol●oy· ee· sees" (confesses). They are in the indicative mood (it’s a fact), the present tense (its continuous), the passive voice, (that which is acted upon by an outside agent) and the third person singular denotes that, the agent is outside of human flesh (Ephesians 2:8). So our hearts (minds) are programmed or directed to believe and our mouths are caused to confess, according to our sovereign call and election by God unto salvation.

There must be agreement with and adherence to the faith message (Romans 10:8), which God has revealed to the Apostle Paul (Galatians 1:12), the only gospel for salvation in the dispensation of grace. Now having considered what is involved in the out-of-faith righteousness conveyed in Romans 10:6-10; Paul in this 11^th verse of Romans chapter 10, speaks of the benefit which accrues to those believing. Paul’s gospel as it relates to salvation was revealed unto him by Jesus Christ (Galatians 1:12), and he often corroborates it by citing passages from the Old Testament. In this verse (Romans 10:11), Paul cites Isaiah 28:16, that "Everyone believing on him will not be put to shame". Here in chapter 10 verse 11, the Greek phrase "pahs o peest· ehv· on", rendered "everyone believing", literally means "every single one believing", emphasizing that no one who believes will suffer shame or disappointment. Note that the Greek phrase "oo kaht· ahee· skheen· thee· seh· teh", translated "will not be put to shame", is in the passive voice and future tense and means that no one will be able to cause the one believing on the Lord to be shamed or to be disappointed. In other words, no one who believes on the Lord Jesus Christ will ever have cause to regret it (Romans 5:5; 9:3; I Peter 2:6).

Now having considered the contextual relation of this 12^th verse of Romans to what has preceded it; we herein exegete, in a meticulous manner, its meaning. The Greek word "thee· ahs· tol· ee", rendered "distinction" is used to indicate that there is no difference between a Jew and a Greek (Gentile). Notice the preposition "thee· ah" prefixed to the verb "stehl· lo", which means that there is no separation, putting asunder or severing between Jews and Gentiles (Greeks) Romans 3:2. The Jews are God’s elect in a previous dispensation (promised), when He separated them from the human race via Abraham, to be His own special people (Genesis 12:1-3). The word Greek is used here to denote all those who are not Jews, hence it is comprehensively used denoting the Gentiles. So in this present church age, God is equally extending mercy to both Jews and Gentiles;, i.e. under grace, He has no priority group (Romans 11:30-32; Ephesians 2:14-16).

Observe the Greek phrase "o gahr ahf· tos keer· ee· os pahnd· on", translated "for the same one is Lord of all". Now this may be rendered "for the same Lord belongs to all", as expressed by the genitive of possession. Formerly (in prior dispensations, i.e. promise and law), the Jews had an inside track with God. They were his peculiar people. But during this church age (grace) they as a group have lost this unique position (Acts 17:30; Ephesians 2:13-22). Now it is certainly true, historically speaking, that is, before Israel was laid aside (Romans 11:11,12,25), that Paul did preach the gospel first to Jews in the synagogues (Acts 13:46; 18:6;28:28). This was unique at that point in time and it ended with the final laying aside of Israel (Acts 28:28). But again we reiterate there is no distinction today in this church age.

As we exegete the latter portion of this verse (Romans 10:12), Paul adds that God is the one "being rich unto all those calling upon Him". Here the Greek present participle "ploo· ton", rendered "being rich," denotes that God continuously, out of His abundant (unlimited) wealth and resources, provides salvation to all those calling upon Him. We also note the Greek present participle "ehp· ee· kahl· oom· ehn· oos", rendered "calling upon", conveys the idea of "calling on", appealing to and crying for help. Generally speaking, it appears that the meaning of this word presupposes the presence of faith. Hebrews 11:6 throws further light on the faith implied in the meaning of this as it states, "For it is necessary for the one coming to God to believe that He is and that He will reward those seeking Him".

In light of the preceding and following contexts we would interpret this word to mean that God is rich unto all those calling upon Him with faith unto salvation. But we must be ever mindful that this faith is not out of us; it is supplied or sourced out of God (Ephesians 2:8-9). Now before we move to the next verse, we will look at one other term. Note the Greek pronouns "pahnd· on" and "pahnd· as", rendered "all" as they are used respectively in the genitive and accusative cases. This term taken in its true context infers the meaning "every kind of" or "everyone of a kind", as indicated by the genitive of possession and as the express object of those who belong to the Lord. Thus the term "all" has reference to certain designated ones, namely God’s elect.

Now as we move to Romans 10:13 we read from the King James Version," For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved". And now from the Greek Text, "For whoever might call upon the name of the Lord will be saved". Now this is an exact quotation from the prophecy of Joel. In its original historical and prophetically setting, it refers to those who are delivered in the terrible day of the Lord. In this verse (13) Paul uses it to depict those, who as a result of calling on the name of the Lord, will be saved from sin. Here the Greek verb "ehp· ee· kahl· ehs· ee· teh" rendered "might call upon", is in the subjunctive mood and may also be rendered "whoever would call upon the name of the Lord".

Thus those who comprise "all" or "every" or "whosoever" must be qualified or determined by some agent outside of "sinful mankind". But there are some who assert and teach the doctrine of "free will" or "free choice"; squarely placing the choice and determination of salvation within the realm of sinful creatures. In essence the usage of the words "all" or "whosoever or "the world", transfers the choice of election from God into the hands of depraved men. Those who espouse such thinking refer to certain scriptures to support their supposition, i.e. John 4:42, "The Savior of the world", II Corinthians 5:14,15, "He died for "all", Hebrews 2:9 "That He by the grace of God should taste death for "every" man", I John 2:2, "And he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world". Now on the surface, this seems very convincing but when one looks into the in-depthness and fully exegete these writings; they in fact solidify the consistency of the doctrine of God’s selection of individuals, solely based on His sovereign call and election to salvation. These scriptures do not infer that God’s sacrifice of Jesus is indiscriminately directed to "all" or "every" or "whosoever" or "the world". Now in order to demonstrate this, we refocus on the verse of scripture that we are exegeting (Romans 10:13) and turn to the Greek grammar and literally exegete from the Greek Text. "Pahs gaho os ahn ehp· ee· kahl· ehs· eet· eh to on· om· ah keer· ee· oo so· thees· eht· eh" again rendered "For whoever might call upon the name of the Lord will be saved". Notice the grammatical construction of this verse.

First note the Greek clause "pahs gahr os", which conveys the expression "for whoever". Now, to understand the implication of this thought; notice that the Greek word "pahs" is technically structured with distributive significance i.e. "all" or "every kind of " which is denoting or designating everything belonging to a classification or any individual within a classification; thus implying "each and every kind" or ""all parts of the whole. Next observe that the Greek conjunction "gahr", rendered "for" in the structure; gives grounds for a conclusion or an explanation, thus in this case it introduces the "cause" or "reason for" or "because". Now observe the Greek relative pronoun "os" as it compliments its antecedent "pahs" both in gender and number (masculine, singular), with its case (nominative), which is determined by its usage in the clause, as they function constructively as the subject of the verse. As we further scrutinize the verse, note the contrasting moods of the main verbs of this verse namely the subjunctive mood for "ehpee· kahl· ehs· eet· eh", rendered "might call upon" and the indicative mood for "so· thees●eh●teh", rendered "will or shall be saved". Note again the subjective mood denotes probability, which expresses that it is possible, that some (not all) might or would call upon the name of the Lord.

So what is conveyed is the possibility and probability that some (not all) "will" and "do" call upon the name of the Lord. As we survey the effect or result of those calling, we observe the indicative mood, as it denotes the factuality that those who call upon Him "shall or will be saved". In other words "all those "who do call upon the name of the Lord (without exception) "will be saved". Now we note the respective tenses and voices of the main verbs in this verse namely, aorist tense and middle voice for "ehpee· kahl· ehs· eet· eh" (might call upon) and future tense and passive voice for "so· thees· eht· eh" (will or shall be saved).

Now as we closely scrutinize John 3:16; we literally read from the Greek Text, "Oo· tos gahr eeg· ahp· ee· seen o theh· os ton kos· mos os· teh ton yee· on ton mon· oy· eh· nee ehth· o· kehn een· ah pahs o peest· ehv· on ees ahf· ton mee ahp· ol· ee· teh ahll ehkh· ee zo· een eh· o· nee· on", rendered, "For God so loved the world , that His Son the only begotten, He gave, that everyone who is believing in Him may not be loosed or perish, but may have life everlasting (without end). Unfortunately, some people quote this verse with complete disregard for the verses that both precede and follow it; thus the context wherein Jesus spoke it is completely ignored. My former Pastor, a man I dearly loved, Pastor Clyde Colbert Sr., use to always admonish the ministers under him, of the danger of taking one verse out of a passage and using it without reading at least a few verses above and a few verses below it, before attempting to interpret its meaning. I have found this to be excellent advice, for it allows one the advantage of conceptualizing the total context wherein a thought is expressed or a question is raised or a statement is made. Thus, it is encumbered upon us to read the total contents of this passage and not in isolation take this verse (John 3:16), and rely upon the expressions "the world" and "whosoever" to determine what the lord was conveying. Also, we must consider whom Jesus was speaking to and what He was talking about! Is it possible that Jesus, who was God incarnated in the flesh at the time He is quoted in this verse, would ever make a contradictory statement to the sovereignty of God’s election and call to salvation? The obvious answer is no! The Bible repeatedly stresses that salvation is the exclusive work of God. For an example, it states in Acts 13:48, (King James Version) "And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed". Note they did not believe first and then they were appointed, but they were caused to believe, because they had been previously appointed.

John 3:16. As we move to the beginning of chapter three of John we note that the entire context which is John 3;1-21 gives the account of a conversation between our Lord Christ Jesus and one named Nicodemus. So here we ask the compound question, who was Nicodemus and what is the total contents of their conversation? Now it is recorded in God’s word "that not many wise men, after the flesh" or mighty or noble are called (I Corinthians 1:26, James 4:6). But Nicodemus is identified as a "ruler" in the King James Version. Here the Greek noun "ahr· khon", rendered "ruler", describes him as a high official or respected leader or one who exercises authority or one who is invested with power or dignity, thus a Lord or Prince or Magistrate. Historically speaking, Nicodemus was a member of the Sanhedrin and was counted as one of the three riches men of Jerusalem, but it was said that afterward he became poor. This was conjectured because later his daughter was seen gathering barleycorn for food from under the horse’s feet. However, during his interview with Jesus, he was a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin or "council" or the highest ruling body and court of justice among the Jewish people at the time of this encounter. The High Priest of Israel and the Sandhedrin headed this tribunal, which in this day in our nation would be synonymous with our Supreme Court. They were granted by Rome limited authority over certain religious, civil and criminal matters of the Jews. Now knowledge of Nicodemus’s background is very important as it forms the basis for properly assessing the things Jesus would say and how he would say them. In other words, in the contents of their discussion, Jesus conveys things that would be known and legally understood by one of Nicodemus’s status, but perhaps not familiar to those not versed in the laws, customs, ordinances and traditions of Israel. Note the Sanhedrin was comprised of the Sadducees or "Chief Priests" and "Elders" and the "Pharisees" or "Scribes". So we must keep this in mind when we analyze the contents of their discussions and consider the contexts or legal aspects of the questions posed by Nicodemus as well as the explanations given by Jesus.

Note the introductory statements of John, chapter three verse one, two and three (King James Version), "There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler o the Jews: (2) The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. (3) Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God". Now as we have already stated, Nicodemus, a Pharisee and ruler came to Jesus at night for a private interview. No one else was present; there was no one else around so we must keep in mind that this conversation, this communicative exchange of questions and answers were conducted in privacy and exclusively between Jesus and Nicodemus.

Note in verse two, how Nicodemus, who was of the Sanhedrin, addressed Jesus as Rabbi. Here the Greek noun "Rahv· vee" is a transliteration of the Hebrew word ‘Rabbi", which comes from a Semitie root word meaning "great" or "head".

Now as the interchange continues, verse three of John chapter three begins with the expression "Jesus answered". Here note the Greek verb "ahp· ehk· ree· thee" rendered "rely" or "answer" is in the indicative mood. This means the subsequent conveyance is factual. The aorist tense conveys the inference that the statement that is to follow describes an action completed in the past. The passive voice means that which is conveyed, is an action, which is not performed by any man, but rather it is received from God. Thus, that is the promise of the new birth by and through the seed, which is Jesus Christ (the anointed one). Here it is very helpful to have a working knowledge of covenants, i.e. the Abrahamic, Davidic and New Covenants, all unilateral contracts that God has with His covenant people of prior and future dispensations (promise, law and millennium). The manifestation of the new birth in essence is the catalyst of the implementation of these covenants for it is by and through Jesus Christ that all the conditions of the contracts are fulfilled.

Thus in John 3:3, the Greek Text reads "ah· meen ah· meen lehg· o see eh· ahn mee tees yehn· nee· thee ahno· thee oo theen· ah· teh ee· theen teen Vahs· eel· ee· ahn too Theh· oo", this would actually translate "Truly, truly, I say unto you, if any one may not be born from above, he is not able to see the reign of God". Note the Greek phrase "yehn· nee· thee ahno· thee", rendered "born or birth from above or renewed". Here Jesus elaborated on one of the key subjects that the Pharisees had established an ardent posture on and that is birth.

From the writings of the respected biblical historian Josephus, it is stated that "the Pharisees say that the soul of good men only passes over into another body, while the soul of bad men is chastised by eternal punishment". In Matthew 14:2, note the question asked by Jesus’ disciples, (KJV) "master, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind? So the "Rabbis" as many Jews referred to the Pharisees, believed in the pre-existence of souls as well as the resurrection. Thus, it is in this vein that Jesus began His elaboration on the subject "yehn· nee· thee" or "birth". Here Jesus knowing the doctrinal position of Pharisaical teaching immediately explains that this birth was not an incarnation but a regeneration. Here He expresses the phrase "yehn· nee· thee ahno· thee", specifying that it is a ‘birth from above" or as it relates to the past, that which is initiated at a prior time or from an earlier period, from the beginning or from the first. Also as it would relate to future time, it would indicate repetition, or that which is anew.

Note the wording of verse 5 as contrasted with verse 3, "This renewed birth from above" is of water and spirit". Note the Greek word "ee· thahr· tos", translated "water" as it is used conjunctively with the Greek word "pnehv· mah· tos", rendered, "spirit" in verse 5. Now, there are many who teach that this verse (as well as others) documents the fact that the usage of the term water, in this context; causes the ceremony of water baptism to be an essential prerequisite for (to) salvation. And then this assertion of water baptism leads to division of factions debating the issues as to how the ceremony should be performed. Again we raise the question, who was Jesus speaking to? The answer is Nicodemus and in light of this, the reference to "water" absolutely signifies "washing" or "baptism", through the medium of "washing". Now again we pose the question, "what gospel did Jesus preach?

Now as we continue in our context of John chapter three, we note Jesus’ statement in verses 6 through 12 contrasting earthly or "terrestrial" things with Heavenly or "celestial" things. Here, our Lord explained the necessity for this change of man status, by stating that the earthly (fleshly) and visible conditions for which man is associated with this present sinful world; is distinct from the Heavenly, spiritual and invisible conditions. Thus it is necessary for man to be transformed in order to be in harmony and fellowship with the rein (Kingdom) of God. Consequently that which is birthed or born of the flesh is and could never be any thing else but corruptible, whereas only that which is birthed or born of the spirit can inherit those things that are incorruptible. So here Christ shows that it is necessary in the nature of the thing, for no man is fit to enter into the reign or Kingdom of God until he is re-birthed or renewed, because that which is born of the flesh is corruptible flesh. Note that which is seen versus that which is unseen illustrates this change. Here, note the usage of the exact Greek word "pnehv· mah", translated both "spirit" and "wind", as Jesus demonstrates the reality and authenticity of the eternal Heavenly things.

Hence following this format we read from the KJV, verse 13, "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven". verse 14, "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up": vs. 16(1^st phrase), "For God so loved the word, that he gave his only begotten Son".

And now from the Greek Text, verse.13, "And no one hath gone up to heaven, except he who is in the heaven". verse. 14, "And as Moses did lift up the serpent in the wilderness, so it behoveth the son of man to be lifted up". verse. 16 (1st phrase), "For in this manner or way, God did so love the world, that His Son, the only begotten, He gave". Now continuing this format, we read from the King James Version, "verse. 15 and 16 (2^nd phrase), "That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal everlasting life. And now from the Greek text, verses 15 and 16 (2^nd phrase) "That (or in order that) every one who is believing in Him may not perish (be loosed), but may have life everlasting (without end)".

Now as we proceed in verse 13 with this word order we continue in the Greek grammar, as we note the Greek adjectival pronoun, "oo· thees", rendered "no one", as it is used for negating a referent, thus "no other" or "no one other than" He (the Son of man) who is in the heaven, that is, already "ahn· ahv· ehv· eek· ehn", (ascended) is born or renewed. Therefore, in verse 14, only He (Jesus) can be or should be exalted. Here the basic theme is that which is "eep· so· sehn", rendered "lifted up on high" or "exalted above all".

So the metaphorical reference to the occurrence of the brass serpent in the wilderness, actually avers to the fact that, (from the Greek Text) "oo· tos eep· so· thee· neh thee ton yee· on too ahnth· ro●poo", translated ‘in this manner it ● or (is necessary) that the Son of man be lifted up (or exalted).

Thus from the Greek Text (1^st phrase of verse 16), "oo-tos gahr ee· gah· pee· seen o Theh· os ton kos· mos os· teh ton yee· on ton mono· yeh· nee eh· tho· kehn", rendered, "in this way or manner God did so love the world, that His son, the only begotten, He gave". So the cause or reasoning for what God had provided for deliverance and salvation is now clearly set forth and that is Jesus, the Son of Man, the only begotten one uniquely born or birthed from above; was given as a ransom for those who will be saved.

As we continue our exegesis in light of the context, we note that the Greek noun ""ton kos· mon", translated "the world", as used in this verse, would be out of harmony with the scope and meaning of the passage if it refers to all who believe (Jews and Gentile). Thus as Jesus makes the statement, Gentiles are not included because salvation at this point historically speaking, had not been directly offered to the Gentiles. Now we have all heard this statement, " Surely, world means world, that means you, me and everybody". In reply to this, we ask that you will take a Bible concordance and look up the word "world’ and then read carefully the various scriptural passages in which the term "world" (as a translation of "kosmos") occurs. As you do this, you will quickly perceive that to ascertain the precise meaning of the word "world" in any given passage; is not nearly as easy as you might otherwise suppose.

Those who attempt this exercise, will find that the Greek word "kos· mos", and its English translation "world" is not used with a uniform significance in the New Testament. Actually "kos· mos" (world) is used in quite a number of different ways. For example, we refer to a few passages where this term occurs: (from the KJV), (1) In Acts 17:24, "kos· mos", (world) is used in reference to the universe as a whole. (2) In John 13:1, "kos· mos" is used in reference to the earth. (3) In Ephesians 1:4, "kos· mos" is used to reference creation. (4) In John 12:31, "kos· mos" is used in reference to the world system. (5) In Romans 3:19, it is used in reference to the entire human race. (6) In John 15:18, and Romans 3:6, it is used in reference to humanity excluding believers. (7) In Romans 11:12, "kos· mos", is used to reference Gentiles as contrasted from Jews. (8) In John 1:29, 3:16,17; 6:33;12:47; I Corinthians 4:9; II Corinthians 5:19, "kos· mos" is used in reference to believers only. (9) In Romans 3:6, "kos· mos" is obviously used in reference to unbelievers, because believers will not be judged (condemned)!

Thus it is demonstrated from the examples given that "kos· mos" (world) has several different clearly defined meanings in the New Testament. So the question may be asked, has the Holy Spirit allowed the usage of a word to confuse and confound those who read the scriptures? The answer to this and any other questions of this nature is absolutely no! Note, as we have said, and here we again implore all of God's people; "the word of God can not be understood by merely academically reading it, but it must be prayerfully studied or scrutinized to be spiritually comprehended (II Timothy 3:15). Now this automatically eliminates those who are not recipients of the Holy Spirit for He (alone) is the teacher. Also the scriptures are not written for those who are too lazy or too dilatory or too busy with the things of this world, such that they have little or no time and no heart to "search and study" the Holy writings (John 5:39). Now the next question is, "How is one who searches the scriptures and know the relevant meanings of the term "kos· mos" (world); to determine its application in any given verse of scripture? The key word is contextual. This may be ascertained by a careful study of the context, by diligently noting what is predicated of "the world" in each passage, and by prayerfully cross referencing other parallel passages to the one being studied.

Now as we return to our base text, i.e. the 1^st phrase of John 3:16, we note again the Greek adjectivally adverb "oo· tos", rendered "in this manner (or way). Observe its three-fold functions. First as a combination with reference to what precedes it (verses 13 and 14) with a correlation to produce a comparison in reference to it and finally to introduce that which follows it. Thus we proceed in this way; we now note the Greek noun O Theh· os", rendered "God", as it is in the nominative case (subject of the sentence). So the principle thought of the phrase is that God "ee · gah· pee· seen", translated "loved" "ton kos· mos", translated "the world". But it is clear who is identified in this context, as evidenced by the selective reference to Israel as God’s exclusive elect in the wilderness in the companion verses of 13 & 14. So it follows that "ton kos· mos", in John 3:16, would identify and be confined to God’s elect, the world of believers.

Thus God in the manner historically documented in the wilderness, did so love "ton kosmos", (the world) (of His elect), os●teh (that), "ton Yee· on" (His Son), ton mo· no· yeh· nee", (the only begotten) "eh· tho· kehn" (He gave or granted). Now observe that the principal subject of John 3:16, is Christ as the gift of God. Note that this phrase identifies what moved God to "give or grant" His only begotten Son and that was His great love. But the underlying questions are (1) whom did God love so much? and (2) for whom did He give His "only begotten Son"? Now it is essential to understand that the "the world" in John 3:16, refers to "the world of believers" (God’s elect), in contradiction from the world of the ungodly (II Peter 2:5), or the world of unbelievers (John 15:18; Romans 3:6). So the term "world" is unequivocally established by a comparison of the other passages which speak of God’s" love". Note, in Romans 5:8, it states in the KJV "God commendeth his love toward us in that while we (God’s elect) were yet sinner, Christ died for us (God’s elect). In Hebrews 12:6-8, it states, (6) "for whom the Lord loveth He "peh· thehv· ee", (chasteneth and instructs through disciplining) and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth (the elect).

(7) "If you "eep· om· ehn· o", (endure or abide under), chastening God dealeth "pros· phehr· o", ( dealeth or bring unto) with you as with sons; for what son is he whom a father chasteneth not? (8) But if you be without chastisement, whereof all are "meht· o· khos" (partners or participators) or partakers, then are you bastards, "no· thos", (illegitimate or rejected) and not sons. In I John 4:19, it states we (God’s elect) love Him because He first loved us (God’s elect).

So what is God’s relationship to the world? We again consider John 15:18-19, wherein it states (from the King James Version), (18) "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you". (19) "If you were of the world, the world would love his own; but because ye are not of the world, therefore the world hateth you. In I John 2:15, it states "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him". Is it conceivable that God would not want His elect to love that which He loves?

Also in I John 3:1, it states "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed (granted or given) "thee· tho· mee", upon us (God’s elect) that we should be called the Sons of God: therefore the world "knoweth", ("yeen· os· ko") us not because it knew him not". Thus it is established that there is no form of intimacy between God and "the world". Accordingly, the usage of the term "kos· mos", (world) in John 3:16 unmistakably has reference to God’s own, (God’s elect), whom He loves and gave His only begotten son for, "that is" the world of believers".

Now we turn to the effect or results or the remedy that was provided by God for deliverance and salvation as we consider John 3:15 and the 2^nd phrase of John 3:16. Note as we have stated, the wording in it’s implied context, is the same but the literal congruency is not exacting. In verse 15, the literal reading is "ee· nah pahs o peest· ehv· on ehn ahf· to eh· khee zo· een eh· o· yee· on", literally translated "that everyone who or is believing in Him, may in Him have eternal life". Notice that the clause "should not" or "may not perish"; does not actually appear in the Greek Text, but it is freely inserted by most translations because the context does indeed imply that which is not actually written.

Here the conjunction "ee· nah", rendered, "that" "or in order that", expresses the purpose or goal of the preceding verse or verses; in this case (verses 13 &14). Thus there was instant deliverance and salvation to those Israelites in the wilderness camp. Now again we stress the fact that this deliverance (salvation) was not applicable to "everyone" in the wilderness that was or may have been bitten by the serpent, but "only those Israelites" who were in the camp who looked upon the remedy of the bass serpent on the pole. Thus we now consider the Greek adjective "pahs", rendered, "whosoever" or whoever" and here we note what many Greek scholars either consciously or subconsciously, but conveniently ignore and that is the definite article "o".

Note, "pahs o"; as structured with the definite article and followed by the substantive prepositional phrase; implies inclusion of all members or parts of a category. So "pahs o", would be rendered " the whosoever" or "the entire or whole" or "everyone of a kind or group" or "everyone who". Also the Greek present participle "peest· ehv· on", rendered "believing" is in the active voice and its declension; nominative masculine, singular agrees with its descriptive Greek adjective (and definitive article) "pahs· o". Hence the translation would literally read, "in order that everyone who is believing". Now as we revert to the cause or reasoning aspect of the communication, we note that the message centers around obedience to the word of God (to focus on the bass serpent). Here in this verse, the focus shifts from the serpent on the pole that was raised; to the Son of man who is exalted above the earth upon the cross of Calvary. Note, this is substantiated by the Greek phrase "ehn ahf· to", rendered "in Him". Note the statement of Jesus in John 12:32-33 wherein He declares (from the King James Version) (verse 32), "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me". (verse 33 ), "This he said, signifying what death he should die". Here it is documented that all who are to be delivered and saved (salvation) must be drawn to Him through the sacrificial offering by His crucifixion on Calvary (or the lifting up on high) of the Son of Man (Jesus).

Note the actual or literal Greek Text of John 12:32, "Kahg· o eh· ahn eep· so· tho ehk tees yees pahn· dahs ehl· kee· so pros ehm· ahf· ton", translated "For (when) I if I may be raised (lifted up high) from (above) the earth, will draw (drag) all (the elect) unto myself". Note the wording "all men’ is not actually stated but the adjectival pronoun "pahn· dahs" (all or every) which is in the accusative case proceeds the Greek verb "ehl· kee· so" (to be lead by force or drag), thus the implication is all who may be (subjective mood) strongly pulled and attracted (compelled) by Him, unto Him. Observe the indicative mood (it is a fact) and future tense of the verb "ehl· kee· so", (will draw or drag); it connotes God’s action as a result of His propitiating sacrifice or status of being lifted or exalted above the earth. Now again, it is in Him. So John 3:15, without a doubt has reference to the elect of God identified by the antecedent verses 13 and 14, which is exclusively designated to those Israelites in the wilderness.

Now we focus on the effect or results or the remedy of the 2^nd phrase of John 3:16, as we note the literal Greek wording; "ee· nah pahs o pee· stehv· on ees ahf· ton mee ahp· ol· ee· teh ahll eh· khee zo· een eh· o· nee· on", translated "that whosoever believeth (everyone who is believing) may not perish (be loosed) but have life unending (eternal).

Here again note the conjunction "ee· nah", rendered "that" or "in order that", as it expresses the introduction of the resulting clauses, which expresses the purpose or goal of the 1^st phrase antecedent context. So the key question is, what is the actual context? Now again, to insure exegetical accuracy, we apply the three fold principles of scrutiny, namely grammatical, historical and contextual. In the grammatical sense we note, that the structure of the Greek adjective "pahs· o" is in the same format as we previously viewed in verse 15, i.e. it carries the definite article. Thus "pahs o", would likewise, as in the case of verse 15, imply inclusion of all members of a certain category.

Thus, God determines those of us who are to believe in Jesus Christ; whom God has given for us, even to us to accept the gift, and answer the intention of the giver, who alone has effectuated this exclusive remedy of salvation. Now it is a fact as conveyed by the clearly defined remedy; the expressed latter ensign of Jesus Christ, the Son of Man, who replaces the former insignia of the bass serpent, that those (the whoever) believing on Him shall not perish (be loosed). Note again the participle verb "pee· stehv· on", translated "is believing", it is the present tense and active voice, which defines continuous action in the present. Thus, faith (belief and trust) is manifested by the recipient of God’s grace in a two-fold manner. First, the gift of deliverance is provided by God through the Son of Man (Jesus Christ). Secondly, the gift of faith is also provided by God to believe upon the only remedy for salvation. Hence, the exercise of saving faith is expressed through the usage of the Greek preposition "ees", in the accusative case as it denotes God (even Christ) as the direct object of salvation. So the Greek phrase "peest· ehv· on ees ahf· ton", rendered "is believing in Him" denotes one who is relying on God for help to have confidence to believe (Mark 9:23-24).

Now in examining the contrasting resulting effects of belief and unbelief, note the aorist tense and subjunctive mood of the Greek verb, "ahpo· lee· teh", augmented by the negative participle "mee", rendered "may not perish" or "may not be loosed". Here again, we have the iffy status of the subjunctive mood conjunctively guided by the aorist tense, which conclusively connotes a completed action in the past. This is verified by the strong adversative conjunction "ahll", rendered "but", which indicates contrast, difference and limitation or an introduction to an exception or exemption then "ahll" (ahllah) could also be expressed "rather" or "however". This Greek conjunction thus serves as a bridge to change the thought direction from the preceding to the succeeding condition. Consequently those who "are believing", do not perish; rather they "eh· khee zo· een eh· o· nee· on", translated "may have life everlasting" (without end). Note again that the iffy connotation of the subjunctive mood of the Greek verb "eh· khee", is conjunctively guided by the present tense; denoting the present continuous position of eternal security, which is realized by all of God’s elect. It infers a close everlasting relationship engendered with the possession of spiritual blessings that are exclusively enjoyed by those who are favored by God. Here the active voice connotes God’s grace that is bestowed upon God’s people. Thus, the sacrificial death of Jesus insures that everyone who is believing (or caused to believe) in Him will not perish or be loosed from Him, but will (not many) have (possess, own and enjoy) life without end. God eternally purposed this position (in Him, in Christ) for His elect only.

This is further illustrated by the succeeding verses and that is the contents of verses 17-21. Here we read John 3:17 from the King James Version, "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved". And now from the Greek Text, "For God did not send His Son to the world that He may judge the world, but that the world may be saved through Him". Note in light of our context, it is explicitly stated that God’s reason for sending His Son ("ees", preposition accusative) "to" the world (of believers); was not to judge or condemn the world (of believers) but He sent Him for the purpose that the world (of believers) may be delivered or saved through Him.

Now the Greek verb "ahp· ehs· teel· ehn (ahp· os· tehl· o) is translated "to send away". It denotes a commission or one who is sent with authority, for a purpose. Here the indicative mood and aorist tense of this Greek verb document the fact that it is a completed action that occurred in a past period. Thus God in eternity commissioned His Son (Jesus) to "so· thee", (save, preserve from harm or rescue) His elect, the world of believers, as determined exclusively by Him. This is confirmed by the aorist tense and passage voice of this Greek verb, which documents that this past completed action, was conferred upon the world (of believers) at a previous point. Thus God by giving His Son shows that He purposed (in eternity) the salvation, not the destruction of the world (of believers); nevertheless, those who will not receive His provision of salvation must necessarily perish because Jesus is the only remedy for sin.

This is expressed in John 3:18, as we read first from the King James Version, "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God". Now from the Greek Text, "He who is believing in Him is not judged, but he who is not believing hath been judged already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God". Note the key Greek verbs in this verse, first the participle "peest· ehv· on" (he is believing) and "kree· neh· teh", (kree· no) (judged or condemned). In the first phrase they are present active nominate masculine singular and indicative present pasive 3^rd person singular respectively. Now observe the verbs in the latter phrase of this verse, namely "keh· ree· teh", (determine, decide or judge) and "pehp· ees· tehf· kehn" (believed, trusted, convinced or confidence) as they are both indicative perfect 3^rd person singular, but passive and active voices respectively. Now if we accurately utilize the Greek grammar of this verse (John 3:18), then the context will automatically align itself in a consistent manner. Note that the Greek word order in this verse certainly is in harmony with the historical and contextual contents of those truths that are previously conveyed in this passage. Observe that the focal points are belief, trust and confidence thus faith of the lack of it on the one hand, verses judgment and condemnation or the lack of it as it has been previously determined decided and judged in the past. Some are going to take serious issue with the premise that this was all adjudicated in eternity, but this verse as well as the entire passage consistently authenticates the sovereignty of God’s choice and election through His foreknowledge, predestination, call (summons), justification, and glorification (Rom 8:30).

Here note the Greek phrase "o peest· ehv· on ees ahf· ton oo kree· neh· teh", rendered "he who is believing (present tense) in Him, is not judged (present-indicative). So it is a present fact that the condition of believing (in Him) is positively linked with the status of one who is not condemned (or negatively judged). Note the passive voice of the Greek verb "kree· neh· teh", (condemnation) as it conveys the thought that an outside agent (God) made the evaluation (innocence or guilt) based on the recipient’s trust in Jesus. Thus it follows that the determination of ones status would necessarily be conditioned upon the determination of one’s condition (belief, trust). This is further demonstrated by the continuation of the next Greek phrase, "o theh mee peest· ehv· on ee· thee keh· kree· teh", rendered "but he who is not believing has been judged already. Here note the structure of the definite article "o" as it is used to form the participle into a relative clause as it is joined by its coordinating counterpart "theh". The conjunction "theh" is most commonly used to denote continuation and further thought development; taking its specific flow from the context, which in this case denotes contrast accordingly it is rendered "but". Thus in contrast he who is "mee peest●ehv· on", (not believing), notice the present tense; is "ee●thee keh· kree· teh", rendered "already condemned". Here note that the Greek adverb "ee· thee", rendered "logically, "of time", "by this time" or "already", modifies the verb "keh· kree· teh", rendered "determined or decided". Thus the one who is not believing, has already been determined (to be negatively judged or guilty), as conveyed by the perfect tense. Now the perfect tense defines a completed action in the past with the results of that action continuing until the present. Hence the determination of judgment (condemnation) in the past; is linked with the determination of the continuous action of unbelief in the present.

Now we move to the conclusive Greek phrase in this verse, "o· tee mee peh· pees· tehf· kehn ees to on· om· ah too mon· oyehn· oos yee· oo too Theh· oo", rendered "because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God". Here this phrase sums up the preceding two statements (phrases) in this verse. First we note the Greek conjunction "o· tee", rendered, "because" or "since" or for (this reason), as it is used to introduce a cause or reason based on an evident fact. Thus the thought is conveyed of one who has "mee peh· pees· tehf· kehn", rendered "not believed" or "not trusted" or "has not been convinced" and does not have any confidence in ("ees) the "on· om· ah (name) of "too mono yeh noos yee· oo too Theh· oo", rendered "the only begotten Son of God". Now this occurs ‘according to" or as "a result of" or "because of", a prior determination and the resulting effect as expressed in the antecedent phrases in this verse as well as the entire preceding verses of this context. Again this is substantiated and confirmed by the perfect tense as it defines a completed action in the past with the results of the action continuing until the present.

The next two verses in the context (John 3:19-20) give demonstrative testimony to the state and status of those who are the non-elect of God as we read first from the King James Version, (19) "And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil". (20) "For everyone that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deed should be reproved". Now from the Greek Text, (19) "And this is the judgment, that the light hath come to the world (of unbelievers) and men, the (non elect), did love the darkness rather than the light, for their works were evil". (20) "for every one who is doing wicked things hateth the light and doth not come unto the light, that his work may not be detected (condemned)". We now observe the pre-arranged state and status of the non elect or permanently unregenerated mankind as we note in verse 19 the Greek phrase "eegah· pee· sahn ee ahn· thro· pee mahl· lon to sko· tos ee to phos", rendered "men did love the darkness rather than the light". Here we focus on the main verb of this phrase, "ee· gah· pee· sahn", rendered "did love".

Notice the indicative mood and aorist tense as it speaks of the fact that this love for darkness over light was a (one time) completed action in the past that was determined and attributed to those who are eternally lost. This was all implemented through the fall of mankind. Thus these are the ones who have not been ordained to receive God’s mercy (Acts 13:48). Now this is manifested by the Greek phrase "een gahr ahf· ton pon· ee· rah tah ehr· gah", translated "for their works, were evil. Note the Greek verb "een", rendered "were" as it is expressed in the indicative mood and imperfect tense. Here we observe that the imperfect tense denotes continuous action in the past, thus it is a fact that evil works or deeds were previously assigned to those who "love darkness rather than light", and this "ehs· teen", "is" the basis of the "kree· sees" judgement or condemnation (note the present tense and indicative mood). Now this is the underlying fact governing those who are lost and will perish.

This is further illustrated in the 20^th verse by the Greek phrase "pahs gahr o phahv· lah prahs· son mee· see to phos keh ook ehr· kheh· teh pros to phos", rendered "for every one (or all of a kind) who is doing evil things hateth the light and does not come into the light". This is pre-conditionally true of all men (by the nature of Adam total depravity), but note the Greek verbal expression "ook ehr· kheh· teh", rendered "does not come".

This verb is in the indicative mood (it is a fact) and present tense and the middle or passive voice, which indicates an outside agent (Satan the devil) is the influence, directing the lost away from the light (II Corinthians 4:3-4). So those who are lost practice their deeds of wickedness in darkness. The obvious reason for this is expressed by the Greek phrase "ee· nah mee eh· lehgkh· tee tah ehr· gah ahfton", translated "that his works may not be detected or exposed and reproved". Here we note that the Greek verb "eh●lehgkh· thee", rendered "detected" or ‘expressed" as it is in the subjunctive mood and aorist tense. Here the "iffy" connotation of the subjunctive mood speaks of the inactiveness of God in dealing with the present condemned acts of the lost, non-elect in this age. The Apostle Paul states in Hebrews 12:8 (KJV), "But if ye be without chastisement (correction), whereof all (the elect) are partakers, then are ye ("noth· os") bastards and (illegitimate) and not sons (or children of God)".

Now as we move to the final verse of our context (John 3:21), we read first from the King James Version, (21) "But, he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God". Now from the Greek Text, (21) "But he who is doing the truth, doth come to the light, that his works may be made manifested, that in God they are having been wrought". Here we note the conclusive statement of this verse as it confirms the factuality of God’s contrasting relationship with His elect as it is distinguished from those who are not called by Him. Now this verse does not begin with the strong adversative conjunction "allah", rendered "but", however the Greek phrase "o theh pee· on" is grammatically constructed to be translated, "but he who is doing". Here again as in verse 18, the Greek definite article "o" (nominative, masculine, singular) is placed before the conjunction particle "theh", to denote continuation and further thought development, taking it specific sense from the context as it is contrasted from the antecedent verses 19 and 20, thus the implied counterpoint could be expressed by the English word "but". So those or he who "pee· on"; here the Greek verbal participle is translated "is doing", "teen ah●lee· thee· ahn", rendered "the truth", "ehr kheh· teh pros to phos", rendered "doth come to the light".

Note the indicative mood and present tense and passive voice of the verb "ehr· kheh· teh" rendered ‘does come’ as it conveys the fact that those who do come (present tense) , are drawn by an outside agent (note the passive voice), who is God (John 6:44). Thus the one who comes to the light, is doing or loves the truth. The truth ("teen ahl· ee· thee· ahn"), is defined as the word of God (John 17:17). Now the results are expressed in the final Greek phrases "ee· nah phah· nehr· o· thee ahf· too tah ehr· gah o· tee ehn Theh· o ehs· teen eer· gahs· meh· nah", rendered, "that his works may be manifested, that in God they are having been wrought". Here the Greek verb "pah· neh· ro· thee", translated "manifested" is in the subjunctive mood (iffy condition) but it is guided by aorist tense, which connotes that the revelation or manifestation of righteous deeds are causative, i.e., made known or are caused to be by an agent outside of the believer (passive voice). The Greek conjunction "o· tee", rendered "that" is used declaretively to form a direct assertion.

This assertion or perception is that it is "eer· gahs· meh· nah", rendered "wrought" or "accomplished" or "activated", "ehn Theh· o", translated "in God". Note the verbal participle "eer· gahs●meh●nah", (accomplished) as it is in the perfect tense and the passive voice. The perfect tense denotes continuous action in the pass with continuous results in the present. The passive voice denotes that this accomplishment of bring us to the light was brought about by an agent outside of the believer (God). Accordingly, the contents of John 3:1-21, all conclusively give consistent testimony and documentation to the sovereignty of God’s eternal choice and election of individual (believers) to salvation. All those who will unbiasly consider the writings of John in this context will understand that the writings therein thoroughly authenticate the doctrine of election.

Now as we move to Romans 10:14, we read first from the King James Version, "How then shall thy call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And now from the Greek Text, "How then should they call upon him in whom they have not believed? and how should they believe in him whom they have not heard? and how can they hear (apart from one preaching) without a preacher"? Here our focus is on three Greek terms in this verse namely: (1) ehp· ee· kahl· ehs· on· the, which is rendered, "should call upon" (2) ehp· ees· tehvs· os· een rendered, "should believe" and (3) ahk· oos· o· seen rendered, "should hear". Also note that each of these Greek verbs is in the subjunctive mood. Again the subjunctive mood expresses probability or it expresses an "iffy" connotation, though it may be in either a positive or negative sense. Now observe the negative participle "ook" in relationship to "ehp· ees· tehvs· os· een", (should believe) and "ahk· oos· o· seen", (should hear) as it expresses the thought that one might not believe and might not hear. Thus the question is posed regarding those from verse 13 who ‘might call upon the name of the Lord and be saved". Here the aorist tense, (past completed action) conveys the probability that one might not have believed and might not have heard due to the fact that it has not received a preaching or one who has proclaimed the gospel. So it follows that first, it is not probable that anyone will call upon the Lord who has not first believed in Him. Second, it is not probable that anyone will believe in the Lord unless he has first heard about Him via the gospel message. Third, it was not probable that any would hear the good news about the Lord unless there was first someone preaching and proclaiming it to them. This must be understood in light of the logical sequence that ignites the process of those who are drawn into a saving relationship with God.

Now as we move to Romans 10:15, we read from the King James Version, "And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! Now from the Greek Text, "How should they preach if they may not be sent? even as it has been written and , How beautiful are the feet of those preaching a message of good things". Note, this verse is a continuation of verse 14. Here the Greek verb "kee· reex· os· een", rendered "how should they preach"? is likewise in the subjunctive mood and may also be rendered "how might they preach"? The basic thought is that it is not probable that they could preach unless they had been sent. Now this quotation which is primarily taken from Nahum 1:15; is mainly used to corroborate what Paul is saying. Now if we link verses 14 and 15 together as a single sentence, which in essence they are, and when we consider the transactions in them in the order in which they take place, we have the following sequence. First, the preacher is sent with the gospel of the grace of God. Second, through the preaching, one hears the gospel of grace. Third, as a result of hearing, some (not all) believe. Fourth, as one who has been caused to hear and has believed, he or she is in a position to call upon the Lord. Note the implication is that faith is a prerequisite to the desire and ability to call upon the Lord. Note the Greek phrase "eh· ahn mee ahp· os· tahl· os· een", translated "if" or "except" "they may not be sent".

As we follow the word order, we note that when the conjunction "eh· ahn" is arranged with the negative particle "mee", it is rendered "if not" or "unless" or "except". Here the Greek word "ah· po· stahlo· seen", rendered "might be sent" is derived from the preposition "ahpo" prefixed to the verb "stehl· lo" and it means to "send from", hence to "send forth" or to "dispatch". This compound verb is in the aorist tense and passive voice, which indicates that at a given point in time, God is the one who sends forth, messengers with the gospel. In light of this, we can confidently affirm that those who go forth with the gospel of God’s grace, God’s message for this present church age; have been sent by God. It follows that we can also positively affirm that those who are not preaching the gospel of God’s grace in this disposition of grace have not been sent with the message for the Grace Church.

Now due to erroneous misconceptions of what the Bible teaches about God’s sending and His call, many have and they continue to misconstrue Satan’s call to confuse and hinder the preaching of the gospel from that which God has intended it to be. Now the latter phrase of this verse "kahth· os yeh· grahp· teh os o· ren· ee ee poth· ehs ton ehv ahg· yehlee· zo· meh· non (ta) ahg· ahth· ah", rendered, "even as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of those preaching a message of good things". Here the Apostle Paul quotes from Isaiah 52:7, as the prophet expresses profound appreciation of not only the Messianic Message of glad tidings but the very feet of those publishing this glorious message, are called beautiful" for the sake of their message.

Now as we move to Romans 10:16, we read first from the King James Version "But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? Now from the Greek Text, "But all did not obey the gospel; for Isaiah says, Lord, who has believed our report? Now this verse begins with the strong adversative conjunction "alla", translated "but". It emphasizes the contrast between what was preached and their disobedience to it. Here the Greek word "ehv· ahg· yeh· lee· o", translated "gospel" defines that which is good news or a good message.

Here we note that the message as written in its context is prophetically applicable to Israel and their relationship to their Messiah, although many apply it to our experience with our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ for this age. Now there is certainly much in common between the way the word "gospel" is used with reference to Isaiah’s report of Israel’s salvation and the way Paul uses it pertaining to salvation, such as his revelation of the gospel of our salvation. In fact, on the basis of what is stated in this verse (Romans 10:16), we can affirm that Paul considered Isaiah 53 as a forerunner, or the antecedent of his gospel as it relates to salvation. Now the point that is made in this verse (Romans 10:16) is that regardless of the veracity of the message or the provisions for deliverance or salvation entailed of the message –"all did not obey the good news or message" which was proclaimed by Isaiah. The evidence Paul cites for this statement is documented in Isaiah 53:1. Here we literally read the last phrase of Romans 10:16, from the Greek Text "Kee· ree· ee tees eh●peest· ehv· seen ahk· o· ee ee ee· mon", rendered "Lord, who has believed our report"? The implication is that very few of Israel if any, believed what the prophet Isaiah had stated. This is evident by the fact that the Jews did not know or recognize him and consequently lightly esteem or despised and therefore did indeed reject him. Note the Greek verb "eep· eek· oos· ahn", translated "obey" in the first phrase of this verse (Romans 10:16). Here the compound word is derived from the preposition "eep· o", prefixed to the word "ahk· oo· o" and literally means to "hear under" hence to do what is heard thus to obey. Accordingly obedience or the act of obeying is the consequence of true faith (Acts 13:48; Ephesians 1:13). Here, the apostle Paul continues to reference the experience of Gods’ elect Israel, that they have not all obeyed the gospel; as he notes elsewhere in these writings that the greater part of them remain in unbelief and disobedience. Here we must observe that the gospel (message) is to first be heard, then believed and finally obeyed. This is the progressive flow and working of faith. So the obvious answer to the question, "who hath believed our report?, in this context is very few (if any). Few as compared to what one would think should have believed such a faithful report that was certainly worthy of acceptance by all that heard it.

Now we move to Romans 10:17, another controversial verse of scripture. No, the statement of this verse is not contentious with itself. But some have used these expressed thoughts to explain their conception of where the origin of faith lieth. We read from the King James Version, "So then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God". We will now read from the Greek Text, "Then faith is out of hearing and the hearing is through the word of Christ". Now some Bible versions (King James and Young’s) have translated the latter half of this verse "the word of God", but the majority Greek transcripts have rendered it "the saying or word of Christ". Here we read the entire verse literally from the Greek Text, "Ah· rah ee peest· ees ehx ahk· o· ees ee theh ahk· o· eethee· ah ree· mah· tos Khrees· too", rendered "then faith is out of hearing, and the hearing is through the word of Christ". Now we will meticulously exegete this verse utilizing our three principles of scrutiny, namely grammatical, historically, and contextual. Here we prayerfully submit documentation of our exegesis of this verse; in light of those who would abrogate the determination of the excise of faith from the sovereignty of God into the hands of depraved men.

Now we note the Greek particle "ah· rah", with which this verse begins. This is an inferential particle denoting the transition of natural sequence to show corresponding thought flow, or logical inferences and it draws its inferences from the antecedent verses particularly verse 14. Now as we have been continuously attempting to convey, it is very important to remember that, no one verse of scripture should ever be idly used to establish what it actually conveys. So the contents of Romans 10:17, should be viewed in light of the context of Romans 10:13-17; thus verse 17 is basically a summation of the progressive thought flow of its antecedent verses (13-16). Thus this is the reason why it is conjunctively linked to the precursory or anterior conveyances preceding it. So the Greek particle "ah· rah", rendered "then" or "therefore" or "as the results of’, indicates that what Paul states in this verse is a consequence of what he has previously stated, beginning in verse 14 and culminating in the actual meaning of its message.

Now we turn to the grammar (notice there are no actual verbs in this verse), here we focus on the Greek phrase "ah· rah ee peest· ees ehx ahk· o· ees", translated "then" or ""as the results of –faith (ehx) by or out of hearing". Now as we observe the Greek word order, we note the case of the noun "pees· tees" (faith) which is nominative as it is linked (prepositional (ehx) (by or out of) to the noun "ahk· o· ees", (hearing) which is genitive. Here we define what the function of a verb is. It is the word mechanism that expresses either existence or action (motion) or occurrences in most languages. In the Greek grammar verbs are expressed in five different parts, namely; person, (1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd) number (singular, plural) tense (conveys the idea of time plus kind of action), mood (degree of probability), voice (active, middle, passive).

So this is the basis or reason most translations have inserted derivations of the verb (to be) i.e. "comes" (King James Version) or "is" (Young’s Literal Translation). Now as we continue the formation of the word order, we note that the preposition "ehx" (out of or by) is placed before the Greek noun "ahk· o· ee", literally rendered, "the message heard". Here observe the cases of both the preposition (ehx {out of by} and the noun (ahk· o· eel {the message heard}); they agree (as they should) and are genitive, showing source, possession or ownership. This is usually very clear when the accompanying noun or substantive is in the accusative (direct object) or dative (indirect object) cases. But as we note in this phrase, the accompanying Greek noun "peest· ees" is in the nominative case. The nominative case indicates or expresses the subject of the sentence (or phrase), note, never the object of a preposition.

So what is the conveyance in Romans 10:17 of the phrase "ehx ahk●o●ees" (by or out of hearing)? Does it convey the message that hearing is the origin of faith or is it possible to hear before one possesses faith? Sequentially speaking, which is the perquisite, hearing or faith, faith or hearing, which comes first. To shed light upon this question, we revert to the expressions of the thirteenth and fourteenth verses of this chapter (10) of Romans, namely (Greek Text) verse (13) "Whoever might call upon the name of the Lord will be saved". Verse (14) "And how then should they call upon him in whom they have not believed"? and how should they believe in him whom they have not heard"? The key is the iffy connotation of the subjunctive mood, which governs the expressions, "might call", "should call upon", "should believe" and "should hear". Note that all of those probabilities are culminating in the certainty of some depraved men being saved, i.e. all that do call and do believe and do hear, "will be saved". Note the ending Greek verb in Romans 10:13, "so· thee· seh· teh", rendered "will be saved". Observe that this verb is in the future tense and indicative mood (it’s a fact). So the fact of the matter is that as sure as night follows day, salvation follows the calling upon the name of the Lord.

Now as we refocus in Romans 10:17 on the question, which is the prerequisite or which precedes the other, hearing before faith as opposed to faith before hearing, we turn again to the grammatical construction of this verse and once more note the nominative case of the Greek noun "peest· ees", translated "faith". This means that faith is the subject of the phrase, and as it is structured functions as the doer of the action or that, which is described by the predicate, thus it is the cause or basis for action. Accordingly, "ehx ahk· o· ees" (out of hearing), denotes the excise (not source) of previous divinely deposited faith that is activated by its defined source (God). Thus a simplified rendering of this phrase would be that faith is expressed through hearing. God alone is the author or originator of faith, resulting in eternal salvation (Hebrews 5:9; 12:2).

Now as we move to the latter phrase of Romans 10:17, we focus on the syntax or the Greek "locution "ee theh ahk· o· ee thee· ah ree· mah· os Khees· too", translated "and hearing through the word of Christ". Here again, we note the absence of verbs in this phrase, thus the corresponding exclusion of all information that could be gleaned by the functions of person (1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd) tenses (time and kind of action) moods (degree of probability of occurrence) and voice (active, middle or passive). However this latter phrase is linked to the former by the conjunction particle "theh", as it denotes continuation and further thought development; taking its specific sense from the preceding context, thus the thought conveyed is further elaboration of its antecedent. Here we follow the word order as we note the case of the Greek noun "ahk· o· ee", (hearing or that which is heard or the message) which is nominative as it is linked prepositional (thee· ah), (by or through) to the nouns "ree· mah· tos Khees· too", (words or message of Christ). As this is arranged the preceding phrase of this verse, the cases of the preposition (thee· ah {by or through} the noun (ree· mah· tos{word or message}) and "Krees· too" (Christ) all agree (as they should) they are genitive, showing source, possession or ownership. As we noted in the former phrase of this verse, this would present a clear-cut conclusion if the accompanying noun were in the accusative (direct object) or dative cases. But again we observe that the noun "ahk· o· ee" (hearing {the message}) is in the nominative case, it is the subject of the phrase. Thus a simplified rendering of this phrase would be that hearing is expressed through the word (saying) of Christ.

Now this all becomes very evident as we exegete the final verse (18-21) of Romans chapter ten. To this end we move to Romans 10:18, as we read first from the King James Version" But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world". And now from the Greek Text, "But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed, their sound went out into all the land, and their words unto the ends of the inhabited earth". In this verse Paul raises the question, didn’t Israel hear the word of God given to them? In other words didn’t they know God’s requirements of them under the Law and the Prophets? The answer is emphatically "mehn· oon· yeh", rendered "yes indeed". Actually it was not a matter of Israel ignorantly sinning against God, in which case there might be some basis for excusing (I Timothy 1:13), but in spite of knowing what the Law and the Prophets said, they willfully persisted in that which they knew to be contrary to that which had been spoken to them.

Now as we move to Romans 10:19, we read from the King James Version, "But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you". Now we will read from the Greek Text, "But I say, did Israel know? First Moses says, I will provoke you to jealously by that which is not a nation, and by a nation void of understanding I will anger you". Now in the preceding verse (18), the Apostle raises the question as to whether Israel had really heard, which he answers with an emphatic yes. In this verse (19), he raises the further question, Did Israel really know? Did they have adequate information regarding the Law and the Prophets? Now the quotation in this verse is from Deuteronomy 32:21. The surrounding context posits the fact that Israel was not living in accordance with the knowledge, which she had. The implication of the quotation cited is that Israel did have the knowledge of God and His will, and it is against the background of this knowledge that God is going to stir them up by wooing an ignoble that did not know Him. The basic principle is that God in some instances uses the uninformed to put to shame those having knowledge or the wise

Now as we move to Romans 10:20, we read from the King James Version, "But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me. Now from the Greek Text, " And Isaiah dared to speak out and say, I was found by those not seeking me, I was made manifest to those not interrogating me". Now the thought in this verse is that Isaiah "ahpo· tol· mah", rendered "dared to speak out", i.e. he took the risk and threw off restraints in saying what he did. Oh that men of God would be courageous and uncompromising when it comes to conveying the word of God, yes Mystery Truth! It may not be popular, but it is so truthful. Here we observe that what Isaiah said was designed to provoke Israel to jealousy. Notice the use of the passive voice indicates that God was the one who initiated a courtship with those not seeking Him. Again, this proves that God has, does and must always be the initiator of any contact between God and depraved men. Thus He was the one who manifested Himself to those who were not making an inquiry concerning Him or seeking to know Him. Note the Greek phrase "tees eh· meh mee zee· too· seen", rendered "those not interrogating me" or " those not inquiring about me". In all these citations the principle is the same; God is always the one who is initiating a relationship with sinners, while sinners (unprovoked by God), are never reaching out toward God. Note, the very thing which made Israel jealous was the fact that God was leaving her in the shadow and eliciting the favor of her no-status neighbors.

Now we move to the last verse of Romans chapter ten verse 21, as we read first from the King James Version, "But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people". And now from the Greek Text, "But to Israel he says, all the day I have stretched forth my hands to a disobedient and speaking-against people". Now the quotations in verse 20 and 21 are from Isaiah 65:1-2. The purpose of the first one is to provoke Israel to jealousies that they might realize what a wonderful God they have. The second quotation calls their attention to God’s relentless compassion toward them. Historically speaking even though they are disobedient and speaking against God, He continues to "ehx· ehpeh· tah· sah", rendered "stretch forth", "extend and "spread out" His hands toward them all day long. This reminds me of Jesus’ compassion for Israel mentioned in Matthew 23:37, where He says, "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one killing the prophets and stoning those sent to her, How often I have wanted to bring together your children in the same manner a hen gathers her young under the wings and you would not".

Now as we move to chapter eleven, we note the continuity of the progression of thought flow as we read verse one from the King James Version, "I say then, hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin". Now we will read from the Greek Text, "I say then, has God cast away his people? May it never be! For I also am an Israelite, out of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin". Now as a consequence of what the Apostle Paul stated in the latter part of chapter ten, it is possible that some would draw the conclusion that God has "ahp· o· sah· to", rendered, "cast away" or "thrust away and repelled from His covenant people, Israel".

Note as he opens this chapter (Romans eleven), he hypothetically raises this very question as he uses a Greek grammatical construction which clearly indicates that God has not cast away His people. Here he points out in absurdity of such a notion as he exclaims the Greek expression "mee yehn· ee· to", rendered "let it not be", "may it never be", and "absolutely not" or as expressed in the King James Version "God forbid". Thus he is saying, "Let there never be such thinking". Observe that this expression (mee yehn· nee· tos", is in the opative mood, the mood in which prayers (or petitions) are made, thus some translations have taken the liberty of translating (God forbid). But in essence he is staying that it is impossible for God to extricate from Him His elect or His people. It is established that the designated descendants of Abraham (and Sarah) are indeed "lah· on ahf· too", translated "His people". Therefore it should be understood that those whom God has chosen are "His people or "His elect" forever.

Here Paul presents himself as evidence to prove that God has not cast away His people. He states that he is an Israelite himself being of the tribe of Benjamin, which is very significant, in that it places him under the auspices of the Kingdom of Judah or a Jew. Thus he is separate and distinct from the descendants of the ten tribes who formed the Kingdom of Israel (Philippians 3:5). Note again the Greek verb "ahp· o· sah· to" (cast away or drive away or to reject) is in the indicative mood (it is a fact) and the aorist tense which verifies the determination that such can not and shall not occur; as it is a past completed action. Those who shun and reject the doctrine of eternal security should look very closely at Paul’s declaration in this verse. If ever there were a reason for people to be loosed from God, Israel would certainly be qualified candidates to receive His repudiation. But the fact that Paul was a child of God, a member of God’s family (Ephesians 2:9), in spite of his terrible past record (I Timothy 1:13); it certainly proves that God has not driven away His people Israel. Now if God was interested in saving a chief of sinners like him (Paul) as an example of His (God’s) longsuffering, Paul was confident that the door was wide open for other believing Israelites (I Timothy 1:16-17). Remember God’s choice is not based on the merits of depraved men, but on the value and worth of Jesus Christ.

Now as we move to Romans 11:2, we read first from the King James Version, "God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying". Now from the Greek Text, "God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew. Or do you not know what the scripture says respecting Elijah? How he intercedes with God against Israel"? This verse opens with a positive declaration that God has not thrust away, repelled or repulsed the very people who He foreknew in Abraham. Here the Greek word "pro· ehg· no", rendered "foreknew" is in the aorist tense and goes back to the point when God knew beforehand, in advance and in prior period that He would make Abraham the progenitor of a new nation-His people, Israel (Romans 8:29).

Here Elijah’s ignorance (as well as men of today) can be attributed to a lack of understand of the foreknowledge of God. Again, we consider the question that is answered by the Apostle Paul, who was given the revelation of the foreknowledge of God. Note, Paul makes the emphatic statement that God has not, has not finally and irrecoverably rejected a people whom He has loved (or approved) for so long, in spite of their obvious rejection of Him. For this is evidently the meaning of the Greek word "pro· ehg· no", translated "foreknew" or "foreknowledge". Hence we note the general meaning of the Hebrew word "ya· da", which is in the primitive root which means to know or to ascertain as it is used in a variety of senses, i.e. figuratively, euphemistically and inferentially, including observations, recognition, but also causatively. Thus foreknowledge involves comprehension and discernment as well as understanding that are governed by declaration. Now as we focus on the original Greek verb "yeen· os· ko", which is a prolonged form of primary verb, meaning to "know" (absolutely) in which a great variety of applications and with many implications, i.e. to be aware of, to perceive, to understand and that which is known because it is caused, decided or resolved to be a fact.

Notice in this verse (Romans 11;2) the question Paul poses, i.e. "Do you know what the scripture saith"? Here as we focus on the Greek grammar, we note the usual use of the Greek verb "ehn· eeg· khan· ee", rendered "intercedes" or "pleads" or "to converse with". This verb derivation of it is used in reference to the Holy Spirit interceding on behalf of the Saints (Romans 8:27,34). It is also used as it expresses that Jesus Christ is continually living to intercede n behalf of those coming to God through Him (Hebrews 7:25). Thus we conclude that if Elijah had been in harmony with the foreknowledge of God, he would have interceding on behalf of Israel instead of against Israel as the apostle does in Romans 10:1. Now as we have linked the conveyances of verses one and two, we summarily submit that Paul proves that Israel has not been cast away by citing the fact that as an Israelite he has been saved.

Also, he states that Israel is constituted of God’s people whom He "pro· ehg· no", (foreknew), i.e. a decision based upon timeless perfect knowledge, therefore immutable. Accordingly those who preach and teach such doctrine as so-called ‘backsliding"; wherein it is possible to be loved by God and drawn into the specials knowledge of Sonship and then discarded; should take special note of what Paul; is conveying in this message regarding God’s unalterable commitment to His beloved elect. God does not change His mind regarding His love for His own because all decisions and callings are based on His complete and eternal knowledge.

Now as we move to Romans 11:14; as we read first from the King James Version," But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal". Now we read from the Greek Text, "but what did the divine communication say to him? I have left to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to Baal". Here the Greek word "kree· maht· ees· mos", translated "divine communication" or "divine response or "oracle" or "answer from God" (King James Version) is used only in this verse in the New Testament. In the classical Greek, this expression conveys the idea of doing business or negotiation or listening to an Ambassador.

Note the Lord’s response to Elijah is that he has "kaht· eh· lee· pon", rendered "left behind" or "remain behind", or He "has remaining seven thousand men for Himself". This certainly aligns with what Paul says in II Timothy 2:19, wherein he states, "The Lord knows those who are his (Numbers 16:5). Thus He knows those who have not bowed a knee to Baal, i.e. who have not given him their alliance. Now notice that the main reason Paul calls our attention to Elijah’s negotiations with God, revolves around the seven thousand men who remain faithful to God. So they remain or constitute a remnant and the remnant is expressive of the call, choice and reservation God makes to Himself.

Now as we continue in Romans 11:5, note the that several different terms are used to designate those who are a part of God’s remnant, such a chosen, foreknew, foreordained, called, elect, vessel of mercy, etc. These are terms that every child of God should be very familiar with, for they identify God’s actions or dealings with those who were the object of His love fro the beginning. Here in this verse (Romans 11:5), Paul’s thesis is that it is not God’s purpose to save all Jews, but save selectively some of them (I Corinthians 9:22) and these are customarily referred to as the elect ("toos ehk· lehk· toos"), according to II Timothy 2:10.

Here in Romans 11:5 the Apostle Paul uses the Greek noun "leem· mah", translated "remnant" to depict that rather small number of Jews when compared to the total number who are being saved in this Church age. This word literally means "those remaining" or "left" or ‘a small residue’.

Note, as Paul writes in this verse, he is not speaking of the Jews who are being saved or who are going to be saved. But he is speaking of those who "have been saved". Note that the leading verb in this verse "yeh· go· nehn", translated "to be" or "to exist" or ‘that which exists" or "that which is", is in the perfect tense (competed action in the past with present results). Thus it denotes that this remnant "has been made" or "ha been brought into being" or "has been elected" or "preordained" or "caused to exist", according to the election of grace. Here the implication is very clear, i.e. if there was no election of grace, there would be no remnant, and thus, none of the Jews would be saved today. This points out the determination of God’s previous act in eternity in picking or choosing and placing individuals according to His eternal plan and purpose.

Now we focus on the ending clause of this verse (Romans 11:5), as we examine the Greek phrase "kaht ehk· lo· yeen kah· ree· tos", rendered "according to (kah· tah) the election of grace". Here the Greek noun "ehk●lo●yeen" rendered "election" is derived from the preposition "ehk" prefixed to the verb "leh· go" and it literally means "to speak out’ or ‘to pick out" or "to select or choose". Note that the Greek noun "kah· ree· tos" is in the genitive case as it denotes possession, consequently the basic thought is that this remnant has been brought "into being", according to the principle of election which belongs to grace. The specific premise expressed is that the factor of grace (or no merit) on the part of those saved; posits the fact that the selection process rests entirely on God’s sovereignty saving His elect solely on the basis of the merit of Jesus Christ.

Now this time we will read literally from the Greek Text, "Ee theh· kahr· ee· tee, ook· eh· tee ehx ehr· gon,eh· pee ee kahr· ees ook· eh· tee yee· neh· the kahr· ees", again it is translated literally word for word, no additions, "And if by grace, it is no longer out of works, for then grace is no longer grace". So it is evident that this second sentence is added in so translations, supposedly for the sale of emphasis or clarity; utilizing the word order connotation of the conditional participle "ee", to express a contrary-to-fact condition. Thus some translations, i.e. King James Version have taken the liberty to add the consequence clause so expressed. But in essence it appears to be an unnecessary duplication, ad added gloss, which goes beyond Paul’s succinct definition of what grace is and what it is not.

Now since this verse (Romans 11:6) makes it clear that grace and works are at opposite ends of the spectrum, and that they are mutually exclusive; it is important that we consider the exact meaning of both of these words. Here the Greek noun "kah· rees", translated "grace" as used in this verse, conveys the meanings of a free gift, or free favor, freely given all that is necessary for salvation and the free provision God has made for us in Christ (John 1:17; II Corinthians 8:9; 9:15). Notice that grace focuses on what God has done for us in Christ, the benefits of which are freely proffered to us (II Corinthians 5:21). Finally, God’s offer of salvation by grace included both the provision of it and the means by which it is appropriated, namely by or through faith, (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Now as we again briefly consider the contexts of Ephesians 2:8-9; in correlation to the text of the verse of scripture before us (Romans 11:6), we again reemphasize its conveyance by noting that the Greek word "kahr· ees", denotes a favor, benefit, kindness, or good will, that is undeserved or unmerited. Notice in Ephesians 2:8, the Greek word ‘thor· ah", which is often used conjunctively with "kahr· ees" (grace) and is basically translated "free" or ‘without a cause". Now anything that can be earned or merited or is deserved or transferred with a cause or because of something is not grace. Only that which is received without any input on the part of the recipient can be considered grace and we note again (for the record) that Ephesians 2:8 states this emphatic fact that grace is a gift.

Also note in Romans 5:15, that the Greek word "khahr· ees· mah", is translated "gift or "free gift" which conveys the idea of a favor which one receives without any merit of the recipient. This is the description of the gift of divine grace. It is through the economy or dispensation of divine grace, by which the pardon of sin and eternal salvation is appointed, based solely on the merit of Jesus Christ worth and value to God. Now many do not comprehend this simply because we do not understand the concept of what a gift in essence truly is. When men give gifts for the most part, grace is not the motive. Normally the recipients of gifts given by men usually contribute something to receiving the gift. Basically the gift is given because of either who recipient is (love one or relative) or because of something the recipient has done (act of kindness, loyal service etc.) in these cases that "gift" or "expression of kindness" that is conveyed is actually a "token of appreciation", thus it is not without cause and it not a free gift. Another example of men giving so-called "gifts"; is the un-noble practice of those who convey favors for the purpose of influencing the recipient in some manner.

As we refocus on Romans 11:6, we note the second principle word of this verse, namely the Greek word "ehr· gon", rendered works, which refers to anything that man may endeavor to produce in his flesh to gain acceptance with God. This word (biblically speaking) is generally used in conjunction with the works of the Law. So, salvation by and through grace is a free gift from God whereas the effort to obtain salvation by the works of the Law is futile due to the weakness of the flesh (Romans 8:3). Thus to mix grace and works together effectively cancels both.

Here we note the Greek expression "os pahr eh· tho· thee· ah tah pah rahp· to· mah· tah ee· mon" rendered "who was delivered up because of our offenses (transgression, sin)". Note it was "on account of our sin", that is, it was in order to expiate (perform an act of penance) (an act of self-mortification or devotion performed voluntarily to contrition, confession and acceptance of punishment thus absolution that leads to reconciliation (to amend, to atone completely) by His blood. Notice the second Greek phrase of this verse "keh ee· yehr· thee thee· ah theen theek· eh· o· seen ee· mon", rendered "and was raised up because of our being declared righteous". Note the Greek preposition "thee· ah", as it is expressed in the accusative case; here it denotes a cause or is indicative of the reason, so it is literally rendered "on account of" or "for the sake of". Thus it was on account of or for the sake of our justification, i.e., in order for our being justified ("theek· eh· o· seen") or declared legally righteous or perfectly acceptable to God.

Now this Greek word "theek· eh· o· seen", literally rendered "perfectly righteous"; strictly denotes an act of making right or just, hence justification, acquittal or absolute vindication. So justification is the righteous act that sets free and gives life (Romans 5:18). Now the basic question is; what is the righteous act or acts that set sinners free and give(s) life to those who are dead? Here we note the Greek verb "ee· yehr· thee", is literally translated "to wake up" or "to awaken" or "to arouse"; but its meaning intransitively is to "get up" or to "bring back" from death; and such is the resurrection of Jesus. Next, the question is who is able to carry through to completion the action of resurrection? Also, can any man qualify to the extent of defying the sting ("kehn· dron"-harmful force which is impelling) of death by fulfilling the obligations and requirements in answering to the curse and penalty of sin, which is death? Here the righteousness of God through Jesus Christ is more than the ample antidote to arrest the destructive effect of sin unto death or separation from God. Accordingly the exclusive work or righteous act of justification is limited to the virtuous accomplishments of our Lord Jesus Christ upon the cross of Calvary, as He died for or because of our sins (sin nature) and rose (resurrected) for or because of our justification (righteousness acceptable to God).

Now Grace Mystery truth is the prime directive to the Church, thus it should be explicitly obeyed. However when there is an opposing misapplication of the principles of the law and kingdom messages mixed in with the grace message; a conflict arises which induces an internal mental struggle. This usually robs God’s people of the basic appreciation for grace truth; as well as the readiness to obey it. So instead of enjoying spiritual buoyancy in the body of Christ, some believers often tend to drift into a state of spiritual indifference and coolness. This common occurrence is the most widespread and devastating result of canceling out grace by mingling law with it. This is why every informed child of God should take an uncompromising stand against injecting the Mosiac or Kingdom Law into this Church age. Now if there is a vivid understanding that election is by grace and that any input or contribution on the part of men would constitute work (even if one were the initiator of his won faith, then it stands to reason that this as well as any work of the law would mitigate grace. Thus Paul in this verse (Romans 11:6) makes the explicit statement that if there is present the works of the law the result is "kah· rees ook· eh· tee yee· neh· teh kah· rees", rendered, "grace is no more grace".

Now as we continue our discourse, we move to Romans 11:7, as we read first from the King James Version "What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it and the rest were blinded". Now from the Greek Text "What then? That which Israel seeks, it did not obtain this, but the election obtained it, and the rest were hardened’. Now in light of all which was expressed in the context of Romans 11:5,6, regarding grace and law; this verse (Romans 11:7) begins with the Greek phrase "tee oon", rendered "what then"? i.e. Israel did not obtain righteousness and salvation because they did not seek for it according to grace. That which Israel was seeking (like some are today) was their own righteousness through the Law (Romans 10:3). Here the Greek word "ehpee· zee· tee", translated "seeks", has the preposition "eh· pee", prefixed to the Greek verb "zee· teh· o" for the purpose of emphasis.

So Paul affirms that Israel, as a whole, did not obtain righteousness and salvation. Here we note that the Greek verb "ehpeh· tee· kheen", translated "obtain" means that Israel did not arrive at, reach, or attain unto salvation. In other words, as this is being written, the Apostle Paul observed that the vast majority of Israelites were estranged from God that is they weren’t having any genuine spiritual relationship with Him. Now they did have a religious godly zeal, but it was not according to knowledge; because they were ignorant of the righteousness of God in Christ (Romans 10:2-4).

But the fact that Israel as a whole did not obtain salvation; does not mean that the gospel, i.e. the word of God, had failed (Romans 9:6). Whether or not something fails or succeeds depends upon the extent to which it accomplishes the purpose for which it was given. If the purpose of the gospel was to save all Israelites according to the flesh, then it would be considered a colossal failure. But if, on the other hand, the purpose of the gospel is to save a God selected remnant out of Israel, then it has to be considered a tremendous success (Romans 9:6-8; 11:5). Note just as certainly as Israel as a whole did not obtain salvation by works, ‘the election (remnant) obtained it". Here we observe that the same Greek verb "ehpeh· tee· khehn", is used for "obtain" in both clauses of this verse. Stated another way, it would read Israel did not acquire it by law/works, but the election acquired it by grace. Here the Greek noun "ehk· loyee", rendered "election", refers to God’s "speaking out", "selecting" and "choosing" certain individuals for salvation, namely (1) Those whom God had chosen before the foundation (creation) of the world (Ephesians 1:4). (2) Those whom He foreknew and foreordained (Romans 8:29). (3) Those to whom He extends mercy and calls (Romans 9:23-24). Now all these will be made righteous through faith and saved. So the faith, which God implants in His elect, in conjunction with the Holy Spirit, irresistibly brings them into an eternal relationship with God in Christ.

This means that the gospel elicits a one hundred percent response from God’s elect, and therefore is perfectly successful in accomplishing its purpose. But what about the Israelites who are not among the elect? Here the ending clause of this verse (Romans 11:7) states ‘and the rest were hardened". Now the Greek phrase "ee lee· pee", translated ‘the rest’, refers to the remaining ones or those left were hardened. Note the Greek verb "ehpo· ro· thee· sahn", rendered "were hardened" is in the aorist tense and passive voice which means that at a given point of time in the past, they were made unimpressed, insensible and callused. Here the passive voice indicates that an outside source hardened them. Now the Alternatives would be either God or Satan. According to Genesis 3:4-5, Satan, in the form of a serpent, made Adam and Eve insensitive to God’s words.

Here he states that God "eh· tho· kehn" (gave) to them. Note the indicative mood and aorist tense of this verb illustrating that, at a point in the past, a spirit of "kah· tah· neex· eh· os", rendered "slumber, stupor or dullness" was committed unto them. This involved eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear. Notice the Lord through Moses spoke this statement to the children of Israel in Moab. Thus it is affirmed that this condition existed up until the day it was spoken.

Now as we proceed, we make special note of the two phrases respectively used in Romans 11:7 & 8, namely (literally from the Greek Text) "ee theh lee· pee ehpo· ro· thee· sahn", rendered "and the rest were hardened (blinded)" in verse seven and "eh· tho· kehn ahf· tees o theh· os pnehv· mah kah· tah· neek· eh· os", rendered "God gave to them a spirit of slumber (deep sleep) in verse eight. These two phrases speak to the activity or inactivity of God in determining who will see (spiritually) and who will hear (spiritually). Thus they detail who will be drawn (elected) unto Himself. First note again as previously stated the aorist tense, indicative mood and passive voice of the Greek verb "ehpo· ro· thee· sahn", in verse seven, rendered "was hardened that it occurred in a past period, namely simultaneously with the fall of Adam which was instigated by Satan himself in the Garden of Eden. Next note again from the root word "theeth· o· mee", the Greek verb "eh· tho· kehn", in verse eight rendered "gave" or that which is assigned or appointed by one who is in a superior position to one who is in a subordinate position. Here we observe that this word is also in the aorist tense and indicative mood, but it is in the active voice. This means that this action (God giving or assigning men a spirit of blindness and hardness also occurred in a past period and the question is when? The answer would have to be, again, at the fall of Adam when all of mankind was surrendered to the curse of separation from God, thus the inability to see or hear (spiritually). But if this is a fact (indicative mood), what is the connotation of the active voice? The answer is God’s active decision to allow (permit) Satan to influence Adam (and Eve); even though He (God) certainly had the power to thwart the efforts of Satan, His choice was to be inactive in the matter. Thus as we exegete the context of these verses (7 & 8), we acknowledge this stupor, lack of perception and inability of these Jews whom Paul speaks of, as well as all men who ‘have a spirit of slumber (blindness)", i.e. eyes that should not see and ears that should hear; as verified by the genitive case, which also would more accurately read "eyes and ears which are possessed by or belong to non seeing and non hearing.

These depraved conditions are the results of the Adamic Fall and the curse that is associated with it. So it is not so much that God actively elected some and then actively hardened others, but that He actively elected some out of all men who thought His inactivity had been previously hardened by the activity of Satan. If it weren’t for divine election all men would remain in a hardened, calloused and petrified position against God (Romans 1:24-32; 3:9-18). It is to god’s praise and glory that He has selectively called (summoned) and actively intervened to reverse the curse of eternal damnation to some (not all). He paid the price in sending His only begotten Son, Jesus, who tasted death for those who are delivered from the penalty of death and whose eyes and hears are opened so that they may see and hear and believe the gospel. But as Paul states, others remain in unbelief "until this very or present (see· meh· ron) day"

Now as we move through the following 21 verses of the eleventh chapter of Romans, we confront the questions of why Israel is currently estranged from God and what is God’s ultimate plan is for reconciling His elect unto Himself? In this regard, we turn to Romans 11:11, as we read from the King James Version, "I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy". Now from the Greek Text, "I say then, did they stumble in order that they might fall? May it never be; but by their fall salvation is come to the Gentiles unto the end to provoke them to jealously". Now in view of the comparatively small number of Jews being saved in this Church age according to the election of grace, and the large number who were hardened, here Paul speaks of Israel as having "eh· pee· teh· sahn", tendered ‘stumbled", i.e. of having failed to reach its goal or as having fallen. Now the Apostle James uses a reference to this same word to depict that the person who stumbles over one thing in the Mosiac Law is guilty of all the Law (James 2:10). Thus Israel’s insistence upon relying upon their performance of keeping the Mosiac Law for righteousness has assured their estrangement from God. Here Paul posed the question "mee eh· pee· teh· sahn ee· nah peh· so· seen?, rendered "did they stumble in order that (or for the purpose that) they might fall? In other words, did God permit or cause Israel to stumble just so He could see her "peh· so· seen", rendered "fall" or "fall down", or "fall short" of obtaining salvation by grace in Christ?

Now we must keep in mind that Paul posed this question only for the purpose of bringing out a very important point. Here the Apostle uses the Greek grammatical construction "mee yeh· nee· to", rendered "may it never be or let it never be or God forbid" as it is expressed in the King James Version. So Paul answer to this question is a resounding no! May this never be God’s purpose of let it never be the reason for Israel’s stumbling (II Peter 1:10).

So in contrast to the question, did Israel stumble that they might fall? Paul emphatically answers no, "but (ahl· lah) by their fall salvation is come to the Gentiles. Now as we scrutinize this statement, we pose an additional question and it is what was it about the fall of Israel that caused salvation to be offered to the Gentiles? To answer this question, we turn first to the eternal purpose and plan of God, when in eternity He predetermined the elect for all the ages to come. As we now understand, salvation was first offered to the Jews. They are God’s covenant people, who first received the call of God unto eternal blessings, even though they are all earthly.

Thus, by means of Israel’s fall, salvation reached out to the Gentiles; the very end of which was "to provoke them to jealousy". So we should keep in mind that Paul’s emphasis in this chapter of his theme on election, is on Israel, not on the Gentiles and the initial reason he turned to preaching to the Gentiles was in order to stir up jealousy in the midst if Israel, to motivate them to believe the good news about Jesus Christ. Here the Greek infinitive "pah· rah· zee· lo· seh", translated "to provoke to jealousy", conveys the idea in this verse of exciting, to emulate, to vie, to surpass or to make them envious to believe on Christ (Romans 10:19).

Now continuing this train of thought, we move to Romans 11:12, as we read first from the King James Version, "Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fullness? Now from the Greek Text, "But if their fall is the riches of the world, and their failure the riches of the Gentiles, how much more their fullness". Note the Greek noun "pah· rahp· to· mah’, translated "fall", is derived from the preposition "pah· rah", prefixed to the verb "peep· to" and literally means "to fall by the side of" or "to fall away", with respect to the truth, hence to trespass, or a transgression. Now accordingly the breadth of meaning of this noun, the fall of Israel may also be called the trespass or transgression of Israel. Since their fall involved their hardened adamant and obdurate mind and heart, which were manifest in unbelief, it follows that their unbelief could be equaled with their trespass and transgression.

Now, let us compare the two "ee" or "if" clauses: (1) If the fall of Israel is the riches of the world; (2) And if the failure of Israel is the riches of the Gentiles. Here it appears that these two clauses, even though worded differently for variety, express basically the same thing. Note the Greek words "pah· rahp· to· mah", rendered "fall" and "eet· tee· mah", rendered "failure", each portray their sinful condition, their trespassing and defaulting. Here the Greek word "Kos· mos", rendered "world" is apparently used to depict Gentiles. Remember, the divers meanings of "Kos· mos". Thus this means that if their trespassing and defaulting has resulted in the riches of the Gentiles, then "how much more their fullness". Note, the Greek noun "plee· ro· mah", rendered "fullness" refers to the completion and consummation of Israel i.e., God receiving them in full fellowship with Himself (Romans 11:15). We shall see in our further discourse that it speaks of the time when all Israel, i.e. all those (who are indeed Israel), shall be saved (Romans 11:26). This is a time, when God will pour out His mercy, not just on a remnant, but on all Israel (Romans 11:31).

Now we move to Romans 11:13, as we read first from the King James Version, "For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office": Now from the Greek Text, "But I speak to you who are Gentiles. Inasmuch then that I am the apostle of the Gentile, I glorify my ministry". Now in verses 11 and 12, Paul primarily directs his remarks to the Gentiles. Here the Greek phrase "ehph· o· son", translated "inasmuch", may also be rendered, "in as much as or "as long as" or "in so far as", thus he is speaking to them because he had been assigned to them as the Apostle of the Gentiles.

Here Paul states as he refers to himself, "mehn oon ee· mee eh· go eht· non ahpo· sto· los", rendered "I am the apostle (over) to the Gentiles, i.e. he is one "belonging to the Gentiles" as we observe the genitive possession of the Greek noun "ehth· non" (Gentiles). Remember, when Paul was saved through his experience on the road to Damascus, the Lord expressed the following decree to one named Ananias, "This is an elect vessel for me, to bear my name before the Gentiles and Kings and the children of Israel (Acts 9:15). Note in Romans 15:16, Paul refers to himself as "minister of Christ Jesus unto the Gentiles". In addition Paul writes in Galatians 2:7-9, that the Kingdom Apostles Peter, James and John also recognize that the Lord had made Paul the apostle of the Gentiles. Now several other passages affirm that Paul had the message for the Gentiles committed unto him (Ephesians 3:1; I Timothy 2:7; II Timothy 4:17). Notice with respect to his ministry unto the Gentiles, Paul states "thox· ah· zo", rendered "I glorify" or I magnify" or "I highly honor it". This denotes that he thought very highly of his ministry (not himself); which God had ordained to him, thus he invested it with dignity and he magnified it. It is very important for minister’s and teachers and particularly Pastors to realize that the ministry does not glorify or magnify the servant, or the one who God appoints to it, but those so called should seek to extol or exhort the ministry not themselves.

Now as we turn to Romans 11:14, we read from the King James Version, "If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them". Now from the Greek Text, "If somehow I may provoke to jealousy my flesh and save some out of them". Now there are those who preach and teach so-called corporate election and they (that is some of them) point to this verse supposedly to make their case that there is man-made participation in ones call to salvation. But the proper exegesis of this verse actually confirms and is consistent with the sovereignty of God’s choice in election. Here we again literally read from the Greek Text, "Ee pos pah· rah· zee· lo· so moo teen sahr· kah keh so· so tee· nahs ehx af· ton", rendered again, "If somehow I may provoke to jealousy my flesh and save some out of them". Note the Greek verb "pah· rah· zee· lo· so", as it is here rendered, "provoke to jealousy", as it conveys the idea of inciting rivalry or agitating to compete or to rouse one to emulate. Here we observe that in Paul’s election discourse, this word is used three times (Romans 10:19; 11:11 and this verse 11:14), as it refers to God’s saving of Gentiles to arouse Jews, those of Paul’s own "sahr· kah" (flesh) kindred, and of the seed of Abraham, to be saved. Now someone will say, well this proves the input of men, but let's look at the Greek grammar! Note that the verb "pah· rah· zee· lo· so", (jealousy) in each instance as used in the 10^th and 11^th chapters of Romans, is either subjunctive aorist or indicative future. Now as we previously explained, that which may be subjunctive, which means that it might happen or it is "iffy"; is tempered, when it is linked to the aorist tense, which denotes a past-completed action; it means it has already been determined. Also, when we have the indicative mood (which means that it is a fact) linked to the future tense, again the connotation is that it has already been determined. To corroborate this we note the grammatical construction of the Greek phrase "ee pos pah· rah zee lo· so", rendered "if somehow (someway) I may provoke to jealousy. Here we focus on the structure of the interrogative participle "ee" as it appears in conjunction with the adverb "pos" rendered "somehow" denoting "if" in some manner or "someway" Paul might provoke "some" (not all) out of them.

Thus, when we have all the facts and we connectively put everything into the contextual aspect of scrutiny, it is important to observe that Paul does not say that he desires, somehow, to rouse up all Israel to be saved, but only "tee· nahs ehx ahf· ton", rendered "some out of them". Here the indefinite pronoun "tee· nahs" (some) denotes certain ones or some ones. Paul uses this same pronoun in I Corinthians 9:22, wherein he states (from the Greek Text) "I have become all things to all men, in order that by all means I might "save some". Paul made it crystal cleat in this 11^th and the two preceding (9^th and 10^th) chapters of Romans, in his discourse of election; that God’s current purpose (in this dispensation of grace) is to save "some" i.e. "a remnant", out of Israel.

Now, with this knowledge in hand, we move to Romans 11:15, as we read first from the King James Version, "For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? Now from the Greek Text, "For if the casting away of them is reconciliation of the world, what shall the receiving of them be except life out from the dead? Now previously, the Apostle Paul spoke of Israel’s fall as being unto the end of salvation of the Gentiles and the riches of the world (Romans 11:11-12). Now he utilizes the same vernacular (casting away of Israel); unto the end of the reconciliation of the world. Here we have a duplication of the same ideas and thoughts expressed in different terminology. The point is that if the fall and "ahpo· vo· lee", rendered "casting away" or "throwing away" of Israel results in the salvation and reconciliation of the "kos· moo" (world) i.e. of the Gentiles, then "what shall the receiving of them (the elect Jews) be except life out from the dead?

Here Paul refers to the future age when God will take or receive unto Himself all Israel (who are really Israel). Note he refers to this as "ee pros· leem· psees", rendered "the receiving", "the taking" or "the acquiring" of Israel unto Himself as his special people (Titus 2:14). Thus Paul describes this receiving of Israel as nothing short of raising them out of spiritual death into spiritual life, or it may be interpreted as raising them out from physical death unto spiritual life, as both in reality is the case. Now before we leave this verse, note one little trivial matter for the sake of those who may look upon this verse (Romans 11:15) and wonder if the term "casting away of them" (Israel) does in fact conflict with Paul’s statement in Romans 11:1, wherein he states, "Has God cast away His people (Israel) and the response is may it never be (God forbid/King James Version).

Now we move to Romans 11:16 as we read first from the King James Version, "For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches". Now from the Greek Text, "And if the first fruit is holy, also is the lump; and if the root is holy, also the branches". Now in order to understand Paul’s usage of the terms "first fruit, lump, root, branches and wild olive tree" in this verse as well as the following eight verses (Romans 11:17-24); one must be fairly familiar with the workings of the economies under which Israel has and does even now abide. First, note, in the book of Leviticus chapter 23 (verses 10 & 11), we observe that the Israelites were required to offer to God the first-fruits of the earth in their raw state in a sheaf of newly reaped grain, signifying that God was to receive this offering first. Also, in Numbers 15:19-21, whatever they produced in a prepared state i.e. when they made cakes of dough, it was required that the first lump be an offering unto God as an heave offering. Next when we focus on the word "root", we notice that it is rendered "shawrash" in the Hebrew language and "ree· zah" in the Greek. It is a common figure in the Bible expressing either the origin or nourishment or stability of something. Sometimes it is symbolic, while other times it is metaphoric. In this context it is utilized to depict the root of a family or a people wherein its reference is to a progenitor (Abraham) whom God first established the relationship with. Thus Abraham or the relationship that God initiated with Abraham is the established basis for His covenant relationship with Israel. Then we focus on the word branch, as we note that there are several words in the Hebrew which, are so denoted (1.) Zemorah, which refers to a vine branch and (2.) Yonegeth, is used figuratively to refer to Israel, (3) kip· pa, references a palm –branch, (4) nester, literally means "a little shoot springing from the root and (5) tes· mach, which references the glorious branch of the Messianic Prophecy. In Isaiah 4:2, it states that "in that day shall the branch of the Lord be beautiful and glorious and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel"." In Isaiah 11:1 it states "And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots" (referencing the Messiah). In Jeremiah 23:5; 33, reference is made to "a righteous branch". In Zechariah 3:8, there is the quote "My servant the branch", and in Zechariah 6:12, reference is made to "the man whose name is "branch". Actually there are a number of other words, though less frequently used, which convey the meaning "branch".

Also as we examine the term "wild olive tree" we observe that the term "olive tree" is rendered "zay· yith" in the Hebrew language and "ahg· ree· eh· leh· os", in the Greek. Here we note that the olive has all through Biblical history been one of the most characteristic, valued and useful of trees in Palestine. In Judges 9:8-9, it is the first named king of the trees. Also, when the children of Israel crossed over into the land of Canaan, they acquired or were given olive trees of which they did not plant (Deuteronomy 6:11; Joshua 24:11).

Now as we further exegete Romans 11:16, here we have a picture of the "ah· pahr· khee", rendered "first fruit" or the first grain from a new crop which is kneaded into a lump of dough. Now the point here is that the characteristics of the first grain threshed; will carryover to the lump of dough made from it. Thus, if the first fruit is holy i.e., the election of grace, then it follows that the lump as a part of it will likewise be holy. Furthermore, as we follow the supervention "if the root is holy, also the branches; again the principle is that the qualities of the root will show in the branches. In other words, a holy root will produce holy branches. So from a holy remnant (those who are saved in this dispensation according to election) God will ultimately (in a future dispensation i.e., Kingdom) produce holy branches. Now we know that this is in conflict with most exegeses of this verse as many ascribe the designation first fruit to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But as we utilize the grammar, we note that the Greek noun "ah· pahr· khee", is in the nominate case feminine gender and singular number and as expressed in Romans 8:23; 16:5; as well as the context of the content currently before us, it speaks figuratively of persons or groups as the first of a set or category as the first converts to be dedicated to God, thus the first to be blessed from a redeemed people.

Now as we move to Romans 11:17, we read first from the King James Version, "And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree". Now from the Greek text, "But if some of the branches were broken off, and you being a wild olive tree were grafted in among them, you were made a joint-partaker of the riches of the root of the olive tree". Now as we approach this verse, we do so with a given perspective; namely, that Paul is looking at Israel as an olive tree (Romans 11:24). Here when he speaks of some of the branches being "ehx· ehk· lahs· thee· sahn", rendered "broken off" or removed through breaking off, he obviously is referring to the non-elect Israelites who were left in their hardened condition (Romans 11:7). This is verified by the usage of the Greek word "tee· nehs", rendered "some", as it speaks of those who were not vessels of mercy (Romans 9:23).

Now to understand Paul’s symbolic and metaphoric usage of the term "ahg· ree· eh· leh· os", rendered "wild olive", one must have some enlightenment of the process of planting or starting an olive yard. Here we observe that young wild olive trees or plants, which grew plentifully over many parts of the land or from the cuttings of other, yard, are planted and cultivated. When the young trees are 3 years old, they are grafted from a choice stock and after another 3 or 4 years, they may commence to bear fruit, but they take a decade or more before reaching full fruition. Much attention is however required. The soil around the trees must be frequently plowed and broken up; water must be conducted to the roots from the earliest rains, and the soils must be freely enriched with a kind of marl known as chuwwarah. Note, if the planting is neglected, the older trees soon send up great many shoots from the roots all around the parent stem. Now these must be pruned away, although should the parent stem decay, some of these may be capable of taking its place. But being however from the root below the original point of grafting, they are of the wild olive type with smaller stiffer leaves and prickly stems and need grafting before they are of use.

Thus Paul’s use of the term "wild olive" or "wild olive tree" depicts the Gentiles (Romans 11:24). Now as we have observed, when Israel, due to its hardness of heart, refused to believe the gospel of grace, Paul turns to the Gentiles (Acts 13:46; 18:6; 28:28). Note the original intent seems to have been to provoke to jealously Israel to the end that they might believe. And as a result of the gospel being preached to the Gentiles many believed and as wild olive tree branches they were "ehneh· kehn· drees· thees", rendered "grafted" or engrafted among the remaining branches on the olive tree, Israel. Note, this indicates that Israel, as the seed of Abraham (the principle of faith), is the first fruit, the root, and the foundation for the gospel of salvation in this age of grace (Romans 3:1-2,29-30; Galatians 4:4).

Thus, as Paul continues to address the individual Gentile in this verse (Romans 11:17), he states, "And you were made a joint-partaker of the riches of the root of the olive tree". Here the Greek-participle "seeg· kee· no· nos", translated "joint-partaker" denotes one who shares with, who is a co-partner, or a co-participant of the riches which emanate from the olive tree Israel. Note, that in the gospel of John 4:22, Jesus makes the statement that (quote from the Greek Text) "salvation is out of the Jews"

Now as we move to Romans 11:18, we read first from the King James Version, "Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee". Now from the Greek Text, "Do not be arrogant against the branches; and if you were arrogant, you do not support the root, but the root you". Now with the information of the previous verse in hand, Paul now gives some very important advise to the Gentile believer. Here the Greek verb, "kah· tah· kahft· kho", rendered "arrogant", basically means to boast or vaunt one’s self. Notice it appears that Paul is warning the gentile converts not to assume an arrogant attitude toward the national branches, i.e., elect Israel or those who are really Israel. Here we must keep in mind that Israel is the root which actually "vahs· tah· zees", rendered "supports" or "bears" or "holds us up" rather than vice versa. As Gentile believers, we need to recognize that God has turned to us in this age, at their (national Israel’s) expense, thus we are indirectly indebted to Israel’s temporary fall (because they are the true root and olive tree) for our salvation in Jesus Christ!

Next, from the Greek grammar, we observe the Greek noun "klah-thos", rendered "branch", which defines a young tender shoot, broken off for grafting. So as we form the picture we note that the Jewish Patriarchs are likened to a root as their posterity (remnant) are likened to branches. Here we follow the procession of the heritage beginning with the original Hebrew, Abraham, from which evolved the original Israelite, Jacob (Israel) from which evolved the original Jew and then Jadah, which culminated in the branches, the elect Jews (the remnant) of the grace dispensation, which are an intricate part of the body of Christ. Now it is into these holy branches that we, the elect Gentiles (the wild olive tree) are grafted in (I Corinthians12:13; Galatians 3:27-28; Ephesians 2:13-16; Colossians 3:11). So having declared that some of the branches were broken off of the olive tree, (Israel), and that believing Gentiles were grafted in, Paul predicts the reaction of some of the more haughty Gentiles. Now assuming an attitude of false superiority over the faithless Jews, certain ones will say that the reason some Jews were broken off was that (note the usage of the first person singular pronoun "eh· go", rendered "I"), I (a more important gentile) might be grafted in.

Now as we turn to Romans 11:20, we read first from the King James Version, "Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear". Now from the Greek Text, "Well, by unbelief they were broken off, but you by faith have stood. Be not high-minded; but fear". Now this verse opens with the Greek adverb "kah· los", translated "well", which conveys the thought that rightly, correctly and truly the faithless Jews were broken off. And the reason they were broken, however was not just to give the Gentiles room to be grafted in, but because of their unbelief. Here the Greek phrase "ah· pees· tee· ah", translated "by unbelief", indicates that by means of or in the sphere of unbelief they were extricated. There is no suggestion in this verse that the Gentiles (themselves) had anything to do with Jewish branches being broken off from God’s program, the Church. The fact of the matter is that those branches broken off were the non-elect, thus they never had a place in the body of Christ. Thus the actual reason for this breaking off was totally due to the failure of some Jews to believe on Jesus Christ as first their Messiah and more importantly (for those in this age) as head of the body.

As far as the Gentile converts are concerned, Paul says, "but by faith you stood". Here the Greek verb "ehs· tee· kahs", rendered "have stood" is in the perfect tense, which denotes that at a given point of time in the past they began standing and do in fact continue to stand. Note the Greek phrase "tee peest●ee", rendered "by faith" indicates that by means of or in the sphere of faith, they have their relationship with God in Christ (Romans 1; 5; 16:26; Galatians 3:8). Thus, in view of the fact that the Gentiles stand by faith, Paul states, "be not high minded, but fear". Now this statement must be understood in the light of God’s sovereign love and mercy. Our relationship to God does not depend upon our own determining and running, but upon God’s mercy, provision of His faith and the drawing of us to Himself though the Holy Spirit (John 6:44; Romans 9:16; Ephesians 2:).

Now that we have looked at the corporate seed of Abraham according to the flesh, the olive tree with its natural branches, we next consider the statement: "for if God did not spare the natural branches". Here the Greek word, "eh· phee· sah· to", translated "spare" infers that God did not remove deserved judgment from most of the natural branches of Abraham. But on the other hand, through sovereign election, through making some vessel of mercy, He spared, removed and delivered some from eternal judgment, by putting them in Christ, who has been judged for them (Romans 9:23). Thus, God did not spare His own Son, in order that He might spare His elect chosen before the foundation (creation) of the world (Romans 8:32; Ephesians 1:4).

Now we turn to Romans 11:22, as we read from the King James Version, "Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. We now read from the Greek Text, "Behold then the kindness and severity of God. Upon those who had fallen severity, but upon you, God’s kindness, if you continue in the kindness, since you also shall be cut off. Notice in this verse the Apostle exhorts us to "ee· theh", translated "behold", look at and consider the kindness and severity of God.

Here the Greek word "khrees· to· tee· tah", translated "kindness", basically speaks of God’s giving that which is useful, which involves His kindness, goodness and beneficence. Now the most useful thing God can do for any man is to bring him into a living relationship with Himself. Notice Paul’s emphasis is on God’s kindness as seen in His making certain individuals the recipient of His mercy, faith and salvation in Christ. He has abundantly poured out His kindness toward us by making us alive together with Christ, raising us up with Christ, and seating us in the Heavenlies with Him (Romans 9:23; Ephesians 2:5-8).

Now having observed the kindness of God, Paul also speaks of His (here we have the Greek noun) "ah· po· to· mee· ahn", rendered "severity". This word basically means, "to cut off" or "cut from" hence, it indicates that God is also severe, sharp and unsparing in His dealings with those who justly deserve judgment. Apart from God’s love and mercy, through which He calls out a people unto His name, all men would experience His severity and wrath against sin (John 3:36; Ephesians 5:6). On the one hand, severity is upon those who have fallen i.e., upon the Jews who have been cut off, left in their unbelief, and who reject Jesus Christ. On the other hand, the Gentiles whom Paul is addressing are the recipients of the kindness of God, i.e. they have been individually elected to occupy a place in the body of Christ.

Here he explains to the Gentiles that if God saw fit to cut them (as branches) out of a wild olive tree, and "pah· rah phee· seen", rendered "contrary" or beyond nature, to graft them into a good olive tree, then it would be very simple for Him to re-graft Jews into their own olive tree.

So the reason Paul is telling these Gentile about the future that God has in store for the Jews is to prevent them from becoming "phron· ee· mee", rendered "wise" or "conceited" or "intellectually proud" among themselves. In other words, Paul is trying to keep them humble-minded, and from thinking that they are better than the unbelieving Jews. In fact, in this context, Paul is addressing those who were thinking (as some do even today); that they had replaced the Jews as God’s chosen people. The thought was that they were assuming this intelligentsia attitude among themselves (ehn eahft· tees). Here Paul’s method of combating this unjustified conceit was to give them knowledge regarding God’s future plan for Israel. He literally tells them not to think that they are better than the unbelieving Jews, for God has a bright future for them. He is going to pour out His elective mercy upon them and graft them into a kingdom relationship with Himself (Acts 3:17-25). Note, Paul in this context, refers to the truth which he is sharing regarding Israel’s future, as he looks at it from the vantage point of this church age, as "to meets· tee· reason" (the Mystery). Since nothing is revealed regarding the present church age in the Old Testament, and what Paul is saying here pertains to Israel during this church age, it was naturally a mystery or secret until revealed here by Paul.

But at this present time, "po· ro· sees ahpo mehr· oos"; rendered "partial hardness" or "hardness from part" has come to Israel. Notice this hardness will continue to blind the majority of Israelites "ahkh· ree oo to plee· ro· mah ton ehth· non ees ehl· thee", rendered "until the fullness of the Gentiles may come in". Now as we see it, the fullness of the Gentiles corresponds with the consummation of this church age. Note the fact that this hardness is partial means that some Jews will be receiving mercy and faith to believe today. But as for the Jewish masses, Paul gives us no reason to think that they will be ready to believe the gospel of the grace of God in this dispensation.

Now we move to Romans 11:28, as we read first from the King James Version, "As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father’s sakes". Now from the Greek Text, "With respect to the gospel they are enemies on account of you but with respect to the election they are beloved on account of the fathers". Now in view of the grammatical construction of this verse, we note the obvious meaning of the particles "mehn" and "theh", which emphasizes contrasting thoughts in a sentence or phrase. Thus using this concept, an amplified translation of Romans 11:28 is, "on the other hand, with respect to the gospel they are enemies on account of you, but on the other hand, with respect to the election they are blessed on account of the fathers. Thus this verse indicates that God has a duel purpose, which He is accomplishing through Israel. At the present time they are unbelieving enemies of the gospel of God’s grace. The reason is "thee ee· mahs", rendered "on account of" or "because of" or "for the sake of" the Gentiles.

Now as we focus on God’s elective purpose in relation to Israel, Paul states that from the point of view of election, they are beloved on account of the fathers. Here the Greek word "ehk· lo· yeen", translated "election" is derived from the Greek preposition "ehk" prefixed to the verb "leh· go" and literally means to "speak out", "pick out" or the "act of choosing or selecting people". Paul’s point is that when it comes to God’s determining whom He will choose and select, the Jews had an edge. They are "ah· gah· pee· teh", rendered "beloved" on account of or because of the fathers, namely Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, etc. Note in the light of God’s present intertwined purpose to bless the Gentiles through the enmity of the majority of the Jews toward the gospel, there is not favoritism in election during the church age. However, when the Messianic Kingdom is established, every true descendant of Abraham will be saved. God will keep all His promises made unto the fathers, which involves esteeming their offspring as beloved ones, the recipients of ultimate mercy and election (Deuteronomy 7:8;9:15;10:15).

Now as we move to Romans 11:29, we read first from the King James Version, "For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance". We shall now read from the Greek Text, "for the gifts and the calling of God are not repentable". Note the thought in this verse is that what God has given to the fathers and the distinct calling which He had called them unto (Genesis 12:1-3). These are "ah· meh· tah· meh· lee· tah", rendered unrepentable i.e., God is not able to repent neither for what He has given nor for whom He has called. Here the Greek word "ah· meh· tah· meh· lee· tah", translated repentable is derived from "ah" and "meh· tah" and "meh· lo· meh", and means that God does not regret, rue or change His thoughts regarding the promises and oaths He has given to the fathers. God being God, who has a panoramic view of eternity past and future would have no reason to regret what He did at any point in time. Furthermore, the moral character of God would be violated if He did not fulfill His promises and oaths. Therefore, Paul could confidently affirm the descendants of the fathers were blessed ones, with a top election priority.

Now as we move to Romans 11:30 we read first from the King James Version, "For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief". Now from the Greek Text, "For even as you once were disobedient to God, but now you have been given mercy by the disobedience of these". Now as Paul continues to address Gentile believers, he reminds us that "po· teh", rendered "once" i.e., at one time, in the past, we were disobedient to God. Here the Greek word "eepee· thee· sah· teh", rendered "disobedient" is frequently used as a synonym of the Greek verb rendered "not to believe" or "to ●these words, there is an interchange between unbelief (ah●peest●ee· o) and disobedience (ah●peeth●ee· ah). Likewise the Jews who were in a state of unbelief were also in a state of disobedience (Romans 11:20,30). Unbelief in itself is both an act of disobedience and it leads to disobedience.

So disobedience was once the lot of the Gentiles. But Paul states, "Now you have been given mercy (ee· leh· ee· thee· teh) (notice this Greek word) is in the passive voice and aorist tense. This means that at a given point in past God gave and extended to them mercy. He made them vessels of mercy, those who had believed, individually calling them out of (ehk) the Jews and Gentiles (Romans 9:23-24). Here the concepts of mercy and election are inextricably tied together. Now because some (not all) sinners are part of God’s elect, they receive mercy with all it entails. As a result they exercise faith in Christ and as such Paul speaks of them as the elect. Thus Paul refers to those who have believed as the elect.

Now as we continue, we move to Romans 11:31, reading first from the King James Version, "Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy". Now from the Greek Text, "As also these now have been disobeying for your mercy, in order that they themselves might now be given mercy". Now there seems to be a difference of opinion (among some Greek scholars) as to the best way to translate this verse. However, we believe that the strict constructionist should always follow the grammatical construction, thus flowing with the context in order for anything to make proper sense. Note in this verse (Romans 11:31) the statement "as also these now have been disobedient", is written to believing Gentiles pertaining to unbelieving Jews. Here the Greek verb "ee· pee· thee· sah", translated "have been disobedient", is in the aorist tense, which means that in the present dispensation of grace they had manifested their disobedience to the gospel.

Again the question, "Why were these Jews disobedient? Here Paul explains it was to "ee· meh teh· ro ehl· eh", rendered "for your mercy". Note that the case used here is as a dative, which means that the Jews’ disobedience was for or with reference to the Gentiles being given mercy. So Jewish disobedience directs divine mercy toward Gentiles in this age.

And now we move to Romans 11:32, as we read from the King James Version, "For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. Now we shall read from the Greek Text, "For God has shut up all unto disobedience that he might extend mercy to all". Here the Greek word "seen· ehk· lee· seen", translated "shut up" conveys the thought that He shut up together or locked up together all men, both the Jews and Gentiles, in the sphere of disobedience. Now this is an interaction of the truth set forth in the third chapter, verse 9, wherein Paul states, "For we before proved that both Jew and Greeks are all under sin".

Now the reason God locked all men under disobedience was "ee· nah", rendered "in order that", he might have mercy on all. From the foregoing context we know that God will have mercy on all the Jews who are Abraham’s descendants after the close of this church age (Romans 11:25-26). Here Paul speaks about a glorious future for the Jews, but after the fullness of the Gentiles has arrived. We have no reason to expect a great outpouring of mercy upon them (the Gentiles) as some teach. Now there is no question about it, all men are shut up together unto disobedience and hence are potential candidates for receiving mercy. But there is no basis for saying that Gentiles are the recipients of God’s mercy until after we see the results of that mercy, namely their salvation.

Here we observe how Paul is struck with the "vah· thos" (depth), i.e., how deep and how immeasurable are the riches which belong to the wisdom (so· phee· ahs") and knowledge of God. Note the Greek word "so· phee· ahs", translated "wisdom" is used some 16 times in the New Testament pertaining to truth revealed for the body of Christ. Here Paul states that this wisdom and knowledge (gnos· eh· os) belongs to God, have their origin in God and are a part of the Mystery Truth (Romans 11:25), which is truth for the Church.

Continuing in the same vein, Paul states, (Greek Text), "How unsearchable are the judgments of God". Note the Greek word "ah· neh· xeh· rahv· o· tan", translated "unsearchable" is derived from three Greek words and literally speaks of that which cannot be searched out or cannot be interpreted or cannot be scrutinized. Now this is the only time this word is used in the New Testament. As far as all that was written is concerned, what Paul has said about God’s "tah kree· mah· tah", rendered "judgments", "determinations" and "manner" of executing the salvation of Jews and Gentiles, can not be searched out in the Old Testament nor otherwise. Since this truth was a secret in the mind of God prior to the Apostle Paul, it is now called Mystery Truth, even though it is now revealed. In other words, truth, which God formerly kept a secret and mystery, is now named by its former description. So that which was previously described, as that which was a mystery, is now known as the Mystery.

Also, Paul states that it is impossible to follow the tracks of God’s ways. Here the Greek word, "ah· neh· xeekh· nee· ahs· tee", translated "cannot be tracked out", connotes that the tracks of His (God’s) ways cannot be followed and cannot be tracked. Now the only other time this word is used in the New Testament is in Ephesians 3:8, where Paul declares that it was given unto him "to preach to the Gentiles the untrackable riches of Christ". The immediate context in this third chapter of Ephesians makes it crystal clear. Paul is declaring that the wisdom and knowledge of the Mystery cannot be tracked or traced out in neither the Old Testament nor any other body of literature. In this 33^rd verse Paul is emphasizing God’s sovereign purpose in soteriology, truth that had not been revealed in the Old Testament namely, that Israel has been partially hardened until the fullness of the Gentiles may come in (Galatians 1:12; II Timothy 1:9-13).

Now as the Apostle Paul closes out the final verse of Roman’s chapter 11 and thus his discourse on the subject election, note his reference to God being the cause and reason from which all things emanates. Here we read Romans 11:36, first from the King James Version, "For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen". Now from the Greek Text, "Because out of him and through him and unto him are all things". This verse begins with the Greek conjunction "o-tee", which according to the context is more accurately translated "because". It may also be rendered, "for that", expressing why or the reason he stated what he did in the preceding verse.

First note the phrase "eh ahf· too", rendered "out of him", is in the ablative case, which means that God is the source of all things, the one from whom everything comes, the origin of all. According to Colossians 1:16, God the Father in conjunction with God the Son, "created all things in the heavens and upon the earth" (John 1:3; Ephesians 3:9; Revelations 4:11). Next we note that the Greek phrase "thee ahf· too", rendered "through Him", declares that all things were brought into existence through the agency of God. Colossians 1:16, likewise, speaks of all things being created "thee· ah" (through) Jesus Christ. These passages indicate that both the Father and Son were active agents in the creations of all things (Hebrews 1:2:2:10).

Lastly, the Greek phrase "ees ahfton", rendered "unto him", denotes that the end or object of all things that have been created is God Himself. Again, we observe that God the Son shares with God the Father as the end and object of creation according to Colossians 1:16 as well as Hebrews 2:10. All of creation, as originally created, had as it purpose the glorification of God the Father and (or even) the Son!