Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 9:9
For this [is] the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son.
9. of promise ] Lit. of the promise; the promise just referred to in the illustrative case. The “children of God” among Abraham’s bodily descendants were to be limited within the descendants by Sarah; i.e. within Isaac’s line.
At this time ] i.e. of the next year. (Gen 18:10.) The quotation is nearly literally after the Hebrew, but varies (merely verbally) from the LXX.
Sara ] The name of limitation. Hagar’s son was also “Abraham’s seed;” but not in the intention of the Promise.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
For this is the word of promise – This is the promise made to Abraham. The design of the apostle, in introducing this, is doubtless to show to whom the promise appertained; and by specifying this, he shows that it had not reference to Ishmael, but to Isaac.
At this time – Greek, According to this time; see Gen 18:10, Gen 18:14. Probably it means at the exact time promised; I will fulfil the prediction at the very time; compare 2Ki 4:16.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 9. For this is the word of promise, c.] That is, this is evidently implied in the promise recorded Ge 18:10: At this time I will come, saith God, and exert my Divine power, and Sarah, though fourscore and ten years old, shall have a son which shows that it is the sovereign will and act of God alone, which singles out and constitutes the peculiar seed that was to inherit the promise made to Abraham.
It should be considered that the apostle, in this and the following quotations, does not give us the whole of the text which he intends should be taken into his argument, but only a hint or reference to the passages to which they belong; directing us to recollect or peruse the whole passage, and there view and judge of the argument.
That he is so to be understood appears from the conclusion he draws, Ro 9:16: So then, it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy. In his arguments, Ro 9:7; Ro 9:8, c., he says not one word of Abraham’s willing Ishmael to be the seed in whom the promise might be fulfilled nor of Isaac’s willing Esau; nor of Moses’ willing and interceding that the Israelites might be spared; nor of Esau’s running for venison; but by introducing these particulars into his conclusion, he gives us to understand that his quotations are to be taken in connection with the whole story, of which they are a part; and without this the apostle’s meaning cannot be apprehended.
The same may be said of his conclusion, Ro 9:18: Whom he will he hardeneth: hardeneth is not in his argument, but it is in the conclusion. Therefore hardening is understood in the argument, and he evidently refers to the case of Pharaoh. The generality of the Jews were well acquainted with the Scripture, and a hint was sufficient to revive the memory of a whole passage. –Taylor, p. 330.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The birth of Isaac was a thing extraordinary; for which, neither Abraham nor Sarah had any ground to hope, but only that promise made, Gen 18:10, in these words: At this time, or according to this time, i.e. the time of bearing children after conception,
will I come, and Sarah shall have a son; i.e. I will manifest my power in fulfilling my promise of giving thee a son. By which it is clear, that the birth of Isaac was an effect of Gods promise, and nothing else. So that they to whom the promise belong, (whosoever they be), they are the seed of Abraham, and, upon the obedience of faith, shall be accepted for the children of God. The apostle Peter tells women, (whether Jews or Gentiles, it matters not), that by well-doing they become the daughters of Sarah.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
For this is the word of promise,…. The following passage is the Scripture, which contains the promise concerning the birth of Isaac; which was the produce, not of nature, but of divine grace and power; and was typical of the regeneration of God’s elect, who “as Isaac was, are the children of promise”, Ga 4:28, for as Ishmael was a type of them that are born after the flesh, and are carnal men, so Isaac was a type of those, who are born after the Spirit, and are spiritual men: the promise is,
at this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son; the passage referred to is in Ge 18:10; which there stands thus, “I will certainly return unto thee, according to the time of life, and lo, Sarah thy wife shall have a son”: some difference there is between the words as cited by the apostle, and as they stand in the original text; the word “lo”, is omitted by the apostle, nor was there any necessity to repeat it, since it was used only to excite Abraham’s faith, attention, and wonder; also the phrase “thy wife”, is neglected, the reason is, because the words in Genesis are an address to Abraham, here the substance of the promise to him is produced; besides it was not only well known in the apostle’s time, that Sarah was the wife of Abraham, but that as such she brought forth Isaac, wherefore it was not so very necessary it should be mentioned here; add to this, that it is not repeated in Ge 18:14, which will justify our apostle in the omission of it: but the greater seeming difference is, that what in Genesis is rendered, “according to the time of life”, is by the apostle, “at this time”: some think, that there may be an emendation of the present original text, and suppose a various reading, and that the apostle, instead of , “life”, read , “this”, but there is no occasion for such a supposition, or to make this amendment: for the phrase “the time of life”, signifies the present time, the “nunc stans”; so R. Levi ben Gerson f, understands this phrase, “according to the time of life”, , “according to this time which is now standing and abiding” and adds, rightly is this said, because neither time past nor to come are to be found, only the present time, the “nunc stans” and afterwards more than once explains it, of this present time, the next year: and so both R. Solomon Jarchi, and R. Aben Ezra g, expound it, , “according to this time”, the year following; that is, exactly according to this present time next year, or this time twelve month; besides, in Ge 17:21 it is said, “at this set time”, and in Ge 18:14, “at the appointed time”; all which support the apostle in his version.
f Perush in Gen. fol. 26. 4. & 27. 2, 3. Vid. in 2 Reg. iv. 16. g In Gen. xviii. 10.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
A word of promise ( ). Literally, “this word is one of promise.” Paul combines Gen 18:10; Gen 18:14 from the LXX.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
This is the word of promise. The A. V. obscures the true sense. There is no article, and the emphasis is on promise. “I say ‘a word of promise, ‘ for a word of promise is this which follows.” Or, as Morison, “this word is one of promise.”
At this time [ ] . Rev., according to this season. The reference is to Gen 18:14, where the Hebrew is when the season is renewed or revives; i e., next year at this time. The season is represented as reviving periodically.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “For this is the Word of promise,” (epangellias gar ho logos houtos) “For this is the (particular) Word of promise;” the essence of God’s promise to Abraham, Gen 12:1-3 and more definitely to Sara and Abraham, Gen 18:10; Gen 18:14.
2) “At this time I will come,” (kata ton kairon touton eleusomai) “According to this (season), particular time, I will come;” as God came to rescue Sara from shame and bring assurance to Abraham in a time of old age, so God sent forth his Son “when the fulness of the time” had come, to keep his promise thru the proper seed, Gal 4:4-5. God still comes to draw men by his spirit to become his children-He draws by His spirit, men choose by their volition or will, Joh 6:37; Joh 6:40; Joh 16:8-11; Joh 1:11-12.
3) “And Sarah shall have a son,” (kai estai te Sarra huios) “and Sarah will have a son;” This was not a may, might, or a mere possibility, but an incontrovertible and incontestable covenant pledge or promise that was fulfilled and is fulfilled and found in Christ for every responsible believer, Joh 3:16. This son of Sara was provided by supernatural intervention (from above-Gk-anothen) just as true children of God are born today, from above, from a spiritual begetting, one above natural begettal and inheritance, see, Joh 3:3-7; Joh 6:63, 1Jn 5:1.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
9. For the word of promise is this, etc. He adds another divine testimony; and we see, by the application made of it, with what care and skill he explains Scripture. When he says, the Lord said that he would come, and that a son would be born to Abraham of Sarah, he intimated that his blessing was not yet conferred, but that it was as yet suspended. (291) But Ishmael was already born when this was said: then God’s blessing had no regard to Ishmael. We may also observe, by the way, the great caution with which he proceeds here, lest he should exasperate the Jews. The cause being passed over, he first simply states the fact; he will hereafter open the fountain.
(291) Gen 18:10. The quotation is not from the Septuagint, but is much nearer a literal version of the Hebrew: the only material difference is in the words, “at this time,” instead of “according to the time of life.” The words in different forms occur four times, — Gen 17:21; Gen 18:10; Gen 21:2; we meet with the same words in 2Kg 4:16. It appears that the Apostle here took this expression, “at this time,” from Gen 17:21, while he mainly followed the text in Gen 18:10. The meaning of the phrase, “according to the time of life,” as given in Genesis and in Kings, evidently is the time of child-bearing, what passes between conception and the birth. This was repeatedly mentioned in order to show that the usual course of nature would be followed, though the conception would be miraculous; the child to be born was to be nourished the usual time in the womb, — “according to the time of producing life,” or of child-bearing.
The exposition of [ Gesenius ] , adopted by [ Tholuck ] and [ Stuart ] , “when the time shall be renewed,” does not comport with the passage, as it introduces a tautology. [ Hammond ] says, that the Hebrews interpret the expression in Kings as meaning the time between the conception and the birth. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL NOTES
Rom. 9:13. As it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hatedThere is no necessity to soften the hated into loved less; the words in Malachi proceed on the fullest meaning of (Wordsworth). The words refer to temporal conditions (Alford).
Rom. 9:14. . Formula used in the Jewish schools; employed by Paul as dealing with Jews.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Rom. 9:9-16
St. Pauls deep things.Augustine asks, How can man understand God, since he does not yet understand his own mind, with which he endeavours to understand Him? This question comes home to the candid and reflective nature. If we were properly penetrated with the sense of our own littleness, we should not presume to compass the infinite greatness. Canst thou by searching find out God? Canst thou find out the Almighty to perfection? Zophars questions have only one answer. Neither science nor philosophy nor theological criticism; can find out the Almighty to perfection. A part of the divine ways alone is known. Paul has given a glimpse of the unknown parts, and we cannot pierce the darkness which revelation has not cleared. It is our wisdom to accept the known and wait patiently for the all-revealing light of that realm where there are no clouds. In a docile and praying spirit let us study St. Pauls mysterious utterances. In this passage we have:
I. The word of promise.In this promise we find contained a divine visit and a divine gift. God has not left the world. He is ever present, and by special interventions He gives proof of that presence. He breaks in upon the laws of nature by the intervention of higher laws, and thus declares that all law emanates from His eternal mind. He is always about us, but there may be special seasons when our vision is cleared, and then He may be said to come. He is ever giving sons, but He gave to Joseph and Mary a special Son, that the world might more fully rejoice in the love and nearness of the Father. Gods special gifts are the outcome of His general gifts. The miraculous gives proof of divine agency at work in the ordinary. Sons born to the young Sarahs of time are no less Gods gifts than the sons born to a Sarah when natures powers were in decay. Let us believe in Gods presence and in Gods promise.
II. A word of mystery.A word, many words, of mystery. The elder shall serve the younger. Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Divine declarations coincident with historical records, with the facts of experience. The elder shall serve the younger. The older nation serves the younger. And so with individuals. Joseph commands the service of his brethren. The enterprising youth of the family goes from the homestead, and the elder members stay at home and become his subordinates. The elders of time serve the younger ones who have just risen up to appreciate the greatness of the service. Here is the mystery. Why should some elder ones be doomed to service? Why should some younger ones command service? Why should Jacob be loved and poor Esau hated? Does God put a premium on the cunning plotters who can overreach their fellows? Does infinite Wisdom love the Jacobs who know how to feather their nests, and hate the Esaus whose prudence and worldly caution are overmastered by passion? This cannot be. We hope for a world where the needful light will be thrown on divine proceedings. Even Paul may not have fathomed the depth of meaning hidden in the words, Jacob have I loved; Esau have I hated.
III. A word of sovereignty.Gods mercy does not move along the channels cut by human limitations. His mercy is guided by His sovereignty. His compassion is under the control of His will; and surely that will is both compassionate, just, and intelligent. Whatever happens, whatever doctrinal views may be broached, whatever seeming partiality may appear in divine allotments, our souls must hold on to this truth, that there is no unrighteousness with God, no injustice with Him who is the perfectly just.
IV. A word of mercy.All is of God that showeth mercy. Shining above all other words is the sweet word mercy; crowning and giving effect to all other deeds is the glorious deed of mercy. Mercy is the darling attribute. It encircles the eternal throne; it spans the earth like a rainbow of many attractive colours. Shrinking from the awful attribute of divine sovereignty, we find refuge in the attribute of mercy as revealed in the method of our salvation by Jesus Christ.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Rom. 9:9-16
Divine sovereignty and freewill.I must pause again here to remind the student that I purposely do not enter on the disquisitions so abundant in some commentaries on this part of Scripture by which it is endeavoured to reconcile the sovereign election of God with our freewill. We shall find that freewill asserted strongly enough for all edifying purposes by this apostle when the time comes. At present he is employed wholly in asserting the divine sovereignty, the glorious vision of which it ill becomes us to distract by continual downward looks on this earth. I must also protest against all endeavours to make it appear that no inference lies from this passage as to the salvation of individuals. It is most true that the immediate subject is the national rejection of the Jews; but we must consent to hold our reason in abeyance, if we do not recognise the inference that the sovereign power and free election here proved to belong to God extend to every exercise of His mercywhether temporal or spiritual, whether in providence or in grace, whether national or individual. It is in parts of Scripture like this that we must be especially careful not to fall short of what is written, not to allow of any compromise of the plain and awful words of Gods Spirit, for the sake of a caution which He Himself does not teach us.Alford.
The privileges of Jews and Christians.It is generally thought an office of love to conceal from persons any truths the recital of which will afford them pain; but true love will rather stimulate us to declare such truths as are necessary to be known, though it will incline us to declare them with the greatest tenderness and circumspection. An admirable pattern presents itself before us in the text. The apostle was about to enter on a subject most offensive to the Jews, but a subject that ought in no wise to be concealed from themnamely, the determination of God to cast off their nation, and to engraft the Gentiles on their stock. But as it would be thought that he was actuated only by a spirit of revenge, he declares to them in the most solemn manner, and appeals to God for the truth of it, that, so far from wishing their hurt, he was affected with the deepest sorrow on their account, and that there was nothing he would not do or suffer if it might but be the means of saving them from the impending ruin. His enumeration of the privileges which they abused and his pathetic lamentation over them may well lead us to consider:
I. The exalted privileges enjoyed by true Israelites.The Jews as a nation were favoured beyond all the nations upon earth. But their privileges were only a shadow of those enjoyed by true Israelites. But by how much the more exalted our condition under the gospel is, by so much the more may we see
II. The disposition we should manifest towards those who despise these privileges.The expressions used by the apostle admit of different interpretations. But in whatever sense they be taken, they certainly import that we should be deeply concerned about their state, and we should account nothing too much to do or suffer for their salvation. Inference: How far are they from a Christian spirit who not only use no means for the salvation of others, but oppose and thwart them that do! How earnest should every Christian be in seeking his own salvation!Simeon.
God does not owe favours.He gives not as a thing due, but as a fruit of His love, which does not imply that therein He acts arbitrarily. Such a supposition is excluded precisely because the giver in question is God, who is wisdom itself, and who thinks nothing good except what is good. The principle here laid down included Gods right to call the Gentiles to salvation when He should be pleased to grant them this favour. The words, of him that willeth, of him that runneth, have often been strangely understood. There have been found in them allusions to the wish of Isaac to make Esau the heir of the promise, and to Esaus running to bring the venison necessary for the feast of benediction. But Isaac and Esau are no longer in question, and we must remain by the example of Moses. It was neither the wish expressed in his prayer nor the faithful care which he had taken of Israel in the wilderness which could merit the favour he asked; and as no man will ever surpass him in respect either of pious willing or holy working, it follows that the rule applied to him is universal. So it will always be. Israel, in particular, should understand thereby that it is neither their fixed theocratic necessities nor the multitude of their ceremonial or moral works which can convert salvation into a debt contracted toward them by God, and take away from Him the right of rejecting them if He comes to think it good to do so for reasons which He alone appreciates. But if the words of God to Moses prove that God does not owe His favours to any one whomsoever, must it also be held that He is free to reject whom He will? Yes. Scripture ascribes to Him even this right. Such is the truth following from another saying of God in reference to the adversary of Moses, Pharaoh.Godet.
Providence and freewill.Now these two facts, that there is a will in man, that the universe shows marks of providence and design, are so evident when taken singly, the one from the immediate witness of our own consciousness, and the other as an inference hardly avoidable from the facts which science and history bring before us, that we ought to suspect any attempt to obliterate one or the other by bringing them into collision. I speak not now of pious efforts to make them explicable together, to enable us, if I may say so, to put our finger on the. point of contact between mans will and the divine power that acts upon it: such phrases as irresistible grace, unconditional decree, co-operating grace, will at once serve to recall them and to suggest their difficulties. But any one who watches at all the drift of the current of modern thought will see another set of influences at work. Two thoughts occur which in leaving this subject ought not to be passed over. First, our Church, in her article on predestination, draws a distinction between the effect of the study of it on the good and on the bad, the sincere believer and the unbeliever. To the godly it is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable consolation; whilst it leads the carnal to wretchedness of unclean living. Our own hearts tell us that the distinction is just. There cannot be a more perilous symptom of the moral state than where men profess to abandon the struggle with their passions because they think they have no choice but to succumb, thus clasping to their arms that loathsome body of death which they were intended to escape from through divine aid. On the other hand, it does not detract from the sweetness of self-approval to ascribe to God alone all the good that we find within us. The Lord hardened Pharaohs heartthat is, He withdrew from it His grace, without which it must needs be hardened, because the lost king did not wish to retain it, and had hardened himself in stubborn resolution against the Lord. Sin, then, is sometimes punished with sin. If any one begins to neglect prayer, he finds it day by day easier to do so without compunction. If any one is pursuing a course of sensual vice, he feels that the protecting sense of shame grows daily weaker in him and the craving lust more imperious. And at a certain stage in his dreary, downward course the Lord hardens his heart. God is not responsible for his sin; but when he has repelled the voice of conscience and the warning of his Bible and the entreaties of friends, then grace is withdrawn from him, and sin puts on a judicial character, and it is at once sin and punishment. Oh, beware of that cumulative power of sin! Human actions admit of three degrees: where the choice is perfectly free, as it is in light and indifferent matters; where the choice is fettered with motives hardly resistible; and an intermediate condition, where motives exist to sway but not to coerce our choice. Every sin we commit adds weight to the motives that endanger our freedom. See the folly of those who allow themselves to continue in sin, believing that hereafter, as their passions cool, they will forsake their evil ways. It is a fearful danger to immerse the moral nature in uncleanness, meaning to escape from it at a future time. Every day makes repentance more difficult; and who can tell when the face of God may be wholly averted from you, so that He will harden your heart? And even if you escape this, the bitter recollection of many a past sin will cleave to you even after your repentance.Archbishop Thomson.
ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 9
Rom. 9:13. The mystery of Gods love.A gentleman who thought Christianity was merely a heap of puzzling problems said to an old minister, That is a very strange verse in the ninth chapter of the Epistle to the RomansJacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Very strange, replied the minister; but what is it, sir, that you see most strange about it? Oh, that part, of course, said the gentleman patronisingly and with an air of surprise, Esau have I hated is certainly very strange. Well, sir, said the old minister; how wonderfully we are made, and how differently constituted! The strangest part of all to me is that He could ever have loved Jacob. There is no mystery so glorious as the mystery of Gods love.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
(9) This is the word of promise.Rather, this saying is of promise. The children of promise, I say, for the saying, At this time will I come, &c., is a matter of promise; it implied a divine and miraculous intervention, and did not come in the ordinary course of nature.
At this timei.e., at the corresponding time of the next year.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Rom 9:9 . Proof of the foregoing . “The children of promise , I say, for a word of promise is that which follows: about this time, etc.” Hence, therefore, we see that not the bodily descent, but the divine promise , constitutes the relation of belonging to Abraham’s fatherhood. The quotation is freely put together from Gen 18:10 ; Gen 18:14 , after the LXX.
To , at this time (namely, of the next year), corresponds in the original (comp. 2Ki 4:16-17 ; Gen 17:21 ), which is to be explained: as the time revives, that is, when the time (which is now a thing of the past and dead) returns to life; not with Fritzsche: in the present time (of the next year), which suits the words of the LXX., where, by way of explanation, the classical , over the year, is added, but not the Hebrew. See Gesenius, Thes. I. p. 470; Tuch and Knobel on Gen 18:10 . On the whole promise, comp. Hom. Od. xi. 248 f., 295.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.
Ver. 9. At this time ] See Trapp on “ Gen 18:10 “
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
9. ] For this word was (one) of promise (not, ‘ For this was the word of promise ,’ i.e. . . The stress is on : the children of promise are reckoned for seed: for this word, in fulfilment of which Isaac was born, was a word of promise ), According to this time ( , ‘when the time (shall be) reviviscent,’ as De W., Thol., al.: i.e. next year at this time. The citation is a free one; the LXX has , . . The change into is probably made for the sake of emphasis the promise was to Sarah ) I will come, and Sarah shall have a son.
son. Greek. huios. App-108. See Gen 18:14.
9.] For this word was (one) of promise (not, For this was the word of promise, i.e. . . The stress is on : the children of promise are reckoned for seed: for this word, in fulfilment of which Isaac was born, was a word of promise), According to this time ( , when the time (shall be) reviviscent,-as De W., Thol., al.:-i.e. next year at this time. The citation is a free one; the LXX has , . . The change into is probably made for the sake of emphasis-the promise was to Sarah) I will come, and Sarah shall have a son.
Rom 9:9. , of promise) It corresponds to the expression, of the promise, Rom 9:8.-, this) viz., is.- , ) At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son. LXX., Gen 18:10 : , ; comp. Gen 17:21.
Rom 9:9
Rom 9:9
For this is a word of promise, According to this season will I come, and Sarah shall have a son.-The promise as made to Abraham was made to the son of Sarah, born at the time appointed. [In verse 6 the unbelieving Israelites are supposed to claim the blessings of the covenant, on the ground that these blessings were promised to Abrahams children, and to say if they are excluded from the kingdom of God, the word of God will fall to the ground. This claim rests on the assumption that all Abrahams descendants have a right to the covenant; but Paul proves that this right was not admitted by God in the case of Abrahams children. Therefore, the claim made based upon it by the Israelites is invalid. Nay, more, the claim of the unbelieving Israelites is precisely the same as that of Ishmael; but believers have a position similar to that of Isaac. The gospel being true, God is only acting in reference to Israels son as he acted of old in reference to the sons of Abraham; for the gospel announces that only believers are heirs of the promise, for they that are of faith, the same are sons of Abraham (Gal 3:7); and if ye are Christ’s, then are ye Abrahams seed, heirs according to promise (Gal 3:29).]
At this time: Gen 17:21, Gen 18:10, Gen 18:14, Gen 21:2
Sarah: Heb 11:11, Heb 11:12, Heb 11:17
Reciprocal: Gen 17:7 – And I Gen 17:16 – And I Act 7:8 – and Isaac Gal 4:28 – General
9:9
Romans 9:9. At this time. God worked a miracle to enable Sarah to conceive, then let nature go through the usual time of expectancy for the forming of the child.
Rom 9:9. For of promise is this word. We restore the emphatic order of the original. That the children of the promise are reckoned as seed is proven, for the word, in accordance with which the birth of Isaac took place, this passage now cited, is a word of promise. (Not was, for the reference is to an existent passage of Scripture.)
At this season, or, more literally, according to this season. The passage is freely quoted from the LXX. (Gen 18:10; Gen 18:14). The Hebrew phrase rendered: at this season, means when the time (shall be) reviving, i.e., at this season of the next year: so the LXX. substantially. According to here suggests nothing more than at.
And Sarah shall have a son. From Gen 18:14, substituted for a similar clause in Rom 9:10, because of the emphasis it gives (in the original) to the word Sarah, who is the principal person (comp. Gal 4:22, etc.).
Rom 9:9-13. For this is the word of promise To show that Isaac was a son of promise, (and so a meet type of those that should be begotten of God by the promise of the gospel through faith,) he cites the words of the promise in substance, by which Isaac was begotten and born. See Gen 17:20; Gen 18:10; in which places two circumstances are mentioned, the one of Gods coming to fulfil his promise, in causing Sarah to have a son; the other of the set time when he would thus come; which plainly evince Isaac to have been a son of promise, conceived and born by virtue of that peculiar promise, which Abraham and Sarah believed, in order to his conception. At this time As if he had said, Even now, though thy body and Sarahs are dead, or at the time which I now appoint; I will come Will manifest my power, and she shall conceive, and have a son And he only shall inherit the blessing, and not whosoever is born of thee. Observe, reader, Isaac is not brought forward in this chapter as a type, or example, of persons personally elected by God from eternity, but as a type of those, how few or how many soever they may be, that shall be counted Gods children, and judged meet to inherit his kingdom. And not only this, &c. And that Gods blessing does not belong to all the descendants of Abraham, appears not only by this instance, but by that of Esau and Jacob, the latter of whom was chosen to inherit the blessing of being the progenitor of the Messiah, and other blessings connected therewith, before either of them had done good or evil The apostle mentions this to show, that neither did their ancestors receive their advantages through any merit of their own; that the purpose of God according to election might stand Whose purpose was to elect to superior blessings, particularly to church privileges; not of works Not for any preceding merit in him he chose; but of him that calleth Of his own good pleasure, who calls to the enjoyment of particular privileges whom he sees good. Nothing can be more evident, says Mr. Sellon, to any one that considers the beginning and end of this chapter, than that the apostle is not speaking of the election of particular persons to eternal life, but of particular nations to outward church privileges, which duly used, through Christ, should be the means of bringing men to eternal life, and to higher degrees of glory therein than others should enjoy, who were not favoured with these privileges. Nor is God, the great Governor of the world, on this account, any more to be deemed a respecter of persons, than an earthly king, who takes some of his subjects for lords of his bed- chamber, and others for lower employments; since he will make them all, that behave well in their station, completely happy. See his Works, vol. 2. p. 134. It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger Not in person, for Esau never served Jacob; but in his posterity. Accordingly the Edomites were often brought into subjection by the Israelites. But though Esau had served Jacob personally, and had been inferior to him in worldly greatness, it would have been no proof at all of Jacobs election to eternal life, nor of Esaus reprobation: as little was the subjection of the Edomites to the Israelites, in Davids days, a proof of the election and reprobation of their progenitors. Add to this, that the circumstance of Esaus being elder than Jacob was very properly taken notice of to show that Jacobs election was contrary to the right of primogeniture, because this circumstance proved it to be from pure favour: but if his election had been to eternal life, the circumstance of his age ought not to have been mentioned, because it had no relation to that matter whatever. As it is written With which word in Genesis, spoken so long before, that of Malachi agrees; I have loved Jacob With a peculiar love; that is, the Israelites, the posterity of Jacob; and I have comparatively hated Esau That is, the Edomites, the posterity of Esau. But observe, 1st, This does not relate to the person of Jacob or Esau: 2d, Nor does it relate to the eternal state either of them or their posterity. Thus far the apostle has been proving his proposition, namely, that the exclusion of a great part of the seed of Abraham, yea, and of Isaac, from the special promises of God, was so far from being impossible, that, according to the Scriptures themselves, it had actually happened. And his intent herein, as appears from Rom 9:30-33, (which passage is a key to the whole chapter,) is evidently to show, that as God before chose Jacob, who represented the Jews, and admitted him and his posterity to peculiar privileges, above the Gentiles, without any merit in him or them to deserve it; so now, (the Jews through their unbelief having rejected the Messiah, and being justly therefore themselves rejected of God,) he had chosen the Gentiles, represented by Esau, to be his peculiar people; according to the prediction of Hosea, I will call them my people, &c., cited Rom 9:25, where see the note; and that without any thing on their part to deserve this favour. It was entirely free with respect both to them and Jacob, Gods mercy and goodness preventing, not the endeavour only, but even the will of both. As, before Jacob either willed or strove for it, the blessing was designed of God for him; so, before ever the Gentiles sought after God, the blessings of Christs kingdom were designed for them. Yet it does not follow that all who are called Christians, and enjoy outward church privileges, shall be finally saved, any more than it is to be concluded that all the Jews were saved before Christ came in the flesh, on account of their privileges.
Vv. 9. This verse is simply intended to justify the expression: children of the promise, Rom 9:8. When the apostle says: a word of promise, he means: a word which had the free character of a promise, and which did not in the least imply the recognition of a right. The quotation is a combination of Rom 9:10; Rom 9:14 of Genesis 18. according to the LXX. The term: at this time, signifies: Next year, at the moment when this same time (this same epoch) will return.
But could Isaac and his race, though proceeding from Abraham, and that through the intervention of a divine factor, be regarded without any other condition as real children of God? Evidently not; for if the faith of Abraham himself ceased to belong to them, they became again a purely carnal seed. It must then be foreseen that the same law of exclusion which had been applied to Ishmael, in favor of Isaac, would anew assert its right even within the posterity of the latter. This is what came about immediately, as is seen in the second example quoted by the apostle, that of Esau and Jacob.
For this is a word of promise [this is the saying or promise that brought Isaac into being, and made him a child of promise and not of natural birth– Gen 18:10], According to this season [Godet translates, “Next year at the moment when this same time (this same epoch) will return”] will I come [to fulfill my promise], and Sarah shall have a son. [This fixing of the definite time (an exact year from the date of the promise) when the child of promise should be born, is extremely significant. Ishmael was alive when this promise was given. But what Jew would have justified him in urging a claim as against the promised Isaac? Later, in the days of Daniel, a time limit was set for Christ, the greater Son of promise, by which it is made sure that he would begin his ministry in A. D. 26. If Ishmael had no reason or right to complain that he and his offspring (though he was established as a son) were stood aside for Isaac and his offspring, what right had Isaac in his turn to complain if God set a date when he and his offspring (though established son as was Ishmael) should in like manner be stood aside for the greater Son of promise, the Christ and his offspring? God fixed the dates in each case, and the dates in Dan 9:24-25 are equally explicit with Gen 17:21 . The Christ, “the anointed one, the prince,” was to appear at the end of sixty-nine weeks of years, or in A. D. 26, and at the full end of the seventy weeks, or eight years later, in A. D. 34, the time “decreed upon thy [Daniel’s] people” came to an end. The Holy Spirit that year emphasized the rejection of fleshly Israel and the acceptance of the children of promise (believers in Christ, his spiritual offspring) by withdrawing from the Jews and appearing upon the household of Cornelius, the firstfruits of the Gentiles (Acts 10). God gave Ishmael only one year’s warning, and no especial call to repent, or opportunity to save himself in any way. But through Daniel, Israel had five hundred years of warning, and was invited of Christ and of all his apostles (even being invariably invited first, by Paul the apostle to the Gentiles) to become joint children of promise with the Gentiles; a joint relationship wherein they were bound by every circumstance to obtain and hold the pre-eminence. Surely, then, the word of God had not failed as to them, but they had failed as to it.]
9:9 {6} For this [is] the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.
(6) A reason of that application: because Isaac was born by the power of the promise, and therefore he was not chosen, no, he was not at all, except by the free will of God: by which it follows that the promise is the fountain of predestination, and not the flesh, from which promise the particular election proceeds, that is, that the elect are born elect, and not that they are first born, and then after elected, by God who predestinates.
God did not choose to bless Isaac after his birth only because he was Abraham’s son. Rather He promised Abraham before Isaac’s birth that He would provide and bless a son for the patriarch supernaturally. His unusual birth confirmed God’s choice of Isaac, as the channel of special blessing, to his parents.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)