Romans Chapter 9
Has God Rejected Israel?
A. Paul’s Heart for Israel
The ninth chapter of Romans introduces a transition in Paul’s argument. In Romans chapters one through eight, Paul has laid out the universal need of man for salvation and the glorious provision of God in Jesus Christ through the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Having firmly established justification, sanctification, and the eternal security of the believer, Paul now turns to address a pressing theological and historical issue: the condition of Israel.
Romans chapters nine through eleven form a distinct section in which Paul carefully explains Israel’s past election, their present rejection of the Messiah, and their future restoration. The central questions that arise are: What does it mean that Israel, God’s covenant nation, has missed her Messiah? What does this say about God’s faithfulness to His promises? What does this mean for Israel’s standing before God? And how does this affect our present position as Gentile believers in the church?
At the heart of the issue lies a personal and theological concern: If Israel was once chosen, loved, and saved, but now appears rejected and under God’s judgment, then how can Gentile believers be certain that they will not one day experience the same rejection? Paul anticipates the objection: If God did not keep His covenant promises to Israel, how can we be sure He will keep His promises to us? This question strikes at the very core of our assurance. As one commentator put it, “If God cannot bring His ancient people into salvation, how do Christians know that He can save them? Paul is not here proceeding to a new and unrelated subject. These three chapters are part of the way he makes plain how God in fact saves people.”
Paul’s Sorrow Over Israel
Romans 9:1-2 – “I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart.”
Paul begins this section with an intensely personal statement. In Romans chapter eight he had lifted believers to the highest summit of assurance, declaring that nothing in all creation can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. Yet immediately afterward, his tone turns to one of heaviness. The contrast is striking: from the triumph of unshakable security in Christ to the anguish of Israel’s estrangement from God.
Paul’s grief is not momentary but continual. He carries a deep burden for his kinsmen according to the flesh, the people of Israel, who have rejected their Messiah. His heart is filled with “great sorrow and continual grief,” not because God has failed, but because his people remain in unbelief.
Notice also the solemnity with which Paul speaks. He appeals to Christ, to his own conscience, and to the witness of the Holy Spirit. He wants his readers to understand that what he is about to say is no exaggeration or rhetorical flourish. This was not a passing thought, but a profound agony that weighed upon him daily.
Paul’s anguish is a reflection of the heart of Christ Himself, who wept over Jerusalem saying, “How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!” (Matthew 23:37). Just as the Lord grieved over Israel’s stubbornness, so Paul grieves over their unbelief.
The Source of Paul’s Sorrow
Romans 9:3-5 – “For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.”
Paul’s grief over Israel now reaches its most passionate expression. He declares, “For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh.” This is not hyperbole, but the sincere lament of a man who loves his people deeply. Paul says he would be willing to endure separation from Christ if that could result in Israel’s salvation. This statement is startling, because in the previous chapter Paul had just celebrated the unbreakable love of Christ that nothing can sever (Romans 8:38-39). Yet here he declares a willingness, if it were possible, to surrender even that most precious bond for the sake of his people.
We should not dismiss Paul’s words as mere rhetoric. In Romans 9:1-2, Paul had already called Christ, his conscience, and the Holy Spirit as witnesses to the truth of his burden. His words are deliberate, solemn, and entirely genuine. This passion for the salvation of souls gave Paul the right perspective in life. He did not waste energy on trivial frustrations, for he was consumed by the greatest concern of all—the eternal destiny of men’s souls. As Charles Spurgeon once wrote, “Get love for the souls of men—then you will not be whining about a dead dog, or a sick cat, or about the crotchets of a family, and the little disturbances that John and Mary may make by their idle talk. You will be delivered from petty worries if you are concerned about the souls of men... Get your soul full of a great grief, and your little griefs will be driven out.”
Paul’s words here echo the intercessory heart of Moses. When Israel committed the great sin of idolatry in the wilderness, Moses prayed in Exodus 32:31-32: “Then Moses returned to the Lord and said, ‘Oh, these people have committed a great sin, and have made for themselves a god of gold! Yet now, if You will forgive their sin, but if not, I pray, blot me out of Your book which You have written.’” Both Moses and Paul expressed a willingness to suffer loss themselves if it could bring forgiveness and salvation to Israel. Of course, only Christ could bear the curse of sin on behalf of others, but the willingness of Moses and Paul reveals hearts that reflect God’s compassion.
Paul also reflects the heart of Christ, who bore the curse for sinners. Galatians 3:13 declares, “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree’).” Paul’s willingness to be accursed shows how deeply the love of Christ had been formed in him. What makes this love even more remarkable is that the Jews were Paul’s fiercest enemies in ministry. They hounded him from city to city, spreading lies, stirring up persecution, and seeking to destroy his work. Yet Paul loved them so passionately that he longed for their salvation, even at his own expense. Truly, as Bengel noted, “It is not easy to estimate the measure of love in a Moses and a Paul. For our limited reason does not grasp it, as the child cannot comprehend the courage of warriors!”
Paul’s sorrow is deepened when he considers Israel’s immense privileges. They were the people to whom “pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises.” The “adoption” refers to Israel’s status as God’s chosen nation, His “firstborn son” (Exodus 4:22). The “glory” points to the Shekinah, the visible manifestation of God’s presence that filled the tabernacle and temple. The “covenants” include God’s promises to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and David, along with the Mosaic covenant at Sinai. The “giving of the law” refers to the Torah, God’s holy revelation entrusted uniquely to Israel. The “service of God” refers to the priestly ministry of the temple, where sacrifices, offerings, and worship were ordained by God. Finally, “the promises” encompass the Messianic prophecies and assurances of redemption that God had given throughout the Old Testament.
Paul continues: “Of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came.” Israel’s heritage includes the patriarchs—Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—through whom God established His covenant promises. More than that, Israel was the nation chosen to bring forth the Messiah in His humanity. Jesus Christ, according to the flesh, came from Israel. This unique privilege magnifies the tragedy of Israel’s unbelief. They, of all people, had every advantage, every promise, and the greatest spiritual heritage.
Paul concludes with a declaration that removes any doubt about the glory of Christ: “Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.” Here Paul gives one of his clearest affirmations of the deity of Christ. Attempts to separate this into two sentences, making the doxology refer to the Father rather than Christ, do violence to the grammar. The natural reading is that Christ, who according to the flesh came from Israel, is also “over all” and “the eternally blessed God.” As Robertson observed, this is the obvious and natural way of reading the text. It provides one of the strongest New Testament testimonies to the full deity of Christ, coupled with His humanity.
Why Israel Is in Its Present Condition from God’s Perspective
Romans 9:6-9 – “But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, ‘In Isaac your seed shall be called.’ That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed. For this is the word of promise: ‘At this time I will come and Sarah shall have a son.’”
Paul begins by addressing the crucial objection: Has God’s word failed? Considering the widespread unbelief of Israel, one might assume that God’s promises to His chosen nation had collapsed. Paul immediately refutes this by declaring, “But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect.” God’s covenant purposes remain unshaken, and His promises are still being fulfilled, though not always in the way man expects. The seeming rejection of Israel does not signal divine failure; rather, it reveals God’s sovereign distinction between the children of the flesh and the children of promise.
Paul continues, “For they are not all Israel who are of Israel.” This statement makes a critical distinction. Israel, whose name means “governed by God,” was called to live under God’s rule. Yet not all physical descendants of Jacob are truly governed by God in the spiritual sense. There is a difference between outward, national Israel and the true Israel of faith. Just as not everyone who is called a Christian is a genuine disciple of Christ, so not every Israelite is truly part of the covenant people in the spiritual sense. God’s word has not failed, because His promises were never intended for all of Abraham’s physical descendants indiscriminately, but for those who are truly His by faith and election.
Paul illustrates this truth with Scripture: “Nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, ‘In Isaac your seed shall be called.’” Though Abraham fathered many sons, including Ishmael, only Isaac was the son of promise. God’s covenant did not pass through Ishmael, who was born according to the flesh, but through Isaac, who was supernaturally born according to God’s promise. This distinction shows that God’s covenant family is not determined by physical lineage alone, but by God’s sovereign call and promise.
Paul explains further: “That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed.” Here the difference is laid bare. Descendants by natural means—the children of the flesh—are not automatically the children of God. Only those who are born according to the promise are reckoned as the true seed. God’s covenant line always followed His promise, not merely human birthright.
To solidify his point, Paul cites Genesis: “For this is the word of promise: ‘At this time I will come and Sarah shall have a son.’” (Genesis 18:10). Isaac’s birth was not merely the result of human effort but of divine intervention. Abraham and Sarah were far beyond childbearing years, yet God fulfilled His promise at the appointed time. This underscores that salvation and covenant blessing are not products of human will or fleshly effort, but of God’s sovereign grace.
Thus, Paul shows that Israel’s unbelief does not prove God’s word has failed. Rather, God’s promise has always been selective, operating through chosen lines according to His will. Just as He chose Isaac and not Ishmael, so He continues to fulfill His purposes through His children of promise. The true Israel is not simply defined by ethnicity, but by God’s election and covenant promises.
Another Example of Promise Over Natural Relation: Jacob and Esau
Romans 9:10-13 – “And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), it was said to her, ‘The older shall serve the younger.’ As it is written, ‘Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.’”
Paul moves from the example of Isaac and Ishmael to a further and even more striking demonstration of God’s sovereign election. In the case of Ishmael and Isaac, one might argue that the choice seemed natural, since Ishmael was the son of a bondwoman while Isaac was the child of Sarah, the legitimate wife. But Paul presses the point further by presenting Jacob and Esau. Both were sons of Isaac and Rebecca, both conceived in the same womb, and both born of the same father. In this case, natural relation and human distinction could provide no ground for God’s choice.
Paul highlights this truth by noting that the decision was made “for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil.” God’s choice was not based on foreseen works, merits, or even failures. Before Jacob and Esau had drawn a breath, before they had any opportunity to act in righteousness or sin, God had already declared His purpose. This ensures that His election is not grounded in human achievement but rests solely in His sovereign will.
Paul then states the purpose clearly: “that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls.” Election is not arbitrary, nor is it dependent upon the will or performance of man. Rather, it is rooted in God’s calling and His sovereign plan. The emphasis falls entirely on God as the one who calls, chooses, and ordains. This truth removes boasting and reminds us that salvation is always a matter of grace, never of merit.
Before the twins were born, God told Rebecca, “The older shall serve the younger.” This divine decree overturned human expectations. In ancient culture, the firstborn naturally held the position of privilege and inheritance. Yet God declared that the younger, Jacob, would rule over the elder, Esau. Centuries later, the prophet Malachi reaffirmed God’s verdict: “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated” (Malachi 1:2-3).
It is important to understand what is meant by God’s “love” for Jacob and His “hatred” for Esau. These words should not be interpreted in terms of human passion or cruelty but in relation to God’s covenant purposes. To say “Jacob I have loved” means that God accepted Jacob as the heir of His promises, while “Esau I have hated” means that Esau was rejected from that role. Scripture often uses the language of love and hate in a comparative sense. For example, Genesis 29:31 says, “When the Lord saw that Leah was unloved, He opened her womb; but Rachel was barren.” The word translated “unloved” (literally “hated”) simply means loved less in comparison. Similarly, Luke 14:26 records Jesus’ words, “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple.” The meaning is not literal hatred but placing one above the other.
Therefore, when God says He loved Jacob and hated Esau, it does not mean Esau was deprived of blessing altogether. Esau became a wealthy man (see Genesis 33:8-16) and the father of a nation (see Genesis 36). God’s “hatred” was specifically in regard to covenant inheritance, not in regard to temporal blessings or ultimate salvation. His choice was rooted in His sovereign plan for the lineage of the Messiah, not in arbitrary favoritism.
This brings us to a sobering but humbling truth: God’s choices are never capricious, though they may be beyond our comprehension. He does not choose as men do, in an “eeny-meeny-miny-moe” fashion. His purposes are eternal, wise, and perfectly righteous, even when we cannot see the reason. As Spurgeon once remarked, “A woman once said to me, ‘I cannot understand why God should say that He hated Esau.’ That is not my difficulty, madam. My trouble is to understand how God could love Jacob.” Jacob was deeply flawed, a schemer and deceiver, yet God in His grace set His love upon him. If anything, the mystery is not why God rejected Esau, but why He chose Jacob—or why He chooses any of us.
Thus Paul demonstrates that God’s word has not failed, nor is His election unjust. His promises are fulfilled not through natural descent but through sovereign grace. Israel’s present unbelief does not mean God’s covenant purposes have collapsed. Rather, His plan is unfolding exactly as He has ordained.
Does God’s Choice of One Over Another Make Him Unrighteous?
Romans 9:14-16 – “What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! For He says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.’ So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.”
Having demonstrated God’s sovereign choice in the cases of Isaac and Jacob, Paul anticipates the natural objection: “What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God?” If God chooses one and not another, does that make Him unjust? Paul answers with the strongest possible denial: “Certainly not!” The Greek phrase me genoito carries the sense of “may it never be” or “absolutely not.” The very suggestion that God could be unrighteous is unthinkable.
Paul supports his answer with the testimony of Scripture. He cites God’s words to Moses in Exodus 33:19: “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” God is sovereign in dispensing mercy. He is under no obligation to extend it to any man, for mercy by definition is undeserved. Justice demands payment for sin; mercy provides relief from that penalty. When God shows mercy, He is not being unfair but is instead being more than fair.
We must remember that mercy is not a right. If mercy is demanded, it ceases to be mercy and becomes obligation. God owes no sinner anything but judgment. The fact that He shows mercy at all is a testimony to His grace. As Jesus illustrated in the parable of the landowner (Matthew 20:1-16), the master of the vineyard had the right to pay his laborers according to his own generosity. Likewise, God reserves the right to bestow mercy as He wills. No man can charge Him with injustice, for no man deserves mercy in the first place.
Paul then concludes: “So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.” Salvation does not come because of man’s desire (“him who wills”) or human effort (“him who runs”), but solely from the sovereign mercy of God. This truth strips away all grounds for human boasting and places salvation entirely within the realm of God’s grace.
The Example of Pharaoh
Romans 9:17-18 – “For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, ‘For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.’ Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.”
Paul then gives a concrete historical example to illustrate God’s sovereign freedom: Pharaoh of the Exodus. God spoke through Moses to Pharaoh, and Scripture records His divine purpose: “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth” (Exodus 9:16). God sovereignly allowed Pharaoh to ascend to power, not because Pharaoh was righteous or deserving, but so that God’s glory could be magnified through him. By defeating Pharaoh and delivering Israel with mighty signs and wonders, God demonstrated His power and spread His name across the nations.
Paul then concludes: “Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.” God glorifies Himself in both mercy and judgment. Sometimes He magnifies His glory through the mercy He shows to the undeserving. Other times He magnifies His glory through the judgment of those who harden themselves against Him.
It is important to note what Paul does and does not mean by “He hardens.” We should not imagine God taking an innocent, tenderhearted Pharaoh and forcing him into rebellion. Rather, God judicially confirmed Pharaoh in the hardness that was already present in his heart. Scripture repeatedly affirms that Pharaoh hardened his own heart: Exodus 7:13, “And Pharaoh’s heart grew hard, and he did not heed them, as the Lord had said.” Exodus 8:15, “But when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and did not heed them, as the Lord had said.” Exodus 8:32, “But Pharaoh hardened his heart at this time also; neither would he let the people go.” Over and over, Pharaoh chose rebellion, and in response, God solidified him in that rebellion, using it to bring about His greater purpose.
This shows us the balance of human responsibility and divine sovereignty. Pharaoh was responsible for his own unbelief and rebellion, yet God was sovereign in using that rebellion for His glory. God’s hardening is never arbitrary, but judicial—it gives men over to the stubbornness they themselves have chosen (cf. Romans 1:24, 26, 28). In this way, God demonstrates His absolute right to act in mercy or judgment, and His name is glorified in both.
Does God’s Right to Choose Relieve Man of Responsibility?
Romans 9:19-21 – “You will say to me then, ‘Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?’ But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why have you made me like this?’ Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?”
Anticipating the next objection, Paul imagines a person asking: “You will say to me then, ‘Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?’” The logic seems humanly reasonable. If everything falls under God’s sovereign will, how can He still hold men accountable? If His purposes always prevail, how can He find fault with human beings for doing what He has determined?
Paul’s response is striking. Instead of attempting to untangle the mystery with a philosophical explanation, he confronts the pride behind the question. “But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God?” The very act of challenging God’s justice reveals disrespect and arrogance. The finite creature presumes to put the infinite Creator on trial, forgetting his own limitations. Just as Job learned when God spoke to him from the whirlwind, man must be humbled into silence before the majesty of divine sovereignty.
Paul then employs an illustration that would be familiar to every reader: the potter and the clay. “Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why have you made me like this?’ Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?” The potter has absolute authority over the clay. He can fashion it into a vessel of beauty for noble use or into a simple, ordinary pot for common purposes. The clay has no right to challenge the intentions of the potter. Likewise, God as Creator has absolute rights over His creation. He is free to order His purposes as He sees fit, and His choices are always just, even when beyond our comprehension.
Doesn’t God Have the Right to Glorify Himself as He Sees Fit?
Romans 9:22-24 – “What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?”
Paul now deepens the argument. If God, in His sovereignty, chooses to display His glory through both judgment and mercy, who can oppose Him? He asks rhetorically: “What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?” In other words, God’s wrath and power are magnified when He bears patiently with sinners who persist in rebellion. Rather than immediately executing judgment, He endures them with great patience, allowing their sin to reach full measure. This was seen in Pharaoh, who continually hardened his heart, and whom God endured until the time of judgment.
Paul then adds the contrast: “And that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory.” God glorifies Himself not only in judgment but supremely in mercy. His grace shines brightest against the backdrop of wrath. When God redeems sinners who deserve judgment, the riches of His glory are magnified. These “vessels of mercy” are prepared beforehand for glory, a clear reference to God’s eternal purposes in election and salvation.
Paul makes it plain that this includes both Jews and Gentiles: “Even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?” Here Paul shatters the Jewish presumption of exclusive privilege. The Jews thought that being Abraham’s descendants guaranteed their place as vessels of honor. Paul refutes this, reminding them that God’s mercy is not bound by ethnicity. He has called a people for Himself from both Jews and Gentiles, demonstrating His sovereign freedom in salvation.
Finally, Paul speaks of “vessels of wrath prepared for destruction.” Notice carefully: he does not say that God actively prepared them for destruction. The grammar suggests that these vessels are fitted for destruction through their own persistent rebellion and sin. They bring judgment upon themselves by their choices, and God righteously confirms them in their unbelief. Yet when it comes to “vessels of mercy,” Paul is explicit: God Himself “prepared them beforehand for glory.” The contrast is deliberate. Man prepares himself for destruction by sin; God prepares His elect for glory by grace.
The Prophet Hosea Declares God’s Right to Choose
Romans 9:25-26 – “As He says also in Hosea: ‘I will call them My people, who were not My people, and her beloved, who was not beloved. And it shall come to pass in the place where it was said to them, “You are not My people,” there they shall be called sons of the living God.’”
To reinforce the principle of God’s sovereign calling, Paul turns to the prophet Hosea. The quotations come from Hosea 2:23 and Hosea 1:10, where God revealed His mercy to Israel despite their unfaithfulness. In Hosea’s day, God commanded the prophet to name one of his children Lo-Ammi, meaning “Not My People,” as a sign of God’s judgment upon Israel for their spiritual adultery. Yet in the same breath, God promised restoration: “I will call them My people, who were not My people, and her beloved, who was not beloved.”
Paul applies this to demonstrate God’s freedom to extend His mercy even to those once estranged. The context of Hosea looks forward to Israel’s eventual restoration, but Paul also sees here a broader principle: God is free to call Gentiles, who were once “not His people,” and make them “sons of the living God.” What was once said of Israel in judgment, “You are not My people,” now finds its fulfillment not only in Israel’s restoration but also in the inclusion of Gentiles in God’s family.
This shows that salvation is not limited to physical Israel. God has the sovereign right to extend His mercy to those who were once outside the covenant. The very fact that Gentiles, who were alienated from the promises of God, are now called “sons of the living God” is a powerful display of divine grace.
The Prophet Isaiah Declares the Remnant Will Be Saved
Romans 9:27-29 – “Isaiah also cries out concerning Israel: ‘Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, the remnant will be saved. For He will finish the work and cut it short in righteousness, because the Lord will make a short work upon the earth.’ And as Isaiah said before: ‘Unless the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we would have become like Sodom, and we would have been made like Gomorrah.’”
Paul then turns to Isaiah to prove that God’s dealings with Israel have always involved the principle of a remnant. Quoting Isaiah 10:22-23, Paul reminds his readers that even though Israel was as numerous as the sand of the sea, only a remnant would be saved. In Isaiah’s day, this referred to God’s judgment through Assyria, when much of the nation was destroyed. Yet God preserved a remnant, ensuring that His promises to Israel would not fail.
This principle extends to Paul’s own time: though the majority of Israel had rejected the Messiah, God was still at work saving a faithful remnant. The promise was never intended for the entire nation indiscriminately but for the elect within Israel. As Morris observes, “It was stupid to think that, since the whole nation had not entered the blessing, the promise of God had failed. The promise had not been made to the whole nation and had never been intended to apply to the whole nation.”
Paul adds another quotation from Isaiah 1:9: “Unless the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we would have become like Sodom, and we would have been made like Gomorrah.” Sodom and Gomorrah were utterly destroyed without a trace of survivors. Judah’s sin was severe, and had it not been for the mercy of God, they too would have been annihilated. The only reason Israel survived was because God in His mercy preserved a remnant.
The message is twofold: judgment is real and severe, but mercy always triumphs in preserving God’s purposes. Even if only a remnant remains, that remnant secures the hope of restoration. As Bruce notes, “But if only a remnant will survive, at least a remnant will survive, and constitute the hope of restoration.”
Thus, both Hosea and Isaiah confirm Paul’s teaching: God’s word has not failed, for He has always worked through a remnant, and He has the right to extend His mercy to whomever He pleases—even to Gentiles who were once far off.
Why Israel Is in Its Present Condition from Man’s Perspective
Romans 9:30-31 – “What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness.”
Paul now shifts the lens from God’s sovereign perspective to man’s responsibility. He asks, “What shall we say then?” and draws a striking contrast. The Gentiles, who were not even seeking righteousness, have attained it—not by their own merit, but through faith. Israel, on the other hand, zealously pursued righteousness through the law but failed to attain it.
This paradox is at the very heart of the gospel. The Gentiles, who had no law, no covenants, and no heritage of Abraham, nevertheless attained the righteousness of God by faith in Christ. Meanwhile, Israel, who possessed the law, the covenants, and the promises, failed to reach righteousness because they pursued it through works of the law.
The words “attained to righteousness” and “not attained” highlight the difference. The Gentiles embraced God’s way—faith—while Israel insisted on its own way—law-keeping. The Gentiles, though unworthy and unprepared, received righteousness as a gift by believing the gospel. The Jews, though zealous and religious, missed righteousness by trying to earn it through their own performance. In essence, the Gentiles humbled themselves to receive, while Israel stumbled in pride, attempting to achieve.
Israel’s Stumbling Over the Stone of Offense
Romans 9:32-33 – “Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone. As it is written: ‘Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense, and whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.’”
Paul anticipates the question, “Why?” Why did Israel fail? His answer is clear: “Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law.” Israel’s failure was not due to God’s injustice but to their own unbelief. They refused to come by faith, seeking instead to establish their own righteousness through the law.
Paul then quotes from Isaiah 8:14 and Isaiah 28:16: “Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense, and whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.” The stumbling stone is none other than Christ Himself. Israel stumbled because the Messiah did not fit their expectations. They wanted a political deliverer, not a crucified Savior. They sought righteousness through law, not through faith in Christ. As Paul explained elsewhere: “For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God” (1 Corinthians 1:22-24).
Israel’s stumbling over Christ was not inevitable in the sense of compulsion but inevitable in the sense of prideful unbelief. The very stone that God laid in Zion for salvation became to them a rock of offense. Yet the promise still stands: “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.” The issue is not God’s sovereignty alone but man’s response to His provision. God’s plan is sure, but man is responsible for how he responds to Christ.
Thus Paul shows both sides of the coin. From God’s perspective, election explains why some believe and others reject. From man’s perspective, unbelief explains why Israel stumbled. The harmony between divine sovereignty and human responsibility is a mystery beyond full human grasp, but Scripture affirms both without contradiction. Israel is accountable for her unbelief, and the Gentiles are blessed because they believed by faith.
