Romans 9–11: The Place of Israel in Salvation History (Part 2a): Israel’s Rejection

Israel’s Rejection and God’s Purpose

“But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but ‘Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.’ This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. For this is what the promise said: ‘About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.’ And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac” (Rom. 9:6-10, ESV). 

In view of the divine promises and spiritual blessings reserved for Abraham’s heritage, the emblematic phrases “children of Abraham” and “children of God” are practically interchangeable (cf. 4:9-18; 8:14-21; Gal. 3:26-29). Abraham had many more biological children and branches of descendants than just those through Isaac and Jacob (Gen. 25:1-6; 36:1-9; 1 Chron. 1:32-33). But his spiritual “children” are those who exemplify the same kind of trusting reliance on God as he did, irrespective of physical ancestry or circumcision (4:9-12, 16). The phrase “our forefather Isaac,” though seemingly excluding Gentiles, is clearly shown by the context to be inclusive of all of Paul’s Christian readers, whether of Jewish or non-Jewish descent. This is further attested by the next use of the first person plural: “us, whom he also called, not only from Jews but also from Gentiles” (v. 24).

The argument continues: “though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—she was told, ‘The older will serve the younger’” (Rom. 9:11-12).

Contrary to what has become a popular and widespread interpretation of Romans 9, this section of the letter does not teach the Calvinistic doctrine of unconditional election. The sovereignty of God is not disputed and is readily acknowledged and accepted on both sides of the debate.¹ Nevertheless, this passage is about the overall “purpose of God” (v. 11; cf. 8:28-30) in implementing his redemptive scheme through Christ (v. 5) and is not addressing the Calvinistic notion of specific persons whom the Lord has allegedly elected to save or not save. Otherwise, why would Paul fervently pray for the salvation of souls (10:1) if they were categorically predestined to be lost? It is important to pay attention to both what is said and what is not said in this chapter. Paul never claims that any human was created for the purpose of unconditional reprobation and condemnation.

Contextually the apostle is confronting the wayward attitudes and misconceptions of ethnocentric Jews who were discounting Gentiles from the Lord’s circle of acceptance (vv. 6-8, 24 ff.). This chapter, only a portion of the discussion, serves to vindicate God’s judgment against the obsolete system of exclusive Judaism. The scriptures which religious Jews hold in high regard are abundantly cited in this discourse to confirm the legitimacy of what Paul is saying. 

Israel’s Rejection and God’s Justice

“As it is written, ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.’ What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means!” (Rom. 9:13-14).² 

Some would argue that if God chooses certain ones and rejects others (even among Abraham’s descendants), this would seem unjust, and since God is not unjust, Paul’s reasoning must be flawed. In response, the apostle notes that particular individuals (e.g., Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Pharaoh) were divinely chosen—while others (e.g., Ishmael, Esau) were not—to play an important role in God’s plan based on his sovereign will. Calvinists claim the focus of this chapter is on individual salvation and individual condemnation, but the texts quoted in vv. 12-13 (Gen. 25:23b; Mal. 1:2-3) are not about Jacob and Esau as individuals but are corporate views of their respective descendants: “Two nations … two peoples” (Gen. 25:23a); “Israel … Edom” (Mal. 1:1-4).

The quote from Malachi 1:2-3, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated,” loses some of its meaning in English translation. The English term “hate” may seem a bit harsh, but the Greek μισέω magnifies the sense of “esteem less” with respect to the absolute importance of one’s priorities (cf. Luke 14:26). Moreover, “love” and “hate” are not emotional expressions (as per modern westernized concepts) but are demonstrated actions (cf. Dan. 9:4; John 14:15; Rom. 5:8). In the fifth-century BC context of Malachi, “Jacob” represents the descendants of Jacob/Israel (1:1, 5) and “Esau” stands for Esau’s descendants, the people of Edom (1:4). The Israelites were being reminded of their special role in God’s plan (“Jacob I have loved” – blessed and provided for), despite the persistent abuse of their privileged status, while the defiant and wicked Edomites were destined for destruction (“Esau I have hated” – punished and condemned).

After expressing his remorse over the spiritual condition of fleshly Israel alienated from Christ, Paul acknowledges that Abraham’s biological descendants (through Isaac and Jacob) were selected by God to be instrumental in bringing the Messiah into the world (vv. 1-5). But the divine purpose goes far beyond the physical. Merely having a hereditary link with Abraham is not sufficient for being right with God, therefore Israel’s current spiritual condition cannot legitimately be blamed on God as though he were unjust (v. 14).

“For he says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.’ So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, ‘For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.’ So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills” (Rom. 9:15-18, ESV).

In stark contrast to human reasoning and preferences and innovations, God’s purpose is rooted in his omniscience, foreknowledge, and infinite wisdom. In v. 15 Paul quotes (from “Moses”)³ the Lord’s statement in Exodus 33:19, in sparing a sinful nation (note chap. 32): “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy …” Yet the extending of divine mercy is not indiscriminate or arbitrary. Allowing the Bible to interpret itself, we read in Isaiah 55:7, “Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; Let him return to the Lord, and he will have mercy on him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.” Proverbs 28:13 says, “He who covers his sins will not prosper, but whoever confesses and forsakes them will have mercy” (see also Ex. 20:6; Psa. 119:132; Luke 1:50).

In v. 16 Paul observes, “So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.” The word “exertion” is lit. “running” [τρέχοντος], a frequently used metaphor in Paul’s writings.⁴ This has nothing to do with someone who might desire to be saved but is disallowed, or one who is incapable of seeking salvation; it is all about the unfolding of God’s purpose (v. 11). Irrespective of Sarah’s ploy involving Hagar (Gen. 16:2), and Abraham’s initial choice of Ishmael (Gen. 17:18), and Isaac’s preference for Esau (Gen. 25:28), human ingenuity and fallibility neither determine nor improve nor thwart the divine scheme. It is not that God has no justifiable reason for extending mercy. Even if his finite creatures were capable of understanding his infinite ways, the Creator is not obligated to fully explain himself to those who, in fact, are incapable of full comprehension.

Accordingly, in v. 17 Paul quotes words spoken to Pharaoh in Exodus 9:16, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” What is the point? “So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills” (v. 18). God has chosen to have mercy on those who humbly submit to his will (like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses) and hardens those who defiantly reject his will (like Pharaoh). 

God hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Ex. 4:21; 7:3; 9:12; 10:1, 20, 27; 11:10; 14:4, 8, 17), not by subverting Pharaoh’s free will but by simply making demands that Pharaoh did not like. At the same time, Pharaoh hardened his own heart (Ex. 8:15, 19, 32; 9:34-35; 10:3; 13:15) because of his own stubborn pride and rebellion. God’s actions and demands in Egypt softened the hearts of many (Ex. 4:30-31; 9:20; 10:7) but hardened the heart of Pharaoh because of the brazen opposition of Pharaoh’s obstinate will. Moses and Pharaoh (like Jacob and Esau) serve as examples of two categories of persons with whom God has to deal (cf. 2:4-11; 6:16, 19; 8:5-8).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ See 1 Chron. 29:11-12; 2 Chron. 20:6; Isa. 46:9-10; Dan. 4:35; Psa. 115:3; 1 Tim. 6:15.

     ² On the rhetorical question, “What shall we say?” and “By no means!” response, see also v. 30; 3:4-6; 6:1-2.

     ³ Cf. Rom. 5:14; 10:5, 19; 1 Cor. 9:9; 10:2; 2 Cor. 3:7, 13, 15; 2 Tim. 3:8.

     ⁴ 1 Cor. 9:24-26; Phil. 2:16; Gal. 2:2; 5:7.

Related Posts: Rom. 9:1-5, Rom 9:19-32

The Exegetical Challenge of Romans 9:5b

The closing doxology of Rom. 9:5, “the one being over all God blessed forever” [ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας], has engendered “one of the most difficult questions of exegesis in the epistle.”¹ As a matter of punctuation and syntax, if the statement stands independently, it would apply to God the Father (cf. 1:25), rendered “… the Christ. God who is over all be blessed for ever” (RSV, NRSV) or “the Christ … who is over all, God blessed forever” (ASV, NASB, KJV). On the other hand, if taken as a relative clause, it would apply to Christ: “the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever” (ESV, CSB, NET, NIV, NKJV). 

Grammar and Style Vs. Theology

The first option may be challenged stylistically and grammatically in that Paul’s doxologies normally complete a preceding thought rather than standing separately (cf. 1:25; 2 Cor. 11:31). The latter option may be challenged theologically in that Paul does not typically call Jesus “God” in such explicit fashion.² However, parallel teachings and implicit allusions in the midst of the apostle’s high Christology make a strong case for the latter. 

Paul’s High Christology

In v. 33 Paul quotes Isaiah 8:14, wherein the “rock of offense” is Yahweh (God's personal name), contextually applicable to Christ (v. 5; 10:4).³ In 10:9-13, affirming the requisites of confessing “the Lord Jesus” and calling upon “the Lord,” Joel 2:32 is quoted, “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” In the original text of Joel’s prophecy, the name to be called upon is Yahweh. The Lord [Yahweh] of Joel 2 is the Lord Jesus of Romans 10.⁴ Further, in 14:10 the judgment seat is God’s, while in 2 Cor. 5:10 the judgment seat is Christ’s. 

In Rom. 14:11 Paul quotes Isaiah 45:23, where every knee shall bow to Yahweh ’ĕl[ōhīm](“the Lord God”), whereas in Phil. 2:10-11 the same OT passage is alluded to yet applied to Jesus Christ. This follows Phil. 2:6, where the pre-incarnate Christ is described as “existing in the form of God,” who “counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped” (ASV).⁵  Paul is not introducing or trying to prove or defend a new theology but is pragmatically calling for a Christlike mindset by appealing to what Christians already know and accept about Jesus.⁶

Intentional Ambiguity?

It is not improbable that the apostle is intentionally ambiguous here to prevent strict partitioning of the divine essence and losing sight of the unified working of the Godhead, seeing that ὁ κύριος (“the Lord”) is applied in Romans just as readily to God⁷ as it is to Jesus Christ,⁸ along with references that are less-than-precise (16:2, 8, 11, 12, 13, 22) or even more ambiguous (10:12; 12:11; 14:4-8). As history confirms, interpretive ambiguities force readers to think more deeply than they probably would have otherwise.⁹

Amen

The brief doxology closes with “Amen” [ἀμήν] (cf. 1:25; 11:36; 15:33; 16:27),¹⁰ an affirmation of truth, signifying “so be it” or “truly.” This Hebraic expression served as a Jewish liturgical formula (BAGD 45) spoken by the congregation at the end of a prayer, a reading of scripture, or a prophetic declaration (1 Chron. 16:36; Neh. 5:13; 8:6), adopted by Christians (cf. 1 Cor. 14:16) and by Paul in particular.¹¹

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ C. K. Barrett, Romans 178. See also F. F. Bruce, Romans 176. 

     ² Notwithstanding scholarly debates about authorship, the so-called hymn or hymn fragment of 1 Timothy 3:16 begins with the relative pronoun ὅς (“who”) in the NA²⁸/UBS⁵ text, but θεός (“God”) in the BMT/TR, applicable to Christ Jesus (v. 13).

     ³ Cf. 1 Pet. 2:4-7. More explicitly, see Col. 1:15-19; 2:9.

     ⁴ By the second century BC, the Jews considered the name Yahweh to be so sacred that when reading the Hebrew scriptures the term adonai (“Lord”) was substituted. This practice is reflected in the LXX in that the Greek κύριος (“Lord”) is consistently used for the divine name. In fact, of the 8,000+ occurrences of κύριος in the LXX, 6,700 are in the place of Yahweh. Those in the first century AD who were familiar with the LXX and heard Jesus addressed as κύριος could surely make this connection.

     ⁵ The term “existing” is the present tense of ὑπάρχω – already in possession of and continuously existing – in the “form” of God. The word “form” is μορφή, signifying the embodiment of the divine essence. His “equality with God” was not something Jesus selfishly “grasped.” Although ἁρπαγμός is a rare term (used only here in the NT) and could refer to the act of seizing, Paul applies it to something Jesus already possesses. In order to carry out the redemptive plan, Jesus did not “take advantage of” or “retain with an eager grasp” his equal status with God. Instead, he “emptied himself” in becoming human so he could suffer death (vv. 7-8). While Jesus maintained his divine essence, he willingly took on a subordinate role.

     ⁶ J. M. Boice, Philippians 126; P. E. Harrell, Philippians 87; G. D. Fee and D. Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth 71.

     ⁷ Rom. 4:8; 9:27-29; 10:13, 16; 11:3, 34; 12:19; 14:11; 15:11.

     ⁸ Rom. 1:4, 7; 4:24; 5:1, 11, 21; 6:23; 7:25; 8:39; 10:9; 13:14; 14:9, 14; 15:6, 30; 16:18, 20.

     ⁹ See K. L. Moore, “Interpretive Ambiguities,” Moore Perspective (30 Oct. 2019), <Link>.

     ¹⁰ With textual variation, see also 16:20, 24 (N/KJV).

     ¹¹ Outside of Romans, see Gal. 1:5; 6:18; Eph. 3:21; Phil. 4:20; 1 Tim. 1:17; 6:16; 2 Tim. 4:18; cf. 2 Cor. 1:20; even more occurrences in the Byzantine Majority Text.

Related Posts: Rom. 9:1-5

Image credit: https://fulleryouthinstitute.org/blog/how-to-plan-a-bible-study

Romans 9–11: The Place of Israel in Salvation History (Part 1): Paul’s Emotional Dilemma

After the first eight chapters of Paul’s letter to the Romans, a new section begins covering chaps. 9–11. These chapters bring “to climactic vindication the thesis stated in 1:16, 17 and correlative doctrines unfolded later in chapters 1 to 8. If this section of the epistle were absent, there would be a hiatus leaving us with unanswered questions and corresponding perplexity …. we may be profoundly grateful that the supreme author of Scripture inspired the apostle to deal with questions so germane to the grand theme of this epistle and urgently pressing upon the minds of intelligent readers” (J. Murray, Romans 2:xii).

The preceding discourse ends with the positive affirmation that nothing external “will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.” But what about the people of Israel, loved by God for centuries but now facing divine judgment because of their rejection of Christ? Is God still faithful to his promises? Paul is not writing to or for unbelieving Jews. This is a Christian concern “for those who believe that salvation has been made available to Jews and Gentiles alike on the basis of faith and those who are faced with Israel’s rejection of the gospel…. it is an internal Christian discussion. As an internal discussion, it is to a certain degree designed to inculcate a way of thinking about the issues involved.”¹

Israel’s Rejection Despite Privileges

“I am speaking the truth in Christ—I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit— that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen” (Rom. 9:1-5, ESV).

Paul reinforces his genuineness and integrity with a positive affirmation of speaking “truth” (emphatically the first word of the sentence) and negative assurance of “not lying.” He goes out of his way to affirm the truthfulness of his words and elude suspicion of dishonesty or insincerity (cf. 1:9).² His trustworthiness is based on the testimony of a sincere “conscience,” governed “in Christ” and “in the Holy Spirit” as indivisible links to the heavenly throne (cf. 8:1-39). Seeing that Roman law required only two witnesses to prove a case³ and Jewish law two or three,⁴ the veracity of Paul’s words is here firmly established.⁵

The prologue’s excessive appeal is probably due to Paul’s reputation as an apostle to the Gentiles (1:1-5, 13; 11:13; 15:16-18),⁶ prompting misguided rumors (cf. 3:8) that he is anti-Jewish and has forsaken his ethnic heritage. He needs to preempt the false impression that his mission among Gentiles indicates a lack of concern for the salvation of his own countrymen. Nor would he want anyone to think he shares the untoward sentiments of prejudicial Gentiles against the Jewish people (cf. 11:13-24). He is expressing the profound intensity of his love, concern, and mental and emotional struggle (“in my heart”): “it is” (presently and constantly) with “great sorrow and unceasing anguish.” 

Love for Israel

“I could wish” prefaces a hypothetical and hyperbolic affirmation. To be “accursed and cut off from Christ” is not an impossibility (cf. 11:17-22; Gal. 1:8-9; 5:4), but such a grim state of affairs requires abandoning the Lord,⁷ hardly a viable option for someone as committed to the Lord as Paul (cf. 1:14-16; 15:15-19). Moreover, sacrificing one’s soul in exchange for the unconditional saving of others is just not possible (cf. 2:6; 14:12). The statement is intended to be shocking and impactful. Paul’s “heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved” (10:1), although he realizes not all will be (9:27). 

As a born-and-bred native Jew, Paul has not totally abandoned his cultural heritage (cf. 11:1)⁸ and is genuinely concerned for his ethnic “brothers … kinsmen according to the flesh.” In fact, his outreach efforts have never been restricted to Gentiles only but significant attempts have been made throughout his ministry to reach unbelieving Jews and proselytes (cf. 1:16; 2:10; 3:29; 9:24; 10:12).⁹ The current spiritual predicament of those engrossed in nationalistic Judaism is certainly not God’s fault, who has blessed the Israelites with many advantages, privileges, and opportunities. 

Israel’s Advantages

Paul had started a list of blessings at 3:2, “To begin with [πρῶτον], the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God.” After a lengthy and necessary digression, the list continues here. Up to this point the ethnopolitical moniker “Jews” has been implemented (1:16; 2:9, 10, 17, 28; 3:1, 9, 29), but here Paul switches to the more theological term “Israelites” (9:4, 6, 31; 11:1), a special designation carrying a sense of dignity and pride.¹⁰ The name “Israel” (meaning “Prince of God”) was first given to Jacob (Gen. 32:28; 35:10), then later used to designate Jacob’s descendants (Josh. 3:17; Isa. 48:1). When the nation divided, the northern kingdom was called Israel in contrast to the southern kingdom of Judah (1 Kings 15:9), but after the Babylonian exile, the unified nation again carried the name Israel (Ezra 6:16). 

As somewhat of a type-antitype comparison of both “adoption” and “glory” (cf. 8:15-18), God has had a long-lasting father-son relationship with the people of Israel,¹¹ a prelude to the “spirit of adoption as sons” granted to followers of Christ. While defining the term “glory” [δόξα] is like “trying to pick up mercury between one’s fingers,”¹² in relation to the Israelites it would be applicable to their connection with God at Sinai, in the tabernacle of meeting, above the mercy seat, and in the temple,¹³  foreshadowing “the glory that is to be revealed to us.” Reference to “the covenants” (plural)¹⁴ would presumably include the Abrahamic, Mosaic, and Davidic covenants,¹⁵ while “the giving of the law” or “the lawgiving” [ἡ νομοθεσία] most certainly refers to the Law of Moses and having been “entrusted with the oracles of God” (3:2). 

Next is “the worship” [ἡ λατρεία], which is probably better rendered “the service” (LSV, WEB, YLT), with alternative translations including “the service [of God]” (N/KJV), “the [temple] service” (NASB), and “the temple worship” (NIV). The noun λατρεία can be used in the sense of “service or worship” (BAGD 467), although the emphasis is mostly on the service that facilitates worship (cf. John 16:2; Heb. 12:28). The verb form λατρεύω means to “serve,” especially the carrying out of religious duties. This is not the same concept as what is communicated by the verb προσκυνέω, which means to “worship, do obeisance to, prostrate oneself before, do reverence to …” (BAGD 716). Paul is not discussing or describing προσκυνέω (“worship”) here, a term that does not appear anywhere in Romans.¹⁶ To the Jews (with their Levitical priesthood) were committed the worship rituals of the tabernacle/ temple sanctuary (cf. Heb. 9:1-8), now embodied in the lives of Christians in everyday service (12:1).¹⁷

Israel’s Greatest Privilege

The “promises” that started with Abraham (4:13-21) have also included further messianic assurances (15:8).¹⁸ Hence, “the patriarchs” or “the fathers” [οἱ πατέρες] (cf. 11:28) references at least Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (4:1, 19; 9:7-13) but also many others in the lineage of “the Christ” through David (1:3; 4:6), “from their race [ἐξ ὧν – ‘from whom’], according to the flesh” or biological descent (cf. v. 3; 1:3; 4:1).¹⁹ The title “Christ” [Χριστός], derived from the verb χρίω (“anoint”), means “anointed one,” equivalent to the Hebrew mašíaḥ (“messiah”), appearing sixty-six times in Romans, half of which as a lone moniker.²⁰

The brief doxology with which v. 5 ends is an exegetical challenge that will be addressed in the next post.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ J. W. Aageson, “Scripture and Structure” 288-89.

     ² Note also 2 Cor. 1:18, 23; 11:10, 31; Gal. 1:20; Phil. 1:8; 1 Thess. 2:5, 10; 1 Tim. 2:7. 

     ³ “Where the number of witnesses is not specified by law, two are sufficient” (Code, 4.20.8; Digest, 22.5.1, 12).

     ⁴ Deut. 17:6; 19:15; John 8:17; Heb. 10:28. 

     ⁵ Cf. Matt. 18:16, 20; 2 Cor. 13:1; 1 Tim. 5:19.

     ⁶ See also Acts 9:15; 22:21; 26:17; Gal. 1:15-16; 2:7-9; Eph. 3:1-8; 2 Tim. 4:17.

     ⁷ See K. L. Moore, “Perseverance of the Saints,” Moore Perspective (22 July 2015), <Web>.

     ⁸ Acts 16:1-3; 18:18; 21:20-26; 22:2-3; 24:18; 26:4-5; 1 Cor. 9:19-20; 2 Cor. 11:22; Phil. 3:4-5.

     ⁹ See also Acts 9:20; 13:14-42; 14:1; 16:1, 13; 17:2-4, 10, 17; 18:2-5; 19:8; 21:21, 40; 20:21; 28:17-31; 1 Cor. 9:19-20.

     ¹⁰ John 1:47; Acts 2:22; 3:12; 5:35; 13:16; 21:28; 2 Cor. 11:22. 

     ¹¹ Ex. 4:22-23; Deut. 14:1; Isa. 63:16; 64:8; Hos. 11:1; Mal. 1:6; 2:10. 

     ¹² G. D. Fee, First Corinthians 515-16.

     ¹³ Ex. 24:16-17; 40:34-38; Lev. 16:2; 1 Kings 8:10, 11; 2 Chron. 7:1-2. 

     ¹⁴ The singular “covenant” is a variant reading with strong documentary support, but “there is no good reason why the singular, if original, should have been altered to the plural” (B. M. Metzger, Textual Commentary [2nd ed.] 459). 

     ¹⁵ Gen. 15:18; 17:2-13, 21; Ex. 2:24; 19:5; 24:7-8; 34:27; Deut. 5:2; 2 Sam. 23:2-5; 2 Kings 13:23; 2 Chron. 21:7; Psa. 89:3-4, 20-36; Luke 1:72-73; Acts 3:25; Gal. 3:16-19; Eph. 2:12.

     ¹⁶ The only biblical record of Paul’s use of the word προσκυνέω (“worship”) is Acts 24:11 and 1 Cor. 14:25.

     ¹⁷ The priesthood has changed (Heb. 7:12). Under the authority of Jesus as “high priest” (Heb. 4:14; 7:23-28), who grants free access to God without any other human mediation (Mark 15:38; Heb. 4:16; 9:12; 10:19-22; cf. 1 Tim. 2:5-6), we are a “holy” (in service to God) and “royal” (in service to the world) “priesthood” (1 Pet. 2:1-10; cf. Rev. 1:5-6; 5:9-10).

     ¹⁸ Gen. 12:1-3; Acts 2:39; 13:32; 2 Cor. 1:20; Gal. 3:16; Heb. 7:6; 11:13, 33.

     ¹⁹ Matt. 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38. See K. L. Moore, “The Lineage of Jesus According to Matthew,” Moore Perspective (3 Feb. 2013), <Link>.

     ²⁰ Note, for example, the “body of Christ” (7:4), the “spirit of Christ” (8:9), the “love of Christ” (8:35), the “word of Christ” (10:17), the “gospel of Christ” (15:19), the “churches of Christ” (16:16).

Related Posts: Secure Life of the Redeemed (Rom 8:28-39), Exegetical challenge of Rom 9:5b, Rom 9:6-18