<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Romans 8-14</title>
	<atom:link href="http://faith.briankurtz.com/bible-study/romans-8-14-feb-2010/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://faith.briankurtz.com/bible-study/romans-8-14-feb-2010/</link>
	<description>Faith Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 22:33:18 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Brian Kurtz</title>
		<link>http://faith.briankurtz.com/bible-study/romans-8-14-feb-2010/comment-page-1/#comment-6</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Kurtz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 22:24:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://faith.briankurtz.com/?p=118#comment-6</guid>
		<description>I saw something in Romans 9 today that never &quot;clicked&quot; before.  In vs. 6-16 we have Paul giving a summary of the concept that The Elect are not separated because of their paternal heritage to Abraham, but that The Elect are actually part of the group that is chosen by &quot;promise&quot;.  The question then becomes, what is this &quot;promise&quot;?  The conclusion is then presented that those of &quot;faith&quot; are the ones really covered by the promise and not just those born &#039;physically&#039; from the line of Abraham.

Paul quotes the Old Testament saying in Romans 9:6 &quot;Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.&quot;

He moves to an explanation that the children of Isaac (Jacob and Esau) were chosen while in the womb before they committed any acts.  Now this is one of the best examples that divine election is all of grace by the sovereign will of God...in the Calvanistic sense.

I&#039;ll have to admit that I got caught up in that and was not able to see the forest for the trees a bit.

If we go back into the Old Testament we see that Abraham had a number of children.  Isaac, of course, and Ishmael but also a number of others by his second wife.  These &quot;lesser&quot; children are given monetary blessings and sent off at the end of Abraham&#039;s life.

The words of Romans 9:7 always made sense to me because in Genesis 17:21 God tells Abraham that is will DEFINITELY be through Isaac that the covenant will be established and not Ishmael.  But I the significance was lost when Romans 9:10-13 went spoke in reference to Jacob and Esau.

Today I saw the importance of it.  Isaac was specifically chosen to bear the line of &quot;promise&quot; for no other reason than God wanted to show His power in the lives of Abraham and because it pleased him to run the show that way instead of using Ishmael as a conduit of the promise.  But it&#039;s really with the next generation that this is driven home.

God CHOSE Isaac, so, it&#039;s easy to think that all of Isaac&#039;s children would have been included in the promise.  This kind of thinking comes from the next (3rd) generation when Jacob&#039;s 12 sons are chosen as the 12 tribes of Israel.

This is a false assumption though, as we see here.  Just because Isaac was &quot;chosen&quot; did not mean that all of his children were chosen.  One was included in the promise and one was not.  Even at this early phase of the covenant, God was sovereignly &quot;choosing&quot; his people when there was only TWO to choose from!

We also know for a fact that that not all of the descendants of Jacob were &quot;chosen&quot;.  Take a look at Nadab and Abihu for example.  It seems like there is an unspoken understanding that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jacob&#039;s 12 sons were &quot;chosen&quot; but it&#039;s after THAT that we see people not being chosen.  It&#039;s kinda dismissed as irrelevant that Ishmael and Esau were excluded.

The truth is that from the very beginning, God was always &quot;choosing&quot; those who would have true faith...and that the early history of Israel was no exception.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I saw something in Romans 9 today that never &#8220;clicked&#8221; before.  In vs. 6-16 we have Paul giving a summary of the concept that The Elect are not separated because of their paternal heritage to Abraham, but that The Elect are actually part of the group that is chosen by &#8220;promise&#8221;.  The question then becomes, what is this &#8220;promise&#8221;?  The conclusion is then presented that those of &#8220;faith&#8221; are the ones really covered by the promise and not just those born &#8216;physically&#8217; from the line of Abraham.</p>
<p>Paul quotes the Old Testament saying in Romans 9:6 &#8220;Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.&#8221;</p>
<p>He moves to an explanation that the children of Isaac (Jacob and Esau) were chosen while in the womb before they committed any acts.  Now this is one of the best examples that divine election is all of grace by the sovereign will of God&#8230;in the Calvanistic sense.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll have to admit that I got caught up in that and was not able to see the forest for the trees a bit.</p>
<p>If we go back into the Old Testament we see that Abraham had a number of children.  Isaac, of course, and Ishmael but also a number of others by his second wife.  These &#8220;lesser&#8221; children are given monetary blessings and sent off at the end of Abraham&#8217;s life.</p>
<p>The words of Romans 9:7 always made sense to me because in Genesis 17:21 God tells Abraham that is will DEFINITELY be through Isaac that the covenant will be established and not Ishmael.  But I the significance was lost when Romans 9:10-13 went spoke in reference to Jacob and Esau.</p>
<p>Today I saw the importance of it.  Isaac was specifically chosen to bear the line of &#8220;promise&#8221; for no other reason than God wanted to show His power in the lives of Abraham and because it pleased him to run the show that way instead of using Ishmael as a conduit of the promise.  But it&#8217;s really with the next generation that this is driven home.</p>
<p>God CHOSE Isaac, so, it&#8217;s easy to think that all of Isaac&#8217;s children would have been included in the promise.  This kind of thinking comes from the next (3rd) generation when Jacob&#8217;s 12 sons are chosen as the 12 tribes of Israel.</p>
<p>This is a false assumption though, as we see here.  Just because Isaac was &#8220;chosen&#8221; did not mean that all of his children were chosen.  One was included in the promise and one was not.  Even at this early phase of the covenant, God was sovereignly &#8220;choosing&#8221; his people when there was only TWO to choose from!</p>
<p>We also know for a fact that that not all of the descendants of Jacob were &#8220;chosen&#8221;.  Take a look at Nadab and Abihu for example.  It seems like there is an unspoken understanding that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jacob&#8217;s 12 sons were &#8220;chosen&#8221; but it&#8217;s after THAT that we see people not being chosen.  It&#8217;s kinda dismissed as irrelevant that Ishmael and Esau were excluded.</p>
<p>The truth is that from the very beginning, God was always &#8220;choosing&#8221; those who would have true faith&#8230;and that the early history of Israel was no exception.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
