Romans 9:30-31

Romans 9:30-The Paradoxical Conclusion: The Gentiles Who Did Not Pursue Righteousness Like The , Obtained It By Faith

Next, we begin a study of the final paragraph in Romans chapter nine by noting Romans 9:30 in which Paul presents a paradoxical conclusion based upon his preceding statements that the Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness like the Jews, obtained it by faith. A “paradox” is a statement or proposition that is seemingly self-contradictory or absurd but in reality, it is expressing a truth. The “paradox” in Romans 9:30 is that the Gentiles who unlike the Jews were never characterized as zealously pursing a right relation to God, obtained it through faith in Christ whereas the Jews who did zealously pursued a right standing with God, never obtained it because they pursued it through a meritorious system of works. By way of review of what we have studied thus far in the first twenty-seven verses of this chapter, we have noted the following: The first paragraph in chapter nine appears in verses 1-5, which serve as a preface for Paul’s comments for the rest of the chapter. In Romans 9:1, Paul implicitly appeals to Christ and the Holy Spirit as witnesses as to the veracity of his statements in Romans 9:2-3. Paul feels the need to do this since in his day he was accused by many in as being a traitor to the nation. Romans 9:1, “I am speaking the truth in accordance with the code of Christ. I am by no means lying, while my conscience does confirm to me in accordance with the code of the Holy Spirit.” Then in Romans 9:2, Paul expresses his great sorrow and unceasing grief over the nation of Israel’s rejection of Christ as their Messiah. Romans 9:2, “That, as far my feelings are concerned, there is always great sorrow as well as unceasing anguish in my heart.” Paul in Romans 9:3 communicates to his readers his great love for the nation of Israel by expressing his desire to be separated from Christ for their sake. Romans 9:3, “In fact, I could almost wish that I myself could be accursed, totally and completely separated from Christ as a substitute for my brothers, specifically, my fellow countrymen with respect to racial descent.” Next, in Romans 9:4-5, he lists eight privileges that were given to the nation of Israel by God that helps the reader understand the depth of his sorrow and grief. Romans 9:4-5, “Who indeed by virtue of their unique, privileged character are, as an eternal spiritual truth, . To them belongs the adoption as sons and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the service

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Ministries 1 and the promises. To them belong the fathers and from them, the Christ with respect to human racial descent, the one who is, as an eternal spiritual truth, God over each and every living and non-living thing, worthy of praise and glorification throughout eternity. Amen!” In Romans 9:6, Paul begins the second paragraph in the chapter that presents his premise for the chapter. In this passage, he teaches that the nation of Israel’s rejection of Jesus of Nazareth does not imply that God promises to the nation have been nullified because those who descended in a racial sense from Israel, aka are never considered by God to be spiritual Israel. Romans 9:6, “Now, this does not by any means imply that the word originating from God is nullified because each and every person who descended from Israel, these are, as an eternal spiritual truth, by no means, Israel.” Then in Romans 9:7, Paul teaches that a racial Jew is never considered by God to be a member of spiritual Israel because they are biological descendants of but rather He considers those who have been effectually called from the line of to be Abraham’s spiritual descendants and thus spiritual Israel. Romans 9:7, “Nor because they are, as an eternal spiritual truth, Abraham’s biological descendants are they, as an eternal spiritual truth, spiritual children. On the contrary, ‘by means of the line of Isaac for your benefit, spiritual descendants will be effectually called.’” He mentions Abraham since the effectual call of Abraham was the first stage in the formation of the nation of Israel. Thus being a true Israelite is not based solely upon racial heritage, which supports Paul’s premise in Romans 9:6. The apostle in Romans 9:8 teaches that these biological descendants of Abraham are by no means considered by God to be His children but rather He considers the children of the promise as being such and that the children of the promise are regarded by God as being Abraham’s spiritual descendants. Romans 9:8, “This means these biological children by no means are, as an eternal spiritual truth, God’s children. On the contrary, the promised children are, as an eternal spiritual truth, regarded as spiritual descendants.” This passage supports his premise in Romans 9:6 that not all racial Israel is spiritual Israel since the second stage in the formation of the nation of Israel was based upon the fulfillment of a promise that God made to Abraham that he and would have a child. In Romans 9:9, Paul paraphrases Genesis 18:10 and 14 to identify specifically the content of the Lord’s promise to Abraham, which was that the Lord would fulfill His promise to Abraham and they would have a son named Isaac.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 2

Romans 9:9, “Specifically, this is, as an eternal spiritual truth, the word, which is a divine promise: ‘At this time next year, I will intervene and for the benefit of Sarah there will be a son.’” This passage further supports Paul’s premise in Romans 9:6 in that it points out that the second stage in the formation of the nation of Israel was based upon a miracle with God providing Abraham and Sarah with a son when they were both past the age of child bearing. This would refute those in Israel who contend that racial heritage or circumcision is the basis for being a true Israelite. Then in Romans 9:10 Paul moves on to the third stage in the formation of the nation of Israel. Romans 9:10, “In fact, not only this, but also Rebekah, while having been pregnant by means of one man as a source, our father Isaac.” The implication of this statement is that there was nothing to discriminate or distinguish Jacob from . They had the same father and mother and were conceived from the very same act of sexual intercourse. Therefore, God’s selection of Jacob over Esau was not based upon race but rather God’s sovereign grace since they shared the same biological parents and were conceived at the same point in time, thus neither of them received the covenant promises based upon race or being biological descendants of Rebekah and Isaac. Next, in Romans 9:11, Paul teaches that God’s choice of Jacob’s descendants over Esau’s in forming spiritual Israel was in order that the Father’s predetermined plan, which is in accordance with election, would remain immutable. Never by means of human merit as constituting this plan’s source but rather by means of the Father who effectually calls as constituting this plan’s source. Romans 9:11, “For you see, when they had not yet been born nor practiced anything good or evil in order that God the Father’s predetermined plan, which is in accordance with election would remain immutable. Never based upon meritorious actions as constituting its source, but rather based upon the one who effectually calls is the one who constitutes its source.” So in this passage, he is teaching that God’s choice of Jacob’s descendants over Esau’s is in accordance with the Father’s immutable predetermined plan and sovereign will. God’s selection of Jacob and his descendants, the Israelites over Esau and his descendants, the Edomites to be His covenant people further supports Paul’s premise in Romans 9:6. It points out that the third stage in the formation of the nation of Israel was not based upon racial heritage but rather upon God’s sovereign grace and totally apart from human merit. In Romans 9:12, the apostle cites Genesis 25:23, which contains the prophecy that Esau’s descendants would be in subjection to Jacob’s. Romans 9:12, “It was said to her, ‘The older will be in subjection to the younger.’”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 3

The quotation from Genesis 25:23 was made by the Lord to Rebekah in the context of the nations that would descend from her twins. Thus, this quotation is used to advance Paul’s discussion that the formation and election of the nation of Israel was never based upon racial heritage but rather God’s sovereign grace, which again would support Paul’s premise in Romans 9:6. In Romans 9:13, Paul quotes :2-3, which is also clearly speaking of Esau’s descendants and not Esau as an individual. Romans 9:13, “As it stands written for all of eternity, ‘Jacob I loved however Esau I hated.’” God’s selection of Israel rather than Edom illustrates perfectly that the election of Israel is based upon God’s sovereign grace and never based upon human merit. Thus this contributes to Paul’s argument that not all biological Israel are spiritual Israel since many in Israel erroneously believed that being a biological descendant of the patriarchs or performing meritorious works constitutes being a member of the covenant people of God. That the quotation in Malachi 1:2-3 is a reference to the national election of Israel and has nothing to do with Jacob and Esau as persons is indicated in that this passage is quoted by Paul in Romans 9:13 as he is discussing the origins and national election of Israel as a nation. In Romans 9:1-5, he expresses his sorrow and grief over the nation of Israel’s rejection of Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah. Then in verse 6, he teaches that this rejection does not imply that God’s promises to the nation have been nullified since not all “racial” Israel is considered by God to be “spiritual” Israel, i.e. His covenant people. Then, in verses 7-12, he illustrates this premise in verse 6. Secondly, in Malachi 1:1, Malachi says that the oracle in Malachi 1:2-3 is to the nation of Israel. In Malachi 1:2, the Lord says to the nation of Israel, “ I have loved you ” and Israel’s response is “ how have You loved us ?” Therefore, the context clearly indicates that the Lord is addressing the nation of Israel and saying that He loved the nation as demonstrated by His electing them to be His covenant people rather than Esau’s descendants, the Edomites and is emphatically not addressing them as individual human beings. The statement “ Jacob I loved but Esau I hated ” is “not” a reference to Jacob and Esau as individuals but rather it is a reference to the nations, which descended from them, namely, the Israelites from Jacob and the Edomites from Esau. Therefore, the statement refers to the “national” election of Israel as God’s covenant people who are descendants of Jacob and the rejection of the Edomites as His covenant people who were descendants of Esau. The rejection of Esau’s descendants as His covenant people does “not” mean that God elected the Edomites and the Gentiles to eternal condemnation and the

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 4

Israelites to salvation since that would contradict the biblical doctrine of the unlimited atonement, which states that God desires all men to be saved. The election of the nation of Israel, like the choice of Jacob over Esau was “non-meritorious” meaning that there was nothing that the nation of Israel and Jacob did that secured God choosing them since many times both sinned and failed to obey God. In Romans 9:14, Paul begins the third paragraph and reverts back to his diatribe style by asking the rhetorical question. Romans 9:14, “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? There is, as an eternal spiritual truth no unrighteousness with respect to the judgment of God (the Father), is there? Absolutely not!” He poses this rhetorical question since he anticipates one of his readers coming to the erroneous conclusion that there is unrighteousness or injustice in the judgment of God. This conclusion is based upon God’s dealings with contemporary unregenerate Israel (Romans 9:6) as well as His dealings in the past when He chose Isaac over Ishmael and Jacob over Esau to be members of His covenant people (Romans 9:7-13). So in verse 14, Paul emphatically declares that there is no unrighteousness with respect to God’s judgment in rejecting unregenerate Israel in his day and accepting those Jews who had faith in His Son Jesus Christ. Nor, was there unrighteousness in God’s judgment with respect to His dealings in the past when He chose Isaac over Ishmael and Jacob over Esau to be members of His covenant people. In Romans 9:15, Paul supports this argument by presenting the basis for his statement in Romans 9:14 that God is never unfair, which is that God is sovereign and can be merciful and compassionate to whomever He desires. In Paul’s day, God rejected unsaved Israel and accepted those Jews who had faith in His Son Jesus Christ because He is sovereign to do so and no one has any merit with God to start with. Romans 9:15, “Because, He says to , ‘I will be gracious to whomever I choose to be gracious to and in addition I will be merciful to whomever I choose to be merciful to.’” Then, in Romans 9:16, Paul teaches that experiencing God’s grace and mercy and thus eternal salvation is never dependent upon human desire or effort but rather it is based upon God’s grace policy, which would support his premise in Romans 9:6 and refute those who contend being a true Israelite is based upon racial heritage. Romans 9:16, “Therefore in fact, it is never, as an eternal spiritual truth, dependent upon human desire or dependent upon human effort but rather dependent upon the One who is gracious, who is God.”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 5

Next, in Romans 9:17, Paul cites Exodus 9:16, which records God’s confrontation with the unregenerate Pharaoh of Egypt to illustrate further his statements in Romans 9:14-17 that God is never unfair. Romans 9:17, “In fact, the Scripture says to Pharaoh, ‘For this very purpose, I raised you up in order that I myself may demonstrate My power through you and in addition that the reputation of the character and work of my Person may be proclaimed publicly everywhere throughout the entire earth.” In Romans 9:15-16, he viewed God’s sovereignty and righteousness in the positive sense but now in Romans 9:17 he views them from the negative side. In this passage, Paul wants his readers to see the relationship that exists between God’s dealings with Pharaoh and His dealings with unregenerate Israel in his day. In the same way that God was glorified among the Gentiles through Pharaoh’s disobedience in the past so in the same way in Paul’s day God was being glorified among the Gentiles through the nation of Israel’s disobedience to his gospel. So in this passage Paul views God’s righteousness from the negative side to further illustrate why God is never unfair for rejecting those Jews in Paul’s day who rejected Jesus Christ as Savior as well for rejecting Ishmael and Esau. In Paul’s day, God rejected unsaved Israel and accepted those Jews who had faith in His Son Jesus Christ because He is sovereign to do so. However, we must qualify this by saying that those whom God rejected for rejecting His Son as Savior, God desired for them to be saved but they refused His offer of salvation in His Son and so God only rejects those who reject Him. Therefore, grace and mercy was extended to all men, both Jew and Gentile on the basis that Jesus Christ’s spiritual death on the Cross propitiated the Father’s holiness, which demanded that sin and sinners be the objects of His wrath, i.e. His righteousness indignation. Thus, those who experienced the grace and mercy of God are those who accepted God’s free gift of salvation through faith alone in Christ alone and those who did not did not were those who rejected Christ as Savior. Also, God was never unjust in the past when He chose Isaac over Ishmael and Jacob over Esau to be members of His covenant people because God is sovereign. He chose to extend grace and mercy to Isaac and Jacob by making them members of His covenant people since He has that right to do so. This is not to say that Ishmael and Esau were never extended grace and mercy in the sense that they could not get saved since God desires all men to be saved. So God extended grace and mercy to these two but Isaac and Jacob not only received grace and mercy in the form of the offer of salvation but also they received it in the form of being made members of the covenant people of God. Neither earned it or deserved it since no man has any merit with God. Nor, did Ishmael and Esau not merit being chosen to be members of the covenant people of God.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 6

Romans 9:18 closes the third paragraph and summarizes Romans 9:14-17 by teaching that God extends grace to whomever He chooses to extend mercy to and He hardens whomever He chooses to harden. Romans 9:18, “Therefore, in fact He, as an eternal spiritual truth, does extend grace to whomever He does choose however on the other hand, He, as an eternal spiritual truth, does harden whomever He does choose.” Those whom He extends grace to are those sinners who appropriate His grace by exercising faith in Jesus Christ as their Savior and those whom He hardens are those sinners who fail to appropriate His grace by rejecting Jesus Christ as Savior. Thus, God is never unrighteousness in His dealings with sinners as Paul argues in Romans 9:14 and if so then He was certainly not unrighteousness when rejecting the nation of Israel for rejecting His Son Jesus Christ as Savior. Neither is He unrighteous or unjust in exercising His wrath towards unregenerate Israel, nor is He unrighteous or unjust for exercising grace in the form of the forgiveness of sins towards those who Jews who accept His Son as Savior. The fifth paragraph appears in Romans 9:19-29. In Romans 9:19, Paul addresses those who would contend with him by posing the rhetorical question as to why does God still find fault with those who reject Him since who can ever resist His sovereign will. Romans 9:19, “In reply, you will contend with me, ‘Why does He, as an eternal spiritual truth, still find fault? For who does, as an eternal spiritual truth, resist His will?’” No one can resist the sovereign will of God since in His omniscience He has figured into His plan in eternity past every decision that members of the human race will make during the course of their lifetimes, even those decisions to accept or reject Jesus Christ as Savior. Therefore, no one can resist the sovereign will of God since in relation to the divine decree God decided in eternity past, from His attribute of sovereignty that each and every decision to either accept or reject Jesus Christ as Savior would take place. No one can resist the sovereign will of God since each and every positive and negative that a person would make during the course of their lifetime was a part of God’s sovereign will that is based upon His omniscient knowledge of all the facts concerning what will take place in the future. No one can resist the sovereign will of God since the Lord from His omniscience looked down the corridors of time and decreed to take place each and every positive and negative decision that a person would make during the course of his lifetime including those decisions to either accept or reject Christ as Savior. In Romans 9:20, Paul responds to the rhetorical questions he presented in Romans 9:19 by implicitly rebuking the attitude of those who would pose these questions and would thus presume to judge the ways of their Creator.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 7

Romans 9:20, “In fact, on the contrary, who are you-a mere human being- to contradict God? The object formed will not contend with the one who forms the object, ‘Why did you make like this?’” No sinner has a right to call into question, God’s decision to extend grace to whoever He chooses to and harden those whom He chooses to harden since no one has any merit with God. In fact, those whom He hardens are those who first harden themselves by rejecting His Son as Savior and those whom He extends grace to are those who appropriate His grace through faith alone in Christ alone. Furthermore, every member of the human race is treated by God in grace since the offer of salvation is extended to all men since He desires all men to be saved and sent His Son to the cross for all men to make this offer possible for all men. In Romans 9:21, Paul continues to respond to the rhetorical questions he presented in Romans 9:19 that might be posed by his opponents by implicitly rebuking the attitude of those who would presume to judge the ways of their Creator. Romans 9:21, “Or does not the potter possess authority over the clay in order to make from the same lump, on the one hand a vessel, which is for honor while on the other hand that which is for dishonor? Absolutely!” Paul employs the potter-clay motif to illustrate to his readers that like the potter over the clay, God has authority over Israel so as to extend mercy to those Israelites whom He chooses that accept by faith His Son Jesus Christ as Savior and to harden those Israelites whom He chooses that reject His Son. In verse 21, Paul employs a rhetorical question that is related to the one in verse 20, which demands a positive response from the reader that the potter who is analogous to God does have authority over the clay, which is analogous to Israel. Remember, although this is true of the Gentiles as well, Paul is speaking in the context of Israel’s rejection of Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah. In verse 21, he is continuing to demonstrate his premise in Romans 9:6 that even though Jesus of Nazareth was rejected by the nation of Israel as her Messiah, this does not imply that God’s promises to the nation have been nullified since not all racial Israel is considered by God to be spiritual Israel. In verse 22, Paul teaches that because God does choose to demonstrate His wrath and to make known His power publicly and explicitly through the gospel, He endured with much patience unsaved Israel in his day who are destined for eternal condemnation. Romans 9:22, “In fact, if-and let us assume that it is true for the sake of argument that because God the Father, as an eternal spiritual truth does choose to demonstrate His righteous indignation and in addition to make known publicly and explicitly His power, endured with much patience vessels destined for righteous indignation which are prepared for destruction.”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 8

Then, in verse 23, Paul teaches that God endured with much patience unregenerate Israel in his day in order to make known through the gospel His infinite glory to vessels destined to be the objects of grace, which He prepared in advance in eternity past for glory. Romans 9:23, “And we agree that He has done so in order to make known publicly and explicitly His infinite glory upon vessels destined to be the objects of grace, which He prepared in advance for glory.” Romans 9:24 continues to advance and intensify the discussion of God’s sovereignty over Israel, which is illustrated in Romans 9:20-21 with the potter-clay motif. In this verse, Paul teaches that these objects of grace, which God elected in eternity past, were also effectually called by Him, not only from the Jews but also from Gentiles. Romans 9:24, “Whom He also effectually called, namely us, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles.” In Romans 9:25-26, Paul quotes 2:23 and 1:10 to support his statement in Romans 9:24b that God would not only effectually call Jews but also Gentiles. In Romans 9:25, Paul cites :23 to support his teaching in Romans 9:24 that the Scriptures predicted that like the Jews, Gentiles were to be effectually called by God to be the objects of His grace for all of eternity. Romans 9:25, “In fact, as He says in the book of Hosea, ‘I will effectually call those who were never My people to be ‘My people’ and in addition those who were never divinely loved to be ‘divinely loved.’” In Romans 9:25, Paul is quoting freely from Hosea 2:23 (MT and LXX 2:25) and reverses the order of the two clauses he cites from it and uses different wording from both the Septuagint and Massoretic Text. The apostle Peter in :10 quotes from this passage as well. The major difficulty involved with this quotation is that Paul is using this quotation to support his teaching in Romans 9:24 that Gentiles are also included in the plan of salvation, when originally, Hosea was addressing the Northern Kingdom in Israel and not Gentiles. This problem is resolved by taking in account that this quotation from Hosea 2:23 is rather “free” in that the order of the clauses is reversed by Paul in Romans 9:25 to fit the application to the Gentiles. The order of the clauses in Hosea 2:23 are reversed by Paul in Romans 9:25 in order to make this quote apply to Gentiles. The key to understanding how Paul could apply Hosea 2:23 to Gentiles when it was directed towards the Northern Kingdom in Israel specifically is the expression “ not My people .” Unsaved Jews and Gentiles are both not the people of God simply because of their unregenerate status. So in Romans 9:25, Paul took the expression “ not My people ” that appears in Hosea 2:23 and applied it to the Gentiles as well since by ethnic or racial heritage

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 9 and more importantly, their unregenerate status the Gentiles of course were not God’s people. Therefore, he was led by the Spirit to apply these verses to Gentiles even though it was originally directed towards the Northern Kingdom of Israel. When Hosea says to the Northern Kingdom that they are not God’s people it was because of their unregenerate state, which placed them on the same status of unregenerate Gentiles. Next, in Romans 9:26, Paul cites :10 to support his teaching in Romans 9:24 that the Scriptures predicted that like the Jews, Gentiles were to be effectually called by God. Romans 9:26, “Furthermore, it will come to pass in the very same place where it was said to them, ‘you are, as an eternal spiritual truth, by no means My people,’ there they will be effectually called sons by the living God.’” In this passage, the apostle continues to apply passages in Hosea to Gentiles that were initially directed towards the Northern Kingdom. He does this since through the Spirit, Paul saw an analogy between God’s present rejection of Israel with His past rejection of the Gentiles. Paul also sees the analogy between the present effectual calling of the Gentiles and His future effectual calling of the Jews. Therefore, Paul quotes both Hosea 2:23 in Romans 9:25 and Hosea 1:10 in Romans 9:26 because he wants his readers to see this analogy. In Romans 9:27, Paul cites 10:22 to teach that only a remnant of Jews throughout history will be saved, which supports his premise in Romans 9:6 that not all racial Israel is considered by God to be spiritual Israel, children of the promise and spiritual descendants of Abraham. Romans 9:27, “However, Isaiah cries out over Israel, ‘Though the number which is the posterity descended from Israel is like the sand, which is by the sea only the remnant will be delivered.’” In the first century, as is the case in the twenty-first century most Jews have rejected Jesus of Nazareth as their Messiah. Some in Paul’s day some reasoned as they do today that if Jesus was indeed the Messiah, then, why didn’t Israel accept Him as such? Therefore, in Romans 9:27-33 explains why they rejected Him through the Old Testament Scriptures. Throughout Israel’s history she had rejected the Word of the Lord as witnessed by the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities. Jesus Christ is the incarnate Word of God, thus Israel has always rebelled against Him since to disobey His Word is to disobey Him. Israel’s rejection of the incarnate Word of God resulted in the destruction of and the temple by the Roman armies in 70 A.D. resulting in a centuries long dispersion that lasted until 1948 when Israel was brought back into the land of Palestine.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 10

So in Romans 9:27-33, Paul instructs his readers that the prophets of Israel had foretold this rebellion against the Lord and that only a remnant would be delivered from eternal condemnation in the lake of fire. That a remnant has always been preserved by God in Israel is demonstrated during the church age where only a small percentage of Jews have trusted in Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah. There will only be a remnant that will be saved during Daniel’s Seventieth Week and at the Second Advent of Jesus Christ. Therefore, in Romans 9:27-33, Paul continues to demonstrate his premise in Romans 9:6. Romans 9:27-33 reconciles the promises of God to Israel with the small number of Jewish Christians and serves to substantiate the premise found in Romans 9:6. So the doctrine of the remnant taught by Paul in Romans 9:27-29 serves to support his premise in Romans 9:6. By doing this Paul is actually defending his gospel since its failure to attract the majority of Jews in his day to trust in Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah was undoubtedly used to discredit it. Just as Israel was at fault in the past for rejecting her prophets sent to her by God, so during Paul’s day Israel was at fault for rejecting the greatest of her prophets, Jesus of Nazareth as well as Paul’s gospel. Then, in Romans 9:28, Paul quotes from :23 to warn unregenerate Israel of eternal condemnation in that the Lord Jesus Christ will execute this judgment thoroughly and decisively. Romans 9:28, “In fact, the Lord will execute judgment upon the inhabitants of the land thoroughly and decisively.” In Romans 9:29, Paul quotes :9 to teach that if the Lord had not been merciful by leaving a remnant in Israel that it would have become like Sodom and would have been make like Gomorrah in that not only would the nation have been destroyed but all its citizens would have suffered eternal condemnation as well. Romans 9:29, “So that just as Isaiah predicts, ‘If the Lord over the armies had not left to us descendants and He has, we would have become like Sodom and in addition like Gomorrah, we would have been made like.’” Now in Romans 9:30 we begin the sixth and final paragraph that appears in the chapter, which ends in verse 33. In fact, in Romans 9:30-10:21, Paul addresses God and Israel’s relationship from Israel’s perspective in that unsaved Israel’s culpable in other words, they are responsible for their own actions for rejecting Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah and will face the consequences in that they will suffer God’s wrath for all eternity. Romans 9:6-29 addresses from God’s perspective Israel’s relationship to the gospel of justification by faith alone in Christ alone whereas Romans 9:30-10:21 addresses it from Israel’s perspective. In Romans 9:6-29, we have seen that Paul speaks of God’s relationship with Israel from God’s perspective in that the national election of Israel was based upon

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 11

God’s initiative and sovereign grace and totally independent of human merit. In Romans 9:30-10:21, Paul addresses from Israel’s perspective, their relationship to the gospel of justification by faith alone in Christ alone. Therefore, beginning in Romans 9:30 Paul is shifting the discussion from God’s sovereign grace to Israel’s volitional responsibility. Romans 9:30 and not :1 begins this new section regarding Israel’s culpability. This is indicated first of all by the fact that the rhetorical question ti eroumen , “ what shall we say ?” that appears in Romans 9:30 is frequently used by Paul in the book of Romans to begin a new argument (:1; 6:1; 7:7; 8:31; 9:14). Also, in Romans 9:30, Paul presents a paradoxical conclusion to his remarks in Romans 9:1-29 by teaching that the Gentiles who did not pursue the righteousness of God like the Jews, obtained it by faith, which cues the reader into the discussion of Israel’s failure to attain the righteousness of God through faith in Christ. Then, in Romans 9:31, continues this conclusion by teaching that Israel pursued God’s righteousness based on the Law but did not arrive at it. Next, Paul teaches in Romans 9:32 presents the reason why the did not attain the righteousness of God, namely, they did not pursue it by faith but rather through a meritorious system of works. At the end of this verse and in Romans 9:33 he teaches that Israel as a nation stumbled over the stumbling stone, Jesus of Nazareth, the God-Man, who was crucified. Therefore, based upon the content of Paul’s remarks in Romans 9:30-33 and this rhetorical question in Romans 9:30, it is clear that Paul is beginning this new argument regarding Israel’s culpability in Romans 9:30 rather than Romans 10:1, which the English have the argument beginning. Romans 9:30, “What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith.” This is the seventh time that we have seen the rhetorical question ti eroumen , “what shall we say ?” (:5; 4:1; 6:1; 7:7; 8:31; 9:14) and in every instance, except Romans 3:5, it appears with the inferential use of the conjunction oun . Normally Paul uses this rhetorical question in the book of Romans to introduce a refutation of an inference that might be falsely drawn from what he has said previously to the question. However, in Romans 9:30, Paul uses this rhetorical question to introduce the implication of his teaching in Romans 9:6-29 and in particular Romans 9:24-29. Romans 9:30, “What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith.”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 12

“What ” is the accusative neuter singular form of the interrogative pronoun tis (tiv$ ) (tis), which asks a debater’s rhetorical question and functions as an accusative direct object meaning it is receiving the action of the verb ereo . “Shall we say ” is the first person plural future active indicative form of the verb ereo ( e)revw ) (er-eh-o), which means, “to say.” The verb ereo denotes a strong affirmation by the writer and expresses a solemn declaration. It is used with the interrogative pronoun tis , “ what ” in order to present a rhetorical question that introduces the implication of his teaching in Romans 9:6- 29 and in particular Romans 9:24-29. The first person plural form of the verb is an “exclusive we” since Paul is teaching his readers about Israel’s failure. By using this form he is engaging his audience. The future tense of the verb is a “deliberative future” meaning that it asks a question that implies some doubt about the response. However, Paul is asking a rhetorical question in place of a direct assertion introduces the implication of his teaching in Romans 9:6-29 and in particular Romans 9:24-29. In the active voice, Paul as the subject performs the action of the verb. This is an ‘interrogative” indicative where an “assertion is expected” from Paul’s Christian readership indicating that he is presenting a rhetorical question that introduces the implication of his teaching in Romans 9:6-29 and in particular Romans 9:24-29. This rhetorical question is translated by the New American Standard as “ what shall we say ?” However it is a Greek idiom in debater’s technique and it should be translated, “what is the inference or conclusion that we are forced to?” We will translate the expression ti eroumen , “ what is the conclusion that we are forced to ?” Romans 9:30, “What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith.” “Then ” is the “inferential” use of the post-positive conjunction oun ( ou@n ) (oon), which denotes that what is introduced at this point by the rhetorical question is the result of an inference from Paul’s teaching contained in Romans 9:6-29 and in particular verses 24-29. We will translate oun , “ Therefore .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 9:30: “ Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to ?” Romans 9:30, “What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith.” “That ” is the conjunction hoti ( o^ti ) (hot-ee), which is used with the indicative mood of the verb katalambano , “ attained ” in order to introduce an appositional

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 13 clause that presents the content of Paul’s conclusion that is based upon his teaching in Romans 9:6-29 and in particular verses 24-29. When the conjunction hoti stands in apposition to a noun, pronoun or other substantive it introduces an appositional clause where you can substitute the clause for its antecedent. In Romans 9:30, the hoti clause stands in apposition to the interrogative pronoun tis , “ what ” and could replace it entirely. If we do this Paul is saying, “Therefore, we can say or conclude that the Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith.” We will translate hoti , “ that .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 9:30: “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? That…” Romans 9:30, “What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith.” “Gentiles ” is the nominative neuter plural form of the noun ethnos ( e&qno$ ) (eth-nos), which is used in contrast to the Jews and thus refers to all those individuals who are “not” of Jewish racial descent and thus “not” members of the covenant people of God, Israel. The word functions as a “nominative subject” meaning that it is performing the action of the verb dioko , “ who did pursue ” whose meaning is negated by the particle me , “ not .” The anarthrous construction of the word is significant since usually the nominative subject is indicated by an articular construction. However, Paul omits the article since he wants to emphasize that the Gentiles are characterized as not pursuing the goal of being right with God. This is not to say that the Gentiles did not have individuals who were moral and did not seek to be right with God. But typically, the Gentiles did not demonstrate the same desire as the Jews for being right before God. We will translate ethnos , “ the Gentiles…characteristically .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 9:30: “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? That the Gentiles… characteristically…” Romans 9:30, “What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith.” “Who did not pursue ” is composed of the negative particle me ( mhv) (may), “not ” and the articular nominative neuter plural present active participle form of the verb dioko ( diwvkw ) (dee-o-ko), “ who did pursue .” Albrecht Oepke lists the following classical meanings for the verb dioko (Theological Dictionary of the volume 2, pages 229-230): (1) To impel (2) To set in rapid motion; without object, app. Intr., “to journey, to ride, to march, to row,” or generally “to hasten.” (3) To persecute, to expel (4) Zealously

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 14 to follow (5) To run after a person; to attach oneself to someone (6) Earnestly to pursue or promote a cause. In classical Greek dioko literally means “to chase, pursue, run after, drive away, and figuratively “to pursue something zealously, try to achieve something, try to obtain, prosecute.” The original Greek sense of the word is based on the meaning drive, set in motion, push, which then becomes persecute, banish and, used metaphorically, follow, strive for a person or a thing, push forward zealously, aspire to, be zealously behind something, endeavor with zeal. The word was used of pursuing or chasing in war or hunting (Herodotus 9.11). It was also used of a person following after a lover. The verb was used of seeking or pursuing an object. It was used of following or waiting for an event to take place. The word was also employed of pursuing an argument with someone. It was used of driving or chasing someone away (Odyssey 18.409; Herodotus 9.77). The word was of the wind driving a ship (Odyssey 9.77). Dioko was used of rowers who impel or driving a ship. It could also mean drive on or to drive (Illiad 23.344, 424). The word was used of horses who gallop and soldiers who march on (Xenophon Anabasis 7.2.20). Dioko was also used of music which impels or urges. It was used of work meaning to urge on, carry forward. The verb dioko was also utilized as a legal term meaning to prosecute a defendant (Herodotus 6.82). It was also used of impeaching a law in a decree. Aristotle used the verb for one who pursues his rights at law. Homer used the word in regards to chariot racing in the ancient world: “You must drive your chariot and horses so as to hug this, and yourself, in the strong- fabricated chariot, lean over a little to the left of the course, and as for your right horse, whip him and urge him along, slacking your hands to give him his full rein, but make your left-hand horse keep hard against the turning-post so that the hub’s edge of your fashioned wheel will seem to be touching it, yet take care not really to brush against it, for, if so, you might damage your horses and break your chariot, and that will be a thing of joy for the others, and a failure for you. So, dear son, drive thoughtfully and be watchful. For if you follow the others but get first by the turning-post, there is none who could sprint ( dioko ) to make it up, nor close you, nor pass you” (Homer Iliad Book 23, 340-345). He uses it again in the Iliad, “While you Hektor, run after ( dioko ) what can never be captured, the horses of valiant Aiakides” (Iliad Book 17, 75). Philo employed the word as well: “And secondly, that men might not be warring with their bodies while their souls were far from the battle; for it is impossible but that the minds of men in such a condition as has been described above must be held back and kept on the stretch, from a desire to enjoy the things from which they have been torn away. For as men who are hungry or thirsty, if

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 15 they only get a sight of anything to eat or to drink, pursue ( dioko ) it and run after without ever turning aside in their eagerness to reach it” (On the Virtues, On Courage, 30). The verb dioko appears 108 times in the Septuagint, of which 22 are non- canonical and is used to translate 14 Hebrew terms: (1) ‘Ayav ( bya ), “enemy” (Ps. 69:4 [68:4]- (2) Barach ( jrb ), “flee, run away”; hiphil: “put to flight” (1 Chr. 12:15-Codex Sinaiticus only). (3) Dahar ( rhd ), “gallop” (Na. 3:2). (4) Dachaph ( [jd ), “hurry” (Est. 8:14-only some Sinaiticus texts). (5) Halakh (rlh ), “go” (Mi. 2:10). (6) Charadh ( drj ), “tremble”; hiphil: “make afraid” (Is. 17:2). (7) Charedh ( rrj ), “trembling” (Ezr. 9:4). (8) Nadhaph ( [rn ), “drive away”; niphal: “pursue” (Prv. 21:6). (9) Nus (swn), “flee” (Am. 2:16). (10) Radhah ([dr ), “rule” (Lev. 26:17). (11) Radhaph ( [dr ), Qal: “pursue” (Ex. 15:9); “run” (2 Kgs. 5:21); “persecute” (Jer. 17:18); niphal: “be pursued” (Lam. 5:5); “the past” (Ecc. 3:15); piel: “pursue” (Prov. 12:11; Na. 1:8); pual: “be chased” (Is. 17:13); hiphil: “pursue” (Jgs. 20:43). (12) Ruts ( Jwr ), “run” (Hb. 2:2); “be busy” (Hg. 1:9). (13) Shadhadh ( rrv ), “destroyer” (Is. 16:4). (14) Shaphat ( ?pv ), “judge” (Ps. 109:31 [108:31]-only in some Sinaiticus texts). The word is often used in the Septuagint of pursuit by enemies (Ex. 15:9; Ps. 7:1; 31:15 [LXX 30:15]; 35:3 [34:3]). The verb dioko translates a number of Hebrew verbs but chiefly radhaph , “pursue.” It is used of pursuing a goal (Deut. 16:20; Ps. 34:14 [LXX 33:14]; Prov. 15:9). The Old Testament contains exhortations to strive for a goal. In normal Greek settings it will be the good, the beautiful, or virtue that is to be pursued. In the Septuagint it is relationships, e.g. social righteousness (Dt. 16:20; cf. also Josephus, Ant. 6, 12, 7), peace (Ps. 34[33]:14), and righteousness in the sense of true honoring of God (Prov. 15:9), that are to be followed. The verb dioko appears 48 times in the Greek New Testament and has two senses: (1) Negative: to persecute (2) Positive: to pursue. The New Thayer’s Greek Lexicon lists the following NT meanings for the verb (page 153): (1) To make to run or flee, put to flight, drive away (2) To run swiftly in order to catch some person or thing, to run after; to press on: figuratively of one who in a race runs swiftly to reach the goal (3) To harass, trouble, molest one; to persecute; passively with the dative denoting the cause, to be maltreated, suffer persecution on account of something (4) Without the idea of hostility, to run after, follow after (5) Metaphorically with accusative of thing, to pursue i.e., to seek after eagerly, earnestly endeavor to acquire. Bauer, Gingrich and Danker list the following meanings (A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature page 201): (1)

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 16

Hasten, run, press on (2) Persecute (3) Drive away, drive out (4) Run after, pursue both literally and figuratively. Louw and Nida have compiled the following from their research (Greek- English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains volume 2): (1) To follow with haste, and presumably with intensity of effort, in order to catch up with, for friendly or hostile purpose – ‘to run after, to chase after, to pursue’ (page 202). (2) To move quickly and energetically toward some objective – ‘to hasten, to run, to press forward, to press on’ (page 209). (3) To systematically organize a program to oppress and harass people – ‘to persecute, to harass, persecution’ (page 499). (4) To do something with intense effort and with definite purpose or goal – ‘to do with effort, to strive forward’ (page 663). Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words states, “Dioko denotes (a) ‘to drive away,’ (Matt. 23:34); (b) ‘to pursue without hostility, to follow, follow after,’ said of righteousness, (Rom. 9:30); the Law, (9:31; 12:13), hospitality (‘given to’) lit., ‘pursuing’ (as one would a calling), the things which make for peace, (14:19); love, (1 Cor. 14:1); that which is good, (1 Thes. 5:15); righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness, (1 Tim. 6:11); righteousness, faith, love, peace, (2 Tim. 2:22); peace and sanctification, (Heb. 12:14); peace, (1 Pet. 3:11); (c) ‘to follow on’ (used intransitively), (Phil. 3:12,14), RV, ‘I press on’; ‘follow after,’ is an inadequate meaning.” Gunther Abel lists the following New Testament meanings (The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, volume 2, pages 805-806): (1) Persecution (2) Pursuit of Christian Objectives. Moulton lists the following (The Analytic Greek Lexicon Revised, page 104): (1) To put in rapid motion (2) to pursue (3) to follow, pursue the direction of (4) to follow eagerly, endeavor earnestly to acquire (5) To press forwards (6) To pursue with malignity, persecute. In Romans 9:30, the verb dioko means, “to zealously pursue” and is used with the Gentiles as its subject and its meaning is negated by the particle me , “ not .” The verb refers to doing something with intense effort and with a definite purpose or goal in mind and that purpose and goal is identified as being in right relation to God. It denotes zealously pursuing after something so as to acquire it. The negative particle me negates any idea as well as denying any thought of the Gentiles exerting intense effort to attain a right relation to God. The verb functions as a “substantive” participle as indicated by the definite article preceding it, which functions as a substantiver meaning that it converts the participle into a substantive. Therefore, this can be reflected by translating the article with a relative pronoun, “ who .” The present tense of the verb is a “customary” present, which is used to signal an action that regularly occurs. This indicates that the Gentiles who “customarily”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 17 did not zealously pursue a right relation to God, obtained that righteousness by means of faith in Christ. The active voice indicates that the Gentiles as the subject perform the action of not pursuing zealously a right relation to God. We will translate dioko , “ who, customarily do zealously pursue .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 9:30: “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? That the Gentiles who, customarily and characteristically do not zealously pursue …” Romans 9:30, “What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith.” “Righteousness ” is the accusative feminine singular form of the noun dikaiosune ( dikaiosuvnh ) (dik-ah-yos-oo-nay), which refers to a right standing with God or righteous status with God or we could say to be declared justified by God. This is indicated by the following: In -8 Paul taught that God declares a sinner justified through faith in Jesus Christ, which the Gentiles adhered to as indicated by his statements in Romans 9:30-10:21. However, the Jews attempted to be declared justified by God by means of a meritorious system of works as indicated by Paul’s statements in Romans 9:30-10:21. The Gentiles attained the righteousness of God by means of faith in Christ whereas the nation of Israel did not because they pursued it by means of a meritorious system of works. In Romans 9:30, the noun dikaiosune functions as an “accusative direct object” meaning that the word is receiving the action of the verb dioko whose meaning is negated by the particle me , “ not .” Therefore, we will translate the noun dikaiosune , “righteousness .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 9:30: “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? That the Gentiles who, customarily and characteristically do not zealously pursue righteousness…” Romans 9:30, “What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith.” “Attained ” is the third person singular aorist active indicative form of the verb katalambano ( katalambavnw ) (kat-al-am-ban-o), which is a compound word composed of the verb lambano , “to take” whose meaning is intensified by the preposition kata , “down” and thus literally means “to take down.” Delling lists the following classical meanings for the verb (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, volume 4, page 9): (1) Active (a) “to seize, to grasp” (esp. in a hostile manner). (b) “to light upon, to overtake” (c) “to grasp,

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 18 truly to understand (d) “to hold fast” (2) Middle (a) “To requisition for oneself” (b) “to grasp, to understand.” Liddell and Scott list the following classical meanings (page 897): (1) “to seize, lay hold of, to seize for oneself” (2) “to befall, overtake” (3) “seize with the mind, comprehend” (4) “accept” (5) “catch, overtake, come up with” (6) “find on arrival” “to be taken by surprise” (7) “it happens to (8) “had befallen, what had happened, the circumstances” (9) “hold down, cover” (10) “to be compressed” (11) “to keep under, repress, check” (12) “bind” (13) “enforced” (14) “concluded” (15) “compel, constrain to do” (16) “convict, condemn.” Delling lists the following usages of the word in the Septuagint (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, volume 4, page 9): (1) Active (a) Of God; of man (b) Esp. also “to surprise, to light upon suddenly, to overtake (c) “to perceive, to fathom (2) Middle (a) Esp. of captured cities (b) “to overtake.” The verb katalambano appears regularly in the Septuagint where it translates 18 Hebrew words: (1) ‘Achaz ( zja ), “catch” (Jgs. 1:6-only some Vaticanus texts). (2) Bo’ ( awb ), “come” (Prv. 11:27). (3) Ba `ah ( hub ), niphal: “be ransacked” (Ob. 6). (4) Davaq ( qbd ), qal: “follow” (Jer. 42:16 [49:16]); hiphil: “overtake” (Gn. 31:23). (5) Chazaq ( qzj ), “be strong”; hiphil: “to take hold of” (2 Sm. 15:5- only). (6) Lakhadh (dbl), “capture” (Jos. 8:19; 2 Sm. 12:26; Jb. 5:13). (7) Laqach ( jql ), “take” (Ez. 33:4). (8) Matsa ( axm ), qal: “find, reach” (Nm. 32:23; Is. 10:14; Dn. 1:20); niphal: “be found” (Ex. 22:4). (9) Naghash (vdn ), “come near”; niphal: “overtake” (Am. 9:13). (10) Nasa’ ( acn ), “bear” (Jer. 10:19). (11) Nasagh ( gvn ), hiphil: “overtake” (Dt. 19:6; 2 Kgs. 25:5; Lam. 1:3). (12) Saghar (rgs), “be sure” (2 Chr. 9:20). (13) `Atsar ( rxu ), “stop” (1 Kgs. 18:44). (14) Qadham ( sdq ), piel: “come before” (Mi. 6:6). (15) Shekhach ( jbv ), haphel: “find” (Dn. 6:11-Aramaic). (16) Shalam ( slv ), “be complete”; piel: “reward” (Prv. 13:21). (17) Taphas ( cpj ), “seize” (Ps. 71:11 [70:11]). The verb katalambano appears 15 times in the Greek New Testament (Mk. 9:18; Jn. 1:5; 8:3, 4; 12:35; Ac. 4:13; 10:34; 25:25; Rm. 9:30; 1 Co. 9:24; Eph. 3:18; Phlp. 3:12 twice, 13; 1 Th. 5:4). In the New Testament, kata intensifies the verb lambano meaning “to grasp with force,” or of suddenness, “to surprise” Delling states that the verb is used in both a positive and negative sense (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament volume 4, page 10): (1) Positive: “to attain definitively” (20 Negative: “to overpower.” He also states in the same article that in the middle voice and only in the intellectual sphere it can “to establish” (Ac. 4:13; 25:25, “to grasp fundamentally, to appropriate to oneself inwardly” (Ac. 10:34; Eph. 3:18).

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 19

Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words commenting on the verb writes, “ Katalambano properly signifies ‘to lay hold of’; then, ‘to lay hold of so as to possess as one's own, to appropriate.’ Hence it has the same twofold meaning as the Eng. ‘to apprehend’; (a), ‘to seize upon, take possession of,’ (1) with a beneficial effect, as of ‘laying hold’ of the righteousness which is of faith, (Rom. 9:30) (not there a matter of attainment, as in the Eng. versions, but of appropriation); of the obtaining of a prize, (1 Cor. 9:24) (RV, ‘attain’); of the apostle’s desire ‘to apprehend,’ or ‘lay hold of,’ that for which he was apprehended by Christ, (Phil. 3:12-13); (2) with a detrimental effect, e. g., of demon power, (Mark 9:18); of human action in seizing upon a person, (John 8:3-4); metaphorically, with the added idea of overtaking, of spiritual darkness in coming upon people, (John 12:35); of the Day of the Lord, in suddenly coming upon unbelievers as a thief, (1 Thes. 5:4); (b), ‘to lay hold of’ with the mind, to understand, perceive, e. g., metaphorically, of darkness with regard to light, (John 1:5), though possibly here the sense is that of (a) as in (12:35); of mental perception, (Acts 4:13; 10:34; 25:25; Eph. 3:18). Louw and Nida list the following New Testament meanings (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains, volume 2): (1) To acquire, with the implication of significant effort – ‘to acquire, to attain, to obtain, to take’ (page 564). (2) To attack, with the implication of gaining control over – ‘to attack, to overpower’ (page 500). (3) To seize and take control of – ‘to catch, to seize, to arrest’ (page 485). (4) To gain control over – ‘to overcome, to gain control of’ (page 474). (5) To come to understand something which was not understood or perceived previously – ‘to understand, to realize, to grasp, to comprehend’ (page 382). Bauer, Gingrich and Danker list the following meanings (A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature pages 412- 413): (1) Active and passive seize, win, attain, make one’s own (2) Seize with hostile intent, overtake, come upon (3) Catch, detect (4) Middle grasp, find, understand. The New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon lists the following (pages 332-333): (1) To lay hold of so as to make one’s own, to obtain, attain to: with the accusative of the thing, the prize of victory, 1 Co. 9:24; Phlp. 3:12; to make one’s own, to take into one’s self, appropriate (2) To seize upon, take possession of (3) To detect, catch (4) To lay hold of with the mind; to understand, perceive, learn, comprehend. The following is a comprehensive list of meanings in the New Testament: (1) “to comprehend” (Jn. 1:5; Eph. 3:18). (2) “to surprise” (1 Th. 5:4). (3) “to seize” (Mk. 9:18). (4) “to catch” (Jn. 8:3-4). (5) “to observe” (Ac. 4:13). (6) “to understand” (Ac. 10:34). (7) “to overcome” (Jn. 12:35). (8) “to acquire” (Rm.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 20

9:30). (9) “to obtain” (1 Co. 9:24). (10) “to apprehend” (Phlp. 3:12-13). (11) “to find” (Ac. 25:25). In Romans 9:30, the verb katalambano means “to acquire, obtain” and is used with dikaiosune , “ righteousness ” as its object and the Gentiles as the subject. Therefore, it indicates that the Gentile who characteristically did not pursue a right standing with God “obtained” this righteousness by means of faith. The aorist tense of the verb is a “culminative” or “consummative” aorist tense, which is used to emphasize the cessation of an act or state. This type of aorist views an event in its entirety but regarding it from the viewpoint of its existing results. Therefore, the “culminative” aorist views the Gentiles obtaining a right standing with God through faith in Jesus Christ. But regards their justification by faith in Christ from the standpoint of its existing results, which is that they possess His righteousness, which was imputed to them the moment they exercised faith in Christ. The active voice indicates that the Gentiles as the subject perform the non- meritorious action of obtaining a right standing with God through faith in Christ. The indicative mood is “declarative” presenting this assertion as an unqualified statement of fact. We will translate katalambano , “ obtained .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 9:30: “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? That the Gentiles who, customarily and characteristically do not zealously pursue righteousness obtained…” Romans 9:30, “What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith.” “Righteousness ” is the accusative feminine singular form of the noun dikaiosune ( dikaiosuvnh ) (dik-ah-yos-oo-nay), which once again refers to a right standing with God or being in right relation to Him. The word functions as an “accusative direct object” meaning that it is receiving the action of the verb katalambano , “ obtained .” Romans 9:30, “What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith.” “Righteousness ” is once again the accusative feminine singular form of the noun dikaiosune ( dikaiosuvnh ) (dik-ah-yos-oo-nay), which for the third time in this passage refers to a right standing with God or being in right relation to Him or declared justified by God. However, this time functions as an “accusative of simple apposition” meaning that it is appositive to the same noun in the same case.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 21

Corrected translation thus far of Romans 9:30: “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? That the Gentiles who, customarily and characteristically do not zealously pursue righteousness obtained righteousness…” Romans 9:30, “What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith.” “Even ” is the “emphatic” use of the conjunction de ( deV) (deh), which introduces a statement that advances upon Paul’s statement that the Gentiles obtained justification with God and intensifies this statement. The conjunction de is emphatic in that not only is it presenting “additional” information regarding the Gentiles obtaining a justification with God but it also is “advancing” and “intensifying” this statement. Not only did the Gentiles obtained justification with God but they did so “in fact” by means of faith in Christ. We will translate de , “ in fact .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 9:30: “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? That the Gentiles who, customarily and characteristically did not zealously pursue righteousness obtained righteousness, in fact a righteousness…” Romans 9:30, “What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith.” “Which is by faith ” is composed of the accusative feminine singular form of the definite article ho ( o() (ho), “ which is ” and the preposition ek ( e)k ), “ by” and the genitive feminine singular form of the noun pistis ( pivsti$ ), “ faith .” The noun pistis refers to the non-meritorious system of perception of placing one’s “trust” or “confidence in” the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior. He is the object of faith for salvation and justification since His spiritual death on the Cross as an impeccable person redeemed sinful mankind from the slave market of sin, satisfied the demands of a holy God that human sin be judged, reconciled the entire human race to God and fulfilled the righteous requirements of the Law. He is also the object of faith for salvation and justification since His physical death dealt with the problem of man’s sin nature, which is the source of personal sin. That He is the object of faith is indicated in Romans 3:22 and 26. Romans 3:21-26, “But now, independently of seeking to be justified by obedience to the Law, the righteousness originating from God is being manifested at the present time while simultaneously being attested to by the Law and the Prophets. Namely, the righteousness originating from God through faith in Jesus who is the Christ for the benefit of each and every person who does believe for there is, as an eternal spiritual truth, absolutely

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 22 no distinction . For each and every person has sinned consequently, they are always failing to measure up to the glory originating from God with the result that they might, as an eternal spiritual truth, be undeservedly justified based upon His grace by means of the redemption, which is by means of the spiritual death of Christ who is Jesus whom God the Father offered publicly as a propitiatory gift through faith by means of His blood in order to demonstrate His righteousness because of the deliberate and temporary suspension of judgment of the sins, which have taken place in the past on the basis of the tolerance originating from the character and nature of God the Father . Correspondingly, in relation to the demonstration of His righteousness during this present distinct period of history, that He Himself is, as an eternal spiritual truth, inherently righteous, even while justifying anyone by means of faith in Jesus .” In Romans 9:30, the preposition ek is used with the genitive form of pistis as a marker of means constituting a source. The noun pistis as a “genitive of means” indicates that faith in Jesus Christ is “the means constituting the source by which” God the Father justifies the sinner. Paul uses ek not only because he wants to emphasize the means of justification, faith in Jesus Christ but that this means constitutes the source of justification. This preposition ek indicates that justification is not only by means of faith in Jesus Christ but that it also constitutes the source of justification. Therefore, in Romans 9:30, the preposition ek is a reminder to the Jew that justification is not only by means of faith in Jesus Christ but that this faith in Jesus Christ constitutes the source of justification. We will translate the prepositional phrase ek pisteos , “ by means of faith as a source .” The definite article ho functions as a “substantiver” meaning it nominalizes (i.e. converts to a noun) and conceptualizing the prepositional phrase ek pisteos , “ by means of faith as a source .” Thus, we can translate it with the noun phrase “which is .” The article functions as a “accusative of simple apposition” meaning that it is appositive to the noun dikaiosune , which is in the same case. Completed corrected translation of Romans 9:30: “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? That the Gentiles who, customarily and characteristically do not zealously pursue righteousness obtained righteousness, in fact a righteousness, which is by means of faith as a source.”

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 23

Romans 9:31-Even Though Israel Pursued A Legal Righteousness, They Never Measured Up To The Law

As we studied in detail, in Romans 9:30, Paul presents a paradoxical conclusion based upon what he taught in Romans 9:6-29 that the Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness like the Jews, obtained it by faith. We complete this paradoxical conclusion by noting Romans 9:31 in which Paul teaches that even though the majority in Israel customarily and characteristically zealously pursues a righteousness that is based upon obedience to the Law in contrast to the Gentiles, they never measured up to the Law in the sense that they could not render the perfect obedience, which the Law required in order to be declared justified by God. Romans 9:31, “But Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law.” “But ” is the “adversative” use of the conjunction de ( deV) (deh), which introduces a statement that presents a contrast with Paul’s statement in Romans 9:30. Romans 9:30, “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to? That the Gentiles who, as an eternal spiritual truth, characteristically do not zealously pursue righteousness obtained righteousness, in fact a righteousness, which is by means of faith as a source.” In this passage, Paul presents a paradoxical conclusion based upon what he taught in Romans 9:6-29 that the Gentiles who did not pursue the righteousness like the Jews, obtained it by faith. Now in Romans 9:31, he uses the conjunction de to introduce a statement that stands in contrast with this statement in verse 30. In verse 31, he teaches that in contrast to the Gentiles, even though the Jews zealously pursued righteousness that is based upon obedience to the Mosaic Law, they never attained the perfect obedience that the Law requires. We will translate the word, “however .” Romans 9:31, “But Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law.” “Israel ” is the nominative masculine singular form of the proper name Israel ( )Israh/l ) (Is-rah-ale), which refers of course to the nation of Israel who are descendants racially of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, aka, Israel. It refers to unregenerate Israel since Paul says that they pursued a righteous status with God by obedience to the Mosaic Law and as a result they never attained perfect obedience to the Law, which it required. The anarthrous construction of the word is significant since usually the nominative subject is indicated by an articular construction. However, Paul omits the article since he wants to emphasize that the Israelites as a nation are

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 24 characterized as pursuing a righteous standing with God based upon obedience to the Mosaic Law. We will translate Israel , “ the Israelites…characteristically .” The word functions as a “nominative subject” meaning that it is performing the action of the verb dioko , “ pursuing .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 9:31: “However, Israel characteristically…” Romans 9:31, “But Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law.” “Pursuing ” is the articular nominative masculine singular present active participle form of the verb dioko ( diwvkw ) (dee-o-ko), which means, “to zealously pursue” and is used with the unregenerate Israelites as its subject. The verb refers to doing something with intense effort and with a definite purpose or goal in mind and that purpose and goal is identified as being in right relation to God. It denotes zealously pursuing after something so as to acquire it. The word functions as a “concessive” participle, which implies that the state or action of the main verb is true in spite of the state or action of the participle. This indicates that the nation of Israel never measured up to the Law “even though” in contrast to the Gentiles, they zealously pursued a righteousness that is based upon obedience to the Law. The present tense of the verb is a “customary” present, which is used to signal an action that regularly occurs. This indicates that even though unregenerate Israel “customarily” zealously pursues a righteousness that is based upon obedience to the Law, they never measured up to the Law in the sense of being able to render the perfect obedience that the Law requires in order to be declared justified by God. The active voice indicates that unregenerate Israel as the subject performs the action of customarily zealously pursuing a righteousness that is based upon obedience to the Law. We will translate dioko , “ even though customarily zealously pursues.” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 9:31: “However, even though Israel customarily and characteristically zealously pursues…” Romans 9:31, “But Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law.” “A law ” is the accusative masculine singular form of the noun nomos ( novmo$ ) (nom-os), which refers to the Mosaic Law as indicated in that Israel pursued righteousness by obedience to the Law. Some interpreters view nomos in Romans 9:31 as referring to a “principle” as Paul used the word in Romans 3:27 and dikaiosune as an “epexegetical genitive” thus rendering the expression nomon dikaiosunes , “the principle which is righteousness.” This would indicate that Paul’s criticism of Israel in Romans 9:31

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 25 was that she pursued a righteous standing with God in a wrong way. This interpretation does have merit. However, it is best to interpret nomos in Romans 9:31 as a reference to the Mosaic Law rather referring to a principle for several reasons. First of all, historically as recorded in the gospels and the book of Acts, the Jews sought a righteous standing before God through obedience to the Law, which the Lord Jesus Christ refutes. John 7:19, “Did not Moses give you the Law, and yet none of you carries out the Law?” The first church council in Jerusalem was the result of some Pharisees contended that you could not be saved without adherence to circumcision as directed in the Mosaic Law and that the Gentile Christians should be adhering to this. However, the apostles rejected this by reminding them that the forefathers of the Jewish believers could not bear the yoke of obedience to the Law for justification. Thus, they did not direct Gentile believers to obey the Law and in particular to obey circumcision as stipulated in the Law because no Jew in the past was ever to be declared justified by doing so. Secondly, in the context of the book of Romans, Paul is addressing this erroneous conclusion of his fellow Jewish countrymen that obedience to the Law will result in justification. If you recall, in -4, Paul exhaustively points out that the Jew like the Gentile has no merit with God to start with since all are sinners by nature, thus perfect obedience to the Law, which the Law requires is impossible for any Jew. He argues that it is only through faith in Jesus Christ and not by obedience to the Law that a sinner, whether Jew or Gentile is declared justified by God. So Paul’s statements in Romans 9:31-32 reiterate his teaching in Romans chapters 2-4. Therefore, that nomos in Romans 9:31 is an explicit reference to the Mosaic Law is indicated by Paul’s teaching in previous chapters. In Romans chapter two, Paul points out that the Jews are guilty of breaking the Law, thus they could never obtained the righteousness of God by obedience to the Law since the Law demands perfection (See :13). Romans 2, “For this very reason, you are, as an eternal spiritual truth, without excuse O man, each and everyone of you without exception who as a lifestyle judge as guilty for by means of that which you as a lifestyle judge as guilty the other person, you, as an eternal spiritual truth condemn yourself for you, who as a lifestyle judge as guilty, make it a habit to practice the same things. Now, we know for certain that God’s judgment is, as an eternal spiritual truth according to truth, against those who as a lifestyle practice such things. But, do you continue to presume this that you will escape God’s judgment, O man, when you, who as a lifestyle, judge as guilty those, who as a lifestyle, practice such things and you do, as a lifestyle, the very same things?

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 26

Or do you continue to hold in contempt His infinite kindness and tolerance and patience, habitually ignoring the fact that the kindness originating from God’s character and nature is, as an eternal spiritual truth, leading you to repentance? But according to your obstinacy and unrepentant heart, you are, as an eternal spiritual truth, storing up for yourselves righteous indignation on a day characterized by righteous indignation, yes, when the righteous judgment executed by God is revealed who will recompense each and every one without exception according to their works. On the one hand, according to perseverance, which produces work that is divine in quality and character: glory and honor and immortality for the benefit of those who as a lifestyle make it a top priority to diligently and tenaciously pursue after eternal life, sparing no effort for it is of the highest value while on the other hand, for the disadvantage of those who are motivated by inordinate selfish ambition and continue not to be persuaded so as to believe and thus disobey the truth but rather continue to obey unrighteousness, there shall be righteous indignation, yes, the manifestation of that righteous indignation. There will be tribulation and distress upon each and every soul of man, who continue to accomplish that which is evil, namely, both to the Jew first and also to the Greek. But not only this, there will be glory and honor and peace for the benefit of each and every one who works hard to accomplish the good, which is divine in quality and character, for both the Jew first and also the Greek. For, there is, as an eternal spiritual truth absolutely never any partiality in the presence of God. For as many as have sinned without the Law have caused themselves to be destroyed without the Law and as many as have sinned under the jurisdiction of the Law will be condemned by means of the Law. For you see, the hearers of the Law are, as an eternal spiritual truth, absolutely never righteous before God but rather the doers of the Law will, as an eternal spiritual truth, be justified. Since, whenever Gentiles, who, as a fact of history, do not possess the Law, obey, at any time, instinctively the principles belonging to the Law, although, these, as a fact of history, do not possess the Law, they, as an eternal spiritual truth, manifest that they possess inherently, a law, which belongs to them. Who, indeed by virtue of their obedient character, demonstrate, as an eternal spiritual truth and fact of history, the conduct produced by obedience to the Law as written on their hearts. During which time their conscience does confirm the testimony, namely, their thoughts alternately, at any time, making an accusation or else, at any time, making a defense. On a day when God will judge the secret motives of mankind according to my instruction in the gospel through Christ, who is Jesus. Now, if-and let us assume that it’s true for the sake of argument-you do identify yourself by the name ‘Jew’ and you do rely upon the Law and do boast in a relationship with God and know His will

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 27 through instruction and can discern the essentials because you have received oral instruction in the past in a detailed, systematic and repetitious manner by means of the Law and continue to do so. Moreover, you are confident in yourself, namely that you are as a guide for the blind, a light to those in darkness, an instructor of the ignorant, a teacher of the immature because in the Law you are in possession of the unique embodiment of that, which is full of knowledge well as that, which is full of truth. Then, you who do teach another person, do you ever teach yourself? You, who do publicly proclaim (the Law) as a herald in a dignified and authoritative manner: don’t steal, do you steal? You, who do command: Don’t commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who do abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who do boast about possessing the Law, by means of your transgression of the Law, do you cause the (Son of) God to be dishonored? Consequently, ‘the reputation of the character of God’s person as a fact does get slandered among the Gentiles because of all of you’ just as it stands written, for all of eternity. Indeed, on the one hand circumcision is, as an eternal spiritual truth, beneficial if you should always practice the Law. On the other hand, if you should be at any time a transgressor of the Law, (then) your circumcision has become uncircumcision. Therefore, if the uncircumcision always observes the righteous regulations originating from the Law, then, will not (God) consider and treat accordingly his uncircumcision as circumcision? In fact, the physically uncircumcised by fulfilling perfectly the Law will condemn you who are by means of Scripture and circumcision a transgressor of the Law. Therefore, as an eternal spiritual truth, he is absolutely never a Jew who is one by means of the external, nor, as an eternal spiritual truth, is circumcision, that which is by means of the external in the human body. But rather, as an eternal spiritual truth, he is a Jew who is one by means of the internal and circumcision originates in the heart by means of the omnipotence of the Spirit, never by means of the letter whose praise is as an eternal spiritual truth never from men but from God.” In Romans 3:19-24, Paul refutes the idea that a righteous status with God can be obtained by obedience to the Law since no one has merit with God to start with and thus only through faith in Jesus Christ can one receive a righteous status with God and be declared justified by Him. Romans 3:19-24, “Now, we know for certain that whatever the Law says, it speaks for the benefit of those under the jurisdiction of the Law in order that each and every mouth may be silenced and in addition all the unsaved inhabitants of the cosmic system may be demonstrated as guilty in the judgment of God. Because each and every member of sinful humanity will never be justified in His judgment by means of actions produced by obedience

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 28 to the Law for through the Law there does come about an awareness of the sin nature. But now, independently of seeking to be justified by obedience to the Law, the righteousness originating from God is being manifested at the present time while simultaneously being attested to by the Law and the Prophets. Namely, the righteousness originating from God through faith in Jesus who is the Christ for the benefit of each and every person who does believe for there is, as an eternal spiritual truth, absolutely no distinction . For each and every person has sinned consequently, they are always failing to measure up to the glory originating from God with the result that they might, as an eternal spiritual truth, be undeservedly justified based upon His grace by means of the redemption, which is by means of the spiritual death of Christ who is Jesus.” In Romans chapter 4, Paul uses Abraham and as examples of Jews who received a righteous status with God through faith rather than obedience to the Law. Romans 4, “Therefore, what is the conclusion that we are forced to with respect to Abraham’s experience, our forefather with respect to genealogical descent? For instance, if-and let us assume that it’s true for the sake of argument that Abraham was justified by means of meritorious actions, then, he does possess a reason for boasting but never in the judgment of God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham had absolute confidence in (the Son of) God. Consequently, for his benefit, it was credited and regarded as righteousness.” But for the benefit of the one who does work hard, his compensation is never considered at any time as a gift but rather, what is due. On the other hand, for the benefit of the one who does not work hard but does exercise absolute confidence in the One who, as an eternal spiritual truth, justifies the ungodly, his faith is, as an eternal spiritual truth, credited and regarded as righteousness. In fact, in the same way, David also describes the blessing that produces divine happiness in the person for the benefit of whom God (the Father) as an eternal spiritual truth credits (divine) righteousness independently of meritorious actions: “Spiritual benefits belong to those whose crimes have been fully pardoned and whose failures to measure up have been covered. A spiritually prosperous man, whose personal sin the Lord, as an eternal spiritual truth, absolutely never ever takes into account. Then , is, as an eternal spiritual truth, this blessing that produces a happiness that is divine in quality upon the circumcised, or also upon the uncircumcised ? For we contend, “Faith was credited and regarded as righteousness for the benefit of Abraham.” In what condition then, was it credited, at the point of time when he was circumcised, or when uncircumcised? By no means, when circumcised but rather, when

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 29 uncircumcised. In fact, he had undergone the distinguishing mark, namely, circumcision as confirmation of the righteousness, that is by means of faith, which he had when uncircumcised in order that he himself might, as an eternal spiritual truth, be the spiritual father over each and every person who does believe while uncircumcised so that righteousness might be credited to them for their benefit. In addition that he himself might, as an eternal spiritual truth, be the father over the circumcision, not only with reference to those from the circumcision, absolutely not. But also, with reference to those who do imitate the example produced by our father Abraham’s faith, which he exercised when uncircumcised. For the promise to Abraham or to his Descendant that he himself, as an eternal spiritual truth, would inherit the earth was, as an eternal spiritual truth, never by means of obedience to the (Mosaic) Law but rather by means of the righteousness produced by faith. For, if-and let us assume that it’s true for the sake of argument, those who by means of obedience to the (Mosaic) Law are, as an eternal spiritual truth, heirs, then faith is useless and in addition, the promise is meaningless. For, the Law, as an eternal spiritual truth, produces righteous indignation but where there is, at any time, the total absence of the Law, neither, is there, as an eternal spiritual truth, violation. On account of the following, it (the promise of inheriting the world) is, as an eternal spiritual truth by means of faith as a source in order that it might be fulfilled in accordance with grace with the result that the promise is, as an eternal spiritual truth, guaranteed to each and every one of the descendants. Not only for the benefit of those descended from the jurisdiction of the Law, absolutely not but also for the benefit of those descended from Abraham’s faith who is, as an eternal spiritual truth, the spiritual father of each and every one of us . (Just as it stands written for all of eternity, “I have appointed you to be the spiritual father of many nations.”) He is, as an eternal spiritual truth, the spiritual father of each and every one of us in the determination of God whom ( God ) he ( Abraham ) had absolute confidence in, the One who, as an eternal spiritual truth, gives life to the dead ones and in addition, as an eternal spiritual truth, commands the non-existent to exist who had absolute confidence upon the object of confident expectation contrary to human expectation with the result that he himself became the father over many nations according to that which is solemnly declared, “in this way, your descendants will be.” In fact, without becoming weak with respect to his faith, after careful consideration and observation he was thoroughly aware of his own physical body as now being sexually impotent while already being approximately a hundred years of age as well as the impotence of Sarah’s womb. Yet, with respect to the promise from (the Son of) God, he never permitted himself to doubt by means of unbelief but rather

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 30 he permitted himself to be empowered by means of his faith while simultaneously giving glory to (the Son of) God. Also, he was being fully assured that what He had promised to do in the future, He is also, as an eternal spiritual truth, able to fulfill. Therefore, for this very reason, “for his benefit it was credited and regarded as righteousness. Now, by no means was it written on behalf of him alone that it was credited for his benefit but also for our sake. For whose benefit, it is without a doubt, as an eternal spiritual truth, credited when we do exercise absolute confidence upon the One who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead ones who has been delivered over to death because of our transgressions and in addition was raised because of our justification.” Lastly, in Romans 9:30-10:21, Paul is pointing out that the failure of the Jews in rejecting Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah was the direct result of attempting to be justified by God through keeping the Law of Moses. His statements in this section are directed towards Israel’s culpability. In Romans 10:3-5, Paul points out that Israel sought to establish their own relative righteousness based on obedience to the Law rather submitting to the righteousness of God, Jesus Christ and exercising faith in Him. This was their great failure. Romans 10:1-5, “Brethren, my heart's desire and my prayer to God for them is for their salvation. For I testify about them that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge. For not knowing about God's righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. For Moses writes that the man who practices the righteousness which is based on law shall live by that righteousness.” Thus, we can see that historically as recorded in the gospels and in the context of the entire book of Romans up to this point and by virtue of Paul’s statements in Romans 9:30-10:1-21, nomos in Romans 9:31 is referring to the Mosaic Law. The purpose of the Law was to lead the sinner to faith in Christ. However, the Jews misunderstand this purpose and chose rather to pursue obedience to the Law as the means of justification, which was doomed to failure since the Law requires perfect obedience, which a sinner has no capacity whatsoever to fulfill. Also, in Romans 9:31, the verb dioko indicates that the expression nomon dikaiosunes is a reference to obedience to the Mosaic Law since the gospels and Paul teach that Israel zealously pursued obedience to the Law as a means of justification rather than having faith in Jesus Christ as Savior. In Romans 9:31, the noun nomos functions as an “accusative direct object” meaning that it is receiving the action of the verb dioko .

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 31

Now, the noun nomos should be translated with the English adjective “legal” since the genitive form of the noun dikaiosune is functioning as an “attributed” genitive. This type of genitive takes place when the head noun rather than the noun in the genitive functions in sense as an attributive adjective. In this construction, you can convert the noun to which it stands related into a mere adjective. Therefore, the genitive form of the noun dikaiosune functions as an “attributed” genitive meaning that it is functioning as an attributive adjective. This would render the expression nomon dikaiosunes , “a legal righteousness,” which can be unpacked as “a righteousness that is based upon obedience to the Law.” Thus, Paul is saying that even though Israel customarily and characteristically pursued a legal righteousness, or in other words, a righteousness that is based upon obedience to the Law, they never measured up to the Law in the sense that they could not render the perfect obedience that the Law required in order to be declared justified by God. This interpretation maintains the subject of Paul’s discussion in Romans 9:30- 10:5, which is a righteous standing before God, i.e. justification. It also adheres to what Paul has been teaching in previous chapters of the book of Romans regarding the Jews stubborn adherence to the Law as the means of justification rather than having faith in Jesus Christ as Savior. The NET Bible points this out in their footnotes of Romans 9:31. We will translate nomos , “ a legal .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 9:31: “However, even though Israel customarily and characteristically zealously pursues a legal…” Romans 9:31, “But Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law.” “Of righteousness ” is the genitive feminine singular form of the noun dikaiosune ( dikaiosuvnh ) (dik-ah-yos-oo-nay), which refers to a right standing with God or righteous status with God. Corrected translation thus far of Romans 9:31: “However, even though Israel customarily and characteristically zealously pursues a legal righteousness…” Romans 9:31, “But Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law.” “Did not arrive ” is composed of the emphatic negative adverb ou ( ou)) (oo), “not ” and the third person singular aorist active indicative form of the verb phthano ( fqavnw ) (fthan-o), “ did arrive .” The verb phthano occurs in Greek literature from the time of Homer (8 th century B.C.). This common verb means “to come first, to do first, to be first, to overtake.” In the abstract the word means “to come, do first,” as opposed to “hustero , husterizo , “to come, be later.” Liddell and Scott lists the following meanings (Greek-English Lexicon New Edition, page 1926-1927): (1) With accusative person, to be beforehand with,

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 32 overtake, outstrip, in running or otherwise; passive, to be overtaken (2) Abstract, come or act first; with prepositions, come or arrive first; arrive at, attain to; extend; reach; grammatically, to be applied or applicable (3) The action in which one is beforehand is expressed by the participle agreeing with the subject (4) With negatives. In classical Greek phthano is used with the connotation of priority (doing something or coming before someone or something else), for example, overtaking someone else in a footrace. It was also used to convey the notion of having done something previously or of anticipating something, such as the coming of a storm. It was also used of simply coming or arriving with or without prepositions. Josephus also used it in the original sense of priority when he wrote that Ahimaaz arrived before Chushi with the news of Joab’s victory (Antiquities 7.10.4). The verb phthano appears 27 times in the Septuagint and is used to translate the following Hebrew terms: (1) `Amets ( Jma ), “be strong”; Hithpael: “manage” (1 Kgs. 12:18). (2) Davaq ( qbd ), “cling, stick”; Hiphil: “overtake” (Jgs. 20:42). (3) Yaghah (hgy ), Hiphil: “remove” (2 Sm. 20:13). (4) Nagha ` ( ugn ), Qal: “be near, come” (Jgs. 20:34; Ezr. 3:1; Neh. 7:73 [8:1]; Hiphil: “meet, happen” (2 Chr. 28:9; Ecc. 8:14). It is used in the Septuagint with the basic idea of priority (Wisdom of Solomon 16:28) and is also used with the sense of simply arriving or coming (Neh. 7:73 [LXX 8:1]; Dan. 7:22). In the abstract phthano does not mean, “to come first” but “to come” in the sense “to arrive, to get there, to attain to.” It is used with the prepositions eis , epi , heos in the sense “to reach, to attain to, to come to.” The verb phthano appears 7 times in the New Testament (Mt. 12:28; Lk. 11:20; Rm. 9:31; 2 Co. 10:14; Phlp. 3:16; 1 Th. 2:16; 4:15). The original sense “to precede someone” occurs in the New Testament only once at 1 Thessalonians 4:15. The believers on the earth at the time of the rapture will not receive their resurrection before the dead in Christ. The verb’s sense is strengthened by the compound with accusative and participle in Matthew 17:25. This construction is peculiar to Matthew. Both the simple construction in 1 Thessalonians 4:15 and the compound in Matthew 17:25 follow ancient classical usage. In the other 5 New Testament references is used with a prepositional phrase: (1) Epi (Mt. 12:28) (2) Participle (1 Th. 2:16) (3) Eis (Rm. 9:31; Phlp. 3:16) (4) Archri (2 Co. 10:14). The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised lists the following New Testament meanings (page 424): (1) To be before-hand with (2) To outstrip, precede (3) To advance, make progress (4) To come up with, come upon, be close at hand (5) To attain an object of pursuit.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 33

Louw and Nida list the following (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains volume 2): (1) To move toward and to arrive at a point – ‘to come to, to reach, to arrive’ (page 193). (2) To come/go prior to some other event, normally one involving a similar type of movement – ‘to come/go prior to, to come/go beforehand, to precede’ (page 200). (3) To attain or arrive at a particular state – ‘to come to be, to attain, to achieve’ (page 151). (4) To happen to someone prior to a particular point in time – ‘to happen to already, to come upon, to come upon already’ (page 163). The New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon lists the following meanings (page 652): (1) To come before, precede, anticipate (2) To reach, attain to. Bauer, Gingrich and Danker lists the following meanings (A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, pages 856- 866): (1) Come before, precede (2) Have just arrived, arrive, come, come upon, overtake, come up to, reach, attain something. In Romans 9:31, the verb phthano means “to measure up” in the sense of reaching or attaining a certain standard, which in our present context is the Mosaic Law as indicated by the prepositional phrase eis nomon , “ to the Law ” that precedes it. The word’s meaning is emphatically negated by the emphatic negative adverb ou , which is used to deny the reality of an alleged fact and is the clear cut, point- blank negative, objective, final. It therefore emphatically negates the idea that the nation of Israel ever measured up to perfect standards of the Mosaic Law in order to be justified by obeying the Law. Thus, with these two words Paul is saying that even though the nation of Israel customarily and characteristically zealously pursues a legal righteousness, they never measured up to the Law. They could not render the perfect obedience, which is required by the Law in order to be justified before God by it. The third person singular form of the verb is of course a reference to the majority of the citizens of the nation of Israel. The aorist tense of the verb is a “culminative” or “consummative” aorist tense, which is used to emphasize the cessation of an act or state. This type of aorist views an event in its entirety but regarding it from the viewpoint of its existing results. Therefore, the “culminative” aorist views the nation of Israel never measuring up to the Law, which required perfect obedience in order to be justified by it. But regards this from the standpoint of its existing results, which is that they never attained a righteous status with God. The active voice indicates that the nation of Israel as the subject perform the action of never measuring up to the Law in the sense of rendering the perfect obedience that it required in order to be justified in the sight of God.

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 34

The indicative mood is “declarative” presenting this assertion as an unqualified statement of fact. We will translate the expression ouk ephthasen , “ they never measured up .” Corrected translation thus far of Romans 9:31: “However, even though Israel customarily and characteristically zealously pursues a legal righteousness, they never measured up…” Romans 9:31, “But Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law.” “At that law ” is composed of the preposition eis ( ei)$ ) (ice), “ at that ” and the accusative masculine singular form of the noun nomos ( novmo$ ) (nom-os), “ law .” Nomos refers once again to the Mosaic Law. The word is the object of the preposition eis , which denotes an extension towards a special goal. The goal is the obedience to the Law required in order to be declared justified by it. So although the nation of Israel customarily and characteristically zealously pursues a legal righteousness, they never measured up to the Law so as to be declared justified by God because they could not render the perfect obedience due to the presence of the sin nature. Therefore, we will translate the prepositional phrase eis nomon , “ to the Law .” Completed corrected translation of Romans 9:31: “However, even though Israel customarily and characteristically zealously pursues a legal righteousness, they never measured up to the Law.” So Paul is teaching in Romans 9:31 that even though the majority in Israel customarily and characteristically zealously pursue a righteousness that is based upon obedience to the Law in contrast to the Gentiles, they never measured up to the Law in the sense that they could not render the perfect obedience, which the Law required in order to be declared justified by God. Paul is reiterating what he has mentioned in Romans 2-4 that the nation of Israel misunderstood the purpose of the Mosaic Law. In the study of the Bible, there are three specific purposes that surface in the proper use of the Mosaic Law. First of all, in a general sense, the Mosaic Law was given to provide a standard of righteousness (Deuteronomy 4:8; Psalm 19:7-9) and in the process, it revealed the righteousness, holiness, and goodness of God (Deut. 4:8; Lev. 11:44-45; 19:2; 20:7; Rom. 7:12-14). The Law given at to Israel was to reveal who a holy God and to demonstrate the reality of an infinite gulf that separated man from Him. Romans 3:23, “For each and every person has sinned consequently, they are always failing to measure up to the glory originating from God.” Secondly, the Law was given to identify sin and reveal man’s sin and bankrupt condition as guilty before God (Rom. 3:19f; 7:7-8; 5:20; Gal. 3:19). As J. Hampton

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 35

Keathley Jr. states, “Like the blood-alcohol test is designed to prove men are drunk, so the Law is designed to prove men are sinners, under the wrath of God.” God’s holy Law reveals to man just who and what he is, namely, sinful and separated from God by an infinite gulf that he is unable to bridge in his own human strength. Romans 3:19-20, “Now, we know for certain that whatever the Law says, it speaks for the benefit of those under the jurisdiction of the Law in order that each and every mouth may be silenced and in addition all the unsaved inhabitants of the cosmic system may be demonstrated as guilty in the judgment of God. Because each and every member of sinful humanity will never be justified in His judgment by means of actions produced by obedience to the Law for through the Law there does come about an awareness of the sin nature.” Lastly, the Law was given to shut man up to faith, i.e., to exclude the works of the Law (or any system of works) as a system of merit for either salvation or sanctification and thereby lead him to Christ as the only means of righteousness (Galatians 3:19-20, 20-24; 1 Timothy 1:8-9; Romans 3:21-24). Galatians 3:19-25, “Why the Law then? It was added because of transgressions, having been ordained through angels by the agency of a mediator, until the seed would come to whom the promise had been made. Now a mediator is not for one party only; whereas God is only one. Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law. But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.” Like Israel in Paul’s day, today, people often try to use the Law as a means of establishing their own standing before God. But the Word of God emphatically teaches us that the Law brings a curse (Galatians 3:10-12), brings death, it is a killer (2 Corinthians 3:6-7; :9-10), brings condemnation (2 Corinthians 3:9), makes offenses abound (:10; 7:7-13), declares all men guilty (Romans 3:19), and holds men in bondage to sin and death (Galatians 4:3-5, 9, 24; Romans 7:10-14). This is because man possesses an old Adamic sin nature that can never fulfill the righteousness of the Law. Therefore, mankind always falls short as Romans 3:23 tells us, and becomes condemned or guilty before a Holy God (Romans 3:19).

2009 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 36