https://youtu.be/4I2VgDnZ4qo
In our verse by verse study of Romans last time we completed our Expanded Translation of Rom 9:10; "And not only (referring to previous case history); but also Rebecca when she had become pregnant from one, Isaac our father."
Rom 9:11; begins with the explanatory use of the conjunctive particle "gar" (for). This particle indicates that this is going to be a parenthesis to explain the case history of the twins. After the word "gar" (for) the words (the twins) are inserted because Esau and Jacob,are the subject of this verse. We see the words (the twins) are in italics in the NASB.
Next comes the negative adverb "mepo" (not yet) followed by the genitive absolute with the aorist passive participle from the verb "ginnao" (born). The genitive absolute is a group of words, including a participle, in the genitive case.
Usually there is a noun and a participle in the genitive case that is not grammatically connected with the rest of the sentence. In this genitive absolute we have the "ginnao" (born), so we should have a noun but the noun is missing in this case so we have to insert the subject, the twins, Esau and Jacob.
They are a part of the genitive absolute that is understood from the previous verse. What we have in expanded translation is: "For the twins (Esau and Jacob) though not yet having been born."
The aorist tense of the participle is a constantive aorist that refers to a momentary action of the existence of the fetus in the womb. This is before birth with biological life but before human soul life. The passive voice: the unborn twins receive the action of the verb. Before human soul life is imputed at birth and before the twins had human soul life they had done neither good nor evil.
They had done nothing to distinguish one from the other so one could not be better than the other. This is the first issue. The genitive absolute is used in the Greek to indicate that the fact that they had done nothing is what is being illustrated so it must be emphasized.
This is a concessive participle recognising a historical fact before the fact actually occurs, which is why we have to add the word "though" in the translation.
We see here that Esau and Jacob were biological fetus's in the womb but God's omniscience had known from eternity that Jacob would believe and Esau would reject Jehovah Elohim, the God of Israel, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Shekinah glory.
Esau and Jacob were not yet human beings but God's omniscience had known from eternity that one would be a believer and one would be an unbeliever. He knew exactly how the free will of each one would function in time before time existed and only facts were fed into God's decree.
Esau was fed into the decree as an "unbeliever." God knew that he would reject Jesus Christ as savior; Jacob was fed into the decree as a "believer" because God knew that He would believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.
That is why the printout of Esau is condemnation and the printout of Jacob is foreknowledge, predestination and election. The printouts do not affect the function of freewill; they do not coerce freewill, they merely acknowledge what freewill does.
Therefore God's omniscience fed these facts into the decree. In the printout of God's foreknowledge acknowledged that Jacob would believe so he was elected and foreordained.
Election, foreknowledge and predestination only apply to believers. They are never used in connection with unbelievers. This is an extremely important point and this is where many of the followers of John Calvin in his theology have become very confused. Calvin himself did not go that far but his student Beza did.
The principle is based upon human viewpoint thinking from the Hegelian fallacy that for every thesis there must be an antithesis and when thesis and antithesis are put together you have synthesis.
That may work when you are dealing with certain human factors but it will never work with the Word of God. For example, thesis: the believer in the Lord Jesus Christ is described as being foreordained and predestined.
That is true because God's Word of Truth teaches that as a printout from God's decree. Then some take that and go on to try to deduce the antithesis that is that the unbeliever is predestined to the lake of fire and that is false.
It is true that the unbeliever will spend eternity in the lake of fire, but it is untrue, erroneous and incorrect, to say that the unbeliever is predestined to go there.
The unbeliever goes to the lake of fire only because of his own free negative volition. God's Word never uses predestination to describe the unbeliever.
So the synthesis would be wrong if you say that the believer is predestined to eternal life and the unbeliever is predestined to eternal lake of fire. That is totally incorrect even though it is true that the unbeliever goes to the lake of fire because that is a part of the condemnation from God's wrath.
It is also true that the believer is described as being elected, predestined, foreordained, and predetermined. But election, foreknowledge, predestination are printouts from the decree exclusively for the believer.
The unbeliever is never predestined to anything. The unbeliever self determines from his own free will. He is an agent of free will so he has the right of self-determination so he is never in the categories of election, foreknowledge or foreordination and predestination.
Esau prints out from decree as firstborn. He was the first born through physical birth. But he was rejected from the origin of the Jewish race and the nation of Israel.
Election acknowledges what is in the decree; therefore election acknowledges all decisions to believe in Jesus Christ and relates them to God's plan. The unbeliever is not connected in any way with God's plan.
God's omniscience in eternity past knew every thought, every decision, and every action of the twins. Furthermore, there never was a time when God's omniscience did not know all of these things.
In eternity before anything existed God's omniscience created time and space and later mankind. But God's omniscience always knew these things and God's omniscience only fed historical facts into the decree. The alternatives, the probabilities, and the possibilities, were not fed into the decree.
The culminative aorist views the action of the verb in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of existing results. They were not yet born so they had done absolutely nothing. The active voice: the twins, Esau and Jacob, produce the action of the verb that at that point is nothing.
Next we have an object of the participle, the accusative neuter singular from the indefinite pronoun "tis" (something or anything) so we have "and though they had not accomplished anything."
Then we have the accusative singular direct object "agathos" (good) that refers here to divine good production then the disjunctive particle "e" (or) then the alternative accusative singular direct object from "phaulos" (evil) so we have "and though they had not accomplished anything, good or evil."
Long before Jacob received the imputation of human life at birth and long before his salvation through faith in Jesus Christ God's omniscience knew these things and fed them into the decree and the printout was election.
Since the verb "prasso" is translated "accomplish" it implies attainment. Therefore the Holy Spirit through the dictation of the apostle Paul would use two antithetical words of great significance "agathos" (good) that describes momentum in God's plan and "phaulos" (evil) that describes the inevitable evil production that results from rejecting Jesus Christ and His Word of Truth.
Next we have a final purpose clause that is introduced with the conjunction "hina" (so that) and a final clause not only uses this conjunction but the verb will be in the subjunctive mood indicating it is a future purpose "in order that." With this we have "prothesis" (purpose) the nominative singular subject.
"Prothesis" (purpose) describes a predetermined plan. It is used in Eph 1:9; to describe God's plan. Then we have a possessive genitive from the noun "Theos" (God) with the definite article "ho" (the) describing "the predetermined plan of the God.
Expanded translation: "in order that the predetermined plan of the God." God's purpose "prothesis" (purpose) is defined in Eph 1:11 where it is related to the verb "proorizo" (predestined).
"In whom Christ we have received an inheritance (or a destiny) having been predestined" - the aorist passive participle of "proorizo" (predestined) "according to a "prothesis" (purpose)] from the one (God the Father) putting into operation the all things according to the decree from his own will."
In Eph 1:11 describes all of the printouts from God's decree for the believer in Jesus Christ because God's "predetermined plan" is the divine decree.
Rom 9:11; Next we have the preposition "kata" (by) plus the accusative singular from the noun "ekloge" (choice or election).
Then we have the present active subjunctive of the verb "meno" (stay, remain, or abide). This is a present active subjunctive that means "might remain or stay in the status quo that is described as a perpetually existing condition from God's decree.
The active voice: the divine decree or God's predetermined plan produce the action of the verb. The subjunctive mood describes the purpose.
In the Greek verse 11 stops here in the English translations the next phrase is moved from verse 12 to verse 11 so we will pick up here next time.