I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spirit— 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, 4 the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. 5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen. 6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 8 In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring. 9 For this was how the promise was stated: “At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son.” 10 Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

A homonym is a word that has two or more different meanings. Some common examples of homonyms are: Pitcher, Left, Chair, Park, Bark, Date, Rose, and Scale. Think about these words and how they could mean completely different things, given the context of the sentence they are in. Saying that Jesus 'Rose' from the grave and that the Bachelor handed a girl a 'Rose' give two very different meanings to the same word. It's very important that we get the context and definition of the word correct, or it can create confusion and ruin the meaning of what is trying to be communicated. Another word in the Bible that has very different meanings, given the context of the sentence, is the word "Israel ."Within Scripture, Israel can be described as God's chosen people via the bloodline leading to Christ. It can be used to describe the ancient kingdom known as Israel. It can be used to describe the current physical state or nation called Israel. It can be used to describe a Biblical character named Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel. It can also describe a more modern religious system of Judaism, which expresses that religion through the practice of the Torah. And it can also describe a remnant of people who remain in covenant with God. These are six very different meanings and definitions of the same word. The problem is that people often like to use whichever meaning fits their own bias, desires, or beliefs and then overlay that definition onto a verse or passage when, in fact, that is not at all the definition or correct usage of that word given the surrounding context. It's important that when reading scripture, we find how the word was being used by the writer to his audience and then apply only that specific definition given surrounding contextual evidence, and not jump to other definitions, even if we like or prefer those definitions better.

Over the entire letter known as Romans, Paul uses a few of these definitions at different times, especially in chapters 9 through 11. For example, Paul says, "For not all who descended from Israel..." (speaking of the bloodline and ethnicity of those who descended from Jacob) are Israel...(Here, he speaks of a remnant of those who are set apart and remain in covenant with God). Paul is reminding the reader that there is a there is a distinct difference between Israel or Jewish ethnicity versus Israel the remnant. He makes a clear distinction here between DNA and the state of the heart, which is also true today. The truth is that only the bride of Christ, Christians (those in Christ) can be used in this description of Israel because only Christians are in covenant (The new covenant) which can only be entered into by the blood of Christ. Those who are not in Christ (non-Christians) cannot currently be in covenant with God. Salvation is the new covenant; therefore, only those who are truly Christ followers are in covenant. Modern Jews who are not Messianic (Christian) are out of covenant with God because they have rejected Jesus and are no longer the remnant of Christ. This can be an unpopular view in modern times, but it also was in ancient times, and Paul had no issue declaring this distinction with boldness and clarity. It was this bold statement that stirred up murder plots against Paul and eventually led to his arrest in Jerusalem. But the good news for Jewish people in Paul's day, as well as today, is that God loves them and desires that they would turn back to him and once again be his people as God intended. We should remember that when it came to ministry, the Jews, Paul's own people, had become Paul’s worst enemies, yet he still loved them. They harassed and persecuted him from town to town, stirring up lies and violence against him, yet he still loved them passionately and brought the gospel first to them. The pain Paul feels for his lost brethren is all the more severe when he considers how God has blessed them with all the privileges of being His own special people. Paul also considers the incredible human legacy of being God’s chosen people. Israel not only gave us the great fathers of the Old Testament, but Jesus Himself came from Israel. This entire spiritual legacy makes Israel’s widespread unbelief and rejection of Christ all the more problematic and troublesome.

A woman once said to Charles Spurgeon, ‘I cannot understand why God would say that He hated Esau. Spurgeon replied and said, 'That is not my difficulty, madam. My trouble is understanding how God could love Jacob.'" Our greatest error in considering the choices of God is to think that God chooses for arbitrary or random reasons. Or that we, or anyone, somehow deserve or are entitled to God's grace, mercy, and blessing. Paul's heart for Israel reflects God's heart for Israel. God Himself was rejected by the Jews when they rejected his son, though some wrongly thought they were remaining faithful to God by rejecting Jesus. In the same way, Paul and the gospel he preached were widely rejected as well. Paul uses every possible assurance to declare his great sorrow for Israel. And this deep sorrow was something that bothered Paul and was constantly on his heart and in his prayers. In Romans 9 through 11, Paul begins to deal with the problems associated with the condition of Israel and answers many lingering questions like: What does it mean that Israel has missed its Messiah? What does this say about God? What does it say about the future of Israel? What does it say about our present position in God? The underlying question goes something like this: How can I be secure in God’s love and salvation toward me when it seems that Israel was once loved and saved but now seems to be rejected and cursed? Will God also reject and curse me one day? If God cannot bring his ancient people into salvation, how do Christians know that he can save them?

These next three chapters are part of the way Paul makes plain how God saves people and that God's plan has in no way failed or even changed. It is now only more fully revealed through Christ. Paul answers the questions by asserting that God’s word did not fail, because God still reaches His children of the promise, which may or may not be the same as physical Israel who is still waiting for their messiah. Merely being the physical descendant of Abraham saves no one and never did. For example, Ishmael was just as much a son of Abraham as Isaac was, but Ishmael was a son according to the flesh, and Isaac was a son according to the promise. One was the heir of God’s covenant of salvation, and one was not. Isaac stands for the children of the promise, and Ishmael stands for the children of the flesh. The good news is that we get to choose which type of son we will be, and we will live with the consequences of that decision.