But Elin, "purpose" is an empty word! The (inscrutable?) content of the purpose is the question.
When God chose Tom, but not Dick, assuming it was not to prove that He could arbitrarily make a capricious choice,
we still are left scratching the head as to the purpose.
we still are left scratching the head as to the purpose.
"And not only so; but Rebecca also having conceived by one, even by our father Isaac— for the children [italics! = the nations? -- 2 nations are in thy womb] being not yet born, neither having done anything good or bad, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth, it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. Even as it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
This election is not about salvation,
This election is not about salvation,
but privilege in the world. We may also ask if Esau ever served Jacob? Is that in the Bible?
If we made this the nation of Esau served the nation of Jacob, that would be easy to prove.
If we made this the nation of Esau served the nation of Jacob, that would be easy to prove.
And Rom 9 does not use the word "foreknowledge" there. Instead of elect according to foreknowledge, it is "purpose according to election." I guess you want to make foreknowledge = foreknowledge of a purpose
choice (elect) according to foreknowledge of his purpose.
And we still don't know what the purpose was; and if foreknowledge is knowledge of an unknown purpose,
we still are in the dark.
we still are in the dark.