I get it too, brother, it is a tough chapter!
To just write it off in that manner, as if it were handled properly, as if it were that simple is what a person should take issue with. The entire objective of the statement was apparently to do that, and put others who know God's electing Sovereignty in their place as if God does not do as the text says.
Of course his statement hardly did any of this. The disingenuous nature and pretense of the comment begged to be addressed.
No offense, but I've not witnessed any non-Cal rebut the Reformed position, and I've read and listened to many who have tried. I'm talking some good godly men, but they all fall short. People imho are afraid to let God be God in all his glory, they are instead offended by this.
Here is my take on Romans 9: (Excerpted from my commentary)
1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,
[I say the truth in Christ, I lie not] This is one of the most solemn oaths any man can possibly take. He appeals to Christ as the searcher of hearts that he tells the truth; asserts that his conscience was free from all guile in this matter, and that the Holy Spirit bore him testimony that what he said was true. Hence, we find that the testimony of a man's own conscience, and the testimony of the Holy Spirit, are two distinct things, and that the apostle had both at the same time.
Since the apostle had still remaining a very awful part of his commission to execute, namely, to declare to the Jews not only that God had "chosen the Gentiles", but had rejected them because they had rejected Christ and his Gospel, it was necessary that he should assure them that however he had been persecuted by them because he had embraced the Gospel, yet it was so far from being a gratification to him that they had now fallen under the displeasure of God, that it was a subject of continual distress to his mind, and that it produced in him great heaviness and continual sorrow.
(from Adam Clarke's Commentary, in public domain via E-sword)
2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.
3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
Verses 2-3: Paul is so grieved that the majority of the Jewish people have rejected Jesus, that he would willingly endure the wrath of God on their behalf, if that were possible. But, he recognizes that it is not possible.
4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service [ ], and the promises;
[ ] The words ‘of God’ are absent from the Greek text and were added by the translators without support.
to whom pertaineth the adoption, (See Ex 4:22.) {Return to: Ro 11:17 }
and the glory, God’s divine presence (See Ex 13:21.)
and the covenants,
(See: Ge 12:3, Ge 17:21, Ge 28:20-22, Ex 34:10, Lv 26:1-9, Dt 29:1-13.)
and the giving of the law, (See Dt 30:10.)
and the service I believe this refers to the gathering to worship three times each day, during the first six days of the week; Friday nights and Saturdays for the Sabbath; and during the appointed times of Lv 23:2-41, in the synagogue,
and the promises; scattered throughout the OT and too numerous to list.
{Return to: Mal 1:2 } 5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
Whose of the Israelites
the fathers specifically Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, (See Lk 3:23-34.)
6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. God’s promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob have not failed.
For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
First: the words “cut off from Israel, “cut off from the assembly of Israel”, or “cut off from among his people” occur 28 times in the law.
Second: Idolatry separates the idolater from Israel. (See Dt 6:14-15)
Third: Deuteronomy chapters 27 and 28 indicate an expectation of a lifestyle of obedience.
Hence we may conclude that only those, among the nation of Israel, who have a sincere desire to live a life pleasing to God are, from Paul’s point of view, part of Israel.
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.
10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;
11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth
the purpose of God according to election “We cannot avoid the doctrine of election, nor can we reconcile God’s sovereign election with man’s free will. Both are true”
(from J. Vernon McGee’s radio comments on Ro 9:14.)
It must be remembered that God is eternal and not bounded by time. God knew everything that both Esau and Jacob would do before they were born. So, nothing precludes God from basing His sovereign election on both men’s life choices; nor does anything preclude God from electing without considering their life choices. God does not (nor is He obliged to) operate within the limits of our understanding.
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
See Ge 25:23.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
but Esau have I hated. Hated in both Greek and in English can mean either despised, or loved less, as in Lk 14:26. I believe that hate here means to abhor or detest.
See Mal 1:2-3.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
[What shall we say then?] What conclusion shall we draw from these acknowledged facts, and from these positive declarations of Scripture.
[Is there unrighteousness with God?] Does God do injustice or wrong? This charge has often been brought against the doctrine here advanced. But this charge the apostle strongly repels. He meets it by further showing that it is the doctrine explicitly taught in the Old Testament (Rom 9:15, 17), and that it is founded on the principles of equity, and on just views of the sovereignty of God; Rom 9:19-23.
(from Barnes' Notes, in public domain via E-Sword)
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
[For he saith to Moses] Ex 33:19.
[I will have mercy] This is said by God when he declared expressly that he would make all his goodness pass before Moses (Ex 33:19), and when, therefore, it was regarded, not as a proof of stern and inexorable justice, but as "the very proof of his benevolence," and the highest which he thought proper to exhibit. When people, therefore, under the influence of an unrenewed and hosthe heart, charge this as an unjust and arbitrary proceeding, they are resisting and perverting what God regards as the very demonstration of his benevolence. The sense of the passage clearly is, that he would choose the objects of his favor, and bestow his mercies as he chose. None of the human race deserved his favor; and he had a right to pardon whom he pleased, and to save people on his own terms, and according to his sovereign will and pleasure.
[On whom I will have mercy] On whom I choose to bestow mercy. The mode he does not explain. But there could not be a more positive declaration of these truths,
(1) That he does it as a sovereign, without giving an account of the reason of his choice to any.
(2) That he does it without regard to any claim on the part of man; or that man is regarded as destitute of merit, and as having no right to his mercy.
(3) That he will do it to any extent which he pleases, and in whatever time and manner may best accord with his own good pleasure.
(4) That he has regard to a definite number and that on that number he intends to bestow eternal life; and,
(5) That no one has a right to complain. It is proof of his benevolence that any are saved; and where none have a claim, where all are justly condemned, he has a right to pardon whom he pleases. The executive of a country may select any number of criminals whom he may see fit to pardon, or who may be forgiven in consistency with the supremacy of the laws and the welfare of the community and none has a right to complain, but every good citizen should rejoice that any may be pardoned with safety. So in the moral world, and under the administration of its holy Sovereign, it should be a matter of joy that any can be pardoned and saved; and not a subject of murmuring and complaint that those who shall finally deserve to die shall be consigned to woe.
(from Barnes' Notes, in Public Domain via E-Sword.) {Return to: verse 14 }
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
[So then] It follows as a consequence from this statement of God to Moses. Or it is a doctrine established by that statement.
[Not of him that willeth] This does not mean that he that becomes a Christian, and is saved, does not choose eternal life; or is not made willing; or that he is compelled to enter heaven against his own choice. It is true that people by nature have no desire of holiness, and do not choose eternal life. But the effect of the influences of God's Spirit on the heart is to make it "willing in the day of his power;" Ps 110:3 The meaning here is evidently, that eternal life is not bestowed because man had any original willingness or disposition to be saved; it is not because he commences the work, and is himself disposed to it; but it is because God inclines him to it, and disposes him to seek for mercy, and then confers it in his own way. The word "willeth" here denotes wish or desire.
[Nor of him that runneth] This denotes "strenuous, intense effort," as when a man is anxious to obtain an object, or hastens from danger. The meaning is not that the sinner does not make an effort to be saved; nor that all who become Christians do not "in fact" strive to enter into the kingdom, or earnestly desire salvation, for the Scriptures teach the contrary; Luke 16:16, 13:24. There is no effort more intense and persevering, no struggle more arduous or agonizing, than when a sinner seeks eternal life. Nor does it mean that they who strive in a proper way, and with proper effort, shall not obtain eternal life;
Matt 7:7. But the sense is,
(1) That the sinner would not put forth any effort himself. If left to his own course, he would never seek to be saved.
(2) That he is pardoned, not "on account" of his effort; not because he makes an exertion; but because God chooses to pardon him.
There is no merit in his anxiety, and prayers, and agony, on account of which God would forgive him; but he is still dependent on the mere mercy of God to save or destroy him at his will. The sinner, however anxious he may be, and however much or long he may strive, does not bring God under an obligation to pardon him any more than the condemned criminal, trembling with the fear of execution, and the consciousness of crime, lays the judge or the jury under an obligation to accquit him. This fact, it is of great importance for an awakened sinner to know. Deeply anxious he should be, but there is no merit in his distress. Pray he should, but there is no merit in his prayers. Weep and strive he may, but in this there is no ground of claim on God for pardon; and, after all, he is dependent on his mere sovereign mercy, as a lost, ruined, and helpless sinner, to be saved or lost at his will.
(from Barnes' Notes, in public domain via E-Sword)
17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, (See Ex 9:16, Ro 9:14 .)
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. 19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
Verses 18-22: state that it is within God’s prerogative to create people for the purpose of destroying them; and this is certainly true; but it does NOT suggest that God actually works this way. The idea is stated hypothetically. Likewise, it is not my place to insist that He does not work this way; it is only my role to point out that recognizing that something as being within God’s prerogative does not obligate God to work that way. It is within my prerogative to break all the windows in my home; but I am not about to exercise that prerogative. {Return to: Is 45:9 }
23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,