• Was God's sovereignity the PRIMARY (if not the sole) cause of Israel's falling away? Was the 'real' (or 'higher') reason why Israel failed (and everyone who does) because God had eternally DECREED that they would?

• Is the absolute and irresistable decree of INDIVIDUAL redemption and reprobation (i.e.damnation) being here considered by Paul?

• Does God eternally predestine some to irresistable salvation and some to hopeless damnation? Do some people have NO CHANCE whatsoever to be saved, with divine sovereignity deciding who would and who wouldn't?

• Is DOUBLE PREDESTINATION being proclaimed in Romans 9?

My Reformed brethren will answer all questions with an unqualified Yes. Yet before we even begin addressing their exegesis, we need to bear in mind the following verses:
 

Rom 2:7-10, "To those who by PERSISTENCE in doing good seek glory, honour and immortality, God will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who REJECT THE TRUTH and FOLLOW EVIL, there will be wrath and anger...first for the Jew, then for the Gentile..."

Rom 2:28-29, "A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is a circumcision of the HEART, by the Spirit..."

Rom 9:31-32, "...but Israel, who pursued a LAW of righteousness, has not attained (righteousness). Why not? Because they pursued it not by FAITH but as if it were by WORKS."

Rom 10:3, "...but (Israel's) zeal is not based on knowledge..they SOUGHT TO ESTABLISH THEIR OWN (righteousness)"

Rom 10:21, "(God) says: 'All day long I have held my hands to a DISOBEDIENT and OBSTINATE people.'"

Rom 11:20, "(Israel) was broken off BECAUSE of unbelief..."

Thus, given the vast amount of data pertaining to Israel's failures and the faith-path to salvation, we should at least be real cautious in accepting Calvinistic conclusions.  Our critiqe will thus focus on
 

Right from the start I'm sincerely confused as to how Calvinism seeks to prove double-predestination (DP) from this passage. If I understand DP correctly, the exegesis of these verses must imply that any child NOT of the promise is thus EXCLUDED from salvation i.e. mere physical descendancy from Abe, unless being 'complemented' with the PROMISE, necessarily suggests non-election to salvation. (And unless my Reformed brothers intend to teach that all other children of Abraham APART from Isaac were reprobated, I frankly don't know how their DP theology intends to garner support from this passage.)

Yet Paul's very own cross-reference to Genesis here EXCLUDES any notion of SALVIFIC implications whatsoever regarding the rest of Abraham's children. In fact, in the case of Ishmael - the key 'counterpart' to Isaac - quite the OPPOSITE is presented! Taking the cue from Paul's Genesis reference:

Gen 21:12, "...it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned. I will make the SON OF THE MAIDSERVANT (Ishmael) into a nation also, because he is your offspring."

Gen 21:14-18, "(Hagar) wandered in the desert...she put the boy under one of the bushes...then she went off...and thought, 'I cannot watch the boy die'...she began to sob. God heard the boy crying, and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven and said to her, "Do not be afraid; God has heard the boy crying as he lies there. Lift the boy up and take him by the hand, for I WILL MAKE HIM INTO A GREAT NATION."

The above do not give the impression of Ishmael being eternally 'passed over' for salvation.  What we have instead is Ishmael who, despite not being the child of promise, nevertheless falling under the love and care of our Lord, including being given a promise not entirely common in the OT! Furthermore, nowhere in the OT is it even hinted that Ishmael was reprobated, let alone predestined to damnation. His kids even became tribal rulers (read: princes!); check out his family tree in Gen 25:12-18.

Now although it's true that eventually Ishmael's descendants will become trouble-makers to the Jews (as per Gen 25:18 and the fact that they constitute our present-day Arabs), this doesn't erase the fact that if Paul wanted to teach DP he had a very strange way of making this absolutely clear.

Another thing to note is that Abraham's OTHER children (apart from Isa and Ish, see Gen 25:1-2) are also nowhere reported to have been predestined in any negative way, yet I think Calvinists - in order to support DP - will have to postulate that EVERY CHILD of Abraham apart from Isaac was eternally decreed to damnation.

The idea of personal salvation (let alone salvific predestination) is simply NOT within the context of the Genesis passages at all - let's not read it into the Romans one. As a note, let me say that I have no doubt that if the Israelites rejected God and rebelled against Him then sadly yet surely they will miss out on His salvation plan. Yet my point is that the sovereignity and purposes of God as laid-out in Romans 9 is always in context of BLESSING and nowhere are we taught that God sovereignly predestined anyone to eternal damnation.

I'll conclude here by submitting one of my previously written paras regarding this portion of Romans:

"The apostle speaks necessarily of the vast difference between being GOD'S children (which comes through repentance, trust and faith), and merely having similar DNA. In other words, yes, God DID elect them as a physical nation to represent Him but failing to trust Him, many of them bungled miserably to be ultimately reckoned as Abraham's offspring."

Now, on to Esau.