Consider Paul's point/counterpoint in Romans 10:

Point: "If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved" (Romans 10:9)

Supporting argument: "for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation" (Romans 10:10).

Supporting Scripture: "For the Scripture says, 'Whoever believes in Him will not be disappointed’" (Romans 10:11).

Conclusion: "For there is no distinction, between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; for 'Whoever will call on the Name of the LORD will be saved'" (Romans 10:12–13).

Counterpoint: "How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed?" (Romans 10:14a).

Supporting argument(s): "How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? How will they preach unless they are sent?" (Romans 10:14b-15a).

Supporting Scripture: "Just as it is written, 'How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news of good things!'" (Romans 10:15b).

Point response to Counterpoint: "However, they did not all heed the good news" (Romans 10:16a)

Supporting Scripture: "For Isaiah says, 'LORD, who has believed our report?'" (Romans 10:16b)

Conclusion: "So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ [KJV, "God"]" (Romans 10:17).

Counterpoint response to Point: "But I say, surely they have never heard? have they?" (Romans 10:18).

Point response to Counterpoint: "Indeed they have" (Romans 10:18b).

Supporting Scripture: "'Their voice has gone out into all the earth, And their words to the ends of the world'" (Romans 10:18c).

Counterpoint response to Point: "But I say, surely Israel did not know, did they?" (Romans 10:19).

Point response to Counterpoint: 3 Scriptures -

Scripture 1 - God will use another nation to rouse jealousy in Israel: "I will make you jealous by that which is not a nation, by a nation without understanding will I anger you" (Romans 10:19b).

Scripture 2 - God will do this by letting non-Israelite people know Him: "I was found by those who did not seek Me; I became manifest to those who did not ask for Me" (Romans 10:20).

Scripture 3 - God has always reached out to Israel, but they stubbornly refused to listen: "But as for Israel He says, 'All the day long I have stretched out My hands to a disobedient and obstinate people'" (Romans 10:21).

Friends, if you follow this interesting self-dialogue that Paul has with himself of point and counterpoint, you can find three main lessons:

Salvation is by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ for everyone, both Jews and Gentiles.

Israel certainly heard the Gospel but simply failed to believe.

The reason Israel heard but did not believe was because their hearing did not come by the word of Christ/God.

It is this last point, on which I would like to dwell. It arises from Romans 10:17, which I will translate with greater literality:

So faith [is] from the hearing ear and the hearing ear [is] by the spoken word of God.

This is an interesting verse because it does not simply say that faith comes by hearing the Gospel. The verse argues that not all kinds of hearing lead to faith. The hearing, perhaps "the hearing ear," comes "by the spoken [rhema, emphasizing a spoken decree as opposed to logos, a written message] word of God." In other words, the only kind of hearing that leads to faith, even saving faith, is the kind of hearing that God speaks forth.

In terms of Paul's argument, the reason why Israel heard the Gospel but did not believe was because God did not give them "the hearing ear" from which faith could arise. Faith did not simply arise from the preaching of the Gospel. That is why Paul declared that even when Israel heard, they did not believe (see Romans 10:16,21). The LORD had to give "ears to hear" so that the hearing would lead to saving faith. God gave these hearing ears to Gentiles in the same way that He selected an elect remnant of Jews for salvation (cf. the argument of Romans 9).

Why did God do this? Was it simply to show His sovereignty in salvation?

I think it was to show three things:

From Adam mankind's experiment with autonomy (freedom of will) is bankrupt, leading them only to certain condemnation.

Even the Jews, who had the Good News of God, are bankrupt and self-condemned, because having the message was no guarantee of salvation since it was not combined with faith.

In every way both Jews and Gentiles are absolutely bankrupt in themselves and needful of both God's saving message and His enabling faith.

Thus, Romans 10 continues the argument of Romans 9, demonstrating that salvation is always by God's gracious election.

Friends, in view of this, let us praise God, who has saved us by grace in keeping with His election of us for salvation from the foundation of the world. Let none of us think that we were saved because we were somehow wiser, more moral, or more humble than others. Let us understand that we are just as condemnation-worthy as any other child of Adam. It was neither our works nor our faith that justified us. It was His work and His faith that justified us:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this [grace, faith, all of salvation] is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do (Ephesians 2:8–10).

AI-Expanded Reflection

The original’s point-and-counterpoint outline encourages readers to follow an argument rather than isolate a familiar sentence. Romans 10 moves from the nearness of the word and the promise to those who call on the Lord toward questions about proclamation, hearing, and Israel’s response. Paul uses questions and scriptural citations to expose inadequate explanations of unbelief. The author’s labels are interpretive aids rather than headings supplied by Paul, but the effort to trace the sequence is valuable. Each conclusion should be tested against the movement of the whole passage.

The first major emphasis is the availability of salvation without distinction between Jew and Greek (10:9–13). Confession and belief concern Jesus as Lord and his resurrection, and the promise is extended to everyone who calls upon him. Paul then reasons backward through the necessary connections: calling presupposes believing, believing presupposes hearing, hearing requires proclamation, and proclamation involves sending (10:14–15). This sequence gives mission a theological basis. It would be strange to interpret its conclusion as making the announced message incidental to the emergence of faith.

The original’s rendering of verse 17 as “the hearing ear” is not more literal than the familiar translation. The Greek akōē can refer to hearing or to what is heard; the verse does not contain a separate word for an ear. Likewise, rhema does not inherently mean an elective decree in contrast to a written logos. The vocabulary cannot by itself establish the proposed distinction between external sound and a divinely created faculty. Paul has already used rhema for the message he proclaims in verse 8. A theological account of effective calling requires an argument broader than this lexical proposal.

The observation that some hear without believing remains entirely compatible with the role of proclamation. Paul does not claim that exposure mechanically produces faith in every hearer. In verse 16, the problem is that not all obey the good news; the Isaiah quotation names unbelief. The subsequent questions reject the claim that Israel simply lacked hearing or understanding altogether. The chapter closes with the image of God extending his hands toward a disobedient people. That conclusion requires attention to the genuine appeal and genuine resistance, not only to a hidden explanation behind them.

Romans 9–11 certainly raises questions of election, mercy, hardening, and the remnant. Yet those themes are accompanied by Paul’s sorrow, prayer, missionary reasoning, and warning against Gentile arrogance. The original’s exclusion of boasting fits that wider concern. Its final wording that it was neither our works nor our faith that justified us needs careful explanation: faith is not a meritorious achievement, but Paul still explicitly describes justification through faith. Calling faith God-given should not make it sound as though the believer never actually trusts Christ.

The practical result is a humble commitment to both prayer and proclamation. We cannot create saving life through rhetorical force, but neither are we free to neglect the message through which people are called to believe. We can ask God for receptive hearts, explain Christ clearly, and listen patiently to resistance and questions. We can also examine whether our own familiarity with biblical language has become a substitute for obedient trust. Romans 10 does not invite speculation that makes witness unnecessary. It magnifies the grace of the Lord who is rich toward all who call on him and the importance of carrying that good news to those who need to hear.

As I was growing up, I remember envying my friends whose parents were believers. I thought they always had someone to pray for them, unlike me, the only believer in my family. That brought loneliness into my life, especially when I was going through hardships. Even now I feel the same way on occasion! Today, however, I read the letter the Apostle Paul wrote to me roughly two thousand years ago and was reminded that I have Someone who intercedes for me without ceasing! This Intercessor is the One who predestined, called, justified, and glorified me, and who willingly took my shame upon Himself, died a shameful death, and was raised from the dead to give me hope! Even more amazing, His prayer never returns empty! Once again my eyes well up with tears today!

A hymn I love expresses this: it asks why God would choose me out of millions to be His child, knowing all the wrongs I have done — how He could pardon me and forgive my iniquities by giving Jesus His Son to save me. It prays for help to be what He wants me to be, to obey His word and live for Him, walking by His side; and it confesses amazement that so great a God could love me so, with a love so wonderful and mercy so bountiful that I cannot understand it.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The comment beautifully draws out Romans 8:34, where Paul asks, who is to condemn, since Christ Jesus died, was raised, and is at God's right hand, "who indeed is interceding for us." Hebrews makes the same point: Jesus "always lives to make intercession" for those who draw near to God through Him (Hebrews 7:25). And Romans 8:26–27 adds a second Intercessor: "the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words," praying for us "according to the will of God" when we do not know what to pray. The believer who feels alone in prayer is, in fact, prayed for by both the Son at the Father's right hand and the Spirit within.

The comment's experience of being the only believer in a family is shared by many, and Scripture speaks to it tenderly. Jesus promised that no one who has left family for His sake would fail to receive "a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children" (Mark 10:29–30) — a promise fulfilled in the family of the church. And Paul's own ministry often began with a single believer in a household: Timothy's father was not a believer (Acts 16:1), yet Timothy became Paul's "true child in the faith" (1 Timothy 1:2). Those who pray alone for their families stand in good company.

"You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit," if the Spirit of God dwells in you; anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to Him (Romans 8:9).

Paul writes that the believers he is addressing are NOT in the flesh. In other words, even though he wrote in chapter 7 of the conflicting natures within every believer, he also makes clear that the believer's enduring realm is in the Spirit. In fact, he goes so far as to say that if this is not true of someone, they are not truly a Christian.

Yet Paul does not deny the ongoing duality within every believer, for he also writes that if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness (cf. Romans 8:10). This echoes his somewhat despairing cry in the previous chapter: "Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?" (Romans 7:24).

He also writes of a present groaning within every believer until their bodies are finally redeemed, when they receive glorified bodies in place of their sinful ones: we who have the firstfruits of the Spirit groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies (a paraphrase of Romans 8:23).

So while believers are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, they nevertheless still battle the flesh as long as they live in their present bodies. There are two realities in view: a present one and a future one.

The present reality is full of struggle, as every believer does their utmost to live by the Spirit and put to death the deeds of the body. Yet this very struggle demonstrates the reality of the believer's faith, for the unbeliever has no such struggle but lives entirely "according to the flesh," which is the way of death, even eternal separation from God. So we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh; for if we live according to the flesh we will die, but if by the Spirit we put to death the deeds of the body, we will live (a paraphrase of Romans 8:12–13). "For the wages of sin is death," but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 6:23).

On the other hand, our future reality is glory. Although we live in a body that is dead and bound for destruction because of sin, we possess a spirit that is alive because of Christ's righteousness. And in the day of resurrection, the Spirit of Christ, who raised Jesus from the dead, will also transform our mortal bodies into the same immortality that Christ possesses: if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you (a paraphrase of Romans 8:10–11).

That is why we can and must endure our present struggle with our sinful nature: what we experience now is temporary, while an eternal weight of glory awaits us. Paul considers that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us (cf. Romans 8:18).

This verse is often read in light of the suffering of persecution — suffering from outside. However, I believe the immediate context suggests that the suffering in view is primarily the believer's internal struggle with sin, which has been the focus of chapters 7 and 8 leading up to this verse.

This also suggests that the preceding verses have the battle with sin in view rather than a battle with sinful people: the Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs — heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, "provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him" (a paraphrase of Romans 8:16–17).

These verses speak of the Holy Spirit's inward witness to our adoption into God's family. What is the basis of this witness? That we have participated in Christ's death, even as we will participate in His resurrection. Paul wrote exactly this a couple of chapters earlier: we were buried with Him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life; for if we have been united with Him in a death like His, we shall certainly be united with Him in a resurrection like His (a paraphrase of Romans 6:4–5).

How do we participate in Christ's death? I think in two ways. First, by faith in what Christ accomplished for us on the cross: He took our sins upon Himself, so that when He died, we died with Him with respect to our sins. God made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God (cf. 2 Corinthians 5:21). Paul says he has been crucified with Christ; it is no longer he who lives, but Christ who lives in him, and the life he now lives in the flesh he lives by faith in the Son of God, who loved him and gave Himself for him (a paraphrase of Galatians 2:20).

Second, we participate in Christ's death for sin when we daily, by the Spirit, put to death the deeds of the body: if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live, for all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God (a paraphrase of Romans 8:13–14). "Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires"; if we live by the Spirit, let us also keep in step with the Spirit (a paraphrase of Galatians 5:24–25).

So the truth that Christ has paid for our sins and given us His righteousness is a present reality, but its full freedom and benefits await our glorification. Meanwhile, as we live in our bodies, we are commanded and led by the Holy Spirit who lives within us to shun sin and pursue righteousness. Paul says not to let sin reign in our mortal bodies to make us obey its passions, nor present our members to sin as instruments of unrighteousness, but to present ourselves to God as those brought from death to life, and our members to God as instruments of righteousness (a paraphrase of Romans 6:12–13).

Friends, I hope this somewhat long discussion helps you appreciate our salvation in Christ, by which all our sins are not only paid for but replaced with the righteousness of God. Yet I hope you will also understand the reality of our present, even daily, struggle with our sinful nature while we live in the body. The struggle itself is evidence of the Holy Spirit's activity, leading us to put to death the deeds of the body and pursue the righteousness of Christ.

Unbelievers have no such struggle and face only a fearful prospect of eternal death at the end of their lives. They are still slaves to sin. Jesus said that everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin (cf. John 8:34). Paul asks whether we do not know that if we present ourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, we are slaves of the one we obey, either of sin leading to death or of obedience leading to righteousness (cf. Romans 6:16). "For the wages of sin is death" (Romans 6:23).

But we believers have not received a spirit of slavery that leads back into fear. No, we have received the Spirit of adoption, by whom we have been brought into the family of God and made heirs of God with Christ. By Him we cry, "Abba! Father!" — the Spirit Himself bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ (a paraphrase of Romans 8:15–17).

Hallelujah! Praise the Lord! We have this inexpressible joy for His indescribably wonderful gift.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The comment reads Romans 7:14–25 as describing the ongoing struggle of a believer, which is the view of Augustine (in his later writings), Luther, Calvin, and many others. It is worth noting that this is one of the most debated passages in Paul. Other interpreters — including many early church fathers, John Wesley, and a large number of modern scholars — read Romans 7 as describing life under the law without the Spirit, whether Paul's own pre-conversion experience or Israel's experience, noting that the Spirit is not mentioned in 7:7–25 but appears about twenty times in chapter 8. On that reading, Romans 8 describes the deliverance from the "wretched" condition of chapter 7. Both views agree that believers still battle sin (Galatians 5:17; Romans 8:13) and that the Spirit gives victory.

Similarly, the comment's view that the suffering in 8:17–18 refers primarily to the inner struggle with sin is one reading; many interpreters understand it more broadly to include persecution and the groaning of all creation, since the chapter goes on to list "tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword" (8:35–36). Both kinds of suffering are part of sharing in Christ's sufferings.

Whatever one's reading of Romans 7, chapter 8 is one of the most joyful passages in Scripture. It begins with "no condemnation" (8:1) and ends with "no separation" (8:39), and the comment's closing — the Spirit's cry of "Abba! Father!" — sits at its heart.

Romans 8

7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot.

Here's another one to show you can't choose God without God intervening.

In fact:

20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope

Everything was submitted to futility, not by choice but by subjugation; by Jesus. Adam sinned and all became under sin and therefore death and corruption for the glorification of God in the works of Jesus.

So then

Romans 9

18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Romans 8:7 describes the mind set on the flesh as hostile to God and unable to submit to his law. The original reads this as evidence that turning to God depends on divine intervention. That emphasis fits the chapter’s wider contrast between life governed by the flesh and life in the Spirit. Christian hope does not begin with a claim that unaided human desire can simply rearrange itself into full obedience whenever it chooses.

The term flesh here should not be equated with the physical body as though material existence were evil. Romans 8 looks forward to the redemption of believers’ bodies, and the Spirit who raised Jesus will give life to mortal bodies. The contrast concerns the governing orientation of life, not a division between a bad body and a naturally pure inner self. This matters because the solution is not escape from creation but life restored under God’s Spirit.

The passage about creation’s subjection to futility extends the horizon beyond individual conversion. Paul portrays the created order as sharing in frustration and longing for liberation. The subjection occurs in hope, and that qualification is indispensable. Corruption is not creation’s intended final state. The same argument that recognizes profound bondage announces a future freedom associated with the revealing of God’s children.

The original identifies the one who subjects creation specifically as Jesus. The verse itself refers to the one who subjected it without naming Jesus in that clause; the NET makes God explicit in its explanatory note. A Christian doctrine of creation and providence can include the Son’s divine agency, but that broader conviction should be distinguished from the immediate wording. NET notes on Romans 8:20

Romans 9:18 then places mercy and hardening within Paul’s discussion of God’s sovereign purpose. Bringing the chapters together can deepen recognition of dependence on grace, provided the themes are not flattened into one undifferentiated claim about subjugation. Romans 8 emphasizes adoption, the Spirit’s help, and the assured future of those in Christ. God’s action is not portrayed merely as overpowering creatures; it brings them into filial freedom and the hope of glory.

The practical response is both humility and expectation. We acknowledge that we cannot heal the human condition through self-sufficient resolve, yet we do not regard creation or the body with contempt. We pray for the Spirit’s work, practice obedience, and care for a world destined for liberation. The believer’s dependence is not a humiliation without hope. It is dependence on the God who gives life, adopts children, and promises that the present frustration will not have the final word.

For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering (a reference to Romans 8:3).

Notice what the problem was. It was not the law, as Romans 7 affirms — the law was good. The problem was the flesh, the sinful nature, which could not obey it. Our nature was too weak, and the law was powerless to produce righteousness apart from complete obedience. It was a hopeless situation.

Then notice the solution. God sent His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh. Jesus identified with our humanity, and unlike us He perfectly obeyed. He was sent as our substitute in receiving judgment, becoming a sin offering on our behalf, like the sacrificial lamb. As the unblemished lamb was offered to cover the people's sins, the sinless Christ was offered to atone for ours. As the lamb temporarily satisfied the demands of God's justice, Jesus permanently fulfilled that requirement.

This is applied through what Paul calls the law of the Spirit who gives life — which, unlike the Mosaic law that revealed sin and brought condemnation, applies Christ's death to our account, so that His righteousness shines through us. This is why Romans 8 begins with the declaration that there is now no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The diagnosis the comment draws from Romans 7–8 is exactly Paul's, and the precision matters: the failure is located in the flesh rather than in the law, which is why Paul can call the commandment holy, righteous, and good in the same breath as describing its lethal effect.

Worth adding what Paul does with the "likeness" language, since it is carefully chosen. He does not say God sent His Son in sinful flesh, and he does not say in the likeness of flesh. The phrasing preserves both a real incarnation and a real sinlessness, and the church spent several centuries defending exactly that balance against errors in both directions.

The continuation is also worth keeping in view. Paul's stated purpose in verse 4 is that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who walk according to the Spirit — so the argument does not end with imputation but moves immediately to actual obedience, produced by the Spirit rather than by effort against the flesh. The chapter that begins with no condemnation goes on to describe putting to death the deeds of the body.

Paul writes that believers can count on Christ's love to the very end, and that no hardship or trial will change it.

We know that in all things God works for the good of those who love Him, who have been called according to His purpose. What then shall we say? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare His own Son but gave Him up for us all — how will He not also, along with Him, graciously give us all things? Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? As it is written, for Your sake we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered. No — in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord (a paraphrase of Romans 8:28, 31–39).

I love Paul's writing. This passage communicates God's commitment to His people. God, who did not spare His Son, will be there in our difficult times. Paul writes that we are conquerors — that we can overcome any trial, even death, in our hope in Christ. In the end we will all face death, our own and our loved ones'. Our hope must be in the word and promise of God.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The list in verse 35 repays attention, because Paul does not choose abstractions. Trouble, hardship, persecution, famine, nakedness, danger, sword — these are specific and largely things he had personally experienced, as the catalogue in 2 Corinthians 11 makes clear. He is not reassuring people that such things will not come; he is naming them as present realities and denying them the one power that would matter.

The quotation he inserts is from Psalm 44, and the choice is deliberate. That psalm is a complaint — the people insist they have not been unfaithful and cannot understand why disaster has come. Paul quotes the hardest verse in it, the one about being counted as sheep for slaughter, and answers it without explaining it away. The phrase "more than conquerors" comes immediately after, which means the victory he describes is not the absence of the slaughter but something that holds through it.

Friends, there is a branch of modern biblical interpretation called "Literary Criticism," and it tries to understand the Scriptures from the perspective of literature, as opposed to simply history. This approach recognizes that the writers of Scripture had the freedom to use literary devices like figures of speech, rhetoric, irony, etc. to convey the message of Scripture. While this is universally acknowledged today, I have sensed that it is only partially and haphazardly applied. As a result, there has been much misinterpretation, or at least misunderstanding of Scripture. Let me give an obvious example, and then ones not so obvious.

In Romans 6:1, we read, "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?" If we stopped there, we would think that Paul seriously entertained the possibility that believers should sin so that God might show more of His grace. However, immediately following this, he writes, "Certainly not!" Paul used a literary device that we refer to today as the "rhetorical question."

Here's a tougher one. In Romans 3:7–8 we read,

For if the truth of God has increased through my lie to His glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? And why not say, “Let us do evil that good may come”?—as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just.

Paul "plays the devil's advocate" in order to dispel the false logic of those that would criticize the justice of God. Note that, even though he uses the first person pronoun "I" the objections are not his own but those of others.

In today's reading, we have an even tougher reading. Paul writes in Romans 10:14–15,

How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “ How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, Who bring glad tidings of good things!”

It's tougher because Paul does not immediately respond to the question, and he even includes a Scriptural reference, which may make us automatically assume that what is written is Paul's perspective.

The key here is that Paul made his point in the immediately preceding verse, Romans 10:13, where he writes, "For 'whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved." What follows are objections to his point. And rarely if ever are the objections his own, but they are those of others. Another reason we know that these are not his objections is that in Romans 10:16ff he responds: "But they have not obeyed the gospel..."

So, it is the Objector who is asking, 'Can people be held accountable for faith since no preacher was sent to preach the gospel to them?' And Paul responds to the objection by saying that even when a preacher was sent, they did not believe (Romans 10:16–17).

Why is this significant? When Bible interpreters fail to see this literary technique at work, they presume that the objections and the response are one and the same; thus, the objections cease to be objections and the response ceases to be a response. So, they misinterpret a key verse like Romans 10:17 into meaning that faith comes when preachers preach the Gospel. No! It is just the opposite. Paul is making a contrast between the word of a preacher versus the "word of God." Faith comes by God's design, His plan, and His will, which is in keeping with Paul's thesis of God's sovereignty in these chapters. Even when the preacher preached the Word, people did not believe. But God's Word always accomplishes its purpose, which is attested also by Isaiah, whom Paul will quote frequently:

So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void, But it shall accomplish what I please, And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it (Isaiah 55:11).

In fact, having this perspective, when we go back and reread Paul's somewhat nebulous words in Romans 10:6–8, it makes much more sense:

But the righteousness of faith speaks in this way, “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’” (that is, to bring Christ down from above) or, “‘Who will descend into the abyss?’” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith which we preach):

Paul writes about the righteousness of faith in contrast to "the righteousness which is of the law." One requires perfect compliance to what is seen, namely the commands of the Law. The other is unseen. As Jesus said to doubting Thomas, "Blessed are those who believe but have not seen." This faith does not require a visible sign of Christ's descent from heaven nor of His ascent from the grave. The "word of faith" which Paul preaches is one that God has put in their mouths and in their hearts. This is the meaning of the Scripture "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart." This, of course, is also in keeping with the New Covenant promise of Jeremiah 31:33–34,

This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time,” declares the LORD. “I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the LORD,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,” declares the LORD. “For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.

God sovereignly and supernaturally puts "the word of faith" into the hearts of people so that they might believe. As Jesus told Nicodemus, "Unless a man is born again (or "born from above"), he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3). It is by the regeneration of the Holy Spirit that people believe and are saved.

Now, please jump down to Romans 10:18. After Paul responds to the objection that people cannot believe unless preachers are sent to preach the gospel to them, he then responds to the objection that people cannot believe unless they hear. He writes in Romans 10:18,

But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed: “ Their sound has gone out to all the earth, And their words to the ends of the world.”

I confess that when I first read this as a young seminary student, I had no clue what this meant. And no one at the time could explain it to me. Also, I was not satisfied with anything the commentaries had to say. Everyone seems to recognize that Paul's question, "Have they not heard," is a rhetorical one, particularly since he answers "Yes indeed."

However, the passage he quotes to support his response is from Psalm 19:4, which talks about God's general revelation in creation, which comes short of what is necessary for salvation, namely, faith in Jesus Christ. So, why would Paul make this citation? The knowledge of God's general revelation in creation would only serve to condemn rather than save. It would point to a sovereign God, who has power over creation; however, it is not the "Gospel." It is only in the second half of Psalm 19 (starting in verse 7) that David writes of the virtues and blessedness of God's specific revelation in His Word.

So how is Paul responding to the objection that people must hear in order to believe? He is saying that they have heard enough, or have enough awareness that there is a sovereign God, who is just to both condemn and save. His response here is much like his response to the objector in Romans 9:19–20,

You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?”

Paul reminds the objectors that God is the Creator, and His sovereignty over what He has made gives Him the freedom to act according to His own glory, even if that means to only save some and allow the rest to be self-condemned (cf. Romans 1:18–32).

Coming back to Romans, in Romans 10:19 Paul continues in his response to the objections. He next responds to the objection "How shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed?" Paul answers with another rhetorical question: "But I say, did Israel not know?" (Romans 10:19). The expected answer: Yes! Then, he goes on to give three Scriptures that point to what God has done.

First, he cites Deuteronomy 32:21, where Moses prophesied what would happen in light of Israel's stubborn rebellion against God. God would judge them severely, even to the extent that they would be jealous and angry because God has removed favor from them and given it to the Gentiles. This is consistent with the theme Paul would more fully develop in Romans 11.

In the next two citations Paul quotes from Isaiah 65:1–2, which reveals what God has done and why God has done it. He has made Himself known to those that did not seek Him, namely, the idolatrous Gentiles. Why? He has done this in light of the stubborn disobedience of the Jews. Again, Paul would develop this in Romans 11, where he would argue that the disobedience of the Jews has made a way for the Gentiles to know and obey God.

As an aside, Romans 10 is often used in Gospel tracts to speak of the universal salvation message; however, that is not the context of the chapter. It is primarily addressing the Jewish people. After all, that is how Paul introduced the chapter:

Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they may be saved. For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God.

The objections, therefore, come on behalf of Israel. And this is also why, Paul's final response is directed pointedly to Israel: "But I say, did Israel not know?" (Romans 10:19).

Just as in the previous chapter, Romans 9, Paul makes two significant points. First, the Jews, along with all peoples, are guilty of their own sinfulness and are justly condemned by God for their unbelief. But second, apart from the law, apart from visible manifestations, apart from the preaching of preachers, God has sovereignly put His Word, even the Gospel, in the hearts and mouths of a chosen group of people, such that these would in turn call on the Name of the Lord and be saved.

Several of you have told me that this matter of election is not important to you because it does not make any practical difference. You say, we still have to evangelize the lost. Yes, but let me remind you that in the time of the Judges people worshipped idols even while they worshipped the LORD. What's the problem here? Both groups are worshipping. In the time of the Divided Kingdom, Jeroboam of the Northern Kingdom told Israel to worship the LORD in Dan and Bethel rather than in Jerusalem. What's the problem here? They still worshipped the LORD. The place shouldn't matter, right? In both instances God brought severe judgment on Israel for this disobedience.

The matter of sovereign election, namely, that God chooses some for salvation, may be relatively less important than the central message of "salvation by grace through faith"; however, it is still a weighty issue. Your view of election will reveal your attitude toward God, your perspective of man, as well as your approach to Scripture. Your view of election will guide your witness and define the basis of your eternal security. Without a proper view of election, you will inevitably misinterpret many passages of Scripture, and thus, cause you to provide misleading counsel to other believers. Thus, this matter of sovereign election is quite important.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The original rightly insists that readers must recognize the voices within an argument. Paul can state an objection he rejects, answer an imagined interlocutor, or use a question to advance his own case. Romans 3 and 6 supply clear examples. But recognizing the existence of those devices does not by itself identify every question as an objection. The interpreter must establish the speaker and function from the local argument. Otherwise, a useful literary insight can become a device for reversing any sentence that appears inconvenient.

Romans 10:14–17 gives substantial reason to retain proclamation as a means through which faith comes. Verse 8 has already identified the message as the word Paul and his fellow workers proclaim. The sequence of calling, believing, hearing, and being sent then explains the place of that message. Verse 16 observes that hearing has not resulted in universal obedience; this does not imply that preaching and God’s word are opposite things. Verse 17 draws its conclusion from hearing the message concerning Christ. The reading “word of God” in the NKJV and “word of Christ” in many other translations reflects a textual variation, but neither wording creates an opposition between divine agency and faithful proclamation. See the parallel text and NET notes.

The citation in verse 18 comes from Psalm 19:4, not Psalm 119. Its use is debated: Paul may adapt the psalm’s language of worldwide witness to the gospel’s dissemination, rather than identify general revelation as the complete content of saving faith. The original’s proposed reading deserves examination, but it is not the only way to explain the quotation. Moreover, Romans 10:12 explicitly brings Jew and Greek together under the same Lord. Israel’s unbelief is the chapter’s particular concern without cancelling the scope of its invitation.

The theological issue is therefore not whether grace or preaching saves as rival causes. In the author’s own framework, God can appoint both the saving purpose and the means of communicating Christ. A preacher cannot manufacture regeneration, but this limitation does not render preaching causally meaningless. The pastoral consequence is hopeful diligence: communicate clearly, pray for receptive hearts, and resist both manipulation and resignation. Election should make evangelism humble. It should not require interpreting Paul’s account of gospel proclamation as an argument against the efficacy of the very message he was sent to preach.

Friends, from time to time I come across good analysis of biblical texts I like to pass along. Here's one from a local pastor named Bob Deffinbaugh, whose clear, accurate, thorough commentaries I respect. This is his exposition of Romans 9 — it's long, but I believe you'll find it genuinely enlightening.

Deffinbaugh's central argument is that Romans 9 teaches individual, not merely corporate, divine election in salvation — a doctrine he sees as directly answering why so many Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah while so many Gentiles believed, without implying any failure in God's promises. He walks through three Old Testament illustrations Paul uses to make this case: God's choice of Isaac over Ishmael, Jacob over Esau (chosen before either had done anything good or bad), and Moses over Pharaoh (whose heart God hardened for His own purposes). Deffinbaugh argues these examples show salvation was never based on human ancestry, merit, or anticipated choices, but purely on God's sovereign election — and that this doctrine, properly understood, isn't meant to trouble believers but to humble and comfort them, since it means salvation depends entirely on God's grace and not on anyone's own worthiness or effort. He closes by addressing common objections (that election is based on God foreseeing who would choose Him; that it removes human responsibility; that it makes evangelism pointless) and argues that recognizing God's sovereignty in salvation should actually deepen gratitude, humility, and confidence in evangelism, since the outcome ultimately depends on God rather than on human persuasion.

AI-Expanded Reflection

This is, by a wide margin, the most extensive and heavily documented presentation of the Reformed view of election in this entire collection of comments, drawing on a long line of historic Calvinist voices — Luther, Spurgeon, Edwards, Pink, and others — to make its case. Given how often this specific theological position has now appeared at length throughout these comments, it's worth stating plainly and clearly: this remains one of the most substantial, long-running, and sincerely contested questions in the history of Christian theology, and thoughtful, Bible-believing Christians in the Arminian, Wesleyan, and other traditions have written with equal seriousness and equal reliance on Scripture in defense of positions that differ from the one presented here — particularly regarding whether God's election operates by unilaterally determining faith, or by graciously enabling a genuine human response that remains, in some meaningful sense, a real choice. Both traditions affirm, without disagreement, that salvation is entirely a matter of grace rather than human merit; they differ on the deeper mechanics of how that grace operates in the moment a person comes to faith. A reader encountering this heavily one-sided presentation deserves to know that the case for the other view has also been made, across centuries, by equally serious and equally devoted students of the very same Scriptures.