(9) For this is the word of promise, M this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son. This verse is evidently designed to show the propriety, and to explain the force of the phrase children of the promise, Isaac was so called because God said, At this time I will come, &c. This is not only a prediction and promise that Isaac should be born, but also a declaration that it should be in consequence of God's coming, i. e. of the special manifestation of his power ; as, in scriptural language, God is said to come wherever he specially manifests his presence or favour, John 14 : 23. Luke 1 : 68, &c.
(10) And not only this, hut when Rebecca also had conceived by one, &c. Not only the case of Isaac and Ishmael demonstrates the sove- reignty of God in the choice of the recipients of his favour, but that of Rebecca evinces the same truth in a still clearer light. It might be sup- posed that Isaac was chosen on account of his mother, but in the case of Jacob there is no room for such a supposition. Jacob and Esau had the same mother, the same father, and were born at one birth. The choice here was certainly a sovereign one.
(11) For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, &c. The force of /or is clear by a reference to the pre- ceding verse, and the object of the apostle. ' Not only does the case of Isaac and Ishmael evince the sovereignty of God, but that of Rebecca and her children does the same, in a still more striking manner, for the decision between her children was made previous to their birth, for the very purpose of showing that it was not made on the ground of works, but of the sovereign pleasure of God.' This is an example which can- not be evaded. With regard to Ishmael, it might be supposed that either the circumstances of his birth or his personal character was the ground of his rejection, but with regard to Esau neither of these suppo- sitions can be made.
Neither having done good or evil. The design of the introduction of these words is expressly stated in the next clause. It was to show that the ground of choice was not in them, but in God ; and this is the main point in regard to the doctrine of election, whether the choice be to the privileges of the external theocracy, or to the spiritual and eternal blessings of the kingdom of Christ.
That the purpose of God, according to election, might stand. This is the reason why the choice was made prior to birth. The original here admits of various interpretations, which, however, do not materially alter the sense. The word rendered purpose is that whicji was used in the previous chapter, v. 28, and means here, as there, a determ,ination of the, will, and of itself expresses the idea of its being sovereign, i. e. of having its ground in the divine mind and not in its objects. Hence, in 2 Tim. 1 : 9, it is said, " Who hath called us not according to our works, but according to his own purpose," &c. ; see Eph. 1 : 11. 3 : 11. The words according to election are designed to fix more definitely the na- ture of this purpose. The word election often means the act of choice