하나님나라를 꿈꾸며(Kingdom of God)

4  aFor Gaza shall be deserted,

and Ashkelon shall become a desolation;

Ashdod’s people shall be driven out at noon,

and Ekron shall be uprooted.

5  Woe to byou inhabitants of the seacoast,

you nation of cthe Cherethites!

dThe word of the Lord is against you,

eO Canaan, land of the Philistines;

and I will destroy you funtil no inhabitant is left.

6  gAnd you, O seacoast, hshall be pastures,

with meadows3 for shepherds

and folds for flocks.

7  iThe seacoast shall become the possession

of jthe remnant of the house of Judah,

hon which they shall graze,

and in the houses of Ashkelon

they shall lie down at evening.

For the Lord their God kwill be mindful of them

and lrestore their fortunes.

a Zech. 9:5, 6; [Jer. 47:5]; See Amos 1:6–8

b Jer. 47:7; Ezek. 25:16

c See 1 Sam. 30:14

d [Nah. 2:13]

e [Josh. 13:3]

f ch. 3:6

g ver. 7

h Isa. 65:10

3 Or caves

i [Josh. 19:29]

j [ch. 3:13; Obad. 19]

h [See ver. 6 above]

k Zech. 10:3; Luke 1:68

l ch. 3:20

 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), 습 2:4–7.

4 ◎가사는 버림을 당하며 아스글론은 폐허가 되며 아스돗은 대낮에 쫓겨나며 에그론은 뽑히리라

5 해변 주민 그렛 족속에게 화 있을진저 블레셋 사람의 땅 가나안아 여호와의 말씀이 너희를 치나니 내가 너를 멸하여 주민이 없게 하리라

6 해변은 풀밭이 되어 목자의 움막과 양 떼의 우리가 거기에 있을 것이며

7 그 지경은 유다 족속의 남은 자에게로 돌아갈지라 그들이 거기에서 양 떼를 먹이고 저녁에는 아스글론 집들에 누우리니 이는 그들의 하나님 여호와가 그들을 보살피사 그들이 사로잡힘을 돌이킬 것임이라

 대한성서공회, 성경전서: 개역개정, 전자책. (서울시 서초구 남부순환로 2569: 대한성서공회, 1998), 습 2:4–7.

본 절의 내용들은 열방에 대한 심판을 다룬다. 아모스서는 머너 열방에 대한 심판을 선언한 뒤에 이스라엘에 대한 심판을 선언했다. 스바냐도 마찬가지로 열방에 대한 심판 이후에 유다에 대한 심판을 선포하면서 선배 선지자의 방식을 따른다. 

스바냐 선지자의 경고는 분명하다. 유다가 회개하지 않으면 하나님께서 열방을 심판하시는 날 함께 망할 것이다. 왜냐하면 하나님께서 유다를 특별히 구별하셔서 자신의 백성으로 삼으셨는데, 유다는 좌짓고 여호와 하나님을 거역하는 일에 있어서 다른 나라들과 전혀 다를 바가 없기 때문이다. 은총을 입

은 사람이 그 은총에 걸맞게 살지 못하면 비난을 받는 것이 당연한 일이며, 은총을 베푼 자도 크게 실망하게 된다는 것을 충분히 인지할 수 있다.

여기에 언급된 나라들의 순서는 지리적 위치에 근거한 것이다. 블레셋은 서쪽에, 모압과 암몬은 동쪽에, 구스는 남쪽 멀리, 아시리아는 북쪽에 위치해 있다. 선지자는 이처럼 유다 땅의 동 서 남 북에 있는 나라들을 예로 삼음으로써 자신이 예고하는 심판이 온 세상에 임할 것을 암시한다. 또한 이 국가들의

중요성을 다른 각도에서 찾아 볼 수도 있다. 선지자는 군사적 강국인 블레셋, 이스라엘과 희미한 친척관계에 있는 모압과 암몬(창 19:38-38), 별로 알려진 게 없는 먼 나라 구스 일방적인 제국주의를 지향하는 아시리아 등 이 세상에 서로 얽히고설킨 모든 나라가 이스라엘의 하나님 여호와의 통치 아래 있다는 점을 역설하고 있다. 이 국가들의 면모로 보면 도시국가로 구성되어 있는 블레셋, 작은 자치국가 모압과 암몬, 그리고 대형 제국 아시리아  등 국가 규모에 상관없이 모든 나라가 여호와의 심판을 받아 통일한 종말을 맞게 된다는 것이다.

(엑스포지멘터리 484-5)

1. 블레셋에 임할 심판(2:4-7)

2. 암몬과 모암에 임할 심판(2:8-11)

3. 구스에 임할 심판(2:11)

4. 아시리아에 임할 심판(2:13-15) 

4절) 가사는 버림을 당하며, 아스글론은 폐허가 되며, 아스돗은 대낮에 쫓겨나며 에그론은 뽑히리라. 

블레셋은 원래 5개의 도시국가로 형성되었다. 가사, 아스글론, 아스돗, 에글론과 여기에는 빠져있는 가드가 있다. 

위의 지도에서 보는 것처럼 남쪽 연안으로부터 올라가면서 도시를 언급하고 있는데 가드는 빠져 있다. 가사는 블레셋의 주요도시(수 13;3; 삿 16:1;  삼상 6:17)로 예루살렘에서 남서쪽으로 80km떨어진 곳이다. 본문에서 언어유희를 보여주는데 앗자(가사)가 아자브(버림받을 것) 당한다라고 표현하였다. 

아스글론은 가사에서 북쪽으로 20km 떨어진 해안 도시(삿 14:19; 삼상 6:17)였다. 

아스돗은 아스글론에서 북쪽으로 20km 떨어진 곳에 있었으며(삼상 5:1; 대하 26:6), 에글론은 뽑힐 것이라는 말씀역시 ‘에크론’이 ‘아카르’될 것이다라는 언어유희이다. 

블레셋의 5대 도시중에 가드가 빠진 것은 앗수르 사람들에 의해서 이미 멸망했고 선지자 시대에 아직 회복하지 못했기 때문으로 보인다. 

선지자가 블레셋의 네 도시와 연결하여 사용하는 동사들은 도시들뿐만 아니라 여자들에게도 똑같이 적용될 수 있다: 가사는 결혼 전에 약혼자에게 버림받은 처녀와 같고(cf. 사 54:6; 렘 4:29), 아스글론은 결혼 후 남편에게 버림받은 여인과 같으며 (cf. 사 54:1 ; 심하 13 : 20), 아스돗은 내쫓긴 이혼녀와 같고(cf. 레 21 :14), 에글론은 임신하지 못한 여인처럼 뿌리째 뽑힐 것이라고 한다. 선지자가 ‘버림받은 여인’ 은유를 사용하고 있다는 추가적인 증거로는, 아스돗과 함께 사용되는 동사인 ‘내치다’보다 ‘황폐하다’가 본문에 더 적합한 동사임에도 불구하고, ‘결혼한 여인’ 비유를 위해 일부러 부자연스러운 ‘내치다’를 사용하고 있다는 점이다. 국가를 결혼한 여인에 비유하는 것은 선지서에서 자주 사용된다(사 54:4-8; 렘 3; 호 1-3). 그러나 항상 이스라엘에게 적용되며 이방 나라에 대하여 결혼 비유가 사용되는 것은 이곳이 유일하다. 그러므로 블레셋에 대한 심판 선언은 유다에게 자숙하라는 경고이다. 블레셋을 치시는 것을 마치 결혼한 아내를 내치는 것으로 묘사하심으로써, 진짜 아내인 이스라엘도 내치실 수 있음을 암시히는 것이다.(엑스포지멘터리 488)

선지자는 아스돗이 대낮에 쫓겨날 것이라고 말한다. 이는 전쟁이 매우 신속하게 끝날 것이라는 의미이다. 보통 가나안 지역에서는 동이 트면 전쟁이 시작된다. 그러므로, 대낮(정오)에 끝난다는 것은 적군이 매우 신속하게 이 도시를 점령할 것이라는 것을 말하는 것이다. 

-  2:4 Zephaniah mentioned four of the five main Philistine cities. He excluded Gath, which may have perished by his time.13 He probably used the four cities to represent the destruction to come on the entire area of Philistia.

Zephaniah basically moved from south to north in his description of the destruction. Gaza, the most remote Philistine city, lay fifty miles southwest of Jerusalem. Since the time of Sennacherib, Gaza had served as a vassal of Assyria and held Judean territory with the help of the Assyrians.14 From Gaza, Zephaniah moved his prophecy progressively closer to Jerusalem, proclaiming the coming destruction of Ashkelon, Ashdod, and Ekron. Zephaniah’s message came closer and closer to the covenant people who had rejected the true God for idols which do not profit.

The prophet used assonance, a poetic device based on similar sounds, to communicate his message. Gaza (ʿazzâ) would be abandoned (ʿăzûbâ) and Ekron (ʿeqrôn) would be uprooted (tēʿāqēr).

Zephaniah proclaimed the judgment against Gaza as a city deserted, a statement meaning something like our saying that “grass would grow in the streets.” The following statement, “Ashkelon left in ruins,” is parallel to the pronouncement about Gaza. Both cities would suffer the same fate.

Nebuchadrezzar took both Gaza and Ashkelon. Ashkelon, laying twelve miles north of Gaza and ten miles south of Ashdod, recovered and became famous as a Hellenistic city.15 Ashdod and Ekron fell at the same time but were also rebuilt at a later time.16

Two lines of thought on the significance of “midday” have been suggested. First, people often rested at noontime which was the hottest part of the day. The attack then would have come at noon surprising the city and making it an easy prey. The idea may have been the suddenness of the attack as perhaps in Jer 15:8.17 Second, the attack concluded by noon, meaning that the city fell easily to the attacking forces. Taylor cited a reference from the Moabite stone, “And I fought against it from the break of dawn until noon, and I took it,” as a reference to the ease of taking a city such as Ashdod.18

The second suggestion is more likely. Ashdod, like the other Philistine cities, would receive the judgment of the Lord God. The judgment emphasized here is loss of population, not the act of conquest and destruction. Roberts explains this: “the major problem with the Philistines was that they occupied territory claimed by Judah.”19

13 Micah mentioned Gath prominently (Mic 1:10, 14). The city could have been destroyed by an Assyrian invasion. Amos indicated that the city may have suffered defeat by his day (Amos 6:2). W. F. Stinespring noted that Sargon II boasted of having destroyed Gath in connection with his campaign of 711 b.c. After that time Gath seems to have disappeared from history (“Gath,” IDB, 355–56). Motyer (“Zephaniah,” 3:931) attributes the decline of Gath to the military campaign of Uzziah (2 Chr 26:6). Roberts (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 197) follows Rudolph (Micha, Nahum, Habakuk, Zephanja, 279) in seeing Gath as under Judean control at the time the oracle was originally delivered.

14 Stinespring, “Gaza,” IDB, 357–58.

15 Id., “Ashkelon,” IDB, 252–54.

16 Patterson, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 339.

17 Berlin, Zephaniah, 100.

18 C. L. Taylor, Jr., “The Book of Zephaniah: Introduction and Exegesis,” IB (New York: Abingdon, 1956), 1024; O. P. Robertson illustrates Esarhaddon’s prideful boast of taking Memphis in only half a day, but then says neither surprise nor quickness of victory was in view. Rather he points to the emphasis on military superiority, so confident was he that no element of strategic surprise was necessary for victory. Frontal attack in broad daylight brings overwhelming victory to the superior forces (The Books of Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, NICOT [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990], 298).

19 Roberts, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 198.

 Kenneth L. Barker, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 454–455.

5절) 본문의 내용은 앞선 4절의 블레셋 도시들이 심판받을 것을 다시금 확인하는 것이다. 블레셋 사람들은 그렛 족속으로 그레데에서 온 사람들로 추정된다. 본문은 블레셋 사람의 땅을 가나안이라고 호칭한다. 가나안이라는 말은 일반적으로 이스라엘이 블레셋에 도착하기 전에 그 땅에 살던 원주민들을 가리키는 말이지만(창 12:5) 이 지역 출신의 무역업자들을 가리킬 수도 있다.(습 1:11)

-  2:5 The seacoast indicates the location of the Philistines, from which the name “Palestine” is derived. They lived to the southwest of Judah, and are also called Cherethites (1 Sam. 30:14; 2 Sam. 15:18), showing historical links with Crete. An unusual title for them is Canaan, which more regularly refers to the natives of the territory before the arrival of Israel and the Philistines (Gen. 12:5) but could indicate the traders from the area (Zeph. 1:11).

 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1735.

-  2:5 “Woe” is a word meaning both judgment and lament. The word could introduce either a judgment speech or a word lamenting the fate of the city (cp. Nah 3:1; Hab 2:6–20). Of the fifty-three occurrences in the Old Testament, R. J. Clifford lists three possible uses for hôy: (1) to describe funeral laments (eight times), usually translated as “alas;” (2) a cry to get attention (four times), usually translated as “ho” or “ah”; and (3) an announcement of doom (forty-one times and used only by the prophets), usually translated as “woe to.”20 Zephaniah employed the latter usage. While no reason for the judgment is mentioned, “the context shows the prophet has anything but affection for the Philistines.”21

Zephaniah identified the Philistines as “Kerethites,” a term that may identify a clan of the Philistines or may be associated with the island of Crete, from which most assume the Philistines migrated.22 In Amos 9:7, Deut 2:13, and Jer 47:4, the Philistines are associated with Caphtor, which may have been Crete.23 David recruited part of his bodyguard from the Kerethites (2 Sam 8:18). In the present context Zephaniah referred to the whole nation by the name of Kerethites.

Zephaniah also used the term “Canaan” with the Philistines, probably in the sense of their common fate with the Canaanites as a people to be driven out of the land. Canaan normally meant the region west of the Jordan River. Motyer points to Gen 9:25 to say that Zephaniah has brought Philistia under the curse of Canaan.24 When Israel subdued the Philistines in the past, they were able to do so only because of the intervention of the Lord (1 Sam 7:13). Judah could know of the certain end of the Philistines because of the word of the Lord. The central couplet in this verse “traces all to the agency of the ‘word of the Lord.’ The divine agent in creation (Ps 33:6; see also Gen 1:3; Heb 12:3; 2 Pet 3:5) is the overmastering agent in history; in both arenas alike he ‘spoke and it came to be’ (Ps 33:9; Isa 13:3).”25

20 R. J. Clifford, “The Use of hôy in the Prophets,” CBQ 28 (1966): 458–64. See the discussion on Nah 3:1.

21 Ibid., 462.

22 Roberts (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 196) calls the Kerethites a “subgroup of the Philistines that apparently traced their origins to the island of Crete.” They “were a dominant element in the Philistine population (1 Sam 30:14; 2 Sam 8:18; Ezek 25:16).” See C. S. Ehrlich, “Cherethites,” ABD 1:898–99, and K. A. Kitchen, “Philistines,” Peoples of Old Testament Times, ed. D. J. Wiseman (Oxford: University Press, 1973), 52:67.

23 A. B. Davidson, The Books of Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah, with Introduction and Notes, CBSC (Cambridge: University Press, 1899), 122–23. Cp. R. S. Hess, “Caphtor,” ABD 1:869–70.

24 Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 3:932.

25 Ibid.

 Kenneth L. Barker, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 455–456.

6-7절) 해변은 풀밭이 되어 목자의 움막과 양떼의 우리가 거기 있을 것이고 그 지경(해변)은 유다 족속의 남은 자에게 돌아갈 것이다. 남은 자들이 거기에서 양떼를 먹이고 저녁에는 아스글론 집들에 누우리니 그들의 하나님 여호와가 그들을 보살피사 그들이 사로잡힘을 돌이키실 것임이다. 

하나님의 심판이 블레셋, 해변 지역에 임하면 이들의 땅은 풀밭(초원)이 되고 주민들은 더이상 살지 않게 된다. 하나님께서 블레셋을 심판하시는 이유는 그들을 그 지역에서 없이 하심으로 그 땅을 유다에게 주시기 위한 것이다. 풀밭과 목자의 움막, 양떼의 이미지는 여호와께서 이스라엘의 목자가 되심으로 그들을 푸른 초장과 쉴만한 물가로 인도하시는, 여호와가 그들을 돌보시는 이미지를 극대화시킨다. 

남은 자(쉐에릿)는 신학적으로 매우 중요한 단어이다. 죄에 대한 하나님의 심판은 매우 혹독하여서 소수의 생존자만 남을 것이다.(9, 3:13; 사 17:6) 하나님의 심판이 매우 극심하지만 모두 멸망당하는 것은 아니고 소수는 남아서 하나님 백성의 존재를 이어가게 될 것이다. 

-  2:6–7 Remnant is a theologically significant term, showing two sides of God’s relationship with his people. His judgment against sin will be so severe that only a few survivors will remain (v. 9; 3:13; Isa. 17:6). All hope is not lost, however, since the destruction is not complete; at least a few refugees will remain, continuing the existence of God’s people. God will be mindful of Judah, taking note of their need and responding to it (Zech. 10:3). This involves not only thought but also action, since he will restore (Zeph. 3:20) the bounty of which they have been deprived. The mention of pastures and shepherds (2:6) predicts that, after the Philistine cities have been destroyed, the area will be repopulated by God’s people (v. 7), who will live in peace.

 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1735.

-  2:7 God would restore the fortunes of the people of Judah by giving to them the land of the Philistines. Far from abandoning his people, he intended to do good to them by caring for them. The metaphor “portrays the remnant of Judah lying down like sheep in the wasteland that was once Philistia. Before this pastoral image Yahweh only cares about Judah’s destruction, but now is their shepherd who creates a haven for His ‘sheep.’ ”28

God’s magnificent promises of restoration involved the remnant of the house of Judah, probably a reference to the humble and submissive of the people of Judah (Zeph 2:3) rather than to a proud and arrogant group of returning exiles. “Remnant” can be a piece of wood left over from making idols (Isa 44:17) or a people who have survived a catastrophe (1 Chr 4:43; Isa 37:4; Jer 25:20). Theologically important is the remnant God uses after his discipline to participate with him in his universal plan of redemption (Gen 45:7; Isa 37:32; Mic 2:12; 4:7).29 Baker rightly reminds us that the remnant doctrine is always two-sided: “exemplifying both the severity of God’s punishment and also the graciousness of his mercy. Destruction will come, but no annihilation.”30 This remnant God will “care for.” Here the literal Hebrew text is “Yahweh their God will visit them,” picking up the same verb used to express God’s visit to punish Judah in 1:8–9. God faithfully visits his people. The result and emotion of those visits depends on the people’s faithfulness to their covenant love relationship with him.31

28 P. R. House, Zephaniah: A Prophetic Drama. JSOTSup 69 (Sheffield, Eng.: Almond Press, 1988), 149.

29 See Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 3:933. Cp. Isa 10:20–23; 11:11–16; Jer 23:1–8; 31:11–14, 27–37; Ezek 11:13–20; 34:20–31; 37:15–28; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12–13; 4:1–8; 5:7–8; 7:18–20; Zech 8:6–8; Zeph 3:9–20).

30 D. W. Baker, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, TOTC (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1988), 23b, 106.

31 Cp. Robertson, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 301.

 Kenneth L. Barker, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 457.

본문에서 하나님께서는 이스라엘의 대적인 블레셋을 심판하신다. 그런데 이 심판이 이스라엘의 남은 자들에게는 희망의, 기쁨의 소식이 된다. 왜냐하면 그들이 살던 그 지역에서 대적들이 쫓겨나가고 그 땅이 유다의 것이 될 것이기 때문이다. 여호와 하나님이 함께하심으로 남은 자들을 돌보실 때에 희망이 있다. 

• All children at some time wonder if their parents really love them and ask, “If they do, why are they so mean to me?” This is always at a time when they have been severely disciplined. That is also the situation with Israel. Moreover, the response of parents is quite similar to Paul’s answer: (1) Your Father has a perfect right to do what he knows is best (9:6–29), and (2) you have gotten just what you deserve for your actions (9:3–10:21). Chapters 9–11 primarily are a defense of the faithfulness of God in dealing with his covenant people. Chapters 9–10 deal with the negative side: why has he rejected Israel? But Paul has been very careful with his language, never saying that all of Israel has been rejected: In 9:6–7, “not allwho are descended from Israel are Israel”; in 9:21, “somepottery for noble purposes and somefor common use”; in 10:16, “not allthe Israelites accepted the good news”; and in 11:17, “someof the branches have been broken off.” In other words, there are still Israelites who have become part of the new covenant people. That is the topic of this chapter. The theme is stated in verse 2, God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew.
•  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 282.

• The majority of Israel failed to believe. Does this mean that God has rejected his people? Paul presents himself as an example of the remnant that has been preserved, a remnant that indicates that God is not finished with Israel and that he will fulfill the promises made to his people.
•  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2176.

• Elijah in his despair thought Israel would be extinguished. But God assured Elijah that he had preserved a remnant, which gave Elijah hope that God would fulfill his saving promises in the future. In Paul’s day, as in Elijah’s day (v. 4) and today, a remnant of Jews believe in Christ because of God’s electing grace (cf. 9:27–29).
•  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2176.

• The next section (vv. 2–4) introduces the idea of a remnant chosen from within the apostate nation as the recipients of God’s covenant love. It begins with the rhetorical question, Don’t you know?…(compare 6:3, 16; 7:1). This assumes that the readers are familiar with the two passages from 1 Kings 19 about Elijah.He was the great prophet who single-handedly opposed Ahab and Jezebel and their plan to introduce Baal worship into Israel. More than any other, he was the prophet who performed miracles, but his purpose was to rescue his people from idolatry. Thus when it says here, he appealed to God against Israel,it refers to his complaints against their apostasy. The verb can mean “to intercede, plead” but here has a negative connotation of praying “against” his people. The passages cited are from 1 Kings 19:10, 14 (v. 3), 18 (v. 4). They are part of a section (1 Kings 19:1–18) describing the events after the great victory against the prophets of Baal on Mt. Carmel (1 Kings 18). Immediately afterwards, Jezebel threatens to kill Elijah, and in one of life’s great ironies, this prophet who had been the focal point of that great victory runs for his life into the wilderness. There he is cared for by God (vv. 4–8) and then travels forty days and nights to Mount Horeb (where Moses saw the burning bush, Ex 3:1). There he pours out his complaint, which has shifted from Jezebel to the people of Israel and their desertion of him: Lord, they have killed your prophets and torn down your altars; I am the only one left, and they are trying to kill me.Elijah’s complaint appears twice in 1 Kings 12:10, 14 to emphasize his discouragement and Israel’s sins. The differences with the lxx (inverting the first two clauses, slightly altering the others) probably come from Paul quoting from memory rather than for any theological purposes (so Cranfield 1979; Dunn 1988b). Paul uses this to show that the failures of Israel in his own day are no different from those in the past. The nation is still turning against God and his chosen leaders.
• After Elijah’s lament, God responds, I have reserved for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal(v. 4 = 1 Kings 19:18), an abbreviation of the lxx, probably also from memory. Although the majority of the nation has turned against God, he has been faithful to his covenant by reserving for himself a faithful remnant (reserveis a major remnant term in the Old Testament, a cognate of remnantin v. 5). Here is another example of the balance between sovereignty (reserved for myself)and responsibility (not bowed the knee)in this passage. God foreknew(v. 2) that they would be faithful and so reservedthem for himself.But the emphasis is on sovereignty and election. Some (Michel 1966; Cranfield 1979; Dunn 1988b; Morris 1988) see significance in the number seven thousand, since seven is the number of completeness. However, it is difficult to see why this must be so. Paul is quoting an Old Testament text, and there is no indication he sees numerological meaning in the number (so Moo 1996). At best the emphasis is on the paucity of the number (Schreiner 1998).
•  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 285–286.

• Election and graceare inseparable, for both show that salvation is God’s work alone, and that it has nothing to do with works. On grace, see also 4:4–5; Acts 15:11; Eph. 2:8–9.
•  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2176.

• Election is stressed in 8:33; 9:11; 11:5, 7, 28; and 16:33 (with equivalent terms like “predestined” in 8:29, 30; and “called” in 1:1, 6, 7; 8:28; 9:24–26). Graceas opposed to works is emphasized in 3:24; 4:16; 5:2, 15, 17, 20–21; 6:14; and 11:5, 6. It is quite clear that there would be no salvation apart from grace. If all humanity received its just desserts, there would be nothing except eternal damnation. Yet God’s lovingkindness and mercy have led him to choose a remnant. Morris says (1988:401–2, following Lagrange), “it was not the number so much as the permanence of God’s plan for Israel that mattered in the time of Elijah, and it is this that mattered for Paul too. He put his trust in God’s grace, not in numbers.”
•  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 287.

• The references are to Isa 29:16; 45:9 and to the widespread OT comparison between God and the potter (e.g., Job 10:9; 38:14; Isa 64:8; Jer 18:1–6). God has the right to treat his human creatures as he chooses. Paul does not intend to deny human responsibility; as his repeated emphasis on the importance of faith reveals, human decisions are significant. But God’s sovereignty over all things, including salvation and eternal condemnation, is a foundational theme of the Bible. We must affirm both God’s sovereignty and human responsibility without denying one or the other.
• OT Old Testament
• e.g. for example
•  Douglas J. Moo, “The Letters and Revelation,”in NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2015), 2309–2310.

• Paul challenges the legitimacy of this complaint. He is saying not that there is no answer, but rather that there is no right to ask such a thing. While some think O manis equivalent to “my dear sir,” it is far more likely that there is a deliberate contrast between manand Godto indicate that the objection comes from a purely human perspective (so Cranfield 1979; Dunn 1988b; Fitzmyer 1993b; Schreiner 1998; contra Barrett 1957; M. Black 1973). Finite humanity has neither the right nor the understanding to talk back to Godin this way. As a created being, the creature cannot tell the creator how to act, nor can the creature question the way the creator has decided to operate. Morris (1988:364) comments, “ ‘Little, impotent, ignorant man’ (Wesley) is set over against the great God whose purpose runs through the whole creation and who moves people and nations.” To anchor this Paul cites part of Isaiah 29:16 lxx (Shall what is formed say to him who formed it)and then adds a portion that may reflect Isaiah 45:9 (Why did you make me like this?).Both passages in Isaiah are part of the metaphor of the potter and the clay, so this is a natural introduction to verse 21. Isaiah was also speaking of God’s judgment upon his people Israel. Once more, the creature has no place criticizing the creator. It is like a small child “talking back” to their parents. In most families that provides grounds for punishment, which is also true in the family of God.
•  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 251–252.

• If Paul had said nothing more on the subject, it would be reasonable to conclude that God exercises his absolute power in an unqualified sense. But Paul had not as yet given us the entire story. God is not an arbitrary despot who does what he wishes without regard for anyone or anything. In the very next verse (v. 22) Paul told of the great patience God showed toward those who deserve wrath. And in the following chapter he discussed the liberty and responsibility of human beings. God’s freedom operates within a moral framework. Human logic cannot harmonize divine sovereignty and human freedom, but both are clearly taught in Scripture. Neither should be adjusted to fit the parameters of the other. They form an antinomy that by definition eludes our best attempts at explanation.
•  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 202.

• God created a world in which both his wrathand his mercywould be displayed. Indeed, his mercy shines against the backdrop of his just wrath, showing thereby that the salvation of any person is due to the marvelous grace and love of God. If this is difficult to understand, it is because people mistakenly think God owes them salvation!
•  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2173.

• Paul quotes Hos. 2:23 and 1:10 to illustrate the stunning grace of God—that those who are not my people … will be called “sons of the living God.”In calling the Gentiles to salvation, God calls a sinful people to himself, just as in saving Israel he showed mercy to the undeserving. No one can presume on God’s grace. In calling anyone to salvation, he shows undeserved mercy to those who were not his people.
•  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2174.

• The fact that only some of Israel would be saved was prophesied in Isa. 10:22–23. Most of Israelwas judged, and only a remnantexperienced salvation. Indeed, as Isa. 1:9 says, Israel deserved to be wiped out like Sodom and Gomorrah, but God had mercy and spared some.
•  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2174.

• Turning to the plight of the Jewish nation (v. 27), Paul quoted Isaiah, who declared that though the Israelites were as countless as the sands of the sea, only a remnant would be saved (Isa 10:22).35The Lord would carry out his judgment “fully and without delay” (TCNT).36Isaiah again was quoted, noting that unless the Lord Almighty had left the Israelites a few descendants, they would have been like Sodom and Gomorrah (cf. Gen 19:24–29). So Paul was saying that God had brought together in his   p 204  new order those of faith regardless of their ir national background. Although he worked out his redemptive plan through his Son Jesus, a descendant of David in terms of his human nature, his new people are comprised of those who are Gentile by birth as well as Jewish. It is faith, not national origin, that brings a person into the family of God.
• 35κράζει, “cries out,” carries with it a note of urgency. E. Käsemann, sees it as indicating “inspired, proclamatory speech” (Commentary on Romans, trans. and ed. G. W. Bromiley [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980], 275).
• TCNT Twentieth Century New Testament
• 36συντελῶν and συντέμνων are participles meaning “bringing to pass” and “cutting short.” Moffatt translates “with rigour and dispatch.”
•  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 203–204.

• aGod calls people from the Jews (v. 24b)
•    bGod calls people from the Gentiles (v. 24c)
•    b´The OT confirms that God calls people from the Gentiles (vv. 25–26)
• a´The OT confirms that God calls people from the Jews (vv. 27–29)

•  Douglas J. Moo, “The Letters and Revelation,”in NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2015), 2310.