Bogged Down in Romans -- Part I

My posts have been slowed because I'm bogged down in Romans, considering what the Apostle Paul has to say about the relationship between man choosing God and God choosing man, as it relates to salvation.

Romans seems to be the key text for those who view salvation as a result of God's election. Consider the following from chapter 9:

• Paul begins the chapter discussing the plight of his own race, the Jews. He reminds readers that it is the Jews who received every advantage from God -- adoption as sons, the law and covenants, the temple worship, the patriarchs, and the lineage of Christ. But, (vs. 6) "Not all who are descended from Israel are Israel." What has Paul said? That not all of Israel is saved, but just some? What is the basis for this?
• Paul goes on to say that it is the portion of Israel that are descendents of Isaac only that are "children of the promise." (vs 7-8) So that, it is "not the natural children who are God's," but only children of the promise are God's children.
• Then Paul discusses Isaac's children, Jacob and Esau, and the continuance of the promise. Paul points out that (vs. 11) "Before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad -- in order that God's purpose in election might stand, not by works but by him who calls -- she was told, "The older will serve the younger. Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." What does Paul say here? Well, that God had a plan -- that before the children of Isaac wore born (before they had demonstrated even one nation of holiness or sin), God would fulfill his promise of salvation to the line of Jacob (the youngest) and not of Esau (the oldest). Paul then reminds us that God loved Jacob but hated Esau (vs. 13). That doesn't seem fair of God, that he would love one and hate the other, just because He wishes to, does it?
• Paul anticipates that his readers (and us today) would question God's fairness, because he then writes (vs. 14) "What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."
• For those who preach election, that is where the argument really starts to gel. Note what has happened here. Paul has said that not all of Israel will be saved, but only some. The predictor of those who would be saved is not human behavior, but God's plan of salvation -- even to the extent that a line of Israel was chosen through Jacob before Jacob was even born. Furthermore, Paul knows that his audience will cry foul and say that God's behavior doesn't seem fair. Paul answers this by simply quoting God's own words to Moses -- "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." Then Paul summarizes this by saying (vs. 16) "It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy." "It" is salvation.
• Then Paul uses one more example, that of Pharoah (the Egyptian ruler that experienced God's plagues before the Jews left Egypt). Paul says, essentially, that Pharoah was born for a single purpose (vs. 17) -- "that I (God) might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." Paul then summarizes this verse by saying "God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden."

I'll stop here for now. Any feedback on these verses?