at all...
No darkness
Romans Chapter 9 Commentary
Let’s now dive into the challenging verses of Romans 9-11. At the outset, we must consider the overall point Paul was making. These chapters deal with the nation of Israel falling away from God’s favor because of their rejection of Christ. Paul points out that not all Jews rejected Jesus and that there is a righteous Hebrew remnant (Rom. 9:1-6; 11:5). However, the nation of
Israel had fallen away and Paul was in great anguish about it. Paul’s topic in Romans 9-11 is primarily about the election and rejection of Israel as a nation, not about the election and rejection of individual men. Jesus taught that both men and nations will be separately judged (Matt. 7:21-23; 2 Cor. 5:10; Matt. 25:31-33). This background leads us to our first challenging passage.
1. And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Rom. 9:10-13.
I have had more than one person cite these verses to attempt to show that God loves certain men and hates others. In fact, these persons believe that God hates the guts of certain unborn babies whom he has predestined and predetermined will grow up evil. This is the wrong way of interpreting these
verses.
a. First, the word “hate” is used in this passage not in the sense of outright emotional disgust and venomous resentment.
Rather, the word is used to mean “loving less.” Charles Hodge, the greatest American theologian of the nineteenth
century, stated this view in his commentary on Romans concerning this passage, “It is evident that in this case the word hate
means to love less, to regard and treat with less favor.” Hate is certainly used this way in other key passages. In Gen. 29:32-
33 “hatred” is used of Jacob’s feelings for Leah, when in truth the clear meaning of the passage is that Jacob loves and favors
Rachel more than Leah. The NIV translates this verse as Leah saying, “I am not loved.” Lk. 14:26 likewise uses the term
“hate” in the sense of “loving less.” If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. Lk. 14:26. Jesus is obviously not teaching us to hate our parents, siblings and children, for that would contradict thousands of other scriptures. Jesus is saying we must “love them less” than we do the Lord. There is not any other verse in the Bible where God is said to hate any individual man, so using this verse to substantiate the view that God hates individual men is dangerously unwarranted. God hates evil deeds, not evil men
(Rev. 2:6). God loves all men. Christ died for all men. Christ offers salvation and forgiveness to all men. But, not all men
choose to receive God’s free gift of salvation. But God even loves those who reject Him. Jesus loved the rich young ruler
who rejected His call (Mk. 10:21-22). Jesus healed the ear of a soldier who came to arrest Him (Lk. 22:51). Jesus asked
forgiveness for all who killed Him (Lk. 23:34). Consider the quote of Michael Green, The love of God, with arms extended on a cross, bars the way to hell. But if that love is ignored, rejected, and finally refused, there comes a time when love can only weep while man pushes past into the self-chosen alienation which Christ went to the cross to avert. Michael Green, p. 166, The Westminster Collection of Christian Quotations, Westminster John Knox Press, (2001).
b. Second, Paul uses Jacob and Esau to represent God’s election of nations, not the election of individual men. Paul was
addressing the arrogant presumption of nationalistic Jews who believed Israel was the only chosen nation (people) of God,
regardless of their corporate level of faith. Paul’s purpose in these chapters is to show that election is now not by nation but
by individual faith alone. Paul in these verses is tracing back the historical development of Israel as God’s chosen nation
(people). In Romans 9 Paul acknowledges the Israelite nation as the blessed recipient of “the adoption , and the glory, and
the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the fathers, and of whom
as concerning the flesh Christ came” (Rom. 9:4-5). He traces back the call of God through Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It is
in this process that Paul quotes with regard to Jacob and Esau: (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Rom. 9:11-13. Paul quotes verse 12 from Micah 1:2-3. These verses in Micah are clearly referring to Jacob and Esau not as individuals but as
the nations of Israel and Edom. That Paul was referring to the call of a nation (Israel) rather than the call of an individual in
these verses is highlighted in the following passage from F. F. Bruce’s commentary on Romans 9:11-13. ‘The elder will serve the younger.’ From the birth oracle to Rebekah (Gn. 25:23). The prophecy relates not to the individuals Esau and Jacob (for
Esau never rendered service to Jacob) but to their descendants; it relates to the long periods during which the Edomites were in servitude to Israel or Judah (cf. 2 Sa. 8:14; 1 Ki. 22:47; 2 Ki. 14:7; etc.). ‘Jacob, I loved, but Esau I hated.’ From Malachi 1:2-3, where again the context indicates it is the nations Israel and Edom, rather than their individual ancestors Jacob and Esau, that are in view. The way in which communities can be so freely spoken of in terms of their ancestors is an example of the common oscillation in biblical (and especially Old Testament) thought and speech between individual and corporate
personality (cf. exposition of 5:12-21, p. 120, n. 1). Israel was the elect nation, and Edom incurred the wrath of God for its unbrotherly conduct towards Israel in the day of Israel’s calamity (cf. Ps. 137:7; Is. 34:5 ff.; Je.49:7 ff.; Ezk. 25:12 ff.; 35:1 ff.; Ob. 10 ff.). F. F. Bruce, Tyndall New Testament Commentaries, Revised Edition, Romans, p. 182. The nation Israel sprang from Jacob and the nation of Edom sprang from Esau. Interestingly, in Amos 8:11-12, Edom is used figuratively to represent the Gentiles. Romans 9 seems to echo the use of Esau as a symbol of the Gentile nations by starting off comparing and contrasting Jacob and Esau, and then concluding by comparing and contrasting Israel and the Gentiles. This allows for the possibility that this whole passage is dealing with the calling of Israel versus the calling of all the Gentile nations, and how their respective favor\disfavor from God has now essentially flip-flopped with each other. (Rom. 9:25-26, 30-33). All the Gentile nations are now favored through faith in Christ, while national Israel has reaped disfavor from God because of their corporate and continual unbelief. But even that will change when national Israel is grafted back into favor as they become jealous of the nation of faith which fills the earth. (Rom. 11:11-30). But in the beginning Israel was the only chosen nation because of the
faith Abraham sowed in response to God’s promise. Paul’s point in these verses is that Israel’s election as a chosen nation
was already determined in Rachel’s womb. The Edomites were not God’s chosen nation, even though they too were Isaac’s
seed. The key reason Edom could not be God’s chosen nation was that Jesus was not in their seed. God loved Esau less not
because Esau was an evil baby in Rachel’s womb. God loved Jacob more because he carried the seed of Jesus in him. God
did ordain that through the protected seed of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc. all the nations of the world would be blessed
through the birth of one seed - - Jesus the Christ (Gal. 3:16). Science is settled on the point that fraternal twins, which Jacob
and Esau were, come from entirely separate sperm and eggs. Thus, there was a world of genetic difference between Jacob
and Esau, a difference large enough to ultimately spawn two entirely separate nations. Only one of these nations had the
exact genetic input to produce the destined seed of Jesus - Israel. God had promised Abraham his seed would bless all
nations, but God also promised that the chosen seed would come from the people which would come to occupy the specific
boundaries of the promised land. (Gen. 13:14-18; 15; 17; Acts 17:26). Esau and Edom could never fit this bill, thus only
through Jacob and Israel could the blessed and prophesied seed come - - the seed of Jesus.
Nonetheless, God still greatly loved Esau and the Edomites as individuals, even if they did not stand in corporate favor with
God. That God loved Esau and the Edomites is established by Isaac’s blessing of Esau (Gen. 27:39), the inclusion in scripture
of Edomite genealogies (Gen. 36; 1 Chr. 1), God’s apparent siding with Edom against the Moabites (Amos 2:1-2), and,
most importantly, the clear injunction of Dt. 23:7, “Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite; for he is thy brother.” These mercies
toward Esau and Edom hardly support the view that God hates their guts. They were certainly less favored corporately than
was Israel, but God continued to love them dearly, for that is His nature. God is love and God loves all men. Israel was only chosen as a nation because it carried the seed of Jesus within it. Abraham received this seed by faith from the Lord when he believed God for the miraculous birth of Isaac. Thus, it was God’s election of Abraham’s seed made possible through Abraham’s faith in receiving the promises for the nation of Israel, the birth of Jesus and ultimately the bride of Christ - - the church. Once Jesus arrived and imparted His righteousness to mankind, then no longer was a national election needed. Faith had come to all nations. The Holy Spirit had come. His bride, body and church had arrived. No longer was there Jew or Gentile, but one new man (Gal. 6:15; Eph. 2:12-15). Similarly, we are not the elect because God loves us more than other men. We are of the elect because we have received the seed of Christ into our being by the exercise of our faith. Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness; In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began; Titus 1:1-2. God loves all men the same, but men each receive different levels of that love based on their respective faith. Faith allows us to receive and embrace our pre-destined walk of good works and anointed living.
2. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Rom. 9:14-18.
These verses are often cited by Calvinists for three propositions: God predetermines and predestines mercy to some men and not others; Man’s freewill plays no part in salvation, while God’s mercy predetermines all offers of salvation as well as compelling all acceptances; God, by His own hidden counsel, softens the hearts of certain men and hardens the hearts of others. These three assertions form the framework for the Calvinistic viewthat man has no freewill to choose anything, but rather all men’s choices are predetermined and pre-dictated by the will of God. I will deal with these erroneous assertions in order:
a. God’s mercy is not reserved for a limited number of men. The Calvinist view here pictures the great supper of the lamb to be
“by select invitation only.” The only ones who will be allowed entrance are those who can show an engraved invitation sent
to only an elect few while gestating in their mother’s womb. All other men were never sent this invitation in the womb and
cannot obtain one during their lifetime regardless of what choices they make, what Gospel they hear and what prayers
they utter. The problem with this view is that it contradicts too many other scriptures that hold that God desires and allows
the opportunity for all men to be saved (Ez. 18:23, 32; 33:11; Jn. 3:16; 1 Tim. 2:4; 4:10; 2 Pet. 3:9; 1 Jn. 2:2). Moreover,
it contradicts Paul’s other teachings in Romans 10:11,13 which clearly state that “whosoever” believes and calls on Jesus will
be saved - - no limitations, provisions or stipulations. Jesus taught that He died for all men, thus all men are invited and
capable of accepting the free gift of salvation. That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Jn. 3:15-16. If a man were prejudged and predestined incapable of accepting the Lord’s invitation, then the invitation is faulty, insincere and ineffectual. If the blood of Jesus cleansed the sin of the world (all men), then all men have a real invitation,
a real opportunity, a real choice of life or death to be made (1 Jn. 2:2; Dt. 30:19-20). Does this mean that all men choose
life, believe in Jesus, and call on the name of the Lord? Of course not. Men are free to reject or accept, to believe or not,
and to love God or not. The dice are not loaded. But, does God know before we are born what choices we will make? Extreme Calvinists believe not only does God pre-know our choices, but He also predetermines them. Some Arminians believe God may pre-know our choices but that He doesn’t predetermine them. Still others believe that there is nothing for God to pre-know until the moment we actually choose. Under this view, a choice is not a choice until it’s made. God has, by His own power, made our choices “unknowable” ahead of time, even to Himself. When God made freewill, He voluntarily withdrew any predetermining coercive power from the wills of men. God has what theologians call a “covenant of non-coercion” with man which He will not break. Another complication in this question comes from God existing both within and outside of time simultaneously. If the eternal life of God is outside of the space-time continuum, then His ability to navigate in and out of our time is certainly beyond our ability to fully understand. Ephesians 2:6 tells us we are seated now with Christ in Heavenly places. Does this mean that somehow we are already with God outside of time in His eternal kingdom? If so, we are, like God, simultaneously present both inside and outside of time. Could this mean that all men who ever choose Christ are already seated with Christ now in His eternal Kingdom where there is no beginning or ending? Perhaps we are the sons of God referred to in Job 1:6 and 2:1. Perhaps we as the elect have always been with God. Perhaps our choice here gives us retroactive entry into God’s eternity. If so, we are not saved because we are seated now with Jesus in heavenly places. No, we are seated with Christ in heavenly places because we choose to believe in Christ while here in this life. God’s powerful goodness makes these possibilities almost paradoxical, yet scriptures are clear that our entry into God’s eternity is based on the grace we receive in this life based on our faith in this life. (Eph. 2:8-10; Rom. 10:8-10; Jn. 3:3-8). A foundational point in this whole existence is that God gave us the gift of freewill, a gift He will never violate or take back. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. Rom. 11:29. He is a powerful and loving Father, not a cruel puppeteer who manipulates us for His own enjoyment. He has called all men to receive forgiveness of sins and the indwelling Holy Spirit. Yet only those who by faith choose to are able to receive the gift of God. This is why Jesus taught that many are called but few are chosen. (Matt. 20:16).
It is like a million dollar check we have been freely given by a wonderful benefactor. We have done nothing to earn it, but we must do something to actually receive the funds - - endorse and present the check. Without the endorsement, the funds
are never transferred to us, deposited by us and used for us. We can walk around with an unendorsed million dollar check
in our shirt pocket, but it is not our million until we endorse it and present it to a bank. So it is with salvation. All men have been given the million dollar check of salvation which comes from the blood of Jesus shed for the sins of the world. But, only those men who endorse Jesus with their faith and present Jesus by their confession actually receive the provision of salvation (Rom.
10:8-10).
b. The second erroneous Calvinistic assertion drawn from the Romans 9:14-18 passage is that God’s mercy alone determines
and dictates salvation, not any decision or act of man. While I heartily agree that God’s mercy alone is the absolute source
of all salvation, it is the exercise of faith alone which serves as the instrument to receive God’s grace. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. Eph. 2:8-9. Faith is not a work. I can’t will myself to have faith in God by my own mental determination. I can’t perform any act which earns or merits
my receiving God’s grace. However, faith is a heart decision to receive and respond to the promises of God. Going back to our previous example, I did nothing to earn the million dollar check, yet I had to endorse it and present it to truly receive it. Faith then is our posture of trust in accepting God’s grace. We love God only because He first loved us, yet we must receive that love before we can truly possess it and return it to God. This passage in Romans is merely stating that no one can work or mentally will their way to God on their own. Each man must first receive God’s prompting in their heart by believing (endorsing) and confessing (presenting) the promise as true. Everything in God’s economy is about learning to receive what has already been freely given at the cross and Pentecost. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 1 Cor. 2:12. Faith is a response to God’s grace, not a cause of God’s grace. If ever faith is taught as a cause of God’s grace, then this false teaching mutates faith into a work. It is this error, I am sure, that the Calvinists seek to avoid. However, the Calvinists err to the other extreme when they teach that man’s response of faith is totally predetermined, pre-dictated and pre-established by God before birth. The call of Israel as a nation was certainly assured to be the corporate womb which would produce the protected seed of Jesus. This seed was according to the faith of Abraham who received and responded to God’s call and promise. That much was settled by God and could not be thwarted until the coming of the Messiah. This is why the nation of Israel was protected by God from the destructions of Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, Greece and Rome. God did not dictate that generation after generation of Israel would be “forced” to be faithful to God’s covenant from Abraham to Jesus. In fact, many of those generations of Israelites were largely unfaithful. Ten of the twelve tribes were dispersed out into the world. Yet, God did not allow Israel as a nation to be extinguished. God protected the tribe
of Judah because it carried the seed of Jesus, not because Judah was holier than the ten lost tribes. This Romans’
passage then is about, and only about, how God chose Israel through the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (whose name
was Israel) rather than the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Esau.
c. Many Calvinists also cite this Romans’ passage for the idea that God hardens the hearts of men from being able to choose
salvation. The implication here is that God violates our freewill, or according to Calvinism God absolutely controls our
freewill. The passage cites Pharaoh as an example of someone whose heart was hardened by God. This passage says God
first raised Pharaoh up, which preference F. F. Bruce believes, “may be not only to God’s raising up Pharaoh to be king, but
to His patience in preserving him alive for so long, in spite of his disobedience.” Tyndall New Testament Commentaries, F. F. Bruce, Inter-Varsity Press, 19, p. 183 (1985). But, next the passage says that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart and the hearts of the Egyptians during the ten plagues of the Exodus (Ex. 9:12; 14:4). Calvinists take this to mean that God took over Pharaoh’s will. In other words, God loaded the dice in this situation. This interpretation is wrong because it omits other passages which clearly state that Pharaoh hardened his own heart against God (Ex. 8:32; 9:34). This is entirely consistent with the governing dynamics of God. God shows us mercy after mercy after mercy in giving us space to repent and opportunity to draw close to Him. But, if we refuse and continue to sow seeds of unbelief, then God’s protective presence must progressively withdraw from our lives or our freewill will be violated. God didn’t harden Pharaoh’s heart as a direct affirmative act. God withdrew His mercy from Pharaoh because Pharaoh hardened his own heart first when he killed all the male Israelite newborns. For God to withdraw His mercy is like severe drought which hardens the soil. Pharaoh’s heart was further hardened as God progressively withdrew His mercy from Pharaoh after each plague. Pharaoh’s heart was not hardened because God’s presence acted violently upon Pharaoh’s heart but becauseGod’s presence reluctantly abandoned Pharaoh to his own evil reaping. Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Jas. 4:8.
This is the concept of divine attraction and repulsion. God first sends His love to us. If we draw near to Him in response, then
He draws even nearer to us. If we pull away from Him, then God must withdraw somewhat. His withdrawal is never
proportionate to our withdrawal because His love is stronger than His judgment. If we pull away a mile, God will grudgingly
withdraw an inch. Yet, it is still a mandatory withdrawal because of the freewill law of sowing and reaping. But if we continually sow to the flesh, the “inches” of God’s reluctant withdrawals eventually add up to feet and miles. When we examine scripture, we see that God doesn’t blind men, Satan does. In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. 2 Cor. 4:4. (Jn. 12:31; 14:30). We also see in scripture that God is not the agent which hardens hearts. Unbelief is the agent which pressures God’s protective presence away from our hearts, which results in our hearts growing even more parched and hardened. Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness: When your fathers tempted me, proved me,
and saw my works forty years. Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways. So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest.) Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily,
while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end; While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation. For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses. But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness? And to
whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not? So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. Heb. 3:8-19. These verses clearly attribute hardness of heart to come from sin, unbelief and not hearing God. The result of this continual “departing from the living God” (v. 12) results in greater and greater hardening of the heart. Eventually, God’s presence is completely withdrawn as we are “given over” to our unbelief (Rom. 1:21-28). Also consider John 12:40. He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. Jn. 12:40. If the “He” in this verse is Satan and the “I” is God, then again we see that Satan is involved in the hardening of hearts as well. Jesus clearly taught that the primary cause in hardness of heart is unbelief. (Mk. 16:14; 8:17-21). The only sense in which God hardens hearts is the resultant drought which occurs in a sinner’s heart as the sinner pressures away the protective presence of God.
3. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the
potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonor? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory. Rom. 9:19-23.
Paul here quotes the potter\clay analogy from Jeremiah 18. It is vital to note that Jer. 18:7-10 confirms this analogy concerns nations, not individuals. To apply it to individuals is to stretch it out of context. God treats groups (nations) differently
than individuals (men). This difference is highlighted at even the subatomic level of existence. Quantum physics prove that while the mechanistic laws of Newtonian physics may accurately predict how large groups of particles will behave in a given event, how individual quantum particles exactly behave is unpredictable. In nature, ants operate similarly. As a group, activity is predictable, but not so on an individual level. Weather patterns echo this tension between general predictability and specific unpredictability. What God destines for nations simply does not apply to individual free will. Consider the following commentary on these verses by Gregory Boyd: “[W]e begin to understand what is misguided about the deterministic interpretation of Romans 9 when we consider its interpretation of thepotter-clay analogy that Paul uses in Romans 9:20-23. In the deterministic interpretation, it is assumed that the clay has no ‘say’ in how it is fashioned; the potter decides everything. This, I submit, is
not at all how Paul understood this analogy. It is important to remember that Paul did not invent this analogy; he found it in the Old Testament. Moreover, the Old Testament passage that is the source of this analogy employs it to make the exact opposite point that those who espouse the deterministic reading of Romans 9 think Paul is making with it. In Jeremiah 18 the Lord shows Jeremiah a potter working on a vessel. ‘The vessel he was making of clay was spoiled in the potter’s hand, and he reworked it into another vessel, as seemed good to him’ (Jer.18:4). The Lord then says, ‘Can I not do with you, O house of Israel, just as this potter has done? . . . Just like the clay in the potter’s hand, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel’ (Jer. 18:5-6). As we discussed in chapter three, the Lord says that since he is the potter and can do whatever he wants with the clay, he will recant prophecies of fortune or misfortune if the people he prophesies about change for better or for worse (Jer. 18:7-11). As a master potter, he reserves for himself the right to rework vessels whenever he sees fit. God can and will change his plans if people change their hearts. Hence the Lord reassures the Israelites that though their sin has ‘spoiled’ the vessel he was making out of them, as a masterful potter he can refashion a new vessel out of them if they, the clay, will allow him to. If they repent, he will repent of the judgment he intended to bring on them. When Paul used this analogy to explain why God had mercy on Moses and hardened Pharaoh, therefore, we need not conclude that this entails that Moses and Pharaoh had no say in how they were made. Quite the opposite. As in Jeremiah, the ‘clay’ Paul is referring to is not some preexistent clay of humanity out of which the Lord arbitrarily fashions individuals to suit his own eternal purposes - - that is, to demonstrate his wrath or mercy. It is rather the clay of people’s lives in history. As in Jeremiah 18, people make themselves ‘spoiled’ or pliable , and God responds by reworking them in this state ‘as seem[s] . . . good to him’ (Jer. 18:4) - - always in accordance with their pliable or hardened hearts. This is why Paul says that God ‘endured with much patience’ the vessels he was preparing for destruction (Rom. 9:22). Why would he need much patience if the vessel was ‘spoiled’ according to his own design? Why would he say, ‘All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people’ (Rom. 10:21), quoting Is. 65:2, if he was the one molding them to be disobedient in the first place? Finally, one must wonder why an all-holy, all-loving God who ‘does not willingly afflict or grieve anyone’ (Lam. 3:33) would intentionally fashion ‘spoiled’ people in the first place. The patience and frustration of God toward the vessels that he prepared for ‘destruction’ makes no sense on the deterministic interpretation, but it makes perfect sense if we understand them in the light of Jeremiah 18. This understanding of God’s use of Pharaoh also squares best with the Exodus narrative about Pharaoh that Paul relies on in using his analogy. It is important to note (as the rabbis of Paul’s day frequently did) that the first acts of hardening in the Exodus narrative depicting God as hardening Pharaoh’s heart are done by Pharaoh himself (Ex. 8:15, 32). God simply used Pharaoh’s hardening to suit his own providential purposes. He desires ‘to show his wrath and make known his power’ (Rom. 9:22) in order to intimidate Israel’s future adversaries. When Paul responds to the charge of injustice by asking, ‘Who . . .are you, a human being, to argue with God?’ (Rom. 9:20), he is not thereby appealing to the sheer power of the potter over the clay. He is rather appealing to the rights of a wise and just potter to fashion clay according to his providential purposes and in a manner that is appropriate, given the kind of clay with which he has to work. If Israel persists in their rebellion, the potter hardens them and prepares them for destruction. If Gentile and Jewish believers persist in their simple faith, God has mercy on them and fashions out of them a
beautiful vessel displaying his own eternal glory (Rom. 9:21-23). This fashioning may look arbitrary, especially to hardened Jews who believed that they were the ‘vessel of honor’ simply by virtue of being Jewish. As in Jeremiah 18, however, Paul’s use of this analogy demonstrates that this kind of Jewish thinking and the charge of arbitrary injustice that rises from it is incorrect. God’s activity in history is not arbitrary; it is just and wise. Moreover, to the offense of many Jews at the time, the possibility of being clay fashioned into a vessel that displays God’s glory is open to Jews and Gentiles alike. It all depends on whether or not one is willing to seek after the righteousness of God that comes by faith, not works (Rom. 9:30-32;
10:3-5,12-13l 11:22-23).” Gregory A. Boyd, Satan and the Problem of Evil, p. 361-364. As a final note concerning Romans 9-11, “it is worth noting that this passage was not interpreted in a deterministic fashion prior to M. Parmentier, “Greek Church Fathers on Romans 9,” Bijdragen 1 50 (1989): 139-54; 51 (1990): 2-20; J. Patout Burns, “The Atmosphere of Election: Augustinianism As Common Sense,” JECS 2 (1994): 325-39; Peter Gorday, Principles of Patristic Exegesis: Romans 9-11 in Origin, John Chrysostom, and Augustine, Studies in the Bible and Early Christianity 4(New York: Mellen, 1983).
This in part explains why Calvin, for example, cannot cite ante-Nicene fathers against his libertarian opponents (e.g., Pighius). On Calvin’s use of patristic sources, see Wilhelm H. Neuser and Brian G. Armstrong, eds., Calvinus Sincerioris Religionis Index [Calvin As Protector of the Purer Religion], Sixteenth Century Essays and Studies 36 (Kirksville, Mo.: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1997). Hence, when Calvin debates Pighius on the freedom of the will, he cites Augustine abundantly. I will explore this Augustinian shift more fully in my forthcoming book, The Myth of the Blueprint.
Augustine in the fourth century (with the exception of certain Gnostics and the Manicheans)1. Once the blueprint model of providence became established in the church, the interpretation became common (though prior to Calvin, few carried it through as consistently as Augustine). This may suggest that the deterministic reading of this passage is at least partially the result of people bringing to the text an assumed world view (the blueprint world view) that Paul (and the early postapostolic fathers) did not share.” Gregory A. Boyd, Satan and the Problem of Evil, p. 360-361. E. I want to emphasize that I am only addressing the concepts of predestination and freewill as they pertain to the issue of God’s goodness. There are millions of questions about predestination, many of which are unblessed and\or unanswerable. However, the key issue is answerable - - God predestines all men for His goodness. Satan also predestines all men for destruction (2 Tim. 2:24-26). Man uses his freewill to choose which predestiny he will embrace. It’s that simple. Certainly there are events in the tide of history which have been to varying degrees predestined by God, resisted by men and impeded by Satan. However, in all of this God has never violated the freewill of a man. Nor has God acted unworthily by initiating, aiding, abetting or actively allowing evil in any way. Nor has God
loaded the dice of events unfairly against any man. God is fair. More than fair. God has invited all nations and men aboard His “A” trains of salvation, healing and deliverance. These trains run according to God’s predestined schedules, however who will actually board the trains remains an open question. Satan also has trains of sickness, oppression and destruction predestined for all nations and individuals. That such destruction is scheduled to occur is set, but who will actually board these trains is an open question yet to be determined by the free will of men. God has predestined His bride, His body and His church to walk in supernatural strength, anointing and victory. Yet, the actual membership of God’s family is open-ended for whoever believes and acts on the spirit-revealed word of God. This is why all men are already written in the Lamb’s book of eternal life; but as men reject, neglect or unselect the invitation, then God reluctantly must “blot out” their names. (Ex. 32:33; Rev. 3:5; 22:18). This “blotting out” concept means that all men are already provisionally saved; but as they fail to receive the free gift of God, then they lose their position by being tearfully blotted out by a loving Father who has been wilfully rejected by faithless men. I
freely admit that I can do nothing positive without the Lord’s leading and empowerment. (Jn. 5:19, 30; 15:5). Nothing, that is, except to accept or reject the Lord’s leading and empowerment. (Dt. 30:19-20). As the ancient rabbis taught, everything is in God’s hands except devotion to God. Devotion is our portion, our calling and our response to God’s limitless grace.
By Richard K Murray
Who has made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.- 1 Corinthians 3:6
