It is widely taught in the religious world that we are saved by faith alone. I once heard a man
preaching on the radio who declared that we are saved by grace alone. The Bible certainly teaches that
we are saved by faith. When the Philippian jailer asked Paul what he should do to be saved, Paul told him
to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31). Paul wrote to Titus and said that the grace of God has
appeared and brought salvation to all men (Titus 2:11). There is no contradiction here and neither verse
says that we are saved by faith alone or by grace alone. The Holy Spirit declares through the apostle Paul
that by faith we have access to God's grace (Romans 5:1,2). So we see there is no contradiction in the
Scriptures when it says we are saved by grace and we are saved by faith.
The Scriptures teach that we are saved by obedience. We read: “...though he was a son, yet learned he
obedience by the things that he suffered; and having been made perfect, he became unto all them that
obey him the author of eternal salvation” (Hebrews 5:8,9). Is there any contradiction here? No, there is
never any contradiction in the word of God. Jesus, in His prayer to the Father, said: “Sanctify them in the
truth: thy word is truth” (John 17:17). Truth never contradicts itself. That is an impossibility.
Obedient Faith
Let us show then that there is no contradiction between being saved by obedience and being saved
by faith through grace. Let us read from the Word of God again: “And the word of God increased; and
the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem exceedingly; and a great company of the priests were
obedient to the faith” (Acts 6:7). So we see that the faith that saves is an obedient faith. James, by the
power of the Holy Spirit, put it this way: “For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, even so faith
apart from works is dead” (James 2:26).
One brother in India said to me: “It is hard to reconcile James and Romans.” I said, “It is not
difficult to reconcile James and Romans. The problem is that you cannot reconcile James with what you
think Romans teaches.”
It is a very common fallacy of the religious world to claim that Paul taught justification by faith
alone in the book of Romans. He did not. Let us see what Paul said in the book of Romans. We read:
“Who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness by the
resurrection from the dead; even Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we received grace and
apostleship, unto obedience of faith among all nations, for his name's sake” (Romans 1:4,5). So instead
of Paul teaching justification by faith alone, he plainly stated by the power of the Holy Spirit that he was
talking about an obedient faith. Lest the world should fail to grasp this great truth, he said in the very
last chapter, referring to mystery of the gospel: “...but is now disclosed and through the prophetic
writings is made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the
obedience of faith” (Romans 16:26).
Love of the Truth
The Scriptures clearly point out that we are saved by these things. So as we study and learn more
things by which we are saved we shall have no problem as long as we do not teach that we are saved by
any one of them alone. If we are going to be saved, we must love the truth (II Thessalonians 2:10).
Jesus said that the word is truth (John 17:17). He said that the Holy Spirit would guide the
apostles into all the truth. “But the Comforter, even the Holy Spirit, whom the father will send in my
name, he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you” (John 14:26).
Jesus further declared: “Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth is come, he shall guide you into all the truth;
for he shall not speak from himself; but what things soever he shall hear, these shall be speak; and he shall
declare unto you the things that are to come” (John 16:13).
So the Holy Spirit gave the apostles the truth. He gave them all the truth. He guided them into all
the truth. We are to love the truth. We would not take from it nor would we add to it. John now talks to
us by the power of the Holy Spirit: “Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ,
hath not God; he that abideth in the teaching, the same hath both the Father and the Son” (II John 9).
We have studied enough now that we can see the truth in God's Word when it says: “Wherefore
putting away all filthiness and overflowing of wickedness, receive with meekness the implanted word,
which is able to save your souls” (James 1:21). How does the Word save? When we believe it. “So belief
cometh of hearing, and hearing by the Word of Christ” (Romans 10:17).
The Place of Baptism
If we have faithfully followed the teaching of the Scriptures we shall not have trouble in
accepting the fact that we are saved by baptism (I Peter 3:21). Why do people reject this plain
statement of Scripture? Because they have been taught that we are saved by faith alone. We are
saved by receiving with meekness the implanted word. We are to abide in the teaching. Here is
what Jesus said: “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to the whole creation. He that believeth
and is baptized shall be saved; but he that disbelieveth shall be condemned” (Mark 16:15,16). No child of
twelve years old could misunderstand what it says here. Why do men who profess to be Bible scholars
reject this plain statement? Jesus gave us the reason: “And he said unto them, Full well do ye reject the
commandment of God, that ye may keep your traditions” (Mark 7:9). The tradition of man today is that
we are justified by faith alone. In order to hold to that tradition they must reject the commandment of
Jesus in Mark 16:15,16. If you, in times past, have held to that tradition of justification by faith alone, will
you continue to hold to it and reject the commandment of God?
The day the gospel was first preached, after the sermon by Peter, the people asked the question:
“Brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37). Now listen carefully to Peter's answer for it was the answer
of the Holy Spirit: “Repent ye and be baptized every one in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of
your sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). Is there anything difficult to
understand about this? No. Why does nearly the whole religious world reject this command? They want
to maintain their doctrine of justification by faith alone.
The line is drawn. The issue is clear. If we teach justification by faith alone, we must reject the
commandments of God, but if we accept the fact that we are saved by an obedient faith we can accept
every Scripture we have used. We can accept all Scriptures. If we keep the human doctrine of
justification by faith alone then we must reject the commandment of God as revealed in the New
Testament.
The battle line is drawn up. Some day we are going to be judged by the Word of God (John
12:48). Why not live by it now!
J. C. Bailey, 1982, Dauphin, Manitoba
Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)
This is a particularly difficult thing to speak about at this
time. I don’t need to develop the reason right now other than to say
that the body and mind of a very dear friend and a great man of
God is under attack. I mention the difficulty of speaking about it only
so that you won’t think I’m being glib!
Life is and should be precious to us. We see and feel that truth in a
host of ways don’t we. And why wouldn’t it be this way for most of us?
This means that even Christians who believe in life with Christ after
death and then resurrection are loath to leave this place with all its
warm relationships, lovely predictability and harmless pleasures.
Yes, we cheerfully sing, “This World is Not My Home” but it’s the only home we’ve known all our lives and
it is God’s gift to us so how could we not, at some level, regret
leaving it? Bless me, even at airports when our beloved is leaving for a
longish period there are tears and hugs, almost a refusal to let them
go. Should it be surprising that we express the fear of “loss” of them
in the feverish way we try to prolong their life when it seems clear
they are dying?
Still, in our bones we know we can’t put off the day forever. It’s
appointed! Wouldn’t it be fine if we (not just the dying one—but the
family and friends) were so shaped and assured that we could “give them
up” in an assured and glorious way?
Not in a life-denying way, mark you, but doing it after we have (as
Robert Browning put it) “earned” our death by living life to the full in
joyful integrity. There are things worth dying for and there is a time when it’s okay to “lay yourself down with a will,” as Robert Louis Stevenson expressed it.
In the movie, El Cid, the hero lies mortally wounded
with an arrow deep in his chest. He’s sure to die but his adoring wife
wants to prolong it by mere hours by having the arrow removed even
though it will weaken him. He resists her pleas because he must address
and go out with the army that has lost heart because they think he’s
dead and think they will have to face the enemy without him. He keeps
the arrow and speeds his death so that he can do something worthy of his
having lived—a life he has lived so well and honorably. He tenderly
tells her, “You can’t save my life. You must help me to give it up.”
We all need that kind of help. When Death comes calling, and this
time won’t go away without us, we need friends and family to help us
“give it up” in a way that’s appropriate for who we are. There aren’t
many scenes more impressive than those where vibrant faith in Jesus
Christ is facing death with assured sorrow. But long before we’re on our deathbeds we need that kind of help. We
need people to help us not to hoard the life we’ve been given. We
desperately need help to keep us from spending it selfishly on our own
ease and we need people around us who will help us to be generous with
it. Beyond the very obvious I don’t know well what this sort of talk
means for myself so I’m not trying to diagnose and assess the life of
anyone else. I just know that we are all sinners and in need of some
help toward a richer Christlikeness.
During a dangerous viral outbreak a husband didn’t want his doctor
wife to put their life together at risk by getting involved in helping
the afflicted. Who can’t understand that? But who can’t be thrilled and
pleased by her response? She told him, “I love you with all of my heart,
my dear, but you mustn’t make it hard for me to do what’s right.” She
was telling him, “Help me give it up.”
And then there was the One who faced the most momentous moment in His
life when He would be overwhelmed with such sorrow (Matthew 26:38;
sorrow! not fear) that He verges on an emotional breakdown and He called
on three of His dear friends to come with Him to a garden and help Him
to do what had to be done to bless a world.
His view of this occasion of mind-bending sorrow included this: “Therefore does my Father love Me because I
lay down my life.” (John 10:11, 17) The Holy Father watches His Holy
Son all through His life and watches Him consummate it when He puts the
cup to His lips and He whispers, “How I love Him!” As this consummating act is happening the Father is loving His Son and not punishing Him. (A pox on that “punishing” notion!)
The great news is this: hearts like His “lay it down” that they might
“take it again.” (John 10:17) They don’t scorn life and throw it away
as trash.
Then there is this: in Matthew 20:22-23 the Lord Jesus tells His followers that they will drink of His
cup. Sharing His cup is living a life of covenant faithfulness and love
in the presence of “a world” that hates His followers precisely because
they are His followers (John 15:18-21); followers who have
taken up their crosses and are crucified with Him (Galatians 2:20;
6:14). However flawed they live a life “given up” throughout years in
all those lovely Christlike ways and consummate it by a death faithfully
offered up to God that it might be taken up again, purer, stronger more
beautiful and more glorious.
(Holy One, bless us as we reflect on You in light of Your Holy Son
and bless us with relationships or at least awareness of those who
faithfully follow in His steps that we might be enabled to drink His cup
and hear you say that You love us in our doing it. This prayer in
Christ Jesus.)
Come the judgment day, there will be two lines: one for the saved, and
one for the lost. What won’t be present is a line for those who almost
made it. You know, for the ones who almost, but never found the time to
obey the gospel, and even if they did, were only faithful to the Lord
part of the time. Salvation is an “either, or” proposition. Either we
obey the gospel, and remain faithful to it, or we don’t. The line has
been drawn. The question remains, which side are you on?
Scripture Reading: Matthew 5:38-45
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’
But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the
right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to
sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone
forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who
asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from
you.
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your
enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who
persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven.”
“and whoever shall force you to go one mile, go with him two.”
This seeming innocent sentence that was
spoken by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount, contains enough power to
change the course of this world.
– In it is we see one of Jesus foundational principles for Abundant Living.
– Jesus describes the Christian religion as one which goes the 2nd mile.
The background and setting of this verse is very important in understanding the significance of what he is saying.
Whenever the Roman empire conquered a new
town or province, a symbolic Roman yoke was placed in the market place
or in a prominent part of the city..They often made the people of that
city pass under it in order to acknowledge their obedience to Rome
As a conquered people whenever a Roman
soldier or Roman official wanted you to carry his pack for a mile, or
run an errand for a mile, or even guide him for a mile, you had to, you
had no choice!
It was part of Roman law (but just one
mile). This was a humiliating experience, especially for the Jews who
were a proud people.
It is said that Jews would have a mile
markers placed all over so that they would not have to travel any
further than they had to.
Now with this in mind, consider who Jesus is speaking to as he said, “and whoever shall force you to go one mile, go with him two.”
… They probably instantly thought of the
Romans that occupied their land and how much they hated them. And as He
said, “Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two”, they
probably couldn’t believe their ears.… They probably clinched their
fists and shook their heads wondering why in the world should they do
anything extra for those Romans.
I believe that Jesus deliberately used that
obnoxious Roman rule as an illustration demonstrating a great principle
for Christian living. As a master teacher they probably would not
forget this principle because Jesus used this Roman rule as an
illustration.
And what principle is that? What is the second mile all about? I believe that Jesus is teaching that as Christian, we are to do a little more than what is required, or even expected of us.
In the Sermon on the
Mount, Jesus taught how one can have a blessed life, or a full and
abundant life. And here in this text He lets us know that part of having
a full and blessed abundant life is making a point to practice this
principle of going the second mile.
There are 4 observations about the second mile that are worthy of our attention today:
1. The Second mile always makes the one who travels it happier..
a) Illustration. The great surgeon who
always tied 3 knots in the thread after closing a wound. When asked by a
younger Doctor why three when only one was required, the skilled
surgeon told the younger that he call his knot his ‘sleeping knot’. When
he wakes up in the middle of the night trying to remember if he had
finished the procedure by tying a knot in the thread he can turn over
and go back to sleep knowing that he had tied 3 knots instead of just
one.
b) Imagine a young Jewish man being
approached by a Roman soldier. The soldier called him and tells him to
come and carry his pack. The Jewish man looks at him. He wishes he could
hit the soldier with the hoe he is using. He slams down the hoe with
an attitude but submits because he know he has to. He slowly drags
himself over to the soldiers pack and picks it up and half carries it
and half drags it for the mile. After going the mile he throws the
soldiers pack down with an attitude and he start back to his house in a
angry mood for the rest of the day.
– Now if you can imagine a different scenario of a young man who learned the principle of the 2nd mile from Jesus:
When approached by the soldier he willingly
picks up his pack and carries it without complaining. While walking
with the soldier he starts up a conversation and smiles and jokes as he
walks.
When he gets to the mile marker, he
continues on. The soldier reminds him that he only has to carry his pack
a mile but to the soldiers amazement the young man answers, “That’s OK,
let’s walk on, I’ll take you to the edge of the city.”
As he leaves the soldier he leaves walking with his head up, soldiers back and happy inside for having gone the second mile!
2. The Second Mile Calls for the best in others
a) You can’t possibly travel the 2nd mile like this without influencing others, or even affecting their lives. (Especially if you have a good attitude.)
b) The only way that we are going to influence some people for Jesus is by going the 2nd mile. (Husband-wives; Friend, neighbors, family)
Jesus said in Matt. 7:12 “So in everything, do to others what you have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”
c) When you travel the 2nd mile for another, you call out the best in that person. You might not see it happen right away or even ever.
But the only way that we will ever influence some people to travel the 2nd mile with them first. (Click here to view video)
3. The 2nd Mile Lightens Life’s Burdens
The Christian philosophy is a philosophy full of Paradoxes.
– We get through giving
– We live by dying
– We become free by becoming a slave
– We are strong when we are weak
– Likewise, going the 2nd mile lightens our burden!
Imagine a home where everyone goes the 2nd mile
Imagine a church where everyone in the church family goes the 2nd mile.
Imagine a city, a country, a world where everyone goes the 2nd mile!
Life would become more pleasant for all.
That’s the Christian way! We have to learn the lesson from Jesus that
it’s not all about me and what I want!
Rather Jesus let’s us know that abundant life begins by serving and going the 2nd mile!
And if these reasons are not reasons enough to go the 2nd Mile, then consider that…
4. God went the 2nd Mile
John 3:16 “God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.”
When you go the 2nd mile out of love, you become like our Father above. God went the 2nd mile for us and I believe He wants us to be 2nd mile Christians
In John 15:13 before Jesus actually died for us, He said, “Greater love has no one that this, that one lay down his life for his friends.” And then Jesus Himself he went the 2nd mile for us.
Conclusion Comments
Do you want to experience abundant life,
and bring out the best in others, maybe even change your own personal
perspective on life, and even change your world?
Then my challenge for you is to
humble yourself and learn to go the second mile, go beyond what others
demand and expect of you, and encourage others to do the same.
If you have trouble motivating
yourself, do it for Jesus. Do it because Jesus said that it is the best
thing for us to do. Do it to help others. Do it knowing that maybe it
will change another’s heart. Do it with a good attitude and with a
smile your face. And when others ask why why you are doing it, tell
them that you do it because that is what you have been taught your
Lord.
Not only will you be blessed, but you will affect those around you.
I’ve heard members here say they want to see some great things happen here in this church:
– We want to evangelize and see the church grow.
– We want to reach out to our local community.
Let me tell you something, those things just don’t happen. But going 2nd mile for Jesus and for the people in this community will not go unnoticed and will have an effect.
We all may have to get out of our comfort
zone, and do more than what we normally do, maybe even give more than we
have ever gave before.
But in doing so I believe we will feel blessed and you may even see the fruit of your efforts of going the 2nd mile.
But it takes a humble heart, one that first of all love Jesus, and then loves others as He would have us.
So I challenge you to apply this principle of going the second mile in as many areas of you life as you can.
While studying Bible passages about Calvinism, God's sovereignty, and man's free will, Calvinists frequently turn to Romans 9 as a favorite proof-text. The chapter contains multiple passages, which appear
to support Calvinism. Therefore, this article will analyze the entire
chapter in its context, discussing the arguments raised by Calvinists.
Careful examination of the context of Romans 9
reveals that Paul was explaining God's right to predetermine and use
the nation of Israel to produce the Messiah. The Jews profited greatly
from this arrangement; however, such a relationship did not guarantee
God's mercy unto salvation. God maintained and exercised His right to
use nations to accomplish His promise to Abraham, and furthermore, He
demonstrated His prerogative to save individuals as He deemed best. As
long as Israel would seek to establish their own righteousness by the
law of Moses, over-emphasizing their national part in God's plan, they
would fail to be saved. God's promise for mercy was ultimately extended
to whomever would live by faith, not necessarily those who required the
law of Moses, nor necessarily those who descended from Abraham.
The spiritual salvation of individuals, especially a predestined, unconditional election, is not the subject of Romans 9.
Vindication of God's judgment regarding the nation of Israel is the
primary point. However, detailed analysis of the immediate context,
plus the context of the Old Testament passages, which Paul quoted, clearly teaches that God's mercy has always been conditioned upon man's repentance.
The Calvinistic viewpoint focuses on the following verses, which are quoted here along with typical explanations:
... (for the children not yet being born, nor having
done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election
might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), it was said to her, "The older shall serve the younger." As it is written, "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated." (Romans 9:11-13)
A Calvinistic Argument: Paul is laboring to
show that our salvation is not dependent upon what we do ("not of
works"); furthermore, we are saved based on God's predetermined election
("the purpose of God according to election"). As an example of this
election, Paul selects Jacob and Esau to demonstrate that God loved
Jacob and therefore chose him unto salvation, while God hated Esau and
chose him unto condemnation. God clearly chose and predestined their
fates independent of their works ("the children not yet being born, nor
having done any good or evil"); therefore, God's election is
unconditional, and our destiny is predetermined!
For He says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion." So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.
For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have
raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be
declared in all the earth." Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. (Romans 9:15-18)
A Calvinistic Argument: Here we see God's
sovereignty clearly being exercised ("on whomever I will"). Not man -
but God has chosen who will be saved and who will be destroyed ("not of
him who wills ... but of God who shows mercy"). Moreover, Paul uses
Pharaoh as an example of one whom God hardened, just so God could
demonstrate His power and sovereignty by punishing him. In addition to
the Lord's sovereignty, His predestination again is manifested, because
God raised up Pharaoh for this purpose. It was God who chose, created,
manipulated, hardened, and destroyed.
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?" (Romans 9:19-20)
A Calvinistic Argument: Often free-will
advocates claim that Calvinism is not fair. In these verses, Paul
anticipates that charge and condemns all who would question God. We
have no right to challenge God's fairness.
Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory ... (Romans 9:21-23)
A Calvinistic Argument: Admittedly dreadful,
God has chosen, designed, and prepared certain people for destruction.
Their only purpose is to serve as objects of God's wrath, so the elect
can better appreciate God's mercy toward them and His power. Likewise,
the elect were chosen, designed, and prepared to serve - but, they were
fashioned to serve as objects of His mercy and therefore glorify Him.
In these verses we see an undeniable demonstration of God's
sovereignty, predestination, and unconditional election. Before people
were born, and before they had opportunity to perform good or evil, God
divinely chose who would be saved as the objects of His love and mercy,
and He chose who would be destroyed as objects of His hatred and wrath.
In both cases, God's glorious power is demonstrated, and His wrath and
mercy are clearly manifested and contrasted.
Answering the Calvinist, Examining the Context
Were those arguments convincing? To many Calvinists, these
proof-texts are unassailable and entirely persuasive. If these passages
seem overwhelming to you, may I suggest that you are suffering from the
same challenges that confront all good Bible students? Too often, we
bring a prejudiced view to the Bible texts. Even our definitions of
words are too frequently loaded with a bias that essentially proves our
conclusion. In essence, we have guaranteed the triumph of our
conclusion before we begin to reason from the facts, just by our
definitions.
Our prejudices and our fears prohibit us from doing what is
required: Honestly, diligently reading an entire passage based on its
context. After forming an interpretation, we must repeatedly test and
refine our interpretation by comparing it to all
the words in the text, looking for contradictions as well as support -
all the while, ignoring the tug of our human allegiances. ... This
takes time, and regrettably patience is not one of our innate virtues.
Plus, we like to be right. Therefore, too often we rush to judgment,
gravitating toward words that support our view, while unconsciously
dismissing troubling words that detract from our cherished conclusions.
Those words that aggravate, we promise to answer another time, but
conveniently, that time never comes and our prejudiced conclusions
stick. Even worse, if we are not careful, our heart becomes hardened in
our original conviction, because we believe our doctrines overcame
careful examination. When in reality, our beliefs and our heart were
never truly opened to serious challenge.
One goal of this essay is to recognize and sidestep that trap.
We will carefully make a detailed study of this passage, in light of the
Calvinistic arguments, observing and answering each word or phrase that
challenges either side. After you finish reading this article, if you
feel that this responsibility has been betrayed, you would be our friend
by raising this matter to the author's attention. This will enable the author, as well as all readers to benefit through future revisions of these comments.
First, A Word on "Words"
Many people, especially those who identify with Calvinism,
generally associate the words "predestination", "election", and
"foreordination" with Calvin's definition of those terms. However, that
is not necessarily true, and it is certainly not fair.
Please consider "predestination" and "foreordination". Both
words simply mean to "choose beforehand". However, there is nothing in
these words to suggest the basis of the choosing.
Yes, "predestination", "foreordination", and "election" are Bible doctrines. They are affirmed in multiple Scriptures (Romans 8:29-30; Ephesians 1:5, 11). However, we must be careful not to assume the basis of the choice! We must be careful not to assume that every occurrence of these words supports Calvin's view, because we should not assume his definition of these words!
Yes, God made a choice concerning who would be saved and who
would be lost before the world began. However, we should take the time
to properly define these words, as provided by the Scriptural context -
and not rush to assume a loaded definition. This diligence is key to
realizing the truth and resolving our differences on these points.
There is an old saying about debates, logic, and reasoning that goes something like this, "He who defines uncontested, wins."
... This is a case where many of us have accepted a prejudiced
definition that inherently accepts the Calvinistic conclusions. We must
be careful not to blindly accept any man's definitions without
comparing them to their Scriptural usage. Let each compare his
definition with the other's definitions to make sure that we are "speaking the same thing" (I Corinthians 1:10),
and let us be sure not to "load" our definitions with our conclusions
merely restated, so that our conclusions invariably arise from our
"premises" without thorough examination. As we study Romans 9 in its context, we will repeatedly need to make application of this point.
The Context Surrounding Romans 9
Paul's inspired book to the Romans was written to a church
containing both Jewish and Gentile Christians. Their opposing
backgrounds presented difficult problems for the congregation. Paul
developed common solutions for a common need, in spite of their cultural
differences. He elaborates on God's nature and justification, and he
reminds them of their responsibilities to God as well as to each other.
Frequently, Paul anticipated the questions and reactions of each side
and replied accordingly. This letter is extremely logical, moving from
one issue to the next along a consistent theme of justification by faith
in the gospel for the Jew and Gentile alike. The main points of this
great epistle's chapters are as follows:
Introduction of theme, and Gentiles' condemnation for descent into depraved idolatry.
Jews' condemnation for disobedience to the law of Moses.
All stand guilty before a just God. Therefore, justification by His mercy and our faith.
Justification by faith apart from perfect keeping of Jewish law.
Hope and comfort by faith through God's love and Christ's
sacrifice, contrasted with death, guilt, and condemnation introduced
through Adam's sin, perpetuated by all.
Dead to sin through baptism into Jesus' death, and resurrected for new life in God' service.
Jews freed from bondage of law of Moses, through Christ's death, and all freed from bondage to sin through Jesus' deliverance.
Free from carnal mind to walk after the law of the Spirit. Security in God's love in the face of tribulation.
God's right to reject national Israel for salvation after using them to produce the Messiah.
Israel's rejection of a universal call to both Jew and Gentile to believe on the Lord.
Israel's fall through unbelief, Gentiles salvation by faith, and salvation of a Jewish remnant through grace.
Moral Applications: Therefore, be transformed and live sacrificially, devoted unto God.
Submit to the government and neighbors - put on Jesus Christ.
Do not condemn or cause brother to stumble, based on scruples as a Jew or Gentile.
Serving others and glorifying God with one mind - Paul's personal plans.
Paul's personal salutations and warning to avoid divisive brethren.
Romans 9 is immediately preceded by the profound encouragement, promise, and hope of security in the Lord. (Please read Romans 8:31-39
for background.) After Paul's climatic declarations, both Jew and
Gentile readers might have questioned him based on the case of then
current Israel. At that time, Jewish persecution was increasing. Their
rejection of the Lord was becoming more complete, while the Gentiles
were turning to the Lord in droves. Yet, it was clear at that time,
that as a nation, the Jews were rejecting God and being rejected by Him.
Both Jew and Gentile might ask, "Had God not elected and predestined Israel?"
Paul seems to have anticipated such a question, because he moved from a
proclamation of God's love and the elect's victory in Christ to the
situation regarding God's elect nation, Israel, in chapter 9.
Comments on Romans 9
God's Rejection of Physical Israel
Now, Paul turns his attention toward the state of the Jewish people, his people:
I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom pertain
the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the
service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom,
according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen. (Romans 9:1-5)
Ask yourself, "Who is Paul concerned about?" Is it not national, physical Israel? Paul, being a Jew himself (Philippians 3:4-6), declares the subject to be his "brethren" and "countrymen according to the flesh",
not spiritual brethren. The Jewish people were the chosen recipients
of God's blessings. He selected them and delivered from Egyptian
captivity in a glorious manner ("to whom pertain the adoption, the glory").
(Recall the 10 plagues and Pharaoh's defeat in the Red Sea.) God
made covenants with their father Abraham and with the Israelites at
Mount Sinai, and He gave them the law there through Moses ("to whom pertain ... the covenants, the giving of the law"). The nation of Israel ministered and served God in the temple ("to whom pertain ... the service of God").
They were the descendents of the patriarchs and recipients of God's
three-fold promise to Abraham (become great nation, possess Canaan, and
bless all nations through a descendant - Genesis 12:1-7; 13:14-18; 22:17-18).
Finally, it was through the Jewish lineage that Jesus Christ came, Who
was the fulfillment of the seed promise to bless all nations (Galatians 3:16).
The nation of Israel was chosen to be the means of God's
blessings for all people. This choice produced great blessing for them
(consider Deuteronomy 4:1-40), which they did not deserve (Deuteronomy 9:4-7; 4:37; 7:7-8).
Yet, clearly, their national state before God was one of condemnation
and rejection. Paul grieved for them. He even, almost, wished that He
could be personally condemned, in exchange that they might be saved.
But, of course, he would not ultimately do such (Luke 14:26), nor was it even possible.
God's Election By Promise, Not Heritage
Again remembering the backdrop of Romans 8:31-39,
please imagine yourself in the audience of this letter's early reading.
Maybe the Jews felt disgruntled? Maybe the Gentile Christians were
concerned that God's election for them might also fail? Paul seems to
here address the appearance that God's promise and efforts failed for the Jews, for he says:
But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel,
nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but,
"In Isaac your seed shall be called." That is, those who are the
children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the
children of the promise are counted as the seed. (Romans 9:6-8)
Here we are introduced to the concept of "spiritual Israel"
versus "fleshly" or "physical Israel". In 9:3-5, Paul discussed
Israelites who were identified "according to the flesh". But, here in 9:6, we are told that, "They are not all Israel who are of Israel".
This sentence makes no sense, unless one realizes there are two
distinct groups of people recognized by God as the "people of Israel".
We have already been introduced to fleshly, national Israel, but we have previously inferred they were not all saved (Romans 9:1-3).
Therefore, this second "Israel" figuratively represents those
spiritual people (as opposed to "fleshly" or "physical"), whom God had
rescued from spiritual bondage and given a covenant, just as He rescued
physical Israel from Egyptian bondage and gave them a covenant. This
figure is not unique to this passage, rather it is commonly used
throughout Scripture to refer to a set of spiritual, holy people, which
overlaps but does not completely include the set of all Jewish people.
(Compare this figure to the similar symbol of two "Jerusalems", found in
Galatians 4:21-31.)
We will later see that God's plan was always for the Gentiles to
ultimately have access to this blessed circle, as well as the Jews.
God's intention was never to spiritually save all of Abraham's
seed, just because they were his descendents. The Israelites should
have known and been comfortable with this general concept. They were
intimately familiar with at least two occasions where the patriarch's
lineage was separated and God's promise to Abraham was conferred to one
branch and not the other. For example, God chose Isaac over Ishmael to
receive the promise and covenant given to Abraham (Genesis 17:21),
even though both were sons of Abraham. And, God chose Jacob over Esau
to receive the promise of Abraham, even though both were sons of Isaac
and grandsons of Abraham. Over a thousand years before the Jewish
nation was rejected, God showed the Jews that the blessings were
extended based on God's promise and choice, not on ancestry alone.
God's Election To Produce the Messiah - Not Related to Salvation
For this is the word of promise: "At this time I will come and
Sarah shall have a son." And not only this, but when Rebecca also had
conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac (for the children
not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose
of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who
calls), it was said to her, "The older shall serve the younger." As it is written, "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated." (Romans 9:9-13)
Now, please ask yourself this question, "Up to this point, has Paul been focused on the election of individuals or nations?"
Go back and reread verses 1-5. Physical, national Israel has clearly
been the topic of Paul's and his readers' shared concern. Now, in these
verses, Paul turns his attention to two specific cases, as examples of
his previous point. Unfortunately, the Calvinist begins reading here -
without the benefit of the previous context. Consequently, although the
passage never mentions salvation, the Calvinist assumes that the
discussion pertains to the predetermined, unconditional election of individuals
unto salvation, specifically Jacob over Esau. However, the context we
have already studied proves the discussion is focused on the judgment of
the Israelite nation.
Furthermore, please notice that Paul quotes two Old Testament passages, which he believed to support his point ("for the children ... it was said to her, ... as it is written").
Therefore, we should be able to look at these two passages in their
context. Under the influence of inspiration, we know that Paul would
not use these passages in conflict with their original meaning (Titus 1:2).
By reading them, as the Jews themselves would have previously read
hundreds of times, maybe we can better understand Paul's point. Did
God's election of Jacob over Esau pertain to an election of individuals unto salvation? Or, did God's choice relate to the roles played by nations in God's scheme to fulfill the promises to Abraham and produce the Messiah?
But the children struggled together within her; and she said,
"If all is well, why am I like this?" So she went to inquire of the
LORD. And the LORD said to her:"Two nations are in your womb, Two peoples shall be separated from your body; One people shall be stronger than the other, And the older shall serve the younger." (Genesis 25:22-23)
Who was in Rebecca's womb? She was carrying two individuals,
yes. But, God foresaw two nations, two peoples, and He clearly informs
Rebecca of that truth. It is from this vantage point that God foretells
her that the "the older shall serve the younger".
In other words, the nation that descended from the older brother would
serve the nation that descended from the younger brother. This passage
offers no prophesy or foreordination regarding the two brothers as individuals.
Now some may insist these passages still refer to individuals; therefore, please consider this question, "As individuals, did Esau (the older brother) serve Jacob (the younger brother), or did Jacob serve Esau?". Please recall that it was Esau who threatened to kill Jacob (Genesis 27:41). Jacob fled from Esau (Genesis 27:42-28:5), and when Jacob returned, it was Jacob who was terrified of Esau (Genesis 32:3-22)! Jacob sent all his possessions, including his wives and children, as gifts to Esau and bowed down 7 times before him (Genesis 33:1-11)!
In their lifetimes, Jacob came far closer to serving Esau, than Esau
ever came to serving Jacob. Therefore, if this prophecy referred to the
individuals, it failed! Since God's prophecies cannot fail, this
prophecy of the younger's supremacy must not be referring to individuals!
Furthermore, please remember, that Esau and his people sprang to
supremacy earlier, having kings well before Jacob and the Israelites (Genesis 36:1-43, especially vs. 31). And, Esau's people, the Edomites, tormented the Israelites during their journey to Canaan (Numbers 20:14-21).
It was only after over one thousand years, when Babylon and Greece
successively attacked Edom, that we see a significant distinction.
Israel survives as a remnant, but the Edomites were virtually wiped out (Ezekiel 4:21-22; Ezekiel 25:12-14; 32:29; 25:15; Joel 3:19; Malachi 1:4) with the few survivors being absorbed into the Israelite nation (Amos 9:12).
It was from this vantage point, over a thousand years after the
original prophecy, that the second Old Testament quotation was
originally uttered:
The burden of the word of the LORD to Israel by Malachi. "I
have loved you," says the LORD. "Yet you say, 'In what way have You
loved us?' Was not Esau Jacob's brother?" Says the LORD. "Yet Jacob I have loved; But Esau I have hated, And laid waste his mountains and his heritage For the jackals of the wilderness." Even though Edom has said, "We have been impoverished, But we will return and build the desolate places," Thus says the LORD of hosts: "They may build, but I will throw down; They shall be called the Territory of Wickedness, And the people against whom the LORD will have indignation forever. (Malachi 1:1-4)
The Edomites, descendents of Esau, were a "people against whom"
God's wrath and indignation moved. They were "hated", because they
were wicked. However, this "hatred" is not absolute, but relative. The
word, "hatred", is only raised in contrast with God's "love" for the
people of Jacob. (Please, recall that the Edomites were blessed with
land and nation as well. Also, compare to Jesus' usage of "hatred"
toward family relative to the required "love" for Him, Luke 14:26.) In this quoted context of Malachi 1,
the ultimate distinction between Esau and Jacob was that God spared a
remnant from Jacob's seed, through whom came the Messiah, but Esau's
seed were destroyed. This context shows applicability to the role of the nations, not the salvation of the original fathers.
Occasionally, a Calvinist may acknowledge that the context of Romans 9:1-15 is indeed dealing with nations, not individuals, and reply, "But, that makes my point even stronger! God is sovereignly saving or condemning entire nations, not just individuals!" This statement overlooks the second aspect of the Calvinist assumption: The context is dealing with a nation's role in God's providence and plan to bring forth the Messiah, not the salvation
of a nation. Otherwise, we would be forced to conclude that all
Edomites were condemned and that all the Jews were saved. However, that
clearly is not the case. The pages of Scripture contain a multitude of
Jews, who were clearly consigned to hell (for example, Judas, Matthew 26:21-24; the wicked Pharisees and Sadducees of Jesus' day, Matthew 23:13-26; etc.). Therefore, it is impossible to conclude that this passage relates to the salvation of entire nations, because the entire nation of Jews was clearly not saved!
Paul is not laboring to develop the predestination of individuals
unto salvation or condemnation apart from their works. He is first
demonstrating God's choice to use the Jewish nation to produce the
Messiah and receive Abraham's three-fold blessing (inherit Canaan land,
grow to great nation, and produce seed who would bless all nations).
From this point, he is secondly arguing that God does not owe the Jews
spiritual salvation, even if they are Abraham's seed. People are saved
according to God's promise, not by virtue of their ancestry. The exact
conditions of God's promise for salvation are not discussed here - only
that election is not a right by birth, even for the Jew.
Vindication of God's Election and Reprobation
What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! For He says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion." So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. (Romans 9:14-16)
Paul's discussion continues by anticipating a charge from a
dissatisfied Jew. (Recall, it was the Jews, over whom Paul was
grieving. It was the Jews, whom Paul described as receiving God's
blessing of Abraham's promise. It was the Jews, who were not entirely
saved, despite being Israelites according to the flesh. Romans 9:1-7). As is so often the case, when we do not get what we want, we cry out, "That's not fair! I have been robbed!" Paul seems to anticipate such a reaction, so he observes God's right to determine the basis
for one's reception of mercy. It is God's mercy that is extended unto
salvation; therefore, God gets to choose who receives that mercy. We
don't get to choose who receives mercy. No matter how deeply we want,
no matter how diligently we strive, we cannot choose who will be the
recipients of God's mercy. That alone is His sovereign choice. ...
However, let us be careful here: Does this passage reveal the basis of God's choice? Could God choose people apart from their works? Yes, that would be His choice! Alternatively, could God choose people based on their works? Yes, that would be His choice! Or, could
God choose people with red hair, or people over 6 feet tall, or ...?
Yes, He could choose based on whatever purpose He chooses! That alone
is His right and prerogative. However, that purpose is not manifested
here! Only assumption and prejudice can inject a basis into the
passage. (Again, we must be careful not to assume Calvin's connotation
of election and predestination.) We will have to look elsewhere to
learn the basis of God's choice and bestowment of mercy...
He who covers his sins will not prosper, But whoever confesses and forsakes them will have mercy. Happy is the man who is always reverent, But he who hardens his heart will fall into calamity. (Proverbs 28:13)
Let the wicked forsake his way, And the unrighteous man his thoughts; Let him return to the LORD, And He will have mercy on him; And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon. (Isaiah 55:7)
... be clothed with humility, for "God resists the proud, But gives grace to the humble." (I Peter 5:5b)
Why does God draw near to some people, but not others? Why does
God extend mercy and grace to some people, but not others? These verses
clearly teach that penitent humility is the basis of God's choice.
These are the people that God has chosen as the objects of His mercy.
He could have chosen selfish, proud, cruel, wealthy, intelligent, or
strong people, but instead, He chose humble people. We cannot challenge
that choice. It is His mercy, and He can extend it to whomever He
wishes. No matter how hard we try, we cannot change God's basis for
election. For example, we cannot be proud or stiff-necked and receive
God's grace, because he has chosen humility as one characteristic of the
elect. He is the One setting the rules and making the decisions - not
us - and rightly so.
Indeed, this was the very point made to Moses in Paul's
quotation: The Israelites had severely broken God's covenant through
the golden calf (Exodus 32). God informed Moses that He would no longer travel with them (Exodus 33:1-6). Moses pleaded with mercy on behalf the people (Exodus 33:7-13). The Lord agreed to grant mercy to Moses, and He promises Moses salvation ("I will give you rest"), but not to the people (Exodus 33:14). Moses again pleaded for mercy (Exodus 33:15-16). And, the Lord agrees to go with the Israelites at Moses' requests, but He answers with the above quotation (Exodus 33:17-19).
Although God respected Moses, and although He often granted mercy to
the people for Moses' sake, neither He nor the people possessed ultimate
control over God's terms for final rest. No matter how diligently
Moses struggled or willed, it was God's choice, and Moses could not
change God's final decision!
As a side note of clarification, please keep in mind that this
entire discussion refers to those previously condemned under sin (Romans 3:23). God, by force of His just nature, would be indebted to bestow salvation upon any who kept His law perfectly (Romans 4:1-4).
However, since all have sinned, all are in need of mercy. Therefore,
that impractical exception of perfect obedience, is not even considered
here.
"Not ... But"
The keen Calvinist may observe, "But, the text plainly says that salvation is 'not of him who wills, ... but of Him who shows mercy! This statement completely eliminates the influence of man's will on his salvation."
The key to proper understanding of this critical verse is to
recognize the "not-but" construction. This phrasing, commonly used
throughout the New Testament, is frequently employed not to eliminate one constituent, but rather it is used to emphasize one factor over another. It is not a statement of exclusion, instead it declares relative significance. The following examples make this abundantly clear:
"Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life ..." (John 6:27)
Then Jesus cried out and said, "He believes in Me, believes not in Me but in Him who sent Me" (John 12:44)
In this first verse, is Jesus commanding us not to work for
earthly food? Clearly, the answer is no! Elsewhere, we are commanded
to work under the penalty of not receiving food to eat (II Thessalonians 3:10).
Or, in the second verse, is Jesus commanding us not to believe in Him?
Again, the answer is clearly no! Elsewhere, in the same book, John
expresses that belief in Jesus is the very purpose of his letter (John 20:30-31). Jesus is merely emphasizing the root of belief in Him. Belief in Jesus is ultimately an expression of belief in the Father.
In the case of Romans 9:21,
God's determination for the basis of receiving mercy is more essential
than our will to be saved. To justify, please consider the case where
God does not wish to extend mercy. Can man save himself then?
Emphatically, no! God's will is supreme and cannot be thwarted (Isaiah 43:13).
No matter how vigorously such a man seeks to assert his will, he
cannot escape God's justice. (Recall Pharaoh as example: Did he want
to be judged and destroyed? How hard did he seek to establish his
will?) God alone has the right, authority, and power to offer mercy
upon whatever basis He chooses. However, does this fact necessitate or
elaborate on God's will or the basis of His extended mercy? No! He
could just as easily choose to extend mercy based on some conditional
character trait as based on some secret, unconditional purpose. His
choice is the crucial one, because man cannot force God to choose,
although God could force man to choose, if He so desired. However,
recognition of the supremacy of His choice in no way eliminates nor
excludes our choice any more than labor for spiritual food eliminates
labor for physical food, or any more than belief in the Father negates
belief in the Son! We must be careful not to insert our prejudices into
this declaration. We must allow God to declare His will to us, lest we
be found fighting God.
God's Rejection of Israel Compared to Pharaoh
For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth." Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. (Romans 9:17-18)
As further proof to his point, Paul recalls a negative example,
the reprobate king of Egypt, Pharaoh. God hardened this man's heart,
prolonging his rebellion, so God could use him as an object of wrath to
demonstrate His power. Truly, this man did not receive God's mercy. In
fact, God chose to harden his heart. However, we must ask, "Was this hardening apart from Pharaoh's will or in concert with it?"
The passage does not say, because that question is not Paul's concern.
He is defending God's right to manipulate the obstinate and use them
for His own purposes. He is not discussing how these objects originally became obstinate. We will have to look to the background of this Old Testament reference to answer that question:
"But I am sure that the king of Egypt will not let you go,
no, not even by a mighty hand. So I will stretch out My hand and strike
Egypt with all My wonders which I will do in its midst; and after that he will let you go. (Exodus 3:19-20)
And the LORD said to Moses, "When you go back to Egypt, see
that you do all those wonders before Pharaoh which I have put in your
hand. But I will harden his heart, so that he will not
let the people go. Then you shall say to Pharaoh, 'Thus says the LORD:
"Israel is My son, My firstborn. So I say to you, let My son go that he
may serve Me. But if you refuse to let him go, indeed I will kill your son, your firstborn." ' " (Exodus 4:21-23)
Afterward Moses and Aaron went in and told Pharaoh, "Thus says the LORD God of Israel: 'Let My people go, that they may hold a feast to Me in the wilderness.'" And Pharaoh said, "Who is the LORD, that I should obey His voice to let Israel go? I do not know the LORD, nor will I let Israel go." (Exodus 5:1-2)
God knew that Pharaoh would not release the people from captivity. Yet, He commanded Pharaoh ("that I should obey His voice")
to let the people go free, and He threatened Pharaoh, if he did not
release the people. What was the result of this command and threat? It
was the same result produced whenever any proud or arrogant man
receives a command or threat. God first manipulated Pharaoh's proud
heart simply by issuing a command under the threat of severe penalty for
disobedience. Does this imply that God was responsible for the guilt
associated with Pharaoh's hardened heart?
No! First, please recall that Pharaoh had already proved himself
to be an extremely wicked king. His predecessor was fearful of the
Israelites and first subjected them to severe labor and bondage (Exodus 1:8-14). When that failed to reduce their numbers, he instructed the Hebrew midwives to kill the males as they were born (Exodus 1:15-21). When they failed to execute his command, the predecessor commanded all the Israelites to kill their male newborns (Exodus 1:22).
Eventually, this king died, and the Pharaoh under discussion came to
power. Did he recognize the severity of the Israelites' bondage, the
cruelty of their labor, or the wickedness of their population control?
No! In fact, we see that Israelites cried out to the Lord under this
king's rule because of their cruel bondage (Exodus 2:23-24).
There is no indication that he relaxed any of their labors.
Furthermore, after Moses spoke to him, Pharaoh accused the people of
being lazy and idle. He ordered their labor to be increased by forcing
them to fetch straw for their bricks, and the Israelites' leaders were
beaten for failure to make the existing quota (Exodus 5:4-19).
Truly, this man had proven himself to be extremely wicked, well before
Moses ever spoke a word to him. He could have been destroyed by the
Lord before Moses spoke with Pharaoh, yet God spared him for some
reason.
Secondly, Pharaoh's hardening was not performed contrary to his
will or apart from it. Ten different times, the Scriptures speak of God
hardening Pharaoh's heart (Exodus 4:21-23; 7:1-6; 9:12; 10:1, 20, 27; 11:10; 14:4, 8, 17). But, five different times, the Scriptures also speak of Pharaoh hardening his own heart (Exodus 5:2; 8:15, 32; 9:34; see also I Samuel 6:6)!
In fact, the Scriptures establish a pattern during these plagues.
Each time, Moses reissued the command to release the people, Pharaoh
would harden his heart, causing Moses to bring a plague on the Egyptians
from the Lord. Eventually, Pharaoh would beg Moses to cease the
plague, promising to let the people go. On one occasion, Pharaoh
confessed that he had indeed sinned, and it is from this occasion that
Paul takes his quote:
Then the LORD said to Moses, "Rise early in the morning and
stand before Pharaoh, and say to him, 'Thus says the LORD God of the
Hebrews: "Let My people go, that they may serve Me, for at this time I will send all My plagues to your very heart, and on your servants and on your people, that you may know that there is none like Me in all the earth.
Now if I had stretched out My hand and struck you and your people with
pestilence, then you would have been cut off from the earth. But indeed for this purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth. As yet you exalt yourself against My people in that you will not let them go.
Behold, tomorrow about this time I will cause very heavy hail to rain
down, such as has not been in Egypt since its founding until now. ...
Then the LORD said to Moses, "Stretch out your hand toward heaven, that
there may be hail in all the land of Egypt -- on man, on beast, and on
every herb of the field, throughout the land of Egypt." And Moses
stretched out his rod toward heaven; and the LORD sent thunder and hail,
and fire darted to the ground. And the LORD rained hail on the land of
Egypt. So there was hail, and fire mingled with the hail, so very heavy
that there was none like it in all the land of Egypt since it became a
nation. And the hail struck throughout the whole land of Egypt, all
that was in the field, both man and beast; and the hail struck every
herb of the field and broke every tree of the field. Only in the land
of Goshen, where the children of Israel were, there was no hail. And Pharaoh sent and called for Moses and Aaron, and said to them, "I have sinned this time. The LORD is righteous, and my people and I are wicked. Entreat the LORD, that there may be no more mighty thundering and hail, for it is enough. I will let you go, and you shall stay no longer." (Exodus 9:22-28)
God warns Pharaoh that He could destroy him immediately, but he
has spared him solely for the purpose of demonstrating His power. And,
so God sent another plague, because Pharaoh continued to exalt himself
above God's people! Pharaoh was to blame for the guilt of the plagues -
not God. After the hail destroyed so much of their land and people, a
crushed Pharaoh finally repents, acknowledges his sin, and confesses the
Lord's righteousness. Was the Lord responsible for Pharaoh's sin? No!
The Scriptures confirm that Pharaoh was guilty, because he sinned.
But, this was not the end of Pharaoh's story...
So Moses said to him, "As soon as I have gone out of the city, I
will spread out my hands to the LORD; the thunder will cease, and there
will be no more hail, that you may know that the earth is the LORD's.
But as for you and your servants, I know that you will not yet fear the LORD God."
Now the flax and the barley were struck, for the barley was in the head
and the flax was in bud. But the wheat and the spelt were not struck,
for they are late crops. So Moses went out of the city from Pharaoh and
spread out his hands to the LORD; then the thunder and the hail ceased,
and the rain was not poured on the earth. And when Pharaoh saw that the rain, the hail, and the thunder had ceased, he sinned yet more; and he hardened his heart, he and his servants. So the heart of Pharaoh was hard; neither would he let the children of Israel go, as the LORD had spoken by Moses. (Exodus 9:29-35)
Here we see another way that God hardened Pharaoh's heart:
leniency. If the Lord had continued to oppress the Egyptians, Pharaoh
certainly would have crumbled underneath God's hand. But, by
deliberately sending incrementally stronger plagues, and by relenting at
Pharaoh's cries for relief, God effectively hardened Pharaoh's heart.
Each time Pharaoh "escaped" a plague or sensed leniency, he would harden
his heart. Thereby, both God and Pharaoh worked in concert to harden
his heart. Pharaoh provided an arrogant, proud heart, suitable for
hardening, and God provided the commands, threats, and leniency - an
environment suitable for hardening.
Now some might argue that God's actions toward Pharaoh made God
in part responsible; however, it is critical to note that God uses the
same methods on the elect:
Or do you despise the riches of His goodness,
forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God
leads you to repentance? But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who "will render to each one according to his deeds" ... (Romans 2:4-6)
The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. (II Peter 3:9)
The Lord is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34). He offers longsuffering, incremental chastisement, and relief to all, even those He loves (Hebrews 12:5-11).
Yet, it produces salvation in some and hardening in others. Why?
What is the difference? Look back at Pharaoh. God supplied an
environment to promote change (repentance for some, hardening for
others). But, upon whom does Scripture lay the final blame? Pharaoh!
He is the one who sinned, because he chose to use a God-given
opportunity for enlightenment, repentance, and relief as an opportunity
to sin even more - not once, but ten different times! In a similar
example, even the heathen Philistines recognized God's longsuffering and
Pharaoh's hardening of his heart (I Samuel 6:5-6).
In both cases, it could have gone either way. Pharaoh could have
repented, because: God touched his heart; Pharaoh recognized God;
Pharaoh recognized his sin; and he repented outwardly (Exodus 9:14, 27).
But, Pharaoh chose to further sin, while the Philistines chose to
repent under the hand of God's plagues. They were healed (I Samuel 6:1-16), while Pharaoh was temporarily used for God's purpose and finally destroyed.
Clearly, God, Who declares "the end from the beginning" (Isaiah 46:10),
knew Pharaoh's heart and that he would reject God, as God foretold.
However, God exercised His right choose the punishment of Pharaoh, so
that it would suit his purposes. This is Paul's point: God's right to
manipulate the obstinate for His end. Could it be that just as God
persevered with Pharaoh, so that He might exercise some greater purpose,
He also persevered with physical Israel, so that He might exercise some
greater purpose, such as the production of the Messiah? Paul will
continue to develop this theme and drive this point home with his
readers.
Vindication of God's Condemnation and Manipulation
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?" Does not the potter have power over the clay,
from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for
dishonor? (Romans 9:19-21)
Paul, again anticipating the reader's reaction, considers a
follow-up question. Based on the context, the unbelieving, rejected,
even hardened Jewish nation appears to be the original concern (verses
1-6, 14). Therefore, it is concluded that the anticipated charge would
most likely arise from a disagreeable Jew, seeking to justify himself by
charging God with unfairness. In essence, this impenitent Jew is
blaming God for his own rejection and condemnation, as if God's judicial
hardening or manipulation was the cause of his original sin and
ultimate judgment.
This challenge is sternly answered - not because the reader has
challenged the truthfulness of the message, but because the reader has
accepted its truthfulness and accused God in dissatisfaction and
desperation. Therefore, Paul reminds his readers the infinitely removed
positions that they and God occupy by quoting two Old Testament
passages. The first passage reminds us of God's right to manipulate the
life of the individual (Isaiah 45:9).
Specifically, it was a warning to the Persian King, Cyrus, whom God
raised up and used to release the Israelites from Babylonian captivity (Isaiah 45:1-9).
Please note again, this election and fashioning was not one unto
salvation, but of providential preparation, so that Cyrus might do a
great work in saving God's physical people. The second quotation is
taken from Jeremiah's lesson received at the potter's house:
... So I went down to the potter's house, and I saw him working at the wheel. But the pot he was shaping from the clay was marred in his hands; so the potter formed it into another pot, shaping it as seemed best to him. (Jeremiah 18:1-4)
In this parable, the potter represents the Lord, and the clay
represents the children of Israel during the days of Jeremiah. First,
please note that the clay became "marred in his hands". The potter's intention was not that the clay be marred, because after the marring occurs, he then forms it "into another pot".
Clearly, the potter had not predestined what would occur, because his
intention was originally to fashion "another" pot than the final one.
Then the word of the LORD came to me: "O house of Israel, can I
not do with you as this potter does?" declares the LORD. "Like clay in
the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel. If at
any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn
down and destroyed, and if that nation I warned repents of its evil,
then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned.
And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be
built up and planted, and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me,
then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it. Now
therefore say to the people of Judah and those living in Jerusalem,
'This is what the LORD says: Look! I am preparing a disaster for you and
devising a plan against you. So turn from your evil ways, each one of you, and reform your ways and your actions.'" (Jeremiah 18:5-11)
God proclaims His power to fashion Israel as He saw fit, just as
the potter did. However, please notice that their "fashioning" was not
independent of their will. In fact, it was a consequence of it! God
promised to change His plans for a nation, based on whether it repented
or turned to evil! Here God clearly manifests His basis for mercy or
wrath, and what is the basis? Humility, repentance, and obedience - or
the lack thereof. Admittedly, this passage merely proves that a nation
could exhibit free moral will through either repentance or disobedience,
but can a nation exhibit a collective free will, if its individual
constituents have none?
What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory ... (Romans 9:22-23)
Here, Paul begins to more directly introduce his point: God
merely persevered with Jewish nation, so that He might work out a larger
scheme. The vast majority of physical Israel, who rejected God in
faithless rebellion and idolatry, and who rejected and continue to
dismiss His Messiah, were "vessels of wrath prepared for destruction".
Their sins and stubbornness warranted wrath much earlier, but God
suffered long with them, so that He might work out His purpose through
them.
Frequently, Calvinists may observe the phrases, "vessels of wrath prepared for destruction", and "vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory", and assume Calvin's connotation of preparation - an unconditional, individual predestination.
Now, we mortals can discuss how we must exercise longsuffering in
following through on projects or activities that we start. How often
do we naively, ignorantly, accidentally, or even deliberately dig a hole
for ourselves and must therefore labor to dig our way back out?
But God!? How can a perfect, omniscient, omnipotent God ever
exercise longsuffering with Himself? If He has sovereignly decided,
decreed, and designed these wicked machines, then He is really being
longsuffering with Himself! His efforts exerted upon these vessels that
He wholly prepared reduces to a struggle with Himself!
How can He possibly exercise longsuffering with them, essentially
Himself, unless He failed to foresee, control, or prepare for these
exasperating beings? ... Or, unless He gave them an option, and He now
forebears with their abuse of His freedom? ... If this passage teaches
Calvinism, then it contradicts Calvin's view of a supreme God. Since it
is therefore self-contradictory, Calvinism is wrong - or this verse is
wrong. (Truth does not contradict itself or Scripture - Titus 1:2, 9; John 17:17.)
The ongoing context reveals the manner of preparation: God's
general plan to redeem both Jew and Greek in Christ through faith!
Suffice it to say, this involved some "preparation". Lastly, Paul's
letter to Timothy shows that the vessel's "preparation" is also
partially dependent upon the "vessel":
But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay, some for honor and some for dishonor. Therefore if anyone cleanses himself from the latter, he will be a vessel for honor, sanctified and useful for the Master, prepared for every good work. (II Timothy 2:20-21)
God has prepared the plan, the Man (Jesus Christ), and the means.
However, we must avail ourselves of that gracious plan through
penitent faith, if we hope to partake in those glorious blessings.
God's Usage of the Jews to Save the Gentiles
... even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? As He says also in Hosea: "I will call them My people, who were not My people, And her beloved, who was not beloved. And it shall come to pass in the place where it was said to them, 'You are not My people,' There they shall be called sons of the living God." Isaiah also cries out concerning Israel: "Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, The remnant will be saved. For He will finish the work and cut it short in righteousness, Because the LORD will make a short work upon the earth." And as Isaiah said before: "Unless the LORD of Sabaoth had left us a seed, We would have become like Sodom, And we would have been made like Gomorrah." (Romans 9:24-29)
As we approach Paul's closing points in this section, we are
reminded that God long ago planned and prophesied to bring the Gentiles
into His kingdom. The Gentiles had not enjoyed the blessings of being a
chosen people, as had the Jews. The Gentiles had enjoyed none of the
blessings that Paul mentioned at the beginning of this context (9:4-5).
Yet, in the Jewish Old Testament, God had foretold that He would claim
the Gentiles as His beloved people. At the time of those prophecies,
He was preparing the means of salvation for spiritual Israel (consisting
of faithful Jew and Gentile), and He was preparing the occasion of
physical Israel's destruction. Both were realized in the rejection of
God's Messiah and His kingdom.
In contrast to the Gentiles' hope, God foretold that only a
remnant would be saved of the Israelites. In fact, if it had not been
for God's plans to spare a remnant, they would have been annihilated
like all the other nations that had preceded them. As we learn later in
Romans, the nation of Israel had not yet outlived its usefulness.
However, its days were drawing near, when its role would be completed
and God would end the Jewish nation, just like preceding nations.
Righteousness Promised By Faith
What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue
righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of
faith; but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained
to the law of righteousness. Why? Because they did not seek it by
faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at
that stumbling stone. As it is written: "Behold, I lay in Zion a
stumbling stone and rock of offense, And whoever believes on Him will
not be put to shame." (Romans 9:30-33)
Here is Paul's closing summary for this section: The Gentiles
will be saved, because they sought God through faith. However, even
though used by God, the Jewish nation was condemned by God, because they
had sought to establish their own righteousness, independent of God,
based on perfect obedience to the law. They had no excuse for their
obstinance. God's rejection and hardening of the Jews was accomplished
by requiring them to do the very thing they detested. They had to
recognize that God would save the world through one of their brethren,
Jesus, and not through the whole nation. They had to trust in God
through His Messiah, not their twisted version of the Messiah, not their
ancestry, and not their obedience to the law.
Summary
It is ironic that a passage, designed to exemplify God's right to
choose who will be saved and by what means, has been used to mandate an
election and calling defined by a man! Calvinism, and so called
"orthodoxy", have philosophically defined God's sovereignty, such that
it is impossible for God to choose who will be saved, at least outside
of Calvin's choice. Free-will, man's choices, and an individual's
character are theoretically prohibited from serving as a basis of God's
choice, even though this passage was designed to vindicate God's right
to choose who would be saved. However, if we look closely at Romans 9
and its referenced passages, we can observe where God has manipulated
nations in His grand scheme, or judicially hardened rebellious
individuals. Yet, He still allowed the ultimate fate of both nation and
individual to be chosen through either penitent obedience or stubborn
disobedience.
Yes, Romans 9 clearly teaches God's
sovereignty and the immutability of God's election. However, we have
learned to be careful and not to interject our prejudices into the
context. By exercising diligence (II Timothy 2:15; II Peter 3:14-18),
we have examined the context of the Old Testament passages quoted by
Paul, so we could clearly see that God's unconditional election only
applied to the role of nations in producing the Messiah, not the salvation of individuals (Genesis 25:22-23; Malachi 1:1-4). Although God may judicially harden an individual, it only occurs after
an individual demonstrates himself to be opposed to redemption through
his rejection of God's message, God's discipline, and God's mercy (Exodus 3:19-20; 4:21-23; 5:1-2; 9:22-28).
Finally, God may certainly fashion either a nation or an individual
for salvation or condemnation, but God will modify His plans based on
the subject's response (Jeremiah 18:5-11).
Only through one's cleansing himself of evil works may he be fashioned
and prepared for salvation, good works, and use by the Master (II Timothy 2:20-21). Yes, God has made an irrevocable choice, and His choice is to save those who humbly trust in His Son, repent, and obey (Proverbs 28:13; Isaiah 55:7; I Peter 5:5; Matthew 7:21-23). The gospel is designed to invite, touch, and draw these people, and it will by no means fail, because God is its Author (Isaiah 55:11).
