Understanding God's Sovereignty in Romans 9

What's up Every Nation Seminary? Welcome to the lecture on Romans 9. Now this lecture is going to mark the beginning of a whole new section in the book of Romans, which you are probably already familiar with based on our previous lectures and some of the reading that you've already done. But even if you hadn't heard me tell you that or hadn't watched the Bible Project video or some other lecturer tell you that a new section is happening, you can feel it happen. by the end of the book of chapter 8 and what we immediately see that Paul begins talking about in Romans 9. Remember at the end of chapter 8 we're at the end of this massive, massive chapter on the Holy Spirit. And he says, you know, we're more than conquerors, nothing can separate us from the love of God, and it's very triumphant and it ends in this kind of like B-flat major horn, you know, line. There's just trumpets and triumph. And then it immediately goes into something that's really difficult to think about, namely the nature of God's sovereignty in his choosing of ancient Israel and how Paul is thinking about his promises and his choices regarding Israel in light of all that God has done in the gospel and all that God has done in bringing Messiah, the Jewish Messiah, into the world. But it was a head-scratcher for Paul because what Paul is seeing in his ministry, and try to imagine this, is a bunch of non-Jews running and giving their lives to the Jewish Messiah. It must have been kind of confusing on some level. And I'm sure, as we'll see, Paul felt all kinds of emotions and had anguish and thought about that. And so this section starts the beginning of Paul's thought about how the gospel and how the Jesus community, the church, and the Old Testament community, ancient Israel, were connected or disconnected, and in what ways that was to be the case. So in this lecture, we're going to start... this new section. We also want to highlight in this lecture the goodness and justice of God's sovereignty and God's decrees. Now, I recognize that within our seminary, some of you watching this will be more of the Reformed, kind of Calvinist, high view of the sovereignty of God types, and others of you are going to be more of the Arminian, Wesleyan, holiness, high view of man's freedom and personal responsibility types. And we make room for both of those views within our movement. But whether you're a Calvinist or an Arminian, whether you have a a high view of the sovereignty of God, or you see a high view of man's personal freedom, what we all have to do is contend with the actual text of Scripture. And in this section of Scripture, it is just flush with language about God's sovereignty. And when the Bible presents to us the sovereignty, the kingship of God, it is always to be taken as good news. And so I want you, as you go through chapter 9, I want you to pay attention to your own emotions as you read some of these, frankly, really difficult texts. And let's learn together how this is good news for all of us. And we want to, because we want to worship God for his mercy and grace in election, as we'll find out what that means, in his choosing and his sovereign choice of his people. And we want to understand a little bit about, a little bit more about how Christ is the end of the law. So that's what we're going to do in this particular section. Now, there's a great quote from Douglas Magnum I want to read to you. related to this section of Romans, and then we will dive in. He writes this, chapters 9 to 11 are an extension of the refutation section of Paul's discourse. Although not in diatribe, remember he's been doing this kind of question and answer thing, and he kind of lays that down a little bit. You'll see it some, but it's not a ton. Having presented and defended his gospel, Paul now tackles the naughtiest problem of all. If Paul is right about the good news, why has most of Israel rejected it? Has God abandoned Israel in order to court the Gentiles? To vindicate God's faithfulness to his chosen people, Paul widens the scope of his argument to describe God's sovereign plan to bring all people to accountability in order to offer mercy to all people. He supports this argument at every point with Old Testament scripture and concludes this demanding and sobering division of the letter with an outburst of praise for the inscrutable wisdom and all-consuming glory of God. I think it's a good way to begin. So let's read this first section of Romans chapter 9 together, and then we will start. I am speaking the truth in Christ. I am not lying. My conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart, for I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen, according to the flesh. They're Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. To them belong the patriarchs. and from their race according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen. But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham, because they are his offspring. But through Isaac shall your offspring be named. This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise who are counted as offspring. For this is what the promise said. About this time next year I will return, and Sarah will have a son. And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad, in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works, but because of him who calls, she was told, the older shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated. What shall we say then? Is there injustice in God's part? By no means, for he says to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then, it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who has mercy. For the scripture says to Pharaoh, for this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth. So then, he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. You will say to me, then, why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will? But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Well, what does molded say to its molder? Why have you made me like this? Has the potter no right over the clay to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy? which he has prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom he has called, not only from the Jews, but also from the Gentiles. As indeed he says in Hosea, those who are not my people, I will call my people, and her who is not beloved, I will call beloved. And in the very place where it was said to them, you are not my people, there they will be called sons of the living God. And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel, though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them. will be saved. For the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth fully and without delay. And as Isaiah predicted, if the Lord of hosts had not left us offspring, we would have been like Sodom and become like Gomorrah. God's words. Praise him. So in this first section, verses 1 through 29, what are we to make of some of this? Well, let's think through this a little bit. And we're going to slow down here because I really want you to develop the discipline of when you come to a tough passage of Scripture to slow down and make yourself feel the strangeness of the text. I wrote a book a few years ago called Stop Taking Sides. And in that book, I was trying to make the point that when the Bible messes with you, like when the Bible presents you with ideas that make you feel really uncomfortable and seem to be in contradiction, or paradoxical relationship to other ideas the Bible gives you. I believe the Bible is doing that on purpose. I believe that the Bible is more to us than just a book of information, but Scripture is giving to us ideas that feel like they can't all go together, even though they do go together. And figuring out and learning how to sit with those is part of the process of holiness. Remember, the purpose of seminary is not just to fill your mind with knowledge. If that were the case, we wouldn't have built Every Nation Seminary for you. We would have just recommended some podcasts and books. But we're trying to form you into something. And part of formation is sitting with uncomfortable realities about God and learning how to understand that we must trust him in the midst of stuff that is hard. So pay attention to your emotionality is the point of that. All right, so Romans 9, verses 1 through 29. This is the conclusion, remember, or the transition between Romans 8 and Romans 9. And so at the conclusion of Romans 8, several questions... kind of remain. If God controlled everything and he loves us with unfailing love, which is what Romans 8, 28 to 39 suggest, not suggest, teach very clearly. Remember, God works all things together for the good of those who love him, right? What happened to Israel? If that's the case, like what gives? Did God's word fail? I mean, it is the case that like both the Jews and Gentiles sinned, but with this emphasis on Abraham and... David and all of these Old Testament figures that Paul has walked us through in the book of Romans so far, shouldn't it be the case that the Jews are mass converting to Christianity? And if not, what are we to understand about the continued nature of the relationship between Jews and Gentiles? And so Paul has a response in two parts. One is a response of compassion, and the other is a response of consolation, that the Word of God has indeed not failed. but that God's doing something different than what we... can see. So the rejection of Israel is a very painful subject to Jews in Rome, is what we're thinking, right? Because remember, the thesis statement of the book is that the gospel is the power of God for the salvation of all who would believe. And the Jews received the gospel, and remember, they left for a while and came back, and now there's this seeming division. So you can imagine how being Jewish and receiving Messiah, and then watching way more of your non-Jewish friends'friends come to Christ. How that would affect you. And so this is emotional for Paul. And he says it right here. Like, I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. The Bible in English, it always makes emotional language a little bit dry. But he's saying like, this really hurts me. This is deeply emotionally painful. I have unceasing anguish in my heart. That means it's not something that when he thinks about it, it hurts. It's something that hurts all the time. He says this, I wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers. Do you hear what Paul is saying? Paul is saying, if I could change the way God is sovereignly running the universe, and I could spend eternity in hell so that my brothers, my Jewish brothers and sisters, could be with Christ, I would do it. That's a remarkable thing to say. And, I mean, of course it's a little bit hyperbolic because... Paul can't obviously do that, but you need to grab onto, like, Paul loved being Jewish. He loved Israel. He loved his brothers and sisters. There's a whole extra thing there that, like, can tell us a few things, like, it's not wrong to love your family. It's not wrong to be patriotic. It's not wrong to love your nation. It's not wrong to love your ethnic group. It's not wrong. Paul obviously very much did, but he loved them in a way under the lordship and toward the sovereignty of God, right? He says, I wish that I could be a curse so that they, my kinsmen, according to the flesh, could know Christ. They're Israelites. He's saying the question that the end of Romans 8 is kind of bringing up. He's like, look, they're the ones who have the law. They're the ones who have the promises. They're the ones who've got the whole story, the first two thirds of our Holy Bible that make the New Testament make sense at all. So what gives? Is there a continued relationship between? these two. At the very end of this particular paragraph, as it will appear in your English Bible, it contains a relative clause that explains who Paul's kindred according to the flesh are, which is obviously Israel, and he's deeply troubled by their lack of faith, because this is like a really sad and difficult irony that Jesus was not accepted by the Jews en masse, but was much more accepted by the nations. He emphasizes the... the sonship and the glory and the covenants and the worship and all of that stuff, and ends this passage with a very brief doxology, a very brief word of praise and worship, acknowledging that Jesus, the Messiah, who comes from Israel, is also God and blessed forever. So what do we do with this next part? Okay, so we've got an emotional Paul. Paul is saying, look, God is sovereignly in control of everything in ways that make us all a little bit freaked out and worried. That's the end of Romans 8. But he's going to work all things out for the good of those who love him so we can trust him. All right. Thanks, Paul. But man, and then he's kind of emotionally presenting himself to us. But what's that mean for Israel? I would do anything if I could get my brothers and sisters to follow Jesus and to worship Jesus. And so the question kind of hanging out there is like, did the word of God fail? Like, did God divorce his people? And Paul's answer is no. No, you've got to grab this. It's hard for us as non-Jews to feel the weight of this, but we must. He says this in verse 6, but it is not as though the word of God has failed, for not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel. Now that right there, that sentence, that verse, verse 6, that's kind of the foundation of everything else that Paul is about to say. He's saying that not everybody who is Jewish genetically or ethnically connected somehow to Abraham. Not everybody is part of Israel. Not all who are Israel are Israel, is kind of the way that he's saying it. And this is a really big deal, because in this section, Paul is going to defend God's faithfulness by describing how the current separation of Israel through their failure to recognize Messiah doesn't mean that God's promise has failed. However, it does mean that God seems to have chosen to preserve that promise in unexpected ways. Okay, he's chosen to preserve. the promises that he made to Israel in unexpected ways. Abraham's true descendants are not the children of the flesh, but the children of promise. Now, lest you think that Paul is just making stuff up right now, remember, that idea... that the true sons and daughters of Abraham are the ones to have faith like Abraham, not who circumcised their flesh like Abraham did. Why? Because faith came before circumcision. Remember, Paul was telling us all about that back in Romans 4, Romans 5. Like, that's when Paul, he's already laid this foundation to us. And so he's building atop a theological foundation that he's already laid, namely that if this whole thing is by faith, then just because you are Israeli or is, you know, you're a Jew or whatever by passport or by birth doesn't mean That you're actually a true Israel, a true son or daughter of God by faith, a true son or daughter of Abraham. Why? Because these are the people who inherit the promises of God, those who trust God by faith. It has not failed. God's promises have not failed because the promises properly understood were not to all of ethnic Israel, but to spiritual Israel. Okay, so verse 6 and verse 7 and verse 8, these are keys. Verse 7 says, Not all are children of Abraham, because they are his offspring, but through Isaac shall your offspring be named. What is he saying there? He's saying, look, your offspring, Abraham, the true offspring of Abraham, will be named through Isaac. That is, through the promise of Isaac, is what he's saying. So verse 8, this means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God. So this is Paul explaining, verse 7. It is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise who are counted as offspring. So Paul says some very important things. Verse 6, verse 7, and verse 8 all flow into one another, and we have to get this. Now, setting aside, what does that mean about Israel? How should we understand the Middle East? To set all those questions to the side for just a second, we're just dealing with what Paul says right here in Romans 9, and then we can come back and theologize about, you know, politics or whatever. So if you're interested in that, pause, because that kind of... constant dialogue with some present concern can cause you to backfill the way you're reading the Bible in a way that is unhealthy. So if that's you, I just want you to take that, acknowledge, I really care about politics or the Middle East. Great. Set that to the side for a second and let's deal just with the text. What does the text say? What's it mean? And then how do we apply it? It's the basics of how we interpret the Bible. So not all of the children of the flesh who are are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. Therefore, verse eight is key. Not all Israel is true Israel, right? Not all the genetically sons and daughters of Abraham are spiritually those who've had circumcision of the heart. So therefore God did sovereignly accomplish his purposes to spiritual and ethnic Israel. In other words, the promise is not an automatic biological inheritance. Okay. That's what he's saying. The promises that God made to Israel are not automatic. and biological but rather they are sovereign and they are spiritual do you see the difference not automatic and biological sovereign and spiritual because paul has already argued that some of abraham's descendants are not related to him at all he already did that in chapter 4 you can go look in verses 16 and 17. the true descendants of abraham are children of god in that they inherit the blessings of god's covenant with abraham having been adopted by god so when you bump into covenant theology in your systematics class, that's what it's referring to. It's referring to an understanding of the story of God, the history of redemption, on the basis of these covenants that God has made with his people. And when God partnered with Abraham to save the world, he did so not in an automated and biological way, but rather through spiritual obedience and in a sovereign way. How do we know this? Part of the way we know this is going to be argued by... by Paul in the very next verses that can be some of the most difficult to understand. So let's read them. For this is what the promise said about this time next year, I will return and Sarah will have a son. So God made a promise. Remember, he came and visited Abraham and Abraham was given this promise by the angel of the Lord and Sarah laughed and the angel of the Lord was like, you'll be laughing. And so they named him Isaac. Fun, ironic, interesting story. Verse 10. And not only so, but when Rebecca had conceived, okay, that's Isaac's wife and had. children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had not done either good or bad, in order that God's promise of election might continue, not because of works, but because of him who calls, she was told, the older serve the younger, as it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated. I let that sit on you. That's tough because we feel our innate sense of justice in the world is that God should choose me on the basis of my worthiness to be chosen. God should choose to partner with me on the basis of my foreseen, foreknown faith. And what Paul is saying here, at least about God's choice of Jacob over... Jacob over Esau, is that it had nothing to do with them. It had nothing to do with their behavior, but simply to do, quote, in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works, but because of him who calls. Whew, that's a big deal. Abraham is basically saying, look, this is the way it worked right there with Abraham's immediate family. His grandkids were experiencing the chosenness of God and they were, the chosenness of God, the sovereignty of God. had everything to do with spirituality, had everything to do with faith in the promise, because Esau was faithless, Jacob was faithful, which means Esau, even though he was the son of Abraham, he wasn't really. And Jacob was not because of biology, but because of faith in God's sovereignty, because of the promise, because of the covenant and their participation in it. Well, in other words, Paul is illustrating this point with Isaac, who is literally a child of promise. And God declares to Abraham, this is the word of promise. About this time, I'll come. Sarah will have a son. And God's promise was carried on by the son whom God had promised. The younger son, not the elder. This was the result of human plans. Now, Jacob I loved and Esau I hated. Let's think about that. Heavy, heavy word. This is a quote from Malachi, chapter 1, verses 2 and 3. And here's some ideas about it. Paul is underscoring. the sovereign choice of God by quoting Malachi chapter 1 verses 2 and 3 and saying, I love Jacob, but I hated Esau. Now Malachi is referring to Israel and Edom. Edom was the sons and daughters of Esau who became their own nation. And he was announcing God's judgment on Edom. God interacts with both individuals as nations as he wishes so that his purposes will be fulfilled. And Paul right here, what he's doing is he's laying a foundation for his discussion about how God is working with them. both Jews and Gentiles. Now, what you might be saying, but Adam, that's, that word, hated, that is a strong, strong word, especially if you live in the West like I do. We have hate speech laws, and we're told not to be haters, and the great, you know, prophetess Taylor Swift, peace be upon her, says that haters gonna hate. So what are we going to do with that word hate? That sounds really tough. Leon Moore says this, and I think it's a... It's a good way to think about it, so I'll just read you the quote. The meaning of hatred is a different kind of problem. This is a difficulty in that Scripture speaks of a love of God for the whole world, like in John 3.16, and the meaning of God is love is surely that God loves quite irrespective of merit or demerit in the beloved. Specifically, he is said to love sinners, Romans 5, verse 8, this very book we're studying. It is also true that in Scripture there are cases where hate seems clearly to mean love less. And then he gives many examples. Many find this an acceptable solution here. God loved Esau and the nation Edom less than he loved Jacob in Israel. But it is perhaps more likely that, like Calvin, we should understand the expression in the sense of reject over against accept. He explains the passage this way. I chose Jacob and rejected Esau. I induced this course by my mercy alone. and not by any worthiness in his works, I had rejected the Edomites. This accords with the stress throughout the passage on the thought of election for service. God chose Israel for this role, and he did not so choose Edom. So what does Adam think? What do you think, Pastor Adam? Here's what I think. I think that this passage of scripture is giving us one of those insights into the inner mind of God that is so hard for us to understand because it's so different from the way we can interact. None of us have minds that see all things, and none of us have plans that are totally good, and none of us have characters that are totally righteous 100% of the time. So none of us can trust fully in our choices. There's always the possibility that we are making the wrong choice. So when we see God making choices that we find to be very difficult and very different than the ways we would make them, well, it feels like God is doing something wrong. But I want you to note that that is a feeling, and feelings are important. They tell you how you feel, but they don't give you the best insight into understanding God. Here, our feelings are telling us why it would be wrong for us to do that. It would be wrong for me to choose and not choose based entirely on my will alone, certain persons or not. That wouldn't work out well. But the reason that it's wrong for me is not the same reason that it's wrong for God. And what we're going to see is that Paul wants us to see that very same thing next. So what does he say? Verse 14 says this. Is there injustice in God's part? By no means. For he says to Moses, I'll have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I'll have compassion on whom I have compassion. So then, it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who has mercy. For the scripture says to Pharaoh, for this very purpose I raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth. So he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. And then, in the next section, he goes into a whole discussion about vessels, like pots, made for certain uses. Now, let's think a little bit about this chunk of text from verses 14 to 18 that we just read. Is it unjust for God to choose? No, because salvation is by grace and mercy. Like this idea that salvation is by grace and mercy is kind of the foundational idea of the whole book of Romans and almost everything else that Paul has written. So Paul is giving us, as a New Testament scholar himself, his, or as an Old Testament scholar himself, His Old Testament theology right here in the New Testament. He's saying, I've read the Old Testament. I understand the Old Testament. God is making choices all of the time. And we have to be okay with a God who makes choices completely, completely in reference only to his will and his own knowledge and his goodness. If we're not okay with that, we find that that's a bridge too far. We will contort ourselves into trying to read things into these scriptures that are simply not there as some are in the habit of doing. Now, what about the next question? Well, if that's the case, is it unfair for God to blame us for our choices? And Paul's answer is no, because you're a creature and God is the creator. God is not unfair because some wicked are punished and some receive undeserved mercy. That is Paul's whole idea here. And he supports it first by telling us about Pharaoh. He says, I'm going to raise up a Pharaoh. who does some terrible stuff, but I'm doing it so that I can show my power in Pharaoh. That's what he says in verse 17, that I might show my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth. That means that God has interests that supersede our own, that sometimes God will allow us to go through difficult things, will allow Israel to go through different things, to demonstrate to the whole watching world more about who he is, and that God is still good when he does that. That's a heavy idea. So Paul anticipates that we're going to read this and go, oh, that's a heavy idea. So he then moves on to this discussion about pots and vessels. You will say to me, then why does he still find fault? Who can resist his will? But that's if we were to put that in modern parlance, we'd say, well, if God is all like this in charge of stuff, how the heck can he judge me for my choices? And the answer is because he's God. We read on. Who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Well, what is molded, say to its molder, that is, if you make a pot, will the pot say back to you, why have you made me like this? Has the potter no right over the clay to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? Think about this. Here's what's in Paul's mind, I think. Got a lump of clay, and a potter is going to make certain pots that are like chamber pots, like that you would relieve yourself in, and other pots that are like, you know, for eating off of, or for holding. water to bathe with or for putting something really beautiful on. And it's the same clay that made them both. So he says, doesn't the potter have a right over the clay to make out of the same lump, one for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? And then he does this very interesting thing called a thought experiment. But before we get there, I want you to note that in verses 19 and 20 and 21, what Paul is doing is not really answering us. Which is super frustrating, I will fully admit. There are lots of times in the Bible where a great question is posed, and then we're rebuked for asking it. And that's exactly what happens here. God has the right to do what he wishes, in Paul's argument, and this non-answer is actually more of a rebuke, because God's word here is saying, listen, we cannot question the ethics and justice of God, because that's a very Genesis 3, did God really say, kind of thing to do. Even in the book of Job. When Job, for chapters and chapters, just said, man, if I could get God to sit in the witness stand, I would question him. I would ask him questions, but this is all unfair because I can't. And then when God finally shows up, does Job actually do that? No. He's so overwhelmed by the experience of God's godness that he says, okay, I spoke in ways I didn't understand, and I trust you. and I repent in dust and ashes. For smart people, for wealthy people, for people who are used to figuring out things. Let me pastor you for a second. You're going to shepherd people, and you're going to shepherd family members, and even yourself. You're going to go through situations that make you ask, God, what in the world are you doing? What are you doing? And when you do, I want you to come, and I want you to sit in the book of Romans chapter 9. And I want you to hear the words of Paul. Because Paul was just as emotional when he wrote this as you are when you suffer or when you sit with someone who's suffering. And the only question you want answered is, God, why are you allowing this? Why are you, or why are you ordaining this? Or why did you choose this set of circumstances? However we utter it to God. And we want an answer. What we're really after is checking God's math. Paul knows it. Paul wants to understand. why exactly God would do what he's done. And God almost never gives us that. Instead, Paul gives us, hey, he's God and you can trust him. Now, the next thing that he does seems like an answer, but it's not. It's a thought experiment. But before we get there, I just want you to remember what I've said. It's going to help you later when you shepherd people, when you're on the campus, when you're, you know. doing the work of ministry, and someone demands that you, as a holy man or a holy woman, give them an answer that the Bible has not given you, never, ever, ever feel the pressure to explain God's choices. Instead, explain who God is and let them trust in his choices. So, he goes on to say this, What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction in order to make known the riches of his glory? for vessels prepared for mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom he has called. So if I were paraphrasing Paul here, I would say one answer might be that God is doing something like this. He's preparing some vessels for destruction and enduring all of their awfulness with a lot of patience so that he can demonstrate his mercy to those other vessels prepared for mercy. So, in this thought experiment, Paul is offering a form of an explanation, but nothing like a, I know for certain this is exactly how God does it, which is a weird thing to see in the Bible. He asks, what if God made vessels of wrath? The term vessels of wrath, therefore, refers to those who are not meant for ordinary use. In previous chapters, Paul is explaining that both Israel and Gentiles have become vessels of wrath. In Leviticus 11.33 and 15.12, it is written that pottery vessels that become unclean were to be destroyed. So Paul wants us to see that God has an interest in making his power and ability to oppose evil known. God wants his glory, which is, what is God's glory? The word is kavod in Hebrew, and the word is doxa in Greek, and the words actually mean relatively the same thing. Big, significant weight. He wants everyone to understand the weightiness of his nature and who he is to... for everyone to understand it, to see it, to experience the presence and the power and the goodness of the glory of God. So God has an interest in that, which is why, you know, the Westminster Confession of Faith says something like, you know, what is the chief end of man? To glorify God and enjoy him forever. That we are created here, and all of God's acts are to express God's nature so that we, creation, can relate to God's nature in the right way as as those who are wondered and awed by the godness of God. Paul wants us to see that, and so he goes on with this thought experiment in verses 23 and 24, and then supports the idea through a quotation from the book of Hosea. Now here, he questions that if God has allowed certain things to happen in order to reveal the riches of his grace to those who are meant for God's glory, couldn't also be the case that God endures with much patience the idea that those who are intended for destruction. Paul seems to believe that God has chosen to reshape those who were previously ruined vessels by showing them mercy rather than destroying them. Now, get this. When we take the Old Testament idea that unclean pottery was to be destroyed, he's saying, what if God, instead of destroying all of it, chose to redeem some of it? So what doesn't seem to be taught here is like a double predestination where God takes a, you know, kind of an otherwise morally neutral agent and says, uh, you go to hell, you go to hell, you go to heaven, you go to hell. That doesn't... that's not... what's being taught here. Instead, Paul's analogy seems to suggest we are all a pile of dirty dishes. And what if God chose to transform some of them? We are all, none of us are morally neutral agents. We're all defiled in sin. But what if God chose to have mercy on some? That's the idea here. So Paul mentions this, that God has not just, you know, called such people out of the Jews, but also out of the Gentiles, to be among these vessels of mercy. And this shows that God's grace is available to all, regardless of their background. So what are we saying here? We're seeing that this is all coming in the midst of Paul's thinking and trying to process what it means for the gospel to have been more effective amongst non-Jews than Jews. Now, you're probably sitting there asking a really good question and wondering if I'm ever going to talk about it, which is, well, then how the heck... am I supposed to understand God's, on the one hand, desire for all people to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, and on the other hand, his inscrutable, sovereign ways that seem to make choices that I would never make and that frankly don't make a lot of sense to me, and so I just have to say, well, God is God and he can make them. How do I understand that? I want to make a distinction for you that I've made before, but I want to just say it here. And I write about this in the book, Stop Taking Sides, and so I would commend you that chapter just because it's my best thinking on it. But there's also some really good books in the bibliography section of this course to help you think through God and the problem of evil. And I want to briefly talk to you about the difference between God's disposition and God's will. This is the analogy that I like to use. At the time of my recording this, it's just after Christmastime. And I'm notorious in my family for always blowing the budget. I love giving gifts. I just, I really do. And I could spend... so much money and send our family into debt giving gifts to my kids and my wife. I just like to do it. My disposition toward them is to be irresponsibly generous to them. But it is not my will. It is not my will to always do that because there are other things I have to think about. I have to think about my budget. I have to think about, you know, I've got to pay for college for a couple of my kids soon. I've got, you know, one of my kids needs breaks. I have other financial obligations and then I have moral formation. I don't want to raise a bunch of brats. who just expect the world to be given to them. So I refrain from some of my disposition in order to achieve my will. Sometimes we confuse these ideas. We talk about God's will, on the one hand, being to save everybody, and God's will, on the other hand, being apparently not to. And how do we talk about these two versions of God's will? And so I offer this to you as a way to think about this. God's disposition toward all humans is love, patience, kindness, and a desire for all to come to the knowledge of the truth. He doesn't delight in punishing the wicked. He doesn't enjoy doing it. The Bible's super, super clear on all of that. And that is not what actually happens. The Bible talks about, on the other hand, about some things that God chooses, like a guy named Abraham randomly in the Middle East, or a guy named Noah randomly before the flood, or choosing to work through ancient Israel, or choosing to show up to certain ancient kings, or choosing a woman named Mary. And these are his choices. that seem at times to run roughshod over his disposition. That's because God has a will, and his will sometimes supersedes what we can understand about his disposition, because he's doing more things all of the time than we can possibly see. So I offer that to you as one way I think about this chapter, and then help to resolve some of the emotional tension about it. So let's round this out. He says at the very end that righteousness ultimately is not by your family lineage, but by faith. What shall we say then? Verse 30, the Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it. That is a righteousness that is by faith, but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching the law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works, they have stumbled over the stumbling stone as it is written. Behold, I am laying a stop in Zion, a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense. and whomever believes in him will not be put to shame. He's summarizing his argument here about Israel and the Gentiles thus far. Some Gentiles attained righteousness, while some Jews have not, because righteousness is not based on biology, and it's not automatic. It's based on faith, faith in Christ rather than works of the law. So, in verse 30, Paul begins by asking, what should we say? He notes here that Gentiles who were not pursuing righteousness seemed to have attained it, while Israel did not. attain it because they were pursuing a different form. He's shown that Israel, despite their pursuit of the law at various points, never achieved the purpose of the law, which was righteousness. This means that they were not able to demonstrate covenant faithfulness to God through their actions as the law required. Remember what Paul has already said about the law. If you sign up for law righteousness, then you break it once and you've broken it. And the law has no way to get it unbroken. The law can only have those uses of pointing out our sin, showing us morally the way we should be, and demonstrating to us our need for a Savior. But it cannot itself save. So this loops in, this hyperlinks back to the things that Paul was saying about the law earlier. So why did Israel fail to attain it in verse 32? Because they pursued it through works of the law instead of through faith and faithfulness. They stumbled over the stumbling stone, which means they could not accept that human righteousness comes from the faithfulness of the faithful human, the faithful Christ, the one better than Adam, the truer Moses, as Paul talks about in the book of Romans, the true son of Abraham. So in this passage, Paul uses an adaptation of Isaiah 28, 16 and 8, 14 to support his point. He applies a verse that originally referred to God to Jesus. And by doing this, he suggests that Christ has a kind of duality, that he is a cornerstone for some in the foundation of the people of God and a stumbling stone for others, particularly those in Israel who have not yet attained faith in Christ. So what have we said in this very, very, very thick and interesting chapter? Well, we've started a whole new section where Paul is thinking about ancient Israel and how his love for Israel and how God's love for Israel relates to the church. We've thought a little bit about God's sovereignty and particularly his sovereignty in choosing one nation over another and how that works and how he could possibly be faithful to all of these promises that he has made if so many Jews are not actually coming to Messiah. And we thought about what it means that Christ is in fact the end or the goal or the ultimate orientation of the law, namely that Christ himself is the one who can fulfill it. and that the law itself demonstrates greatly our own need for Christ. And that's a little bit of what Romans 9 is about.

And he says, you know, we're more than conquerors, nothing can separate us from the love of God, and it's very triumphant and it ends in this kind of like B-flat major horn, you know, line. There's just trumpets and triumph. And then it immediately goes into something that's really difficult to think about, namely the nature of God's sovereignty in his choosing of ancient Israel and how Paul is thinking about his promises and his choices regarding Israel in light of all that God has done in the gospel and all that God has done in bringing Messiah, the Jewish Messiah, into the world.

But it was a head-scratcher for Paul because what Paul is seeing in his ministry, and try to imagine this, is a bunch of non-Jews running and giving their lives to the Jewish Messiah. It must have been kind of confusing on some level. And I'm sure, as we'll see, Paul felt all kinds of emotions and had anguish and thought about that. And so this section starts the beginning of Paul's thought about how the gospel and how the Jesus community, the church, and the Old Testament community, ancient Israel, were connected or disconnected, and in what ways that was to be the case. So in this lecture, we're going to start...

this new section. We also want to highlight in this lecture the goodness and justice of God's sovereignty and God's decrees. Now, I recognize that within our seminary, some of you watching this will be more of the Reformed, kind of Calvinist, high view of the sovereignty of God types, and others of you are going to be more of the Arminian, Wesleyan, holiness, high view of man's freedom and personal responsibility types.

And we make room for both of those views within our movement. But whether you're a Calvinist or an Arminian, whether you have a a high view of the sovereignty of God, or you see a high view of man's personal freedom, what we all have to do is contend with the actual text of Scripture. And in this section of Scripture, it is just flush with language about God's sovereignty. And when the Bible presents to us the sovereignty, the kingship of God, it is always to be taken as good news. And so I want you, as you go through chapter 9, I want you to pay attention to your own emotions as you read some of these, frankly, really difficult texts.

And let's learn together how this is good news for all of us. And we want to, because we want to worship God for his mercy and grace in election, as we'll find out what that means, in his choosing and his sovereign choice of his people. And we want to understand a little bit about, a little bit more about how Christ is the end of the law. So that's what we're going to do in this particular section.

Now, there's a great quote from Douglas Magnum I want to read to you. related to this section of Romans, and then we will dive in. He writes this, chapters 9 to 11 are an extension of the refutation section of Paul's discourse.

Although not in diatribe, remember he's been doing this kind of question and answer thing, and he kind of lays that down a little bit. You'll see it some, but it's not a ton. Having presented and defended his gospel, Paul now tackles the naughtiest problem of all.

If Paul is right about the good news, why has most of Israel rejected it? Has God abandoned Israel in order to court the Gentiles? To vindicate God's faithfulness to his chosen people, Paul widens the scope of his argument to describe God's sovereign plan to bring all people to accountability in order to offer mercy to all people.

He supports this argument at every point with Old Testament scripture and concludes this demanding and sobering division of the letter with an outburst of praise for the inscrutable wisdom and all-consuming glory of God. I think it's a good way to begin. So let's read this first section of Romans chapter 9 together, and then we will start. I am speaking the truth in Christ.

I am not lying. My conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart, for I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen, according to the flesh. They're Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. To them belong the patriarchs.

and from their race according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen. But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham, because they are his offspring.

But through Isaac shall your offspring be named. This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise who are counted as offspring. For this is what the promise said. About this time next year I will return, and Sarah will have a son. And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad, in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works, but because of him who calls, she was told, the older shall serve the younger.

As it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated. What shall we say then? Is there injustice in God's part? By no means, for he says to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

So then, it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who has mercy. For the scripture says to Pharaoh, for this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth. So then, he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

You will say to me, then, why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will? But who are you, O man, to answer back to God?

Well, what does molded say to its molder? Why have you made me like this? Has the potter no right over the clay to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?

What if God, desiring to show his wrath and make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy? which he has prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom he has called, not only from the Jews, but also from the Gentiles. As indeed he says in Hosea, those who are not my people, I will call my people, and her who is not beloved, I will call beloved. And in the very place where it was said to them, you are not my people, there they will be called sons of the living God.

And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel, though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them. will be saved. For the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth fully and without delay. And as Isaiah predicted, if the Lord of hosts had not left us offspring, we would have been like Sodom and become like Gomorrah.

God's words. Praise him. So in this first section, verses 1 through 29, what are we to make of some of this? Well, let's think through this a little bit. And we're going to slow down here because I really want you to develop the discipline of when you come to a tough passage of Scripture to slow down and make yourself feel the strangeness of the text.

I wrote a book a few years ago called Stop Taking Sides. And in that book, I was trying to make the point that when the Bible messes with you, like when the Bible presents you with ideas that make you feel really uncomfortable and seem to be in contradiction, or paradoxical relationship to other ideas the Bible gives you. I believe the Bible is doing that on purpose. I believe that the Bible is more to us than just a book of information, but Scripture is giving to us ideas that feel like they can't all go together, even though they do go together.

And figuring out and learning how to sit with those is part of the process of holiness. Remember, the purpose of seminary is not just to fill your mind with knowledge. If that were the case, we wouldn't have built Every Nation Seminary for you.

We would have just recommended some podcasts and books. But we're trying to form you into something. And part of formation is sitting with uncomfortable realities about God and learning how to understand that we must trust him in the midst of stuff that is hard.

So pay attention to your emotionality is the point of that. All right, so Romans 9, verses 1 through 29. This is the conclusion, remember, or the transition between Romans 8 and Romans 9. And so at the conclusion of Romans 8, several questions... kind of remain.

If God controlled everything and he loves us with unfailing love, which is what Romans 8, 28 to 39 suggest, not suggest, teach very clearly. Remember, God works all things together for the good of those who love him, right? What happened to Israel?

If that's the case, like what gives? Did God's word fail? I mean, it is the case that like both the Jews and Gentiles sinned, but with this emphasis on Abraham and... David and all of these Old Testament figures that Paul has walked us through in the book of Romans so far, shouldn't it be the case that the Jews are mass converting to Christianity? And if not, what are we to understand about the continued nature of the relationship between Jews and Gentiles?

And so Paul has a response in two parts. One is a response of compassion, and the other is a response of consolation, that the Word of God has indeed not failed. but that God's doing something different than what we...

can see. So the rejection of Israel is a very painful subject to Jews in Rome, is what we're thinking, right? Because remember, the thesis statement of the book is that the gospel is the power of God for the salvation of all who would believe. And the Jews received the gospel, and remember, they left for a while and came back, and now there's this seeming division.

So you can imagine how being Jewish and receiving Messiah, and then watching way more of your non-Jewish friends'friends come to Christ. How that would affect you. And so this is emotional for Paul. And he says it right here.

Like, I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. The Bible in English, it always makes emotional language a little bit dry. But he's saying like, this really hurts me. This is deeply emotionally painful. I have unceasing anguish in my heart.

That means it's not something that when he thinks about it, it hurts. It's something that hurts all the time. He says this, I wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers.

Do you hear what Paul is saying? Paul is saying, if I could change the way God is sovereignly running the universe, and I could spend eternity in hell so that my brothers, my Jewish brothers and sisters, could be with Christ, I would do it. That's a remarkable thing to say.

And, I mean, of course it's a little bit hyperbolic because... Paul can't obviously do that, but you need to grab onto, like, Paul loved being Jewish. He loved Israel.

He loved his brothers and sisters. There's a whole extra thing there that, like, can tell us a few things, like, it's not wrong to love your family. It's not wrong to be patriotic. It's not wrong to love your nation. It's not wrong to love your ethnic group.

It's not wrong. Paul obviously very much did, but he loved them in a way under the lordship and toward the sovereignty of God, right? He says, I wish that I could be a curse so that they, my kinsmen, according to the flesh, could know Christ.

They're Israelites. He's saying the question that the end of Romans 8 is kind of bringing up. He's like, look, they're the ones who have the law. They're the ones who have the promises.

They're the ones who've got the whole story, the first two thirds of our Holy Bible that make the New Testament make sense at all. So what gives? Is there a continued relationship between? these two.

At the very end of this particular paragraph, as it will appear in your English Bible, it contains a relative clause that explains who Paul's kindred according to the flesh are, which is obviously Israel, and he's deeply troubled by their lack of faith, because this is like a really sad and difficult irony that Jesus was not accepted by the Jews en masse, but was much more accepted by the nations. He emphasizes the... the sonship and the glory and the covenants and the worship and all of that stuff, and ends this passage with a very brief doxology, a very brief word of praise and worship, acknowledging that Jesus, the Messiah, who comes from Israel, is also God and blessed forever.

So what do we do with this next part? Okay, so we've got an emotional Paul. Paul is saying, look, God is sovereignly in control of everything in ways that make us all a little bit freaked out and worried. That's the end of Romans 8. But he's going to work all things out for the good of those who love him so we can trust him.

All right. Thanks, Paul. But man, and then he's kind of emotionally presenting himself to us.

But what's that mean for Israel? I would do anything if I could get my brothers and sisters to follow Jesus and to worship Jesus. And so the question kind of hanging out there is like, did the word of God fail?

Like, did God divorce his people? And Paul's answer is no. No, you've got to grab this.

It's hard for us as non-Jews to feel the weight of this, but we must. He says this in verse 6, but it is not as though the word of God has failed, for not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel. Now that right there, that sentence, that verse, verse 6, that's kind of the foundation of everything else that Paul is about to say. He's saying that not everybody who is Jewish genetically or ethnically connected somehow to Abraham. Not everybody is part of Israel.

Not all who are Israel are Israel, is kind of the way that he's saying it. And this is a really big deal, because in this section, Paul is going to defend God's faithfulness by describing how the current separation of Israel through their failure to recognize Messiah doesn't mean that God's promise has failed. However, it does mean that God seems to have chosen to preserve that promise in unexpected ways.

Okay, he's chosen to preserve. the promises that he made to Israel in unexpected ways. Abraham's true descendants are not the children of the flesh, but the children of promise. Now, lest you think that Paul is just making stuff up right now, remember, that idea... that the true sons and daughters of Abraham are the ones to have faith like Abraham, not who circumcised their flesh like Abraham did.

Why? Because faith came before circumcision. Remember, Paul was telling us all about that back in Romans 4, Romans 5. Like, that's when Paul, he's already laid this foundation to us.

And so he's building atop a theological foundation that he's already laid, namely that if this whole thing is by faith, then just because you are Israeli or is, you know, you're a Jew or whatever by passport or by birth doesn't mean That you're actually a true Israel, a true son or daughter of God by faith, a true son or daughter of Abraham. Why? Because these are the people who inherit the promises of God, those who trust God by faith.

It has not failed. God's promises have not failed because the promises properly understood were not to all of ethnic Israel, but to spiritual Israel. Okay, so verse 6 and verse 7 and verse 8, these are keys.

Verse 7 says, Not all are children of Abraham, because they are his offspring, but through Isaac shall your offspring be named. What is he saying there? He's saying, look, your offspring, Abraham, the true offspring of Abraham, will be named through Isaac.

That is, through the promise of Isaac, is what he's saying. So verse 8, this means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God. So this is Paul explaining, verse 7. It is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise who are counted as offspring. So Paul says some very important things.

Verse 6, verse 7, and verse 8 all flow into one another, and we have to get this. Now, setting aside, what does that mean about Israel? How should we understand the Middle East?

To set all those questions to the side for just a second, we're just dealing with what Paul says right here in Romans 9, and then we can come back and theologize about, you know, politics or whatever. So if you're interested in that, pause, because that kind of... constant dialogue with some present concern can cause you to backfill the way you're reading the Bible in a way that is unhealthy.

So if that's you, I just want you to take that, acknowledge, I really care about politics or the Middle East. Great. Set that to the side for a second and let's deal just with the text.

What does the text say? What's it mean? And then how do we apply it? It's the basics of how we interpret the Bible. So not all of the children of the flesh who are are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.

Therefore, verse eight is key. Not all Israel is true Israel, right? Not all the genetically sons and daughters of Abraham are spiritually those who've had circumcision of the heart.

So therefore God did sovereignly accomplish his purposes to spiritual and ethnic Israel. In other words, the promise is not an automatic biological inheritance. Okay.

That's what he's saying. The promises that God made to Israel are not automatic. and biological but rather they are sovereign and they are spiritual do you see the difference not automatic and biological sovereign and spiritual because paul has already argued that some of abraham's descendants are not related to him at all he already did that in chapter 4 you can go look in verses 16 and 17. the true descendants of abraham are children of god in that they inherit the blessings of god's covenant with abraham having been adopted by god so when you bump into covenant theology in your systematics class, that's what it's referring to. It's referring to an understanding of the story of God, the history of redemption, on the basis of these covenants that God has made with his people. And when God partnered with Abraham to save the world, he did so not in an automated and biological way, but rather through spiritual obedience and in a sovereign way.

How do we know this? Part of the way we know this is going to be argued by... by Paul in the very next verses that can be some of the most difficult to understand.

So let's read them. For this is what the promise said about this time next year, I will return and Sarah will have a son. So God made a promise.

Remember, he came and visited Abraham and Abraham was given this promise by the angel of the Lord and Sarah laughed and the angel of the Lord was like, you'll be laughing. And so they named him Isaac. Fun, ironic, interesting story.

Verse 10. And not only so, but when Rebecca had conceived, okay, that's Isaac's wife and had. children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had not done either good or bad, in order that God's promise of election might continue, not because of works, but because of him who calls, she was told, the older serve the younger, as it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated. I let that sit on you.

That's tough because we feel our innate sense of justice in the world is that God should choose me on the basis of my worthiness to be chosen. God should choose to partner with me on the basis of my foreseen, foreknown faith. And what Paul is saying here, at least about God's choice of Jacob over...

Jacob over Esau, is that it had nothing to do with them. It had nothing to do with their behavior, but simply to do, quote, in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works, but because of him who calls. Whew, that's a big deal. Abraham is basically saying, look, this is the way it worked right there with Abraham's immediate family. His grandkids were experiencing the chosenness of God and they were, the chosenness of God, the sovereignty of God.

had everything to do with spirituality, had everything to do with faith in the promise, because Esau was faithless, Jacob was faithful, which means Esau, even though he was the son of Abraham, he wasn't really. And Jacob was not because of biology, but because of faith in God's sovereignty, because of the promise, because of the covenant and their participation in it. Well, in other words, Paul is illustrating this point with Isaac, who is literally a child of promise. And God declares to Abraham, this is the word of promise. About this time, I'll come.

Sarah will have a son. And God's promise was carried on by the son whom God had promised. The younger son, not the elder. This was the result of human plans.

Now, Jacob I loved and Esau I hated. Let's think about that. Heavy, heavy word.

This is a quote from Malachi, chapter 1, verses 2 and 3. And here's some ideas about it. Paul is underscoring. the sovereign choice of God by quoting Malachi chapter 1 verses 2 and 3 and saying, I love Jacob, but I hated Esau.

Now Malachi is referring to Israel and Edom. Edom was the sons and daughters of Esau who became their own nation. And he was announcing God's judgment on Edom. God interacts with both individuals as nations as he wishes so that his purposes will be fulfilled.

And Paul right here, what he's doing is he's laying a foundation for his discussion about how God is working with them. both Jews and Gentiles. Now, what you might be saying, but Adam, that's, that word, hated, that is a strong, strong word, especially if you live in the West like I do. We have hate speech laws, and we're told not to be haters, and the great, you know, prophetess Taylor Swift, peace be upon her, says that haters gonna hate.

So what are we going to do with that word hate? That sounds really tough. Leon Moore says this, and I think it's a... It's a good way to think about it, so I'll just read you the quote. The meaning of hatred is a different kind of problem.

This is a difficulty in that Scripture speaks of a love of God for the whole world, like in John 3.16, and the meaning of God is love is surely that God loves quite irrespective of merit or demerit in the beloved. Specifically, he is said to love sinners, Romans 5, verse 8, this very book we're studying. It is also true that in Scripture there are cases where hate seems clearly to mean love less.

And then he gives many examples. Many find this an acceptable solution here. God loved Esau and the nation Edom less than he loved Jacob in Israel. But it is perhaps more likely that, like Calvin, we should understand the expression in the sense of reject over against accept.

He explains the passage this way. I chose Jacob and rejected Esau. I induced this course by my mercy alone.

and not by any worthiness in his works, I had rejected the Edomites. This accords with the stress throughout the passage on the thought of election for service. God chose Israel for this role, and he did not so choose Edom. So what does Adam think? What do you think, Pastor Adam?

Here's what I think. I think that this passage of scripture is giving us one of those insights into the inner mind of God that is so hard for us to understand because it's so different from the way we can interact. None of us have minds that see all things, and none of us have plans that are totally good, and none of us have characters that are totally righteous 100% of the time. So none of us can trust fully in our choices.

There's always the possibility that we are making the wrong choice. So when we see God making choices that we find to be very difficult and very different than the ways we would make them, well, it feels like God is doing something wrong. But I want you to note that that is a feeling, and feelings are important. They tell you how you feel, but they don't give you the best insight into understanding God. Here, our feelings are telling us why it would be wrong for us to do that.

It would be wrong for me to choose and not choose based entirely on my will alone, certain persons or not. That wouldn't work out well. But the reason that it's wrong for me is not the same reason that it's wrong for God. And what we're going to see is that Paul wants us to see that very same thing next.

So what does he say? Verse 14 says this. Is there injustice in God's part?

By no means. For he says to Moses, I'll have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I'll have compassion on whom I have compassion. So then, it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who has mercy. For the scripture says to Pharaoh, for this very purpose I raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.

So he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. And then, in the next section, he goes into a whole discussion about vessels, like pots, made for certain uses. Now, let's think a little bit about this chunk of text from verses 14 to 18 that we just read.

Is it unjust for God to choose? No, because salvation is by grace and mercy. Like this idea that salvation is by grace and mercy is kind of the foundational idea of the whole book of Romans and almost everything else that Paul has written. So Paul is giving us, as a New Testament scholar himself, his, or as an Old Testament scholar himself, His Old Testament theology right here in the New Testament. He's saying, I've read the Old Testament.

I understand the Old Testament. God is making choices all of the time. And we have to be okay with a God who makes choices completely, completely in reference only to his will and his own knowledge and his goodness.

If we're not okay with that, we find that that's a bridge too far. We will contort ourselves into trying to read things into these scriptures that are simply not there as some are in the habit of doing. Now, what about the next question?

Well, if that's the case, is it unfair for God to blame us for our choices? And Paul's answer is no, because you're a creature and God is the creator. God is not unfair because some wicked are punished and some receive undeserved mercy.

That is Paul's whole idea here. And he supports it first by telling us about Pharaoh. He says, I'm going to raise up a Pharaoh. who does some terrible stuff, but I'm doing it so that I can show my power in Pharaoh.

That's what he says in verse 17, that I might show my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth. That means that God has interests that supersede our own, that sometimes God will allow us to go through difficult things, will allow Israel to go through different things, to demonstrate to the whole watching world more about who he is, and that God is still good when he does that. That's a heavy idea.

So Paul anticipates that we're going to read this and go, oh, that's a heavy idea. So he then moves on to this discussion about pots and vessels. You will say to me, then why does he still find fault? Who can resist his will?

But that's if we were to put that in modern parlance, we'd say, well, if God is all like this in charge of stuff, how the heck can he judge me for my choices? And the answer is because he's God. We read on.

Who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Well, what is molded, say to its molder, that is, if you make a pot, will the pot say back to you, why have you made me like this? Has the potter no right over the clay to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?

Think about this. Here's what's in Paul's mind, I think. Got a lump of clay, and a potter is going to make certain pots that are like chamber pots, like that you would relieve yourself in, and other pots that are like, you know, for eating off of, or for holding.

water to bathe with or for putting something really beautiful on. And it's the same clay that made them both. So he says, doesn't the potter have a right over the clay to make out of the same lump, one for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? And then he does this very interesting thing called a thought experiment. But before we get there, I want you to note that in verses 19 and 20 and 21, what Paul is doing is not really answering us.

Which is super frustrating, I will fully admit. There are lots of times in the Bible where a great question is posed, and then we're rebuked for asking it. And that's exactly what happens here. God has the right to do what he wishes, in Paul's argument, and this non-answer is actually more of a rebuke, because God's word here is saying, listen, we cannot question the ethics and justice of God, because that's a very Genesis 3, did God really say, kind of thing to do. Even in the book of Job.

When Job, for chapters and chapters, just said, man, if I could get God to sit in the witness stand, I would question him. I would ask him questions, but this is all unfair because I can't. And then when God finally shows up, does Job actually do that? No.

He's so overwhelmed by the experience of God's godness that he says, okay, I spoke in ways I didn't understand, and I trust you. and I repent in dust and ashes. For smart people, for wealthy people, for people who are used to figuring out things. Let me pastor you for a second. You're going to shepherd people, and you're going to shepherd family members, and even yourself.

You're going to go through situations that make you ask, God, what in the world are you doing? What are you doing? And when you do, I want you to come, and I want you to sit in the book of Romans chapter 9. And I want you to hear the words of Paul. Because Paul was just as emotional when he wrote this as you are when you suffer or when you sit with someone who's suffering.

And the only question you want answered is, God, why are you allowing this? Why are you, or why are you ordaining this? Or why did you choose this set of circumstances? However we utter it to God.

And we want an answer. What we're really after is checking God's math. Paul knows it.

Paul wants to understand. why exactly God would do what he's done. And God almost never gives us that. Instead, Paul gives us, hey, he's God and you can trust him.

Now, the next thing that he does seems like an answer, but it's not. It's a thought experiment. But before we get there, I just want you to remember what I've said.

It's going to help you later when you shepherd people, when you're on the campus, when you're, you know. doing the work of ministry, and someone demands that you, as a holy man or a holy woman, give them an answer that the Bible has not given you, never, ever, ever feel the pressure to explain God's choices. Instead, explain who God is and let them trust in his choices.

So, he goes on to say this, What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction in order to make known the riches of his glory? for vessels prepared for mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom he has called. So if I were paraphrasing Paul here, I would say one answer might be that God is doing something like this. He's preparing some vessels for destruction and enduring all of their awfulness with a lot of patience so that he can demonstrate his mercy to those other vessels prepared for mercy.

So, in this thought experiment, Paul is offering a form of an explanation, but nothing like a, I know for certain this is exactly how God does it, which is a weird thing to see in the Bible. He asks, what if God made vessels of wrath? The term vessels of wrath, therefore, refers to those who are not meant for ordinary use. In previous chapters, Paul is explaining that both Israel and Gentiles have become vessels of wrath.

In Leviticus 11.33 and 15.12, it is written that pottery vessels that become unclean were to be destroyed. So Paul wants us to see that God has an interest in making his power and ability to oppose evil known. God wants his glory, which is, what is God's glory?

The word is kavod in Hebrew, and the word is doxa in Greek, and the words actually mean relatively the same thing. Big, significant weight. He wants everyone to understand the weightiness of his nature and who he is to... for everyone to understand it, to see it, to experience the presence and the power and the goodness of the glory of God.

So God has an interest in that, which is why, you know, the Westminster Confession of Faith says something like, you know, what is the chief end of man? To glorify God and enjoy him forever. That we are created here, and all of God's acts are to express God's nature so that we, creation, can relate to God's nature in the right way as as those who are wondered and awed by the godness of God.

Paul wants us to see that, and so he goes on with this thought experiment in verses 23 and 24, and then supports the idea through a quotation from the book of Hosea. Now here, he questions that if God has allowed certain things to happen in order to reveal the riches of his grace to those who are meant for God's glory, couldn't also be the case that God endures with much patience the idea that those who are intended for destruction. Paul seems to believe that God has chosen to reshape those who were previously ruined vessels by showing them mercy rather than destroying them. Now, get this.

When we take the Old Testament idea that unclean pottery was to be destroyed, he's saying, what if God, instead of destroying all of it, chose to redeem some of it? So what doesn't seem to be taught here is like a double predestination where God takes a, you know, kind of an otherwise morally neutral agent and says, uh, you go to hell, you go to hell, you go to heaven, you go to hell. That doesn't... that's not...

what's being taught here. Instead, Paul's analogy seems to suggest we are all a pile of dirty dishes. And what if God chose to transform some of them?

We are all, none of us are morally neutral agents. We're all defiled in sin. But what if God chose to have mercy on some? That's the idea here. So Paul mentions this, that God has not just, you know, called such people out of the Jews, but also out of the Gentiles, to be among these vessels of mercy.

And this shows that God's grace is available to all, regardless of their background. So what are we saying here? We're seeing that this is all coming in the midst of Paul's thinking and trying to process what it means for the gospel to have been more effective amongst non-Jews than Jews.

Now, you're probably sitting there asking a really good question and wondering if I'm ever going to talk about it, which is, well, then how the heck... am I supposed to understand God's, on the one hand, desire for all people to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, and on the other hand, his inscrutable, sovereign ways that seem to make choices that I would never make and that frankly don't make a lot of sense to me, and so I just have to say, well, God is God and he can make them. How do I understand that? I want to make a distinction for you that I've made before, but I want to just say it here. And I write about this in the book, Stop Taking Sides, and so I would commend you that chapter just because it's my best thinking on it.

But there's also some really good books in the bibliography section of this course to help you think through God and the problem of evil. And I want to briefly talk to you about the difference between God's disposition and God's will. This is the analogy that I like to use. At the time of my recording this, it's just after Christmastime. And I'm notorious in my family for always blowing the budget.

I love giving gifts. I just, I really do. And I could spend...

so much money and send our family into debt giving gifts to my kids and my wife. I just like to do it. My disposition toward them is to be irresponsibly generous to them.

But it is not my will. It is not my will to always do that because there are other things I have to think about. I have to think about my budget. I have to think about, you know, I've got to pay for college for a couple of my kids soon.

I've got, you know, one of my kids needs breaks. I have other financial obligations and then I have moral formation. I don't want to raise a bunch of brats.

who just expect the world to be given to them. So I refrain from some of my disposition in order to achieve my will. Sometimes we confuse these ideas. We talk about God's will, on the one hand, being to save everybody, and God's will, on the other hand, being apparently not to.

And how do we talk about these two versions of God's will? And so I offer this to you as a way to think about this. God's disposition toward all humans is love, patience, kindness, and a desire for all to come to the knowledge of the truth. He doesn't delight in punishing the wicked. He doesn't enjoy doing it.

The Bible's super, super clear on all of that. And that is not what actually happens. The Bible talks about, on the other hand, about some things that God chooses, like a guy named Abraham randomly in the Middle East, or a guy named Noah randomly before the flood, or choosing to work through ancient Israel, or choosing to show up to certain ancient kings, or choosing a woman named Mary.

And these are his choices. that seem at times to run roughshod over his disposition. That's because God has a will, and his will sometimes supersedes what we can understand about his disposition, because he's doing more things all of the time than we can possibly see.

So I offer that to you as one way I think about this chapter, and then help to resolve some of the emotional tension about it. So let's round this out. He says at the very end that righteousness ultimately is not by your family lineage, but by faith. What shall we say then?

Verse 30, the Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it. That is a righteousness that is by faith, but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching the law. Why?

Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works, they have stumbled over the stumbling stone as it is written. Behold, I am laying a stop in Zion, a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense. and whomever believes in him will not be put to shame. He's summarizing his argument here about Israel and the Gentiles thus far. Some Gentiles attained righteousness, while some Jews have not, because righteousness is not based on biology, and it's not automatic.

It's based on faith, faith in Christ rather than works of the law. So, in verse 30, Paul begins by asking, what should we say? He notes here that Gentiles who were not pursuing righteousness seemed to have attained it, while Israel did not.

attain it because they were pursuing a different form. He's shown that Israel, despite their pursuit of the law at various points, never achieved the purpose of the law, which was righteousness. This means that they were not able to demonstrate covenant faithfulness to God through their actions as the law required.

Remember what Paul has already said about the law. If you sign up for law righteousness, then you break it once and you've broken it. And the law has no way to get it unbroken. The law can only have those uses of pointing out our sin, showing us morally the way we should be, and demonstrating to us our need for a Savior. But it cannot itself save.

So this loops in, this hyperlinks back to the things that Paul was saying about the law earlier. So why did Israel fail to attain it in verse 32? Because they pursued it through works of the law instead of through faith and faithfulness. They stumbled over the stumbling stone, which means they could not accept that human righteousness comes from the faithfulness of the faithful human, the faithful Christ, the one better than Adam, the truer Moses, as Paul talks about in the book of Romans, the true son of Abraham. So in this passage, Paul uses an adaptation of Isaiah 28, 16 and 8, 14 to support his point.

He applies a verse that originally referred to God to Jesus. And by doing this, he suggests that Christ has a kind of duality, that he is a cornerstone for some in the foundation of the people of God and a stumbling stone for others, particularly those in Israel who have not yet attained faith in Christ. So what have we said in this very, very, very thick and interesting chapter?

Well, we've started a whole new section where Paul is thinking about ancient Israel and how his love for Israel and how God's love for Israel relates to the church. We've thought a little bit about God's sovereignty and particularly his sovereignty in choosing one nation over another and how that works and how he could possibly be faithful to all of these promises that he has made if so many Jews are not actually coming to Messiah. And we thought about what it means that Christ is in fact the end or the goal or the ultimate orientation of the law, namely that Christ himself is the one who can fulfill it.

and that the law itself demonstrates greatly our own need for Christ. And that's a little bit of what Romans 9 is about.

Transcript for:Understanding God's Sovereignty in Romans 9

Transcript for:
Understanding God's Sovereignty in Romans 9