Favoritism in High Places?
(Romans 9:14-21)
1.Penicillin was invented by Alexander Fleming in 1928.
What Happened: Halfway through an experiment with bacteria, Alexander Fleming up and went on vacation. Slob that he was, he left a dirty petri dish in the lab sink.
Big Discovery: When he got back, he found bacteria had grown all over the plate, except in an area where mold had formed.
As a Result: That discovery led to two things: 1) penicillin and 2) Mrs. Fleming hiring a maid. {source rd.com]
2. Sometimes thing happen by accident, but, even in this case, effort was underway.
3. One current fad is “manifesting,” the idea that by saying, writing, or brainwashing ourselves, we can make our dreams come true. We can get that dream job or whatever, apart from discipline, work, etc. Like all similar and sometimes occult like practices, the lure is control.
4. Sin is about control. Satan wanted to be in control. Adam and Eve wanted control.
5. Walking with God means surrendering control to Him. And it means accepting what He declares is so, whether we like it or not. And one thing that can be difficult to accept is God’s sovereign choices. They are difficult not because who or what is chosen, but because of who or what is not.
Main Idea: God is at least fair with everyone, but has the prerogative to be especially gracious with those He has chosen.
I. Because God Has CHOSEN Only Some Does Not Make Him Unrighteous (Rom 9:14-18): The Midrash on Pharaoh.
? There are four ways to interpret this text.
? 1. Some think the giving of mercy or withholding it is in the context of nations or people groups, not individuals regarding salvation. God chooses Israel as a nation, but rejects Esau (Edom) as a nation.
? 2. This is about individuals and about salvation.
? 3. This is about both individuals and nations (my view); I suggest evidence of both.
? 4. Always room for something we haven’t thought of or do not see.
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.
A. We are not ENTITLED to God’s mercy – it is a gift He controls. (14-16)
1. God does not need to deal with us evenly (Matthew 20:1-16, passim)
“For the kingdom of heaven is like a master of a house who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. After agreeing with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard. And going out about the third hour he saw others standing idle in the marketplace, and to them he said, ‘You go into the vineyard too, and whatever is right I will give you.’So they went. Going out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour, he did the same. And about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing…He said to them, ‘You go into the vineyard too.’And when evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman,‘Call the laborers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last, up to the first.’And when those hired about the eleventh hour came, each of them received a denarius. Now when those hired first came, they thought they would receive more, but each of them also received a denarius. And on receiving it they grumbled at the master of the house, saying,‘These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.’But he replied to one of them,‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what belongs to you and go. I choose to give to this last worker as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?’” (Matt. 20:1-15).
2. Because we are rebels and members of Adam’s sinful race by birth, He has no obligations to us.
The Palestinians who were within the borders of Israel and left when the Arabs attacked decades ago were not allowed back in. Those who remained were give full rights as Israeli citizens. We are like the Arabs who sided with the enemy and deserted.
God allows some of us deserters back into the country – His Kingdom -- with full rights, while others receive the due consequence of their choices. It isn’t equal, but on one is shortchanged. We have a problem with that.
3. These truths are humbling.
B. God is FREE to determine to whom He will be merciful.
1. There are no union standards, no protocols.
2. Explain the difference between a Monarchy and a constitutional Monarchy.
3. Remember, mercy is not giving us what we deserve.
4. If God were obligated to show us mercy, or to show equal mercy to everybody, mercy would no longer be mercy.
5. The president of the United States or the Governor of a State might choose to pardon a certain criminal, but he or she would not pardon them all. Is that fair?
C. The Midrash about PHARAOH (17-18) [From Exodus 9:16]
David Guzik comments, “We should not think that God persuaded an unwilling, kind-hearted Pharaoh to be hard towards God and His people. In hardening the heart of Pharaoh, God simply allowed his heart to pursue its natural inclination.”
Pharaoh hardened his heart at first, but when we would have been convinced against his will, God hardened his heart so that he would not submit to Moses demands. This was to accomplish God’s purposes. Paul’s point: the idea that God softens or hardens hearts has O.T. precedent.
II. How Can God Fault People If He Controls ALL (19-21)?
A. The fact that the question arises means Paul taught BOTH man’s responsibility and God’s sovereignty.
1. I believe some things He foreordains, as, for example the death of Christ.
2. Other things He allows to happen and foresees, but He can interfere with the course of events.
3. Some people believe everything is foreordained (Dallas prof who leaned back on chair).
4. The question can only arise if God were truly sovereign and man truly responsible.
B. Paul’s answer: Who do you think you are to CRITICIZE God?
1. This means there is not accurate answer that will satisfy human logic.
2. So if you think you understand how God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility work, you are mistaken. Otherwise, Paul would simply answer the question.
3. This also means that this is part of God’s nature, and to challenge it is like challenging His omniscience, omnipresence, or omnipotence. It is Who God is.
C. He compares us to a lump of clay criticizing the POTTER.
D. This is a midrash on JEREMIAH 18.
Jeremiah 18:1-10, The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord: “Arise, and go down to the potter's house, and there I will let you hear my words.” So I went down to the potter's house, and there he was working at his wheel. And the vessel he was making of clay was spoiled in the potter's hand, and he reworked it into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to do.
Then the word of the Lord came to me: “O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter has done? declares the Lord. Behold, like the clay in the potter's hand, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel. If at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom, that I will pluck up and break down and destroy it, and if that nation, concerning which I have spoken, turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I intended to do to it. And if at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom that I will build and plant it, and if it does evil in my sight, not listening to my voice, then I will relent of the good that I had intended to do to it.
E. The application: The Potter’s PROJECTS are not equal when it comes to usefulness.
1. For the believer, the implications to this are many.
2. One is that God made you to be a certain way, yet sin has tainted His intent.
3. We have to be more comfortable rather than trying to be like others, Jesus excepted!
4. We may not realize the special niche he has for us to fill.
5. The same, I might add, could be true with churches.
Note for consideration!
The relationship of responsibility to what is pre-determined is a hot topic in the world of secular psychology today. We see the SAME kinds of issues believers struggle with. I find it interesting that people in the secular world do not escape the paradox of freewill and predestination. Everyone agrees that we seem to have freewill. The question is, do we? And to what extent?
Saul McLeod from Simplypsychology.org writes:
The free will vs determinism debate revolves around the extent to which our behavior is the result of forces over which we have no control or whether people are able to decide for themselves whether to act or behave in a certain way…
Free will is the idea that we are able to have some choice in how we act and assumes that we are free to choose our behavior, in other words we are self determined.
Hard determinism sees free will as an illusion and believes that every event and action has a cause.
Behaviorists are strong believers in hard determinism. Their most forthright and articulate spokesman has been B. F. Skinner. Concepts like “free will” and “motivation” are dismissed as illusions that disguise the real causes of human behavior.
In Skinner’s scheme of things the person who commits a crime has no real choice. (S)he is propelled in this direction by environmental circumstances and a personal history, which makes breaking the law natural and inevitable.
For the law-abiding, an accumulation of reinforcers has the opposite effect. Having been rewarded for following rules in the past the individual does so in the future. There is no moral evaluation or even mental calculation involved. All behavior is under stimulus control.
Soft Determinism
Soft determinism represents a middle ground, people do have a choice, but that choice is constrained by external or internal factors.
For example, being poor doesn’t make you steal, but it may make you more likely to take that route through desperation.
Soft determinism suggests that some behaviors are more constrained than others and that there is an element of free will in all behavior.
[Note: I have done some rearranging of the sequence of this article to make it easier to follow]
___________
Pastor Ed’s belief: We do make many choices, but our choices are limited by our sinful nature (resembling the “soft determinist”). God has to work in us (coax us) so that we make the choice to repent and accept Jesus Christ. If He does, we will. If He does not, we will not. It is not that cannot choose Christ apart from His working, but rather that we would choose not to. What are your beliefs in this matter? Many top-notch Christians and academics disagree on this matter, much like the psychologists above disagree.
