Opening Statement of the Inherent Limitations
- In beginning to interpret this chapter, it’s important to start with the obvious truth: the questions that this passage raises are vexing issues. Election, predestination, and foreknowledge are the perplexing problems that haunt Romans 9.
- A quick reading of this chapter reveals staggering challenges for an Arminian interpreter. I would argue, though, that the Calvinist interpretation solves one problem by creating several bigger ones, “solving” these theological issues while creating concerns that speak to questions about God’s justice as well as humanity’s ability to genuinely love God.
- Further, there are limitations brought into play here by the reality that we are dealing at one level with issues of the infinite. God’s purpose, God’s mind, and God’s plan all create problems that human minds cannot fully comprehend.
- Nonetheless, we will do the best we can to interpret the chapter faithfully.
The Context of the Passage
- Paul has just spent eight chapters laying out the plan of salvation. It is the greatest presentation of that plan found anywhere – Paul’s theological tour de force. While the gospels give us the story of salvation, the first half of Romans represents the greatest explanation of salvation ever written.
- Having eloquently laid out the plan of salvation, Paul now transitions into a new subject, one that naturally flows from what he’s just written.
- The subject: what about Israel?
- The nature of God’s plan of salvation as revealed in Jesus opens the door to faith for all who will repent and believe in Jesus, whether they are Jews or Gentiles. This is, of course, the good news.
- But the good news also raises a concern. If this is the salvation revealed in Jesus, what do we do with Israel? Their story dominated the Old Testament. Are they now just discarded? What about the promises God made to them?
- Paul is going to spend three chapters unpacking the larger picture of Israel in light of this new plan of salvation. Our purpose here is only to unpack the first of those three chapters: Romans 9.
- Romans 9 is one of the most challenging chapters in the New Testament. There are numerous theological challenges to understanding it. To try to make its points clear, I’m simply going to go through it verse by verse and try to unpack the argument Paul is making.
Introduction: The Burden on Paul for His Countrymen (vv. 1-5)
- As I just noted, the focus of these three chapters is Israel’s place in light of the plan of salvation revealed in Christ.
- In vv. 1-3 Paul shares the deep burden that he has for his fellow Israelites, despite the fact that his conversion to Christianity would have led them to despise him as a traitor. This is a tactical starting point for Paul: what he says is not going to be colored by hatred or indifference toward Israelites. No, he actually has a deep concern for them.
- In vv. 4-5 he celebrates many of the glories that the Old Testament had chronicled for the Jewish nation.
- So he starts out with this: he is a Jew, with a deep burden for the spiritual health of his fellow Jews.
Chapter 9 Summary
- What follows for the remainder of the chapter is Paul’s argument about how Israel is connected to the plan of salvation. He does it in four main sections:
1. Proving that God’s promises haven’t failed (vv. 6-13).
2. Proving that God’s actions here aren’t unjust (vv. 14-18).
3. Proving that God’s actions here don’t overwhelm human free will (vv. 19-29).
4. Proving that God’s actions lead to salvation by faith (vv. 30-33).
- Paul essentially picks his starting point and then answers what he presumes to be the most likely objection to his argument as he progresses.
Part One: Proving that God’s promises haven’t failed (vv. 6-13)
- Paul starts at a crucial, logical place: does the plan of salvation revealed in Jesus negate all the Old Testament plans and promises? He says at the beginning of v. 6: “It is not as though God’s word had failed.” He’s saying, “Everything I’ve just written in chapters 1 through 8 do not mean that God’s been lying up this point or that He’s thrown out He promised before!”
- How can Paul say that if God is now inviting Gentiles into the Kingdom of God, not just Jews? It’s important to identify who the real children of Abraham are: “For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel” (v. 6b). In other words, not everyone who claims to be a Jew is truly a child of God. Being a true child of God is about more than racial or national identity. Paul further emphasizes that point in v. 7a: “Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children.”
- No, rather it is “children of the promise” (v. 8) who are truly the children of Abraham and thus the children of God. (See vv. 7b-9 as a whole.) It’s always been those who believed God by faith who were truly His children, which Paul emphasizes by mentioning the seminal “faith moment” of Abraham believing that God would bless him with a son through Sarah (v. 9).
- The point is that it’s always been about salvation by faith in God. This new plan of salvation as revealed through Christ is not a wild forsaking of the promises originally made, but instead is the faithful progression of that.
- Now we come to the first troubling part of Paul’s writing in this chapter – troubling, at least, to our modern sensibilities. In vv. 10-13, Paul uses an example about Rebekah’s twins and how God chose their roles “before [they] were born or had done anything good or bad” (v. 11). Toward what end did God do this? “[I]n order that [His] purposes in election might stand” (v. 11). Sounds pretty harsh.
- First, let’s note the context in which Paul is saying this. The chapter is about Israel and their complaints about the plan of salvation revealed in Christ. In that light, this becomes a surprisingly subversive argument. Israel has long (throughout the Old Testament) seen themselves as the “chosen ones.” They are God’s chosen people, right? Did they do anything to deserve this? No. Were they a particularly impressive nation in power or intelligence? No. Were they, more to the point, a people of unusual religious acumen? No. In fact, God chose them before they were even a nation. He chose Abraham to go to a new land and initiated what would become the chosen nation of Israel. Despite their prevalent religious pride, an accurate assessment of their origin would lead to the undeniable conclusion: they are where they are because God sovereignly and generously chose them, not because of any inherent superiority.
- Here Paul turns that on its head. Israel has for generations relished that they are the chosen people – chosen by God’s election. They essentially would say, “We are chosen. God said it. Too bad if you don’t like it!” Now, Paul is saying that God has chosen to let the Gentiles into the Kingdom. Where has Paul gone in his argument? To paraphrase: “This is happening because God chose to open the door to Gentiles. It was His sovereign choice in how He elected for things to happen.” In other words, “They are chosen. God said it. Too bad if you don’t like it!”
- Again, God hasn’t negated any of His promises. After all, for Him to lie would be against His character and therefore impossible for Him. But in how He has chosen to fulfill His promises, a large piece of the puzzle is this simple but profound truth: this is the way God chose to have things happen. It was His sovereign election that opened the door to the Gentiles.
- Those choices almost always raise the rancor of the one who doesn’t get the prime spot. But for God to achieve His larger purposes, sometimes He has to make a choice. In the example in vv. 11-13, God chose Jacob. In the larger point Paul is making, God is choosing the Gentiles.
- There are supporting arguments to be made about the unfaithfulness of Israel as well as their rejection of Jesus as their Messiah, but the point Paul is focused on here is that this is God’s sovereign choice.
Part Two: Proving that God’s actions here aren’t unjust (vv. 14-18)
- Paul’s argument raises an obvious question: is it just that God makes choices like that? Paul is adamant: “What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all!” (v. 14). So Paul is going to make a case here that God choosing as previously discussed is not unfair.
- Paul starts to build his argument here by quoting Exodus 33 where God is talking to Moses: “I will have mercy on who I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion” (v. 15).
- It is easy to misread this statement and make it say something it doesn’t say. I think many read this verse as “I will save who I will save and I will damn who I will damn.” But notice that both statements within v. 15 (the mercy statement and the compassion statement) are words about the good God desires to do, not the punishment He might bring. So is the point God making here “I want to damn some people, so get out of My way” or “I know it’s undeserved but I want to show My kindness to many people anyway.” The point of the verse is definitively the latter.
- This is made explicit in the next verse: “It does not, therefore, depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy” (v. 16).
- Now Paul uses a most interesting example. It’s telling with regard to all the “election vs. free will” struggles that we have with this chapter. In v. 17 Pharaoh is cited: “For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: ‘I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in your and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.’” Why is Pharaoh such an intriguing example? Because while it would be easy to push Paul’s words here strongly in the direction of “God chose it and a person’s actions have nothing to do with it,” the Pharaoh example is a beautiful balance of free will and election.
- As you look back at the actual story of Pharaoh, there is a balance of Pharaoh hardening his own heart (Exodus 8:15, 19, 32) and God hardening Pharaoh’s heart (Exodus 9:12; 10:1, 20, 27). So the example that Paul uses here is not a “I really wanted to work for God but He (sovereignly) threw me under the bus,” but instead the classic Old Testament example of free will and God’s design working in harmony.
- This leads to Paul’s conclusion in v. 18: “Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.” That last phrase is a tough one, no doubt. But in light of this larger discussion, what emerges here is not an arbitrary Sovereign who is randomly saving and destroying (like David in 2 Samuel 8), but rather a God eager to show mercy where He can, but who allows the consequences of people’s sins to have their effects. This reminds me of the statements in Romans 1 about God “giving them over” to the consequences of their sin (Romans 1:24, 26, 28). This makes it possible to square what is said here with passages like 1 Timothy 2:4 where it says that God wants everyone to be saved.
- God wants people to be saved. God does not block people who would be open to salvation from the opportunity. But sin has consequences and God sometimes allows those consequences to bear their fruit. In all this God is working to accomplish His will, including those times where He sovereignly makes choices.
Part Three: Proving that God’s actions here don’t overwhelm human free will (vv. 19-29)
- Again Paul anticipates the objections his readers are likely to level. This time the objection is, “Does this mean that God just does whatever He wants and, if so, then why are we being blamed if a mortal can’t resist the divine will?” (v. 19). Hey, if I’m just a helpless pawn then I shouldn’t be punished for what I couldn’t control, right?
- Verse 20 is initially difficult: “But who are you, O man, to talk back to God?” At first it sounds like Paul is about to say, “Sit down and shut up! You don’t deserve any reasons! This is the way God decided to do it and you’re just going to have to accept it even if it doesn’t make any sense.” It might make sense to take it that way except that Paul continues immediately thereafter reasoning with his readers. So I don’t think he’s going to for “shut your mouth!”
- What is he going for here, then? I think the point he’s making is more along the line of this: “I know this is difficult to understand, but don’t think that means that you’re smarter than God! God has His reasons for the choices He makes and they are good reasons!” Sure, we may wonder why God has made us in the way He has (v. 20b), but it’s not arbitrary and random divine will. Certainly He has made some specific choices, but He has good reasons for them.
- Verse 21 trips a lot of people up, but it’s because they misread it. The verse states, “Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?” What many people read this verse as saying is: “Doesn’t God have the right be make people who are going to heaven and make people who are going to hell, even if they have absolutely no choice in their destiny?” It’s read as a hard “double predestination” verse that presumes that God has chosen who He is going to save and who is going to damn. I can understand why people might be confused by it, but, again, it’s essential that we read what the verse actually says as well as look at the context in which it is said.
- First, what is actually said. Does verse 21 give us a positive example and a negative example (which would align with saved/damned)? The answer is no! It speaks of a potter making one piece for “noble purposes” and another for “common use.” Note (and this is crucial!) that both are worthwhile and useful, only in varied ways. Yes, they are different, but both are positive.
- That raises the second question – what’s the context? The context will help us to accurately interpret the point that Paul is trying to get to here. Fortunately for us, the following verses explicitly reveal the context and therefore the point Paul is trying to make.
- Verses 22-24 say, “What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objections of his wrath – prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, who he prepared in advance for glory – even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?” There’s a lot here, but let me start with the big piece: the context is the question of Gentiles being saved along with the Jews. As stated earlier, the whole first eight chapters of Romans are an explanation of this new plan of salvation. Now, here in Romans 9-11, Paul is trying to unpack the implications of that plan for the Jewish nation.
- The larger point of v. 22 is not God arbitrarily saving and damning people. It’s that God has shown great mercy and patience when it should have been all wrath. Verse 23 furthers the point by saying that God did this because He wanted to show His glory through showing His mercy, bringing as many people as possible into His glory. Verse 24 caps it by stating that this was not an arbitrary “you’re a Gentile so too bad for you,” but that His great mercy and patience extended to a Kingdom of God that would include as many as possible – even including Gentiles! The verses emphasize how merciful God is being and how many He is bringing in the Kingdom, not random cut lines.
- Paul then quotes four Old Testament passages to bolster his case. Do these tie well into the point I’ve been making or do they send the chapter in a different direction? They point in the direction I’ve been sharing.
- We can take them in pairs.
- The first two have to do with more people receiving adoption as children of God than previously anticipated.
- Verse 25 states in part, “I will call them ‘my people’ who are not my people.” This, again, speaks to the welcoming of Gentiles into the Kingdom. It also, obviously, speaks of more people receiving the open door to the Kingdom than originally thought.
- Verse 26 says, “It will happen that in the very place where it was said to them, ‘You are not my people,’ they will be called ‘sons of the living God.’” The exact same points apply as I just shared about v. 25.
- Having dealt with the Gentile side of the equation, the third and fourth Old Testament quotes deal with the Jewish side.
- Verse 27 states in part, “Though the number of the Israelites be like the sand by the sea, only the remnant will be saved.” This emphasizes the idea that the new plan of salvation shared in Romans 1-8 has vastly expanded the opportunity for salvation through faith and, in doing so, also emphasizes the idea that even for Jews there is a need for genuine faith in the Messiah. They can’t rely on their national heritage. This point is important because it further clarifies how the Old Testament relates to this new plan of salvation Paul is explaining in Romans 1-8.
- Verse 28 points out that even having a remnant among Israel is a sign of God’s mercy: “Unless the Lord Almighty had left us descendants, we would have become like Sodom, we should have been like Gomorrah.” God isn’t ripping Israel off in this new plan of salvation, reducing His promises. No, Israel didn’t was not faithful to the old covenant in the Old Testament – justice from God would have wiped the nation out. Thankfully God was merciful.
- In sum for this section, Paul starts with question that implies that God is smug tyrant, randomly dictating who is in and who is out. Paul’s argument makes it clear that, in fact, God is overflowing in mercy in opening salvation up to vast swaths of humanity.
Part Four: Proving that God’s actions lead to salvation by faith (vv. 30-33)
- Paul finishes the chapter with a brief summary statement. He begins with a question: “What then shall we say?” (v. 30). In other words, what are we to make of all this?
- The summary is that “the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it” (vv. 30b-31). The Old Testament system of Law didn’t work. It did not produce a righteous people. Now, in Jesus, a new way has opened up – a ways that is by faith and that is generously given to the Gentiles despite the fact that they don’t deserve it. Again, rather than arguing for a stingy Deity dictating massive damnation, instead we see an overwhelmingly generous and merciful God opening up the opportunity for salvation up to all of Gentile humanity, despite their complete lack of merit to deserve that.
- Why did Israel end up in this situation? Because Israel pursued salvation “not by faith but as if it were by works” (v. 32a). Even going back to Abraham, we know that it was supposed to be about faith in God (see Romans 4 for an extensive discussion of this). Israel, though, wandered off into legalism. The end result of that winding road was that, shockingly, those who knew the Law the best completely misread the appearance of the Messiah, seeing Him as their mortal enemy. Or, to put it more succinctly, “they stumbled over the ‘stumbling stone’” (v. 32b). This is, of course, a reference to Jesus. Jesus was, writ large, all that God had wanted Israel to look like. The Pharisees (and other religious leaders) were so far from that ideal that they saw Him as a threat rather than a fulfillment. They stumbled over Jesus’ life.
Summary
- When you look at the passage as a whole, there are certainly many challenging aspects. However, when you remember the context and actually dig down into what Paul specifically says, many of the “double predestination” issues are not as substantial as originally thought.
- The passage, rather, is a vigorous defense the vast mercy of God to open the door of salvation to so many.
