Title: Objection! Doesn’t this make God unrighteous?
To fully understand what, exactly, we are “objecting” to, we need to put this verse in context and read what comes before it. My hope this morning is that seeing how Paul handles this question will allow us to deal the the objection from Ephesians “This isn’t fair!”
(read Romans 9:6-18, PRAY)
Paul’s offers a “pregnant pause” after he dropped the possibility upon us that God hated Esau. Today, I’d like to dig in to Paul’s explanation of how this could be so.
It is essential that we have a consistent hermeneutic, that is, that we must read the Bible consistently from beginning to end with the same mind set. God does not change, he is unwavering. Therefore, it is far too simplistic and dangerous to subscribe certain character traits to Yahweh in the O.T. that we say somehow do not apply to Christ teachings in the New Testament. For as Christ said, “The father and I are one.
Is there unrighteousness with God?
(V14-18) (read)
Paul dives right in with a rebuttal of the idea that God hating one while loving another somehow makes God unrighteous. He uses two distinct O.T. quotations, both involving Moses.
The first comes from Exodus 4:21 and illustrates that it is God’s choice and God’s choice alone that can save an individual from His wrath.
You see, we must re-think our understanding of the default position of man before God. Far too many believers are so lazy in their theology that they think as the world thinks: That is, if you do enough good stuff, or if the good stuff of your life outweighs the bad stuff you will go to heaven.
Such theology is found nowhere in the Bible. The default position of man is “Guilty.” And it has been this way since the fall. It is not determined by anything we’ve done or could do. Remember, before Esau was born, before he had done anything righteous or evil, God had decided he was not a child of the promise. We are born into sin. We all are guilty before God. Not a single one of us deserves anything but Hell.
Yet God chooses to show mercy upon those he wills.
Paul further emphasizes this in verse 16 when he says, “So then it is not of him who wills (we can decide to suddenly be holy) nor of him who runs (we can’t do the work to earn righteousness) but of God who shows mercy. (In other words, left alone, were doomed…that God would even choose some is the real mystery.)
The second quotation comes from Exodus 9:16 and it is an even more difficult teaching. What Paul emphasizes here is the God’s purpose in Pharaoh was to raise him up, to be used by God, for God’s purposes. And the Purpose is negative. God is not raising Pharaoh up as he did Moses. He’d not equipping him with great powers to deliver His people. He’s raising Pharaoh up to be destroyed, to have a heart hart, to defy Moses, so that God would be glorified.
This kind of blasts a hole in the secular understanding of free will, doesn’t it. Did Pharaoh choose to be God’s vessel? No. Did God need Pharaoh’s permission to use him as his instrument? No. Then why on earth do so many believers still practice a theology that teaches that we choose to be holy, that we choose salvation, that we somehow are both dead to sin, and yet miraculously able to choose to align ourselves with Jesus? Why? Because most people who claim to be Christian don’t study the Bible. Or when they come across a troubling verse they either ignore it, or search for someone to explain it to them in a way that isn’t threatening to their already well developed ideas of who God is.
I am deeply troubled by how many unbiblical people claim to be born again believers. Let not our church ever be like that. Let us be hated by the world if necessary. Let us be despised by other churches. Let us be outcast by other Baptist who’d have you to believe that “Predestination is of the Devil” Don’t laugh, I’ve met pastors in our own association who would claim this.
I love what J.I. Packard, the great Anglican Theologian says about this passage:
Paul recognizes that his previous statement cannot be allowed to pass without explanation. Could the distinguishing sovereign purpose of God throw into jeopardy His attribute of perfect righteousness? The idea is clearly unthinkable. Paul explains why by citing two biblical texts from which he concludes that God is righteous in showing mercy to some while he hardens the hearts of others. When God shows mercy it is not a person receiving a reward earned by one’s own efforts, but God sovereign free grace extended to persons who are morally incapable of any acceptable effort. God owes mercy to none, so there is no injustice when mercy is not shown. Mercy is a divine prerogative; it rests on God’s good pleasure. When God hardens Pharaoh’s heart He is not creating fresh evil in it, but gives Pharaoh over to his already evil desires as an act of judgement, resulting eventually in God’s display of “power” in the destruction of Pharaoh’s army.
The most devastating thing that God can do to us is nothing. To simply leave us to our own evil desire. If God’s mercy is not shown, we go about our way, in sin, and wait for our foot to slip, in due time. Where are you standing?