God Alone is Totally Sovereign Over All

Transcript

GRM 814
10/20/2002
God Alone Is Totally Sovereign over All
Romans 9:1-24
Gil Rugh

I want to direct your attention tonight to the book of Romans chapter 9. Certain issues are foundational to our understanding of the scripture and seeing it in a proper light. Now, I think that the doctrine of the sovereignty of God is one of those. If you are in error regarding the sovereignty of God I believe the rest of your theology will be distorted to one degree or another. It is an area of great debate and conflict among evangelicals today. There are always articles and books coming out on one side or the other of the issue of God’s sovereignty, of what we would identify generally as Calvinism vs. Armenianism. One book recently came out attacking Calvinism, promoting basically the doctrines of Armenianism. And another well-know evangelical writer says, “this may well be the most important book written in the 21st century.” I don’t know where you cross the line from hyperbole to just a lie, but from my understanding it is one of the most poorly done books, most poorly representing scripture, some of the most poor exegesis that I have seen. The whole book ties together around an ad hominem argument of attacking the character of Calvin and therefore since I have shown that Calvin functioned poorly in certain areas, therefore any doctrines associated with him are wrong. In fact, I’m going to do a review of the book with you on Sunday evening, but I haven’t just been able to figure out how to do it without turning it into a series of a review of the book. And since I can’t find any pages I agree with in it, you end up working page by page.

All that to say, I’m going to walk through Romans chapter 9, and I’m not going to get into the book except to read one excerpt when we get into chapter 9 to show the kind of inconsistencies that I would see there. Romans 9 to 11 is showing how Israel fits into the marvelous plan of God’s salvation. The first eight chapters have unfolded a clear, orderly discussion and development of the doctrine of salvation, presentation of the gospel. Beginning with our sinful condition, our depravity, followed by the righteousness of God provided for us in Jesus Christ. Followed by the doctrine of sanctification, how those who have believed in Christ have not only been credited with the righteousness of Christ but have now been set free and made new to live in the power of the Spirit, manifesting the character of God in their lives. In all of this God is totally sovereign and He is working His perfect purposes.

And His people, Israel, the nation He has chosen for Himself, fits into that plan as well. And Paul begins chapter 9 of Romans talking about Israel, the great burden he has for his people, the Jews. Verse 2, “I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh.” I mean, Paul’s burden for them is great. And we can understand something of that for the depths of those we love. What parent wouldn’t say, I would die for my children. Paul is saying the eternal destiny of Israel, I would give up eternal life if it would mean that my people Israel could be saved. Just showing the depth of his love, compassion, and passion for their salvation.

These are the chosen ones. Verse 4, they “are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises, whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh.” All these things belong to Israel, even the Messiah Himself, the Christ, is a Jew, the Savior. How does this fit into the plan of salvation? Does it mean God has failed? He called Israel to belong to Himself, gave them covenants and promises. But it hasn’t worked out. But verse 6, “But it is not as though the word of God has failed.” So puts it into perspective. The tragedy is all the blessings of God to the nation Israel, and yet as Paul writes this letter to the Romans, Israel is lost. Doesn’t mean that every single Jew is lost and unsaved, because Paul was a Jew. But the nation as a whole, the Jews as a people, had rejected their Messiah, had turned their back on the covenants and promises of God. And now had come under the judgment of God, and were experiencing that judgment in their separation from Him.

What Paul is going to do is go on now and show how even the sovereignty of God is seen in His dealing with Israel and in the carrying out of His salvation. And this will carry us ultimately to chapter 11 where there will come a time when all Israel will be saved. So that by the sovereignty of God His purposes for His people will ultimately be realized. And what he is going to be stressing through all of this is God is sovereign in the entire process. You must understand that it never was God’s intention that every Jew would experience that salvation. So even times of barrenness, spiritually, there is a remnant that has believed and been faithful, and God’s purposes are being carried out and carried on even in that believing remnant.

In chapter 11, the first part of the chapter, we’ll just pick up verse 5, “In the same way there has come also to be at the present time a remnant according to,” election, the election of grace, translated “God’s gracious choice.” Literally according to the election of grace. So even as Paul wrote the Romans every Jew hadn’t been rejected. There was a remnant even in Israel that God was faithfully dealing with. Ultimately there would come a time when it would come to fruition in the entire nation. Going to show then that God’s purposes are accomplished. Not every descendant of Abraham was included in the promises of God.

It is not as though the word of God has failed, and that statement governs what follows. He is demonstrating how the word of God has not failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel. Not every descendant of Jacob, who was also called Israel, is part of the covenant promises of God. There is a special Israel within Israel. You have to be careful so you don’t get confused here. There is the elect nation Israel, and then there are people within the elect nation who are elect of God for salvation. So the nation as a nation belongs to God as His chosen nation, but not every person in the nation belongs to God in a saving way. There is an elect group within the elect nation. And that elect group within the nation are those elect to God’s salvation.

Back up to chapter 2. Paul dealt with this earlier. Verse 28, “For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, neither is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.” That is not saying the Gentiles have become a spiritual Israel. That concept is totally foreign, totally contrary to the New Testament. Israel is Israel is Israel. The Jew is a Jew is a Jew. What he is saying is not every physical Jew has a covenant relationship with God. A physical circumcision couldn’t bring a person into a spiritual relationship with God. The circumcision of the heart brought that believing Jew into a spiritual relationship with God, and thus into the line of the covenant promises to the Jews. So that’s what Paul is saying.

Now, when we’re over in chapter 9 he’s elaborating on that truth, if you will. [Verse 6], “they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; neither are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendants, but: ‘Through Isaac your descendants will be named.’ ” Not all Abraham’s physical descendants are part of the covenant promises given to Abraham. The promise was “through Isaac your descendants will be named,” a quote from Genesis 21:12. Abraham had other children. We think immediately of Ishmael. But remember Abraham married again after the death of his wife, Sarah; he married Keturah. And according to Genesis chapter 25 he had a number of sons and daughters. So to be a physical descendant of Abraham does not mean you are in the line of the covenant promises given to Abraham, you had to be a physical descendant of Abraham through Isaac.

That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise who are regarded as descendants. In other words, it is the word of God that is sovereign here. God determined that Abraham’s descendants through Isaac would have the covenant promises He gave. That was a sovereign decision of God. I have chosen Abraham, I will multiply his descendants and bless them in the covenant relationship I have with Abraham, but I’m just talking about the descendants of Abraham through Isaac.

Verse 9, “For this is the word of promise: ‘At this time I will come, and Sarah shall have a son.’ ” That’s Genesis 18:10. Ishmael was just as much a son of Abraham as Isaac, but he was not the child that God promised. And the point here is physical descendants are not guaranteed the relationship. You have to be according to the promise God has given. And the sovereignty of God -- he’s building here. It is obvious at the beginning of this process. It’s going to become more dominant, more clear, as he develops this. He has started out, who decided that it would be Abraham? God did. Who decided the promise would come through from Abraham through Isaac and no other child of Abraham? God did. So God is sovereign in the process going on. Now some might say, well, that doesn’t prove the case because we have Abraham and Sarah and none of the other children were the children of Sarah. So your argument is weak, because it had to be children of Abraham and Sarah that we’re dealing with. Of course, Ishmael was the son of an Egyptian woman, Hagar, so that naturally is maybe a little different case.

Look at verse 10, let’s narrow this down, “And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father, Isaac.” All right, so it was not only the promise for Abraham through Isaac, now we have the promise further defined that Isaac’s wife would bear children and she would have twins. Now this is as much alike as you can get. There is one father, Isaac, one mother, Rebekah. There is one act of conception or impregnation, two children come from that. We would come down same father, same mother. And the older, even, here is the one that would be in the line of promise normally, because the elder child was the one who was the heir of the promises in the normal flow. But God is going to do something here to demonstrate His sovereignty in the process again. So “not only this, there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac.” You’ll note, he’s stressing this. We had the one woman who’s going to bear two children by the one man and they’re going to be twins.

“For though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, in order that God’s purpose according to His choice,” or according to election, “might stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, “The older will serve the younger.’ ” God sovereignly made a choice, even from among these children that were as much alike as you could get. Same father, same mother, conceived at the same time, if you will, born at the same time. Even here God intervenes, if you will, makes a sovereign determination that the line of promise will come through the younger of the two twins.

Now you’ll note, verse 11 is important, “The twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad.” The point of that means their works did not enter into the decision. This is a sovereign decision of God. In order “that God’s purpose according to His choice might stand, not of works but because of Him who calls.” Seems to me that’s pretty clear. Before either one is born, before either one has done anything good or bad. In other words their works did not come into the decision. God made a sovereign decision according to His choice. He said, “The older will serve the younger.” Some people believe election is based on foreknowledge. This is one of those verses that creates a problem for that, among others. But if it were just God looking ahead foreknowing which of these twins would be the good one and which would be the bad one, He would be making His decision on the basis of what? Their works. He simply knew their works ahead of time, and on the basis of foreknowing that Esau would be the bad one, would despise his birthright, and Jacob would be the good one, God chose Jacob. But then it wouldn’t be on the basis of God’s choice, it would be on the basis of what He saw they would do.

In fact, that’s what the writer of this book actually says. Listen to his comment on this very verse in Romans 9:11, “Calvinists emphasize the statement, ‘For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calleth.’ However, this statement is simply further proof that election is determined by foreknowledge. No one merits God’s blessing, which is always grace, but that grace is given to those whom He foreknows will receive it.” I think we’ve got a little bit of a circle going on here. “No one merits God’s blessing, which is all of grace.” Good so far. “But that grace is given to those whom He foreknows will receive it. Before these men were born God knew that Jacob would hear His voice and turn to Him, but that Esau would despise His birthright and reject God’s grace, and that His descendants would be the enemies of Israel.” Does that not sound like then He made the decision on the basis of what they did? Which is just the opposite of what we’re being told in verse 11. It wasn’t on the basis of what they did, not according to works but solely on the basis of God’s sovereign choice, “of Him who calls.” And yet we read a passage here that those who would say this is demonstrating God’s sovereignty, this verse is simply reflecting foreknowledge, God giving His grace to those He foreknows will receive it, which is something they’re going to do. God knew that Esau would despise his birthright, reject God’s grace. And his descendants would be the enemies of Israel. Is that not talking about their works, what Esau and his descendants would do? That’s why I’m having a hard time going through the book. I say, now I’m missing something here, this makes such sense to the author of the book and it makes no sense to me. It’s the exact opposite of what the verse says. Their works were not in view at all when God made His decision here.

What they would do, how they would act is not in view. What was the basis of the choice? God. According to His choice. You’ll note, verse 6, “it’s not as though the word of God has failed,” verse 11 in the middle of the verse, “in order that God’s purpose according to [His choice],” election. “might stand” -- explaining that the word of God has not failed, God’s purposes are abiding or standing.

[Verse 12], “It was said to her, ‘The older will serve the younger.’ ” Let me say something. Some, like the author of this book and the part I read, sounds like he’s talking about individuals, but then he goes on and says we’re really not talking about individuals, we’re talking about nations here. And there’s no issue of individual salvation at all in view in Romans 9, it’s the choice of nations. And I don’t think there’s any problem that there are nations in view here, Edom and Israel would be in view with Esau and Jacob. But you can’t get away. Individuals are clearly in view in the passage. We have Esau and Jacob. Verse 13, “Jacob I have loved, Esau I have hated.” Verse 15 he’ll talk about “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,” I will harden whom I harden. He’s going to talk about Pharaoh and His action toward Pharaoh. In verse 18, “He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.” So we’re not just talking about nations here. It starts out with the choice of a man Abraham, a man Isaac, a man Jacob, later the appointment of a man Pharaoh in God’s sovereignty to be hardened. So this idea there’s no individual salvation in view here, it’s just national issues, ignores the context completely as far as I can tell.

Let’s go on, look how he develops here. “It was said to her, ‘The older will serve the younger,’ ” in verse 12. That’s a quote from Genesis 25:23. Twins will be the head of two nations, but the younger is going to be the dominant and he will be the child of prominence. God chose the younger over the older, which was a reversal of the normal process. Usually the elder son was the heir. That was normal in the Jacob-Esau situation, but Esau sold his birthright to Jacob, which was a working out of God’s sovereign plan, determined before either had been born. Before either had done anything God’s decision was made. [Verse 13], “Just as it is written, ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.’ ” It’s from Malachi chapter 1 verse 2. Again in the context of Malachi 1 the nations of Israel and Edom are in view; however, the difference in these two nations centered in the choice of God, of one over the other. You cannot escape that fact. God sovereignly determined that Jacob would be the man, and in him the blessings would come and so on. In the context of Malachi 1 that word ‘hated’ is not even ‘just love less,’ because the descendants of Esau are under the wrath of God, the destructive wrath of God

Now something in the context here. It’s going to become unclear as we move toward the end of the section we’re going to be looking at. We have to remember that we are dealing with fallen, sinful human beings here. God is not dealing with innocent, neutral people. We’ve jumped into Romans chapter 9, but if we had started in Romans chapter 1 verse 18 and worked through chapter 3 verse 20, it would have been firmly established there is no such thing as an innocent or neutral person. There are only fallen, depraved sinners, and all are found guilty. So what we have is God exercising His choice in dealing with fallen, sinful human beings. And choosing to bestow special grace on certain fallen, sinful human beings, and not bestowing that same saving grace on other fallen, sinful human beings. And that is God’s prerogative, and that’s how he’s going to move on in the development here.

Look how he continues on with verse 14, “What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!” He asks the question, is there injustice with God? He answers it with a definitive ‘no.’ Impossible. “May it never be!” Such a thought is inconceivable. And then he’ll go on to answer it with two portions of scripture, one in verse 15 and one in verse 17. The first reaction to talking about God choosing one over the other, to say that He loves one and hates the other, that doesn’t sound like it’s fair to me. Just as if fair is the issue. This person says that that is totally contrary, God wouldn’t be a God of love if He did that. If He didn’t save some people He could have saved, He’s no longer a God of infinite love.

Terrible attack on the character of God. God is not obligated to save sinners. This idea that somehow God is unjust if He doesn’t save a sinner. Where does that come from? Step back again, an example I always take you to, Hebrews chapter 2, fallen angels. I take it God could have made provision for fallen angels had He chosen, but He did not. Therefore He’s not a God of infinite love? He chose not to give any opportunity for fallen angels, angels who sinned, to ever repent and be redeemed. He’s not obligated to show mercy, mercy by definition is undeserved.

So look at the next verse, [verse 15], “For He says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.’ ” It’s a quote from Exodus chapter 33 verse 19. Remember Moses wanted to see the glory of God. The point is, God is not obligated to any. Now you see if we’re talking about those who need mercy and those who need compassion, we’re talking about sinful beings. And you cannot say God is obligated to show mercy, because if He is obligated to show mercy it’s not mercy. It’s something at least partially deserved. It’s like grace, if you can deserve grace even a little bit, it’s no longer grace. As he talks about in chapter 11, otherwise grace would no longer be grace. If you could deserve mercy, mercy would no longer be mercy.

So we’re talking about sinful beings, all they deserve is justice. God is free to dispense His mercy and His compassion at His will. He is not free to just dispense justice at His will. His character as the just God requires Him to mete out justice to sinful beings. But He is free to show mercy and compassion. And who decides who the recipients of this mercy and compassion are? God. “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” God is sovereign, God’s in charge, God determines. Again, we’re dealing with sinful beings. We get all caught up in thinking, oh, this is not fair. As though He is dealing with neutral people, people who weren’t sinful. But there aren’t any such people, that’s already been established in Romans. There are no people like that to deal with.

So the only issue is, God’s going to deal with the human race as he dealt with the angelic race. There will be justice, but there will be no mercy. Those who sin will be dealt with justly. Well, with the human race He decided that some from among fallen, sinful humanity will be the recipients of His saving mercy, His compassion. How did He decide that? If He’s going to show it to one person, He has to show it to all. Why? I mean we always use the analogy of a debt, and every analogy breaks down, but if there are 10 people here who each owe $1 million and they’re on their way to prison and you have $10 million and you decide to pay 3 people’s debt, we would say, oh, that’s not fair. If you don’t pay everybody’s debt you shouldn’t pay anybody’s debt. Why? None of them deserve it, do they? They are all guilty. That you would be merciful and pay anyone’s debt, redeem anyone is an act of mercy and compassion. And those whom you did not redeem could not say it wasn’t fair because they are getting what they deserve. And it’s even more clear without the issues that such an analogy raises.

Let’s move on here. God is free to dispense His mercy and His compassion as He wills. [Verse 16], “So that it does not depend on the man who wills or on the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.” I don’t know how it could be any clearer. And it seems to me that it’s clear that individuals are in view here. “It does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.” No doubt national issues are also encompassed here, but could it be any more clear we are dealing with individuals? We are dealing with fallen, sinful beings, and people such as the writer of this book who have problems with the sovereignty of God and election also have problems with the depravity of man. And they believe that the doctrine of total depravity is also an unbiblical doctrine, as they also believe that the doctrine of irresistible grace is an unbiblical doctrine, and the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints is an unbiblical doctrine. But it seems to me clear it doesn’t depend on the man who wills, on the man who runs. What does it depend on? “God who has mercy.” You’re dealing with fallen, sinful human beings. This is our gospel, isn’t it? There’s nothing we can do to save ourselves or earn any salvation or do anything to redeem ourselves. Doesn’t depend on the will of man. He’s a sinner by birth and by choice. What does it depend upon? The God who has mercy, that’s the issue.

“For the scripture says to Pharaoh.” So here’s the second scripture to support the answer to the question, “There is no injustice with God, is there,” back in verse 14. The first was the quote in verse 15, now in verse 17, “the scripture says to Pharaoh.” We deal with another individual here. “For this very purpose I raised you up. To demonstrate My power in you, that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” God has mercy on whom He wants to have mercy, He hardens whom He wants to harden. So the first part of the answer regarding the justice of God dealt with His mercy and compassion. He has mercy on whom He wants to have mercy. The second part of answering that question is, He hardens those He wants to harden. So there is no injustice with God, is there, in His sovereign election? No, can’t be. God has mercy on those that He wants to have mercy, He hardens those He wants to harden. God does as He pleases, always acting consistently with His character. He’s not obligated to soften and save sinful beings. He can as long as He does it consistently with His nature as a just God, but He can harden sinners as well as soften sinners. So Pharaoh is the example.

Why did God raise Pharaoh up? Well, the quote is from Exodus chapter 9 verse 16, that followed the sixth plague, boils upon the people and the animals. And God raised up Pharaoh to do what? To demonstrate His glory. That my power, my name, might be proclaimed through the whole earth. Pharaoh, this particular man was Pharaoh, ruler of Egypt at this time by the sovereign decree of God. Why had God placed him on the throne of Egypt? Because God was going to harden his heart and use him to display His glory throughout the earth. The Psalmist would write of these events 500 years later, about the plagues in Egypt and the display of God, it was a display of His glory in the world. My power, My name in verse 17 are key, you ought to underline or highlight those. To demonstrate My power, that My name might be proclaimed. To demonstrate God’s glory so His character is revealed in the mercy shown to sinners whom He saves. His glory is displayed in the sinners He hardens.

God is sovereign, He softens whom He will, He hardens. Verse 18 summarizes it, “So then He has mercy on whom He desires, He hardens whom He desires.” Now we have problems with this, sort of grates on us because we like to think, well, wait a minute, you know I don’t like to be dealt with this way, I want to have a say. I like to think of a God, we’re working together. That’s why openness theology is so appealing to so many people today. They like it that way. This is God and I working together, and we’re bringing it about. Then I read Romans 9 and God says, it’s not you and I working it out. There’s one sovereign person here and He’s totally, completely sovereign, and before we’re done we find out we’re just a lump of clay, that we have no say in the matter, no rights, if you will. He hardens whom He desires. He is sovereign in this area, important to see this point, in hardening as well as softening. I am aware, and I have the verses down here, (we don’t have time to go through them), it is said repeatedly that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart back in the book of Exodus. Nine times I believe, it says God hardened Pharaoh’s heart. It’s also said that Pharaoh hardened his own heart three times. But the point drawn here is God hardens Pharaoh’s heart. Doesn’t mean that God was the cause of Pharaoh’s sin, rather He gives them over to the sin they want. This was dealt with, look back in Romans chapter 1.

We jump into Romans 9, but we’ve done the first part of Romans numerous times. We don’t want to forget what the foundation is that has already been established in the depravity of man and the work of God. Fallen men suppress the truth in unrighteousness. God is dealing with sinful people, remember, who are His enemies, who suppress the truth. Then verse 24 you read, “Therefore God gave them over… to impurity.” Verse 26, “God gave them over to degrading passions.” Verse 28, “God gave them over to a depraved mind.” Now God is not the cause of sin in those areas. God is simply turning them over to the sin that they desire. Fallen beings have all rejected God, have all chosen sin. So the hardening process of God is simply withholding His softening grace. Doesn’t mean He’s making them sin. When God exposed Pharaoh to His truth and with that exposure to truth did not bring that special act of mercy in softening grace, if you will, Pharaoh was hardened. Because sinful man always rejects the truth. It’s always an act of God’s grace that any sinful human being bows before the truth. So that’s the hardening work of God. He’s not causing them to sin, He is not along with the truth bringing the softening grace that is an act of mercy. So without His mercy accompanying His truth, the truth hardens sinners. They don’t want to have anything to do with it. They are antagonized by it, in fact they hate it, it angers them, as it did Pharaoh.

So there’s no injustice with God here. We’re dealing with sinful beings. He’s not obligated to show mercy, He is free to be merciful when He’ll be merciful and to harden when He would harden. Again, harden does not mean ‘cause to sin.’ This author keeps saying Calvinists believe God causes sin. Well, this Calvinist doesn’t believe that. The Bible is clear, God never does that. The hardening is simply withholding the softening grace, mercy, and He’s not obligated to show mercy, He’s not obligated to show saving grace. Otherwise grace wouldn’t any longer be grace, it would be something deserved.

Back in Romans chapter 9. We have an analogy, as we wrap up this section, of the potter and the clay. The natural question, if God shows mercy to whom He wants to show mercy and He hardens whom He wants to harden, “You will say to me then, ‘Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?’ ” I mean, isn’t that the conclusion? Everything is settled, God is sovereign, His will will be done. Why does He find fault with anybody? That’s a good question. You know what it is? It’s a question we have no right to ask. Well, isn’t that what He says? Here’s the question, verse 19, “You will say to me then, ‘Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?’ On the contrary,” let me ask you a question, “who are you, O man, who answers back to God?” Who are you to answer back to God? You are answerable to God, God is not answerable to us. We are accountable to God, God is not accountable to us. I may not understand all the details of this, but I submit to the truth of it.

“The thing molded will not say,” to Me, “the molder, ‘Why did you make me like this?’ … Does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?” What we are in this is a lump of clay, and He’s the potter. Let me read you what one unbelieving writer wrote, this is William Barclay, concerning this analogy of us being the clay. “It is a bad analogy. One great New Testament commentator has said, this is one of the very few passages we wish Paul had not written. There is a difference between a human being and a lump of clay. A human being is a person, a lump of clay is a thing. Maybe you can do what you like with a thing, but you cannot do what you like with a person.” Doesn’t that get awful close to blasphemy? God can do what He wants with things, He can’t do what He wants with people. “Clay does not desire to answer back, does not desire to question, cannot think and feel, cannot be bewildered and tortured. If someone has inexplicably suffered some tremendous sorrow, it will not help much to tell them he has no right to complain because God can do what He likes. That is the mark of a tyrant, not of a loving Father. It is the basic fact of the gospel that God does not treat men as a potter treats a lump of clay. He treats them as a loving father treats his child.” He later says concerning Paul’s argument here, the argument is not good. That is a way of saying man always is looking for a way to have input here.

But you know the problem is this analogy of the potter and the clay is not just used this one time by Paul. It’s used in Isaiah chapter 29 verses 15-16, Isaiah 45:9, Isaiah 64:8, Jeremiah 18:1-6. All of a sudden we have to throw that all out, too. They’re all bad analogies. Now we don’t mind recognizing some sovereignty for God, but let’s face it, it has to be a shared sovereignty. You cross the line when it’s so sovereign He’s the potter and I’m a lump of clay. That kind of sovereignty I don’t want to have anything to do with. And that’s where we are. We don’t mind God being God as long as we have a say in the process. Now, you know, He can be God, but I’m contributing. Which is what? I’m elevating myself up there. I mean, anybody has a problem with seeing God as the sovereign potter and himself as a lump of clay has a problem of understanding the truth of God is God and we are not. We rebel against that, and that’s why again the openness theology blossoms. Why? People think, I like this, God and I are creating the future, God and I are working it out. That’s the way it ought to be. Of course, He’s God, He’s sovereign, but you know it really takes me, too. Not the way it is.

Come back to Romans 9 and look at this. First thing is we have to, as we follow this discussion, be careful that we keep ourselves in the proper place, that we realize that we cannot challenge God. We might tell God we don’t understand, we might say to God this goes beyond what I can comprehend, but I cannot call God to account. I cannot put Him on the carpet and require Him to give me answers. He is free as God to simply tell me the way it is, and that’s the way it is. Now, we think nothing of that. Now I realize some parents have a problem with this, but you have a two-year-old, you just tell them as a parent this is the way it is. Some parents think they have to wait until their two-year-old has fully expressed himself, then they work it out. But really, most of us understand, there comes a time and ‘this is the way it is.’ God is sovereign. So that’s the first point. Verse 20, before he gives an explanation, let’s understand, don’t step out of line, don’t think you can call God to account. That was verse 20.

“The thing molded will not say to the molder, ‘why did you make me like this,’ will it? Or does not the potter have the right over the clay, to make from the same lump,” and you have that underlined from our former studies, or highlighted, “the same lump.” We’re talking about the lump is sinful humanity. Now if you keep this in mind it helps this passage to be understandable. We’re not saying we got neutral clay here, and so He’s making one vessel to be sinful, so God is the cause of the sinfulness, the hardness, of Pharaoh’s heart. Then He’s taking this neutral… This lump of clay is sinful humanity. Now from sinful humanity God can do what He wants acting consistent with His character. So if He wants to make one vessel for honorable use, He’s free to do that. If He wants to make a vessel for dishonorable use, He’s free to do that. “What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known. He’s willing to do that, He could do that, break forth in wrath and destroy every sinful human being. He “endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction,” made from that lump of sinful clay. He destroyed. He was patient.

[Verse 23], “He did so that He might make known the riches of His glory upon the vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not only from among Jews, but also from among Gentiles.” So he’s gone beyond the issue of just nations here. We’re understanding how the sovereignty of God works in the whole process of salvation, applying it to Israel. Particularly in chapters 9 to 11, but clearly here, we’ve gone beyond Israel. This is how it works according to verse 24, not for Jews only but for Gentiles also. This is how God works in dealing with sinful humanity. That’s why some are saved and some are lost. It’s already established in the first three chapters that all sinful human beings are deserving of judgment, wrath and condemnation. And that’s a fit penalty for sin. But God has chosen to draw from sinful humanity some to be the recipients of His saving grace. Again, I don’t believe in the double predestination in that sense, because God has not created the neutral beings and then caused them to be sinful. We’re dealing with the way God is dealing with sinful human beings. But it has been settled from before the foundation of the earth.

Turn over to the book of Revelation chapter 17. We talked about this in the previous study, that God’s action in election took place before the foundation of the world, particularly from Ephesians chapter 1. There are certain verses that confound me for their absence in this book, two of them are found in Revelation. Revelation chapter 17 verse 8, “The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and go to destruction. And those who dwell on the earth will wonder,” now note this, “whose name has not been written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world.” So you see what happens when God chose from among sinful humanity, some to be the recipients of His saving mercy, their names were written in the Book of Life. There are names that have not been there from the foundation of the world, and in that sense as I’ve mentioned before, whatever your view of election and how the names got there, the fact is some names are in the book and some are not. Some names have not been there from the foundation of the world. It’s not, as we mention in the song, there’s a new name written down in glory and it’s mine. There is a name revealed to have been written down in glory and it’s mine. But that’s made known when I believe the gospel. But it says here there are names that have not been in the book from the foundation of the world. There is not room for an idea here that the names are all written in and then as people die as unbelievers their name is erased. Because you’ll note their name has not been written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world.

Back up to chapter 13, I think we have it accurately here in verse 8. It says the same thing as chapter 17, but we started with chapter 17 because this verse has been done differently. Verse 8 of chapter 13, “All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the Book of Life of the Lamb who has been slain.” So this sovereign work of God took place before the foundation of the world, and that explains how that process of salvation unfolded in the first 8 chapters. It’s accomplished in a life. Why do some fallen sinners repent of their sin and believe the gospel? That’s a testimony to the mercy and compassion of God. And then nothing about my being a better person or more responsive person. And no matter what you say, if it’s man’s and we’re all on equal ground, and I believed the gospel and you didn’t, obviously what I did was better than what you did and in that sense my action is to be commended. But it was really to God’s glory. Can I boast that I believed? It’s the sovereign work of God that’s brought me to that point.

Are there matters here that we don’t understand, that go beyond our comprehension? There are. Did that keep Paul from saying the burden and passion of his heart is for the salvation of Israel and everywhere he went he beseeched men and women to believe the gospel? We beg you in Christ’s stead, he wrote to the Corinthians in II Corinthians 5, be reconciled to God. In all of that, we know that only God could soften a hardened heart. By His grace He has chosen to save some sinners. Why are you here tonight? Because you’re a better person than someone else? No. You’re here as a testimony of God’s grace. We saw that in Ephesians 1. We’re testimonies of God’s grace, we’re evidence of His mercy. There’s no other explanation. God could have done the same thing with us He did with fallen angels, just sentence us all to hell. There is no redemption, you sinned, you’re done. But He didn’t. Why? I don’t know. Because it’s in the mind of God alone. He sovereignly chose to do it that way.

Why did He ever create the world? He didn’t need it. As little as I can understand I still believe that He has existed forever, so He has existed through eternity without the world from the point in time He created it. Why? I don’t know. He did it, He counseled with Himself and did it. Why did He choose you and not someone else? I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, I will harden whom I harden. Lord, I don’t know that I understand that. I can say that. I cannot say, Lord, I don’t think you can do that, Lord, that’s not fair you do that. Wait a minute. God is not accountable to me, I’m not the standard God must meet.

I bow before Him and say, God there are things here that go beyond my finite mind’s ability to grasp. Lord, I submit to this truth, I want to understand it the best I can, and Lord, some of it I’ll continue to grow and learn through all eternity. But one thing I do, I recognize He’s the potter, I’m the clay. Then I’m thankful for His grace shown to me and will be for all eternity, as you will be, too. And I take it the amazement will be there in eternity. We’ll look around in glory and the beauty of the New Jerusalem and we’ll say why me? I can’t think of a good reason. Why am I here? Why am I saved? I say, Lord, why did You open my eyes to understand this? Why am I blessed to call You Father? Why did You open my eyes to see and believe? I don’t know. Why am I going to be in glory? Mercy, grace. There is no other explanation. Why are they going to be in hell? Because of sinful rebellion, because rejection of the truth, because of their own sinful actions, decisions. There I would be apart from the grace of God. So we praise God for His mercy and compassion. He is sovereign, we bow before that sovereignty. But that is our security and comfort.

Let’s pray together. Thank you, Lord, for Your grace. Thank you, that You are a God of mercy and compassion, and Lord, we are humbled to realize that we have been the recipients of that mercy, of that compassion. And we recognize there is no good human explanation, only the explanation of Your word, that in Your sovereign purposes You graciously chose to bestow Your mercy upon us. While we may not understand much of it, we may not comprehend the why it should be us, yet, Lord, that simply causes us to rejoice the more, to thank You for such mercy and grace that has redeemed us, unworthy and undeserving. But that’s a testimony to Your mercy and grace, and we thank You. In Christ’s name. Amen.