Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XXVI)

At this point, we have several early church scholar’s views on what Paul is saying here about patience preceding mercy and glory. For instance, Chrysostom feels that the Jews mistakenly believed that if anyone accused them of being saved only by the goodness and mercy of God it would somehow bring shame to them. After all, look how hard the Jews worked to fulfill every word of the law – including the marks over and the dots under the Hebrew letters, and all the sacrifices, rites, rituals, ceremonies, and feasts they attend in order to prove their worth. Paul rejected such thinking. If saving the Gentiles, despite their lack of virtues and values is glorious, how much more glory would this bring to the Jews through whom God was already being glorified?¹

Augustine offers the view that by giving to the Gentiles what they did not deserve, God obviously wanted His grace to be seen as gratuitous and, therefore, genuine. By the same token, by not distributing His grace randomly to everyone, He showed which one He had called. Because of that, God is seen as being good and kind as a result of the benefits He gave to some by withholding punishment until He can be good to others. This confirms that it is proper when giving what a person deserves, and being fair when something that is not merited is still given without injury being suffered by anyone.² What Augustine seems to be saying is that while God had every right to judge the Gentiles as heathens and punishing them for their ungodliness, instead He offers grace to those who responded to His call, and keeps the door open for those who are still to be called.

When early church French Bishop of Arles looked at this he concluded that at our first birth, we were vessels deserving of God’s wrath but when we were born-again we became vessels of His mercy. Our first birth destined us for certain death but our second birth restored us to life. In fact, before we were saved and baptized our bodies were sanctuaries of the devil but after being saved and baptized we became Temples of the Holy Spirit. Knowing this should make the meaning of our salvation more valuable now that we are indeed living and are true temples of God. As Stephen said at the time of his martyrdom: “God does not dwell in temples made by human hands,”³ but in the soul made according to His own image and fashioned by His own hand.⁴

Reformer Martin Luther takes Paul’s words here as saying that God has patience with those vessels of dishonor so that He might, thereby, have time to make them His elect and fit for glory. Luther believes that God endures their foolishness by allowing them to be proud of themselves; to rule and reign during times when His elect are dealt with harshly, such as occurred under Pharaoh. Many such infidels thought that even though they knew they were doing wrong, since they became sinners because of Adam and not themselves, that God would not punish them. In doing so, they arrogantly presumed that they had somehow reestablished themselves with God by their own free will. But now they learn that grace alone has the power to raise them up above anything they gain through their freewill.⁵ From Luther’s perspective, Paul still has the potter/clay relationship in mind. God does not throw away someone He chose just because He finds imperfections in their character, but rather, puts them back on the wheel of transformation so He can reshape them. This may be hard at first, yet, when He finishes His work, then, because of grace they will be fit to be used to bring glory, honor, and praise to their heavenly Potter. On the other hand, those who are destined to experience His indignation are also subject to His power, and that also brings Him glory.

John Calvin focuses on this last factor of how vessels are made for God’s glory. He writes that the word “glory,” which is mentioned here twice, should be understood as referring to God’s mercy as a metonymy⁶ of cause and effect. Meaning, the main reason God receives glory is because of His acts of kindness. That’s why Paul told the Ephesians that after having being adopted to the praise of the glory of His grace, that they were then sealed by the promised Holy Spirit.⁷ He wished to show that the elect are instruments or vessels through whom God exercises His mercy. In doing so, God will be given honor, praise, and glory for being who He is. Paul then emphasizes the fact that God expressly prepares His elect for glory. And having already talked about those vessels prepared for destruction, there is little doubt that the preparation of both vessels are in line with the secret counsel of God.⁸

It is certainly hard for anyone to think that God would purposely allow children to be brought into this world who from the beginning is inexcusably and irreversibly bound for destruction and torment. If He sent His Son to die on the cross for all those who will believe, how can any be held back because they have been divinely predetermined to suffer such fate? We can see more clearly what Calvin is advocating here by looking at what happened on Mt. Calvary between Jesus and the two thieves being crucified beside Him. At first, both joined the crowd in their ridicule of the sign above Him labeling Him as a pretender to the throne. But before long, one of them saw the light and came to believe and was accepted by Christ, while the other died in the darkness of sin. Was this a surprise to God? Certainly, not. If He knows us before we are born, He can certainly see ahead to when we die and know that based on our makeup and mindset whether we will turn to Him for salvation or turn away from Him and go into punishment.

But Wesleyan theologian Adam Clarke sees what Paul says here as applying to the Jews. He notes that the Jews were destined for discipline long before, but the best time for that to happen was after He prepared the believing Gentiles for redemption to glory. But first, the Messiah‘s scepter was to be raised above and beyond Zion.⁹ The preachers of the Gospel would be supplied by the Jewish nation, and from Jerusalem, their sound would go out all over the land. That’s why the Jewish state was to be preserved for such a time as that despite its religious corruption. That time would come when the Messiah would appear among them as both God and man. Not only that but even during that time the Apostles would establish churches deep into Gentile territory. However, the Jews fought against it and blasphemed those who preached the Gospel, thereby, rejecting the One who died to redeem them. They countered the offer of divine grace with increased stubbornness.¹⁰ As a result, fewer and fewer Jews were impacted by the enrichment of grace while the number of Gentiles increased rapidly. This was how the grace of God was demonstrated, as He bestowed the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy.¹¹

Robert Haldane makes a very salient point here that should be appreciated by all those who have been redeemed, called, and chosen. He writes that it is implied in this verse that the awful ruin of the wicked will make it possible for the riches of Divine mercy in saving the elect to be displayed more spectacularly. Since both the righteous and the unrighteous were originally scheduled for God’s judgment and punishment, the deliverance of the elect from that situation to be made heirs of glory wonderfully illustrates how limitless is His mercy. The salvation of the elect is nothing less than mercy, pure mercy. It is also wonderful mercy when we consider what condemnation and doom they deserved and would have experienced, had they not been delivered by God through Jesus Christ.¹²

This fits so well with the story that is told of John Bradford (1510-1555) the English evangelical preacher who was standing alongside the road as a group of prisoners were being led from the dungeon to their place of execution, a custom that was instated for two reasons: First, to expose the prisoners to public shame where their victims and self-righteous citizens could shout curses upon them; and second, for everyone to see what shame would come to any of those watching if they too committed such villainous deeds. As they passed by, it is reported that John Bradford bowed his head and said: “There but for the grace of God go I.”¹³

Albert Barnes focuses on the fact that none of this is by chance or left up to fate. He indicates that we are brought face to face with the reality that God deals with believers and unbelievers in remarkably different ways. Paul makes it clear that God Himself has prepared those He loves for glory. As far as the unbelievers are concerned, they are being primed for destruction. Paul uses the Greek word katartizō which the KJV translates as “fitted.” It means to be tailored as with a suit, or framed as a picture readied for display. Thayer in his Greek Lexicon states that as used here it means “put in order, arrange, adjust.” That sure can create a picture in one’s mind. Paul does not confirm by whom or what agency this is being done. But he does say that God waits with great patience while it is being done.

As far as the righteous are concerned, God prepares His people for glory, commencing with their redemption, and continues with their sanctification on their way to glorification.¹⁴ As far as the renewing of the heart and the sanctifying of the soul is concerned, it is an act of goodness, worthy of a kind and generous God, and not subject to objection by anyone. How could any person complain about a plan designed to make people better? And since the sole designer is God through His electing love, His involvement with this class of people is easily justified. What Christian would complain because God has chosen them, renewed them, and made them pure and holy. Since this is an important part of God’s plan of salvation, it is easily defended against those who raised the question found in verse 19.¹⁵

Karl Barth opens the door a little wider for us to see how vessels of mercy and vessels of wrath are composed. First of all, people must be made aware of the fact that in God’s eyes they are vessels of dishonor. Without such a revelation they are incapable of acknowledging Him, let alone listening to Him. When people are open to receive His revelation they must either accept its truth that there is such a thing as being saved with everlasting life, or its truth that there is such a thing as being lost with everlasting punishment. Barth wants to know if anyone who is now a believer ever came to a different conclusion through revelation? The very fact that they are now children of God, is precisely because they recognized that they were once vessels bound for destruction because no one can try to become righteous on their own without forfeiting their lives and future.¹⁶ That’s when an absolute miracle occurred, their eyes were opened and found that they had passed from death unto life as new creatures in Christ Jesus. This helps us see that God does not play around when it comes to our salvation. He doesn’t give up easily. Even if He has to make us uncomfortable and even miserable to get our attention He will. And by loving Him for loving us, our salvation becomes a reason for rejoicing in spite of what He had to put us through to keep us from dying and being eternally separated from Him.¹⁷

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XXV)

Luther continues defending the sovereignty of God in making these choices of who will and who will not be saved. He points out that God desires to show both what He approves of and what He abhors; what will be blessed and what will be banished. That’s what He did in the case of Pharaoh and the children of Israel. So Luther asks, why would anyone want to stop God from carrying out His will? We could then inquire if they were trying to hide something? Could it be that they didn’t want to face the truth? When are people going to accept the fact that God created us the way we are, the same way a potter makes a vessel out of clay. So if a potter is permitted to form the clay according to his will, how much more is God permitted to do the same.¹ To put it another way, it would be like a student telling the professor what they want him or her to teach so they can easily pass the test.

Fellow reformer John Calvin echoes the same thought by pointing out that Paul did not begin by giving a reason for divine election. In doing so, he would have made the cause obvious and, thereby, justify why one is chosen and another rejected. The reason for this is that the hidden things of God should never be subjected to the critical review of mankind. In addition, God’s mysteries are incomprehensible and beyond human understanding. That’s why Paul emphasizes that we are wasting time trying to figure out spiritual things we couldn’t understand if explained to us. These must be accepted by faith because whatever the cause, God’s predestination is perfectly fair and just.²

In light of God’s infinite wisdom in choosing His method of selection for His eternal purpose, it is hard to use human logic to form an illustration that may make it easier to understand. But for the sake of trying, we could say it would be like asking God why He made a caterpillar crawl on so many legs, that later will not be needed for that purpose, and then have this insect form a simple silk pad on the underside of a branch or twig to use as a hook-covered appendage called a cocoon and attaches it to this pad. It twists around, embedding its body firmly in the silk and then begins to shed its skin. The cocoon hangs upside down until the butterfly is ready to emerge. So the question is: Why didn’t God just go ahead and make it a butterfly, to begin with? We must accept the fact that God knew what He was doing and that was all His decision.

Along the same line, John Bengel notes that God was willing to tolerate Pharaoh’s hardheartedness and hardheadedness so that all could see it’s negative influence and hopefully draw those of the same mind and attitude out from their state of alienation and come to Him in repentance.³ It shows that God is willing to endure the insults of sinful people as they pretend to enjoy their continued good fortune in this life when He has every reason to consign them to death. But He keeps the path of grace and the gate of mercy open should they decide to accept His offer of forgiveness. However, some are like this caterpillar mentioned above, predestined for beauty and glory, but who refuses to go through the process of transformation and regeneration. So they continue to live out their lives crawling along the ground instead of flying through the air. As Bengel sees it, this long-suffering on God’s part always precedes any plan to let loose His wrath. His enduring mercy is never lacking right up until it’s time for Him to display His disfavor. No one can conclude from this that God has acted unfairly or prejudicially⁴.⁵

Robert Haldane gives us his guidance on this subject. He says that in verses 22 and 23 we find the components of the doctrine of predestination contained in a few words. Then the Apostle Paul gives his third and final answer to the objection stated in verse 19, tying God’s reasons for dealing with one person through acceptance and with another person through rejection. He exercises great patience with them. The one He sees as vessels of fury fitted for destruction as a result of their own sinfulness. This causes God to mark them for the day of judgment. So the question is, why would anybody be against God giving the same consideration to the opposite? Those who are vessels of mercy, thereby fitting them to manifest the riches of His glory, or His glorious grace, whom, by His sovereign election from eternity, and the sanctification of His Spirit has prepared them for glory. So if any of his potential critics were wanting an answer as to the process by which some vessels are made to serve God and some are not, Paul has made it clear that the grand object of God, both in the election and the rejection of some is that it all works out in the end to the praise, honor, and glory to His sovereign name. It is no wonder that when the doctrine of predestination is presented, that there are many who find it offensive. They want to chart their own course, so letting God do it for them seems to be very foolish.⁶

Albert Barnes gives us a clue to better understand the use of the word “displeasure” (wrath, in KJV) in this verse. He says this Greek word orgē occurs thirty-six times in the Last Covenant. Beside wrath, it is also translated into English as, “anger, vengeance, and indignation.” Its meaning is derived from the idea of the mind reaching out with excitement for some object. By analogy, it can also reflect someone’s violent passion of rejection – such as retaliation, or justifiable abhorrence. In other words, it ends up describing an earnest desire for revenge, or of inflicting suffering on those who have caused injury.⁷

It can also denote general indignation without seeking revenge. For instance, it says that on one occasion, “He [Jesus] looked around at them with anger.”⁸ In the Scriptures, it denotes punishment for sin; God’s anger or displeasure against transgression.⁹ As used by Paul here in verse 22 it is evidently employed to denote “severe displeasure against sin.” That is because sin is an evil of great magnitude. That’s why it is “right” for God to openly display His fitting displeasure against it. Some people think that God should hide His annoyance. That makes little sense. If He does not show His dissatisfaction how then would we know if we are pleasing Him or not? If God covered up His irritation, then people would accuse Him of being indifferent; that He couldn’t care less. Let God be God and accept Him for who and what He is and does.¹⁰

Henry Alford notes that some commentators have trouble with Paul’s thinking here, especially that He might unmercifully choose some human vessels to become recipients of His wrath without any consideration as to their possible salvation. So Alford says the real argument is this: What if God, in the case of the vessels prepared for destruction, along with His power and wrath also exhibited His willingness to wait until they could be led to repentance before carrying out judgment? Would this be the mystery which we cannot fathom,¹¹ And in His having mercy on the vessels of mercy prepared for glory, He also manifests the riches of His glory at the same time? That would mean that in both cases God showed He is not a Divine Being who uses His power randomly but designed to bestow the riches of His goodness.¹²

Charles Hodge follows a similar pattern of thought. He says that the two objects which Paul specifies here are the manifestation of His wrath in the exhibition of His power in punishing the wicked. Hodge also notes that the word “wrath” (KJV) is used here (as in Romans 1:18), as God’s divine displeasure against sin. It is His calm, holy condemnation of evil, joined with the determination to punish those who commit it. The power of God is conspicuously displayed in the destruction of the wicked, no matter how mighty or numerous they may be. Although the inherent demerits for sin must always be regarded as the primary basis for the infliction of punishment, a reason which would always be enforced, resulting in no beneficial lifting of the misery scheduled for the wicked. God has so ordered that the grief sinners will incur is both a manifestation of His pure character in the punishment of sin, and the promotion of the holiness and happiness He has prepared for His righteous people throughout eternity.¹³

Frédéric Godet makes the point that God’s dealing with vessels of dishonor will also describe His dealing with vessels of honor. In verse 22, the relation between the participle “willing” (KJV); “choosing” (NIV), and the verb “endured” (KJV); “bore with great patience” (NIV), may be explained in two ways. They may be expressed in one way or the other with the conjunctions, when and because. In the first connection the meaning would be: “When He is willingly, instead of striking all at once, as He already purposed doing, He bore with great patience. Then, because He endured would signify that God’s patience had no other end than to let loose His growing wrath. The question is, would such long-suffering be worthwhile? It is obvious from Romans 2:4-5 that if the long-suffering produces this painful result, this is not the intention of Him who patiently waits, but the result of those who irresponsibly abuse His patience to harden themselves all the more.¹⁴

Verse 23:  He waited with patience so that He could make known the riches of His glory to the people He has chosen to receive His mercy. God has already prepared them to share His glory.

Paul told the Ephesians: “Once you were under God’s curse, doomed forever for your sins. You went along with the crowd and were just like all the others, full of sin, obeying Satan, the mighty prince of the power of the air, who is at work right now in the hearts of those who are against the Lord.”¹⁵ But Paul goes on to express his gratitude that God took something so bad and transformed it into a living witness to His grace and mercy. And Paul told the Colossians that he was so grateful to the Father who was willing to allow us who once hid in darkness to now live openly in His Kingdom of light.¹⁶

Then, in writing to the Thessalonians, Paul shared this: “God has not chosen to pour out His anger upon us but to save us through our Lord Jesus Christ; He died for us so that we can live with Him forever, whether we are dead or alive at the time of His return.”¹⁷ In other words, God could have let us die as rebellious sinners to become a memorial to His judgment. But He decided to save us so that we could live as obedient soldiers, an example of His glorious grace. This was also part of Paul’s personal message to Bishop Titus: “At one time, we too were foolish and disobedient, deceived and enslaved by a variety of passions and pleasures. We spent our lives in evil and envy; people hated us, and we hated each other. But when the kindness and love for mankind of God our Deliverer was revealed, He delivered us. It was not on the ground of any righteous deeds we had done, but on the ground of His own mercy.”¹⁸

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XXIV)

Verse 22: It is the same way God has done things. He wanted to show His indignation and to let people see His power. But He patiently endured those He was angry with – people who were destined to be destroyed.

Paul now lifts the cover off the mystery he has been describing of why God did not outright destroy Pharaoh and his minions to set His people free. Much like the way God used Satan to prove that His servant Job was a loyal follower; one who could not be easily discouraged, instead of destroying Satan on his fall from heaven. As mentioned before, this was God’s explanation of why He kept Pharaoh alive.¹ Moses understood that, and in his prayer he said: “Who can grasp the severity of your anger and fury, to the degree that they end up reverencing you the way they should?”² Even Solomon came to understand that everything God makes serves a purpose, even those that are surely destined for destruction.³

But Paul then says that this not only tests our impatience with God but God’s patience with us. We see this expressed so clearly in what God said to Moses: “How much longer is this people going to treat Me with contempt? How much longer will they not trust Me, especially considering all the signs I have performed among them?”⁴ Later, David would certainly wonder why God left Saul in power as king long after the throne was promised to him. But Solomon seems to have figured it out by saying: “Because God does not punish sinners instantly, people feel it is safe to do wrong. But though a man sins a hundred times and still lives, I know very well that those who reverence God will be better off, unlike the wicked, who will not live long, good lives—their days shall pass away as quickly as shadows because they don’t reference God.”⁵ And as Jeremiah witnessed all the terrible things that were happening to the children of Israel, he had this to say: “But in my mind, I keep returning to something, something that gives me hope — that the grace of the LORD is not exhausted, that His compassion never ends. [On the contrary,] they are new every morning! ‘How great your faithfulness, O LORD!’ That’s all I have to say. Therefore I will put my hope in Him.’”⁶

The Apostle Peter picks up this same theme when he talks about how long it took Noah to build the ark before the flood came. For Peter, this was an example of God patiently waiting for those who refused to listen to Noah’s message to come to their senses and be saved from disaster.⁷ This must have given the Apostle Jude some comfort when it was reported to him that the Holy Spirit seemed to have allowed some perverse Gospel to exploit the weakness of several believers because he knew where they were headed.⁸ Theologian John Gill believes that by Paul employing the designation of certain vessels as those destined for punishment, it confirms the character of the Potter by which he illustrated the sovereignty of God. In other words, whether God allows something that brings destruction, or uses other things that bring victory, they all show who is really in charge.

In the Babylonian Talmud, we have an interesting story of the Rabbis discussing what happened in Persia during the time of Esther. During a festival, on the seventh day, King Ahasuerus ordered his top officials to bring Queen Vashti, wearing the royal crown, to dance in front of everyone so they could see what a beautiful woman she was. But Queen Vashti refused and it infuriated the king. So he immediately consulted with his lawyers to see what legal action he could take. One of these top officials was named Memucan, and he was the one who informs the king of what the law said, and advised him to write a decree stating that Queen Vashti would never again be allowed in the presence of the king and that he should give her position to someone else.

Now here’s the interesting part. The Rabbis took note that the name Memucan means, “destined for punishment.” So they concluded, that even though he was of the lowest rank among the top officials, since his name is mentioned last, he spoke first, therefore, he would suffer the same fate as Haman, even though the King listened to him and took the action he recommended.⁹ This is another case where God had the patience to use something meant for destruction for something good.

Paul finds this whole concept best explained by pointing to God’s patience with us as sinners, and all the years, times, and places that we showed how obstinate we were to His grace and mercy, and continued to do the opposite of His will. Paul exclaims: “Now all praise to God for His wonderful kindness to us and His favor that He has poured out upon us because we belong to His dearly loved Son. So overflowing is His kindness toward us that He took away all our sins through the blood of His Son, by whom we are saved; and He has showered down upon us the richness of His grace—for how well He understands us and knows what is best for us at all times.”¹⁰ He points this out again: “But God is so rich in mercy; He loved us so much that even though we were spiritually dead and doomed by our sins, He gave us back our lives again.”¹¹ And personally, Paul was grateful: “Just think! Though I did nothing to deserve it, and though I am the most useless Christian there is, yet I was the one chosen for this special joy of telling the Gentiles the Glad News of the endless treasures available to them in Christ.”¹² Paul indicates that little did he or any of us really know, that when we were at our worst, God had planned all along to use us for His best.

After British theologian Dr. Gerald Bray reviewed the next eleven verses he concluded that God’s calling of the Gentiles, as well as the Jews, was patiently carried out as prophesied in the First Covenant. Anyone reading the words written in 1 Kings 19:10,14, and 18 will conclude that it was never intended that all the Jews would be saved, only that a remnant would be left. The irony in all this is that the Jews were rejected in spite of all their good works while the Gentiles were saved in spite of having no good works at all. It came down to a matter of faith. Those who have faith will be saved while those lacking faith will be rejected. No matter how hard they tried to please God in order to merit salvation, they ended up stumbling over the Rock called Christ. They were so focused on qualifying by way of their own righteousness that they tripped over God’s righteous provision for salvation.¹³

When seeing what Paul said about how God showed His anger in order to demonstrate His power, yet was patient so as not to destroy the very people He was trying to save, Early church scholar Origen says that he is astonished when he examines the Holy Spirit’s purpose in the Scriptures. What perplexed him was when the Spirit stated that the wrath of God, which is foreign to His nature, will be made known to mankind.¹⁴ But at the same time, His goodness and mercy, which are proper to His nature, will be concealed and hidden. So the question is, why should God reveal His wrath to men and conceal His mercy? One answer may be that because God knows that the human race is weak and prone to error through negligence, it is better for them to fear the unrevealed wrath of God that might come at any time, then to relax knowing that God’s mercy and forgiveness are always available.¹⁵ While this conclusion may sound feasible, it doesn’t address the fact that God has no interest in people coming to Him out of fear seeking to get forgiveness just so they won’t have to suffer the consequences. This would be another version of “cheap grace.” However, knowing that there are both punishment and forgiveness available, the individual then must choose which one they feel is worth the decision to turn everything over to God.

However, early church scholar Ambrosiaster also sees unbelievers being prepared for punishment by the same will and patience of God by which those are chosen to be saved. Instead of being surprised, we should all be grateful He waited as long as He has for sinners to repent and seek His forgiveness by His grace and mercy. And since God has tarried such a long time, they have no excuse or alibi. But God is not fooled, He has known all along that they would not believe.¹⁶ For Chrysostom, it is a question of why some people were created as vessels deserving wrath and others as vessels meriting mercy? It is by their own free choice. God shows the same kindness to both. Look at when Israel was in Egypt. God showed His mercy to Pharaoh and the Egyptian people by sending nine plagues and multiple visits by His servants to convince them to let His people go. Pharaoh’s firstborn was not saved from death because of his father’s own stubborn will. Had Pharaoh listened to the voice of God both he and the children of Israel could have rejoiced upon their departure.¹⁷

As we can see, the debate is between whether or not God is fair and balanced, showing mercy and grace to all, both good and bad, until they die, or whether He has predetermined that some will die in their sins no matter how much grace and mercy is dispensed, while others will be chosen to live by God’s own discretion not by their self-will to be saved. In other words, some are made for destruction,¹⁸ some are being prepared for destruction, and when their quota of sins has been filled they will be destroyed.¹⁹ All will be tested so that in the end everyone will reveal what they really made out of themselves.

This last is the thinking of early church Bishop Theodore who says that Paul is making it clear that this present life is one of struggles and not rewards. Paul wants them to know that wicked people and good ones alike will be tested in both good and bad times. In this way, the destiny chosen for them will be openly seen. As the world observes, those who are good will follow the path of virtue and will not forsake it through all the changes of life. Their commitment will give them no reason to boast when times are good, nor complain when things are bad. Sinners, however, will in every circumstance be lovers of evil more than lovers of God.²⁰ Being ignorant of why things are happening the way they are, sinners will celebrate their good fortune as being personally merited, but when bad times come they will curse God and wallow in their grief. In the end, their path will lead them to the destiny they deserve when this life is over.²¹

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XXIII)

One thing we should learn from this is that we are perfectly capable of silencing all objections and objectors in proving that anything God’s decides is in accordance with His sovereign will. No person, after God’s decision has been made, dare hesitate or doubt its validity. The integrity of God’s will is not to be questioned. What people must do is find out what God says, and then take Him at His word. Any cognition and discernment between right and wrong mankind possesses is a gift from God. So we can see why it is the ultimate discourtesy to question the conduct and motive of Him who gave it to them. Haldane says, the inquiry posed by the Apostle Paul about any person skeptical of God’s wisdom or reason, shows that such a thing is the most preposterous insult that can be hurled in the face of God.¹ The good thing is this, Paul is not through yet with his explanation. So to get the whole story we must read on to the end of this chapter.

Albert Barnes outlines his reasons why he thinks Paul strongly admonished the impropriety and immorality of trying to impeach God. He says that such irreverence appears, first of all, because lost mankind is accustomed to accusing God of causing their troubles. And, secondly, no person is qualified to answer Paul’s inquiry in this verse: “Who are you to ask such questions?” What qualifications does a creature with the limited existence and corrupt intelligence of mankind have to sit in judgment of an Infinite Mind? Who gave them the authority, or invested them with the privilege to become a judge over their Maker? And, thirdly, even if a person were somehow qualified or given the privilege to investigate those subjects, what right have they to answer back after God has given them His reply, let alone charge their Creator with being involved in some kind of shameful and disgraceful conduct?

Nowhere has there ever been found a more cutting or humbling reply to the pride of mankind than this: Who are you to talk back to God? And on no subject was it more needed. The experience of every age of enlightenment, and the development of Christian theology has shown that this has been the main topic of objection against the sovereign rule of God.² This is evident in the fact that so many want to live their lives as they see fit with no restrictions from any authority, especially a God they can’t see and don’t believe has the right to determine their destiny.

When it comes to people questioning God over the decisions He makes for their lives and then their response to whether to follow them or not, Henry Alford remarks that a person’s honor or dishonor are not to be considered as signs of moral purity or impurity of the human vessels. Their ultimate glorification or degradation will determine that. For Alford, Paul is asking these questions about our talking back to God and asking Him why He’s doing what He is doing as a way of silencing any objector. That is God’s unquestioned right to do. Therefore, it is not becoming for us humans to murmur or complain. Paul will go on to state his case and reveal the intent of his argument.³ This is good advice for any student of God’s Word. Wait until you get to the end of the argument or the point the writer is trying to establish before you make up your mind as to what it means.

H. A. Ironside also sees such objections to the doctrine of Divine Sovereignty as having been raised from early on in Paul’s letter. But since we noticed that Paul is only discussing how this in light of what we say and do here on earth, such objections have no real value. We must remember that God is working from eternity past to eternity future. He sees what we do not and cannot see. His foreknowledge leaves nothing out of the equation. As Paul sees it, the privileged Jew may fail utterly to appreciate all that God has done for the Jewish people, and by doing so comes under divine condemnation. Meanwhile, the ignorant Gentile, never having tasted of all the blessings of advanced civilization and enlightenment, may, nevertheless, possess such an open mind that the Holy Spirit will lead them directly to Christ. Either way, it is the height of irreverence for any human being to feel that they are qualified to sit in judgment of God. Paul illustrates this so perfectly with a vessel formed on a potter’s wheel to turn and with little respect ask potter, “Why did you make me this way?” It goes without saying that someone who has the intelligence and skill to form vessels out of clay reserves the right to make them into whatever shape or size they want and for such use as they deem fit.⁴

Frédéric Godet has an interesting view of what Paul says here. It is fascinating to read how Paul compares the relationship between God and man to that of a vessel and the potter who made it. But some say this is logically defective. A person with a freewill and responsible for their actions cannot be some unresponsive instrument in the hands of God. In addition, having been given the ability to know the difference between pleasure and pain, joy and sorrow, satisfaction and dissatisfaction, they should not be treated as some mindless, worthless piece of clay.

Furthermore, unless the question asked by the vessel to the potter is: “Why did you make me this way?” it might suggest a different question: “Why didn’t you make me out of good clay instead of bad clay?” If the intent is to discover the answer to yet another unasked question of how such a choice affected a person’s relationship with God then they might ask: “Why didn’t you create me with a predisposed temperament of being good instead of being evil?” But all of this is mere gibberish. The real question is not about the production of the vessel, or the clay used, or its consequential qualities, but solely about its intended use by the Divine Potter.⁵

What seems to disturb people the most is that this seems to leave everything up to God. In my view, this is a part of some people’s interpretation of predestination that takes the illustration too far. Paul’s main point is this: God created Israel as a special vessel to be used to spread the message of His existence, power, and authority. But some of them turned out to be useless in that regard. Others, however, such as the Apostle Paul and the Apostle Peter were very effective. So neither one should confront God and ask Him why it turned out that way. The real important thing for any believer to know is this: What can they do to become part of God’s plan for good, not the devil’s plan for evil.

In other words, the usage of the potter and the clay, as an illustration, was only employed to show the absurdity of a brainless inanimate object speaking to an intelligent animate being, demanding answers as to why it was being formed in such a way. The moral of this parable was to emphasize God’s sovereignty over His creation which He can activate at His own discretion. F. F. Bruce is convinced that God does not need to give us a reason for everything He does. But one thing is for sure, we can be certain that whatever He does is consistent with His character. We can see this clearly in the way He planned and carried out what happened to His Son, Jesus. With a God like this to trust, should anyone have any reason to question His ways?⁶

Jewish scholar David Stern shares his thinking on what happened when Paul refused to budge on his insistence that God, by His sovereign right, has the authority to make out of His creation what He wants. In the same manner, as a potter has the right to make any vessel he or she wants out of the clump of clay on their wheel. The Jews understood that a potter could make a vessel for everyday use in the kitchen, or one for sacred use in the Temple. This is not without purpose. Those fashioned for service in the Temple were to praise God for being chosen for such a ministry. And those that found themselves in even the poorest huts can be told that they were made this way so that, “Everyone who calls on the name of Adonai will be saved.”⁷ This is similar to what Jewish Rabbi Akiva taught, “All is foreseen, and freedom of choice is granted. The world is judged with goodness, but in accordance with the amount of person’s positive deeds.”⁸

Stern says that Paul does not surrender one way or the other to the apparent paradox of predestination versus freedom of choice. Instead, he is proactive, directing us away from standing around and foolishly questioning God’s right to rule and decide. Paul is looking for a practical and peaceful solution. That comes when we come humbly to God through Yeshua the Messiah — this path is open to everyone. In fact, Rabbi Rashi (1040–1105 AD), in his commentary on Exodus, refers to where God said: “Surely you will fear Me, you will accept reproof.”⁹ Rashi goes on to say: “Nevertheless, in the first five plagues, it does not say, ‘And the Lord strengthened Pharaoh’s heart,’ but ‘Pharaoh’s heart remained steadfast.’” Stern concludes that God has no interest in hardening anyone’s heart, but allows a heart to harden.¹⁰ Instead, God wants all to turn from sin to Him¹¹.¹² This leaves the door open for us to consider that when the potter puts the clay on the wheel, the clay that yields to His hands will be made into an honorable vessel for good, the clay that resists will end up as an ordinary vessel used for the least important purpose.

John Bengel describes the potter and the clay, God and mankind, in a precise way. He says that the potter does not make the clay, he only digs it out of the clay pit. In that sense, we must accept that God has greater power over man than the potter over the clay since He also created the clay. However, God’s absolute power to do what He wants with mankind does not imply that everything that’s going to happen has already been decided. In that case, Adam and Eve would have never sinned. But once they did, if God had assigned the whole human race to the power of sin and death, He would have done so justly. However, He did not exercise that right. It was Paul’s way of showing what might have been had God not taken mankind’s freewill into consideration and decided to place right and wrong in front of every descendant of Adam and let them choose.¹³ In other words, sinners cannot possibly see the wonder or get to appreciate the magnificence of God’s grace before they are redeemed, as they can, once they are called and chosen. Then, they can look back on what God did for them and see it more clearly.

I think it is fair to bring up at this point the case with the prophet Jonah. God informed him that he had been fashioned for the specific duty of bringing His message of salvation to the inhabitants of Nineveh. But Jonah didn’t like God’s choice for his ministry. So what did he do, he ran away and tried to escape the responsibility of doing God’s will. And what did God do? Did He abandon Jonah? Did He leave him to drown in the sea without receiving a proper burial? No! God pursued him and sent a big fish to intercept Jonah after he was thrown overboard. The final outcome, however, was that Jonah realized it is better to do God’s will than fight against it. God told him at the end, that if Jonah could be concerned over things he had no part in creating, then God has the right to be concerned over all the things He made?

Failure is Better than Regret

I read an article by painter and writer Sofo Archon on the question, “Where Our Biggest Regrets Come From.” As far as Sofo is concerned, if you don’t want to end up full of regrets, you need to change the way you live. You can start by assessing your life with an honest perspective. One thing you really need to determine is this: “Do I live in such a way that it makes me feel satisfied?” If you cannot answer “Yes,” then provide the answer for yourself of what it would take for you to live in such a way that it will fill your heart with joy and contentment. And whatever that is, you must resolve in your heart and mind to go for it with all your energy.

But once you start proceeding toward that goal, be prepared to encounter and endure a lot of adversities and hardships, and you might make a lot of mistakes along your journey and do somethings over once or twice to get it right. But no matter how painful that is or how many redos you encounter, keep going, being aware that giving up is the only true failure in life, and one that brings the most regret.

Of course, for a Christian, all these same factors come into play when seeking to live for God in such a way that it brings us His peace and joy. Jesus was asked a similar question by a young man who had been very successful in life. But apparently success and financial security were not enough, it didn’t take away the uncertainty of whether or not his destiny was part of the Kingdom of God. Jesus’ answer was plain and simple: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.” Then Jesus added, this will help you to love others as much as you love yourself.¹

This was in harmony with what our Lord had told His audience in His Sermon on the Mount, that we should first of all want to be part of the kingdom of God and become right with Him. When we do this, Jesus said, all the other things we need to be content in our souls will be added to our lives by God as He sees fit. Not in according to our timetable, but in His time.

So that brings up the critical question, “What must I do to seek God’s kingdom to show that I love my God with all my being?” The Apostle Paul gives us at least two things to think of so that we don’t look back on our Christian journey with regret. First he says, remember, you were bought with a price, so use your body, heart, mind, talent, ability – your everything, to bring glory to God.² And then Paul says elsewhere, that whatever we use our body, heart, mind, talent, and ability to do, whether it’s something we say or something we do, do it in the name of the Lord Jesus.³ This will be your way of thanking God for what He’s done for you. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

BELIEVE WHAT YOU FEEL

As a retired professor from several private Bible Colleges and Seminaries, I can relate to this story I want to share with you. Sometimes it’s not the big things we discover that can alter our lives, but the small things. Never let them go until you’ve learned all you can.

One day in class, a student named Morrie told the teacher that he had an exercise for everyone to try. They were to stand, facing away from their classmates, and fall backward, relying on another student to catch them. This wasn’t all that new, and many of the students were uncomfortable with this. However, the teacher finally agreed just to see what secret Morrie was talking about. The student pairs were chosen, and for the one who was selected to fall backward first, it proved harder than they thought. Just as they start to fall backward, they stopped themselves. A lot of the students laughed in embarrassment.

Finally, one student, a thin, quiet, dark-haired girl who almost always wore bulky, white fisherman sweaters, crossed her arms over her chest, closed her eyes, leaned back, and without flinching, fell backward like one of those Lipton tea commercials where the model splashes backward into the swimming pool.

For a moment, it looked like she was going to thump on the floor. But at the last instant, Morrie, who was assigned as her partner grabbed her shoulders and lifted her back up to her feet. “Wow,” several students yelled. Some clapped. Morrie smiled. “You see”, he says to the girl, “you closed your eyes. That was the difference. Sometimes you cannot believe what you see. You have to believe what you feel. And if you are ever going to have other people trust you, they must feel that they can trust you even when they’re in the dark. Even when they’re falling.”¹

When we see how true this is as we learn to trust others, how much truer it is when we learn how to trust God. This was undoubtedly true of Abraham,² and a lesson learned by Joshua,³ and David,⁴ and his son Solomon,⁵ the Apostle Paul,⁶ and many others. I tried to teach this to my four-year-old son by having him jump into my arms from the first step on our stairway at home. At first, he was reluctant, but after he became convinced, it wasn’t long before he was jumping from the second, then the third, and finally the fourth step without hesitation.

If you have never trusted God to catch you when He’s asked you to take a leap of faith, then you have not learned what complete trust is all about. Remember, trust is the lifeblood of faith. Without trust, your faith will be weak or nonexistent. So let’s all start trusting God more and more every day. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XXII)

Early church scholar Pelagius heard some people saying that Paul is still speaking on behalf of those who they have the right to object to what is happening to them. But how can that be, when opposing the will of God is no different than criticizing God for doing His will. Then there are others who say that from here on the Apostle Paul contends that even if someone felt they had a reason to oppose what God is doing, it must not be done as though there were talking back to their Creator. When compared to God, all of us are like a clump of clay in the potter’s hands.¹ Pelagius seems to be making the case that Paul was not on the side of those who question God’s intelligence for doing what He does, such as those who say, “God shouldn’t have let this happen to me! I don’t think He’s being fair!” Paul was trying to point out that by someone saying, “I don’t think that what God is allowing to happen is right,” is like a spoiled brat sassing God out of disrespect.

Yet others offer their opinions. For instance, one writer from the Roman Catholic point of view states that the Apostle Paul lunges out at the person who was contradicting him in the above verses, letting them know that all of this is part of God’s own will and decision making. Just as the potter makes the decision what to do with the clay, so God is the one who decides what to do with us. The potter can make whatever kind of vessel he wants, and the vessel has no say over it. The clay cannot object and say I want to be this or that. But when it comes to human clumps of clay, some argue that since they have a freewill, they are more likely to resist God’s purpose and find fault with His choice for their lives. Still, who would dare question the will of God.²

Then a Bishop in the Greek Orthodox Church, who was known as somewhat of a maverick, wanted to know how any object could turn around and blame its maker for the way things turned out? In his mind, everyone must be content and enjoy whatever God designed them to be.³ And then another Bishop, who was not afraid to speak out wrote that we are not like inanimate objects such as a clay pitcher. If it were so, then for sure we’d be quiet and accept things the way they are. But we have a freewill and a sense of independence, so why should we be quiet? By being able to reason, we can both describe and express to our Maker what we want to be. That’s why, if a believer is not happy with their status, then investigate the cause and seek to know if that is God’s will for their life.⁴

But Paul insists that the One who makes the pottery can form it anyway He wants, and the vase cannot complain if it is made for common everyday use, not sacred ceremonies. Early church Greek Bible scholar Diodore agrees that no one should dare condemn God or imagine that He showed mercy to one and hardened another by accident. It was all done as a result of the power of His foreknowledge. Nor should we think it wrong that God knew in advance what would happen. Rather, each one who sees what the Divine Potter has made out of their lives, are then responsible for their own reaction, whether positive or negative, good or bad.⁵

Ambrosiaster sees this from another angle. He notes that the substance of the clay is the same; it’s the will of the potter that is different. Likewise God made us all of the same substance and yet we all became sinners. Adam’s sin was not our choice, but it became our curse. The fact that God allowed this is depended on His divine will and purpose. Then according to His will He had mercy on one and rejected another. But He did not do so without proper reason. For He knew who should be shown mercy and who should not.⁶

Chrysostom is convinced that God does nothing at random or by mere chance. Just because we cannot comprehend the genius of His wisdom does not mean that He has no design or purpose in what He does. If a human potter can make different things from the same clump of clay and not be faulted for doing so, then why can’t we grant God the same freedom of expression? How unfair that would be. When vessels are used for honorable or dishonorable purposes, the potter is not charged with the responsibility, that belongs to the users. The same thing is true of God’s creation. He made us creatures of great complexity and ability. What is done with all that potential is a matter of our free choice.⁷ In the same vein, it can be said that the person that invented film is not responsible for how it is employed. Some use it for good motion pictures and misuse it for despicable movies.

Augustine did not remain quiet on this subject. He says that first comes the clay. Some of it fit for use and some only to be thrown away. But it doesn’t stop there. After that, that which is fit is selected, and gradually molded into what the Potter wants it to be. And once it is molded, that’s where it stops. In his mind, God does not use high-level quality clay to make something bad. Neither does He use low-level quality clay to make something good. It all begins with God’s choice in selecting the clay. And as soon as a person realizes what God has formed them to be, the quicker they can offer themselves for use in the role God intended for them, and the sooner they can be called to do what they were meant to do.⁸ But here is the good part, we were all made to serve Him and glorify Him in all that we say and do. So again, it comes down to our choice of being what He made us to be.

In another document, Augustine says that if someone does not understand these matters, who are they then to talk back to God? And if one does understand, they have even less reason to talk back. Once a person understands that the whole human race was initially condemned through Adam by divine judgment on his sin, and if not even one single member of the race were ever saved from it, no one could argue against God’s justice. Not only that, but those who understand this also see that those who are saved were saved on God’s terms. This helps them to see that those who were left unsaved, certainly the greater number, were left to suffer what the whole mass deserved and what God’s merited judgment brought them. Had God’s undeserved mercy not intervened, everyone would have been part of the group rejected. That’s why anyone who might be disposed to brag about their own accomplishments and the merit it brings them should be hushed.⁹ That way, the one who does give glory for their salvation, glories in the Lord¹⁰.¹¹

But a great early church Christian scholar, from Alexandra, makes the point that it is not possible to say on the basis of this verse that Paul is suggesting there are different types of human nature. In fact, neither do the Scriptures claim that some people have been made cruel or obstinate, or even that vessels of honor and purity were fashioned. In addition, there is no hint that such attributes have been made part of their nature. Instead, Bishop Cyril believes it should be understood to mean that all vessels are made from the same clay, it’s how they are used that determines whether they become vessels of honor or dishonor¹².¹³ This is clear from what Paul says to Timothy: “If anyone purifies himself from what is ignoble, then he will be a vessel for noble use, consecrated and useful to the master of the house, ready for any good work.¹⁴”¹⁵

Martin Luther agrees wholeheartedly with what Augustine said in his Enchiridion (Handbook on Ethics), mentioned in Augustine’s commentary above, and then add that the idea of talking back to God is an important thing to remember. The very idea should both enlighten and frighten us greatly. But that’s not its main purpose. If anything, we should be led to humble ourselves before the Almighty. Paul did not bring this up to cause us fear and despair but to glorify divine grace and destroy our arrogance.¹⁶ This should certainly cause any person to take their salvation more seriously when they realize they have been called, redeemed, chosen, sanctified, empowered, and glorified as one of God’s own. It is more than just confession of sins in a weak moment or joining a group because they share the same religious harmony. It is all a personal choice made by exercising one’s will. This is the result of a divine decision by the Eternal Almighty God.

In talking about the potter and the clay, John Calvin says that the reason why the vessel ought not to contend with the potter is that the potter does nothing other than what he has a right to do. In speaking of the potter’s power, Paul wants everyone to understand that it is not just a matter of the potter doing what he has the strength to do, but that he has the power to decide what to do. Paul does not use this illustration to contend that God possesses or exhibits any power that does not rightly belong to Him. He is not usurping some other power or authority with His decision. And this especially applies to mankind’s freewill. In fact, the potter takes nothing away from the clay when he decides what form to give it. In the same way, God takes away nothing from mankind when He decides in what image to create him. Without the potter’s intervention and ingenuity, the clay would remain just that, a shapeless, formless clump of clay. So it is with mankind. As descendants of sinful Adam, unless God had intervened we would all be still unregenerate forms made out of the dirt of the ground. There is no way to extract any honor from this, there is only the opportunity to give it honor. So whichever God decides to do, the clay has no reason to argue and complain it is not getting what it deserves.¹⁷

Robert Haldane offers this as a guide to understanding the questions from either a real or supposed objector to Paul’s message on God’s gratuitous method of salvation. He writes that the Apostle Paul in dealing with the previous objection and in the two following verses gives his answers. His answer here in this verse is similar to what we find in Isaiah.¹⁸ It is directed against the proud assumptions of those who presume that although they were born like a wild, untamed donkey’s colt, they know nothing of what happened yesterday or what will happen tomorrow.¹⁹ How can such ingrates presume they can scan the deep things of God, and to find fault with His plan and providence? Even angels which desire to look, find it incomprehensible for their enlightened understanding.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XXI)

Bible scholar Charles Hodge feels that there were too many people who misunderstand the Apostle’s teaching about God’s justice. After all, if what God does hardens us, why does He blame us for being stubborn? On the surface, such perversion by such objectors to the Apostle’s doctrine is gross. First, Paul rebukes the spirit in which God is maligned and then demonstrates how unfounded the objection is. There is no doctrine in the Bible that declares that God first makes people wicked, and then turns around and punishes them for their wickedness. The Scriptures simply assert what we understand and know to be true: God permits people, by exercising their own free will, to sin. If such sins are not forgiven, then they will be punished in proportion to their guilt. God is only acting here as a fair and just judge. He is not blaming anyone for sinning, that is their choice, He is only carrying out the punishment prescribed for that sin. So who can complain that God is not being fair? Would you not want a court of law to act the same? But Paul adds another factor that is not part of human jurisprudence. Our sovereign God as our judge exercises His authority to determine whether or not He will also be our Savior, or allow us to suffer the just recompense for our evil deeds. This He does based on His divine foreknowledge and omniscience.¹

Jewish scholar David Stern gives us something to think about concerning God’s involvement in people’s hearts being hardened, and their excuses: “If what God does hardens my heart, then why should He blame me for having a hard heart?” As Paul sees it, he offers little comfort before answering the question with a question, which was consistent with a Pharisee’s manners and customs. His question is: “Who are you, a mere human being, to talk back to God?” In case anyone would think that Paul was being arrogant, he lets God answer the question by quoting what He said to the prophet Isaiah about people who call what’s evil as good, darkness being light, and bitter being sweet.² and then uses the image of the potter and the clay from Jeremiah.³ Stein tells us that traditional Judaism takes the same viewpoint. He points to the weekday morning prayers in the Siddur (Prayerbook) where it reads: “Who is there among all the works of your hands, among those above or among those below, who could say to you [God], ‘What are you doing?’”⁴ There is a strong possibility that Paul knew that the Jewish leaders in the church at Rome were acquainted with this morning prayer.

Verses 20-21: Don’t ask such questions! You are only a human and have no right to question God. A clay jar does not question the one who made it. It does not say, “Why did you make me like this?”⁵ The one who makes the jar can make anything he wants. He uses the same clay to make different things. He might make one thing for special purposes and another for daily use.

There are many people, even today, who raise the same questions found here. Some to find an excuse, others who earnestly want to know more. We must, first of all, consider that no human is capable of judging God’s actions. We know little – He is omniscient; we are restricted in scope – He is omnipresent; we are pitifully weak – He is omnipotent. How can we judge when we do not know one billionth of the facts that He knows? Furthermore, since He is God and has made all that exists, it is His right to do as He pleases with His creation. This does not imply fatalism on our part, but rather to acknowledge His sovereignty and His decrees. He has proven not only to be a God of Might but also a God of Mercy; He was willing to sacrifice His only Son, we are not asked to sacrifice ours. Only a fool would go around feeling sorry for themselves because they weren’t chosen when it was a case of them making the choice in the first place. One of the horrors of hell is that there is no consolation there.

So Paul’s concern is that the leaders of the congregation in Rome might opt to continue in the path outlined by the old understanding of God’s Word and not be open to the new revelation that Paul had been chosen by Christ to bring them. One of Job’s advisers made it clear that God does not need to defend His words.⁶ Furthermore, even though God may say something twice, still, there are those who will miss the point.

Even the Apostle James encountered those who were unwilling to give up the old way of thinking. He told his readers: “There still some among you who hold that ‘only believing’ is enough… When will you ever learn that ‘believing’ is useless without doing what God wants you to?”⁷ Finally, God grows weary of all the debate between Job and his friends and interrupts them by asking: “Why are you using your ignorance to deny My providence? …Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell me, if you know so much. Do you know how its dimensions were determined, and who did the surveying?”⁸ God goes on for the next two chapters offering evidence of His superior knowledge and intellect. Finally, He asks: “Do you still want to argue with the Almighty? Or will you yield? Do you – God’s critic – have the answers?”⁹

Paul then uses an illustration to frame his point by supposing a clay pot speaking back to the potter asking, “Why did you make me this way?” Perhaps Paul remembered reading the Talmud where we find the story of Rabbi Eleazar son of Rabbi Simeon who was traveling from Migdal Gedor,¹⁰ after visiting his teacher. He was having a leisurely ride along the river on his donkey, so happy at what he had learned from the Torah. As he rode along, Rabbi Eleazar encountered an exceedingly ugly man who greeted him, but the Rabbi did not return the greeting. Instead, he called the man a fool and told him how ugly he was, and wanted to know if all the people where he came from were as ugly as he was? But then the Rabbi suddenly realized how insulting he had been and immediately apologized. But the man told him, he need not apologize to me, apologize to the One who made me. Likewise, if a vessel is asked why they are so ugly, they may calmly respond: “I do not know, but go and tell the craftsman who made me, ‘The vessel you have made is ugly’.”¹¹

Paul wanted the Roman believers to know that when they talked back to him and tried to criticize his message, they owed an apology to the One who gave him the message in the first place. As King Solomon put it, God has a purpose for everything He’s made.¹² In other words, God possesses no garbage can for items He considers a mistake. By using the potter as an illustration, perhaps Paul was reminded by the words of Isaiah: “Adonai, you are our father; we are the clay, you are our potter; we are all the work of your hands.”¹³ Also, the Apostle may have had the Lord’s instructions to Jeremiah in mind: “’Get up, and go down to the potter’s house; there I will tell you more.’ So I went down to the house of the potter; and there he was, working at the wheels. Whenever a pot he made came out imperfect, the potter took the clay and made another pot with it, in whatever shape suited him.”¹⁴ God goes on to tell Jeremiah that this was an example of how He takes a vessel and does not stop until He fashions it to be what He wants it to be.

That leads Paul to his next point. By acknowledging that God as our Potter; has complete control over how He fashions the clay, we need to be careful that we do not resist His work in our lives. After all, even though God had Israel’s best interest at heart, yet we find them described in Hosea as a nation lying among other nations as a broken pot.¹⁵ Paul himself wanted the Roman church to know that he too was one of God’s vessels, and wanted to be used for the purpose God made him. This was not just his imagination, this is what God told Ananias in Damascus: “Go and do what I say. For Paul is my chosen vessel to take my message to the nations and before kings, as well as to the people of Israel.”¹⁶

Then Paul finishes his point by making note that God fashions assorted vessels for various uses. So when He takes a lump of clay, only He may determine if that vessel will be one of honor or dishonor. This is in line with what Paul told young Timothy: “In a wealthy home there are dishes made of gold and silver as well as some made from wood and clay. The expensive dishes are used for guests, and the cheap ones are used in the kitchen or to put garbage in. If you stay away from sin you will be like one of these dishes made of purest gold—the very best in the house—so that Christ Himself can use you for His highest purposes.”¹⁷

By Paul asking and then answering his own question, early church scholars have a lot to say about their view of this method. Origen excuses Paul of any intended rudeness since this rebuke is not for them. It is intended rather for those who are unfaithful and living an ungodly lifestyle.¹⁸ And for those who see this as God being dictatorial by choosing whom He favors and whom He does not, Chrysostom preached that Paul says this in order not to do away with freewill but rather to show to what extent we ought to obey God. We should be as reluctant to question God as a piece of clay is to quiz a potter. There is no need for us to go on complaining or questioning every negative thing that happens in our lives. In fact, it should not be part of our conversation at all. Instead, we should become like that chosen piece of clay in the potter’s hands, letting ourselves be shaped in whatever way the potter wills. That way we will be known as His work, not ours.¹⁹

Then we have Augustine and Pelagius offering their points of view. First Augustine says that as long as we are part of God’s creation we are like a lump of clay. We have not become a new creation so, therefore, we have not been introduced to spiritual things. As a spiritual person, are we to judge all things but be judged by no one? Is it right for anyone to hold back from hearing this kind of inquiry and not give God an answer? If anyone wants to know God’s plan, they must first become friends with God, and this is only possible for spiritual people who already bear the image of the heavenly Potter.²⁰

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XX)

Verse 19: I’m sure one of you will ask me, “If God controls what we do, why does He blame us for our sins?”

No doubt Paul was expecting such a push-back from the congregation in Rome. This is not the first time that he had his message questioned. In his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul reminded them: “Tell me this! Since you believe what we preach, that Christ rose from the dead, why are some of you saying that dead people will never come back to life again?”¹ Then later, Paul took issue with them because they quibbled over what kind of resurrected body they would have.² These Jewish members of the Roman congregation were much like the Corinthians and Christians today. They not only seek to be guided by God’s Word but are aware of all the concepts and philosophies of the world around them. And while it is proper to question the philosophies of men, Paul is agitated that any believer would dare question God’s Word. It seems today that this concept has been completely reversed because some accept man’s humanistic discipline while questioning God’s spiritual discipline. This is fatal to our faith because God’s Word contains His will, while man’s philosophy harbors his wants.

Unfortunately, this disputing and questioning of God’s messengers was not new. That ancient man of faith, Job, had this to say: “Can anyone teach God knowledge? After all, He judges those who are on high.”³ Later, Job would tell his erstwhile friends that God has no equal, that He is beyond the influence of those who want to change Him; His mind is already made up about what He wants said and done.⁴ For those who dared to question God’s plan and purpose, He had this to say: “At the beginning I announce the end, proclaim in advance things not yet done; and I say that my plan will hold, I will do everything I please to do.”⁵ And Daniel tells us that King Nebuchadnezzar learned this about his God: “All the people of the earth are nothing when compared to Him; He does whatever He thinks best among the angels of heaven, as well as here on earth. No one can stop Him or challenge Him, saying, ‘What do you mean by doing these things?’”⁶

Chrysostom observes that Paul does everything he can to embarrass any questioner. But instead of him rebutting such critics right away, he shuts them up with further questions. Good teachers use this method all the time. So instead of being led off on a tangent and into other areas not under discussion, they stay on course. It is like a gardener who pulls up the weeds, breaks up the ground before the seed is planted so it can grow much better. Too often some teacher tries to plant a full grown tree so the student has no work to do to make it grow.

Paul is obviously aware that many will form the opinion that God is responsible for our wanting to sin. Early church scholar Origen resists this idea. For sure, no one should resist God’s will for their lives because His will is fair and proper. But whether it turns out for our good or bad things result depends on how we respond with our will. We work with what we know. Only God knows if a person’s attitude will destine them for punishment or direct them to glory.⁷ Origen doesn’t say God will send that person to be punished, but that unless the bad person accepts God’s offer of salvation they are bound to go to their punishment by choice. Then Ambrosiaster states that Paul first teaches us that God is in control because He is more powerful than anyone else. Next, he teaches us that God is the Father of all and, therefore, does not want anyone to suffer evil. So what God has made us to be He wants to remain as He has designed us.⁸ So why worry then if God is going to go against His own will. What, if anything, will make us change us from doing good to doing bad? It’s certainly not God. So there’s only one other left, that’s us.

Again, reformer Martin Luther gives strongly worded support to Paul’s opposition to anyone who might question God’s intentions. For him, the Apostle poses this question to point out those who might argue with God in an ungodly and arrogant way. In the wilderness, the people of Israel raged against God and Moses as though they were the criminals. They treated them as though they were on the same level as they. Here the Apostle Paul means to say, “Do you dare dispute with your Creator, defy Him, and judge Him? Are you unwilling to yield to Him at least on one little point?” It is certainly not a sin when a person asks God in a spirit of reverence, humility, and respect: “Why have you made me this way?”⁹ It is also understandable that in the midst of trials and under extreme pressure a person might utter a word of doubt or question God’s tactics. That’s why their conscience may not immediately condemn them. That’s because our God is not an impatient tyrant or cruel master. In fact, He’s not even that way with the wicked. Luther feels this is good advice for those who are constantly troubled by irreverent thoughts and are greatly alarmed by their weakness in this area.¹⁰

John Calvin points to what he feels is the main reason such people would be so upset, and that is when they hear that those who perish have been destined to do so by the will of God. As Calvin sees it, once again Paul adopts the role of an opponent. He saw that it would be hard to stop the mouths of the ungodly from arrogantly complaining that God was being unfair. Paul clearly exposes their thought process in that they were not satisfied with defending themselves, they wanted to make God guilty instead. And once they assigned their blame and condemnation to Him, they then became indignant that God had such great power. They feel like they are being forced to yield to God’s will, so instead, they rebel. That’s because they just cannot give in and acknowledge His sovereignty. So what do they do? They accuse God of tyranny.¹¹

Then Calvin applies the situation that Paul faced to his own time during the Middle Ages in Europe. He claims that the philosophers of his day in their schoolroom classes foolishly dispute what they call God’s absolute and infinite authority to judge and convict. They forget that they are talking about God’s own vow to be fair and equal to all. They accuse Him of exhibiting His unlimited power by throwing all those who disagree with Him into confusion. Calvin then paraphrases what he thinks Paul would have such people say: “Why should God be angry with us? Didn’t He make us what we are? Doesn’t He lead us wherever He wants us to go? What else does He want? Doesn’t He know that by destroying us He is destroying the very thing He Himself made? We don’t have the power to fight back against Him. It doesn’t matter how much we try, He will still have the upper hand. That will make the outcome all that more unfair if He ends up condemning us. That makes it all the more obvious that we are outmatched by all the power He has.”¹² We can take this one step further and quote these words as being similar to the philosophy we hear in our world today. That’s is, except for one caveat: today’s philosophers would not ascribe as much power, control, and authority to God as those did back in Calvin’s and Paul’s day.

Adam Clarke also comments on those who, like Adam, blamed their fall into sin on Eve who in turn, blamed it on the snake. Clarke sees the Apostle Paul introducing a Jewish critic to make an objection similar to that in Romans 3:7: “How can God condemn me as a sinner if my dishonesty highlights His truthfulness and brings Him more glory?” In other words, if God’s glory can best be seen and recognized when we are obstinate and rebellious, and He then allows us to become more and more hardhearted and hardheaded, why should He turn around then and find fault with our behavior? Furthermore, why would He then punish us for doing the very thing out of which He gets so much joy and pleasure?¹³ It’s like accusing God of making a death wish for everyone in spite of the fact that He says He’d rather keep them alive. These are clearly the corrupt thoughts of degenerate individuals, all meant to somehow delegitimize and discredit God as the sovereign ruler of the universe.

In this verse, we have a question that the Apostle does not answer until the next several verses. Robert Haldane sees this and notes that here the Apostle Paul confronts a third objection or deflection on the part of these objectors. The first one was that God is unfaithful, (verse 6). The second was that God is unjust, (verse 14). This third is that God is severe and cruel, (verse 18). So if God were to show mercy, or if He were to harden according to His sovereign pleasure, why, then, it may be asked, would He find any reason to accuse someone else for what’s going on? So here in verse 19, Paul formulates the only response based on the logic that such people who think this way can come up with. Their question is simple: How can God find any fault in what we did since it was His will? Who can He point at that resisted His will? So in other words, if God wants people to sin, and if He is all-powerful, is He not then the author of sin? Haldane finds the objection raised here in the Scripture to be the same he was hearing in his day. And it could not have been written more clearly than the way Paul wrote it here. Paul will answer much of this in the coming verses. But it involves pointing out how people with such disrespect for God can dare argue with Him who is in effect, their Creator.¹⁴

H. A. Ironside sees the questions asked here as being those of a fatalist. Especially one who has come to the conclusion that God’s will is irresistible and they are being moved around by His will, not theirs. So as far as they are concerned, they have absolutely no responsibility for what happens to them. Today they call it Karma and others say it’s fate.¹⁵ That’s why they see it as unfair that God would find fault with them. How can God judge them when they have no say over their lives. If God’s will is irresistible, then let God be responsible for what happens. So they would say to Paul, “Where does my moral responsibility come in?”¹⁶ In other words, if God is responsible for all that takes place then why should I suffer if things go wrong? Likewise, if someone decides that since they are not interested in religion or the Bible or salvation, they should not then be held responsible for their immoral actions the same way as those who are inclined to believe in God. In so doing, they dismiss the idea that there are universal rules of conduct established by an Almighty God to which all believers and unbelievers will be held accountable.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER NINE (Lesson XIX)

This idea of God, not man, making the call to repentance is no doubt hard for many who believe that God’s grace is an unending, indiscriminate source to cover all sin and rebellion. One may ask this question to counter that idea: If that be so, then why hasn’t the devil been saved? This recognizes that this same godless spirit and attitude of Satan can infect people’s hearts and minds. Therefore, it becomes God’s choice in choosing whom He sends His Spirit to and calls them to repentance. If one cannot accept this truth, then it would be easy to call God an unrighteous deity. God forbid that anyone would fall to that level of irreverence and disrespect for Almighty God.

Robert Haldane’s main interest here is to make sure these verses are kept in context. So he states that verse 17 about Pharaoh stands connected to verses 13 and 14. For in verse 13, God’s love for Jacob and His hatred for Esau are declared. That’s why in verse 14 a demand is made to determine if this proves God is not fair or just. Then in verses 15 and 16 the answer is given regarding the preference and love of God for Jacob. Now in verse 17 the Apostle replies to the question involving God’s hatred for Esau. And the answer here is very similar to that given respecting God’s love for Jacob. That is, God’s love for Jacob already existed before he had done anything good. This was God’s normal plan of procedure. And on that same basis, His hatred for Esau existed before he had done anything wrong. So we find here Paul’s doctrine, drawn from the example of one person to whom, in Divine sovereignty, God acted according to justice without mercy, being that God decides, not mankind. After all, doesn’t the Scripture say that God raised up Pharaoh for the very purpose of manifesting His own glory in light of Pharaoh’s hardness and his punishment?¹

Robert Haldane then goes on to contextualize verse 18 in this narrative. He says that here we see a general conclusion drawn from all that the Apostle has said in the three preceding verses. There he denies that God acted unrighteously by loving Jacob and hating Esau. In doing so, it exhibited the way God deals with both the elect and the reject. It makes it clear that His own sovereign pleasure is at play with respect to those whom He receives inside the Kingdom, and those He leaves outside the Kingdom. His love and grace softens one and hardens another. He does so without reference to anything but His own sovereign will. And it is all in accordance with His infinite wisdom, holiness, and justice. “Yes, Father, you did this because it’s what you really wanted to do.”² God cannot be charged with injustice just because His method of salvation selects some and rejects others.³ In reference to the statement that God’s offer of pardon softens one and hardens another, we must understand this by comparing it to the sun. The exact same rays of the sun that shine down on an object with the same intensity and heat, will melt the one and harden the other. That is because the makeup of the object is what causes it to either melt or harden. So it is with men’s souls, minds, and will.

When it comes to the purpose for which God put Pharaoh in power so that He could deliver His people in a way that only He could do, Albert Barnes explains that there are several ways we can understand what God intended by using Pharaoh this way. First, God intended to use him to accomplish great miracles by keeping him alive. Secondly, the only reason God kept Pharaoh alive was just for that reason. Thirdly, God thereby exhibited His total control over this haughty and wicked monarch. He could take his life at any moment, or He could let him live as long as he was useful to carry out God’s will for His people. Furthermore, by having control over all things that could affect the pride, the feelings, and the happiness of Pharaoh, God had control over the man himself. Fourthly, God placed Pharaoh in circumstances suited to his character. He left him in those circumstances until he was ready to be used by God for His purpose. Fifthly, God did not try to change Pharaoh’s mind by exerting undue pressure on his mind. Sixth, that’s why in all this Pharaoh acted freely.

As a result, as Barnes sees it, Pharaoh chose to do what he did by his own volition. He pursued his own course. He voluntarily pursued his own schemes in oppressing the Israelites. It was his decision and his alone to be in opposition to God. He personally decided to pursue the Israelites to the Red Sea. In each case, Pharaoh chose to do what he did, and did so, even though He knew it was wrong. As a result, there was no warning or action that could turn him away from his goal. This explains then, what it means when it says that Pharaoh hardened his own heart.⁴ One other thing, neither could Pharaoh nor can any other sinner blame God for the circumstances they find themselves in. They got to where they are on their own and it is there they develop their own character, and show what they are. So don’t blame it on God, it’s their own fault. No one compels any sinner to sin. At the same time, God is under no obligation to save them just because the sinner thinks it’s a great idea.⁵

On Paul’s assertion that God has full control over whom His mercy will lead to acceptance and whom it will lead to rejection. Henry Alford sees no difficulty in the assertion that God allows His mercy to harden the heart of whom He wills. We must remember this is an ongoing process in the daily course of God’s dealing with mankind. We have all seen how this hardening process develops, especially among ungodly people who are prosperous. The facts are clear, whether discovered by research or revealed openly in history. At the same time, looking for any solution to such hardening is also part of every human’s responsibility. Once they are aware of their hardness, they must take steps to change. No one will ever be perfect, no matter how much they try. However, every attempt must be made to refine a person’s attitude and outlook on life. Without such an attempt, everything will continue downhill.⁶

H. A. Ironside also shares some thoughts on this subject. He writes that it is evident that we cannot accept what the text says about those who are hardened by God’s interaction with this world without logically concluding that it does appear God gives some up to their own destruction and leaves them to perish in their own sins. In Pharaoh’s case, he was a Gentile, a hardhearted oppressor of Israel. In his view, when God sent His servants demanding that he submit to His commands, it riled up his pride and haughtiness. Thus he became brazen and audacious. He exclaimed, ‘Who is the Lord, that I should obey Him?’ As we see, Pharaoh in his arrogance dared to challenge the Almighty. But God was not intimidated, He is ready to accept Pharaoh’s challenge.

Ironside goes on to say that when God told Pharaoh that He allowed him to come to power in order to that His own power could be heralded around the earth, God was not speaking to a helpless babe. These words deal exclusively with the outstanding position that God gave Pharaoh in order that succeeding generations might see the folly of fighting against an Almighty God. Ironside tells us that the Greeks had a saying: “Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.”7 It was a principle that even heathens had no trouble understanding. We see the same principle alive in such personages as an Emperor, a Caesar, a Napoleon, a Kaiser, a President, a Prime Minister who are permitted to climb to the very summit on human ambition alone, only then to be hurled down into the depths of loathing and being laughed at. In each case, God stands by to have mercy on those who repent and let those who seek no rescue to harden by their resolve to remain unrepentant. Since God is the moral governor of the universe and He works all things according to the counsel of His own will. “No one can restrain His hand or say to Him, ‘What have You done?’”’8 This should be a warning to anyone who thinks they can assault God without consequences. In fact, to do so would justify God’s punishment to fall on them with righteous wrath.9

Preacher Octavius Winslow preached on how and who God uses to accomplish His will. In his way of thinking, we should never write off individuals who themselves are living without grace from being used by God for His purpose. In the same way, someone without holiness in their life is still not disqualified from speaking up about the value of holiness in a person’s life. Also, there is nothing that keeps a person who is still in an unregenerate state from being used by God for a spiritual purpose. Anyone who has studied the Bible and Church History has seen how again and again God has employed both sacred and secular agencies in carrying out His will and purpose. The reason He can do this is because all things are subject to His sovereignty.10

Douglas Moo focuses on the subject of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart and informs us that the Greek word skleryno, meaning “harden,” refers to being in a state of insensitivity to God, His Word, and His work. Then he asks, to what do God’s “having mercy” and “hardening” refer? Could it be the same options are available here as they are in verses 7-13 on God’s election? And could it also be that Paul is referring here to the roles of Moses (and Israel) and Pharaoh (and Egypt) in salvation history? Or is it that what Paul says here has direct attachment to the issue of personal salvation? In other words, it is God who determines who is to be saved and who is to be kept in a state of spiritual blindness.11

Jewish theologian David Stern tells us that in Exodus 4:21; 7:3; 9:12, and especially 14:4 we read concerning God’s hardening Pharaoh’s heart. In Stern’s mind, Paul is witnessing history repeating itself. Pharaoh’s rejection of Moses is like Israel’s rejection of Yeshua. It provides the circumstances for God to demonstrate His power through an act of delivering Israel from the Egyptian bondage in the same way that He delivers the believer from sin’s bondage and death. The knowledge of Israel’s deliverance from Egypt became known through the Tanakh [Jewish First Covenant] and the annual reading of the Haggadah [Guide to Seder meal] at Pesach [Passover]. Likewise the Messiah’s atoning death and resurrection are being made known through the Gospel [Christian Last Covenant] and preaching of the Apostles in the Last Covenant.12

Having had the privilege of preaching to audiences as small as five and as large as 20,000, I never ceased to be amazed at how the same message, anointed by the Holy Spirit and empowered by His presence could cause some to stand for salvation, even running to the altar to seek forgiveness, while others left immediately or fidgeted nervously until the benediction was said and they could go out. How could the same call be received by some and rejected by others. Often, my immediate response was to question if I did a good enough job in delivering the message. But in the end I realized that it was their decision based on whether God’s Word melted their resistance to surrender their lives, or hardened their pride in maintaining their status as masters of their fate, and captains of their soul.13 So the only question left is this: Did God already know this? The answer, “Yes, He did.”