God acts

From the lives of the archfathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Paul shows that God has determined the direction at all times (Rom 9:6-13). They were the most important ancestors of Israel. There the story already began. After that, the people of Israel grew larger and Moses appeared on the scene.

“To Moses He says, ‘Have mercy on whom I will have mercy; and have compassion on whom I will have compassion.‘”
Romans 9:15; Exodus 33:19

The next event in the history of the people of Israel is the confrontation with the Pharaoh of Egypt. It’s all visual lessons about how God has everything in His hands.

“For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even therefore have I raised thee up, that I might display My power in thee, and that My name might be made known throughout all the earth.”
Rom 9:17

God acts. This is what it’s all about. When God acts, election plays a big part in it (Rom 9:11). It is His choice to take the story in this direction or that. The fact that God has mercy on whom He wills and also hardens whom He wills (Rom 9:18) is an expression of His being God. Only He is God, and no one interferes with Him. Such a clear statement, however, evokes an immediate backlash – perhaps in us as well.

The potter and the clay

Paul has barely finished his sentence, or he is already catching this probably very human plaintive backlash:

“Now you will reply to me: What then does He rebuke? Who then has ever resisted His purpose?”
Rom 9:19

Here the apostle changes the point of view. If he initially focused on God’s actions, now it’s about us, our conclusions and assessments. As difficult as it is to truly recognize God as God, it can be fierce and hefty to recognize ourselves as not-God, as creatures with limited possibilities. Trust in God, on the other hand, recognizes: we are dependent on Him. The two views are worlds apart.

One problem with misconceptions is probably the short-circuits people make to them. This then goes something like this: “If God were responsible for everything, then we are puppets”. This is black and white thinking that has nothing to do with reality or with God’s statements.

Paul debunks these all-too-human conclusions and lack of knowledge in the following passage:

“O man, indeed, who are you to give such an answer to God? Surely, the object will not reply to the maker: Why hast Thou made me thus – Hath not the potter authority over the clay to make of the same clay the one vessel to honor and the other to dishonor?”
Rom 9:20-21

Those who quickly elevate themselves above God and want to take Him to task fail to recognize the difference between Creator and creation. Doesn’t the potter have authority over the clay? The figurative comparison is of course a rhetorical question, because of course the potter has authority over the clay. Thus, God also has a self-evident authority over us, over the world. In a direct comparison, if we are formed by Him, how could we rebel and say, “Why did You make me this way?

What is happening here?

It is human rebellion against God that Paul exposes here. He speaks of the self-righteousness that people express toward God. It is the wrong assessment of the “I” towards an almighty God, the wrong focus on oneself instead of on Him.

Paul prays for the believers

Perhaps we still remember the beginning of the Epistle to the Romans, wherein Paul mentions that wrath of God is revealed against the unrighteousness and unrighteousness of men. For, though men know God from creation, they have not glorified Him as God or given thanks to Him (Rom 1:18-21).

It is amazing that the same is said here now by believers. Apparently, recognizing God is not a matter of course even for believers. In other letters, Paul is also concerned that we come to know God, and prays for believers for enlightened eyes of the heart (Eph. 1:15-17), that we may grow in the knowledge of God (Col. 1:10).

Apparently, recognizing God is not a matter of course even for believers.

Humility and fear of God are in order, as well as a sober recognition of one’s own inability to assess everything correctly.

A double predestination is not meant

Paul invites us to exchange the human perspective for the divine perspective:

Human Perspective > Divine Perspective.

Calvinism and some other theological approaches use these verses to establish a double predestination (a double foreknowledge and destiny). This is a special teaching. You take these verses out of context and justify something different with them than Paul just explained. In this doctrine, man is subordinated to the work of God, but in such a way that He destines some for heaven and others for hell. Double predestination is about the final destiny of people and God throws some into this pot, others into that pot. There is nothing you can do about it.

The doctrine of double predestination tacitly assumes, without justification, that this is a matter of man’s final destiny and, of course, that everything in our lives is about being for or against God. This narrow view leads step by step to false assumptions about the text. So the doctrine of double predestination thrives not only exclusively on these texts, but also on certain assumptions that are not mentioned here (or elsewhere) in a single word. If we can recognize this, the exegesis of these verses becomes much easier. We do not have to project into it what is not written there, but may discover what Paul wants to explain here in the context of that time.

However, if we follow the words of the apostle, there is no question of heaven, hell or final destiny. Paul is concerned with the course of the world and in particular with the position and task of Israel (Rom 9:1-5). The question is what has changed. What about Israel now? What about the nations? Paul answers these questions carefully here. In general terms, he talks about it here, but with different examples. This connection should not be lost in our consideration. It is God who sovereignly rules over everything. He works, for Israel, as for the nations. This is the concern that Paul describes here.

Accordingly, it is not a question of double predestination. Another cause for the derailment of “double predestination” can perhaps be found in the fact that Israel has long had no future of its own in theology. As long as the understanding is that today’s church has simply replaced Israel, there is of course no longer any application for a declaration about Israel, as Paul does here in Romans. That is probably why Paul’s words were difficult to understand. In my opinion, such views favored the development of the doctrine of “double predestination”.

Theological assumptions about some issues thus influence other issues. However, if one reads along with the development of things in the New Testament, the question of Israel (Acts 1:6) is very much an issue and Paul’s comments in Romans 9-11 are particularly relevant to this.