A while back I received an email from a friend of mine who inquired about some of the difficult passages in Romans chapter 9. He said that he has been reading Romans 9 and that he found it incredibly confusing. Not only that, but that his reading of it had challenged his understanding of God’s nature. He then relayed four specific questions and asked for my feedback on them:
1. Is Paul suggesting that God chose the people that would do wrong to display his majesty?
2. Is Paul suggesting that people like pharaoh didn't have a choice?
3. What is Paul trying to express when he talks about God being the potter?
4. Is Paul suggesting that we don't have a choice and that we shouldn’t question God?
I have been asked similar questions about Romans 9 throughout the years, and so I thought I’d post my response to my friend. I hope that it will be helpful to anyone who has tried to navigate this difficult portion of Scripture and other Scriptures like it. Here was my response:
“You ask some great questions. Romans 9 through 11 is a difficult read for sure, so you are definitely not alone with your questions and concerns. Before attempting to address your specific questions, I thought it might be good to address something more generally that may hopefully help you with this specific issue (as it also applies to many such issues).
I’m not sure if you would remember since it was so long ago, but when I spoke at [a school my friend attended] I taught on “the quest for the radical middle.” Essentially, you will find that in the Bible there are many truths that seem ad odds with each other. In fact, many may even seem contradictory. The example I gave at [the school my friend attended] was that of law vs. lawlessness. It is clear in the New Testament that we are no longer under law, and that trying to do law as a means of righteousness will actually cut you off from grace (see Galatians 5:4). On the other hand, it is also clear that those who practice lawlessness will also cut themselves off from grace (see Hebrews 12:14-17; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11; Galatians 5:19-21). On the surface, it may sound contradictory: you either have law or you don’t. But that is not so in the New Covenant of the Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:6; Romans 7:4-6; Romans 8:1-4). That is, the key to staying in the radical middle (“on the path of life”) is that we must walk by the Spirit. He will lead us and guide us into all truth. If we walk by the Spirit, we will no longer gratify the desires of the flesh (lawlessness; see Galatians 5:16), and at the same time, if we are led by the Spirit we are not under law (see Galatians 5:18 and Romans 8:1-14). [*Note: the audio teachings on the "quest for the radical middle" that I am referring to in this paragraph can be streamed/downloaded here for Part 1 and here for Part 2]
The reason I bring this up is because the principle of the “quest for the radical middle” applies to many such instances where there are seeming contradictions in the Bible. We must stay in the radical middle by holding those truths in happy tension with each other without choosing one truth at the expense of another. Many times people get into error or even heresy because of their inability or failure to hold truth in tension.
The issue you brought up is difficult for many to understand, because there are clear scriptures that seem to contradict that portion of scripture. For example, 1 Timothy 2:1-4 says “I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people—for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.” Of course, if God wants all people to be saved, then how it is that Romans 9 can be true? It seems contradictory. As soon as you find scriptures that seem like a contradiction, chances are the truth is somewhere in the middle. In other words, rather than trying to rationalize away the scriptures that contradict the “truth” you believe, it is better to just accept both as true and then seek The Lord for understanding. Chances are, both are true depending on the context and situation.
In every case, it is always good to take into consideration the point that Paul is trying to make: the audience, situation, and context. Romans 9 needs to be taken in the context of the book of Romans as a whole, and much of Romans has do with distinguishing the Old from the New Covenant. Paul is making many points in this portion of scripture, but one of the main points that he is making is that righteousness in the New Covenant is by faith and not by works (Romans 9:30-33), and this is how gentiles are the true children of promise. You will notice in the argument in Romans 9:6-13 that Paul is stating that it is no longer physical decent of Abraham that makes people children of God, but rather, the people who live by the faith of Abraham (which he addresses in detail in Romans chapter 4). The analogy he is giving is that of Jacob and Esua. Jacob in this case represents the New Covenant church, and Esua the Israelites of natural decent. It is not that God “hates” Israel; it is that God has chosen that the children of promise will be those who are saved by His mercy rather than by works (Romans 9:16; 30-33). Hence, the language that the “older will serve the younger.” The point is that God in His sovereignty had extended salvation to include all of the children of promise (the “younger” in the New Covenant), who He defines as those who live by the faith of Abraham. Not because they earned it, but because of His mercy.
Now in regards to the more difficult scriptures you asked about, although I don’t have all of the answers, let me give you a few points that help me deal with this issue. First, let’s start with the presupposition that it is God's will that everyone is saved (1 Timothy 2:4), and that He loves the world so much that whoever believes in Him will be saved (John 3:16; “whoever” includes anyone). If that is true, then is it also true that God only saves some people, but not others by His choice? Yes, but I do not think that is generally how He approaches salvation. Let me explain. The truths in tension here boil down to God’s sovereignty vs. human free will. This is something that people have had debates over for hundreds of years, and the debate will never be resolved precisely because both are true. God gave us free will, but He is also sovereign. It is error to reject either one of those truths.
So, how do we come to terms with it? Let me give you another example that may help. Scripturally speaking, one could make an excellent case that it is God’s will to heal people. Just look at the life and ministry of Jesus, as well as scriptures showing it is part of the atonement (e.g., Isaiah 53:3-5; Matthew 8:14-17; 1 Peter 2:24). That being said, there are also scriptures that seem to contradict that truth. For example, look at Revelation 2:20-23: “Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds.”
In this instance, it is clear that God cast Jezebel on a bed of suffering and will strike people dead if they don’t repent. It would not be true to say in this case that it is God’s will that she is healed because He is the one who put her on a bed of suffering. It is clear, however, that the reason He did it was redemptive in nature: so that her followers would repent. In fact, He first gave her time to repent, which was mercy to her, but she refused. So, it was her refusal that made God have to judge her in this way. It was not “God’s perfect will” that she suffered, but because of her free choice, He had to judge her in order to get her followers out of deception. This is an exception and not a rule. I believe the general principle is that it is God’s will to heal, but there are exceptions. This is similar with the issues you raised. One could make a good case scripturally (which we did above) that God wants to save everyone. Does that mean everyone will be saved? No.
To get even more specific, let’s examine your questions about Pharaoh. Did God harden his heart? Yes. But if you look at the original narrative, it was Pharaoh who initially disobeyed God’s demand to let His people go. In fact, it says that he hardened his own heart in Exodus 8:15 (see also Exodus 8:19, 8:32; and 9:7). It wasn’t until Pharaoh disobeyed multiple times that God finally hardened Pharaoh's heart (Exodus 9:12). I believe this is similar to Jezebel. God gave Pharaoh many chances to repent and let His people go, but Pharaoh refused and did not listen. Then God finally hardened Pharaoh’s heart.
What’s the point? God is merciful and He operates out of mercy. This is made clear later in Exodus 34:5-7: “Then the Lord came down in the cloud and stood there with him and proclaimed his name, the Lord. And he passed in front of Moses, proclaiming, “The Lord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”
Even though God is merciful and forgives wickedness according to this scripture, He also punished those who persist in sin. This is what happened to Pharaoh. The truth we must hold in tension is that God is merciful, but He is also just.
So back to Romans 9: God often uses the events in the Old Testament as types and shadows for us to follow (1 Corinthians 10:1-13; Colossians 2:16-17). Paul is using Pharaoh as an illustration of the truth that God can and does harden people’s hearts. However, Paul also makes it clear in Romans 9 that God is merciful (see verses 15-16); but that must be held in tension with the fact that He also judges by hardening. However, He doesn’t harden arbitrarily. People who persist in sin and rebellion will suffer consequences because He is also just (see Romans 1:18-32).
Traditionally, Calvinists have used certain scriptures from Romans 9 to support their positions of predestination and limited atonement. On the other hand, Armenians use other scriptures such as John 3:16 to suggest we are saved by our own choice. I would argue that both positions are simultaneously true and false. That is, because there are scriptures that uphold both positions, as well as scriptures that contradict both positions, that means that both schools of thought will inevitably have some truth and some error to them. Therefore, both positions in their extreme forms cannot be absolute Truths because there are also scriptures that clearly state the opposite of what they claim. Thus, the logical conclusion of either position will ultimately be false, and hence, the need for holding both truths in tension and seeking the radical middle. [This reminds me of an interesting quote by Rick Joyner: “Almost every heresy is the result of trying to carry to logical conclusions that which God has only revealed in part."]
I suppose I could go on, but I hope this helps in some way. Let me summarize by saying that to stay on the path of life, we must hold seeming paradox in scripture in tension. The paradox here is that God wants everyone to be saved, but not everyone is saved. The other paradox is that God is sovereign, yet we have free will. The other paradox is that God is merciful, yet He is also just. So, how do we resolve this? One temptation that we should resist is to hold onto the truth that we like best and rationalize the seemingly contradictory truth away. Instead, we should seek to hold both of these truths in tension, and by doing so, remain in the radical middle (the path of life). [It’s like what John Bevere says, “If you believe in the Gospel what you like, and reject what you don’t like, it is not the Gospel you believe, but yourself.”]
Though it may not be satisfactory to say that both are true when they seem at odds with each other, I believe that they are. However, because mercy triumphs over judgment (James 2:13), I think it is true to say that God defaults on mercy. Just like it is generally His will to heal, there are exceptions because of judgment. I believe this is similar to the issue of hardening of hearts. It is true that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and it is also true that He can harden other people’s hearts, but I believe that this is the exception and not the rule. The "rule" is always mercy.
That was a really long answer, but in light of that, let me try to answer your questions: (my answer’s in italics)
“1. Is Paul suggesting that God chose the people that would do wrong to display his majesty?”
Not necessarily. Remember that Pharaoh first hardened his heart and disobeyed, and then God finally hardened his heart.
“2. Is Paul suggesting that people like pharaoh didn't have a choice?”
Not necessarily. The scriptures in Exodus I cite above suggests that Pharaoh first chose to harden his heart.
“3. What is Paul trying to express when he talks about God being the potter?”
This is saying that God is sovereign. It is true that God does show mercy and judge people according to His will.
“4. Is Paul suggesting that we don't have a choice and that we shouldn’t question God?”
In the New Covenant, God always initiates. In other words, it is all by grace. However, we do also have a choice on whether or not to accept His grace. If people persist in sin and rebellion, even though He is extending mercy, then they will suffer the consequences.
I know that my answers don’t address all the issues, but my intention is to try to help you navigate through this and other complex issues. Sometimes we have to settle on not understanding, but trusting God anyway. I hope that this helps you in some way.
David Cwir
