Does God create some people simply so He can pass everlasting judgment on them? Today, R.C. Sproul teaches on a passage he considered to be one of the most difficult texts in all of Scripture. Get R.C. Sproul’s book Hard Sayings, plus lifetime digital access to his four teaching series on the hard sayings of the Bible, the prophets, Jesus, and the Apostles, for your donation of any amount: https://gift.renewingyourmind.org/3648/hard-sayings Meet Today’s Teacher: R.C. Sproul (1939–2017) was known for his ability to winsomely and clearly communicate deep, practical truths from God’s Word. He was founder of Ligonier Ministries, first minister of preaching and teaching at Saint Andrew’s Chapel, first president of Reformation Bible College, and executive editor of Tabletalk magazine. Meet the Host: Nathan W. Bingham is vice president of ministry engagement for Ligonier Ministries, executive producer and host of Renewing Your Mind, host of the Ask Ligonier podcast, and a graduate of Presbyterian Theological College in Melbourne, Australia. Nathan joined Ligonier in 2012 and lives in Central Florida with his wife and four children. Renewing Your Mind is a donor-supported outreach of Ligonier Ministries. Explore all of our podcasts: https://www.ligonier.org/podcasts
In his famous book, The Bondage of the Will, Luther makes this comment, "'Mere human reason can never comprehend how God is good and merciful, and therefore you make to yourself a God of your own fancy, who hardens nobody, condemns nobody, and pities everybody.'" That's an interesting statement that Luther makes there.
The God that we want to believe in is a God who not only is sometimes merciful, but who is always merciful and who never condemns anybody and never hardens anybody.
You and I are made in the image of God, but it does seem that due to our fallenness, sinful man seeks to create a God in his own image, a God of our own fancy, to quote Martin Luther. You're listening to the Friday edition of Renewing Your Mind as we conclude a week-long study of some of the hard sayings of the Bible.
Our task is not to create an idol, a version of God that we like or prefer, but instead to submit to what the one true God has revealed about Himself in Scripture. And that's one reason why we must be very careful when we come to hard sayings in the pages of Scripture, handling and interpreting them with care. Throughout his ministry, R.C. Sproul didn't shy away from these hard sayings.
And in fact, he recorded four teaching series covering the hard sayings of the prophets, of Jesus, of the apostles, and the Bible. Well, today is the last day to request access to these four series when you give a donation of any amount at renewingyourmind.org. And when you do, we'll send you Dr. Sproul's companion hardcover book outlining and explaining these hard sayings.
Don't forget that this offer also ends at midnight. The final hard saying that we'll consider this week is from the Apostle Paul. And R.C. Sproul says it's perhaps one of the most difficult texts in the Bible to interpret. Here's Dr. Sproul in Romans chapter 9.
We come to the conclusion now of our brief series on the hard sayings of the Bible, and I think what I've done here is saved the worst till last. That is, the passage that I want to look at today I think is one of the most difficult texts in all of Scripture to deal with, if not the most difficult, and it's found in Paul's letter to the Romans in chapter 9.
We remember that in chapter 9, Paul deals with the election of Jacob and the passing over of Esau. And in verse 14 of this chapter, he raises this question, what shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not. For he says to Moses, I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy on. and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.
So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. For the Scripture says to the Pharaoh, For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you. and that My name may be declared in all the earth. Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens."
Now we've already examined the problem of the hardening of Pharaoh's heart in an earlier message, but I've read this portion of the text as background for the very difficult part that follows. In verse 19, Paul says, anticipating objections to the doctrine of election, "'You will say to me then, why does he still find fault? For who has resisted his will?'
But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, Why have you made me like this? Does not the potter have power over the clay from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?
What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy which He had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called?" Not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles.
As He says also in Hosea, I will call them My people who were not My people, and her beloved who was not beloved, and it shall come to pass in the place where it was said to them, You are not My people, there they shall be called sons of the living God. Now, what is so problematic about this text
is Paul's reference to the metaphor of the potter who makes clay and who uses the clay to prepare vessels fit for destruction. And he raises the question, will anyone say to God, why have you made me thus? Now, the problem that this passage poses is this. Is the Apostle saying that God creates human beings evil and then punishes them for the deeds that they perform according to their nature?
Does God, like the potter, take a piece of clay that from the very beginning is destined to destruction, and He shapes it and molds it according to that end and for that purpose, and after He makes it, He condemns it to judgment? I mean, this is probably one of the most scary passages that we run up against because the text certainly seems to suggest
that God creates people for His own purpose who are already wicked and then punishes them for acting out the state in which they were made. Now there are those who take this text to mean exactly that, though they are few in number in church history.
The normal understanding of this text is a reference to the broader context of the chapter, which deals with the election of Jacob rather than Esau, by which God shows mercy to one sinner and passes over the other sinner. but that both Jacob and Esau are considered in divine election as fallen sinners. One receives mercy, the other receives justice, and no one receives injustice.
And that's the problem that we're going to deal with. Let me first of all make a reference to the thinking of Martin Luther on this text. In his famous book, The Bondage of the Will, Luther makes this comment. mere human reason can never comprehend how God is good and merciful, and therefore you make to yourself a God of your own fancy, who hardens nobody, condemns nobody, and pities everybody."
That's an interesting statement that Luther makes there. He's speaking, of course, to Erasmus and talking about the propensity of the human heart to fashion God in man's own image and to create an idol in our understanding of God. The God that we want to believe in is a God who not only is sometimes merciful, but who is always merciful and who never condemns anybody. and never hardens anybody.
Now Luther goes on to say, you cannot comprehend how a just God can condemn those who are born in sin and cannot help themselves, but must by a necessity of their natural constitution continue in sin and remain children of wrath. Let me say it again. You cannot comprehend how a just God
can condemn those who are born in sin and cannot help themselves, but must by necessity of their natural constitution continue in sin and remain children of wrath.
Luther is saying, we cannot see how God can be just in this manner to have people who were born in a state of sin into such a degree of sin that they are rendered morally incapable of turning themselves away from their sin and inclining themselves to righteousness
And how can these people then be held accountable by a just God if they're only doing what comes naturally, if they're only working out what is their constitutive nature to do? And Luther is saying that we cannot comprehend how a just God can condemn people who are born in sin. Now before I finish this quote from Luther, let me just make the problem even more exacerbating.
I don't think there's any doubt that the New Testament and the Old Testament teach uniformly that we are indeed born in sin, and that we are born with a fallen nature. and then we sin according to that corrupt nature, and that God indeed expresses His wrath and judgment upon us even as we work out this sinful nature.
Now Luther's answer, which I find less than satisfactory, but nevertheless somewhat insightful, the answer is, says Luther, God is incomprehensible throughout. and therefore His justice, as well as His other attributes, must be incomprehensible. It is on this very ground that St. Paul exclaims, "'O the depths and the riches of the knowledge of God!
How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out!' Now, says Luther, his judgments would not be passed finding out if we could always perceive them to be just. Now, in a flip way, we could say that Luther runs for cover here and hides under the doctrine of the incomprehensibility of God.
and the incomprehensibility of God is really the first article of systematic theology by which we recognize that though we know God in part, we do not know Him exhaustively and totally or comprehensibly. It doesn't mean that we are completely ignorant of the character of God, but that His ways are not our ways, and His ways are past finding out,
and that there is a depth dimension to the very perfection of God that eludes our grasp and our ability to understand in every circumstance. And so what Luther is doing here is reminding Erasmus, and through Erasmus reminding all who would read his work,
that God is incomprehensible, not only in His grace, not only in His being, not only in His love, not only in His mercy, but also in His justice. Now in simple terms that means we don't always understand the justness of God. but the Bible makes it abundantly clear that He is altogether just.
And we assume His justice even when we cannot penetrate it and cannot understand it in its fullest measure. And so I don't think that Luther is simply copping out here, but he is saying this remains a mystery to us, how God can be just and still hold people responsible for their fallen nature and then judge them accordingly. Now,
Again, I want to back up a little bit and say we can understand this text in two different ways. One way is to say that we are born in sin because of Adam's sin, and that the fall of the human race in Adam involves a judgment upon the entire human race, which human race was represented by Adam and Eve in the fall.
Now earlier in this epistle, Paul in chapter 5 makes it clear that we in fact all did fall in Adam. and that the situation or the condition that we call original sin is the judgment of God upon Adam and his seed for the first transgression that was made. Now that's one way of looking at this text, namely that Adam represented all of the human race.
And had he passed his probation with flying colors, God would have rewarded him and all of his descendants, and nobody would ever be complaining about injustice. However, the problem is that Adam fell, and with Adam we fell. and we are born under the judgment for this representation that took place in the past. Now, I don't have the time today to work through the whole doctrine of the Fall.
We've done that in the past. I'm sure we'll do it again in the future. But this is not nearly as difficult to deal with as the idea that God created Adam Himself wicked, as a vessel fit for destruction, and then visited His judgment upon Adam when Adam sinned.
As I say, there are very few people who would go that far to suggest that, that there is that view in church history that some, even some contemporary thinkers maintain, that the inclination to evil by which Adam sinned in the first place was given to him by his Creator, and that God
not only ordained that Adam sin, but He created him for that purpose, and Adam nevertheless is somehow responsible for sinning, and he cannot say to God, why have You made me thus? Now, there are two great theological questions that we encounter when we look at the origin of human sin.
One question is this, if God created Adam unfallen, good in every respect, which the Bible seems to teach clearly, how could He have sinned? How could he have sinned without a prior inclination to sin? And if he had a prior inclination to sin, Where did he get it? If God made him inclined to sin, then the answer would be God gave him the inclination to sin.
So, if God gave him the inclination to sin, that would seem to suggest that God is the author of evil and that God has done something wicked Himself by creating Adam to sin with a propensity for sin, with an inclination for sin, and so on. Now the question ultimately is where we put the mystery.
Those who argue that God did create Adam with some inclination to sin nevertheless say that God is not unjust in so doing. It's mysterious to them how God could create a person with a disposition to sin and then punish that person for exercising that disposition. and still be just in doing it. They don't know how that can be. It remains a mystery to them.
The advantage of that position is that it retains clearly the sovereignty of God. There's no lack of God's sovereignty in that. But it does raise a question about the goodness of God. On the other hand, if we say that God created Adam without any disposition to sin, then it remains an insoluble problem to answer the question, how then could he have sinned?
And the host of theologians in church history have usually chosen to put the mystery at that point, saying, we don't know how Adam could have sinned. We only know that he did sin and that God didn't make him sin. In that regard, God's goodness is preserved, but it raises a question about His sovereignty. And so, we're on the horns of a dilemma here.
Which view we take is going to raise a significant question about the character of God, either with respect to His justice or with respect to His sovereignty. Most people don't feel the weight of the dilemma and simply say, well, it was man's free will. but they haven't really wrestled with how free will is exercised.
Luther, in his own work on Romans, quotes Augustine from Augustine's In Caridion, where he says this. Blessed Augustine writes, quote, "...the whole human race was condemned in its apostate root by a divine judgment so just that not even if a single man were saved from it, no one could possibly rail against God's justice. And those that are saved had to be saved."
on such terms that it would show, by contrast with the greater number of those not saved but abandoned to their holy just damnation, what the whole mass deserved and to what end God's merited judgment would have brought them had not God's unmerited mercy intervened." What Augustine is saying though clearly here is that this judgment is a judgment given to the whole human race after the Fall.
and that after the fall, once the world has fallen, God is under no obligation according to His justice to save a single person. And if every person perished after Adam, God would be perfectly just in condemning them. And so we see that Augustine takes the position here that this being made sinful is itself a judgment on the fall of Adam. Now the question is, which of these views is Paul teaching?
I think he's teaching the latter rather than the former, because the context in which he is writing here is emphasizing the mercy of God on sinners. And that is the general concept here in the text. We know that Pharaoh was judged for his sin after he was hardened, but he was a sinner before he was hardened.
And he is responding to the statement, he has mercy on whom he wills, and whom he wills he hardens. And you will say to me, why then does he still find fault for who has resisted his will? And Paul answers, but indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? And so on.
And in verse 22, what if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? That there is a certain patience in longsuffering that God is manifesting to people who are manifestly wicked. But He says He prepared them for destruction.
The one thing I want us to notice in closing is that Paul contrasts those who were prepared for destruction with those who were prepared for mercy. The voice of the verb that is used here to prepare is passive with respect to those vessels fit for destruction and active with respect to those vessels fit for mercy. And there's something in that distinction that I think is important.
It's one thing to say that God actively prepared a vessel fit for destruction. It's another thing that He did it passively. The fact that it's passive in a certain sense absolves God from being the author of evil.
As we've wrestled with this text, we remember again that in this text, in the broader context of Romans 9, Paul appeals to the Old Testament book of Hosea, where God promises to make a people who were no people. And the analogy that he uses there again refers to the salvation of people who were fallen. And he also uses the term, O man, but indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God?
Our natural tendency is to interpret that question to mean all men universally. But if we look carefully at the book of Romans, we will see that the expression, O man, that Paul uses on several occasions in this epistle is a term that he uses to describe Israel. And again, the broader context of Romans 9 has to do with God's being merciful to some within Israel and judging the rest.
But the basis for that judgment is that those who were of Israel, who were supposedly the holy people of God, were nevertheless wicked, and some of Israel were not to receive God's saving grace.
A challenging text indeed, but one that fills me with gratitude, knowing that I'm an unworthy recipient of God's grace and mercy. This is the Friday edition of Renewing Your Mind, and I'm your host, Nathan W. Bingham. Today you heard a message from R.C.
Sproul's Hard Sayings of the Bible series, one of four series that Dr. Sproul recorded covering hard sayings from Jesus, the apostles, the prophets, and other places in Scripture. These four series, along with his hardcover companion book covering these hard sayings, can be yours when you give a donation of any amount at renewingyourmind.org or by calling us at 800-435-4343.
The book, Hard Sayings, is only available while supplies last. It's been very popular since its release. So I encourage you to visit renewingyourmind.org while there's still time. If you haven't subscribed already, I encourage you to follow Sinclair Ferguson's weekday devotional podcast, Things Unseen. Simply search for Things Unseen wherever you listen to podcasts.
¶¶