Romans - April 05, 2009

SECTION --- Five: Vindication of God (9:1 -- 11:36) .
(continued from previous Class Follow Up)

D. Evidence Applied [Discussion Question Answered] — What is the proof who is God’s people is a matter of God’s purpose and not what one is due because of their family tree?
1. God made a pre-determination between Abraham’s children and Isaac’s children(two nations) as to who was preferred to carry out God’s purpose without any input other than God’s choice. We may look back in history, as are the “LOM Christians” to justify God’s choice but God did not need to justify His choice for it was made before history was involved.
2. The point Paul is making is what has taken place is according to God’s promise in God’s way as God has seen fit, not a family tree or some mis-understanding by the children of Israel.
E. Conclusion — Paul is not discussing how one or who receives salvation after the gospel plan of salvation was established, but showing the Jews that God chose the means and “people”, not a nation, to established the way to be saved (cf. Rom 1:16, 3:25). Expecting the Jew to obey the gospel plan of salvation does not mean God changed His mind or was less than honest with the Jew.

III. {Rom 9:14-18} 2nd of 3 Arguments — Example of God choosing as fits God’s purpose
A. Introduction
1. Review — Paul has established the physical decedents of Abraham (the Israelites) have reason to be proud and deserve respect for their “family tree” for they have been blessed by God, as their history clearly shows. However, God’s choosing is not based on one’s “family tree” but as the Creator He chooses, i.e., God’s as the creator can make decisions without human input and His decision are correct.
2. Preview — Our merciful God did not require human input as to what is fair or unfair to make a decision that is correct — God chooses whom he chooses to provide the fulfillment of Gen 3:15.
B. Question For Discussion?
1. How did God justify His decision regarding Pharaoh?
C. Questions For Encouraging Discussion...
1. (9:14) Based on context what is the significance of the rhetorical question, “There is no injustice with God, is there?”
a. God, the Righteousness One, has the authority and power to pick between Jacob and Esau the instrument best fitting His purpose — man’s salvation.
2. (9:14) Considering the reason for this Section (Vindication of God [9:1-11:36]) what should the listeners learn?
a. God, the Righteous One, has the power and authority to reject the Nation of Jews and accept the individual Gentiles.
3. PONDER: What could the readers say to prove Paul’s reasoning is not valid?
a. By the twins’ actions clearly Jacob was a better person than Esau, thus, God chose the best person.
b. Problem with this position is we can only look at what happen to Esau, thus, can only speculate what Jacob would have become if Esau had been the one “God loved.”
4. (9:15) Paul quotes Exodus 33:19. What light does this shed on Paul’s position.
a. The context of Exodus of 33:19 is God’s refusal to be in the mist of those who had worshiped the “Golden Calf”. Thus, Moses and the people are experience the “wrath side” of God. Moses is concerned God decision to not be among the people will give the world the impression they are not a special people. Moses ask to see the “good side” of God. God shows Moses His “goodness”, but informed Moses God is the one who determines who will receive God wrath or goodness.
b. POINT: God does not required man’s wisdom or concept of right and wrong to make His decisions.
5. (9:16) What is the difference between “the man that wills” and “the man that runs”
a. To will indicates to be resolved or determined to a purpose; To run indicates to spend effort for a purpose.
6. (9:16) What does this have to do with Jacob and Esau?
a. Choosing between Jacob and Esau was entirely what God wanted, man’s actions or wants had nothing to do with the choice. Only one could carrying on the promise of Gen 3:15 and that one was Jacob, argument closed.
7. (9:16) What is the significance of “So then...”
a. A conclusion based on the previous is drawn
8. (9:16) What is the conclusion the non- prejudicial reader should draw regarding Paul’s position on the Jew’s means of salvation.
a. In the previous case (Joseph and Esau) God had the authority and right to chose whom he wanted to serve his purpose (Gen 3:15) . In the case of the Law of Moses or the Law of Christ as the means of salvation; God has the authority and right to choose who must be obeyed to receive God’s mercy (fulfillment of Gen 3:15) and God chose the Law of Christ.
9. (9:17) What is the significance of the 1st and 2nd “for” in this verse?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A LOOK AHEAD
a.
10. (9:17) What are your thoughts on the phrased “I raised you up...”
a.
11. (9:17) PONDER: In light of what Paul has said, was God unfair in His dealings with Pharaoh, i.e., could Pharaoh let God’s people go after the water turned to blood, or did Pharaoh have to continue rejecting God’s will?
a.
12. (9:17) PONDER: What do you feel would have been the results if Pharaoh had let the people go when Moses first ask?
a.
13. (9:18) What does this statement do to the Jew’s concept, “God owes us salvation?”
a.
14. (9:18) Does this verse support the TULIP doctrine God has determine specific individuals who are saved or not saved? Why that answer?
a.

D. Evidence Applied [Discussion Question Answered] — How did God justify His decision regarding Pharaoh?
1. God (creator of Time, Space, and Mass) does not seek to justify His actions. God, who is the example of real mercy and compassion, does what is best for the salvation of mankind, even if mankind (who does not understand real mercy and compassion) does not agree.
E. Conclusion — Based on history the Christian, who are influenced by the LOM, have just been told they do not have the ability, knowledge, or wisdom to suggest or say God’s plan of salvation through Christ, thus, replacing the LOM, is not the right thing to do.


IV. {Rom } 3rd of 3 Arguments