<H3>Chapter # 9  Paragraph # 4  Study # 2<BR />February 25, 2018<BR />Humble, Texas<BR /><a href="https://www.biblical-thinking.org/DOC-Ro3/audio.php?name=Rom180225.mp3">(Download Audio)</a></H3>

<033>

Thesis:&nbsp;&nbsp;  Paul's confrontation of the arrogant man is a blunt, "Who do you think you are?".

Introduction:&nbsp;&nbsp;  In our first study of this paragraph we tackled Paul's willingness to go to the heart of the issue as far as objectors to Truth go:  the issue of God having an irresistible will and a simultaneous commitment to visit judgment upon those who pursue evil.  In the objector's mind, God should give all evil creatures a pass since their existence as evil creatures is an integral part of God's irresistible will.  If, they say, evil is a part of the plan, and no man can resist the plan, God has no business finding fault with those who are simply going along with the plan.
In that study we put forward a primary observation:  it is hypocritical for men to "find fault" with God while claiming He has no business "finding fault" with them.
In this study we are going to look into Paul's reaction to that hypocrisy.

<ul><li>I. Paul's Reaction is "Horror". 
	<ul><li>A. The opening words of <b>Romans 9:20</b> are "O man, no...". 
		<ul><li>1. The "O man" part of the opening is "vocative" (direct address). 
		<li>2. The "No" is a word that is only used four times in the New Testament and in three of those four the translators of the 1769 Authorized Version go with "Yes" (<b>Luke 11:28</b>; <b>Romans 10:18</b>; and <b>Philippians 3:8</b>). 
			<ul><li>a. Part of the reason for this is that the word Paul used does not mean "Yes, or No" in and of itself:  it is an emphatic particle that posits either an emphasis upon a positive, or an emphatic correction of a negative. 
			<li>b. The second part of the reason is that a part of the translators' job is to reflect the actual meaning of an idea in the second language in use. 
			</ul>
		</ul>
	<li>B. As an emphatic contradiction of the idea that a creature has the "right" to "find fault" with God while disallowing Him to "find fault" with creatures, the phrase reflects a rather profound level of horrified opposition to the inherent hypocrisy. 
		<ul><li>1. At any point wherein an ignorant creature sets him/her self up to render a charge of ungodliness against an omniscient God, the underlying issue is towering arrogance. 
		<li>2. At any point wherein an immoral creature sets him/her self up to render a charge of immorality against the only wise God, the underlying issue is, again, towering arrogance. 
		</ul>
	</ul>
<li>II. Paul's Confrontation. 
	<ul><li>A. He challenges the arrogant creature with what the translators render "Who are you...?", but what in our day actually means "Who do you think you are...?" 
	<li>B. He then describes what the arrogant creature really is. 
		<ul><li>1. First, he is one who "replies against God". 
			<ul><li>a. The word so translated is only found in this text and one other (<b>Luke 14:6</b>). 
			<li>b. This other text is clear:  Jesus "shut down" the opposition by pointing our their hypocrisy. 
			<li>c. Thus, what Paul is accusing them of is trying to make God out to be an hypocrite for having an irresistible will and yet finding fault with sinners. 
			</ul>
		<li>2. Second, he is "the thing formed". 
			<ul><li>a. The word so translated is "plasma", from which we get the same word by transliteration. 
			<li>b. The only other uses of this word are in its verb form both in this verse and in <b>1&nbsp;Timothy 2:13</b>. 
			<li>c. The Timothy text is a comment arising out of the creation narrative wherein God "formed" Adam out of clay. 
			<li>d. A parallel concept in our setting is the pouring of molten metal into a mold so that the "form" is that of the mold, once cooling has occurred. 
			</ul>
		<li>3. Third, he is challenging the "right" of the "One Who Forms" to make the questioner as He has. 
		</ul>
	<li>C. He then pulls an illustration out of his own setting wherein a potter makes the choice of what he will "make" out of a part of the lump of clay which he has chosen to use. 
		<ul><li>1. He has the right to make of one portion of the lump a "vessel unto honor". 
		<li>2. He also has the right to make of the remaining portion of the lump a "vessel unto dishonor". 
		<li>3. This is a "right" that no one will dispute. 
		</ul>
	</ul>
<li>III. A Concluding Observation. 
	<ul><li>A. The "arrogant creature" has set himself up as a judge of God, thus attempting to take the place of God. 
	<li>B. The "judgment" of this arrogance is "in kind" along the lines of <b>Luke 19:22-24</b>. 
		<ul><li>1. The "austere man" does not contradict the claim; he simply pushes it to its logical conclusion in terms of what the complainer says. 
		<li>2. Likewise, the God Who is Judge, but also the God of Calvary, is simply subjecting the objector to what He has subjected Himself (You want to be God?  Then do not complain that your desire has led you to the same suffering that being God produces for Himself). 
		</ul>
	</ul>
</ul>