Chapter # 9 Paragraph # 4 Study # 3
March 4, 2018
Humble, Texas
(Download Audio)
<035>
Thesis: The main issue of "irresistible will" is God's "intention" to make "Life" possible for created persons, both angelic and human.
Introduction: We have been working our way into Paul's claim that God is legitimately free to show mercy and to harden. The claim is given a foundation in both "Love" and "Hate", the counter-points in Values. This foundation is primarily fundamentally attached to the basic methodology of relational reality: Promise/Faith. And the key illustrations are two: God's production of Isaac as the base-line in Promise theology (which includes the downside of keeping Sarah barren until "faith" was developed); and God's declaration to Rebecca that it was His decision that the stronger would serve the weaker in respect to her twins without regard for the behavior of either one. Ironically, no one seems to be terribly upset over the "Isaac" issues involved, but many are moved to take up the "hate-that-they-heavily-criticise" as soon as the "Jacob/Esau" issues are brought up. Make no mistake, those who accuse God of being "unrighteous" for removing "the behavior of man" from the issues of His relational realities "hate" Him.
In respect to this "hatred for God", the opposition continues in its hypocritical blindness to "find fault" with Him for His finding fault with them.
All of this is linked to the reality of God as One Who both "desires" and "intends". And, again, ironically men do not seem to have any problem with God's desires as long as He allows them to decide if His desires will be satisfied. They only seem to have a problem with God's "intentions" because, at that very point, they lose their ability to run their universe as they see fit.
This evening we are going to look into the issue of God's desires and intentions.
- I. What Is The "Bottom Line"?
- A. The text before us does not directly indicate this bottom line.
- 1. Our text raises the "methodological bottom line", not the actual "objective".
- 2. The "methodological bottom line" is the transition in God's "desires" to His "intentions".
- a. Our text raises the question of the implications of God having two "desires".
- 1) The first of these desires is "to bring into human understanding" what it means for God to be "Just".
- a) The key words are "demonstrate" and "wrath".
- i. The word "demonstrate" means "to bring something that is not understood into a kind of clarity that enables true understanding" (an illustration being both telescope and microscope in respect to the "pre-sets" of human sight).
- ii. The word "wrath", though heavily invested with emotional overtones, actually simply means "legitimate legal retaliation" in a cause/effect universe wherein are billions of actions that create repercussions (an illustration being Leviticus 24:19-20 -- one of several stipulations in "Law" for "legitimate legal retaliation).
- b) The fundamental issue is that aspect of "the glory of God" that has to do with how He governs "behavior" with "Justice".
- c) It is Paul's contention that men do not naturally understand "wrath" and that it is crucial to them that they come to that needed understanding.
- 2) The second of these desires is to make known what it means for God to be "Omnipotent".
- a) The key words here are "make known" and "power".
- i. The words "make known" are a translation of a term in the New Testament that is almost exclusively used to refer to "declaring something to be true" (making known, in the New Testament is almost invariably tied to "declarative speech", where explanatory words are used to enhance clarity [note Romans 1:20 and the implication that what man "knows" from creation is too fuzzy to be able to do more than settle the reality that God is powerful]).
- ii. The word "power" is the ultimate term for power and its focus is upon the final outcome of the use of it (so that "victory" is the issue in the use of "power").
- b) The fundamental issue is that aspect of "the glory of God" that has to do with final accomplishments, especially in the face of great opposition and difficulties: the "omnipotence" that renders all of the opponents abject failures.
- c) This is the heart of Paul's concept of "the irresistible will" of God.
- 3. Thus, we have the transition from "desires" to "intentions".
- a. God fully intends to bring to light what it means for Him to be "Just".
- b. God fully intends to explain what it means for Him to be "Omnipotent".
- B. So, what is the actual "bottom line"?
- 1. It is apparently necessary to this "bottom line" that men come to grips with "the glory of God".
- 2. This means that each of the attributes of God must come to clarity in order for the "bottom line" to be achieved.
- a. Infinity argues that none of the attributes of God can be exhaustively grasped.
- b. But "Life" argues that none of the attributes of God can be unknown or out of balance.
- 1) Any unknown diminishes "Life" to a significant degree even to the level of disaster.
- 2) Any imbalance also diminishes "Life" to the same end.
- 3. In the Scriptures, there is one objective for clarity regarding the essential makeup of God: the experience of "Life" by creatures of God (John 17:3).