Chapter # 9 Paragraph # 4 Study # 4
March 25, 2018
Humble, Texas
(Download Audio)
<037>
Thesis: Though there is no excuse for angel or man to rebel as "creature" against "Creator", there is a certain amount of divine revelation regarding why God permitted this "Sin" as well as why He continues to tolerate it for the present time.
Introduction: We have been considering Paul's clarification of God's larger plan. We have noted that that plan's clarification begins with the particulars of the "Love" of God as it is to be developed in the hearts of sinful men. In view of all that the Scriptures reveal concering the "smaller" aspects of this "larger plan", this is the only reasonable place to begin. Everywhere in Scripture, God's plan is revealed to be an eventual "Kingdom" of righteousness, peace, and joy. There are two points to make here: first, that no beneficial "Kingdom" can come into existence without righteousness, peace, and joy, and such things "coming into existence" are rooted in the one issue of the most fundamental divine attribute of all -- "Love"; and, second, that the plan is always presented as "eventual" means that there is a specific process involved that is focused upon God bringing His creatures into a full embrace of the chiefest characteristic of this most fundamental attribute -- the unhesitating willingness to be an ultimate sacrifice for the sake of those loved if need be.
From this goal of developing His "Love" in the hearts of men, God reveals the opposite reality that naturally follows; the clarification of the particulars of the "Hate of God" as in "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated". The main point here is that if "Love" exists in any meaningful way, "Hate" must also exist as the automatic reality of an attitude wherein certain existing realities are valued. Where there is "Love" for the sake of the beloved, there must be "Hate" for any and every thing that threatens the "sake" of the beloved.
Then we see Paul moving to God's declaration that He has a sovereign right to focus "Love" upon those whose sins have made them unworthy and, then, to show mercy. Within this "right" are two basic facts: first, that since all are initially unworthy (being active participants in Adam's sin), God reserves the right to totally ignore "behavior" as the basis for His decision(s) to focus His "Love", but to retain "behavior" as the basis for His execution of "Judicial Hatred". The conclusion of this part of Paul's explanation is that man's "willing" and "running" are not a part of God's exercise of the display of mercy, but man's "willing" and "running" are parts of His exercise of displays of hatred and He reacts to them with hardening as it suits His plan.
From there Paul moves to man's penchant to blame God for any and everything that happens to him that he has not wanted to happen. To this, Paul simply declares that man has absolutely no business setting himself up as God's judge so as to criticise Him.
That brings us to our last study in which we see that Paul says that God has been at work in all of these things to bring "Life" to its fullest potential as that potential exists in the realm of man's "knowledge of God". Life's most fundamental methodology is revealed to be in the process of getting to know God (John 17:3). Thus, if God really wants "creatures" to come to the essence of His "Love", He must give them access to the knowledge that will enable that goal.
Now, in our study this evening we are going to look into Paul's argument regarding the particular aspect of God's determination to reveal His "wrath" as a necessary subset to the revelation of His "Love". In order to bring man to the point of what we have called the chiefest characteristic of the most basic attribute, God must reveal what "the ultimate sacrifice" found in Love actually means. Without a revelation of "wrath", there is no possibility of understanding "sacrifice". But, as with all things revealed by God, sinners have twisted His truth. The particular twist that we see in this study has to do with the question of the origin of "Sin" and whether there is a "blameworthy" action on God's part in regard to that origin. The bottom line is the sinner's accusation that if God has an "irresistible will", then He must have forced the decision for evil upon the original sinner and that means that "sinners" are unfairly condemned if "righteousness" has any meaning at all.
What does Paul have to say about this?
- I. First, He Starts At The Beginning.
- A. That "beginning" is "O Man, No...".
- B. But that "beginning" had a previous "beginning" as revealed in Genesis 3.
- 1. In Genesis 3, the fall of man is engineered by a "tempter", the original sinner.
- 2. In Genesis 3, God had made provision for man before the tempter was permitted to act: He had told man what he needed to know to resist the temptation if he believed God.
- 3. In Genesis 3, man's rejection of God's words led directly to "sin" and "sin" led directly to Romans 9's issue of assigning blame to God for decisions made by adequately prepared man if he believed God.
- C. The point is that it is totally out of bounds for man to set himself up as an accuser of God in order to excuse himself.
- 1. Man's point of beginning with God is not "why" he sins.
- 2. Man's point of beginning with God is "that" he sins.
- II. Then, He Moves to The Necessity of "Life's" Revelation of Wrath.
- A. Without this revelation, there can be no "Life" because there can be no genuine "Love" because genuine sacrifice to the ultimate requires one to know what that ultimate means for him/her.
- B. Thus, God first "desired" to reveal "Wrath" and then He hardened that "desire" into "intention".
- III. And, Finally, There Is Paul's Characterization of God's Antipathy For the Existence of Vessels of Wrath.
- A. One thing the accusers of God ignore is what Paul says about God's real attitude toward this existence: they never explain how God can both "force" a sinful decision upon an unblameable creature, and yet "endure" what such "force" has produced.
- B. Paul's declaration is that the existence of vessels of wrath was despised by God.
- 1. When someone is compelled to "endure", that someone is being subjected to something deeply objectionable to him/her.
- a. No one has to "endure" what is "loved".
- b. "Endurance" is only for matters of "hate".
- 2. When that "endurance" is coupled to "much longsuffering", the issue of just how deeply the thing "endured" is despised is revealed.
- 3. When Paul declares that God "endured with much longsuffering", he is doing two things at least.
- a. First, he is revealing just how great is the problem of bringing many "sinful" sons to glory.
- b. Second, he is telling us pointedly that God did not "value" the existence of vessels of wrath.
- 1) This is the point that men do not understand: they, if they could, would never permit something to happen to them that they did not like (they would argue that if one has the power to deny, and does not deny, he/she really wants what can be denied to happen).
- 2) This is a major point in Paul's argument: God, though knowing how detestible the presence of Sin is and how destructive its actions, nevertheless "put up with it".
- a) His terms "put up with it" mean that He did not "force" its reality; He allowed it.
- b) "Allowance" is foremost in "despising the existence of something while permitting it to come into that existence".
- c) Though the creation of "persons" inherently raises the spectre of "Sin", it does not "compel" it and if it occurs, it will only do so because of "permission".
- d) And "allowance" inherently means that, though there may be other ways of accomplishing an objective, the thing "allowed" can, by knowledge and wisdom, be forced into the service of a good result.