Chapter # 3 Paragraph # 1 Study # 3
April 26, 2005
Lincolnton, N.C.
(Download Audio)

• I. The Structure of 3:5-8.
  • A. 3:5-6 raises a "Now if..." question that calls for an answer regarding God's character.
  • B. 3:7-8 raises a "Now if..." question that calls for an answer regarding man's activities.
  • C. Both "Now if..." questions are of the same essence.
    • 1. Both questions are asking about the impact man's sin has upon the issue of the "oracles of God" -- i.e., the "revelation of truth about God".
    • 2. Both questions are rooted in the theological foundation of David's psalm of confession (Psalm 51) in which he makes the claim that man's sin "unveils" the glory of God in a way that nothing else can.
      • a. David makes the claim that it is man's lies that bring God's integrity into the realm of observable light.
      • b. Paul pulls David's claim up into his argument regarding the greatness of the advantage men have who live in close proximity to the oracles of God.
  • D. Both "Now if..." answers are of the same essence.
    • 1. Both answers are responses to Paul's "What shall we say?".
      • a. This question means that we have to say something.
      • b. The necessity is no small, peripheral, issue.
    • 2. Both answers deny any "approval unto acceptance" by God of any wickedness by man.
      • a. This is an issue that has already been raised in 2:4-5 where men have already decided that God's activities in regard to them imply approval of them by Him.
        • 1) There is nothing further from the truth than this (and this makes "looking for confirmation from circumstances" a false method for determining the will of God).
        • 2) There is nothing more dangerous for men than this (men have an enormous penchant for setting aside the words of God and looking to experience to tell them about God).
      • b. This is an issue that Paul uses the strongest terminology possible to address.
        • 1) His "God forbid", followed by an appeal to a most fundamental theological truth in the universe, is his attempt to make sure no one misses his denial.
        • 2) His use of the word "blasphemy" and the phrase "whose condemnation is just" are also a part of his attempt to make sure no one misses his denial.
• II. Does It Make God Wicked to Use Man's Wickednesses For His Own Purposes?
  • A. Where does this question come from?
    • 1. Paul says it "comes from" his "speaking as a man".
    • 2. This phrase means that Paul is putting himself into a "human" reasoning mode.
    • 3. This phrase means that Paul is putting himself into a "vested self-interested" mode: this is the "human reasoning mode".
    • 4. This means that Paul is simply putting forth the kind of "logic" that men will always put forth when they want something that is not true to be true.
    • 5. This phrase means that Paul is absolutely disallowing the conclusion.
  • B. What is driving this question?
    • 1. On the most basic level, it is driven by the "pride of life" of the "Jew" and any who share that "driver".
    • 2. On the most immediate contextual level, it is driven by Paul's demand that the oracles of God be allowed to speak.
      • a. It is a constant problem that God's words are set aside by men and replaced by quasi-legitimate substitutes (Jesus excoriated the Jews for setting aside God's words in favor of "lust of the eyes" issues that were entrenched in "lust of the eyes" based traditions).
      • b. It is a fact that "some", however, will always "believe" God and those are always willing for the words of God to "speak" to them.
  • C. What is the answer?
    • 1. Most basically, the answer is emphatically "NO".
    • 2. In a more expanded form, the answer is that God is going to bring man's activities to judgment on the basis of their nature and motivation without regard for any "good" He managed to bring out of the situation by their actions.
    • 3. Everyone "knows" this at the "gut" level.
• III. Does It Make Man Less Wicked For God to Use Their Activities For His Own Purposes?
  • A. Where does this question come from?
    • 1. Paul says it "comes from" those who wish to accuse Paul of false teaching so that they may undercut his Truth..."some affirm that we teach".
    • 2. This means that fallen humanity wants it both ways...
      • a. They want to "reason" out of their self-interest that there is nothing wrong with their behavior if God is willing to use it.
      • b. They want to "deny" Paul's doctrine of man's sinfulness by accusing him of something that everyone acknowledges at the gut level.
    • 3. This means that no matter which side of the issue one "comes down on", if there is resistance to the doctrine that man is irremediably dominated by sin as far as any human solution is concerned, those "coming down on the sides of the issue" are still in error.
  • B. What is driving this question?
    • 1. It is still being driven by the "pride of life" issue.
    • 2. It is contextually being driven by those who wish to "take Paul's place" in the admiration of those he has been teaching.
  • C. What is the answer to this question?
    • 1. It is still an emphatic "NO".
    • 2. It is still man trying to get out of being held accountable.
    • 3. It is still a universally recognized "NO".