Chapter # 9 Paragraph # 3 Study # 1
November 4, 2008
Lincolnton, N.C.

<448> Thesis: Does "hate" compromise "righteousness"? Introduction: In our rapid flight through Romans 9:10-13 last week we attempted to make the point that the integrity of God automatically means that He does not subject His words to the choices and/or actions of men. There were two major issues involved in that study: the fact that "faith" simply cannot exist unless integrity is genuine; and, the fact that once God "speaks", His purpose is not only revealed, but enforced. Also in that study we saw that Paul's "proof" of his thesis is that God said through Malachi, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated" (Malachi 1:2-3). However, there are two paragraphs of thought in Romans 9:1-13. In the first, Paul makes a pretty big deal out of his "love" for an "Israel" that was into rebellion against God in a big way and suffering the consequences for it. In the second, Paul makes a pretty big deal out of the fact of God's integrity. But, at the very end of the second, Paul seems to destroy the impact of the first: he quotes certain words of the "believable God" that bring "hate" into the picture. If Paul intended his readers to believe that his love for Israel was genuine, wny would he cast himself in the light of an apostle of a God Who actively "hates" certain ones that descended from Isaac? Does not the profession of "love" die under the demonstration of "hate"? And, does this not give us a different answer to Paul's question in 9:14 than Paul gave? If God "loves and hates" with no regard for the "works" of men, how is He "righteous"?