Toward a Unified Theology: Sovereignty, Responsibility and Faith in Romans 9-11
ONE OF THE GREAT MYSTERIES of the universe concerns what astrophysicist Stephen Hawking has termed the "unification of physics." In A Brief History of Time, Hawking described back in 1988 what still amounts to the Holy Grail of theoretical science - a unified theory of physics: "Today scientists describe the universe in terms of two basic theories - the general theory of relativity and quantum mechanics.... One of the major endeavors in physics today...is the search for a new theory that incorporates them both - a quantum theory of gravity." While the search since then has apparently turned up little in terms of consistent, satisfactory results, the unification of physics remains a subject worthy of our consideration. As Hawking concludes, "A complete, consistent, unified theory is only the first step: our goal is a complete understanding of the events around us, and of our own existence."
Something similar could be said of our study of Scripture. To understand biblical theology is to see the big picture - to get a glimpse of our place in the plan of God as a clue to the meaning of the events that make up our everyday existence. And there is no better sourcebook for viewing the big picture than Paul's letter to the Romans. In terms of the theological indicatives found in its first eleven chapters (rather than the more practical imperatives characteristic of chapters 12-15), the book of Romans may be seen as a unification of individual theological essentials: of universal sin, blood atonement, grace without measure, salvation by faith, renewed relationship with God, freedom from bondage under the law, and finally, an eschatological vision of the higher purpose of God as revealed in human history. This last revelation, the subject of chapters 9-11, is often bypassed by Bible teachers because it involves seemingly irreconcilable concepts such as the sovereignty of God and individual human responsibility. (As a former pastor of mine confessed in a sermon: "That is a theological pretzel I'm not even going to attempt to unravel.") Perhaps these teachers could learn something from their counterparts in the secular sciences: The fact that the big picture extends somewhat beyond the scope of human understanding is no reason to cease exploring it altogether. Indeed, that fact is precisely what makes the picture in the book of Romans so big.
Like any other portion of Scripture, Romans 9-11 is best understood in its various contexts. The particular historical context of Romans, for example, reveals that Paul is concerned with mending a widening breach between a growing contingent of Gentiles and a Jewish minority making up a threatened if not openly persecuted church community. The Roman historian Suetonius' record of the expulsion of the Jews from Rome by Claudius in A.D. 49 indicates that the Jews particularly had felt the heat of persecution and likely had lost their majority position in the church. From the evidence of Acts 15 and the letters to the Galatians and Corinthians it may be deduced that the Jewish and Gentile factions in the church misunderstood and mistrusted one another. Paul is concerned with healing the breach, addressing both parties alternatively throughout his letter with assurances of spiritual equality (2:11; 3:9-24; 3:29) and appeals to mutual respect (14-15). Indeed, Paul's main thesis is a gospel message "to the Jew first and also to the Greek" (1:16). The historical situation thus explains Paul's division of humanity in the salvation scheme of Rom. 9-11 into the nation of Israel and the Gentile nations. Moreover, Romans is marked by an insistent, almost apologetic demonstration of God's righteousness - as revealed in the preceding chapters (1-8), first through his righteous judgment of all men as sinners and then in his righteous redemption of men by the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ on the cross. In chapters 9-11, Paul extends this theme to apply to entire nations and peoples as yet another striking testimony to God's sovereign grace, wisdom and righteousness. Most importantly, Romans is a book about the gospel of our salvation. Paul's message is not a dry academic treatise but a joyful declaration of good news, evidenced in 9-11 by the salvation of both Jews and Gentiles as a fulfillment of the purpose of God in the earth.
The Unassailable Sovereignty of God
Chapter 9 opens with the disclosure of Paul's burden for the Jews, "my countrymen according to the flesh," who for the most part had failed to embrace Jesus as the Messiah (v.1-5). Paul's anguish not only demolishes any imagined theological basis for anti-Semitism in the church, but raises the profound question: How is it that God's "chosen people" have seemingly not been chosen? Paul assures us that "the word of God has not failed" (v.6), and supplies a twofold response: First he reminds readers that "Israel" pertains to more than the physical ancestry of Abraham, but rather to the community of elect believers throughout history chosen by God and defined by his promise. So even among Israelites salvation begins with divine election and initiative. Moreover, salvation is a purpose fulfilled strictly by God's grace, irrespective of human works. It is a principle vividly expressed by God himself in the OT: "Jacob I have loved but Esau I have hated." Jacob had few redeeming qualities, yet God chose him. Such an insight serves to confound human pride and demonstrate the centrality of God's grace in the plan of salvation. But it also leads to a further question, seemingly logical from a human viewpoint: "Is there unrighteousness with God? (v.14) Is it really necessary to "hate" (reject) Esau in order to "love" (receive) Jacob?
Paul is undaunted by such questions. He answers by appealing firstly to the sovereignty of God himself, indicated in his words to Moses in v.15: "I will have mercy on whomever I will... and I will have compassion on whomever I will..." Paul's answer reveals the reality of a divine perspective and prerogative, which really should surprise no one. It's only to be expected that the omnipotent Creator would have a different perspective than does his creation. God is sovereign, and if he wasn't sovereign he wouldn't be God. On the other hand, Paul's focus is not merely on God's sovereignty but his mercy. Salvation is "not of him who wills nor of him who runs but of God who shows mercy" (v.16). It cannot be attained by willpower or works. It is an act of pure mercy because, as Paul established earlier in chapters 1-3, all men are deserving of judgment as sinners. So is there unrighteousness in God granting mercy to certain of these sinners? No, because extending undeserved kindness is not unrighteous. Grace is a privilege, not a right. Consequently, God is under no obligation to save Pharaoh (or anyone else) even while saving his own elect from under Pharaoh's cruel dominion. To the contrary, God uses Pharaoh for his own larger redemptive purposes - in much the same way that Pharaoh has exploited God's people for his own sinful purposes for so many years. In the process of all this, Pharaoh becomes hardened. A frightful spiritual dichotomy thus emerges, as it appears that there are but two kinds of people: those finding mercy and those hardened. "He has mercy on whom he wills and whom he wills he hardens" (v.18).
Hence the next question to appear in Paul's rhetorical dialogue has to do with an objection against what is essentially a fatalistic doctrine of predestination: "Why does he still find fault? For who has resisted his will?" (v.19). Why blame Esau if God hated him, or Pharaoh if God hardened him? Paul at this point subtly inserts human responsibility into the whole equation for the first time (and certainly not for the last). He answers a paradoxical question with another: "[W]ho are you to reply against God?" Or to put it another way, "How can you ask this, since replying against God this way shows you capable of resisting his will?" One cannot embrace God's sovereignty and argue against it at the same time. Objecting to God's sovereign rule thereby reveals not only the folly of the will, but its power. But the fatalistic interpretation is faulty for a few other reasons: First, the context of Rom. 9-11 has to do with God's utilizing of individual lives in history as parts of his larger preordained plan of salvation; it really has nothing to say on whether those individuals are, or are not, or can ever be, saved or free to choose or anything else. Second, the context of Romans as a literary unit, and of the entire NT for that matter, indicates that if God wants to "find fault" he doesn't have to look very far: All have sinned, i.e., all have resisted his will. If God redeems anyone he's really being very kind. Finally, it may be that God "raised up" Pharaoh for specific reasons not stated in the text. We know that Pharaoh was an insolent, rebellious, unbelieving man. It is at least plausible that his insolence and rebellion precipitated the hardening of his heart, and not strictly vice-versa.
In any case, all the text tells us (and all we need to know in terms of the plan of God) is that God in fact raised him up for a divinely appointed purpose. In keeping with the theme of sovereignty, Paul proposes a hypothetical ("what if..") beginning in v.21: It is certainly conceivable that God, much like a potter working with clay pots, exercises his own sovereign discretion in setting aside certain "vessels of wrath," so that in the end he might make new "vessels of mercy" - "even us whom he called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles" (v.24). God is a powerful creator, and he can build with all sorts of materials. Thus no one's labors are in vain, not Esau's nor even Pharaoh's. Those particular "vessels of destruction" may in fact never be saved, but before they destruct, God will use even them to accomplish his redemptive rather than destructive purpose. This too is a demonstration of grace. Otherwise as Isaiah says of Israel, "We would have become like Sodom, and we would have been made like Gomorrah" (v.29).
The Unavoidable Responsibility of Human Beings
Still, if the Bible consisted of nothing but Romans 9:1-29, I for one would have few objections to Calvinism. However, in v.30 Paul reaches a conclusion that cannot be separated from the entire dialogue leading up to it: "What shall we say then?" I.e., What's the point of all this? "That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith." Echoing the conclusion from chapter 4, Paul maintains in a larger context that salvation is still by faith. And faith still means two things: (1) A recognition of man's depravity and God's righteousness. This is a key part of what Paul has been driving home to this point. The Gentiles found righteousness not by seeking righteousness, that is, in themselves, but by believing the message of God; (2) A response of human volition or will. In my opinion, this has everything to do with Paul's conclusion, which answers the big question: Why? Why are some saved while others are not? Why did Israel seem to have missed the Messiah? "Because they did not seek it by faith" (v.32). Now Paul shifts the focus to Israel's prerogative. They did not seek it by faith. And though they stumbled in their own pride and ignorance, apparently they had opportunity: "...And whoever believes on him will not be put to shame" (v.33). In my view, an understanding of faith in Paul's argument helps make at least some sense of the disparate spiritual realities of divine election and human decision that somehow converge at the point of salvation. Faith is not reducible to an expression of God's sovereignty; neither is it reducible to an expression of human willpower or works. Faith is an act of the will, yes, but an act that repudiates the ability of the will to obtain righteousness and instead recognizes the power of God alone to save. In other words, faith is the human acknowledgement of divine sovereignty.
So what is the good news of the gospel? It is certainly not that Jesus died to save some of us. The doctrine of limited atonement would be very bad news. No, the good news is that God so loved the world - Jew and Gentile alike - that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him would be saved. Whatever exactly election may mean, it does not mean denying men an opportunity for salvation! Rather, it seems to mean something to the effect that God alone has the moral authority to initiate salvation - we cannot so much as choose it, much less live it, apart from his grace. And he has decreed from the foundation of the world that those who would respond to him in faith would be saved - and he alone knows who they are. It is a waste of time for us to try and figure out who will finally wind up being saved; thus the proper response to the gospel is not to endlessly speculate, but to confess Jesus as Lord and believe that God has raised him from the dead (10:9). This indeed is the glorious message of chapter 10 - that salvation is available to all who will hear and believe the gospel. "For whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved" (v.13). Moreover, almost as if to ensure that his people do not misunderstand the message and settle into a comfortable Calvinist-Stoic indifference to fate, God has specifically appointed the church with the responsibility of sending preachers into the world to minister the gospel, the hearing of which is essential to salvation: "...And how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent?" (v.14-15). We are sent to preach that the message may be heard, because "faith comes by hearing" (v.17). On the other hand, the Jews have heard and yet have rejected the same message. Because faith is not automatic, it may be said truly that unbelief also comes by hearing.
The Inscrutable Plan of God for Humanity
What does this mean for Israel then? "Has God cast away his people?" (11:1) Chapter 11 is a comprehensive answer to that question. One would almost expect Paul to respond with a hearty "yes" here, as would many Christians. After all, Paul has gone to great lengths in preceding chapters to prove that all men are sinners, that salvation is by grace through faith, and that saving faith must have Jesus Christ as its object. In sending Christ to the cross, God has provided the final sacrifice for sins. There is nothing more to be done than to believe in him. The Jews as a people have failed to appreciate any of this. It only stands to reason that God would shrug his shoulders and say, "Hey, I tried. If they don't want to get saved it's their problem!" Paul's response to this is that God's grace is again beyond human understanding, sufficient even for the salvation of persistently unbelieving, "disobedient and contrary people," those who reject Christ. "Even...at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace" (v.5). (This should also serve as yet another scriptural warning against judging others. Who are we to say who's going to heaven and who's not?) So the pattern of grace repeats itself. Just as God had a remedy for the fall of man in Christ, he now has a remedy for the Jews' rejection of Christ. It is again fully dependent on God's election and grace, and this time God's instrument to open the eyes of his people is... the Gentiles! "But through their [the Jews'] fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles" (v.11). In an ironic role reversal orchestrated at God's discretion, the Gentiles now enjoy center stage as his elect, so that the Jews, now looking on from the outside, might again call upon the Lord for salvation. The picture that emerges is not of a fixed predestination scheme, but of a highly fluid interaction of aggregate human wills under the wise governance of a sovereign God. With his illustration of Israel as the olive tree and the Gentiles as branches grafted onto it, Paul explicitly cautions against misreading human fatalism into divine election:
"You will say then, 'Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.' Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off. And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, for God is able to graft them in again" (11:19-22).
The language there suggests open possibilities ("He may not spare you either") depending on human decisions ("if you continue in His goodness"). Therefore the story of God's presiding over salvation history is not over. In the divine plan of redemption, God will again choose Israel in a final master stroke of grace - to bring in a last harvest of Gentiles and then redeem both Jews and Gentiles forever: "For if their being cast away is the reconciling of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?" (v.15) The glorious resurrection of the entire church is actually contingent on none other than the conversion of the Jews. This perspective of Israel's role in the redemption of the nations serves as an antidote for the arrogance of the Gentiles, who might otherwise be tempted to think of themselves as God's permanent chosen replacements for the Jews. As is turns out, God is now using us (Gentiles) to save Israel, in the same way that he used Israel to save us. There is simply no grounds for Gentiles, a "wild olive tree," to boast against the cultivated tree to which they have been grafted strictly by grace. After all, the Gentiles have been brought in "so all Israel will be saved" (v.26).
Paul's astounding conclusion of the entire matter is that God is able to use even disobedience - whether that of Jews or Gentiles - to fulfill his sovereign plan. "For God has committed them all to disobedience, that he might have mercy on all" (v.32). In his great love and mercy, God has determined to save his people. Not even rebellion can stop him! To follow Paul's argument from beginning to conclusion is to follow him right into his spontaneous worship of God expressed in v.33: "Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out!" Paul's argument is much more than a "theological treatise." It is like Stephen Hawking's examination of the physical universe, a testimony to the mind-boggling wisdom and majesty of God. Hawking asks, "Even if there is only one possible unified theory, it is just a set of rules and equations. What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe?" For believers the answer should be obvious. In the same way, the soteriology of Romans is not merely a set of abstract doctrines and principles. It points the way to the living God, who breathes fire into our theology by actively working in the course of history, down to the details of our very individual lives, saving for himself a people called by his name. As Paul continues into the opening verse of chapter 12, such a God is worthy of unreserved praise, worship and obedience: "I beseech you therefore brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service...."