Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Mercy Not Sacrifice

Home
About
My Book
Archives
More
- Theology
- Culture
- Politics
- Sermons
- Bible
- Devotions
- Daily Office
- Podcast

Home
Progressive Christian
Who is Romans 9:22-23 talking about? (A response to Greg Boyd)

Who is Romans 9:22-23 talking about? (A response to Greg Boyd)

Last updated on: July 17, 2014 at 2:25 pm by Morgan Guyton

Who is Romans 9:22-23 talking about? (A response to Greg Boyd) 2014-07-17T14:25:25-05:00 Morgan Guyton

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I’m one of the “pod-rishioners” of the popular Michigan pastor Greg Boyd. One thing I love about Greg is his earnestness in wrestling with aspects of the way the gospel has been framed that bother him. He’s very open about the fact that it’s often inconclusive wrestling. A lot of times I agree with him on the problem he’s identified but differ on the solution. One such occasion was several weeks ago in his sermon “Does God play favorites?” Greg confronted the infamous favorite verse of Calvinist double-predestinarians, Romans 9:22, where Paul talks about people who are God’s “objects of wrath created for destruction.” I wasn’t entirely satisfied with the way that Greg dismantled this verse, because its context points to a much better answer than just saying “This seems out of character with Jesus’ nature” or making a comparison with Jeremiah’s potter house prophecy in Jeremiah 18, which were Greg’s two approaches.

Romans 9:22 is often proof-texted out of context to support the double-predestinarian Calvinist claim that much of humanity, perhaps even the vast majority, have been created by God to serve as reprobate extras in the salvation drama of humanity. In other words, their pre-doomed existence serves to create meaningful challenges and character foils for the predestined elect, the small group of people whose sins Jesus actually died to forgive. Verse 23 is used by people who espouse this claim to explain why God creates people who are damned from birth: “to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory.”

The way that some of the most hard-core Calvinist pastors like the famous Puritan preacher Jonathan Edwards have explained how God “makes the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy” is to speculate that this might refer to the way that those in heaven are given the privilege of watching the torture of the damned, which is what Edwards describes in his infamous sermon “Sinners in the Hand of an Angry God”:

You shall be tormented in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb; and when you shall be in this state of suffering, the glorious inhabitants of heaven shall go forth and look on the awful spectacle, that they may see what the wrath and fierceness of the Almighty is; and when they have seen it, they will fall down and adore that great power and majesty.

Obviously the image of heavenly inhabitants falling down to worship God in celebration of torture is the most disgusting depiction of heaven that you could possible conjure, which is why it’s attractive to the “manliest” of disciples among us, those who follow the Kantian caricature of “objectivity” that says truth is whatever is most disagreeable to our sentiments. Boyd says rightly that this interpretation of Romans looks nothing like Jesus. But I don’t think he offers a better alternative that effectively accounts for Romans 9:22-23.

Romans 9 expresses Paul’s profound grief at the way that his fellow Jews have rejected Jesus as their messiah. And they haven’t just politely declined to become Jesus’ disciples, but rather have persecuted Paul and his fellow apostles ferociously. By the time Paul wrote this letter to the Romans, he had nearly been killed many times for what he was preaching. He describes this in 2 Corinthians 11:24-27:

Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was pelted with stones, three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea, I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my fellow Jews, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false believers. I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked.

So when Paul talks about “objects of wrath” in the context of grappling with an explanation for the disbelief of his people, this isn’t an abstract category. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to understand the “objects of wrath” as Paul’s Jewish persecutors and other Israelites throughout history who have persecuted their prophets. This seems consistent with the comparison Paul makes in Romans 9:17 to the Egyptian pharaoh who had oppressed the Israelite slaves. In setting up this section, Paul says in verse 6 that “not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.” The “objects of wrath” could be defined as those who are descended from Israel without being Israel.

This explanation would fit with the very particular grammar of verse 22 that many eager Calvinists seem to skate right over: “What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath?” The emphasis is not on the display of God’s wrath but on the patience with which God bore objects of his wrath. The grammar suggests that it’s God’s patience and not His outpouring of wrath that fulfills the purpose of “making the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy.”

Verse 24 adds that these objects of mercy are called “not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles.” Subsequent verses use the prophets to debunk Israel’s exclusivity of election. What this suggests to me is that Paul’s polemical agenda is to argue that God’s preservation of the Israelite people throughout history doesn’t constitute their unconditional approval by virtue of birthright.

“Bearing with great patience the objects of his wrath” refers to the fact that God preserved not only the Israelites who emulated the faith of Abraham, but also the Israelites who persecuted their prophets and made themselves objects of wrath, not because God wasn’t going to hold them accountable for their sin, but because God needed enough of a viable nation to work with in order to accomplish the eventual extension of the gospel to the Gentiles.

Even a cursory look at the context of Romans 9 shows that Paul is not making a universal statement about double-predestination in Romans 9:22-23 but giving a providential explanation for God’s patience with the disbelief of much of Israel for the sake of the evangelism of the Gentiles, a point which he continues to reiterate throughout the stream of discourse in Romans 9-11.

Regardless of how satisfactory this answer is, the two most important words in Romans 9:22-23 that almost everyone ignores are “What if.” Paul gives a very different level of force to what he is saying by framing it as two “What if” questions rather than making very direct, unequivocal statements which he does in plenty of other places. It is remarkable how many double-predestinarians have completely ignored these two critical words.

The bottom line is Paul was grieved that so many of his people are rejecting the gospel and persecuting him. He’s grappling for an answer and throwing out possible explanations. It seems like certain Christians want the Bible to be more distasteful than it is in order to give them an excuse to flex their theological muscles and show how tough they are. Paul didn’t write what he did to give us muscle-flexing opportunities. In fact, he would probably say that the reason people who do that haven’t been struck by lightning yet is because “God bears with great patience the objects of his wrath.”

Theology

2 Corinthians 11

Calvinism

Double predestination

Previous Post

January 18, 2013

Lance Armstrong and the need for grace

Next Post

January 21, 2013 Justice as a question of piety vs. holiness

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Advent Beauty Will Save the World Bible Big Picture: Ephesians Bloggers Book Christian salvation and the Beautitudes Culture Daily Office Danceable Homiletics Deadly Sins Deep Roots: Genesis Devotions Dominican Republic May 2011 El Principio Misericordia (The Mercy Principle) Five verses God tattooed on my heart Fundraising FutureGospel Good Biblical Words Henri Nouwen Interview Jennings' Christian Imagination Jesus inside the beltway Jesus Is My Candidate Jesus vs the Pharisees Jesus vs. Plato Journey to Eternity Looking Back on 2012 Love Actually Monday Merton Monday Merton Music Occupy the manger On Earth As It Is In Heaven Original Sin Podcast Poetry Politics Prayer Psalm 119 Radical Jesus 101 Reviews Sermon on the Mount Sermons Spanish Bible study Special Series Spiritual but not religious Synchroblog Theology Things that made me think Thomas a Kempis Ugliness Into Beauty Uncategorized Viaje Dominicano 2013 Walking in the Valley (Lent) Welcome: It's More than a Mat Wild Goose 2013 Wrestling

Select a Month March 2022 January 2022 December 2021 September 2021 April 2021 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What does the name "Delilah" likely mean?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Beloved Beautiful Delicate Wise