https://youtu.be/SadXxaH3jEQ
In our study of Romans last time we started on Rom 9:19; where Paul presents two questions to his opponents.
Our translation so far is "Therefore you will say to me" or "you will say to me then." Next we have the first debater's question: "Why does he still find fault?" This begins with the nominative neuter singular from the interrogative pronoun "tis" (why).
With it is the adverb of time "eti" (yet or still). After all that Paul has presented the question is why is there still opposition. The tremendous logic and ability of Paul's presentation begs the question as to why anyone would say no to these things because any opposition is irrational.
The opposition is irrational because each doctrine is resisted individually, and as scar tissue is built up, arrogance is increased that causes blindness to the next concept without rational thought. At this point they have become totally implacable so their viewpoint is to reject everything that Paul says so they are thinking exactly what Paul is presenting in his question.
Then we have the present active indicative of the verb "memphetai" (find fault). We see from this that this debater's question anticipates objections to the doctrine of God's integrity and the doctrine of God's decree, as well as other related doctrines including election, adoption, and foreordination.
At this point the objection is irrelevant because it is blasphemous because it assumes that God does not know what He is doing and that perfect God is unfair.
Paul anticipates the antagonism of the racial Jew against the true spiritual heritage of Israel.
The racial Jew emphasizes physical genealogy and natural descent from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob while the spiritual Jew emphasizes the new birth and the spiritual descent from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
This becomes a conflict related to the natural and the spiritual seed of Abraham. It also demonstrates that irrelevance becomes irreverence by blaspheming and maligning God's integrity.
The blackout that is caused by scar tissue of the soul always finds fault with God and becomes critical of God's policy. In fact, scar tissue of the soul or hardness of the heart moves and enters places where angels fear to tread.
The self-righteousness and legalism of the Jews results in the distortion of doctrine that is the predicate for their rejection of Israel's spiritual heritage and the Lord Jesus Christ.
This first debaters' question anticipates a distortion of doctrine on the part of Jewish reversionists who follow the same pattern as the Pharaoh of the Exodus generation of Israel They see God's power and glory but they reject it.
It is inevitable that God's perfect character will find fault with imperfect sinful mankind so Paul poses his first question: "Why does He still find fault?"
The anticipation of omniscience, the reality of God's decree and foreordination, and the adoption of the elected ones, does not preclude, hinder or even contradict the function of God's justice when He judges and condemns.
After all, foreordination or predestination does not hinder, coerce or rescind the function of the free will of man. God never tampers with man's free will and man cannot tamper with God's judgments.
In fact, omniscience, foreordination and predestination acknowledge the free will of man and the principle of self-determination in human history.
On the basis of the imputation of God's judicial righteousness to those who believe in Jesus Christ God's justice has the right to condemn those who do not have God's judicial righteousness because they did not believe in Jesus Christ.
Men with free will have the freedom to reject Jesus Christ and God is free to judge and condemn those who reject Jesus Christ.
On the basis of the potential of the imputation of blessing in time to the target of God's imputed judicial righteousness God also has the right to administer punishment and discipline to those believers who do not attain spiritual maturity because they reject God's Word of Truth, those who are distracted from the study of God's Word, and those who resist God's Word.
So on the basis of God's perfect character God's integrity as the right to find fault with sin, human good, and evil, and to punish with strict justice all three categories of he old sin nature's function.
God's integrity and God's entire essence can never be compromised by finding fault, judging, condemning, disciplining, or punishing any individual or group within the human race.
The reality of judgment always elicits the reaction of "unfair" - "How can God be fair and do this and that?" As soon as people are in a reality situation where they know they are being disciplined or being judged and the old sin nature instinctively screams out "unfair" the result is that the benefit from God's administration of discipline and punishment is lost to that individual.
The concatenation of God's judgment or God's blessing is not subject to critical scrutiny on the part of mankind because mankind does not have the necessary facts or the necessary standards from God's Word to be critical.
The Jews found fault with Paul. They had a habit of finding fault because they had resisted truth. The less you know of the truth the more critical you are of the truth. They had resisted, just like the Pharaoh of Egypt, and they had the same buildup of scar tissue in their souls.
The more scar tissue the greater the arrogance and arrogant people who are ignorant of the facts are always critical. So even though they had the habit of finding fault they did not want anyone else to find fault and they even criticized God for finding fault. "Why does He still find fault?"
The second debater's question: "For who has resisted his will?" begins with the inferential use of the postpositive conjunctive particle "gar" (for) that is used to bring out an inferential concept. The inference is from the previous debater's question.
Next is the nominative masculine singular from the interrogative pronoun "tis" (who) followed by the perfect active indicative of the verb "anthistemi" (anthi = against; istemi = to stand so it means to stand against, to oppose, or to resist).
So far we have "For who resists." The dramatic perfect tense emphasizes the results of the action. It is the rhetorical use the intensive perfect. The action is completed in the past and the results continue at the present time.
The active voice: the human race in general is regarded as producing or attempting to produce the action of the verb. The indicative mood is interrogative so it assumes that there is a definite and actual fact that can be used in answer to the question.
With this is the dative singular indirect object from the noun "boumela" (will). It refers to a plan or project or purpose, goal or intention, and is sometimes means tendency so it means purpose or intention.
With it is the possessive genitive singular from the intensive pronoun "autos" (His) j, which in the Koine Greek is used for the third person singular personal pronoun. This is a possessive genitive so the phrase is translated, "For who has resisted his purpose (or, intention)?" His purpose or intention includes the function of His mercy or His hardening that we see in verse 18.
Paul's use of these two debater's questions anticipates the blasphemous attitude of the racial Jews. They picked up on the fact that if God had hardened Pharaoh's heart how can God blame or condemn Pharaoh for what Pharaoh has done?
Paul actually anticipates the view of supralapsarianism, a system of theology that blames God for Pharaoh's bad decisions and for Adam's bad decision. Supralapsarianism makes God the author of Adam's sin and the supralapsarianist would also make God the author of Pharaoh's bad decisions.
The blasphemy further implies that God is using Pharaoh as a patsy so it is God who has made the mistake and not Pharaoh. All of this ignores the fact of Pharaoh's free will. Pharaoh had the right of self-determination and was a free agent who was responsible for his own decisions.
God merely used Pharaoh's negative volition to evangelize Egypt and the entire world. Every time Pharaoh said no from his own free will God's greater function of omnipotence in the miracles of the plagues impressed Pharaoh's subjects resulting in the fact that the reality of God and the necessity for having a personal relationship with God on the basis of faith became apparent.
Pharaoh's continued in stubborn rejection of God and God's grace increased the scar tissue of the soul and at the same time sent out fresh waves of evangelism bases on his free will decision. The more Pharaoh said "no" the more the rational people of Egypt and the known world said "yes."
God used the "no" of Pharaoh to evangelize the world. That is one way that God uses the wrath of man to praise Him. God uses Pharaoh's negative volition to reveal Himself to positive volition throughout Egypt and the entire world.
Therefore Pharaoh must take the responsibility for his own decisions. God hardening of Pharaoh's heart had nothing whatever to do with tampering of Pharaoh's volition. God only gave him more time ant therefore more opportunity to say yes or no.
The fact that God used Pharaoh's negative volition to reveal Himself to the world did not cause Pharaoh to cease to be a free agent.
In eternity past God's omniscience anticipated that only the overruling omnipotence of God would deliver the Jews from their slavery. The Jews had been selected by God to form the first client or priest nation in history and only God's power would pry them loose.
But even God's power must not be coercive, and therefore God's power had to be used in such a way that Pharaoh was always a free agent in saying no. God's omniscience plus God's omnipotence combined to overrule the tyrannical arrogance, the great power and abuse of Pharaoh's authority.
Had the matter been left to the sovereign will of Pharaoh the Jews would still be slaves in Egypt. But in grace God's sovereign will vetoed the power of Pharaoh by freeing the Jews from slavery.
It was accomplished through the negative volition of Pharaoh. (Whether you say yes or no to God you are not going to stop God's plan. 2Cor 13:8;
In other words, God's purpose or intention was accomplished without destroying or rescinding Pharaoh's free will. The momentum of the plan of God continues without regard to the success or failure of human beings or the negative or positive volition of human beings.
Pharaoh did not lose his free will or sovereign self-determination but did use it against God's will. By hardening Pharaoh's heart God merely kept Pharaoh alive and that gave him greater opportunity to express to the maximum his free will by his opposition to God.
The greater the opposition the greater God's power that was manifested and used to overcome the opposition without in any way tampering with Pharaoh's free will.
The confrontation between God and Pharaoh with Moses being God's representative is a perfect demonstration of the coexistence of God's sovereignty and the free will of man. This coexistence is necessary throughout human history to resolve the angelic conflict.
God did not tamper with Pharaoh's free will but He did use Pharaoh's negative volition in opposition in contrast with Moses' positive volition to execute His perfect plan in human history.
As Pharaoh's free will expression of his negative volition gathered momentum God used that momentum of opposition to accomplish His purposes and His intentions.
Expanded Translation Rom 9:19; "Therefore you will say to me, Why does he still find fault? For who resists his purpose?"