Who is Able to Resist God's Will? (Calvinist Position) - Steve Gregg

Hinzugefügt: 2026-05-11

[00:00:13]Uh, let's see. Mark in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Welcome.

[00:00:18]>> Hi, Steve. Thanks for taking my call.

[00:00:20]>> Um, I have a question on Romans 9. Um, I've listened to everything you have on Romans and I really appreciate it and it helps me understand it in a way that my gut feels and all that, but but um I obviously I have many Calvinist friends and um what I will say one of the points that I haven't heard you specifically address that I'd like you to to do to address um is on the the argument that was posed to me is so if we go Romans 9:19, why does why does he still find fault for who can resist his will? Okay. So the argument I had opposed against me was that the will that is referred to the word that's used for will is different than uh the Greek word there is different than the will that's used in other places for example right above that when he says um he hardens whomever he wills or just in other examples and so um so the first question is have you ever heard that argument how you respond and then the second question I have is more generic which is Um the response to that question, my understanding is that your position is that uh Paul is basically saying, you know, well, you can resist his will.

[00:01:37]This is a you have a bad premise. Your premise is bad. And and so I'm going to address that. But I think the Calvinist has a better argument or it seems on its face that when he says who are but who are you oh man to answer back to God you know what is mold uh will what is molded say to its molder and so on and so forth. I think that logically follows with uh from the Calvinist perspective like it seems like he is treating it like a serious question and he is saying yeah you know so so there's two questions one is have you ever heard that specific objection and how do you respond to it and the second one is the generic argument it does seem to be more in favor of the Calvinist position >> well it depends on what you're thinking as you read up to it and beyond it if you think that Paul is interested in presenting the Calvinist paradigm in this passage then of course it's going to seem like he's presenting a Calvinist paradigm because some of the things he says can be read through that lens what what I understand is Paul is has not broken away in this passage from the subject he was talking about just before it or afterwards chapter 9 10 and 11 he's discussing what is the nature of Israel and what what is the explanation for the fact that though the Messiah has come Israel has not been saved as the Old Testament prophet said Israel would be saved through the Messiah. And so the the question on the table is uh the Jew would be asking Paul, you say that Jesus is the Messiah, but our Bible says when the Messiah comes, Israel will be saved.

[00:03:13]But look on, you know, if if being saved means following Jesus, Israel has not been saved because Israel doesn't follow Jesus. And so Paul is saying, well, the the scriptures were not wrong. He says that in verse six of the same chapter.

[00:03:29]It's not that the word of God has taken no effect or has failed to come true because not all are Israel who are Israel. So he's saying what he's arguing here is there's a distinction between what we might call ethnic Israel as a whole race and the Israel that the promises of God are applicable to. And he and this is how he talks through this area. Verses 7 and 8, he's pointing out that Abraham had more than one son, but only one was the one the promises applied to. And that one, Isaac, had two sons, but only one of those was the one that a promises applied to. And and by extension, anyone might uh, you know, be a physical descendant of Abraham or of Isaac and the promise is not applied to him. And that's what he's arguing. He's saying you're wondering why God promised Israel would be saved when Messiah comes and now Messiah has come and Israel hasn't been saved. Well, who who is the Israel that would be saved? Not all who are of Israel, meaning not all who are descended from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are this Israel that was promised. And he goes on to say in verse 27 that Isaiah speaks of uh only a remnant of Israel would be saved. Isaiah said, "Though the number of the children of Israel be as a sand to see, only the remnant will be saved." So, he's saying only the faithful remnant of Israel are Israel. And he continues talking this way all the way through chapter 11. Now, the Calvinist thinks that at some point, I don't know where, maybe at uh probably verse 10, Paul decided to talk about an entirely different subject. He's he he stopped talking about who Israel is. He stops talking about what the promises how the promises of Israel salvation have been uh fulfilled uh to the true Israel and now he's just decided to go off and uh and and go on to a Calvinist screed where he's saying listen you know God doesn't give people choices about these things. Now Paul doesn't say that God doesn't give people choice about these things. Though some people uh particularly perhaps Manachans who believe that God does ordain all things sort of the Manachans are sort of the ones who first had the doctrines that later came to Augustine. Augustine was a manachan and then Augustine's doctrines were passed down through Calvin and so forth as Calvinism. But you know Paul is not changing the subject as Calvinists think. Calvinists like to take this block and say, "Look, Paul is affirming our doctrine of unconditional election."

[00:05:57]Well, I don't think he is. I think he's talking about the subject he was talking about. I don't think he's changed his subject. Uh I don't think he's off on a rabbit trail somewhere else. Uh what he's he's still arguing the same thing.

[00:06:10]He's saying that just as Abraham and Isaac's families uh you know were more numerous in number than the ones to whom the the promises applied because only one of Abram's seed of the of his eight sons only one of them the promise applied to him of Isaac's two sons only one of them the promise applied to him and by extension this continues there are other people who are descended from Abram Isaac and Jacob but the promise doesn't apply to them Well, he's what he has said just before the passage, the verse you're talking about. He says um well, actually it's just after it, isn't it? He says in verse 20, "Indeed, oh man, who are you to reply against God?

[00:06:51]Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, why have you made me thus?

[00:06:55]Does not the potter have power over the clay from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?" Now, the clay of course is is Israel. This is his subject in Romans 9 through11. He's talking about Israel.

[00:07:10]Okay. In Jeremiah chapter 18, the clay was Israel. God was the potter. So God can take one lump of clay, which is Israel, the nation, and divide it into two parts. And that's what he's been saying all along. He's saying of the children of Abraham, there's two categories.

[00:07:29]There's Isaac, who's the one that the promises apply to, and then there's all the others that the promises don't apply to. What he's saying is that God can take the ethnic Israel as one lump of clay and divide it into two categories.

[00:07:43]Those that the promises apply to and those that the promises do not apply to.

[00:07:48]And of course, he goes on from there to argue that the promise is made clear in Isaiah. Of course, we're in Romans 9:27 where he says only the remnant of Israel, not all Israel, but only the remnant of Israel be saved. So, he's arguing all the way through the same point. Now, when he talks about how God uh, you know, chooses to have mercy on whom he'll have mercy, he's making it very clear that God doesn't have to show mercy on the whole nation of Israel. In fact, when God said to Moses, "I will have mercy upon whom I'll have mercy."

[00:08:23]This was right after God had told him, "Get out of my way. I'm going to destroy the Israelites because they made a golden calf. I'll make an I'll make a greater nation out of you, Moses, and I'll wipe them out." Now, think of what that would mean. That would mean that all the Israelites, if God wiped them out, the ones that God made the promises to, he they wouldn't be included in the promises, but only a small remnant, the ones that would come from Moses would.

[00:08:48]Now, what what Paul is pointing out is God doesn't owe it to all Israelites, even disobedient ones, >> to fulfill his promises to them. He can he can show mercy to whoever he wants to, and he wants to show mercy on the faithful. and uh and he doesn't have to show mercy to those who are unfaithful even if they bear the stamp of the name Israel. He's talking about Israel here the whole time. And so, but then of course he introduces and you you know because you've heard me say this before, maybe some of the listeners have not. In verse 19, he says, "You will say to me then, why does he still find fault? For who has resisted his will?" Well, see, when Paul says, "You will say then," this is by no means the first time Paul has mentioned what he expects somebody to say in misunderstanding him back in chapter three. And and several times, chapter six, chapter 3, and chapter six, he expects people to misunderstand.

[00:09:45]Um, and he says, "Well, if if what I'm saying is true, then is this other thing true?" Certainly not. Now the other thing that he says is not true is what somebody might mistake him to mean. And he's doing the same thing here. You will say to me then now now the fact that they will say it doesn't mean it's true.

[00:10:06]>> They will say it because they're objecting to what they think he's saying. But in every case where Paul raises what someone might object to him, they are misunderstanding what he has said.

[00:10:18]you know they they they you know so he said for example he says in at the end of chapter 5 he says so that as sin reigned unto death so grace might reign so where where sin abounds grace abounds much more okay well that's true but in chapter 6 verse one says well then shall we continue in sin so grace will abound you see he's just said that where sin abounds grace abounds more well then it's good for grace to abound so maybe we should sin more now see that's a total uh misunderstanding understanding of what he said. Although they're it kind of sounds like he might have said that, but they misunderstood his meaning. So he has to clarify it. So here also, I believe that's what he's doing. He says they think he's saying that God's will is done with every individual.

[00:11:01]What what he's saying is that God has the right to choose what portion of Israel is the true Israel and which ones are not. And and the answer is the faithful are, the remnant are the true Israel, the others are not. God's got the right to do that. Now, someone's going to personalize that. And that's what Calvinists do. In fact, Calvinists are the ones who make the this objection is the one that the Calvinists themselves seem to raise. They make the same mistake because he says, "You will say to me, then why does he find fault for who has resisted his will?" Now, we have to recognize everyone recognizes those are rhetorical questions. Uh a rhetorical question is really a statement that's made in the form of a question. To say how can he find fault means he can't find fault. That's I mean the question is implying he can't find fault because who has resisted will means nobody has. So the these two statements are rhetorical questions that are really in a sense affirmations. No one he he cannot find fault. Paul if you're right then then God cannot find fault because no one has resisted his will. And Paul says wait a minute here.

[00:12:10]I didn't say no one has resisted his will and Paul couldn't say that no one has resisted God's will. Now you know it says for example in Luke 7 and verse 30 that the Pharisees the Pharisees rejected the will of God for themselves by not being baptized by John. It says so God wanted them to be baptized by John but they didn't and thus they rejected God's will for themselves.

[00:12:36]Okay. So obviously people can reject or resist God's will. In fact, that's kind of the whole theme of the Old Testament, isn't it? I mean, God has a will for Israel and they keep rejecting it. He doesn't want them to worship other gods, but they do. Uh Jesus said, of course, in Matthew 23, uh Jerusalem, how many times I would have gathered you as a hand gathers through chicks under wings, but you wouldn't come. So, I mean, it's it's the theme of scripture almost almost throughout that God has a plan and a desire for people, but they reject it too often all the time. Stephen said to the Sanhedrin in Acts chapter 7, uh, which of the, you know, you always resist the will of God? Which of the prophets did you not kill? And so forth.

[00:13:20]So I mean for Paul to suggest no one has resisted God's will would be for him to ignore Jesus, the prophets, you know, every frankly the whole Bible. And so he's not saying that. But the but the objector thinks he is. They think what he has said implies that nobody has rejected God's will. And if that's true, they're saying he can't find fault because whatever people do that he's finding fault for was his will. And Paul's Paul's saying, "I never said that." And and and the second statement, who has resisted his will, since it's in the form of a question, Paul answers it.

[00:13:56]Who are you? You're answering against God. That's resisting. Now, I don't know how we can escape that. They've asked a question. Who has resisted God's will?

[00:14:07]It says, well, for example, you. Who are you?

[00:14:10]>> You want to know who has? You have.

[00:14:11]>> Okay, that makes sense. That makes more sense. That's And I' I've heard you say it. It never clicked cuz I I follow you every like I follow that line of thinking through Romans and it makes sense to me. This is just the one weak point where I'm like well it does sound like he's saying like hey shut up you know like you know >> don't talk back to God. But when you say if the who is the who now but you there was one thing you didn't address if I and that's a specific thing of the will argument. I'd never heard it and someone asked me that and I on whether the will that he's saying is the quote unquote secret will what you just you you kind of describe it. Okay. God has a secret will and he has what he want.

[00:14:48]>> There are different words in the Bible for will that are more or less synonyms just like just like there are >> Oh my it's Are we already out of the first half hour? Um let me come back to you because we have to take a break here and I'll I'll hold you over and we'll address that very point. Okay. Please do. All right. All right, you're listening to the narrow path radio broadcast. Uh the music means we're at the halfway point. We're not done. We have another half hour coming, so don't go away. At the half hour point, we'd like to let you know that the narrow path is listener supported. And uh if you'd like to help us stay on the air, you may. You don't have to. Everything at our website is free. Our our uh our radio program is commercial free and and free to you. But if you want to help us down there, you can. You can write to the narrow path P. Box 1730, Tmacula, California 92593.

[00:15:43]Or you can go to our website. You can donate or just take stuff for free. It's the narrow path.com.

[00:15:51]That's the narrow path.com.

[00:15:53]I'll be right back. Don't go away.

[00:15:55]>> If truth did exist, would it matter to you? Whom would you consult as an authority on the subject? In a 16 lecture series entitled The Authority of Scriptures, Steve Greg not only thoroughly presents the case for the Bible's authority, but also explains how this truth is to be applied to a believer's daily walk and outlook. The authority of scriptures can be downloaded in MP3 format without charge from our website, the narrowath.com.

[00:16:45]Welcome back to the Narrow Path Radio broadcast. My name is Steve Greg and uh we're live for another half hour. So uh stay tuned and if you our lines are full, we'll be taking calls through this entire half hour. If lines open up, I'll let you know the number and invite you to call. But looks like we're probably going to be busy for this hour half hour with the questions that are already waiting to be asked. uh before uh the break we were uh talking about uh the question of whether uh people could resist God's will and and Paul had said that uh you know God's will is done in the in in the selection and actually in the saving of the remnant of Israel and his passing over the unbelieving portion of Israel and that is God's will and God has the right to do what he wants to accept who he wants to accept. Now, he accepts people who are believers.

[00:17:47]He has the right to make that the basis for acceptance and he has done so and so he can reject unbelievers and he's not unfaithful. He's got that right. Now, that's what we're talking about. We were talking about Romans 9:19 where the question is raised uh well, who has resisted God's will? How can he find fault uh for who has resisted his will?

[00:18:06]and we were uh discussing whether there's two words for the will of God.

[00:18:11]There's there's numerous uh words in the Greek for a will or the you know the word will or desire.

[00:18:20]Um uh you know those desire and will are uh translated interchangeably sometimes. I mean purpose could be a translation of the word also.

[00:18:32]uh this particular word is only found twice in the New Testament but similar words and ones that are uh derived from the same root uh are found numerous times like the word that uh who has resist resisted God's will is ble in Greek and it's based on the word boly which is used a number of times. uh there's possibly not very much difference in their meaning. But the idea the the only other time that particular word is found is in Acts chapter 27 and verse 43 where it says but the cent centurion willing to save Paul kept them from their purpose.

[00:19:12]That's the same word bimma. Um the purpose that is the will of the people were to kill the prisoners. when Paul was about to be shipwrecked and the the soldiers wanted to kill the prisoners on the ship uh but someone stopped them from their purpose or from their will, their intention. So the you know the will, the intention, the desire, uh the purpose, these are all possible meanings of what we use the word will to mean and what the Bible means. Now, so there are different words for will. The question though related to Calvinism is are there two kinds of will of God? Uh Calvinists believe that God has two wills. His what we might call his decreedal will and and his secret will or his prescriptive will which is where he commands us to do something. He says don't murder, don't commit adultery.

[00:20:07]He's expressing his will that people not murder and not commit adultery. And uh if we say can people resist that will of course people do commit adultery, people do steal, people do murder. So God's will that they not do so is violated.

[00:20:22]But Calvinist say but there's a secret will of God, another will of God and that is what he really wants to happen.

[00:20:30]It's not always the same as what he says he wants to happen because they would believe for example and Calvinism does teach this that God ordained by his sovereign grace that Adam and Eve would fall and that frankly that he ordained everything that happens including every sin that's ever committed. But let's take that one. They that God ordained that Adam and Eve would fall. The fall was decreed by God's sovereign decree.

[00:20:55]That was part of his secret will. It was a secret because he told them not to do it and gave the impression that he didn't want them to do it. He said, "Don't eat that tree." Now, if we were to deter determine what his will was in the situation, we might think we should determine it by what he told them. He said his will was for them not to eat it.

[00:21:15]I mean, I don't know how he could have expressed it plainer. But Calvinism says, "No, there's another way to know the will of God, and that is what happens. What actually happens was decreed by God. So there's what God tells people or implies that his will is for them and then his real secret will is what they actually end up doing.

[00:21:34]This is how they maintain an idea of sovereignty of God that is not biblical but is manachan. It's a manachan doctrine uh that everything God wants happens. Well, the Bible teaches that not everything God wants happens. In fact, a great number of things God doesn't want happens. That's why he complains and is angry so often because he didn't want things to be done that are done. But Calvinism said, "No, no, he's just putting on a show there. He's he really did want it to happen. He decreed it. He could have done it differently if he wanted. Everything happens just as he wants. According to his good pleasure is what the Westminster Confession of Faith says.

[00:22:12]Everything happens according to God's good pleasure." Okay. Well, the Bible doesn't say that and it doesn't seem to agree with the way God acts in the Bible. Even Jesus wasn't happy about everything that happened, nor Paul. And therefore, it would seem like they didn't hold the doctrine that everything's really just going the way God wants it to. Now, the idea that there is a secret will of God as well as his uh revealed will, we might say, does not is not based on the idea that there's different Greek words for will.

[00:22:43]There's a number of Greek words that can be translated will, but they're all more or less the same in meaning. There's not like one of them that speaks of secret will and another another. It's just that the whole concept of willing. Let's face it, we have layers of will. For example, God wanted people not to sin. That it was his will that people not sin. It is his will that we don't sin. It's also his will that we have free choice. His will is that we'll use that free choice not to sin. But because we have free choice, which is also his will, we might end up sinning against what he'd prefer.

[00:23:17]It's like if you are trying to train your children how to manage money and you say, "Okay, I'm going to give each of you kids uh $10 and I'd like you to uh you know give a dollar to church if you want to uh you know put aside some money to give to the poor and then spend the rest on on good things." and uh you you want your kids to do good things, but you're giving them responsibility, which means you're giving them freedom to do maybe something other than what you'd prefer. Now, your will that they should have the choice is your overriding will. You have a a more negotiable will, I suppose, that uh that they should only give or use their money the right way. But because you have a stronger desire to let them make up their own decisions, you're willing, unfortunately, to have some things you would prefer not happen.

[00:24:17]Uh, and I believe that's how it stands with God. God wanted to make creatures that had free will. This means they could do the wrong thing. He didn't want them to do the wrong thing. He didn't decree that they would do the wrong thing. Uh, there are different layers of will. There's like our dominant desire, our dominant will, and then there's what we really wish would happen and want to see happen, but we would not sacrifice the dominant thing for that lesser thing. So, yeah, there's different wills, different degrees of will. But these are not the same categories that Calvinists talk about. Calvinists talk as though God really wants one thing but commands you to do the opposite thing.

[00:24:54]In other words, God has two wills that are contrary to each other.

[00:24:59]and that the Bible does not teach. And certainly the Greek words for will not support that. All right.