Romans 9, Predestination & Total Depravity
A Critique of Reformed Theology
Romans 9 - Introduction
The following musings on Romans 9, 10 and 11 are probably not presented in the most logical order. However, they represent the process I went through to arrive at my present understanding. I started with the general belief that the Reformed understanding of Romans 9 was correct. We’re talking early 70’s here. The first thing I couldn’t make “fit” was Jeremiah 18. That passage is so explicitly conditional and national that it didn’t make sense to me why Paul would reference it to support the idea that Pharaoh and Jacob and Esau were individually predestined from eternity past by immutable decree. Then I started digging into Jacob and Esau. More contradiction and confusion ensued. I could not understand why or how Paul was using Genesis 25 and Malachi 1 to support the idea that Jacob was loved and Esau was hated by sovereign decree of God in eternity past when both passages were explicitly national and concerned Edom and Israel. Pharaoh was also an exegetical mess. (God hardened Pharaoh’s heart/Pharaoh hardened his own heart.) At that point, I came to the conclusion that Paul wasn’t saying what I thought he was saying. I couldn’t figure out what he was saying, but I was convinced that what I had believed he was saying was wrong. It seemed hopelessly contradictory. After much thought and struggle without resolution I finally accepted the “contradiction” – I gave up - and was prepared to live with it the rest of my life.
When I first began the debate with my Calvinist opponent it was frustrating to me how much he used Romans 9 to support the idea of God’s monergistic predestination of individuals in eternity past to salvation or reprobation. He was constantly citing Romans 9, Jacob and Esau, Pharaoh, etc. I just couldn’t see past the problems I had had for the previous 25 years with interpreting it in the Calvinist manner. Furthermore, at the beginning of our dialog, neither could I offer a coherent interpretation to counter his position because I had given up trying to understand it roughly 15 years previously.
NOW, however, as a result of the afore-mentioned dialog with my beloved Calvinist opponent and seriously revisiting Romans 9 through 11 after at least 15 years of benign neglect, I have resolved these issues to my own satisfaction.
I will emphasize the points of conflict first, those things that I couldn’t get to “fit” with the Reformed interpretation, then resolve those conflicts by giving my interpretation towards the end, all of which I hope will adequately illustrate WHY I do not accept the Reformed position on this text.
The best way to read this material is click on the first link in the "Romans 9" sub-menu, or the "Jacob and Esau" link below. You can then proceed by following the link at the bottom of each page.