Agnosticism, Atheism, Bible Study, Christianity

Romans 9: A Divine and Fickle Dictator

Nate

It had been a while since I’d read Romans 9, but an email correspondence that I keep with a Christian caused me to read it last night. When I was a Christian, this chapter had always been difficult for me, but that’s because I was trying to fit it within my own theology. Last night, I was struck by several things I had forgotten and thought it would be worth sharing.

For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.” And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls — she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”
— verses 6-13

Here, Paul makes a distinction between those who belong to Israel by birth, and those who are children of Abraham by faith. In other words, just because someone is Jewish does not mean he/she is really God’s child. He then points out that even before Jacob and Esau were old enough to know right from wrong, God rejected Esau in favor of Jacob. That seems a little arbitrary, doesn’t it?

What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.
— verses 14-18

So is God being unjust in choosing one infant over another? Not according to Paul. Why? Because God can do what he wants.

What kind of answer is that? If Paul’s argument were true, then there would be no such thing as right and wrong. God is always right, regardless of his behavior, because whatever he does is right by default. That flies in the face of what most Christians believe today, yet that’s Paul’s position. And he anticipates an argument about it:

You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, oh man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory — even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?
— verses 19-24

Paul’s only defense is that we can’t question God. But we’re not questioning God, Paul, we’re questioning you and the authors of the Old Testament.

And don’t miss what Paul says here. He’s saying that God creates some people to show mercy toward, and he creates others that he can use to demonstrate his power. He’s a god with an inferiority complex. Such a god does not actually care for his creation; he uses them as pawns for his own glory. And who is this god trying to impress? Obviously not humans, if he thinks so little of us. And he’s supposedly the only deity, so who’s he putting on the show for?

And what about Paul’s argument regarding the potter and the clay? On one hand, there’s a decent point there. It’s kind of like “don’t look a gift horse in the mouth.” If someone gives you something, don’t be overly critical of it. So if God gave us life, who are we to question him on the quality of it? The problem is Paul is saying more than that. He’s saying if God created you and finds you inadequate, you can’t put that back on God — you can’t complain “why did you make me this way?” But Paul’s wrong about that. If God’s not happy with how humanity turned out, that’s not our fault, it’s his. It would be like a child putting a model together incorrectly and then becoming angry at the model. It’s not the model’s fault that the child built it wrong, so it would be unjust to take that out on the model.

Paul’s God is fickle and arbitrary. He makes people like Pharaoh disobedient, and then punishes them for their disobedience. He picks others for glory and mercy, who have done nothing to merit such favor. The sad thing is that many Christians view this as a good thing and talk about God’s wondrous mystery and mercy. This is not a good thing. Such a God is untrustworthy. Unlimited power and a personality disorder make for a very dangerous combination.

And the description of God in this chapter is at odds with other passages that claim God is the embodiment of love and wants all men to be saved. Both versions can’t be right. In addition to its contradictory descriptions of God, the Bible is filled with all kinds of contradictory accounts, failed prophecies, immoral commandments, bad science, and faulty history. Why do so many people, even after learning about the Bible’s faults, continue to believe that it teaches anything accurate about the supernatural?

Unknown's avatar

Published by Nate

184 thoughts on “Romans 9: A Divine and Fickle Dictator”

  1. There WAS a flood in Mesopotamia, Marc, in 2900 BCE, which is 3000 years too recent to have been affected by glacial ice melting. I don’t know your familiarity with the Sumerian Kings List – there are in fact, several of them, and they don’t all list the same kings, but the one king they all agree on is Ziusudra, a king traced by modern methods to have ruled the City-State of Suruppak in 2900 BCE. On each of the Sumerian Kings Lists, his name is given, followed by the phrase, “and then the flood swept over.” For more on Ziusudra, try here.

    Like

  2. Your chronology sucks Arch. If you understand that the generations of Genesis are patriarchal periods were the the next patriarch is born in the same year as the death of the previous patriarch unless he was named by the previous patriarch, the chronology using the Septuagint places the creation of Adam and Eve at about 12,000 BC. the beginning of the Neolithic period. This same chronology places Noah’s flood at about 6,000 BC., the same time as the massive ice melts and rise of worldwide sea levels.

    Like

  4. Actually, the chronology isn’t mine, Marc, it belongs to the Jewish people who originated all of this BS, but I’ll certainly pass along your critique.

    “…the generations of Genesis are patriarchal periods were the the next patriarch is born in the same year as the death of the previous patriarch unless he was named by the previous patriarch….

    That’s a clever trick, how’s it done, magic?

    Like

  6. Sorry, that’s what happens, kc, when I try holding two conversations simultaneously – I called you by the other person’s name, then scrambled to hit “cancel” after I’d hit “Post, but too late. I haven’t done that since that time with my now-ex-wife —

    Like

  8. According to answersingenesis.org Noah’s Flood happened in 2348 BC

    Calculated BC date for creation: 4004
    Calculated AM date for the Flood: – 1656
    Calculated BC date for the Flood: 2348
    Current Year (minus one2): + 2011
    Number of years since beginning of Flood: 4359

    Like

  12. Most biblical authorities give a range from your date of 2348, and 2600, but then I’m sure we can all agree with Marc, that these authorities’ calculations — what was that technical term again? Ah yes, “suck“!

    Like

  13. Sorry Arch. I meant to say “most biblical authorities” use chronologies that suck.

    Given that most of the readers here believe that biblical authorities and the Bible itself sucks, I am glad you can all agree with me because I slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

    Like

  14. Actually Marc, I was truly hoping you were going to give some references from some authorities we could read that describe the calculations you’ve noted. I’m being serious – your chronology is new to me and I am curious. I’m not near as knowledgable about things pertaining to the flood like Arch, so you won’t get any fight from me on this one.

    Like

  15. That makes sense:

    2900 BCE – the Euphrates River overflows it’s banks by 15 meters, during the Jemdet Nasr period, flooding three counties.

    2600 BCE – the Epic of Gilgamesh is written ascribing a week-long, area-wide flood to the wrath of the Mesopotamian gods.

    2300+ – the Hebrews plagiarize the Mesopotamian flood story, attributing it to their god.

    Like

  18. Howie,

    I don’t have any authoritative references for you regarding the patriarchal generation approach to a chronology of Genesis. I first read a work by Harold Camping regarding this approach some years ago before Harold lost his marbles. I believe he got it from a 19th century work by some obscure Christian missionary whose name I can’t find right now.

    http://www.biblemysteries.com/library/adam.htm

    Like

  20. All you have to do, Howie, is imagine tribes of Semitic nomads, unsanitary, unwashed, unimaginably poor dietary habits as a result of not having a steady diet of staple vegetables, due the inability of nomadic life to sustain gardens, having no health care of any kind, yet able to live 6-10 times the length of the lifespans of the healthiest humans who ever lived on the planet. Then imagine one generation of them miraculously dying, just as the next generation is born (talk about absentee father-figures!), this continuing through generation after generation, then imagine all of the above happening by magic, and you’ve just about got it.

    Familiarize yourself with the Sumerian Kings List, previously mentioned (if it were possible to upload an image on these WordPress sites, I’d show it to you) – they credited their kings with unimaginably long lifespans, 20 thousand years, 30 thousand years, not uncommon. So when the Hebrews stole that from them, as they did most of the stories of the Torah, they realized that no one was going to buy into lifespans that long, so they dropped them down to a MUCH more credible 7 or 8 hundred years!

    Anybody wonder why Harold Camping checked into the rubber room? Cognitive dissonance! If you have any kind of conscience at all, and you’re trying to peddle moose-turd pies, sooner or later, something’s gotta give.

    Like

  21. Re: Water water everywhere!

    You guys are a hoot! You point out (correctly) that determining an exact date for the flood is like trying to figure out Superman’s birthday. But that doesn’t stop you from posting comment after comment puzzling over the question. Reminds me of conversations you hear on the ‘Big Bang’. How did Ma Kent sew a suit for her son? What sort of scissors could she have used to cut indestructible cloth from Planet Krypton?

    If you’d like to read something that actually makes sense, something that approaches a work of mythic fiction in the way it ought to be approached, read this: http://reflectionsofacatholicchristian.wordpress.com/2012/02/04/gods-beautiful-idea/

    Paul

    Like

  22. Marc – thanks for the link. I’ll try to read it after work, although I’m sure Arch would say it’s not worth my time ;-), but new ideas always make me curious.

    Like

  23. “Nor any drop to drink” – I must assume that was the password d’jour, and that I am now, in —

    I’m still wrestling with how the man with the big red S shaves! I WILL check out your link – thanks, I was wondering what I was going to do with today.

    Like

  24. @Arch – I always did wonder about those oddly long lifetimes – as usual you’ve got me laughing again – a great start to my workweek!

    @Paul (CC) – I can’t help but thinking sometimes that you are actually an “atheist” of the Joseph Campbell type. But some of your posts give me other impressions, so you are for sure a mystery, which is perhaps an enjoyable thing for you. So I’m not trying to peg you down to some specific label, just trying to learn your perspective as I’m sure you’ll continue to expound in the future. 🙂

    Like

  25. No, Howie, I would never say that! It would surprise you all of the things I read, to get a good laugh.

    This thing Marc is suggesting may be good for a chuckle or two, but for a REAL OMGROFLMAO, among the religious genre, I’ve yet to see beaten Louis Ginzberg’s Legends of the Jews. Mr. Ginzberg, as the name might imply, is far from anti-Semitic, but he has collected a vast series of legends that have grown out of biblical stories, and some of them will crack you up. Remember, in Chapter 14 of Genesis, when these five kings and their armies from Mesopotamia came into the Levant and fought and defeated four other kings, and for reasons making no sense whatsoever, kidnapped Abe’s nephew, Lot, and his family, and Abe and his 318 Ninja/goatherds chased those five armies of seasoned, battle-hardened troops the entire length of the Levant, from the south end of the Dead Sea, all the way to Dan, a hamlet in the north that wouldn’t have existed until one of Abe’s grandchildren, Dan, established it a couple of hundred years into the future? Sure you do!

    Well, in Legends, the reason Abe was so successful in retrieving his nephew was because Abe miraculously grew to a height of 50 feet, and each of his strides was a league, so it was easy to catch up with the fleeing army. I’m guessing Marc’s source should be at least as funny as that!

    Ah, those whacky Hebrews can sometimes be more fun than a barrel of matzo balls!

    Like

Leave a comment