Chapter # 10 Paragraph # 3 Study # 4
September 23, 2018
Humble, Texas
(Download Audio)
(077)
Thesis: Paul's claim to be an "apostle" of the true God specifically "sent" to the nations is
not undercut by the facts of Psalm 19.
Introduction: In our last study, we considered the fact that "faith" arises out of the "hearing" of the Gospel and that, that "hearing" results directly from Christ's commissioning of "apostles" to "go and preach".
This "conclusion" expressed in Romans 10:17 is unlikely in that it is drawn from the fact that "not all" (a euphemism for "most") reject the "hearing" to which they are exposed. This was Isaiah's declaration. If the "hearing" is ineffective in "most" cases, why claim that "faith" arises from the "hearing"? Because the claim is the truth. The process is not undercut by the fact that it fails more often than it succeeds.
But this train of thought leads us to understand what Paul says next.
- I. Does Paul's "Conclusions" From Isaiah 53:1 Mean That It Is a Lack of "Hearing" That Is the Reason For the Lack of Faith?
- A. Remember the conclusions.
- 1. That "who has believed our report?" means that "belief" requires the prior "report" (faith arises out of "hearing").
- 2. That "our report" means that the "reporting" requires a prior "sending" by the "Lord" (thus, the "hearing" arises out of the commissioning of the Christ).
- B. Think of the possible reaction.
- 1. If "faith" arises out of "hearing", but the "hearing" is "discriminant" because it rests upon the "word of Christ" (both His commissioning and His particular oversight in directing the commissioned as to the particular places to "go" to "proclaim"), then, perhaps, the lack of "faith" is caused by the absence of a "universal" -- non-discriminating -- "hearing".
- 2. This is the way men typically react: it is God's fault if men don't believe Him.
- C. Thus, Paul's next words.
- 1. His use again of the abrupt "reversing adversative" (he used this tactic in 68 verses in Romans).
- a. What he is challenging is what his readers are likely to conclude from what he has declared.
- b. What he is declaring is cast in the form of "doctrine" ( legw ).
- c. What he is asking is whether his readers are understanding that doctrine.
- 1) For whatever reasons, the translators have been swayed into casting his words into a question about whether "they" have heard and a declaration that "indeed they have".
- 2) But the words actually question whether it is his teaching that "they" have not heard and give his answer that "No" that is not what "I am saying"; "rather" what I am saying is "they" have heard.
- d. Given the penchant of fallen men to try to excuse themselves, his readers may have decided that "since the hearing is by the decision of Christ", what Paul is saying is that those who do not believe are those who aren't given the chance to hear.
- e. This Paul denies with his "reversing adversative" and his "no, rather...".
- 2. Paul's "doctrine" is not that salvation is rooted in a discriminating Christ Who only gives some a "hearing", but, rather, the lack of salvation is rooted in a consistent rejection of a "hearing" that every single human being is given.
- a. His argument is from a verbatim quote of a portion of the Septuagint version of Psalm 19; a psalm that declares two forms of "revelation", one of which is universal and one of which is particular.
- 1) Psalm 19:1-6 declares a universal exposure to a real and substantial "hearing".
- 2) Psalm 19:7-14 declares a non-universal exposure to an even more real and more substantial "hearing" (this was an element in the great advantage to being Jewish that Paul declared in Romans 3:1-2).
- b. His argument for a universal "hearing" is couched in the words of 19:4 that indicate a "hearing" (a sound) that has gone out "unto all the earth" and a "content" (words) that has gone out "unto the limits of the inhabited world".
- 1) We need to understand Paul's "theology" of God's making known His truth to grasp this.
- 2) Though not referenced with a "verbatim quote", this is the same truth that undergirds Romans 1:19-20.
- a) In this text, the content of the revelation is said to be "...what may be known of God..." and "...the invisible things of Him..." so that men are responsible and without any form of legitimate "excuse" for failing in their responsibility.
- b) The specifics of this revelation are nailed down: "...His eternal power and Godhead...".
- c) The argument is potent.
- i. The basic issue, in the Romans 10 text, is "good news of good things".
- ii. Paul argues that "eternal power" pushes for a recognition of this basic issue and he argues that "His Godhead" pushes the same result.
- iii. It is ironic that men have consistently used the empty "problem of evil" issue to detract from this witness because it is far harder to explain the existence of "good things" in an evil creation than it is to explain the existence of "evil things" in the creation of a "good" God.
- iv. It is the nature of "evil" to destroy all good, but it is not the nature of "good" to destroy all evil.
- v. "Good's" toleration of some levels of "evil" is a testament to its "goodness" Who would deny that grace, mercy, patience, long-suffering, etc. are not "good", even though those "good things" are only recognizable in the face of evil?
- vi. It is the testimony of Scripture that the Good God is never going to completely eliminate all "evil" from His "good" creation, for "the smoke of their torment will ascend forever and ever" (Revelation 14:11).
- vii. Interestingly, "good" cannot be forced to serve evil goals, but "evil" can be forced to serve "good" ones (Romans 8:28).
- c. The bottom line is still Isaiah 53:1 -- no matter what the "hearing", it is met with disbelief by a large majority.
- 1) The problem is not a discriminatory restriction upon what is allowed to be heard by the Christ.
- 2) The problem is that, no matter what He reveals, it is consistently met with contempt and antagonistic disbelief.
