Or, Can Any Good Come from Evil? Romans 3:5-8 February 13, 2022 Lord’s Day Worship Sean Higgins

Introduction

The first time I read the following argument was in the fall of 1993 by a man named Erasmus. He wrote that some parts of the Bible are too difficult to understand, are likely to cause confusion, maybe even will lead to heretical teaching, and should therefore be untouched, certainly by untrained men and probably even by the academic theologians. Then I read Martin Luther’s response, which could be summed up as: Who do you think you are to know better what God Himself should or should not say? How arrogant does a man have to be to edit God and claim it’s for God’s own good? Of course, God can, and does take care of Himself, no thanks to us.

Whether we know it or not, whether we like it or not, whether the Prince of Darkness and the earthly powers rage against it, “God’s truth abideth still,” so we sing with Luther in “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God.” And it is truth, as revealed in God’s Word, that is above all those earthly powers. We should respect it, and receive it, not redact any of it. We use neither scissors of black Sharpies on our Bibles. We open the Book, read the Word, and pray that God would open our eyes to behold wondrous things in it.

That doesn’t mean that we immediately, easily, or necessarily ever fully understand it, not while in these mortal bodies. History, even church history, is littered with false teachers, with those who deliberately misunderstand and misrepresent God’s revelation. The apostle Peter, writing by the Holy Spirit’s guidance, wrote that some of Paul’s writings were “hard to understand,” and that “the ignorant and unstable twist (them) to their own destruction” (2 Peter 3:16). These are “lawless people” (verse 17) in their behavior even if they claim to be teachers of the law (see 1 Timothy 1:7). There are some hot takes so bad only a religious person could make them.

I say all that to introduce the next paragraph in Romans 3 where Paul acknowledges some willful accusations against his teaching about the relationship between God’s sovereignty and God’s righteousness. In these verses we have less explanation, but a great example and great encouragement for those with an ear to hear. Any problems we find do not lie with God’s Word.

We’ve been confronted with the need for the gospel since Romans 1:18. God’s wrath is revealed on those who despise His revelation. His glory is seen and magnified as He judges those who exchange the truth for a lie, who know God’s decree and who do the debased things anyway. We also saw that those who have enough moral conscience to condemn others are storing up wrath for themselves as they do the same things. And then we’ve seen Paul keep poking at Jewish pride since 2:17, those who boasted in the externals of religion rather than believing in their hearts.

The case of the Jews is especially important for Paul, not only because he was one, but also because they are a people with unique privilege, a people who had been chosen by God according to God’s sovereign grace, a people who had a covenant with God, many of whom rejected the Messiah, rejected God’s righteousness by faith, and were in danger of God’s wrath. How could this nation who had the law and the oracles and the circumcision be so unfaithful? Even more, is God sovereign over that unfaithfulness? And if He is, is it righteous for Him to hold men responsible for it?

Those are questions that have been making men squirmy and squirrelly long before our current effeminate Evangelicalism. Erasmus tried to get God off the hook for what he took as a bad look in the 16th century, Pelagius tried in the 5th century, and at least some were doing it in the 1st century. These sorts were always the first in line to talk to Paul after his sessions at the regional conference. He provides the Roman readers with the problem and the right perspe[...]