1) Romans 9 – The chapter Romans 9 has been mentioned almost 300 times in emails. Lots of questions about that chapter. Today a question about why Calvinists so often speak of election of believers as unconditional, but the reprobation of the non-elect as conditional. Question from Henry, "Dear Pastor John, hello.

In Romans 9 10-13 Paul says God loved Jacob and hated Esau before either had done anything good or bad. I've heard many Calvinists say election has nothing to do with works alone, good or bad, present or foreseen. That's true and glorious. However, many of those same Calvinists say that when God predestines people to hell, he ensures that they are deserving of judgment due to their past sins.

This sounds contradictory to me. If election is unconditional, why is perdition here so often presented as a conditional response?" Let's put the text, the key text, in front of us and make sure we understand the question in context. Here's what Paul wrote in Romans 9 11-13. "Though Jacob and Esau were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad." Really important.

Really important. They had done nothing good or bad. In order that… Now, Paul is explaining why he chooses the way he does. In order that God's purpose of election might continue not because of works but because of… And you might expect him to say because of faith. No. He says not because of works but because of him who calls.

Rebecca was told the elder will serve the younger. As it is written, "Jacob I loved, Esau I hated." Now what Paul had said in verse 6, that was verses 11-13, what Paul had said in verse 6 was that the promises of God to Israel have not failed, even though many Jewish people are perishing according to verse 3, being accursed and cut off from Christ.

And the reason the promises of God to Israel have not failed, even though some are perishing, is that "not all Israel is Israel." That is, the saving promises of God do not guarantee the salvation of every single ethnic Israelite, but only the true Israel. That's the point of verses 6-8.

Not all the descendants of Abraham are the children of God. Then Paul shows the deepest root of what makes a person part of the true Israel, the saved Israel, and that deepest root is God's unconditional election, meaning God's choice of one person and not another, not based on any good deeds or any bad deeds, not based on any good deeds or bad deeds, one person is chosen and not another.

Chosen for what? Choice for what? What choice are you talking about? Well, what Paul is dealing with in verse 3 is how can so many individual Israelites be lost, be cursed, and cut off from Christ, verse 3? So the issue is eternal salvation. Paul is burdened by his kinsmen according to the flesh who are lost, eternal cursedness.

So election here means election of who will be the true Israelites, verse 6, the true children of God, verse 8, and who will not be. Now what Henry is pointing out is that the Scriptures—not just Calvinists—the Scriptures teach that everyone who is sentenced to eternal condemnation, hell, deserves to be there.

That's biblical teaching. Nobody is in hell because they don't deserve to be there. They will be there because of their unbelief and their sin. And Henry is saying this sounds contradictory. Unconditional election on the one hand, conditional damnation on the other hand. When God decided not to choose a person, he did not base his decision on foreseen unbelief and sin.

But when God condemns a person, in the end, it is based on unbelief and sin. And Henry wonders if that's a contradiction. And my answer is no, it is not. There are good reasons for why God elects in the beginning in the way he does, and there are good reasons for why God judges in the end the way he does.

And these acts of election and condemnation and these reasons are not contradictory. He condemns in the end on the basis of unbelief and sin because he's just. And the principle of justice in the Bible is, Exodus 23, 7, do not kill the innocent and righteous. And Proverbs 17, 15, it's an abomination to the Lord to condemn the righteous.

And Romans 2, 8, those who do not obey the truth but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. That's the biblical principle of justice, and God is just. So God's final decision to assign someone to hell will be because they deserve it. There will be no injustice. No one will be in hell who does not deserve to be there.

And no degree of punishment in hell will be out of proportion to the greatness of the guilt of the sinner, Luke 12, 47. So God condemns on the basis of unbelief and sin because he's just, but he elects before the foundation of the world, not based on unbelief and sin, because he's free and independent of all external constraints in forming his own plan.

Let me say it again. Here's the way Paul puts it. He seems to be laboring to make this clear. Though they were not yet born and had done nothing good or bad in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works, good or bad, but because of him, his purpose, his will, his counsel, alone, his freedom.

She was told the elder will serve the younger. So here's why I think Henry says this sounds contradictory, that God condemns on the basis of unbelief and sin, but he elects before the foundation of the world, not based on unbelief and sin. And I think Henry says that sounds contradictory because we don't know how God sees to it that all those who are not elect do in fact become guilty of condemnation.

Let me say that again. We don't know how God renders it certain or sees to it that all those who are not elect do in fact become guilty of condemnation. How does real guilt become a certainty for all the non-elect? Which is another way of asking, how does a sovereign God govern the heart choices of all human beings, and yet those human beings be accountable for their heart choices?

And I am happy to let that be one of the hidden things that belongs to the Lord, Deuteronomy 29.29. What we do know is this. Both are taught in the Bible. God governs the choices of all people, and all people are accountable for their choices. That's not a contradiction.

It is a mystery, or it may be a mystery. Some think they may have figured it out. I haven't. It may be a mystery. That is, we don't know how—that's the key word—we don't know how God does it, but we do know he does it. The king's heart is a stream of water in the hand of the Lord, and he turns it wherever he will, Proverbs 21.1, and that king is accountable before God.

Amen. A divine mystery indeed. Thank you, Pastor John. And we've now surpassed 1,300 total episodes in this podcast. Thanks for your interest and your questions over those past six years as we enter now our seventh year on the podcast. You can search all of those episodes. You can read full transcripts and send us your own questions all at our online home at DesiringGod.org/AskPastorJohn.

Well, why does God withhold good things from his children, from us? It's a perennial question. It's older than Psalm 73, and most recently it came to us from a 27-year-old woman who is waiting for marriage. It's a great question, applicable to the not-yet-marrieds, but in principle applicable to all of us.

I'm your host Tony Reinke. We'll see you back here on Wednesday. you