The Bible contains a lot of questions, and it doesn’t always provide satisfactory answers. So I’ve been answering some of the Bible’s questions myself. This time, I’m looking at questions from Paul’s letter to the Romans.
Paul asks: When you pass judgment on anyone for anything and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment? (Implied answer: You won’t.) Real answer: Yes, but why would you assume I do those things? Not everyone’s as hypocritical as you, Paul.
He asks: You who preach against stealing, do you steal? You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? (Implied answer: Yes.) Real answer: I wouldn’t think so. What kind of person would assume that everyone does all that?
Paul asks: If those who are not circumcised keep the law’s requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? Answer: No, circumcision is part of the law, so it’s impossible to keep the law’s requirements without being circumcised.
He asks: What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? Answer: Probably not enough to outweigh the harms of circumcision.
Paul asks: Why not say “Let us do evil that good may result”? Answer: Because if the result of what you were doing was good, then you wouldn’t actually be doing evil.
After asserting that “a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law”, Paul asks: Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? (Paul’s answer: Not at all!) Real answer: You never explain how that’s not the case, so I’m gonna say yeah, you are trying to nullify the law.
Paul asks: We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? Answer: Because Jesus failed to actually put an end to it.
He asks: Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey? Answer: Offer yourselves? I don’t think that’s usually how slavery works.
Paul asks: Do you not know that the law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives? Answer: Yeah, that goes without saying. It’s impossible to break the law when you’re dead. But that doesn’t follow from the “example” you give, nor does it actually support the point you’re trying to make.
He asks: What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? (Paul’s answer: Certainly not!) Real answer: You say the law caused sin that never would have existed without the law, so yeah, that sounds right. God’s law is sinful.
And he asks: Did that which is good, then, become death to me? (Paul’s answer: By no means!) Real answer: Yes, according to what you just said, it did. (I mean, if you want to call it “good”.)
Paul asks: Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? Answer: I’ll do it, if no one else wants to.
He asks: Who then is the one who condemns? (Paul’s answer: No one.) Alternative biblical answer: God, Moses, Jesus, his disciples, Christians, thousands of “holy ones“, and whoever else has been given authority to judge.
After saying what something says, Paul asks: But what does it say? Answer: It says what you just said it says, doesn’t it? Or were you lying?
Paul asks: How can they call on the one they have not believed in? Answer: Lip service?
He asks: And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? Answer: Sensus divinitatis?
Then he asks: And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? Answer: By hearing something that isn’t someone preaching to them? Or by overhearing preachers who aren’t talking to them?
And he asks: And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? Answer: By making their own decisions?
Paul asks: Why do you judge your brother or sister? Answer: What do you expect me to do, leave that to God? He’s obviously completely unqualified as a judge of morality.
Questions about God
Paul asks: If our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (Paul’s answer: Certainly not!) Real answer: Are you saying that what we’re doing is actually ultimately good? If that’s true, then yes, obviously it would be wrong to punish us for it.
He asks: If that were so, how could God judge the world? Answer: Unjustly. As usual.
Paul imagines someone arguing: If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner? Answer: Apparently God isn’t a consequentialist.
He asks: Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Answer: He is now. Sort of.
Paul asks: If God is for us, who can be against us? (Implied answer: No one.) Alternative biblical answer: Could it be… Satan? Or Nero? Or the Jews? Lots of people in the Bible were against the Christians.
He asks: How will he who did not spare his own Son not also graciously give us all things? Answer: His son asked him to spare him and he didn’t, so he must have some reason for refusing to give people what they want.
Then he asks: Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? (Implied answer: No.) Real answer: Jesus could easily prevent all that from happening to you, if he wanted to, couldn’t he? But he doesn’t. Doesn’t seem like he loves you very much, then.
Paul asks: What then shall we say? Is God unjust? (Paul’s answer: Not at all!) Real answer: Yes, hating someone and deciding to treat him unfavorably when he’s done nothing wrong is obviously unjust. So is the practice of choosing to have mercy on some people but not others in a completely arbitrary way, which is what Paul is about to try to use to somehow prove that God isn’t unjust.
After declaring that God not only arbitrarily chooses to have mercy on some people but not others, but even causes people to disobey him so he’ll get a chance to punish them, Paul imagines someone asking: Then why does God still blame us? Answer: Because he’s unjust.
He imagines this person further asking: For who is able to resist his will? (Implied answer: No one can resist God’s will.) Alternative biblical answer: Adam and Eve, Saul, Ahab, the whole nation of Israel, some enemies of Israel, all friends of the world, etc. Oh, and don’t forget Hezekiah, a supposedly righteous king who God rewarded with the gift of success in all things, and who then apparently used it to successfully do a bunch of stuff that God would rather he didn’t do.
Paul asks: But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? Answer: Judging by the things you’ve been telling me about him, apparently I’m someone morally superior to God.
He asks: Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it “Why did you make me like this?” Answer: If it’s a thing that has been designed to have no choice but to do evil, then yes, it would be reasonable for it to say that.
And he asks: Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use? Answer: Sure, but that’s not what you were talking about. You were talking about making something for evil purposes.
Then he asks: What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath, who are prepared for destruction? Answer: No. That is absolutely not a reasonable way to characterize the situation you’ve been describing.
Patience is for things that are out of your control. We’re talking about God forcing people to do evil, and then punishing them for what he made them do. God is in complete control here. Patience does not apply.
If God was being patient with these people, that would imply that he would rather they behave differently. But that can’t be the case when they’re unable to resist his will. They are doing exactly what he wants. There is nothing for God to be patient about. Don’t try to pretend God is the victim here.
Paul asks: What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy? Answer: Then he’s a jerk who forces people to do evil and treats people unjustly just so he can show off.
To be continued…