Paul did not teach determinism.
Paul taught free will.
Whenever Paul mentions that God created something or someone, he is making his argument for divine determinism. Ephesians 2:10.
Your verses:
Romans 9:14-18
14What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!
15For He says to Moses, “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.”
16So then it
does not
depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.
17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH.”
18So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.
Roger, If God created everything,,,that includes evil too.
But then the reformed like to smooth out the edges and say that God did not create evil.
Very prominent reformed understand that if they say that God created everything...
then by necessity God created evil too.
I was hoping we would talk about the passage, but instead you decided to launch into philosophy. I don't get it. If you want to have a philosophical discussion, I can do that. But I'd rather talk about the passage.
Here’s a clearer, more logical flow that keeps your meaning but tightens the argument and makes the progression easier for your viewers to follow:
Paul’s question in verse 14—“What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!”—arises naturally from the point he has just made. He has argued that salvation does not depend on human willing or human effort, and that claim immediately collides with our instinctive expectations. We tend to assume a kind of moral symmetry in the universe: good people should be rewarded, bad people should be punished, and human choice should be the decisive factor in determining which outcome we receive. Because of that instinct, Paul anticipates the objection that his teaching makes God appear unjust. If salvation is not grounded in our will, our motives, or our decisions, then how can God judge anyone? This is the very tension that has fueled centuries of debate about human freedom. Many theologians have argued that without free will, God could not justly punish evil or reward good. Paul raises the question here precisely because he knows his readers will feel that tension—and he wants to address it head‑on before continuing his argument.
In essence, Paul has removed human freedom from the equation. We can argue human freedom all day, but it doesn't matter because our salvation doesn't depend on what we do or what we want. It depends on what God wants and what he does.
You skipped Romans 9:13 thanks. Maybe you realize that it IS speaking about two nations and not two individuals.
I have read that argument before, but it misunderstands Paul's argument. Were Jacob and Esau the progenitors of two nations? Yes. And did God bless Jacob's nation and curse Esau's nation? Yes. However, this does not negate the fact that God decided what to do with each man and his nation before they were born. This clearly demonstrates that God was not reactive in his decisions but proactive.
God does not hate anyone.....in fact, Jesus taught that God loves the whole world, but that's a different topic.
Romans 9:14
14What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!
is addressing the problem of Israel not having accepted Jesus as the awaited Messiah.
They felt that God owed all of Israel salvation just due to their being Jewish.
And if God did not save the Jewss,,,then God was considered unrighteous by them.
The jews believed they were all saved through Abraham.
You must be thinking of Romans 9:6, instead of Romans 9:14.
Paul’s rhetorical question in Romans 9:14 becomes clearer when it is tied directly to what he has just asserted. He has claimed that God determined the destinies of Jacob and Esau—and by extension their nations—without reference to their actions or moral performance. That raises an obvious objection: doesn’t this make God unjust? Instead of defending God by appealing to His fairness or His mercy, Paul takes the discussion to a deeper level. He grounds his answer in God’s identity as Creator—the One who has the sovereign right to shape His purposes and guide history according to His will.
This shift is important because it reframes the issue. Paul is not arguing that God is arbitrary or capricious; he is arguing that God’s prerogative as Creator precedes human categories of merit, effort, or entitlement. The question of justice can only be understood within that larger framework of divine authorship and purpose.
Romans 9:15
15For He says to Moses, “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.”
Paul is speaking to the JEWS. They know to what Paul was referring...
it was not referring to the idea that God would have mercy on some and not on all.
In Romans 9:15, Paul insists that God meant exactly what He said to Moses. When Moses pleaded for the salvation of the whole nation, God granted the request—but He also made clear that the exercise of mercy remains His sovereign prerogative. He alone decides on whom He will show compassion. Paul’s point is not that God is inconsistent, but that God’s mercy is never something humans can claim as a right. It flows from His sovereign freedom, not from human effort, lineage, or entitlement.
'll just jump to Romans 9:30 which destroys any reformed idea of Romans 9:14-18
Here is
Romans 9:30-32
30What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith;
31but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law.
32Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone,
We can note that Paul explaines exactly how an individual is saved....
Gentiles were able to attain righteousness BY FAITH (not by predestination)
Paul says that the Gentiles were
not pursuing righteousness, and yet they obtained it—by faith. Let that sink in for a moment. Is Paul suggesting some kind of accidental righteousness, as if a man were strolling down the beach, tripped over righteousness, and picked it up by chance? If he wasn’t even seeking it, can he really claim that God rewarded him on the basis of his own merit? That would be absurd. The whole point is that righteousness came to those who were not looking for it, precisely so that no one could boast that they earned it.
To be saved by faith, one must first hear the gospel and respond to it. But in Romans 9:30-32, Paul argues that the Gentiles obtained righteousness even though they were not pursuing it. How can that be?
