PASTOR'S SERMONS

Radio Programs     Confession     Sermons     Riverside Baptist Report     Links

Pastor Brant Seacrist

June 10, 2018

"THE SOVEREIGN CHOICE OF GOD "

TEXT: ROMANS 9: 6-18
READING:  PSALM 119: 145-160

If you would like to download the Audio File
Right Click your mouse Here and choose
"Save Target As"

If you would like to listen to the Sermon
Push the Play Button below


SUBJ: The sovereignty of God and the fact that He has made choice from among men and that such choice is infallibly unto salvation.

AIM: That we may know that we are the objects of eternal love and tender mercy and have no other claims to the salvation we know through faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.

INTR: The most obvious evidence of the rejection of the Scriptures is the denial of the absolute sovereignty of God and the fact that they are shut up to His will and purpose.
1. Men run to God in their trouble, concede to God as to strength, but ultimately retain (in their minds) their own rights and so subject God to their will. This puts them in direct conflict with Him of whom it is said: In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will: Ephesians 1:11
2. In many ways, men try to set a standard for the operations of God in the matters of righteousness, justice, and the judgment to come and would place Him under obligation to treat all men equally.
3. If we would derive the maximum benefit from the Word of God we must submit to the righteousness of God, the wisdom of God, and thus the exercise of His will, while recognizing that fallen man will always choose wrongly.

THESIS: This we would know: God has loved a people from all eternity and determined to redeem them to Himself that a loving and joyous eternity may be enjoyed by Him with them in Christ Jesus our Lord.

I. The fact of a divine choice (vv. 6-9)
1. Having lamented that his kinsman, the Israelites had rejected Christ and the Gospel as a nation, he turns to the fact that the promise given to Abraham still stands.
1) It is obvious that the Israelites confronting Christ believed it enough to be of the lineage of Abraham.
2) The reference here is to something not immediately apparent but is in fact declared and that is that the promised seed will be preserved as a matter of divine choice.
2. Being a descendant of Abraham was not enough (consider Ishmael and the sons of Keturah).
1) It was first restricted to Isaac and again to
2) The choice of God and the manifestation of the faith of Abraham and Isaac.
3. The promise given to Abraham ultimately pointed to Christ and it is in the revelation of Christ in us that the true seed of Isaac (a type of Christ) is made manifest.
4. Thus, it was to be the son of Sara and not the child of the bondmaid that was the choice of God.

II. The fact of divine choice further demonstrated (vv. 10-13)
1. We would consider here the narrative of the choice of Rebecca and the birth of her twin sons noting the we would be made to know that the Lord would be subject to no human factors.
2. In the case of Sarah an argument might be made that she was the true wife and therefore it should be her son who was the heir – not so with the sons of Rebecca.
1) The fact is carefully established that the determination was made before they were born
2) And, that neither good nor evil entered the picture.
3) It was rather the purpose of God according to election and would not be of works or any other typical human consideration.
3. In verse 12 we note a clear departure from custom and another prediction is made – the elder to serve the younger.
4. It is then that a fact troubling to many is stated – the divine hatred of Esau. This quoted from: I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob, And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. Malachi 1:2-3.

III. An objection to the truth of divine choice answered (vv. 14-18)
1. The anticipated objection is one based on man reasoning from the perspective of man and the answer is one heard before: God forbid!
1) The question is one of fairness that the Lord should choose one and leave another.
2) What is missing in this objection is that none are deserving of divine favor and that Jacob was just as unworthy as Esau.
2. The quote is from the Old Testament: And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy. Exodus 33:19.
1) This takes the application of the mercy of God away from men – it is reserved to Him alone.
2) We rejoice is the fact that He will have mercy and that we have received it.
3) We are given further hope that He will have mercy on others and so we preach.
3. But then, Paul calls to remembrance the case of Pharaoh and Egypt and the fact that He served the power of God in manifest opposition and by the same demonstrated the choice of God not to show mercy to Him; rather he was left to his own free will and perished.
1) God did not make Pharaoh do evil or think evil.
2) God simply left him to himself.
4. The sovereignty of God and divine election are revealed to us that we may know salvation that is sure, and that mercy and grace are of the Lord and not of ourselves. It is not meant to teach exclusion; it is rather inclusive. It does not turn people away; it welcomes them to a greater knowledge of the love of God. It is so ordered that men can have exactly what they want and so there is never one going to hell and blaming God for not choosing them. Thus, it does not harden the heart; it tenderizes it with loving wonder that we have been and are being loved by one so majestic and holy and good.