I love Reformed theology, but I try to stay focused on basic evangelism rather than on evangelism regarding Reformed vs. Arminianisn or Molinism. But this passage always stands out to me as an oblique indication that Paul was not defending the latter two.
So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?”(Romans 9:18–20, ESV)
If Paul was defending the Arminian/foreknowledge view, why would he think that anyone else would think that it was unjust of God? That view holds that God wooed everyone, but people had a free choice to reject him. Why would anyone think that is unfair? Paul was clearly defending the Reformed view. He emphatically states that God was indeed in the right but that what is molded has no right to question the molder.
Again, if Paul said, “God looked down the corridor of time and chose/elected/predestined [all words from the Bible, regardless of your preferred definitions] those who would freely choose him and elect themselves,” then why would he anticipate those arguments? No one would be saying, “Why does he still find fault?” or “For who can resist his will,” because they’d be saying, “We used our free will to choose, so we have only ourselves to blame.”
I submit that the default destination of all humans is Hell and that God, in his incredible grace and mercy, elected to save some. We should share and rejoice in that and not cast aspersions on God for his divine rescue plan.
And, as always, the sometimes-slanders made against Reformed theology fall back on the accusers. For if, in their views, God let people choose solely by their free will, then by definition he couldn’t have persuaded them otherwise or elected not to persuade them otherwise. How is that different than God’s election/choosing/predestination?
Be blessed, everyone, and rejoice that God made a way back for us!
Eternity Matters 
I get so tired of the non-Reformed camps claiming heresy whenever any of this is brought up. I am also tired of the non-Reformed types doing their best to destroy TULIP (the acronym) rather than interacting with the many verses that TULIP encompasses. I lean heavily Reformed, but I have trouble with TULIP on its face. But, I have no issues with the verses it uses. I don’t claim Arminians are heretics, maybe mistaken (as I may well be), but not heretics, so why are they so adamant that believing that God is absolutely sovereign and does whatever He wills is heresy? I just don’t get it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed on all counts!
LikeLike
I have to say that I haven’t really done a deep dive on any of these three notions. Sometimes at Stan’s it comes up, and it always leaves me with questions. One of the most glaring is how do I know I’m of the Elect if that concept is the best understanding of Scripture? Another is the issue of God’s Sovereignty. Regardless of how much freedom to choose He allows, so long as He’s capable of removing that freedom, how can man’s free will suggest God is no longer Sovereign?
For my part, I simply try to abide His Will. In doing so, I have to presume or assume I’m saved because of my acceptance of Christ and desire to abide. Beyond that, these discussions just fill me with doubt about my eternal consequence.
LikeLike
Interesting timing – today’s post was on assurance — https://eternity-matters.com/2024/04/01/john-1025-30-assurance-and-so-many-other-eternal-truths-in-one-short-passage/
Dealing with cancer (fighting my 6th bout and running low on options) definitely makes you stop and think about where your faith really is. By the grace of God, I know my faith is in what Jesus did and not on my health.
The tension between God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility is generally acknowledged by those on both sides. Both are biblical and therefore true, but will probably make more sense in Heaven.
LikeLike