NT Wright Addresses Why Calvinists Interpret Romans 9 Incorrectly | Leighton Flowers | Calvinism

The speaker was convinced to become a Calvinist after being systematically taught about total inability from birth, irresistible grace, limited atonement, and then being walked step by step through Romans 9 by a passionate, intelligent, articulate preacher like John MacArthur or John Piper. The systematic way of reading, combined with the teachings of these preachers, made Calvinism seem very convincing.

NT Wright is a respected theologian who tries to pull topics off of the systematic theological grid and examine them in their biblical context. He places a strong emphasis on biblical theology over systematic theology and aims to understand what the author of a passage, such as Paul, was trying to communicate within his context.

NT Wright views election in Romans 9 in terms of God's historical, redemptive plan. He notes that while Paul does mention the choice of individuals like Isaac over Ishmael and Jacob over Esau, he argues that the broader context is about how God's redemptive plan is being carried forward through the people of Israel, with specific individuals chosen to carry that purpose forward.

The speaker believes that the purpose of God's election is not about predestining certain individuals to salvation before they are born, as Calvinism suggests. Instead, he agrees with NT Wright that it is about God's purpose in electing Israel for the coming of the Messiah and the proclamation of his message through Israel.

The speaker interprets the role of individuals in God's plan as being chosen to carry out specific purposes, like service, rather than being predestined for salvation. He notes that not all direct descendants of Abraham were chosen to fulfill God's redemptive purpose, and he suggests that individuals are selected within Israel to advance God's plan.

Starting the reading of Romans 9 with Calvinistic presuppositions may lead to interpreting the text in a way that aligns with Calvinistic doctrines, even if there may be alternative interpretations. The speaker believes that if one understands the presumptions of other viewpoints, such as those presented by himself or NT Wright, then the text can make just as much sense from a non-Calvinistic perspective.

The speaker challenges the Calvinist interpretation by suggesting that the interlocutor in Romans 9—the objector Paul anticipates—is not someone objecting to reprobation but rather the hardened Jew who is being used by God in his plan for redemption. He asserts that if it can be demonstrated that the objector is not opposing reprobation, then the Calvinist defense of their unique claims based on Romans 9 is invalidated.