A friend of mine posted this in another forum which I agree.
Paul uses two teaching methods throughout Romans even secular philosophy classes will use Romans as the best example of these methods. Paul does an excellent job of building one premise on the previous premises to develop his final conclusions. Paul uses an ancient form of rhetoric known as diatribe (imaginary debate) asking questions and most of the time giving a strong “By no means” and then goes on to explain “why not”. Paul’s method goes beyond just a general diatribe and follows closely to the diatribes used in the individual laments in the Psalms and throughout the Old Testament, which the Jewish Christians would have known extensively. These “questions or comments” are given by an “imaginary” student making it more a dialog with the readers (students) and not just a “sermon”.
The main topic repeated extensively in Romans is the division in the Christian house churches in Rome between the Jews and Gentile Christians. You can just look up how many times Jews and gentiles are referred to see this as a huge issue.
The main question (a diatribe question) in Romans 9 Paul addresses is God being fair or just Rms. 9: 14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all!
This will take some explaining, since just prior in Romans 9, Paul went over some history of God’s dealings with the Israelites that sounds very “unjust” like “loving Jacob and hating Esau” before they were born, but remember in all of Paul’s diatribes he begins before, just after or before and just after with strong support for the wrong answer (this makes it more of a debate and giving the opposition the first shot as done in all diatribes).
Who in Rome would be having a “problem” with God choosing to work with Isaac and Jacob instead of Ishmael and Esau? Would the Jewish Christian have a problem with this or would it be the Gentile Christians?
If God treaded you as privileged and special would you have a problem or would you have a problem if you were treated seemingly as common and others were treated with honor for no apparent reason?
This is the issue and Paul will explain over the rest of Romans 9-11.
Paul is specific with the issue Rms. 9: 19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?”
Who is the “one of you” is this Jewish Christian (elect) or Gentile Christian (elect) or is this “non-elect” individual (this “letter” is written to Christians and not non-Christians)?
Can Jews say they cannot be blamed for failing in their honored position or would it be the Gentiles that would say they cannot be blamed since they were not in the honored position?
Is it really significant when it comes to what really counts, if you are born a gentile or Jew in first century Rome?
Are there issues and problems with being a first century Jew and was this a problem for Paul?
The Jews were created in a special honorable position that would bring forth the Messiah and everyone else was common in comparison (the Gentiles).
How do we know Paul is specifically addressing the Jew/Gentile issue? Rms. 9: 30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone.
Paul is showing from the position of being made “common” vessels by God the Gentiles had an advantage over the born Israelites (vessels of honor) that had the Law, since the Law became a stumbling stone to them. They both needed faith to rely on God’s Love to forgive them.
Without going into the details of Romans 9-11 we conclude with this diatribe question:
Romans 11: 11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring!
The common vessels (gentiles) and the vessels of honor (Jews) are equal individually in what is really significant when it comes to salvation, so God is not being unjust or unfair with either group.
If there is still a question about who is being addressed in this section of Rms. 9-11, Paul tells us: Rms. 11: 13 I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I take pride in my ministry 14 in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them.
Rm 9: 22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?
This verse is not saying all the “vessels” created for a “common purpose” were created for destruction (they were not made from the start by the Potter “clay pigeons”). Everything that leaves the potter’s shop is of great quality. Those vessels for destruction can come from either the common group or the honor group, but God is being patient with them that will eventually be destroyed. The vessels God does develop great wrath against, will be readied for destruction, but how did they become worthy of destruction since they left the potter’s shop with his mark on them? Any vessel (honorable or common) that becomes damaged is not worthy of the potter’s signature and He would want it destroyed.
To understand this as Common vessels and special vessels look at the same idea using the same Greek words of Paul in
2 Tim 2: 20. There Paul even points out the common can become the honored vessel.
2 Tim. 2: 20 In a large house there are articles not only of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay; some are for special purposes and some for common use. 21 Those who cleanse themselves from the latter will be instruments for special purposes, made holy, useful to the Master and prepared to do any good work.
Important to note is the fact: the dishonorable vessel can cleanse themselves and become vessels of honor.
That is a short explanation, since you really need to study all of Romans especially chapters 9, 10 and 11. Also please look at individual laments in the Psalms and diatribes in general, I really cut those short.
YES!! Let us not mitigate the Greek!!!
2Tim.2:20 In a large house there are articles not only of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay; some are for special purposes and some for common use.
21 Those who cleanse themselves from the latter will be instruments for special purposes, made holy, useful to the Master and prepared to do any good work.
You are right to say this concept is not discussed in
Ro. 9, but in
2 Tim. 2:21 you have the exact same words used by Paul again presenting a similar analogy as he did in
Ro. 9.
In
2 Tim 2:21 you have the τιμὴν (timēn) meaning honorable, special, highly prized and also, we have ἀτιμίαν (atimian) meaning common, disgraceful, dishonorable, which are the exact same words Paul uses again in
Ro.9.
The point is: a wealthy home owner is not going to have anything dishonorable in his house, but would have lots of common vessels in his house (not made of silver and gold).
Many translators pick up on Paul’s use of τιμὴν (timēn) and ἀτιμίαν (atimian) and translate these words special and common in
Ro.9, again the potter makes both special and common vessels and puts his mark on the bottom of both, because they fit their purpose.
In both
Ro. 9 and
2 Tim. 2:21 Paul is referring to the differences in people and the way they are born (come out of the shop). In
2Tim. 2 Paul also conveys the idea people can change themselves, so the vessel is not fixed from the beginning, but can change (this is not talked about in
Ro.9).
In
Ro. 9 Paul is trying to get across the idea it does not matter whether you left the Potter’s shop (were born) for a very special purpose (Jews) or a common purpose (Gentiles), since everything that left the shop (was born) with the mark of the Potter.
What is made for destruction then? The Potter does not make objects for destruction (like clay pigeons), but any vessel that leaves the shop can be changed by the individual vessel (this is seen in
2 Tim.2:21). If the vessel (common or special) develops a crack and leaks, it is not worthy of the Potter’s mark and should be destroyed (people of the first century would understand this).
The problem is in suggesting the Potter (God) makes stuff to be destroyed (some humans), since nothing would leave His shop (be born) of no value.
Also
Jer. 18 is talking about clay still in the shop and God changing it before it leaves made from the shop. Totally different scenario.bling
hope this helps !!!
