Drew
Member
As I am sure you are all aware, in Romans 9 Pauls refers to "vessels of destructions". Many see these vessels as human individuals who have been "pre-destined" to ultimate loss.
It is my purpose in this thread to argue for a different interpretation - that the vessels of destruction are in fact the very same hardened Jews that Paul clearly identifies in Romans 11.
Here, in very brief overview, as some of the elements of the argument I intend to put forward:
1. The theme of God’s faithfulness to the Abrahamic covenant is woven throughout the first eight chapters of Romans, establishing at least the plausibility that covenantal issues in relation to Israel are in view in chapter 9 and that it is possible that the vessels of destruction are unbelieving Jews;
2. Chapters 9 and 10 themselves manifest a clear, albeit implicit, covenantal focus – the entire covenant history from Abraham to the present is re-presented in miniature. There are so many points of connection between the chapter 9 / 10 material and the story of God’s dealings with Israel, all presented in precisely the proper sequence, that this simply cannot be a coincidence. A treatment of the abstract doctrine of the election of individuals, with no specificity to the Israel story, would be decidedly out of place.
3. The entire letter exhibits a “spiral†structure, whereby Paul introduces a theme only to re-visit it later in greater detail. It turns out that by the time we get to Romans 9, we are at precisely the point in the spiral where we would indeed expect a detailed treatment of God’s covenantal use of the nation of Israel.
4. The potter metaphor used by Paul has a distinctive tradition of being used specifically in relation to God’s treatment of Israel. The interpretation that I offer honours this tradition by seeing God as moulding national Israel to create a new “true Israelâ€. The “individual pre-destination reading ignores the connection by seeing no Israel-specificity. This is highly suspicious – Paul is a careful thinker and he chooses his images to evoke and leverage Old Testament themes.
5. The view that I am advancing connects more coherently with other material in Romans. A hallmark of a good thesis is that “explains a lot†– in the present case it places more of Paul’s statements in Romans 9 into an internally consistent model that extends beyond chapter 9. The “individual predestination†argument with no Jewish specificity leaves many things more things un-explained than the position I am advocating. This particular element of my argument is hard to disassociate from other elements. Let me illustrate. If you open your mind to a specifically covenantal reading of Romans 9, you will find that it explains material in chapters 3,5,9, and 11. Not to mention other material in Romans 9. I see no evidence that the “individual pre-destination†position with no Jewish specificity has such explanatory power.
6. Romans 9 through 11 resonates with an argument made elsewhere by Paul - that Israel’s contribution to the plan of redemption is “cross-shapedâ€, that Israel acts out the same pattern of being cast away for the sin of the world as does Jesus on the cross. Paul makes such an argument in Galatians 3, 2 Corinthians 3, and Philippians 3.
7. There is powerful evidence that a central element of Jesus’ teaching was to announce the re-constitution of the nation of Israel – in the sense that He redrew the boundary markers of God’s true people (example: Matt 8:11-12 about Gentiles being included at the great banquet while some Jews are excluded). This coheres perfectly with the thesis I am advancing – that, in Romans 9, Paul is not setting forth an abstract (non-covenantal) doctrine about the election of individuals to an eternal fate but is rather making an historical covenantal argument about how God has hardened the Jews (as per the Jews excluded from the Abraham feast of Matt 8:11-12) in order to enable Gentiles (as per the unexpected invitees to this same feast) to become members of the true family of God.
And there may be other points as well. In future posts, I hope to fill in the details of the argument that Paul sees the vessels of destruction specifically as unbelieving Jews.
It is my purpose in this thread to argue for a different interpretation - that the vessels of destruction are in fact the very same hardened Jews that Paul clearly identifies in Romans 11.
Here, in very brief overview, as some of the elements of the argument I intend to put forward:
1. The theme of God’s faithfulness to the Abrahamic covenant is woven throughout the first eight chapters of Romans, establishing at least the plausibility that covenantal issues in relation to Israel are in view in chapter 9 and that it is possible that the vessels of destruction are unbelieving Jews;
2. Chapters 9 and 10 themselves manifest a clear, albeit implicit, covenantal focus – the entire covenant history from Abraham to the present is re-presented in miniature. There are so many points of connection between the chapter 9 / 10 material and the story of God’s dealings with Israel, all presented in precisely the proper sequence, that this simply cannot be a coincidence. A treatment of the abstract doctrine of the election of individuals, with no specificity to the Israel story, would be decidedly out of place.
3. The entire letter exhibits a “spiral†structure, whereby Paul introduces a theme only to re-visit it later in greater detail. It turns out that by the time we get to Romans 9, we are at precisely the point in the spiral where we would indeed expect a detailed treatment of God’s covenantal use of the nation of Israel.
4. The potter metaphor used by Paul has a distinctive tradition of being used specifically in relation to God’s treatment of Israel. The interpretation that I offer honours this tradition by seeing God as moulding national Israel to create a new “true Israelâ€. The “individual pre-destination reading ignores the connection by seeing no Israel-specificity. This is highly suspicious – Paul is a careful thinker and he chooses his images to evoke and leverage Old Testament themes.
5. The view that I am advancing connects more coherently with other material in Romans. A hallmark of a good thesis is that “explains a lot†– in the present case it places more of Paul’s statements in Romans 9 into an internally consistent model that extends beyond chapter 9. The “individual predestination†argument with no Jewish specificity leaves many things more things un-explained than the position I am advocating. This particular element of my argument is hard to disassociate from other elements. Let me illustrate. If you open your mind to a specifically covenantal reading of Romans 9, you will find that it explains material in chapters 3,5,9, and 11. Not to mention other material in Romans 9. I see no evidence that the “individual pre-destination†position with no Jewish specificity has such explanatory power.
6. Romans 9 through 11 resonates with an argument made elsewhere by Paul - that Israel’s contribution to the plan of redemption is “cross-shapedâ€, that Israel acts out the same pattern of being cast away for the sin of the world as does Jesus on the cross. Paul makes such an argument in Galatians 3, 2 Corinthians 3, and Philippians 3.
7. There is powerful evidence that a central element of Jesus’ teaching was to announce the re-constitution of the nation of Israel – in the sense that He redrew the boundary markers of God’s true people (example: Matt 8:11-12 about Gentiles being included at the great banquet while some Jews are excluded). This coheres perfectly with the thesis I am advancing – that, in Romans 9, Paul is not setting forth an abstract (non-covenantal) doctrine about the election of individuals to an eternal fate but is rather making an historical covenantal argument about how God has hardened the Jews (as per the Jews excluded from the Abraham feast of Matt 8:11-12) in order to enable Gentiles (as per the unexpected invitees to this same feast) to become members of the true family of God.
And there may be other points as well. In future posts, I hope to fill in the details of the argument that Paul sees the vessels of destruction specifically as unbelieving Jews.