Vessels of Destruction - Take 2

[Drew]

Another thread I started on this got locked, so I will try again, assuming that as long as we behave ourselves, there is no reason why we cannot discuss who the mysterious vessels of destruction of Romans 9 are.

As some of you will already know, I believe that Paul sees hardened Jews as the vessels of destruction. Of course many, if not most, see the vessels of destruction as a category that includes Gentiles as well.

Before launching to my case - and constructive, competent critique - is invited, a number of manifestly false objections to my position need to be tabled and addressed.

A natural objection to the view that the “vessels of destruction†category in Romans 9 contains only Jews – the view to which I ascribe - is that Pharaoh is put forth as a Gentile who has been hardened. How, then, could the “vessels of destruction†category not include Gentiles? I will now demonstrate that, despite the admitted superficial appeal of concluding that Pharaoh falls into the “vessels of destruction†category, there is a way to legitimately read the text so that he does not.

Imagine that we unearth a letter written by a now deceased medical researcher who was known to have performed medical experiments on animals that resulted in their deaths. Imagine that the text of the letter is as follows:

1. I conducted medical experiments on chickens, resulting in the deaths of those chickens, and these experiments benefited humanity;

2. I conducted medical experiments on rats, resulting in the deaths of those rats, and these experiments benefited humanity;

3. I therefore had the right to conduct medical experiments on the vessels of destruction for the benefit of humanity.

Who are the vessels of destruction? Does this category includes chicken and rats? It seems that way, but appearances are deceiving. Suppose another source of information is unearthed, one that shows that the doctor was accused by other people for conducting medical experiments on dogs, and was highly motivated to respond to that “dog-specific†accusation.

This new item of information gives us an entirely legitimate alternative in respect to how we read the initial letter. The cryptic reference to “vessels of destruction†can now be read to denote dogs and dogs only, with the allusions to the killing of chickens and rats functioning specifically as examples, provided by the researcher in his own defence, of his general right to experiment on animals.

The point is that the second source gives us a context in which it is clear that the immediate concern of the researcher is to defend himself in respect to the killing of the dogs. So even though he has just written about killing chickens and rats, we are not forced to understand these animals as belonging to the “vessels of destruction†category.

Same thing with Pharaoh. Even though he is a hardened Gentile, there are other reasons to conclude that Paul’s specific goal is to defend the right of God to harden Jews. Therefore, Pharaoh need not be deemed to belong to the “vessels of destruction†category. And therefore the presence of the Pharaoh example does not force us to understand that the vessels of destruction category must contain Gentiles.

Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. Other considerations need to be brought to bear to answer this.

 

[Drew]

Another, frankly absurd, objection to my proposal involves accusing me of being anti-Semitic in suggesting that Paul is saying that God has hardened some Jews during some period of history.

First of all, it is clear from Romans 11 that this is precisely what Paul believes when he repeatedly speaks of Jews in particular being "hardened" or "broken off from the olive tree" so that Gentiles can be grafted in. Does this make Paul an ant-semite?

Of course not. It no more makes him an anti-semite than to suggest that believing that God hardened Pharoah makes someone "anti-Egyptian".

The texts say what they say - Paul speaks of specific examples where God has "hardened" different people or groups of people. If readers do not like this, fine - you do not have to believe it. But let's not pretend that Paul didn't make such clear statements.

And on a related note, to suggest that Paul is saying that God hardened some Jews during a specific period of history does not, of course, mean that no Jews can be saved. It is clear from Romans 11 that Paul believes both the following:

1. Some Jews have been hardened (or sent a "stupor");
2. Other Jews can indeed be saved.

 

[Drew]

Now to actually make the case. One easy argument to advance is to point out that Paul opens the letter with a clear lament over the status of his "kinsmen according to the flesh" - namely, his fellow Jews.

All other things being equal, when Paul goes on to refer to "vessels of destruction", there is good reason to suspect that he is talking about the specific group whose lamentable, lost state he has bemoaned at the beginning of the chapter - namely unbelieving Jews.

The argument I am advancing has the following advantage: it shows Paul to be a logical, focused thinker: First he tells us the problem he is concerned with - the sad state of Israel, then he gives us an explanation for precisely that sad state - Jews have been hardened as vessels of destruction.

If the vessels of destruction category include Gentiles, then we are forced to conclude that even though Paul begins the chapter with a clear Israel-focused lament, he is now addressing the sad destiny of those humans, Jew or Gentile, who are destined for destruction.

Where is the textual evidence that Paul is now talking about lost Jews and Gentiles together? I suggest there is none. Clearly the very tone of the potter metaphor is one of explanation - Paul is clearly attempting to argue that God has the right to harden these un-named vessels of destruction. But, and this is key, if the vessels of destruction include Gentiles, where in this chapter has Paul put on the table any kind of problem statement to which a statement that some Jews and some Gentiles have been hardened (or pre-destined) to destruction functions as an explanation?

This is but one of many problems with the traditional reading of the potter metaphor - the traditional reading puts Paul in the decidedly odd position of providing an explanation - that a sub-set of humanity including both Jews and Gentiles have been hardened - that is in search of a problem: there is simply no evidence at all that Paul is trying to explain something bad that has happened to both Jews and Gentiles.

The only "lost people" - and surely it is the lost person who is heading for destruction - that Paul has identified in his problem statement at the beginning are, yes, Jews.

But in any event, there are many more reasons to believe that Paul is talking about hardened Jews when he refers to vessels of destruction.

 

[Drew]

One powerful line of argument that the vessels of destruction are hardened Jews is the fact that, in the Old Testament, the potter metaphor is always, and I mean always, used to refer to God and His treatment of Israel.

In his use of the potter metaphor in chapter 64, Isaiah is deploying the metaphor in specific relation to Israel. Note the material in bold:

4For from days of old they have not heard or perceived by ear,
Nor has the eye seen a God besides You,
Who acts in behalf of the one who waits for Him.
5You meet him who rejoices in doing righteousness,
Who remembers You in Your ways
Behold, You were angry, for we sinned,
We continued in them a long time;
And shall we be saved?
6For all of us have become like one who is unclean,
And all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment;
And all of us wither like a leaf,
And our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.
7There is no one who calls on Your name,
Who arouses himself to take hold of You;
For You have hidden Your face from us
And have delivered us into the power of our iniquities.
8But now, O LORD, You are our Father,
We are the clay, and You our potter;
And all of us are the work of Your hand.
9Do not be angry beyond measure, O LORD,
Nor remember iniquity forever;
Behold, look now, all of us are Your people.
10Your holy cities have become a wilderness,
Zionhas become a wilderness,
Jerusalema desolation.
11Our holy and beautiful house,
Where our fathers praised You,
Has been burned by fire; And (Z)all our precious things have become a ruin.
12Will You (AA)restrain Yourself at these things, O LORD?
Will You keep silent and afflict us beyond measure?

There are many indication that this is Israel-specific, some obvious, others less so. The obvious ones:

1. Verse 10 and its references to Zion and Jerusalem;

2. Verse 11 and its allusion to the destruction of the Jewish temple (the "house" is the temple)

Others allusions to Israel-specificity that are perhaps more subtle:

1. Verse 5b and its allusions to the sins of the nation of Israel;

2. Verse 7b and its allusion to exilic punishment Israel received at the hands of Babylon;

3. Verse 9 and its invocation of the Old Testament theme of return from exile for the nation of Israel.

Now Paul is most certainly aware of how the potter metaphor is used with specific reference to God and His treatment of Israel. And what is the fundamental issue between a potter and his clay? It is the right of the potter to mold or transform the clay into whatever shape he wants.

And what is the problem on the table in Romans 9? It is that Israel is in a sad state. And we know from the first 8 chapters of the chapter that Paul has vigourously argued that the true family of God is not limited to Jews, but includes Gentiles as well:

Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith

What better way to explain the sad state of Israel than to argue that God has hardened her in order that the family of God be expanded to include Gentiles - just as a potter would take clay (Israel) and make a new pot out of it (Gentiles and Jews). How might one express this notion?:

What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

 

[Drew]

As should become clear in subsequent posts, my argument is essentially this: Paul argues that God has used the Law of Moses to "harden" Israel - to cause the power of sin to be built up in her. Why would God do such a thing? Why would God give Israel a law that has this dark, "negative" effect? The reason is this: God is "luring" the power of sin - which Paul clearly describes as an agency or force or power - into taking up residence in national Israel. Why would God do this? In order to then further lure the power of sin into the flesh of the one faithful Israelite - Jesus of Nazareth. And why would God do this? In order to "corner" sin in the flesh of Jesus and there condemn it. Remember what Paul says in Romans 8:3 - it is sin, not Jesus, that is condemned on the cross.

In short, Paul argues that God has used the Law of Moses to "trick" sin, understood as a personal force, or agent, into attacking Jesus on the cross. However, this force of sin and death is indeed being lured into a position of vulnerability. Localized in the flesh of Jesus on the cross, the true and legitimate target of God's wrath is then attacked and defeated on the cross - the power of sin.

So, despite the prevailing view, the cross is not really about Jesus being "punished" in our place - it is about Jesus being a vessel (yes, he is the ultimate Jewish vessel of destruction) into which sin is poured and then, yes, condemned. Jesus is not condemned on the cross, sin is. But Jesus does die in the violence of God attacking the true enemy - sin.

In subsequent posts, I will provide Biblical evidence for the notion that the Law of Moses has this dark effect - that of "hardening" Israel.

 

[savedbygrace57]

drew:

As some of you will already know, I believe that Paul sees hardened Jews as the vessels of destruction

Paul does not say that. Paul in rom 9 is speaking of God's Sovereign prerogative over His creatures He made.

 

[savedbygrace57]

drew:

Paul argues that God has used the Law of Moses to "harden" Israel

Paul does not even mention the law of God to harden Israel in rom 9. I don't see where the Law is even mentioned in rom 9.

The Law of God was given to be a schoolmaster to the elect remnant of grace in Israel, is True from another context.

Gal 3:

19Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

24Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

So the Law served as a reminder to the regenerate jew of their need of the promise seed, Jesus Christ. So in actuality the Law was not given to Israel to harden them, but to keep them sensible of their sinnership and their hope of the coming messiah.

So the Law was made for the vessels of mercy in Israel if anything.

 

[MarkT]

Paul's answer to, "why does he still find fault?", considering God hardens the heart of whomever he wills, was, "who are you, a man, to answer back to God?"

If he had said, "who are you, a Jew, to answer back to God?", we might consider your interpretation. As it is, we can not.

Man is the moulded and God is the moulder. Some men are filled with wrath. For example, Pharaoh was filled with the wrath of God towards the Israelites. Then he was destroyed. He was a vessel made for destruction. Just so, God hardens the heart of whomever he wills and he has mercy on whomever he wills.

So it depends not on mans exertion or will, but upon Gods mercy. Romans 9:16

If Jesus was anything, he was a vessel of mercy showing Gods mercy towards man.

In every case we look at men. If they are filled with wrath towards us and towards Israel, it is Gods will. Their destruction is assured. If men show us kindness and mercy, it is Gods will. They were prepared beforehand for glory as we were prepared beforehand for glory.

 

[Strangelove]

Fascinating study Drew.

Do you think that these vessels of wrath fitted to destruction......

.....are represented today in the shape of Christ hating Talmudic Zionism??

 

[Drew]

Paul's answer to, "why does he still find fault?", considering God hardens the heart of whomever he wills, was, "who are you, a man, to answer back to God?"

If he had said, "who are you, a Jew, to answer back to God?", we might consider your interpretation. As it is, we can not.

It's not that simple.

Some argue that the following text from Romans 9 shows that Paul is focused on the matter of election of individuals to an eternal fate:

You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" 20On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?

The argument runs along these lines: Since Paul is referring to individuals, he intends the reader to understand that the issue is the election of individuals.

Note that in the phrase "you will say to me then, Why does he still find fault", the "me" is Paul, the person making the argument. So the “me†pronoun would be singular even if Paul were making an argument about groups. The singularity of the “me†pronoun does not, therefore, tell us anything of relevance.

Now consider the “you†in this phrase. Is this a person who is protesting his pre-destination to loss? No it is not. It is instead Paul’s imaginary opponent in his debate – the person objecting to Paul’s point about the choices God makes. It cannot be assumed to be the person protesting his own pre-destination. It could be such a person, but it could equally well be a person who disputes a point that Paul is making about pre-destination of groups.

I grant that, in verse 20, Paul appeals to a singular model where Paul invites us to imagine a single person challenging God in respect to what has befallen him. This man is no longer Paul’s imagined opponent, but clearly one who God has pre-destined to something bad.

However, this does not make the case that Paul is talking about election of individuals. We know that he uses the singular to represent plurality in other contexts. In Romans 7, he does this very thing when he use the "I" and "me" construct to demonstrate the plight of Jews (plural) under Torah. So, the use of the singular here in the “o man†/ “me†of Romans 9 is not definitive.

I suggest that Paul uses the "O man" construct as a literary device to "personalize" the objection that corporate Israel will have to its treatment. Note how this is consonant with the Israel focus suggested by the first verses of the chapter. In order to make his point accessible to the reader, Paul "puts a face" on corporate Israel by representing her by a single man, just as in Romans 7 where the “I†represents Israel as a whole.

Note also the reference to moulding and the potter and recall that Old Testament precedent repeatedly has God moulding Israel. Paul is keenly aware of this and is leveraging that precedent.

Besides, consider this allusion, from earlier in the same basic argument:

15For He says to Moses, "I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION."

Paul is quoting Exodus where the issue is God's showing mercy unto the Israelites as a group. If predestination of individuals is on Paul’s mind, why does he bring up an example of God being merciful to a group to make a point about election of individuals?

Furthermore, there is "group-level" election in the Jacob / Esau account where the Old Testament references make it clear that the election in view involves the Edomites (a group) being chosen by God to be sub-servient to the Israelites (another group).

Furthermore, consider the Isaiah 29text that Paul quotes from in verse 20:

​

The Lord says:
"These people come near to me with their mouth
and honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
Their worship of me
is made up only of rules taught by men.

14 Therefore once more I will astound these people
with wonder upon wonder;
the wisdom of the wise will perish,
the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
15 Woe to those who go to great depths
to hide their plans from the LORD,
who do their work in darkness and think,
"Who sees us? Who will know?" 16 You turn things upside down,
as if the potter were thought to be like the clay!
Shall what is formed say to him who formed it,
"He did not make me"?
Can the pot say of the potter,
"He knows nothing"?

This is the very text from which the "o man" text is drawn – and clearly a pluralistic reading is intended.

And as I have already argued, and will continue to argue, Paul's vessels of destruction are hardened Jews.

 

[Drew]

Fascinating study Drew.

Do you think that these vessels of wrath fitted to destruction......

.....are represented today in the shape of Christ hating Talmudic Zionism??

First of all, thanks for reading these posts and your kind words. I am used to people disagreeing with me and am not at all averse to challenges to what I am saying. And to be completely fair, and to give proper "credit", my ideas are substantially influenced by the writing of British theologian NT Wright.

Now to your question: On the view that I am putting forward, the time of God hardening the nation of Israel (or most of them, anyway) came to an end 2000 years ago. So, on my view, there is no Biblical evidence that God is, in any sense, hardening Jews now any more than He is hardening Norwegians, or people with big noses.

My argument is this: the "hardening" of the Jews was a necessary and vital "set-up" acitivity for the cross. With the victory on the cross achieved, God no longer needs to harden Jews.

 

[Strangelove]

First of all, thanks for reading these posts and your kind words. I am used to people disagreeing with me and am not at all averse to challenges to what I am saying. And to be completely fair, and to give proper "credit", my ideas are substantially influenced by the writing of British theologian NT Wright.

Now to your question: On the view that I am putting forward, the time of God hardening the nation of Israel (or most of them, anyway) came to an end 2000 years ago. So, on my view, there is no Biblical evidence that God is, in any sense, hardening Jews now any more than He is hardening Norwegians, or people with big noses.

My argument is this: the "hardening" of the Jews was a necessary and vital "set-up" acitivity for the cross. With the victory on the cross achieved, God no longer needs to harden Jews.

I'm not necessarily talking about Jews. How about the Synagogue of Satan? The Jews who say they are Jews but do lie [edomites?].

Do you see that group still around today?

 

[Drew]

I'm not necessarily talking about Jews. How about the Synagogue of Satan? The Jews who say they are Jews but do lie [edomites?].

Do you see that group still around today?

Ok, but I have no opinion (or relevant knowledge) on this matter.

My argument is that the "vessels of destruction" from Romans 9 refers to those Jews, who in the time leading up to the cross, were hardened by God.

 

[savedbygrace57]

drew:

My argument is that the "vessels of destruction" from Romans 9 refers to those Jews

And yet you have no scripture proof of that. Paul does not say it, so why should you ?

 

[savedbygrace57]

drew:

Some argue that the following text from Romans 9 shows that Paul is focused on the matter of election of individuals to an eternal fate:

He is, and uses individuals to support His argument, such as pharoah, Jacob and Easu, Isaac and ect.

 

[savedbygrace57]

mark:

If he had said, "who are you, a Jew, to answer back to God?", we might consider your interpretation

Excellent point.

 

[Drew]

As already stated in an earlier post, I suggest that Paul is arguing that the Law of Moses function to harden Israel, to concentrate and bring sin to full expression in her. This statement, no doubt will raise eyebrows - I am indeed suggesting that the Law of Moses has this "dark" purpose of making Israel more sinful, not less.

The following snippet of text from Galatians 3 is consistent with this position:

All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law."11Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." 12The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them." 13Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, ....

There is, of course, a lot of meat in this passage. However, I simply want to point out that Paul says that the Jews who are trying to observe the law are, yes, under a curse. So I am not making up this idea that the law has a dark effect on those who try to follow it - Paul himself says so in this very passage. Paul is arguing that those Jews who make the mistake of thinking that "obeying the Law of Moses is what its all about" are led down the garden path. In other words, hardened.

And then we get this from the same chapter:

Why the Law then? It was added because of transgressions,

Now this statement is admittedly ambiguous - what does "because of transgressions" really mean? Well, Paul also writes this in Romans 5:

The Law came in so that the transgression would increase

This statement, by itself, supports the point I am making - Paul is making the remarkable claim that God gave the Jews the Law of Moses to make them more sinful - that is to harden them. You watch what people do with this verse - they will invariably try to bend it into something like this: The Law came so that sin would be revealed. But this is simply not what the text says - it says that transgression (sin) would increase, not simply be "revealed".

The reason for bringing up Romans 5:20 is that it establishes that it is at least possible that the cryptic statement in Galatians - about the law being added "because of transgressions" is a re-statement of the same point - the purpose of the Law of Moses was to increase transgression in national Israel. In other words, to harden her, just as a potter might harden a vessel of destruction.

Finally, we get this statement:

Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not!

The critical point here is that Paul clearly believes that he has just concluded an argument that would lead people to believe that the Law was doing something bad. And indeed he has done this very thing - like in Romans 5:20 he is saying things in Galatians 3 about the Law of Moses having this dark "sin-inducing" and, yes, hardening, effect on some Jews who follow that Law. For example, Paul has said that those who pursue the Law in a certain manner are cursed. This is a clear assertion that there indeed a "dark" side to the Law - a way in which it functions to drive the Jew away from following God.

So why does Paul insist that, appearances notwithstanding, the law is, after all a good thing? I suggest that the reason is this: the Law of Moses, and its hardening effect on the Jew, has had salvific effect for the Gentile! As Paul writes at the end of Galatians 3:

You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Here is another, arguably cryptic, way one could express this notion that the hardening of the Jew has expanded the family of God to include Gentiles:

Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

 

[MarkT]

Destruction - Take 2

As already stated in an earlier post, I suggest that Paul is arguing that the Law of Moses function to harden Israel, to concentrate and bring sin to full expression in her. This statement, no doubt will raise eyebrows - I am indeed suggesting that the Law of Moses has this "dark" purpose of making Israel more sinful, not less.

There’s nothing dark about it Drew. The trespass increases if you know the law. It’s worse if you break the law knowing it is the law than if you break the law not knowing it is the law. If you trespass knowing the law says it is an offence, it is a greater offence or trespass than if you trespass not knowing you are trespassing. If you know the law says don’t do it, and you do it, it’s a greater offence, a 1st degree trespass or offence.

The following snippet of text from Galatians 3 is consistent with this position:

All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law."11Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." 12The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them." 13Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, ....

There is, of course, a lot of meat in this passage. However, I simply want to point out that Paul says that the Jews who are trying to observe the law are, yes, under a curse. So I am not making up this idea that the law has a dark effect on those who try to follow it - Paul himself says so in this very passage. Paul is arguing that those Jews who make the mistake of thinking that "obeying the Law of Moses is what its all about" are led down the garden path. In other words, hardened.

It says everyone, not just the Jew. Everyone who relies on the works of the law is under a curse if he doesn’t abide by everything that is written in the book of the law. I don’t understanding the connection here. Pharaoh was ready to let the Israelites go a number of times and God hardened his heart each time so that he changed his mind. What’s the law got to do with it? The law didn’t cause Pharaoh to harden his heart.

When Paul speaks of a hardening he is talking about the heart. The people who followed Jesus did not understand. The prophecy was they would hear but never understand, and see but never perceive. For this people’s heart has grown dull, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and their eyes they have closed. Paul said a hardening has come over a part of Israel, referring to those who did not understand or believe. The law didn’t close their eyes. The law didn’t cause them to not understand or believe.

And then we get this from the same chapter:

Why the Law then? It was added because of transgressions,

Now this statement is admittedly ambiguous - what does "because of transgressions" really mean? Well, Paul also writes this in Romans 5:

The Law came in so that the transgression would increase

This statement, by itself, supports the point I am making - Paul is making the remarkable claim that God gave the Jews the Law of Moses to make them more sinful - that is to harden them. You watch what people do with this verse - they will invariably try to bend it into something like this: The Law came so that sin would be revealed. But this is simply not what the text says - it says that transgression (sin) would increase, not simply be "revealed".

The reason for bringing up Romans 5:20 is that it establishes that it is at least possible that the cryptic statement in Galatians - about the law being added "because of transgressions" is a re-statement of the same point - the purpose of the Law of Moses was to increase transgression in national Israel. In other words, to harden her, just as a potter might harden a vessel of destruction.

Well again Paul did not say anything about the law hardening Israel. Paul is talking about God’s right to make out of the same lump one vessel for beauty and another for menial use. The same lump refers to our ancestor, whether Abraham or Adam, being the ancestor of us all. He calls them vessels of mercy and vessels of wrath - men prepared beforehand for glory and men made for destruction, and he refers to himself when he says even us whom he has called. So Paul is saying God made us. We were prepared beforehand for glory.

On the subject of foreknowledge, some have said God knows who will choose him. But Paul said ‘whom he foreknew‘ Romans 8:29 Foreknew and having foreknowledge are two different things. Foreknew means God knew us before we knew him.

Let us not be puffed up with conceit but don't forget, we are the sons of God.

 

[smaller]

Here is 'how' God hardens ANY HEART:

Mark 4:15
And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.

Matthew 13:19
When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.

Luke 8:12
Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.

ALL, Jews and Gentiles alike HAVE SIN because of the FIRST LAW, 'do not eat.' That was THE LAW, Gods Word that prompted the EXACT SAME entry of SATAN into Adam. Sin is OF THE DEVIL. (1 John 3:8)

Hearts are HARDENED exactly as Jesus taught above. That hardening is STILL going on, especially in those who DON'T BELIEVE what Jesus taught is TRUE for THEM and think themselves EXEMPT.

Sin is OF THE DEVIL. ALL have sin. Do the math. Gods Words have arrived into our environment and those WORDS have AROUSED DEVILS to enter MANKIND and to SIN.

What any given individual does in response does NOT stop DEVILS from doing what 'they do' and they DO SIN in MANKIND which places them WITHin mankind.

THERE IS YOUR HARD STONY HEART and IT'S CAUSE.

It ain't just the JEW, it's YOU.

And if you don't believe Jesus, what can I say? Look out below. The ten plagues may be headed yer way.

enjoy!

smaller

 

[MarkT]

Well you're not telling us how he hardens the heart. Isaiah tells us the LORD shut their eyes and their minds.

Isaiah 44:18 RSV
They know not, nor do they discern; for he has shut their eyes, so that they cannot see, and their minds, so that they cannot understand.

Actually God can harden the heart because his spirit is in man, and it is the spirit in a man, the breath of the Almighty, that makes him understand. Job 32:8

So it has nothing to do with devils or devils entering people. People get tired of hearing. Their hearts get dull, unreceptive to the word of God. They become stupid. But it's God' s will.