Who are the "Vessels of Destruction"?

[Drew]

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.

 

[smaller]

and again the instant you say there will be unbeliving gentiles destroyed, then your position is defeated (unbelieving Jews ONLY)

 

[Drew]

and again the instant you say there will be unbeliving gentiles destroyed, then your position is defeated (unbelieving Jews ONLY)

No. The fact that there will be unbelieving Gentiles destroyed does not defeat my position.

Again, I may have been less that precise in my wording. I am not suggesting that the hardening of Jews ensures that all Gentiles will be saved. I am saying that the hardening of Jews is causally connected to the possibility of Gentiles being saved.

 

[smaller]

No. The fact that there will be unbelieving Gentiles destroyed does not defeat my position.

Again, I may have been less that precise in my wording. I am not suggesting that the hardening of Jews ensures that all Gentiles will be saved. I am saying that the hardening of Jews is causally connected to the possibility of Gentiles being saved.

And to that I agree. See how easy this is...

But gentiles are also hardened.

 

[Sparkey]

I think Paul was just saying that God, being "the potter," is justified, having made some for destruction and some for keeping. Paul was pointing out that both were made out of the same lump of clay.

The image we see is that of a master potter at his potters' wheel. One lump of clay (owned by the potter). Different 'vessels' are being made (also owned by the potter). They are made with different purposes in mind.

[Romans 9:20-26 HNV] - [20] But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed ask him who formed it, "Why did you make me like this?" [21] Or hasn't the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel for honor, and another for dishonor? [22] What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath made for destruction, [23] and that he might make known the riches of his glory on vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory, [24] us, whom he also called, not from the Yehudim only, but also from the Goyim? [25] As he says also in Hoshea, "I will call them 'my people,' which were not my people; And her 'beloved,' who was not beloved." [26] "It will be that in the place where it was said to them, 'You are not my people,' There they will be called 'sons of the living God.'"

We clearly see that God is willing to show his wrath, that He "puts up with" or "endures" with much patience, the one so that we could see the contrast and so that He could make known the riches of His Glory to be given to us, that is, to any who believe on the Name of Jesus, both those of the Children of Israel, and those who are not physically connected through direct earthly blood line.

Seems to me that all who love God and follow after Christ have a higher blood connection. We don't have to employ "spiritualism" to know that it is the blood, the physical blood, that our Lord, Jesus shed for us that forms the bond.

This bond is greater than any genealogy.

 

[smaller]

A great difficulty with this topic arose for me many years ago when debating a fairly intelligent Jewish believer who was associated with the organization called 'Jews for Judaism.'

The fulcrum of that difficulty came to me when he 'rightly' pointed out a couple things of fact.

The first fact is that ALL of Israel are taught in the O.T. that they are Gods children. He gave, and I accept the truths of Deut. 14:1 and Psalm 82:6 and other scriptures of similar matter in which God is described as The Father of them all such as Malachi 2:10 or even some similar references in the N.T. such as Matt. 23:9 or even Acts 17:28-29 or Eph. 4:6 all pointing to the same fact.

So, the conclusion that was unavoidable to me was that God was going to actually destroy His children permanently in the Lake of Fire. But when I looked for a specific example of this actually happening I could find NO such statements that applied to Children of God, that being Israel, all.

In fact I found just the opposite in Revelation. That THEIR NAMES are written on the GATES of The Holy City. (Revelation 21:12) The O.T. does a meticulous job of 'keeping track of their names, their tribes and their physical lineage' for quite a stretch, even up to the time of Jesus' life in Holy Flesh.

He also said that no Jew holds to the position of eternal torment for any person on earth because they extend that 'Heavenly Fathership' to ALL mankind. Many in Orthodoxy have taken similar positions, such as the Roman Catholic church.

Just food for thought that IF God does not save even UNbelieving Israel He is also in FACT going to BURN ALIVE His Own Children. I find that conclusion without support, particularly in the LIGHT of Romans 11:25-32 where Paul comes to the exact OPPOSITE conclusion regarding ALL OF ISRAEL inclusive of ENEMIES OF THE GOSPEL who are LOVED and SAVED by God anyway for the sake of their fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

But many cannot see that 'mystery.' I believe that fact remains clouded in the minds of many believers and they simply can NOT see that fact, even though it is RIGHT THERE in front of us.

enjoy!

s

 

[Drew]

And to that I agree. See how easy this is...

But gentiles are also hardened.

But I am making the case that the hardening of Gentiles is not an important theme in this passage - Romans 9 to 11.

So things are not as simple as you suggest. It is entirely possible that Paul gives all kinds of examples of God "hardening" people leading to his conclusion that God has hardened Jews in particular with salvific implications for Gentiles:

because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles

You {***the Gentile} will say then, "Branches {***Jews} were broken off so that I {***the Gentile} could be grafted in." Granted.

 

[Drew]

I think Paul was just saying that God, being "the potter," is justified, having made some for destruction and some for keeping. Paul was pointing out that both were made out of the same lump of clay.

Paul is making a much more specific and covenantal argument. In keeping with consistent Old Testament tradition where the potter metaphor is specifically used in respect to Israel, Paul is arguing that God has hardened (most) Jews with salvific implications for a remnant of Jews as well as Gentiles.

This is not a timeless general argument - it is a focused historical argument about how God has molded Israel, and how, strangely, this is in perfect accord with the covenant plan.

Notice how chapter 9 through to the middle of chapter 10 is a compact re-telling of the entire covenant history of, yes, Israel - from Abraham to the promised in-gathering of Gentiles. This is an argument about Israel, not some general theological statement about the nature of mankind and pre-destination, etc.

 

[smaller]

But I am making the case that the hardening of Gentiles is not an important theme in this passage - Romans 9 to 11.

So things are not as simple as you suggest. It is entirely possible that Paul gives all kinds of examples of God "hardening" people leading to his conclusion that God has hardened Jews in particular with salvific implications for Gentiles:

because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles

You {***the Gentile} will say then, "Branches {***Jews} were broken off so that I {***the Gentile} could be grafted in." Granted.

I have conceded the point Drew and do not disagree with your conclusions 'to that point' notwithstanding the hardening of the gentiles as well.

You have not yet given your reflections on Romans 11:25-32 with respect to 'enemies of the Gospel,' those unbelieving Jews being ALL SAVED,

and with the exception that hardening is not an unbelieving Jews only matter. Unbelieving Gentiles are obviously hardened into unbelief as well. There is no question about the latter either and I think we have agreed on that as well.

s

 

[smaller]

But I am making the case that the hardening of Gentiles is not an important theme in this passage - Romans 9 to 11.

And I would find the hardening of a NON JEW to be one of the major themes of the Old Testament and the entire Jewish people and re-iterated in Romans 9, that hardening of PHARAOH.

So things are not as simple as you suggest. It is entirely possible that Paul gives all kinds of examples of God "hardening" people leading to his conclusion that God has hardened Jews in particular with salvific implications for Gentiles:

The fact that gentiles are hardened who could care less about Jews or Israel remains a fact. There is no avoiding this fact either. I have no issues with unbelieving Jews being hardened for our benefit as Gentiles, but that again is NOT the only hardening that went on or that still goes on. Every unbeliever has been likewise hardened regardless of their nation of origin. God did work with Israel to show us many many deeply spiritual matters to the which Paul does a fantastic job describing in Romans and even how THAT SAME WORKING applies to believing or unbelieving gentiles. Jews were singled out in our behalves in these matters 'because' they point us to the DEEPER MATTERS of indwelling sin, resistance to Gods Words as a result, and the DELIVERANCE of God in Christ that is presented and delivered to ALL MANKIND therein regardless of their national origin.

 

[Sparkey]

and I think we have agreed on that as well.

s

That was my impression, but I don't mind saying that I don't know how to sift the words spoken here to such fine detail. Is there any disagreement that remains?

 

[Drew]

You have not yet given your reflections on Romans 11:25-32 with respect to 'enemies of the Gospel,' those unbelieving Jews being ALL SAVED,

In some recent thread, I did address this, but perhaps you were not participating in that thread.

I do not think that Paul is talking about national Israel (or Jews only) in 11:26 - I assert that Paul is using the term "Israel" like he does at the end of Galatians - to refer to the Jew + Gentile church.

So I do not think Paul believes in any large-scale salvation of Jews. Remember this key statement:

And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.

Paul is obviously not convinced that these Jews will, in fact, be saved.

hardening is not an unbelieving Jews only matter. Unbelieving Gentiles are obviously hardened into unbelief as well. There is no question about the latter either and I think we have agreed on that as well.

We do agree on this. One would have to rip the reference to Pharoah out of the Bible to try to suggest that God never hardens Gentiles.

s[/QUOTE]

 

[smaller]

In some recent thread, I did address this, but perhaps you were not participating in that thread.

I do not think that Paul is talking about national Israel (or Jews only) in 11:26 - I assert that Paul is using the term "Israel" like he does at the end of Galatians - to refer to the Jew + Gentile church.

So I do not think Paul believes in any large-scale salvation of Jews. Remember this key statement:

And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.

Paul is obviously not convinced that these Jews will, in fact, be saved.

Well, I certainly buy your blue argument with regards to 'present election' but Paul is abundantly clear about 2 things in Romans 11:25-32.

One, that being ALL OF ISRAEL saved and TWO inclusive of enemies of the Gospel who are loved of God for the sake of the 'elect' that being Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, which DOES open the door to a number of interesting observations, the main being POST PHYSICAL DEATH salvation of those ENEMIES.

A similar matter is prophetically spoken of by the Prophet Ezekiel in the 'valley of dry bones' prophecy in the O.T. (my connection.)

We do agree on this. One would have to rip the reference to Pharoah out of the Bible to try to suggest that God never hardens Gentiles.

s

heh heh. Glad you have a sense of humour.

s

 

[Sparkey]

Hey, smaller, Drew

I like you guys. Wanted to thank you for sharing the discussion here. It lets me read and learn. Just saying...

 

[savedbygrace57]

The vessels of destruction are all [jew and gentile] who were not of the election of grace, who are the vessels of mercy.

rom 9:


22What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

23And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

24Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

There are vessels of mercy God prepared afore out of the jews and gentiles vs 24

And likewise there are vessels of destruction out of the jews and gentiles that are fitted for destruction.

 

[smaller]

The vessels of destruction are all [jew and gentile] who were not of the election of grace, who are the vessels of mercy.

rom 9:
22What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

23And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

24Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

There are vessels of mercy God prepared afore out of the jews and gentiles vs 24

And likewise there are vessels of destruction out of the jews and gentiles that are fitted for destruction.

Uh I know you won't listen to this or be able to respond. ALL OF ISRAEL are taught in the Old Testament to be GODS CHILDREN. Sorry, this is just a hardline scriptural FACT:

Deut. 14:1, Psalm 82:6, Mal. 2:10, Matt. 23:9.

 

[savedbygrace57]

Uh I know you won't listen to this or be able to respond. ALL OF ISRAEL are taught in the Old Testament to be GODS CHILDREN. Sorry, this is just a hardline scriptural FACT:

Deut. 14:1, Psalm 82:6, Mal. 2:10, Matt. 23:9.

Not all Jews were God's Children rom 9:

8That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

Also Jesus called some children of the devil Jn 8:

44Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.

He says in vs 42

42Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me:

Jesus did not believe all jews of Israel had God as their Father. Again, you do not study !

 

[smaller]

Not all Jews were God's Children rom 9:

THEN you are claiming that the Old Testament scriptures are FALSE. I say your understanding of Romans 9 is false because it contradicts those Old Testament scriptures. Clearly the BLINDED JEWS had and still have A SPIRIT OF STUPOR put upon them ala Romans 11:8-9, and that by God and that SPIRIT having been PUT upon them makes that spirit NOT THEM. Then CAN and ARE still Gods children, just BLINDED. The spirit of stupor upon them is what is NOT ISRAEL.

Your view is simply poor accounting for 'all' the parties.

OR your view insists on DENYING the truths of Deut. 14:1, Psalm 82:6, Mal. 2:10, Matt. 23:9 and many many others.

Jesus did not believe all jews of Israel had God as their Father. Again, you do not study !

Sorry. Bind men can not see other blind men accurately.

enjoy!

smaller

 

[savedbygrace57]

small:

THEN you are claiming that the Old Testament scriptures are FALSE.

I guess you just flat out ignored post 17 ?

 

[smaller]

small:



I guess you just flat out ignored post 17 ?

or you can't follow the line of reasoning in post #18 and respond to the fact that your position is that Gods children are are also devils. What's that tell you about their Father? You know, the God Father? Your view can ONLY LEAD to God being the father OF DEMONIC CHILDREN. I don't find that view credible whatsoever.

Either God is their Father as the texts dictate or He is not. He cannot be both Father and NOT their Father. Do you understand this simplicity? Either those texts are fully true AND there were other entities called CHILDREN OF THE DEVIL that are WITH those same people OR, your view, that we have to see that GOD IS THE FATHER OF DEMONIC CHILDREN.