Lets refresh what we are even arguing about. It was not about Jews or Gentiles in the Church. It was your questioning does God love all people equally.
You say: “God can have mercy on who he wants.” So can God be totally arbitrary about who He saves and does not save?
I answered your question with a simple quote of Romans 9:15. You try long and hard to dispute these simple words. Understand that the verse is a direct quote of Exodus 33:19. It is a truism that stands on its own. It needs no "context" of a Jewish Gentile clash to be explained.
It is one thing to start a person out rich or become a rich person and make or start out with another person mentally challenged and/or unhealthy like Lazarus, but that does not matter in the large scheme of things since a Lazarus can go to heaven and the rich man can go to hell. Everything that leaves the Potter’s shop has His name on it and can be used for a common purpose or a very special purpose, but from both groups some after leaving the shop become damaged and are worthless (made for destruction).
You allude to groups changing after leaving the hands of the potter. Isaiah 29:16 and Isaiah 45:9 teach nothing like that.
I did not say the common water jug, became a jug for a very special purpose or vice versa, that is not the analogy Paul is using. The fact that you are born common (like the gentiles could see themselves) and other were born very special (like the Jews could see themselves), does not matter in the least since either one can become damaged and worthless (undeserving of the Potter’s name).
Like I said, Romans 9 has the summary title "God's Sovereign Choice", not man's choice.
It is not teaching on the choices that man makes, but God's. These verses highlight people being held accountable to God's plan in creation.
11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand:
14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all!
19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”
23 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
It is the plan of God's election that the saved will come from both Jew and Gentile as Romans 9:8 along with Romans 9:24-29 state. Lastly Romans 9:30-33 show the importance of faith in the elect over either being a descendant of Abraham or following the law.
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.
Surely Paul was at odds with Jews in the early church that did not make it easy for Gentiles to come in. He did discuss it in multiple letters, but it was doctrine firmly established very early in Paul's ministry as documented in Acts. The controversy in the early church for Gentiles to follow Jewish laws and customs has been settled long ago.
Not to say that the doctrines gleaned from Paul's letters are without debate, only that the doctrines are much "meatier" than what you propose significant. If one wants to ponder what great doctrine Paul was teaching in his letter to the Romans, it would be that of righteousness. Paul uses the word more times than any other apostle and in Romans uses it more than any of his other letters. Does this mean Romans 9 is about righteousness, no. It means Paul is able to teach on varied topics and you can't pigeonhole him to only discussing Jewish Gentile relationships.
Understanding Ro. 9 takes lots of study:
Paul uses two teaching methods in Romans that are taught in secular philosophy classes and are used even in secular classes 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 follows closely to the diatribes used in the individual laments of the Psalms, 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
Romans 9 may be difficult to accept, but I would never say it difficult to understand. There is no great context required to read the chapter. It affirms the supremacy of God, which should be understood from creation, Romans 1:19-20. It highlights God's plan and active role in realizing that plan. These concepts had been taught in the OT: Exodus, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah. The Hebrew nation had the history of all the signs where God made his might and authority known.
The Gentiles that Paul was reaching out to were much more grounded in reasoning over blindly following. Paul anticipates challenges to God's sovereignty, and quotes imaginary questions Romans 9:14,19. Note that Paul does not formulate a reasoned response with arguments proving his answer. He merely quotes the OT: Exodus 33:19, Exodus 9:16, Isaiah 29:16, Isaiah 45:9. Hardly analytical rhetoric debate.
The main 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 the question with strong support for the wrong answer (this makes it more of a debate).
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?
That is what is at 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, but is this “letter” being written to 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 the first century in Rome?
Are there issues and problems with being a first century Jew and was this a problem for Paul?
Sounds like identity politics. Everything is not about race. In fact, the race question was settled in Romans 9:7-8, well before all the arguments in this discourse. And, if you want a race debate, go read Romans 11. Does the extent of God's plan only involve Jews vs. Gentiles? God's sovereignty extends to the whole world and the purpose of his plan is stated in Romans 9:22-23. An example of God's wrath is given with Pharaoh, which Exodus 9:12 says God hardened his heart. God did this so that his might and glory should be known to his people, the objects of his mercy. The argument is not over race.
The Jews were created in a special honorable position that would bring forth the Messiah and everyone else was common in comparison.
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.
So Paul postulated that Jews are inherently special, only to cut them down to being equal to Gentiles. He creates a problem to solve it. He takes the opposite side of every other time he argues Jews vs. Gentiles. I don't think so.
Did you notice that Romans 9 quotes 17 verses of OT text? There was not a huge Jew vs. Gentile clash in the Church in that time. What Paul was teaching is an old concept that has nothing to do with race. It has to do with God's plan and election. This is what Romans 9:24 states with Paul clearly stating "us", the elect, are both Jew and Gentile.
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 “clay pigeons”). Everything that leaves the potter’s shop is a 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 the left the potter’s shop with his mark on them? Any vessel (honorable or common) that becomes damaged is not worthy of the potters signature and He would want it destroyed.
Romans 9:22 can't be read without Romans 9:21,23. Romans 9:21 states an authority of the potter to make two different kinds of pots: special and common. Who are the special? Romans 9:6 says they are those of Israel, but not because of race. This is an early reference to Romans 11 where Israel is a term for all the saved. Verses 7 and 8 reinforce this, adding in the children of the promise, symbolized with the promise to Sarah. Verse 12 adds in the special as being the elect. Read Matthew 24:31 to see the elect come from every direction. Read Romans 11:7 to see that some elect come from the Jews but are not all of them, not a race. 2 Timothy 2:10 says they are those that have salvation in Christ. 2 Peter 1:10 says the elect are those called by God. The special are those God has compassion on, Romans 9:15.
The other kind of pot is the common. It is represented by Esau who sold his birthright because of his lack of faith, verse 13. And, Pharaoh whose heart was hardened to go against God, verse 17. Those judged by the Lord in the times of Isaiah, verse 28,9.
If there are two kinds of pots, then Romans 9:22,23 describe the purpose of the two kinds. He uses one kind for making his power known. He uses the other kind to show his glory and mercy. Nothing in the text alludes to the two kinds of pots being of race. Nothing in the text speaks about the pots changing after being made. Nothing talks about them having his "special mark".
To understand this is Common vessels and special vessels look at the same idea using the same words of Paul in 2 Tim 2: 20. There Paul also points out the common can become the honored vessel.
You take great liberties bringing in 2 Timothy 2:20-21 to this text. Timothy is addressing what people should do while claiming to follow God: don't quarrel, avoid godless chatter, stay in the truth, turn away from wickedness and so on. This text is markedly different from Romans 9 where it speaks of God's actions, not man's. So what if two words are common?
PS
In the end I want commend you though for defending what you believe and using scripture to do so, even if I am at odds with some of your views. I think truth unchallenged is subject to errors so it is good to get multiple perspectives instead of just putting all your trust in ones teacher.
Or maybe we are just honing our skill in presenting arguments.
, some may put off making a decision and then find it is too late. Some may mistakenly believe that all religions lead to God, or that they are saved by their good deeds.
