I don't understand Romans 9 anymore

friend of

A private in Gods army
Site Supporter
Dec 28, 2016
5,606
3,964
provincial
✟781,378.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Basically, by Paul's logic, I should be allowed to buy an animal and maim and torture it because it's my property and I own it.

Romans 9:22-23
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? 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—

If you were a father of two boys, would you beat one of them with a belt until they pass out in order to show the other one how much you love him?

I don't get it anymore.
 

Friedrich Rubinstein

Well-Known Member
Aug 20, 2020
1,266
1,337
Europe
Visit site
✟179,771.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
If the text said that God is "maiming and torturing" the unbelievers, yes. Then that would be Paul's logic. But it doesn't.
Please pay close attention to Paul's usage of the word "prepared". In verse 22 it is in the passive form ("they are prepared"), while in verse 23 it is in the active form ("He prepared them"). I admit in the English language it is not as easy to differentiate between passive and active as in the original Greek and other languages.
God actively prepares those he has mercy on, but he doesn't actively prepare those who will face his wrath. Instead, he bears them with great patience while they are bringing destruction onto themselves.

In other words, wrath is something you earn yourself through your actions. Mercy is something you do not earn. You receive it as a free gift from God.

And who are we to say that God has to give the same gift to everyone? Gifts are nothing you deserve.
 
Upvote 0

Maria Billingsley

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 7, 2018
9,798
7,994
64
Martinez
✟948,774.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why are you choosing such a small portion of this chapter to make Him your object of doubt? Read the entire message and know that this is not about you but about the condition of unrepentant Israel.
Blessings.
 
Upvote 0

friend of

A private in Gods army
Site Supporter
Dec 28, 2016
5,606
3,964
provincial
✟781,378.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Why are you choosing such a small portion of this chapter to make Him your object of doubt? Read the entire message and know that this is not about you but about the condition of unrepentant Israel.
Blessings.
The passage is talking about individuals just as much as it's talking about unrepentant Israel, who is comprised of individuals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clare73
Upvote 0

friend of

A private in Gods army
Site Supporter
Dec 28, 2016
5,606
3,964
provincial
✟781,378.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
If the text said that God is "maiming and torturing" the unbelievers, yes.

That's kind of what happens to vessels of wrath when they end up in hell. Hell is a place of torture.
 
Upvote 0

Friedrich Rubinstein

Well-Known Member
Aug 20, 2020
1,266
1,337
Europe
Visit site
✟179,771.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
That's kind of what happens to vessels of wrath when they end up in hell. Hell is a place of torture.
Hell is a place of perfectly fair punishment. God never punishes a person in a way they don't deserve.

The question is why they end up there. Is it because God caused them to deserve punishment? Or is it because they themselves chose to do things that deserves it? I think my previous post answers that question.
 
Upvote 0

HTacianas

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2018
8,626
9,123
Florida
✟331,496.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Basically, by Paul's logic, I should be allowed to buy an animal and maim and torture it because it's my property and I own it.

Romans 9:22-23
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? 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—

If you were a father of two boys, would you beat one of them with a belt until they pass out in order to show the other one how much you love him?

I don't get it anymore.

If I was the father of two boys I would not beat one to make the other feel good. And neither does God. Romans 9:22 does not describe the actions of God. It is meant to illustrate the sovereignty of God. Romans 9:20 asks who is a man to question the actions of God. Romans 9:22 asks a hypothetical question, "what if"? So what if God did those things, who are you to question it. It doesn't state "God does this".

It's one of the reasons behind the mistake of some forms of predestination. The idea that God does a thing based on the misreading of a hypothetical. What if? To ask what if I had two sons and I beat one of them is not to say that I do it.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: YahuahSaves
Upvote 0

YahuahSaves

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2022
1,760
714
Melbourne
✟30,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Basically, by Paul's logic, I should be allowed to buy an animal and maim and torture it because it's my property and I own it.

Romans 9:22-23
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? 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—

If you were a father of two boys, would you beat one of them with a belt until they pass out in order to show the other one how much you love him?

I don't get it anymore.

Yes this whole question of predetermination is the subject of much debate.

My take on it is that God already knows beforehand who will accept him and who will reject him (hence the ones who reject him being the objects of wrath).

Israel’s Unbelief


30 What does all this mean? Even though the Gentiles were not trying to follow God’s standards, they were made right with God. And it was by faith that this took place. 31 But the people of Israel, who tried so hard to get right with God by keeping the law, never succeeded. 32 Why not? Because they were trying to get right with God by keeping the law[o] instead of by trusting in him. They stumbled over the great rock in their path. 33 God warned them of this in the Scriptures when he said,

“I am placing a stone in Jerusalem[p] that makes people stumble,
a rock that makes them fall.
But anyone who trusts in him
will never be disgraced.”[q]

In a way, you could say Israel is the example none of us (gentiles) want to follow.. they were given great mercy and kindness but rejected it repeatedly. The ultimate rejection of God is rejecting Jesus as the Messiah.
 
Upvote 0

atpollard

Well-Known Member
Jun 18, 2017
1,792
858
62
Florida
✟116,295.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Good thing Romans does not start out in Chapter 9.
If we go back to Romans 1 and begin reading from verse 18, we gain a great deal of insight into this wrath and those that are earning it and God’s part in the process. Chapters 2 and 3 continue to provide still more information on mankind and sin. There is a great deal that comes before Romans 9 that should be read if one really desires understanding.

On the other hand, if one is determined to just throw rocks at God … why read Romans at all?
 
  • Like
Reactions: YahuahSaves
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

bling

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,295
1,826
✟841,813.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Basically, by Paul's logic, I should be allowed to buy an animal and maim and torture it because it's my property and I own it.

Romans 9:22-23
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? 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—

If you were a father of two boys, would you beat one of them with a belt until they pass out in order to show the other one how much you love him?

I don't get it anymore.
Romans 9

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.
 
Upvote 0

atpollard

Well-Known Member
Jun 18, 2017
1,792
858
62
Florida
✟116,295.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Basically, by Paul's logic, I should be allowed to buy an animal and maim and torture it because it's my property and I own it.
Actually, Paul’s logic is closer to: I have the right to buy two pot-bellied pigs and bring one as a pet to live in my house and send the other to a field to be slaughtered for Sunday dinner.

Would you disagree that I have that right?
Should farm animals as pets be forbidden?
Has God no right to save anyone, but a moral obligation to deliver the punishment that all sin deserves?
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Watching and Praying Always
Oct 22, 2019
7,606
2,371
43
Helena
✟212,899.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
it is one of the hardest parts of the bible to take in.

Yes, God is objectively Good, and in fact, being the creator, gets to define good.

But the chapter seems to suggest that He creates some people.... just to torture forever and have suffer.
and that is a hard pill to swallow and accept as a good and benevolent creator.
 
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
25,634
6,367
North Carolina
✟285,952.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
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,
Not according to the text.

Let's not mitigate the Greek here, the two groups are for honor (time) and dishonor, disgrace (atimia)--for human-waste vessels.
It's about the sovereignty of God to do as he pleases.
Paul asserts God's sovereignty over the Jews when he magnifies his justice in their destruction (Jer 18:3-6, Ro 9:22) .
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,686
27,089
Pacific Northwest
✟747,273.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Basically, by Paul's logic, I should be allowed to buy an animal and maim and torture it because it's my property and I own it.

Romans 9:22-23
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? 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—

If you were a father of two boys, would you beat one of them with a belt until they pass out in order to show the other one how much you love him?

I don't get it anymore.

Romans 9 only makes sense in the context of everything Paul had been writing prior, and everything Paul continues to write after. It sits in the middle of "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23) and "God has consigned all to disobedience in order that He might have mercy on all" (Romans 11:32). Recall Paul's thesis statement for the epistle, "I am not ashamed of the Gospel for it is the power of God to save all who believe, the Jew first and also the Gentile. For in it is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith, just as it is written, 'The just shall live by faith.'" (Romans 1:16-17).

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Like
Reactions: Strong in Him
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

bling

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,295
1,826
✟841,813.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Not according to the text.

Let's not mitigate the Greek here, the two groups are for honor (time) and dishonor, disgrace (atimia)--for human-waste vessels.
It's about the sovereignty of God to do as he pleases.
Paul asserts God's sovereignty over the Jews when he magnifies his justice in their destruction (Jer 18:3-6, Ro 9:22) .
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.
 
Upvote 0

zoidar

loves Jesus the Christ! ✝️
Site Supporter
Sep 18, 2010
7,256
2,624
✟901,750.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Basically, by Paul's logic, I should be allowed to buy an animal and maim and torture it because it's my property and I own it.

Romans 9:22-23
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? 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—

If you were a father of two boys, would you beat one of them with a belt until they pass out in order to show the other one how much you love him?

I don't get it anymore.
I will suggest the reason you don't get it is because you don't understand the chapter. Don't let your lack of understanding this passage get in your way of loving Jesus. I mean this in a good way. There are many passages in Scripture I have to struggle with, but every time we come to the conclusion that God is unfair or unloving there is something wrong with our understanding of Scripture.

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? (This is a reference to the Jews only who denied their Messiah) And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy (both from the Jews and the Gentiles), which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.
— Romans 9:22-24
 
Upvote 0

Bob Crowley

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dec 27, 2015
3,139
1,950
69
Logan City
✟774,586.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I have trouble with the concept of Hell's eternity for temporal sins, but i don't doubt it's existence. I think it's a bad as it's painted if the visions of some saints are anything to go by. The following link includes some visions of heaven for a semblance of balance.


While the OP used the example of a father belting one of his sons till he blacked out, I accept that is to some extent what appears to be what Hell is like.

But this raises the question as to why the father was belting the son in the first place? How severe was the offence - breaking a window with a cricket ball? Refusing to help with mowing the lawn? Maiming the dog? Killing another child, or maybe his brother? Torturing someone? Murdering millions in the killing fields of Cambodia and being completely unrepentant about ti?

But then God, in the form of Jesus Christ, died Himself in extreme agony so we could avoid Hell. HIs creatures mocked Him, stuck a crown of thorns on His head, humiliated Him, scourged Him, crucified Him, and ridiculed Him even as He hung on the cross, and then to make sure He was dead stuck a spear in His side.

God may not much admire the human race in view of the way we treated Him when He came, especially when all He did was to help people. I doubt if He admires us. I believe He thinks we're stupid a lot of the time.

To give a complete balance to the OP's question, the father would first of all have had to make some supreme sacrifice in order that the wayward son could avoid the thrashing.

But if the wayward son refuses the offer, what is the father to do?
 
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
25,634
6,367
North Carolina
✟285,952.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I have trouble with the concept of Hell's eternity for temporal sins, but i don't doubt it's existence.
Hell is not for temporal sins, hell is for those who don't seek Jesus' salvation from the condemnation into which they are born (Ro 5:18) due to the imputation of Adam's sin to to all those born of Adam (Ro 5:12-15), who by nature (with which we are born) are objects of wrath (Eph 2:3).
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Bob Crowley

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dec 27, 2015
3,139
1,950
69
Logan City
✟774,586.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
We become objects of wrath because of our sins, not because we were born with sinful natures over which we had no control.

We're held responsible for our personal thoughts, words, actions and inactions - not because the human race is inclined to sin.

It boils down to our individual choices.
 
Upvote 0