devonst@burdvax.UUCP (Tom Albrecht) (11/19/86)
I think that Charles Hedrick makes some important observations in discussing the Romans 9 passage. It is true that Paul is discussing the fate of the Jews and the apparent hardening they are experiencing to the benefit of the gentiles. I do think we need to go a little farther and attempt to tackle the question of whether this passage speaks in any way of the condition of individuals. Paul used the picture of Pharaoh by way of explanation so that we might have more information to go on. The clay analogy by itself may be insufficient (although I don't think it is). Those who would attempt to assert that man is totally free in accepting or rejecting God's salvation certainly have their arguments undermined by these verses. He also uses the examples of Jacob and Esau to show that God's sovereign choice extends not only to nations, but also to individuals. Israel mistakenly believed that the natural inheritance which they received form Abraham was sufficient to secure their salvation. Jesus showed the error in this thinking when, after the Jews claim Abraham as their father, He says in John 8, "If you were Abraham's children then you would do the things Abraham did. ... You are doing the things you own father does." He later tells them that their father is the devil. Paul may have had these statements of Jesus in mind when he discusses the children of promise in Romans 9. Not all those who are physically descended from Abraham are the children of promise, but only those who come through the line of Isaac. Paul goes even further in proposing that God was perfectly just in saying, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." Obviously, if we believe that God can harden a race, such as the Jews, in order to accomplish His will in salvation, then He must have the ability to harden individuals within that race. Some have suggested that in the potter/clay relationship we see a choice. That the clay has a choice as to what shape it will be. If the clay chooses to remain soft and pliable, then it will become a vessel of honor. If, however, it chooses to dry up and be unworkable to the potter, it will become a vessel of dishonor. This understanding clearly violates certain rules of biblical interpretation. If that were the case anyone could twist any analogy to suit the desired results. If you talk to any human potter and discuss the work he's doing I would venture to guess that you would never get him to admit to believing that somehow the clay can will to be more or less workable. But we must proceed from the assumption that men are unable to accept the offer of salvation found in the Gospel without the direct intervention of God. The Bible says that no one seeks after God. Jesus said, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, ..." (John 6:44) The Bible talks about people being dead in sin. Now if death is a state of complete helplessness then it would follow that some sort of intervention is required in order to make that dead person alive. The story of the raising of Lazarus is a good picture of salvation. While Lazarus was in the tomb there was nothing he could do to change is condition. It required divine intervention for him to receive life and come out of the tomb. The fact that Jesus also called Lazarus by name speaks to the fact that God knows each of us individually and calls each one of us to himself by name. God's election is too often framed in the wrong terms. Most people who are exposed to the doctrines of grace for the first time ask the question, "Why would a loving God choose some for salvation and not others? That's so unfair." I prefer to look at it this way, "Why did a holy God choose anyone to receive eternal life? He would have been justified in leaving all of us to suffer the punishment for our sins." It is by His grace alone that we are saved. -- Tom Albrecht "Reformata, semper reformanda"
christian@topaz.UUCP (11/23/86)
Count me as another who has trouble with Romans 9. I don't have any problems until we get to verse 20 (funny thing). Paul is certainly reading the Isaiah he quotes in a sense different from that in its original context. The "potter" quote originally appears in the context of "why do you think you can outwit me? I created you, don't you think I understand your schemes?" But then Paul gets sucked up in the clay analogy, and imputes upon it the notion that God exerts His will upon every aspect of our being all the time. Besides the fact that accepting it as it stands justifies the Maltheist criticism, there is a constant thread of imagery in the NT of God not summoning us, but calling to us. Salvation is *offered*, Jesus *calls* us, "no one can come to me unless the Father who sent me *draws* him". (by the way, I have to disagree with Tom over John 6:44; the verse that follows speaks of the Father teaching and calling to those whom he draws, no force of will being implied at all.) Taking all of this together, I have to conclude that some people are predestined for salvation, and that God acts deliberately to harden the hearts of some, but that He chooses not to exert His will to compell the vast majority. I therefore agree with Tom that the principle point of the passage is that the children of Israel cannot rely on the blessing given to their forefathers for salvation, yet I think that Paul goes off the rails right at the end and asserts a universal lack of freedom which to my mind runs counter to the rest of scripture. C. Wingate
homeier@aero.UUCP (11/29/86)
[... but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ ...]
There has been a lot of discussion of what Paul was talking about when he
compared man arguing with God to a pot arguing with the potter. I think
that we first have to realize something of the disparity that Paul was
illustrating here. We are not God. We do not have the intelligence that
God has. We do not have the insight and wisdom that God has. We could
never design something as delicate and as complex as a leaf, let alone a
forest with wildlife, let alone a human being.
In all this we need to learn humility, to accept that He is far greater than
we are, and that there are some things that God does and is that are beyond
our ability to understand and comprehend.
I have come to believe that God has many truths that seem to our limited
intellects to be contradictory, yet in Him they form a harmonious whole.
Free will and predestination are often held by human philosophers to be in
conflict, yet I believe that they both reveal God's purpose towards us, but
from different viewpoints.
Clearly we all have free will, for we all make decisions every day, both
good decision and bad decisions, and we find out which they were sooner or
later. The fact that we are influenced in our decisions by our background,
our friends, and our circumstances in no way takes away our responsibility
for our own choices. The most fundamentally important choice any man or
woman makes is whether to accept Christ as their Lord and Savior. We are
all responsible for this choice, and on this choice rests our eternal
destination, whether that is the glories of heaven or the horror of hell.
"I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set
before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that
both you and your descendants may live." (Deut. 30:19)
This views the question of how man is saved from man's perspective, that as
far as he can see, he is completely free to choose either alternative. And
indeed this is so, that although we may bring up cases of confusion or
delusion, many people (including several on this network) have heard all
they need to come to Jesus and find forgiveness. But there is another
perspective to consider, and that is God's.
What I believe Paul is speaking of is how salvation looks to God.
God is not surprised when people come to Him for salvation, nor is He
anxiously biting His nails waiting to find out what each person will decide.
God sees all of time before Him, and knows now what each person's decision
will be. And yet He does not use that knowledge to prejudice Himself
against any person, but treats every single one the same way, for as the
Word says, "God desires that all should repent and come to the knowledge
of God." In the end it will be seen that God did not treat unfairly or
unjustly any person on earth, but they of their own evil hearts and selfish
cruelty cut themselves off from Him and turned to their own way, the way of
destruction and death, despite every appeal that their Creator could call
out after them.
Their hearts became hardened because they decided to harden them, from man's
perspective. Their hearts became hardened because God gave them over to a
hardened heart, from God's perspective. Both are true, and keeping both in
mind brings a balanced understanding of our place. We have a enourmous
privilige in our free will, and a tremendous responsibility in correctly
submitting our free will to God. At the same time, we need to realize that
we do not have God over a barrel, that nothing of what we do is ever out of
His hands, that it solely by His grace that we are drawn to respond to Him
as we do. It is He who is the Lord of all, and we exercise our free wills
under Him and by His grace.
As you enter the door into the sanctuary, you notice the word "choice" above
the lintel; after passing through, you look up and see the word "chosen".
---------------------------------------
Peter Homeier ______
Arpanet: homeier@aerospace / o \_/
UUCP: ..!ihnp4!trwrb!aero!homeier \___)__/ \
The Aerospace Corporation, M1-108
El Segundo, CA 90245
Disclaimer: Anything expressed above is my personal opinion, and not
the position of the Aerospace Corporation.mberkley@watdcsu.UUCP (11/29/86)
>I therefore agree with Tom that the >principle point of the passage is that the children of Israel cannot rely on >the blessing given to their forefathers for salvation, yet I think that Paul >goes off the rails right at the end and asserts a universal lack of freedom >which to my mind runs counter to the rest of scripture. I don't think that Paul is saying that God would harden our hearts to keep us from salvation. I think that God is saying that He would harden our hearts if we rejected salvation. God knows our hearts and He knows when we love Him and when we are buying fire insurance. Take Pharaoh for example. In Exodus 5, Pharoah refuses to listen to Moses and he states, "Who is the Lord, that I should obey him and let Israel go? I do not know the Lord and I will not let Israel go." Pharaoh clearly states that he will not let the Israelites go, and also he doesn't believe in the Hebrew God, in spite of all that Joseph did for Egypt (in God's name). Thus, after Pharaoh has made his choice, God hardens his heart against the Israelites. God knows the hearts of men, and he knew that Pharaoh's heart was decided irrevocably. Then and only then did the potter turn to make another use of the clay, for His glory. If God had not hardened Pharaoh's heart, who knows what would have happened. Perhaps Pharaoh would have let the Israelites go, but I believe that it would have been out of fear of the plagues, not submission to the Lord. Mike Berkley, Department of Computing Services, University of Waterloo EAN: mberkley@dcsu.waterloo.cdn UUCP: {allegra,ihnp4,utcsri,utzoo}!watmath!watdcsu!mberkley [I think we're beginning to exhaust this topic. If any theologians would like to grace us with new formulations of the doctrine of election, I'd be only too happy, but I think we have seen this passage from most of the common viewpoints now. --clh]