BadBadBad

Someone explain this passage from Romans to me. It says God creates souls like a potter creates a pot. God creates some pots to honor and show mercy, some to dishonor, "hardeneth," and show wrath. If I'm created like a pot by an omniscient and omnipotent god with my heart hardened against God, to be dishonored by God, and to suffer his wrath for eternity, where does Free Will come into this? Do I get the same shot at Free Will as those christian pots that are blessed by God at birth to have the eternal honor, compassion, mercy, and the eternal bliss of God in heaven? If God creates my soul and hardens my heart against him, who am I and how am I to question that. Why would God harden my heart against God when he wants me to worship God?

What am I missing in understanding this passage?

9:11
(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth)

9:12
It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.

9:13
As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

9:14
What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

9:15
For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

9:16
So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

9:17
For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

9:18
Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

9:19
Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

9:20
Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

9:21
Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

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

Carrie

--Romans 8:29-30 and Romans 9:16-23 --
You aren't missing anything.

I’ve had a problem with this scripture from the beginning. People in my church tried to explain it away, but it says what is says, and means it. It says that God predestines people to be saved. Predestined means they were chosen from the beginning of time to become Christians. It does not mean that God knew they would decide to become Christians someday and so he called them. Supposedly God calls everyone to him, but THIS says that people were predestined to be called or not.

Romans 9:16 says that it does not depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. Sounds to me like even if a person
really desires God and tries, it doesn’t matter.

Verse 18 says God has mercy on who he wants to have mercy and hardens who he wants to harden. "So why does God still blame us?" And Paul answers that by saying, “Who are you to talk back to God?” Then he says, “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, who he prepared in advance for glory?”

So God PREPARED people to be objects of destruction. Predestination means that people do not have a choice. Their destination is pre-chosen for them. Some people were made for destruction, and some for salvation.

And even IF this might not be what Paul meant, many people sure believed it! Christians TODAY do not believe in predestination, because it seems wrong to them, but Christians long ago really believed that some people were just made for destruction, and others were made for heaven. And there was a lot of fear and depression about this, and suicide (I saw a special about this on the Discovery channel).

So even it wasn't meant the way it reads, why would God allow a terrible and confusing scripture like this to be in his Bible?

What I think is that Paul was just spouting off from his own mouth, and this was not Inspired by God. That’s why Paul says, “what if,” because he doesn’t know, he’s just guessing. So it’s not like everything Paul said is the word or the Lord. It's just Paul’s opinion.

But if you dod think Paul's words are God's words, then you can't know whether or not you'll make it as a Christian. Even if you have been one for years, you may have been predestined for destruction, and therefore your heart will get hard, and you will end up leaving Christianity. Not much security there.

There are scriptures that make a person's salvation sound secure, but there are also a lot of scriptures that don't offer much security of salvation. But that's for a whole other thread. When I was a Christian, I never was really secure that I would make it to heaven, so there wasn't much joy in my salvation.

BadBadBad

That's what it says to me as well. I'm interested in how Christians interpret this.

In Exodus, God keeps on hardening Pharaoh's heart. I read that. I shook my head and thought this God guy isn't much of a diplomat is he? Why does he keep doing that? Then I read:

10:1
And the LORD said unto Moses, Go in unto Pharaoh: for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might shew these my signs before him:

10:2
And that thou mayest tell in the ears of thy son, and of thy son's son, what things I have wrought in Egypt, and my signs which I have done among them; that ye may know how that I am the LORD.

Oh, now I get it. Well no, not really. I guess it didn't occur to him that he could have just as well softened Pharoh's and the Egyptian's hearts and done something miraculous in a positive way to accomplish the same goal.

Then, Pharoh finally surrenders:

12:30
And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead.

12:31
And he called for Moses and Aaron by night, and said, Rise up, and get you forth from among my people, both ye and the children of Israel; and go, serve the LORD, as ye have said.

Then he hardens Pharaoh's heart once again, and he chases after Moses to his death at the hand of God in the Red Sea.

Well, if my heart is hardened against God by God like that, no wonder these Christians can't get me to see the light! Pharaoh had Free Will, and exercised it several times. He was going to let the Israelites leave without their livestock. Then he finally did let them leave, but God just kept after it. What good does Free Will do me if God is just going to keep hardening my heart anyway?

Old Man

You display a remarkable amount of incisiveness for a non-Christian. Something makes me think that you are not very sincere in your "unbelief". More like a petulant irritation with things you don't understand.

But when was not understanding the bible a reason for ceasing to believe?

Paul is referring here to the doctrine that God knows the end from the beginning. He knows everything, not just about yesterday and today, but also tomorrow. So he knows who will be saved and who won't. That's an attribute of God which is radically different from humans, and its hard to understand.

Nevertheless, despite that, God has made it quite clear to all men that they do have a choice, nonetheless:

Deu 11:26 Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse;

What Paul failed to mention, in his consideration of predestination, is that God works through and with the actions and decisions of men. So although some men are made for damnation (in that God knows that is what their end will be) it is also true that such men choose to damn themselves through rebellion against God. Every person choose heaven or hell for themselves.

And in regard to eternal security, you know the teaching is that if a person remains faithful, God will remain faithful to that person:

2Ti 2:11 [It is] a faithful saying: For if we be dead with [him], we shall also live with [him]:

2Ti 2:12 If we suffer, we shall also reign with [him]: if we deny [him], he also will deny us:

2Ti 2:13 If we believe not, [yet] he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.

BadBadBad

Fine, he knows. What about he "hardeneth." That's the issue. Paul doesn't say you get a choice. God hardens your heart. Just like Pharaoh, if God wouldn't do this heart heardening thing, perhaps he might have a few more worshippers. Just like in Exodus Paul reminds us that God has a point to make by hardening hearts:

9:17
For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

After God hardens my heart, do I really have the right to "resist his will" and use my Free Will to contradict his goal as describe in 9:17 and Exodus?



After he hardens my heart does Free Will mean the same thing to me as it does to the one he chooses mercy and honor for? I'd really like an answer to this. I think the Bible leaves out any answers to that.


You're right, this passage says very clearly some men are made for damnation. Unfortunately, you added in "(in that God knows that is what their end will be)." That's not what it says. It says specifically:

9:17
For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

Did you read that verse? How about in Exodus:

10:1
And the LORD said unto Moses, Go in unto Pharaoh: for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might shew these my signs before him:

10:2
And that thou mayest tell in the ears of thy son, and of thy son's son, what things I have wrought in Egypt, and my signs which I have done among them; that ye may know how that I am the LORD.

You said "it is also true that such men choose to damn themselves through rebellion against God." I don't recall the verses, but I'll give you that it may "also" be true that the Bible says that, but the point is that it's contradictory. Does God's hardening of my heart cause me to choose to rebel against God just like Pharaoh? Wasn't that his intent as in 9:17 and Exodus 10:1-2? Isn't it clear from Exodus that Pharaoh chose to stop rebelling against God until God hardened his heart again? When he had free will, he chose to let the Israelites go.

God creates my soul out of his omnipotence. Prior to me ever being created, he uses his omniscience to see into the future that I will chose through Free Will to rebel against him. So he creates me with my heart hardened against him to be dishonored, to suffer his wrath and eternal damnation. It's circular don't you think?

Volker.Doormann

I think there is a lot missing in understanding this mistaken symbols from the Hebrew Talmud. All this vanities who is most familiar with god are religious mistaken personal creations of the writer of Rom. He has cited Genesis 18:10 and Genesis 25:23 and some more which is related to flesh and the theme of
the 'firstborn' son versus the 'twiceborn' son. Esau, Jakob, Ismael, Isaak are named in this context. This symbols in hole contain the understanding, that a second birth (also if this seems to be stupid, because Sara left her menopause more then 50 years ago) is told as to be of more value as a first birth produced by the symbol 'Egypt' personalized in Hagar, the physical body in opposition to Sara, who is the spiritual soul, which is birthing a new (spiritual) life. The 'descend' from this form of spiritual life - as John has cited it from Jesus: 'You must be born again!' - is preferred in opposition to the birth of the physical body, which is first born as flesh. Jesus was aware about this symbol from the Hebrew Talmud, but no one of the Hebrew Teacher could follow him with his parables, which containing the very same understanding as the origin spiritual meaning of the Hebrew Talmud. Because spiritual symbols from a parable of the Talmud never can contain secular social claims, the claim of that, what is written in Rom is from the religious point of view irrelevant. Religion is the spiritual understanding of truth and love and has a very different target than social life, that is symbolized and dramatized many times in the Hebrew Talmud as 'Egypt' - 'down in Egypt' with the bondage of the soul in a body and it's efforts to find back home to the home of the spiritual soul dramatized as 'Israel' with it's twelve spiritual attributes (Jesus has parablized this twelve spiritual houses as 'twelve breads'). Each story in the Hebrew Talmud deals with this theme of the 'second birth' preferring the 'first birth' and is celebrated in the Passah each year on full moon day after spring equinox, with the remembering, that a second spiritual birth has taken place as the ascending of the soul - called Israel - leaving back the dead 'first born' bodies symbolized trough the firstborn sons of 'Egypt'. This second birth is the awoken free consciousness of the individual soul. From this it can be recognized, that each political or social claims of gods or religious leaders are religious nonsense. Exact the 'birth' of each individual soul, detaching from the social bonding ('flesh') (p.e. the claims in Rom 9) is the meaning of all religious symbols from the scriptures. Jesus was aware about this, Paul not. Each one of us are a part of god. It is the very own freedom of each soul and creature to find this out. The worship of god is the own consciousness respecting truth and love more than secular social claims of religious leaders to 'first born flesh' = Life, which exist without a spiritual consciousness, that is very aware that it is a part of god.

Volker

BadBadBad

Volker, I had a professor that taught control theory at the University of Texas. It was an engineering course with very complex mathematics. He'd get up on the board and manipulate those equations with a flurry of chalk dust and hand waiving, then he'd come up with the answer as if it were a grade school addition problem. He was famous for finishing with pride saying "and if you didn't understand that, you're going to end up in Pflugerville Texas!"

Now, what did that have anything to do with the clear text of Romans 9 or the questions I asked? Just because it mentions Jacob and Esau, you can derive all this extra meaning? If Paul had meant to say all of that, if God had inspired Paul to say all of that, why didn't he?

Volker.Doormann

If you have read the gospels, you know, that Jesus has spoken in parables because he want, that only who can hear (in a spiritual manner) do understand his teachings. From this one can learn, that it can be, that some understandings are only possible if one is able to understand the spiritual meaning of parables or symbols. If one is following your argumentation, each bible text must be taken literally as rational science. But as you may know also Paul has stated, that the story of Abram and Sarai has not to taken literally, but as allegory .

No one has problems with parables or symbols. Problem are only generated by transferring spiritual symbols in a social secular manner of hierarchy like universities with it's professors and students. To find truth under this circumstances is recognizable not possible.

If truth is corrupted by personal (social) motives, as one can find in Rom (and in Texas), it has no spiritual meaning. I only had the idea to give a hint about the spiritual background of that talking (Sara) as it is understand p.e. in the Hebrew mysticism.

Volker

BadBadBad

Someone must have a secret bible decoder ring. Do you have one? Where can I get one? Hopefully, that will show me which parts I take literally for the clear text it is, which parts are allegory, which parts are symbolic, and what the symbolism and allegory mean. In the mean time, it says what it says. I can only assume it means what it says.


It's like we have a sacred Beatles album. It's not what it says when you play it forward that counts. If you play it backwards, you can almost make out that it says ...... You can be pretty imaginative about what you want it to say, since it doesn't really say anything in reverse. That's what the Beatles were really trying to say.

I still don't think you've explained this passage even with all your symbolism and allegory. You've read a whole lot into this passage, that frankly, I see no basis for what so ever. You've used a lot of hocus pocus, smoke and mirrors to get it to read like you've posted. Where did this all come from?

You still have a lot left that you haven't discussed at all. What about hardening your heart? Why does God do that. Whether that was your first born or second born as you've described it, if my heart is hardened by God, how do I get Free Will!

Clutch

Well, it's a valuable feature in a book that's supposed to appeal to everyone, to have plenty of contradictions.

Whoever believes will be saved. God made some to be damned. God loves everyone. God made some people for the express purpose of dishonour, and hates them. People are free to act as they decide. God hardens some hearts to make people act as they do.

Open-ended universalists, cliquish predestinationists, we're all bound for heaven, virtually everyone's going to hell: step right up with your favourite preconceptions and prejudices, we've got a theology for you. Take what you like, call the rest a metaphor, and don't forget to pontificate about the objective truth of Christianity.