Eric said,
Because He didn't just select them unconditionally out of the blue to do that, as Skan just pointed out. They could have not fallen into that role, but they refused the truth, and then God hardened them into it.
I agree, it is a lesser imposition than choosing those who had no such long record of rebellion - but it is still a causing of men to sin and allowing them to do nothing else, from your perspective. No fundemental difference from the Calvinist one, just a matter of degree.
Oh, no? In 2 Tim.2:20, 21, the 'vessels' of honor and dishonor are mentioned again, and a person chooses to be a vessel of honor, rather his choice being because he was preordained as a vessel of honor. God determined beforehand that those who leave themselves in their sinful state constitute the "vessels of wrath", and those who have faith are vessels of mercy. "Vessels" is like a plural unity in this case— Israel for instance, consists of individual "vessels" as all creatures can be likened to vessels, but Israel as a whole was the "vessel", as shown in Isaiah 29:16 & 45:9 and Jer. 18:4-6ff & 25:34 which are the very passages Paul is drawing upon here. So for Israelites trusting in their physical heritage to save them, that group is "vessels of wrath", but believers, Jew and Gentile are vessels of mercy.
You seem to think similar metaphors must refer to the same reality. Are the vessels in Rom.9 and 2Tim. referring to the same thing? Perhaps salvation and damnation are in view in 2Tim. That would agree with all of us beginning as vessels for dishonour. Cleasing ourselves from evil works then makes us vessels for honour. A bit problematic regarding salvation by faith.
Or 2Tim. could refer to the believer cleansing himself from the evil that still lurkes within, making us then sanctified vessels for His use. I think this seems the likely case.
In any event, how can we square this human action with the potter's work described in Rom.9? You try to make God's preparation before our birth conditional on our will - but that is entirely absent from the text. It is a construct only of your Arminian theology. The examples of how God works are clearly otherwise; Isaac and Ishmael; Jacob and Esau; Pharaoh. None of these had a veto on God's determination. Take Pharaoh: God 'raised him up' for this end, that through his obstinacy and rebellion against God, God's mighty power would be displayed. There could have been no other occurance; Pharaoh could not have let Israel go peacefully. But this did not make God the author of his sin; it made Pharaoh do what he was only too willing to do.
In Him
Ian
Because He didn't just select them unconditionally out of the blue to do that, as Skan just pointed out. They could have not fallen into that role, but they refused the truth, and then God hardened them into it.
I agree, it is a lesser imposition than choosing those who had no such long record of rebellion - but it is still a causing of men to sin and allowing them to do nothing else, from your perspective. No fundemental difference from the Calvinist one, just a matter of degree.
Oh, no? In 2 Tim.2:20, 21, the 'vessels' of honor and dishonor are mentioned again, and a person chooses to be a vessel of honor, rather his choice being because he was preordained as a vessel of honor. God determined beforehand that those who leave themselves in their sinful state constitute the "vessels of wrath", and those who have faith are vessels of mercy. "Vessels" is like a plural unity in this case— Israel for instance, consists of individual "vessels" as all creatures can be likened to vessels, but Israel as a whole was the "vessel", as shown in Isaiah 29:16 & 45:9 and Jer. 18:4-6ff & 25:34 which are the very passages Paul is drawing upon here. So for Israelites trusting in their physical heritage to save them, that group is "vessels of wrath", but believers, Jew and Gentile are vessels of mercy.
You seem to think similar metaphors must refer to the same reality. Are the vessels in Rom.9 and 2Tim. referring to the same thing? Perhaps salvation and damnation are in view in 2Tim. That would agree with all of us beginning as vessels for dishonour. Cleasing ourselves from evil works then makes us vessels for honour. A bit problematic regarding salvation by faith.
Or 2Tim. could refer to the believer cleansing himself from the evil that still lurkes within, making us then sanctified vessels for His use. I think this seems the likely case.
In any event, how can we square this human action with the potter's work described in Rom.9? You try to make God's preparation before our birth conditional on our will - but that is entirely absent from the text. It is a construct only of your Arminian theology. The examples of how God works are clearly otherwise; Isaac and Ishmael; Jacob and Esau; Pharaoh. None of these had a veto on God's determination. Take Pharaoh: God 'raised him up' for this end, that through his obstinacy and rebellion against God, God's mighty power would be displayed. There could have been no other occurance; Pharaoh could not have let Israel go peacefully. But this did not make God the author of his sin; it made Pharaoh do what he was only too willing to do.
In Him
Ian