Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The vessels prepared for destruction are also valuable to God and are dear to His heart
Actually they are hated by God, and were made to suffer His vengeance for sin in contrast to them [vessels of mercy] who were made to experience His mercy for sinners..
My goodness, of course there is a subject but does the subject have to be stated???? NO.You have supplied the subject to be God (because of your Calvinist worship) that prepared the vessels of wrath. It does not say that. It says He endured w/ them in the verse you quoted and even underlined. Paul made the distinction with the vessels of mecry by using the personal pronoun 'HE' and the preposition 'before' with the word prepared in regard to the vessels of mercy but not with the others of wrath. Have you ever thought that Paul's emphasis was not to state the subject because that was not his focus. NO. His point was simply to state that they were prepared for destruction w/out any regard to how or who. Although if you follow Paul's argument it is obvious that it was unbelief in the promised Messiah.
You said: 'GOD is clearly the antecedent.' Wrong. He is the antecedent to the verb endured in the verse you cited. Also Read Rom.3:21-26 - Go ahead read it.
If you have a problem with semantics go read Wallace's Grammar. Grammar does not solve every issue.
The reference to the posts was to remind you that you diminish the grammatical possibilties of a forms interpration in light of all other linguistic phenonmenon - context - and only seem to give one viable option - it may be good to give one viable option more weight but not to consider any others is foolish and quite ignorant considering your Greek studies and honors in Graduating from seminary. You can go look up your own threads my responses were to your thread and posts - it was a long while ago - I am over it.
I never claimed to know biblical languages as you have. I have studied Linguistics and refered to Wallace as a good resource - whom you said was your teacher. By the way many atheist, non-Calvinists, and Armenians have graduated from seminary - it is irrelevant - so stop trying to make what you say correct because of it.
Rom.9, yes where else would I be refering to.
Dear Shiloh: YOU are the one bringing up the language and antecedents. I do not make a point of my seminary education--I only do so to those who come here and distort the Greek text, which you are doing.
Furthermore, I consult MY copy of Wallace's book quite often. In fact, I have the original syllabus we used in class before Wallace had his work published in book form. In fact, Shiloh, you ARE claiming to know biblical languages. Even after studying Greek formally in seminary and informally since that time (over 20 years!), I still do not understand fully some of the contents of Wallace's book. Yes, there are definitely matters of nuance and semantics and there are complex constructions about which even scholars disagree, but there are also matters of much clarity in simple Greek construction. There are little if any complexities in the passage in Romans 9. Complexities are often created by those who do not like what the simple construction indicates!
You claim that my Calvinist perspective keeps my from seeing the deep nuances and semantics of this passage, when in fact, it is your arminian bias that causes you to miss the simple Greek construction there!
Did I say that HE was the antecedent to "prepared for destruction?" I do not think so. The "prepared for destruction" is used adjectivally. κατηρτισμενα is an accusative, plural, neuter, perfect, passive participle. It modifies "vessels." Literally it reads "the prepared for destruction vessels of wrath." As in English, participles are "verbals" in that they are based on verbs. Like true verbs they express action or state of being. BUT they are modifiers--they modify nouns or pronouns. They don't HAVE antecedents! BUT as I CLEARLY stated in my previous post, God IS the antecedent of the pronoun "he" embedded in "endured" "make known" and "prepared beforehand."
Furthermore, (and I have to be blunt), it is evidence of lack of knowledge when someone totally misses the significance of synonyms. There is no real distinction between Paul's use of "prepared" and "prepared beforehand." That distinction is of your own making. Both vessels were prepared by God. Paul is simply emphasizing the beforehand of the vessels of mercy. This does not forbid that the vessels of wrath were also prepared beforehand. The whole concept of something being prepared, Shiloh, demands that it be done beforehand! When have YOU ever prepared something but that you did it beforehand. Both Greek words, then, involve a "beforehand." Paul simply emphasized it in the case of the vessels of mercy! It is simple!
But, again, the entire passage speaks of God. Simple Greek construction is used here, Shiloh--simple! Do we not see the word wrath in the first part of verse 22? Whose wrath is it, Shiloh? It is GOD's wrath. It is the same wrath of the latter part of verse 22--the vessels of wrath--the vessels of GOD'S wrath! HE prepared those vessels of wrath for destruction. There is nothing complex here! You are making it so by your contempt for Calvinism and your refusal to let the passage say what it clearly says.
I am not the one being "foolish" and "ignorant" here. I will say as I have said many times before--I do NOT consider myself a Greek scholar. I leave that to the Daniel Wallace's of the world! Even after over twenty years of study, I am a humble student of biblical languages. I earned straight A's in my Greek and Hebew studies, but I do not say that to boast. I say that to tell you that even as well as I did and as much as I learned, and learned very well, there is much I still do not know. Having said that, however, it annoys me to no end when those who have not studied Greek, especially not to the extent that I have, want to call me foolish or ignorant. I have invested HOURS and HOURS and YEARS and YEARS in the study of Greek, Shiloh--in the memorizing of hundreds and hundreds of words, in the study of declensions of nouns and the parsing of verbs, in the translation and exegesis of biblical books, in the writing of theological papers, in studying for quizzes, mid-term and final exams, etc. It took me seven years to complete a three-year program because of family and work obligations. I put in my sweat, tears and time, Shiloh. Any semiarny graduate reading this knows exactly what I am talking about! Does that make me right in my exegesis? Of course not. When did I say or even suggest that my seminary studies made me correct? I did NOT, Shiloh. You are putting words in my mouth which I NEVER spoke. Please stop! But my seminary studies give me somewhat of a right to attempt to exegete the Greek text. You have not earned that right!
I am very aware of how a little knowledge of something can be more dangerous than no knowledge at all. That is why I am very, very cautious about how I use the biblical Greek. You, however, having no formal training whatsoever, by your own admission, assume to know what you do not know! I wish I had a dollar for all the people on these boards who dare to instruct people in the Greek behind a text by their perusal of Strong's Concordance or some other Greek word study resource! I am not opposed to these things, but they are more useful to those who have studied the languages and are oftentimes dangerous to those who have not! It is sadly evident to me that often those using (or misusing) the Greek don't even understand the English into which it is translated. You, for example, apparently do not recognize the difference between a simple verb and a participle.
Romans 9 is clear, Shiloh--in both the English AND in the simple Greek construction there. I am sorry that you do not like what it says. I myself used to read Romans 8, skip Romans 9, and then pick up at Romans 10, because I simply did not like what it clearly taught! But it is what it is.
What about Romans 3:21-26? I have read it many times. It still says the same thing. God justifies all WHO BELIEVE. And who believes? "For by grace you have been saved though faith, and that NOT of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast" (NKJV). The same inspired Paul who wrote Romans 9 also wrote Romans 3. Quoting Psalm 14:1-3, he wrote: "There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands; there is none who seeks God. They have ALLl turned aside; they have ALTOGETHER become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no, not one" (Romans 3:10-12). Based upon this hopeless condition of ALL men, faith is the gift of God, indeed, faith HAS TO BE the gift of God. He bestows it freely and according to His own will upon the vessels of mercy whom He has prepared beforehand!
Preterist
Last edited by Preterist; 07-16-2009 at 09:24 AM..
What about Romans 3:21-26? I have read it many times. It still says the same thing. God justifies all WHO BELIEVE. And who believes? "For by grace you have been saved though faith, and that NOT of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast" (NKJV). The same inspired Paul who wrote Romans 9 also wrote Romans 3. Quoting Psalm 14:1-3, he wrote: "There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands; there is none who seeks God. They have ALLl turned aside; they have ALTOGETHER become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no, not one" (Romans 3:10-12). Based upon this hopeless condition of ALL men, faith is the gift of God, indeed, faith HAS TO BE the gift of God. He bestows it freely and according to His own will upon the vessels of mercy whom He has prepared beforehand!
Preterist
Romans 12:3 (AV)...
For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.
(Concordant Literal Translation)...
For I am saying, through the grace which is given to me, to everyone who is among you, not to be overweening, beyond what your disposition must be, but to be of a sane disposition, as God parts to each the measure of faith.
It is because God gives faith to every human each among us can think in accord with the faith he has. That "faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God" (Rm 10:18) means God must speak to us for there to be faith. But does that include everyone? Is it true that what He say He says to all? Quoting the ancient Hebrew (Ps 19) the apostle says, "But, I am saying, Do they not hear at all? To be sure! "Into the entire earth came out their utterance, And into the ends of the inhabited earth their declarations." (Rm 10:18, CLT)
It is very important God's voice has gone forth unto everyman, even as Jesus the Word, becoming one of us, "...was the true light -- which is enlightening every man -- coming into the world." God is not making us liars by commanding us, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." (Mk 16:15, AV) It is even stronger more literally rendered: "to the entire creation." How glorious the future God has spoken. If it is not to all, what have any of us to settle upon, to grasp and close with for our own salvation?
Romans 4:4-5 (AV)...
4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
(Concordant Literal Translation)...
4 Now to the worker, the wage is not reckoned as a favor, but as a debt.
5 Yet to him who is not working, yet is believing on Him Who is justifying the irreverent, his faith is reckoned for righteousness.
Rm 5:6 (AV)...
For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
(Concordant Literal Translation)...
For Christ, while we are still infirm, still in accord with the era, for the sake of the irreverent, died.
Last edited by JamesMRohde; 07-16-2009 at 01:53 PM..
The vessels prepared for destruction are also valuable to God and are dear to His heart
Actually they are hated by God, and were made to suffer His vengeance for sin in contrast to them [vessels of mercy] who were made to experience His mercy for sinners..
God's pretty hateful if he makes people just for the purpose of hating them.
And it doesn't correspond with scripture! God bless. Jesus was sent to be the Savior of the world, which includes all mankind. God bless.
07-16-2009, 01:31 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preterist
Dear Shiloh: YOU are the one bringing up the language and antecedents. I do not make a point of my seminary education--I only do so to those who come here and distort the Greek text, which you are doing.
Furthermore, I consult MY copy of Wallace's book quite often. In fact, I have the original syllabus we used in class before Wallace had his work published in book form. In fact, Shiloh, you ARE claiming to know biblical languages. Even after studying Greek formally in seminary and informally since that time (over 20 years!), I still do not understand fully some of the contents of Wallace's book. Yes, there are definitely matters of nuance and semantics and there are complex constructions about which even scholars disagree, but there are also matters of much clarity in simple Greek construction. There are little if any complexities in the passage in Romans 9. Complexities are often created by those who do not like what the simple construction indicates!
You claim that my Calvinist perspective keeps my from seeing the deep nuances and semantics of this passage, when in fact, it is your arminian bias that causes you to miss the simple Greek construction there!
Did I say that HE was the antecedent to "prepared for destruction?" I do not think so. The "prepared for destruction" is used adjectivally. κατηρτισμενα is an accusative, plural, neuter, perfect, passive participle. It modifies "vessels." Literally it reads "the prepared for destruction vessels of wrath." As in English, participles are "verbals" in that they are based on verbs. Like true verbs they express action or state of being. BUT they are modifiers--they modify nouns or pronouns. They don't HAVE antecedents! BUT as I CLEARLY stated in my previous post, God IS the antecedent of the pronoun "he" embedded in "endured" "make known" and "prepared beforehand."
Furthermore, (and I have to be blunt), it is evidence of lack of knowledge when someone totally misses the significance of synonyms. There is no real distinction between Paul's use of "prepared" and "prepared beforehand." That distinction is of your own making. Both vessels were prepared by God. Paul is simply emphasizing the beforehand of the vessels of mercy. This does not forbid that the vessels of wrath were also prepared beforehand. The whole concept of something being prepared, Shiloh, demands that it be done beforehand! When have YOU ever prepared something but that you did it beforehand. Both Greek words, then, involve a "beforehand." Paul simply emphasized it in the case of the vessels of mercy! It is simple!
But, again, the entire passage speaks of God. Simple Greek construction is used here, Shiloh--simple! Do we not see the word wrath in the first part of verse 22? Whose wrath is it, Shiloh? It is GOD's wrath. It is the same wrath of the latter part of verse 22--the vessels of wrath--the vessels of GOD'S wrath! HE prepared those vessels of wrath for destruction. There is nothing complex here! You are making it so by your contempt for Calvinism and your refusal to let the passage say what it clearly says.
I am not the one being "foolish" and "ignorant" here. I will say as I have said many times before--I do NOT consider myself a Greek scholar. I leave that to the Daniel Wallace's of the world! Even after over twenty years of study, I am a humble student of biblical languages. I earned straight A's in my Greek and Hebew studies, but I do not say that to boast. I say that to tell you that even as well as I did and as much as I learned, and learned very well, there is much I still do not know. Having said that, however, it annoys me to no end when those who have not studied Greek, especially not to the extent that I have, want to call me foolish or ignorant. I have invested HOURS and HOURS and YEARS and YEARS in the study of Greek, Shiloh--in the memorizing of hundreds and hundreds of words, in the study of declensions of nouns and the parsing of verbs, in the translation and exegesis of biblical books, in the writing of theological papers, in studying for quizzes, mid-term and final exams, etc. It took me seven years to complete a three-year program because of family and work obligations. I put in my sweat, tears and time, Shiloh. Any semiarny graduate reading this knows exactly what I am talking about! Does that make me right in my exegesis? Of course not. When did I say or even suggest that my seminary studies made me correct? I did NOT, Shiloh. You are putting words in my mouth which I NEVER spoke. Please stop! But my seminary studies give me somewhat of a right to attempt to exegete the Greek text. You have not earned that right!
I am very aware of how a little knowledge of something can be more dangerous than no knowledge at all. That is why I am very, very cautious about how I use the biblical Greek. You, however, having no formal training whatsoever, by your own admission, assume to know what you do not know! I wish I had a dollar for all the people on these boards who dare to instruct people in the Greek behind a text by their perusal of Strong's Concordance or some other Greek word study resource! I am not opposed to these things, but they are more useful to those who have studied the languages and are oftentimes dangerous to those who have not! It is sadly evident to me that often those using (or misusing) the Greek don't even understand the English into which it is translated. You, for example, apparently do not recognize the difference between a simple verb and a participle.
Romans 9 is clear, Shiloh--in both the English AND in the simple Greek construction there. I am sorry that you do not like what it says. I myself used to read Romans 8, skip Romans 9, and then pick up at Romans 10, because I simply did not like what it clearly taught! But it is what it is.
What about Romans 3:21-26? I have read it many times. It still says the same thing. God justifies all WHO BELIEVE. And who believes? "For by grace you have been saved though faith, and that NOT of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast" (NKJV). The same inspired Paul who wrote Romans 9 also wrote Romans 3. Quoting Psalm 14:1-3, he wrote: "There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands; there is none who seeks God. They have ALLl turned aside; they have ALTOGETHER become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no, not one" (Romans 3:10-12). Based upon this hopeless condition of ALL men, faith is the gift of God, indeed, faith HAS TO BE the gift of God. He bestows it freely and according to His own will upon the vessels of mercy whom He has prepared beforehand!
Preterist
Why do you even argue with me if I am unlearned and ignorant?
Answer one thing before I go and post some more response to this crying.
Do you then believe that your intepretation can be wrong and that there are other viable possibilties as to what the verse is saying - or not? And if so what are they? Please, it's a simple question.
Oh and as far as your take on Eph 2:8 as faith being the gift - why don't you go and read Wallace's take on it - he delievers a complete refutation of it - evn though he is nice and puts it under 'Debatable'. It's on page 334-335.
Romans 12:3 (AV)...
For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.
(Concordant Literal Translation)...
For I am saying, through the grace which is given to me, to everyone who is among you, not to be overweening, beyond what your disposition must be, but to be of a sane disposition, as God parts to each the measure of faith.
It is because God gives faith to every human each among us can think in accord with the faith he has. That "faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God" (Rm 10:18) means God must speak to us for there to be faith. But does that include everyone? Is it true that what He say He says to all? Quoting the ancient Hebrew (Ps 19) the apostle says, "But, I am saying, Do they not hear at all? To be sure! "Into the entire earth came out their utterance, And into the ends of the inhabited earth their declarations." (Rm 10:18, CLT)
It is very important God's voice has gone forth unto everyman, even as Jesus the Word, becoming one of us, "...was the true light -- which is enlightening every man -- coming into the world." God is not making us liars by commanding us, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." (Mk 16:15, AV) It is even stronger more literally rendered: "to the entire creation." How glorious the future God has spoken. If it is not to all, what have any of us to settle upon, to grasp and close with for our own salvation?
Romans 4:4-5 (AV)...
4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
(Concordant Literal Translation)...
4 Now to the worker, the wage is not reckoned as a favor, but as a debt.
5 Yet to him who is not working, yet is believing on Him Who is justifying the irreverent, his faith is reckoned for righteousness.
Rm 5:6 (AV)...
For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
(Concordant Literal Translation)...
For Christ, while we are still infirm, still in accord with the era, for the sake of the irreverent, died.
What is the context of Romans 12:3? Paul is speaking of "every man that is among YOU." To THOSE in that context, God has dealt to each one a measure of faith. This has nothing to do with God dealing out a measure of faith to all men everywhere? Paul began this chapter with "I beseech you BRETHREN." Again, this is a letter written to the saints at Rome. While there are applications to us, we are not the direct recipients. These words were written in a actual historical setting (first century A. D.) to actual flesh-and-blood people, concerning issues that were then directly affecting them! That is the context! We must not make universal that which is restrictive!
Just because the Apostles were commanded to proclaim the gospel throughout the world, does not in any way mean that all would be given faith to believe. It is of the will of God only that any become sons of God (John 1:12).
What is your point in Romans 5:6? Of course God justifies the ungodly or "irreverent." If He did not, none would ever be saved. It does not, however, say that He justifies each and every ungodly person. Again, what is the context? Paul clearly states that "those who receive abundance of grace" and the "GIFT of righteousness will reign in life."
Consider John 1:12. The world did not know Christ even though He was in the world among them. He came to the Jews, but they rejected Him and "did not receive Him" (vs. 11). BUT as many as received Him, to THEM He gave the right to become children of God, to those who BELIEVE in His name: who were born, NOT of blood, NOR of the will of the flesh, NOR of the will of man, but OF God." In the context of the kingdom of heaven in Matthew 20, Jesus demonstrates that the power of choice belong totally to the Landowner (God). Some are brought into the kingdom early; others are brought in later. But they are ALL hired by the Landowners. Many are never hired by the Landowner. The laborers are waiting to be hired. They do not and cannot enter the vineyard unless they are hired! Jesus said, "many are called; few are chosen."
God knows the end from the beginning, so from His viewpoint He does some things ahead of time to everybody, whether vessels of wrath or mercy, according to what they are as they are revealed in history. That is not the end of the story for anyone, however. Jesus is called, "The first and the last, the beginning and the end." Is He good, this one named "THE END?" He also will do things to us after our brief sojourn here in this veil of flesh. He will have the last word. He is the "AMEN." He is altogether lovely. What is important is that we grow out of the errors of men's traditions that have been passed on to us and that we agrow up from the cartoon version of the things of God that we had when we began our walk with God.
What is "revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men" as the wrath of God? It is revealed and in plain view, not hidden.
"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them." (Rm 1:18-19, AV)
It is plainly described as being, "...indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil."
"But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile..." (Rm 2:8-9)
The consumation of the revelation of the righteous wrath of God is death (cf., Rm 6:21)
Romans 6:20-23 (Conc. Lit. Trans.)...
20 For when you were slaves of Sin, you were free as to Righteousness.
21 What fruit, then, had you then? -- of which you are now ashamed, for, indeed, the consummation of those things is death.
22 Yet, now, being freed from Sin, yet enslaved to God, you have your fruit for holiness. Now the consummation is life eonian.
23 For the ration of Sin is death, yet the gracious gift of God is life eonian, in Christ Jesus, our Lord.
The wages of sin is not ceaseless torture for ever. God could have said it. Here in Romans would be an ideal place for Him to have made it clear if that was what he meant us to understand. But, it is clear that He did not. Death, bit by bit, finally altogether: that is what the rations (pl.) of sin are. Death is what stops all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men. Mao is dead. Stalin is dead. Hitler is dead. They are no longer multiplying the miseries of their fellow men by their ungodly and unrighteous deeds for they have died. The wrath of God revealed from heaven is that most everybody is dying.
Why do you even argue with me if I am unlearned and ignorant?
Answer one thing before I go and post some more response to this crying.
Do you then believe that your intepretation can be wrong and that there are other viable possibilties as to what the verse is saying - or not? And if so what are they? Please, it's a simple question.
Oh and as far as your take on Eph 2:8 as faith being the gift - why don't you go and read Wallace's take on it - he delievers a complete refutation of it - evn though he is nice and puts it under 'Debatable'. It's on page 334-335.
Shiloh: First of all, I was not intending to insult you. There is nothing shameful about being ignorant or unlearned. The word "ignorant," unfortunately, has taken the degrading characteristic of "stupid." Rightly understood, however, it means to not have a certain knowledge in a certain area. I am ignorant of the science behind the space shuttle. A problem arises only if I attempt to claim, in spite of that ignorance, that I am knowledgeable concerning the science behind the space shuttle! That was the only point I was making.
I do not know you personally, of course, but you have the very familiar characteristics of people bent on looking for discrepancies and textual "difficulties." There are people who will tear a verse apart to such a degree that it cannot be put back together again! That is why without a fundamental knowledge of Greek, you have no business in Wallace's ADVANCED Greek grammar. This is obvious because you have made a connection that he never made. You are assuming that because he sees some antecedent difficulty in Ephesians 2 that the same difficulty exists in Romans 9. That is an illogical conclusion. The Greek construction between the two is completely different. Wallace addresses Romans 9:22 (pages 101, 417-418), but he makes no comment about an antecedent--there is none! The issue he deals with on page 101 is the correct rendering of the genitive. Furthermore, oftentimes these so-called discrepancies result in no real significant change to the meaning of the text. This is why Wallace places the whole issue under the "debatable examples" category! Clearly, it is Wallace's opinion that it is doubtful that grace or faith are the antecedent of "this." There are learned men who would cast doubt on his understanding. The meaning is clear either way--salvation is from God alone through His grace. From what I know of Daniel Wallace, he believes that we are saved through grace alone and through nothing of ourselves. In the end, Shiloh, that includes the exercise of faith. I do not think that Daniel Wallace has a great problem with the way Ephesians 2:8, 9 are currently rendered.
Do you even understand the issues behind the so-called problem with κατηρτισμενα in Romans 9:22? Again, it is a participle. The question asked among scholars who love to debate these things is whether this participle should be understood in the middle voice or the passive voice. Wallace is not of the camp that denies that the classical Greek had any influence on Koine Greek. He leans more toward allowing for the possibility that in rare instances the middle voice had some force in the Greek of the NT. But he is quick to point out that it is rare (p. 416). In the direct middle or reflexive middle, the subject acts upon himself. Whereas in the passive voice, the subject is acted upon by another. The middle and passive forms are the same! With the reflexive middle approach, some, such as Chrysostom and Pelagius (YOU and other arminians) argue that the vessels acted upon themselves and prepared themselves for destruction. This, of course, allows for them to have freedom of choice and to change course.
Wallace clearly concludes that "the middle has little to commend itself" (p. 418). He declares that nowhere else in the NT does the participial form of καταρτιζω have the direct middle force (p. 418). So, he disagrees with you and agrees with me. To narrow down the correct rendering further, Wallace considers the tense of the participle. It is in the perfect tense. Wallace states--"in the perfect tense, the middle-passive is ALWAYS [emphasis mine] to be taken as a passive in the NT (p. 418). The tense and the rarity of the middle voice taken together lead Wallace to this conclusion--the preparation for destruction has been done TO the vessels of wrath and it is a "done deal." There is no changing it. Wallace also refers to verse 20 where it is clear that the molder of the vessel is GOD! Note the question: "Why have YOU MADE ME this way?" Note also the rhetorical question: Does not God have power over the clay? Yes!
Wallace's conclusion, with which I firmly agree, is: "To argue, then, that κατηρτισμενα is a direct middle seems to fly in the face of grammar (the normal use of the voice and tense), lexeme, and context."
Are there viable possibilities for insignificant discrepancies in Ephesians 2:8, 9? Perhaps. But as I stated before, there is no real change in the meaning. But we were not dealing with Ephesians 2--we were dealing with Romans 9. In Romans 9:22, I state firmly that there are NO viable possibilities that the participle is reflexive. It is passive and it means that the vessels of wrath (God's wrath) were prepared (by Him--He is potter; we are the clay) for destruction. There is nothing here that even remotely suggests that God might somehow remold them at a subsequent time.
Are you accusing me of crying?
Preterist
Last edited by Preterist; 07-16-2009 at 03:46 PM..
There is nothing here that even remotely suggests that God might somehow remold them at a subsequent time.
Hi, the theme of destruction and restoration is presented in the scriptures. Even the earth which perishes, will be changed (Hebrews 1)
Romans 8:18-22
18. For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us.19. For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God.20. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope21. that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.22. For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now.
God bless.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.