OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp Romans:9:20:

rwp@1Corinthians:12:18 @{But now} (\nun de\). But as things are, in contrast to that absurdity. {Hath God set} (\ho theos etheto\). Second aorist middle indicative. God did it and of himself. {Even as it pleased him} (\kaths thelsen\). Why challenge God's will? Cf. strkjv@Romans:9:20|.

rwp@James:4:12 @{One only} (\heis\). No "only" in the Greek, but \heis\ here excludes all others but God. {The lawgiver} (\ho nomothets\). Old compound (from \nomos, tithmi\), only here in N.T. In strkjv@Psalms:9:20|. Cf. \nomothete\ in strkjv@Hebrews:7:11; strkjv@8:6|. {To save} (\ssai\, first aorist active infinitive of \sz\) {and to destroy} (\kai apolesai\, first aorist active infinitive of \apollumi\ to destroy). Cf. the picture of God's power in strkjv@Matthew:10:28|, a common idea in the O.T. (Deuteronomy:32:39; strkjv@1Samuel:2:16; strkjv@2Kings:5:7|). {But who art thou?} (\su de tis ei;\). Proleptic and emphatic position of \su\ (thou) in this rhetorical question as in strkjv@Romans:9:20; strkjv@14:4|. {Thy neighbour} (\ton plsion\). "The neighbour" as in strkjv@James:2:8|.

rwp@Romans:9:20 @{Nay, but, O man, who art thou?} (\O anthrpe, men oun ge su tis ei?\). "O man, but surely thou who art thou?" Unusual and emphatic order of the words, prolepsis of \su\ (thou) before \tis\ (who) and \men oun ge\ (triple particle, \men\, indeed, \oun\, therefore, \ge\, at least) at the beginning of clause as in strkjv@Romans:10:18; strkjv@Phillipians:3:8| contrary to ancient idiom, but so in papyri. {That repliest} (\ho antapokrinomenos\). Present middle articular participle of double compound verb \antapokrinomai\, to answer to one's face (\anti-\) late and vivid combination, also in strkjv@Luke:14:6|, nowhere else in N.T., but in LXX. {The thing formed} (\to plasma\). Old word (Plato, Aristophanes) from \plass\, to mould, as with clay or wax, from which the aorist active participle used here (\ti plasanti\) comes. Paul quotes these words from strkjv@Isaiah:29:16| verbatim. It is a familiar idea in the Old Testament, the absolute power of God as Creator like the potter's use of clay (Isaiah:44:8; strkjv@45:8-10; strkjv@Jeremiah:18:6|). \M\ expects a negative answer. {Why didst thou make me thus?} (\ti me epoisas houts?\). The original words in Isaiah dealt with the nation, but Paul applies them to individuals. This question does not raise the problem of the origin of sin for the objector does not blame God for that but why God has used us as he has, made some vessels out of the clay for this purpose, some for that. Observe "thus" (\houts\). The potter takes the clay as he finds it, but uses it as he wishes.