If a
man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour,
sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.
(2 Tim 2:21)
2 Tim 2:21 is just one of the many passages
that makes very little to no sense if Reformed theology is indeed biblical.
Notice how we can make ourselves vessels worthy of God’s favour or
wrath; it is not something that was decided upon by God in the eternal past and
is being worked out temporally as part of his decree.
Commenting on this text, I. Howard Marshall and
Philip Towner wrote in their commentary on the pastoral epistles:
21. ἐὰν οὖν τις ἐκκαθάρῃ ἑαυτὸν ἀπὸ τούτων, ἔσται σκεῦος εἰς τιμήν, ἡγιασμένον, εὔχρηστον τῷ δεσπότῃ, εἰς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἡτοιμασμένον οὖν is used loosely to draw a conclusion that is
implied in the metaphor, but not actually stated. It goes beyond what is said
in it. The point appears to be that a vessel which is used for so-called
dishonourable uses (like storing garbage) can be thoroughly cleaned and would
then be fit for a honourable purpose (such as cooking or even serving a meal).
At this point the question of what the vessel is made of seems to have
disappeared from sight, and equally questions of the suitability of the vessel
for one purpose or another (in terms of its size and shape) are irrelevant. τις, ‘anybody’, is quite
vague. Some commentators appear to take the reference to be to the church,
which is to be purged of the opponents (NEB mg, not retained in REB), but this
is an impossible interpretation; clearly the pronoun refers to ‘any member of
the congregation’, and further specification (e.g. the false teachers or those
influenced by them, orthodox believers, or even a delicate reference to Timothy
himself) is unnecessary. All members of the church are called on to cleanse
themselves from anything that would defile them. For ἐκκαθαίρω see 1 Cor 5:7***, where it is used
metaphorically of purging out old leaven from the church; the verb is
constructed with the acc. of what is removed or what is cleansed. The phrase ἀπὸ τούτων has no obvious antecedent. (a) The empty disputes
with the opponents (v. 16) are too far away, and do not give the right sense.
(b) The nearest possibility is the vessels in v. 20 (cf. NIV: ‘from the
latter’, presumably the ‘some [articles] for ignoble purposes’). These,
however, represent the false teachers in the church (vv. 17–18) from whom
Timothy is to separate himself. However, this interpretation is illogical in
that what is envisaged is a vessel used for one type of service being transformed
to be suitable for another type, not the separation of one kind of vessel from
another in order to become clean. (c) The reference must accordingly be
somewhat loosely to the activities of the opponents, including their false
teaching and the associated evil way of life.
Such persons will become (ἔσται) honoured vessels,
used for good purposes. Whether likely or not in the literal sense, the
metaphorical vessel can undergo a change of use and with it a change of status.
Cleansed from evil, the ‘vessel’ is now ‘pure’ (ἁγιάζω, 1 Tim 4:5**) and capable of being used. For εὔχρηστος see 4:11; Philem
11***;62 there is possibly a contrast with ἐπʼ οὐδὲν χρήσιμον in v. 14. δεσπότης (1 Tim 6:1, 2; Tit 2:9) is equivalent to οἰκοδεσπότης, the owner of a house
and its contents. With εἰς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθόν we return to a characteristic phrase and motif of
the PE;63 ἡτοιμασμένον is a variant for ἕτοιμος (Tit 3:1) and ἐξηρτισμένος (2 Tim 3:17).
Behind this development of the metaphor lies
the practice of the potter described in Wis 15:7 (NRSV): ‘A potter kneads the
soft earth and laboriously moulds each vessel for our service, fashioning out
of the same clay both the vessels that serve clean uses and those for contrary
uses, making all alike; but which shall be the use of each of them the worker
in clay decides.’ Here the point, which is incidental to the main theme, is the
authority of the potter to decide to what different uses the same clay will be
put. The same point is developed by Paul in Rom 9:21, where there are also
vessels for honour and dishonour which are the objects of wrath and mercy
respectively. But the point here is different and has nothing to do with
predestination, although the thought of the ultimate destruction of the vessels
εἰς ἀτιμίαν is implicit. It is in the power of the individual
to seek cleansing from evil and become fit for good use (Oberlinner, 106);
again, the possibility that the heretics may return to the truth is allowed.
Other points, such as that there will be good and bad alike in the church until
the judgement (Mt 13:24) or that the church should excommunicate such people,
are foreign to the context, whether or not it is legitimate to see them as
implications.
The passage as a whole is difficult for three
reasons: the shift from the initial description of materials, which in the end
is not especially relevant, to that of functions; the stress on the value
assigned to the vessels regardless of the fact that even dishonourable
functions are necessary functions; and the loose reference of the phrase ἀπὸ τούτων. When allowance is made for these points, the
basic lesson is fundamentally clear. (I. Howard Marshall and Philip H. Towner, A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles [International Critical Commentary;
London: T&T Clark International, 2004], 761-63)
For more against Reformed theology, see:
Critique of the Theological Presuppositions Underlying Reformed Theology
