You are on page 1of 13

Double Double, Toil & Trouble?

© Rob Wilkerson

Chapter Five The Second Text: Proverbs 16:4
“The LORD has made everything for his own purposes, even the wicked for punishment.” The excursus was strategically placed between chapter five and this chapter. Looking at the various sources of religious literature contemporaneous with the Scriptures allowed us to conclude that the concept of double-predestination was actually nothing out of the ordinary for the common Jew of Paul’s day. And it is the wording one of the texts of a Dead Sea Scroll, in particular, that I have purposefully used to transition us into this chapter. If you have a moment, flip back to the excursus where we quoted from 1 QH 15:12-22. The verse in particular I wanted you to focus on was verse 17, which reads, “You have created the wicked [for the time of] of Your [wr]ath and have set them apart from their mother’s womb for the Day of Massacre…”The wording presented in this verse is simply a reflection of another Jewish passage, but an inspired one – Proverbs 16:4. That text reads, “The Lord has made everything for its own purpose, even the wicked for the day of destruction.” The Qumrani text was written several hundred years after the text in Proverbs, which makes the quotation in the Dead Sea Scroll an allusion back to the original thought in Proverbs. What this means is that we are afforded a Jewish interpretation of the thought expressed in Proverbs. At first, the wording seemed so similar that there could be no doubt that a connection was intended. A quick comparison of the Hebrew text of Proverbs 16:4 with that of the Qumrani text revealed that they were in fact very similar. What this means then, is that the Qumrani text can be used to help understand the biblical text. Now, let not your hearts be troubled! I’m not going to spend precious time exegeting a text from the Dead Sea Scroll. I only bring it up to let you know as we begin this chapter that the concept of double-predestination as found in OT theology is not far-fetched. If you read the Excurses at the end of the previous chapter you will know what I am talking about. If we find the subject of double-predestination in Proverbs, and then again in another Hebrew text outside the Bible, we ought not be surprised. Again, this kind of theology is not entirely uncommon.

Double Double, Toil & Trouble?

© Rob Wilkerson

What I do want to do, however, is to open up the passage of Proverbs 16:4 and unpack it. After having done so personally before writing this chapter, I found three keys to understanding the passage. So obviously I want to pass these along to you by way of three analytical comments. They are comments of a literary, lexical and interpretive nature. Considering the Genre The first thing we must always do when studying a text of Scripture is try to figure out what kind of literature it is. “It’s biblical! That’s not so hard!” Yes, you are right! And you are on the right track. But I’d like us to be more specific. Let’s say for example that you are reading the newspaper. In one newspaper there are various sections, aren’t there? There is the front page, the business section, the beloved sports section, the classifieds, and the funnies. If you’re lucky, you might even get a home and garden section and an entertainment section. But if you lived in my county, you would never be so lucky. The point is that you don’t read each section of your newspaper with the same mindset, do you? You don’t read the funnies with the same kind mental attitude as you would the business section. And you don’t read the front page headlines as if it were the classifieds. With each section of the paper you come to, you put on a different sort of thinking cap, if you will. It’s really not so different when it comes to reading the Scriptures. There are various types of sections in the Scriptures. The Hebrews categorized all their OT books into three main categories or types: law, prophets and writings. The first section is called law, or in the Hebrew Bible, Torah (the Hebrew word for law). Books like some parts of Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy, would be included in this category, though to be accurate, a Jew would recognize the first five books of the OT as making up the Law. But for our purposes, I simply want you to recognize that even in books labeled as law, there are different types of material in it, including some historical, prophetic, and even poetic material. Another name for this kind of literature is hortatory or even epistolary, for those who like to learn new and big words. In the NT it would include those parts of the gospels where Jesus is preaching or teaching. The point behind these books is to convey commands, instructions, exhortations which God wanted His people to know. The second section is what the Hebrews would have called the nevi’im, or the prophetic. These books, like all the prophets (major and minor) as well as Revelation, all foretell the future and predict the end of the world, or else major cataclysmic or apocalyptic events. The point behind these books to is to prepare God’s people for what He has planned in the future, and if they are in sin, call them to repentance as they await the coming of God.

Double Double, Toil & Trouble?

© Rob Wilkerson

The last category of writings, which the Hebrews called the kethuvim, contained many sub-categories of literature such as history and poetry. Examples of history books would be Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, Judges, 1 & 2 Samuel. In the NT, books like the gospels and Acts would fall into such a category. The point behind these books is to tell stories that fit into a bigger picture, namely the purpose of the book which the author had in mind when writing it. Books like Proverbs, Psalms, Job, Song of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations are in a smaller category known as poetry. It is this last category here on which we must focus some attention. After we identify what kind of literature we are dealing with in a biblical book, that will better inform us how to read it. We would never read poetry like history, and we would never read apocalyptic material like poetry. Different literature types require a different course of thinking. So the first point in working our way into Proverbs 16:4 is to realize that we are dealing with poetry. (I’m sure that this was an incredibly deep insight for you since you already knew this fact!). Hebrew poetry is often written in parallelism, which is a writing tool to convey one truth in two differing or similar thoughts. It is not at all like our “Roses are Red, Violets are Blue,” type of poetry. You can easily pick that up when reading a book like Proverbs where the author seems to make his point by stating two different things, and then jump to a different truth in the very next verse. There is not a lot of context, many times. In Hebrew poetry, Proverbs 16:4 would be an example of what we call ‘synthetic parallelism.’ In this method of poetry the author is basically stating a truth in the first line, and then affirming or explaining it in the second line. It is very common throughout the book of Proverbs. Once you get the hang of it in this verse, you’ll be instantly able to pick up on it when you read the rest of the book. In the first line of the verse, what we have is a statement about God’s purposes in all things. This is followed by an affirmation in the second line that God has made the wicked for the day of destruction. In the first line, God has a purpose in all things, for everything He has created. In the second line, since wicked people would fit into the category of “all things,” He created them too, and He also has a purpose for them. That purpose, according to the text, is the day of destruction, or judgment. Considering Word Meanings Having worked through our crash course in literary genre, let’s work a little deeper by examining the word meanings or lexical facts of our text. Let’s just jump right in! “The Lord has made everything for His own purposes...”

Double Double, Toil & Trouble?

© Rob Wilkerson

The Hebrew word for “made” simply means ‘to do or to make.’1 Albert Barnes recommends what he believes to be a better translation: “the Lord has done everything for its own end.”2 Certainly this removes the emotional tension created by the thought that God made a person specifically for destruction. I’ll be honest with you here. This is one text for which I have never had a comeback. Neither did Alex, that day in April 2004 when I shared it with him. The only thing he could do with the text is what every anti-Calvinist normally does with it. Pretend I didn’t bring it up and play scriptural leap-frog. There was no slow boiling this frog. He felt the heat increase instantly when I turned to this verse, and feeling the intense heat, he leapt blindly out of the pot and into another text. That seems so often to be the problem with anti-Calvinists. They just cannot stay in one text if their lives depended upon it! I’ll give Alex some credit here. He stayed in the pot, but only for two seconds. He was courageous enough to raise a challenge about the meaning of words in the text. And he even made a statement, as I recall, that tended toward something like Barne’s translation above. But even in that translation, which brings hopeful release from the pressure, albeit very temporary release, there are two problems with it. First, scholars and theologians much smarter than I have traditionally understood the word to mean “make” instead of “do.” Second, it seems to neglect the latter phrase in the first part of the verse. This leads us to examine it next. “The Lord has made everything for His own purposes…” Barnes’ translation ignores the actual Hebrew behind the phrase which he translates, “for its own end.” The Hebrew actually reads, “for His own purpose.” The Hebrew word actually ends with a masculine suffix, requiring the word to be translated for His own purposes rather than for its own purposes. If we remove the masculine suffix, we remove the divine purpose for which everything was made. The Lord made everything, according to the text. Would He make each thing in such a way that He would let it work out its own purpose? That’s not what a creator does with something he invents. And that’s not what God does with what He creates. It is designed and created for a specific purpose, a purpose also designed by the Maker and Creator. Therefore, to leave the His out of the text leaves God’s divine purpose out of the things which He created. Keil and Delitzch’s remarks here are worth repeating. “…the proverb is not intended to express that all that God has made serve a purpose… but that all is made by God for its purpose, i.e., a
1

l[;P. BDB, # 8024.
Proverbs 16:4. Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Old Testament, E-Sword 7.0.5, 2003. Emphasis added.

2

Double Double, Toil & Trouble?

© Rob Wilkerson

purpose premeditated by Him, that the world of things and of events stands under the law of a plan, which has in God its ground and its end, and that also the wickedness of free agents is comprehended in this plan, and made subordinate to it.”3 “…even the wicked for punishment.” The final phrase to consider is the last one in the verse. Beyond the obvious reading of the verse, there is not anything special to notice. God has made everything for His own purposes. Wicked persons are made by Him. Therefore they serve one of His purposes. And that stated purpose, according to the text, is for punishment. According to John Gill, “‘The day of evil’, or ‘evil day’, is the day of wrath and ruin, unto which wicked men are reserved by the appointment of God…”4

Considering an Interpretation Having considered the genre or type of literature we are dealing with here, and having considered the important words and phrases in the text, it is now time to move to an interpretation. If this passage is built on synthetic parallelism, stating a truth in line A, followed by an explanation or affirmation of it in line B, then the first sentence must govern the last sentence. What this means is that the first part of the verse is the main truth to be emphasized, not the last part of the verse. In the first line, God has made everything for His own purposes. God is the Maker of everything. And God has His own purposes for everything He has made. In the second line, wicked persons are said to be included in the everything that He has made. Therefore, they are made for His own purposes. According to the text, His expressed purpose for making the wicked is destruction. Let’s move now to consider what all of this means. God’s Glory Determines His Purposes for Everything If God has made everything for His own purposes, what are those purposes? This little phrase for His own purposes, carries a magnificent amount of implied truth. Plain and simple, His glory is His purpose. He makes everything for His glory. His glory is the sole motivating factor behind why He made everything in the first place.
3

Proverbs 16:4. Commentary on the Old Testament by Keil and Delitzch. Quoted in E-Sword. Emphasis added.
4

Proverbs 16:4. John Gill’s Exposition on the Whole Bible. Quoted in E-Sword.

Double Double, Toil & Trouble?

© Rob Wilkerson

Now if ever there was a theologian among theologians who understood this concept the best and wrote of it with the most lucidity, it is the prince of Puritans, John Owen. He saw in this text of Proverbs 16:4 a powerful proof that God does whatever He does for His own glory. His most succinct statement on the subject is found in his commentary on Hebrews. There he writes, “‘The LORD hath made all things for himself;’ his glory is the final cause of them all.”5 In other places, he makes several comments on this Proverb which elucidate further what he means. “The Lord doth necessarily aim at himself in the first place, as the chiefest good, yea, indeed, that alone which is good; that is, absolutely and simply so, and not by virtue of communication from another: and therefore in all his works, especially in this which we have in hand, the chiefest of all, he first intends the manifestation of his own glory; which also he fully accomplisheth in the close, to every point and degree by him intended. He ‘maketh all things for himself,’ Proverbs 16:4; and every thing in the end must ‘redound to the glory of God’…”6 “God doth, maketh, worketh all things for himself, Proverbs 16:4; that is, for the satisfaction of the holy perfections of his nature in acts suitable unto them, and the manifestation of his glory thereon.”7 In volume one of his works, entitled Christologia, Owen explains in chapter fifteen that there are, “three excellencies of the divine nature principally to be considered in all the external works of God.”8 The second one of these “excellencies” he considers to be, “Wisdom, which is the directive power or excellency of the divine nature. Hereby God guides, disposes, orders, and directs all things unto his own glory, in and by their own immediate proper ends…”9 In chapter four of that same work, Owen’s main point is that the person of Jesus Christ is the foundation of all the counsels of God. One of the truths he seeks to expound is that His counsel – His secret decisions and plans to do certain things - delights Him just as much as the outcome of those counsels. In other words, we misunderstand God’s
5

John Owen. An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews. In The Works of John Owen Vol. 19 (Rio, WI: Ages Software, 2000), p. 459.
6

The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, Vol. 10 in Works, p. 265. On page 320 of this same work Owen, lists this passage once more as arguing for a limited atonement. That is, according to this, among many other texts, Christ could not have died for those whom God had made for the day of destruction.
7

Hebrews, Works Vol. 20, p. 322. Christologia¸in Volume 1 of Works, pp. 238-9 Ibid.

8

9

Double Double, Toil & Trouble?

© Rob Wilkerson

glory if we think of it only in terms of the outward accomplishment of what appears to be God’s plan. His point is that God’s secret, unknown, mysterious plan which would eventually be accomplished is just as glorifying to Him as the accomplishment itself. And with regard to the finishing of one of His plans, Owen believes Proverbs 16:4 is a crucial text. “God does delight in the actual accomplishment of his works. He made not this world, nor any thing in it, for its own sake. Much less did he make this earth to be a theatre for men to act their lusts upon — the use which it is now put to, and groans under. But he made ‘all things for himself’ (Proverbs 16:4)… that is, not only by an act of sovereignty, but to his own delight and satisfaction.”10 Finally, turning to volume three of his works, chapter three, Owen’s efforts to prove and vindicate the person and nature of the Holy Spirit is begun with this God-centered thought. “The nature and being of God is the foundation of all true religion and holy religious worship in the world. The great end for which we were made, for which we were brought forth by the power of God into this world, is to worship him and to give glory unto him; for he “made all things for himself,” or his own glory, Proverbs 16:4.”11 As stated before, Owen makes it clear for us from Proverbs 16:4 the necessary truth that God has made everything for Himself, and Himself alone. He made it all for His glory. He will bring everything to the end for which He has designed it, for His glory. No, God’s glory is not explicit in the text, but it is definitely implicit. Here is Owen again, confirming this matter. “All agree that the glory of God is the utmost and supreme end that he intendeth in all his decrees. Although they are free acts of his will and wisdom, yet, on the supposition of them, it is absolutely necessary, from the perfection of his being, that he himself or his glory be their utmost end. His absolute all-sufficiency will not allow that he can in them have any other end. Accordingly, in pursuit of them he makes all for himself, Proverbs 16:4.”12

10

Ibid, pp. 88-9. A Discourse Concerning the Holy Spirit¸ in Volume 3 of Works, pp. 88-9. An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in Volume 18 of Works, p. 38.

11

12

Double Double, Toil & Trouble?

© Rob Wilkerson

Fitting Together God’s Glory and Man’s Wickedness As I was dealing with Alex that afternoon, I didn’t have to resort to brow-beating him. The neat thing is that I didn’t have to do this! He was a Majority Text Only user. That meant, though he didn’t like to admit it, that he was a King James Only advocate. This afford me the very great luxury of making him stick to his own text which reads, “The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.” Notice the part I italicized. God Himself made the wicked for Himself. And He did so for the day of evil. That’s where he jumped out of the kettle, as I recall, and rightly so, for the verse allows no wriggling room. Whatever the author means by God’s relationship to the wicked, it must be governed by the truth of the first line. The wicked serve God’s purpose to glorify Him. And in some way, their destruction serves that purpose. This causes us to turn to the deeper question of the precise meaning of that relationship. The first factor to consider is that if God has made the wicked for His own purposes, those purposes being designed and worked out according to what glorifies Him, then somehow the destruction of the wicked serves to glorify Him. This can only mean one of two things, as I see it. First, God made persons wicked so that He could glorify Himself by destroying them. Or second, God made persons who would act wickedly, and in destroying them for their wickedness He would glorify Himself. Which is it? If you know of another alternative, let me know. I don’t want to paint anyone in a corner and force us to bifurcate, feeling as if we have to choose between these two options when they are not the only ones! On this matter, let us turn our consideration first to some remarks made by Keil and Delitzch. I have italicized the most important phrases. These remarks will be especially helpful in future chapters, so take a moment to mark them in the book so you can return to it later. They show the balance which I have always sought to maintain in a theology of double-predestination. “God has not indeed made the wicked as such, but He has made the being which is capable of wickedness, and which has decided for it, viz., in view of the “day of adversity” (Eccl. 7:14), which God will cause to come upon him, thus making His holiness manifest in the merited punishment, and thus also making wickedness the means of manifesting His glory. It is the same thought which is expressed in Exod. 9:16 with reference to Pharaoh.”13 In this understanding of the Hebrew text, according to these commentators, there are three things to note. First, God does not make a person wicked. Second, God makes
13

Ibid.

Double Double, Toil & Trouble?

© Rob Wilkerson

them capable of wickedness, and able to decide for it. Third, He has also made a day of evil, destruction and adversity, and He will send it or bring it on the wicked person. But! And this is a very big “but,” God uses their wickedness as a means of glorifying Himself by pouring out His wrath upon them. So then, God purposes to glorify Himself by destroying those who men and women, whom He has made, who choose to act wickedly. He glorifies His justice when He takes holy vengeance on them for their sinfulness. John Gill understood the text in this way. An exegete, par excellence, he believed that the last part of the verse was given to illustrate the proposition in the first part of the verse. He further believed that the purpose of the last part of the verse was to handle objections from those who somehow might try to argue that wicked men cannot possibly be part of God’s intended purposes. By including that last phrase, Gill believes the author is maintaining God’s sovereignty even over the wickedness of men. God will not go unglorified, if I may coin a new word, even in the lives of wicked persons. He will glorify Himself even in their destruction. In Gill’s own words, “…even the destruction of the wicked, which is under a divine appointment, is for his glory.”14 What is interesting in Gill’s commentary on this verse is what he did not believe about the propositions. Gill did not believe that the text was saying that God made persons wicked. Here he is in his own words. “It is not the sense of this text, nor of any other passage of Scripture, that God made man to damn him; nor is this to be inferred from the doctrine of predestination: God made man, neither to damn him, nor to save him, but for his own glory; and that is secured, whether in his salvation or damnation; nor did or does God make men wicked; he made man upright, and he has made himself wicked; and, being so, God may justly appoint him to damnation for his wickedness, in doing which he glorifies his justice.” Gill’s view would concur with the original Geneva Bible’s study note that, “the justice of God will appear to his glory, even in the destruction of the wicked.” 15 At this point, let me stir up the waters a bit, if you will. You knew this was coming, didn’t you? There’s always something else lurking underneath! And you’re right! It is the old Puritan Matthew Henry. I introduce his comments on Proverbs 16:4 to push us into deeper thought about what else may be behind this text. Here is what Henry had to say.
14

Proverbs 16:4. E-Sword. Proverbs 16:4. E-Sword.

15

Double Double, Toil & Trouble?

© Rob Wilkerson

“Note, 1. That God is the first cause. He is the former of all things and all persons, the fountain of being; he gave every creature the being it has and appointed it its place. Even the wicked are his creatures, though they are rebels; he gave them those powers with which they fight against him, which aggravates their wickedness, that they will not let him that made them rule them, and therefore, though he made them, he will not save them. “2. That God is the last end. All is of him and from him, and therefore all is to him and for him. He made all according to his will and for his praise; he designed to serve his own purposes by all his creatures, and he will not fail of his designs; all are his servants. “The wicked He is not glorified by, but He will be glorified upon. He makes no man wicked, but He made those who He foresaw would be wicked: yet He made them (Gen. vi.6), because He knew how to get Himself honour upon them. See Rom. ix.22. Or (as some understand it), He made the wicked to be employed by Him as instruments of His wrath in the day of evil, when He brings judgments on the world. He makes some use even of wicked men, as of other things, to be His sword, His hand (Ps. xvii.13,14), flagellum Dei – the scourge of God.”16 Without restating Henry’s own words, I don’t want you to miss what I believe he is trying to communicate in no uncertain terms. God is the first cause. He made the person who would be wicked. And He made them knowing full well, according to Gill’s view, that they would turn out wicked. He made them, knowing this about them, in order to bring His wrath upon them so that He could glorify Himself. Further, per Henry, not only did God make the wicked person, but God also made them capable of acting wickedly. And not only that, but God gave them “those powers with which they fight against him, which aggravates their wickedness.” He gives them the ability to sin, and built into that sinful nature is the power to aggravate itself into more and more sinfulness. I trust you can feel the tension building here. Behind all of this is the unseen hand of God who has created them with a sinful nature knowing full well that their sinful nature would give itself over to wickedness, resulting in His destruction and wrath. With this in mind, let me return to the two options I stated earlier.
16

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, Proverbs 16:4. Quoted in BibleWorks 6.0 (Big Fork, MT: Hermeneutika, 2003). Emphasis added. I must note that in my observations of Henry, he does not seem to hold to double-predestination, though some of his argumentation logically leads that way. For this reason, some of his comments are useful to my argumentation here.

Double Double, Toil & Trouble?

© Rob Wilkerson

First, God made persons wicked so that He could glorify Himself by destroying them. Or second, God made persons who would act wickedly, and in destroying them for their wickedness He would glorify Himself. Which is it? May I ask one more question based on these two options? It’s one I also asked Alex. What’s the difference between making a person with a sinful nature, knowing full well they would use that sinful nature to the point where God would destroy them, thereby glorifying Himself; and making a person who is capable of wickedness, and leading them to act wickedly so that He can glorify Himself by exercising His wrath against them? The difference, of course, is in how that person comes to commit his or her wicked acts. The difference is the degree of responsibility that God bears for that person’s sinfulness as opposed to how much the individual bears for his sinful deeds. Now my point in raising this issue is not so much to solve that Gordian knot as it is to point out that if God chooses to glorify Himself by exercising His wrath against wickedness, how can He be assured that He will get to do so unless He ensures that men are born who will act wickedly against Him? In other words, God’s desire to display His glory, includes His desire to act in wrath against wickedness. Ergo, without wickedness, there is no wrath, and consequently no glorifying Himself. So in order to ensure that He glorifies Himself in His wrath, there must be wickedness to punish. And how can it be guaranteed that wickedness will exist unless He makes it exist? Perhaps I have unleashed the Incredible Hulk in some of you! I know the responses all too well. They come from those who know the doctrine of sin very well. “God doesn’t have to make already depraved creatures sin. They are born sinful and will do it the first chance they get!” Very good. I agree. But as it was in the case with the texts in Romans, so also is it here that this text does not argue for man’s part in His own condemnation. There is no mention in the text anywhere of what man does to make himself wicked. That truth is clearly taught in other texts, but not in this one. God is the subject of all the action in the text. He is the One performing all the action, not man. The text is very clear that God makes wicked persons, and that He does so for the final day in which He will judge them, and thereby glorify Himself. I think that what Henry was saying in his observations is that God makes wicked men, though He does not make them act wickedly. But isn’t that last point contested if for no other reason than the simple fact that, according to Henry, He indirectly aggravates their wickedness. Oh, sure, their own sinful nature has inherent within it all that is necessary for aggravating itself to more and more wickedness. But who gave it to them

Double Double, Toil & Trouble?

© Rob Wilkerson

in the first place? And what does such a though mean except that God makes them able to sin, and then exacerbates their abilities and desires with opportunities to sin? He may not tempt them, but He gives them the ability to sin, and makes it easy for them. In essence, He orchestrates their wickedness.17 Conclusions No doubt, you are struggling with this concept. You too, like me, are being drawn into asking, “Why does God find fault with us then! If He makes us capable of and inclined toward sinning, and then exacerbates that problem, why does He hold us responsible for it! That’s not fair!!!” I hear you, man. I hear you loud and clear. And other than Paul’s answer that we as the clay ought not to talk back to the Potter like this, I’d like to offer an answer I’ve already touched on before, and one to which we will return again and again. The problem, however, is that this answer, which is also the Bible’s answer, will provoke us to more frustration because we aren’t able to understand it. It is mysterious. That answer is forever and always God’s glory. “Oh, that’s so frustrating! Where does that kind of an answer get us in this discussion?!” I feel your pain brother and sister. It gets us bumping our heads harder into mystery, doesn’t it? But it is based only on this foundational truth of God’s glory that we can ever begin to consider the following question: If God makes a person capable of sinning, and if He gives them the wherewithal to aggravate their own sinful condition toward further wickedness (essentially exacerbating their condition so that they will make sinful choices), why would He then hold them accountable for sinning? The only answer can be that He does so because it glorifies Him. Is that sick, twisted, demented and sadistic? If you are a fallen human being, yes. But if you are holy, perfect, all-wise, all-knowing, all-powerful, all-good God, then no. This is why Henry can say that God made them, “because He knew how to get Himself honour upon them…He made the wicked to be employed by Him as instruments of His wrath in the day of evil.” He made them to do what they did so that He might use them as instruments to honor Himself by pouring out His wrath upon them. He made them specifically for the day of destruction so that He could glorify that part of His character. The righteous are made to glorify His mercy, grace and saving love. God makes men of both kinds to ultimately and completely glorify His character. As John Owen wrote, “All mankind…belong to the lordship and dominion of Christ. All mankind was in the power of God as…“one mass,” or “lump,” out of which all
17

See Appendix ?? for an illustration of what I mean by this concept of orchestration.,

Double Double, Toil & Trouble?

© Rob Wilkerson

individuals are made and framed, Romans 9:21, some to honor, some to dishonor; the to< ajuto< fu>rama not denoting the same substance, but one common condition. And the making of the individuals is not by temporal creation, but eternal designation. So that all mankind, made out of nothing and out of the same condition, destined to several ends, for the glory of God, are branched into two sorts; — elect, or vessels from the common mass unto honor; and reprobates, or vessels from the common mass unto dishonor… others are appointed to the day of evil, Proverbs 16:4.”18

18

Owen, Hebrews, in Works Vol. 19, p. 67.