ROM 9:21 Parallel View

Note: This view shows ‘verses’ which are not natural language units and hence sometimes only part of a sentence will be visible. This view is only designed for doing comparisons of different translations. Click on the version abbreviation to see the verse in more of its context.

OET (OET-RV) Doesn’t the potter have the right to split the lump of clay and make a beautiful bowl out of half and a chamber pot out of the other half?

Key: yellow:verbs, light-green:nominative/subject, orange:accusative/object, pink:genitive/possessor, red:negative.
Note: Automatic aligning of the OET-RV to the LV is done by some temporary software, hence the OET-RV alignments are incomplete (and may occasionally be wrong).

ULT Or does the potter not have authority over the clay to make from the same lump not only what is a vessel for honor, but also what is for dishonor?

UST God can surely do whatever he wants to do with what he has made. In the same way, someone who makes containers can do whatever he wants to do with his materials. From the same material he can make both containers for special use and containers for ordinary use.

BSB Does not the potter have the right to make from the same lump of clay one vessel for special occasions and another for common use?

BLB Or does the potter not have authority over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel unto honor, but one unto dishonor?

AICNT Or does not the potter have authority over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?

OEB Has not the potter absolute power over their clay, so that out of the same lump they make one thing for better, and another for common, use?

WEB Or hasn’t the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel for honor, and another for dishonor?

NET Has the potter no right to make from the same lump of clay one vessel for special use and another for ordinary use?

LSV Does the potter not have authority over the clay, out of the same lump to make one vessel to honor and one to dishonor?

FBV Doesn't a potter have the right to use the same batch of clay to make both a decorative bowl and an everyday pot?[fn]

9:21 Literally, “pots of value and dishonor.”

TCNT Does the potter not have a right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?

T4T Instead, ◄the potter certainly has the right to take some clay and from one lump of clay make one pot that people will honor and make another one for ordinary purposes [MET]./does not a potter have the right to take some clay and from one lump of clay make one pot that people will honor and make another pot for ordinary purposes?► [MET, RHQ] Similarly, God has the right to carry out what he purposes for people.

LEB Or does the potter not have authority over the clay, to make from the same lump a vessel that is for honorable use[fn] andone that is for ordinary use[fn]?

?:? Literally “honor”

?:? Literally “dishonor”

BBE Or has not the potter the right to make out of one part of his earth a vessel for honour, and out of another a vessel for shame?

MOF No MOF ROM book available

ASV Or hath not the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?

DRA Or hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

YLT hath not the potter authority over the clay, out of the same lump to make the one vessel to honour, and the one to dishonour?

DBY Or has not the potter authority over the clay, out of the same lump to make one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour?

RV Or hath not the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

WBS Hath not the potter power over the clay of the same lump to make one vessel to honor, and another to dishonor?

KJB Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

BB Hath not the potter power ouer the clay, euen of the same lumpe to make one vessel vnto honour, and another vnto dishonour?
(Hath not the potter power over the clay, even of the same lumpe to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?)

GNV Hath not the potter power of the clay to make of the same lumpe one vessell to honour, and another vnto dishonour?
(Hath not the potter power of the clay to make of the same lumpe one vessel to honour, and another unto dishonour? )

CB Hath not the potter power, out of one lompe of claye to make one vessell vnto honoure, and another vnto dishonoure?
(Hath not the potter power, out of one lompe of clay to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonoure?)

TNT Hath not the potter power over the claye even of the same lompe to make one vessell vnto honoure and a nother vnto dishonoure?
(Hath not the potter power over the clay even of the same lompe to make one vessel unto honoure and a nother unto dishonoure? )

WYC Whether a potter of cley hath not power to make of the same gobet o vessel in to honour, an othere in to dispit?
(Whether a potter of clay hath/has not power to make of the same gobet o vessel in to honour, an other in to dispit?)

LUT Hat nicht ein Töpfer Macht, aus einem Klumpen zu machen ein Faß zu Ehren und das andere zu Unehren?
(Hat not a Töpfer Macht, out of one Klumpen to make a Faß to Ehren and the other to Unehren?)

CLV an non habet potestatem figulus luti ex eadem massa facere aliud quidem vas in honorem, aliud vero in contumeliam?[fn]
(an not/no habet potestatem figulus luti ex eadem massa facere aliud quidem vas in honorem, aliud vero in contumeliam?)

9.21 Ex eadem massa. Sic tota massa humani generis juste corrupta, et lutosa est: si inde vas in honorem, misericordia est; si in contumeliam, justum est, quia hoc erat ex natura: ecce justitia in his qui non habent tempus operandi; de his autem qui habent tempus subdit: quid si Deus volens, scilicet quid respondeas Deo. Aliud in contumeliam. Vas in honorem, sed in contumeliam: si vile est; ex se lutum habet, non ex figulo. Quid si Deus, etc. AUG., lib. 1, ad Simplicianum, quæst. 2. Quasi dicat: Jam ostensum est; quod etsi Deus nihil boni det, non tamen iniquus est, etc., usque ad sed abusi sunt hac gratia.

9.21 Ex eadem massa. So tota massa humani generis juste corrupta, and lutosa it_is: when/but_if inde vas in honorem, misericordia est; when/but_if in contumeliam, justum it_is, because hoc was ex natura: ecce justitia in his who not/no habent tempus operandi; about his however who habent tempus subdit: quid when/but_if God volens, scilicet quid respondeas Deo. Aliud in contumeliam. Vas in honorem, but in contumeliam: when/but_if vile est; ex se lutum habet, not/no ex figulo. Quid when/but_if God, etc. AUG., lib. 1, to Simplicianum, quæst. 2. Quasi dicat: Yam ostensum est; that etsi God nihil boni det, not/no tamen iniquus it_is, etc., usque to but abusi are hac gratia.

UGNT ἢ οὐκ ἔχει ἐξουσίαν ὁ κεραμεὺς τοῦ πηλοῦ, ἐκ τοῦ αὐτοῦ φυράματος ποιῆσαι ὃ μὲν εἰς τιμὴν σκεῦος, ὃ δὲ εἰς ἀτιμίαν?
(aʸ ouk eⱪei exousian ho kerameus tou paʸlou, ek tou autou furamatos poiaʸsai ho men eis timaʸn skeuos, ho de eis atimian?)

SBL-GNT ἢ οὐκ ἔχει ἐξουσίαν ὁ κεραμεὺς τοῦ πηλοῦ ἐκ τοῦ αὐτοῦ φυράματος ποιῆσαι ὃ μὲν εἰς τιμὴν σκεῦος ὃ δὲ εἰς ἀτιμίαν;
(aʸ ouk eⱪei exousian ho kerameus tou paʸlou ek tou autou furamatos poiaʸsai ho men eis timaʸn skeuos ho de eis atimian? )

TC-GNT Ἢ οὐκ ἔχει ἐξουσίαν ὁ κεραμεὺς τοῦ πηλοῦ, ἐκ τοῦ αὐτοῦ φυράματος ποιῆσαι ὃ μὲν εἰς τιμὴν σκεῦος, ὃ δὲ εἰς ἀτιμίαν;
(Aʸ ouk eⱪei exousian ho kerameus tou paʸlou, ek tou autou furamatos poiaʸsai ho men eis timaʸn skeuos, ho de eis atimian? )

Key for above GNTs: yellow:punctuation differs (from our SR-GNT base).

UTN uW Translation Notes:

Note 1 topic: figures-of-speech / rquestion

ἢ οὐκ ἔχει ἐξουσίαν ὁ κεραμεὺς τοῦ πηλοῦ, ἐκ τοῦ αὐτοῦ φυράματος ποιῆσαι ὃ μὲν εἰς τιμὴν σκεῦος, ὃ δὲ εἰς ἀτιμίαν?

or not /is/_having authority the potter ˱over˲_the clay out_of the same lump /to/_make one on_one_hand to honor vessel one on_the_other_hand to dishonor

Paul is not asking for information, but is using the question form here to emphasize the truth of what he is saying. If you would not use a rhetorical question for this purpose in your language, you could translate his words as a statement or an exclamation and communicate the emphasis in another way. Alternate translation: “The potter surely has authority over the clay to make from the same lump not only what is a vessel for honor, but also what is for dishonor!”

Note 2 topic: figures-of-speech / exmetaphor

or not /is/_having authority the potter ˱over˲_the clay out_of the same lump /to/_make one on_one_hand to honor vessel one on_the_other_hand to dishonor

Paul speaks about God’s authority over people by using the metaphor of a potter and his clay. Paul means that God has the right to do whatever he wants with people, because he made them. If it would be helpful in your language, you could express this metaphor as a simile. Alternate translation: “Or does God not have authority over us like a potter has authority over the clay to make from the same lump not only what is a vessel for honor, but also what is for dishonor?”

Note 3 topic: translate-unknown

or not /is/_having authority the potter ˱over˲_the clay out_of the same lump /to/_make one on_one_hand to honor vessel one on_the_other_hand to dishonor

A potter is a person who makes containers out of a type of soil called clay that becomes hard after it is heated. The potter takes a lump of clay and forms it into different kinds of containers that are used for various purposes. If your readers would not be familiar with clay containers, you could use the name of a different type of material that is used in your area to make containers, or you could use a general expression. Alternate translation: “Or does the person who makes something not have authority over his materials to make from those materials not only what is a vessel for honor, but also what is for dishonor?”

Note 4 topic: figures-of-speech / abstractnouns

εἰς τιμὴν σκεῦος & εἰς ἀτιμίαν

to honor vessel & to dishonor

If your language does not use abstract nouns for the ideas of honor and dishonor, you could express the same ideas in another way. Alternate translation: “a vessel for what is honorable … for what is dishonorable”

Note 5 topic: figures-of-speech / explicit

εἰς τιμὴν σκεῦος & εἰς ἀτιμίαν

to honor vessel & to dishonor

Here, honor and dishonor refer to how these vessels will be used. If it would be helpful in your language, you could state this explicitly. Alternate translation: “a vessel for honorable use … for dishonorable use”

Parallel ROM 9:21