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

e ouk ekhei exousian o kerameus tou pelou ek tou autou phuramatos poiesai o men eis timen skeuos o de eis atimian;

an non habet potestatem figulus luti ex eadem massa facere aliud quidem vas in honorem aliud vero in contumeliam

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

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

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

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

Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?

Hath not the potter power over the clay to make from the same lump one vessel unto honor and another unto dishonor?

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?

Or is not a potter authorized over the clay to make some formed things from it, one vessel for honor and one for dishonor?

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

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

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?

Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?

A potter has the right to do whatever he wants with his clay. He can make something for a special occasion or something for everyday use from the same lump of clay.

Or has the potter no right over the clay, to make from the same lump one piece of pottery for honor and another for dishonor?

A potter has the right to do what he wants to with his clay, doesn't he? He can make something for a special occasion or something for ordinary use from the same lump of clay.

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

Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?

Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

When a potter makes jars out of clay, doesn't he have a right to use the same lump of clay to make one jar for decoration and another to throw garbage into?

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

Or has not the potter rightful power over the clay to make out of the same lump one vessel for more honourable and another for less honourable uses?

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?

Somebody who makes pots can choose to make any kind of pot. He can use the same piece of clay to make two different pots. One of the pots may be for special parties. The other pot is for dirty things.

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?

The man making the pots has the right to use the clay as he wants to. He can make two pots from the same piece of clay. One can have an important use. The other one can be of little use.

Does not indeed the potter have authority over the clay to make, from the same lump, one vessel unto honor and another unto dishonor?

Doesn’t the potter have the right to shape the clay in any way he chooses? Can’t he make one lump into an elegant vase, and another into a common jug? Absolutely.

When a man makes a jar out of clay, doesn’t he have a right to use the same lump of clay to make one jar beautiful, to be used for holding flowers, and another to throw garbage into?

Surely, the potter can mold the clay as he wishes. Does he not have the right to make out of the same lump of clay one vessel for a noble purpose and another for ordinary use?

Or does not the potter have authority over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?

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

Or has the potter no right over the clay, to make from the same lump one piece of pottery for honor and another for dishonor?

Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same mass (lump) one vessel for beauty and distinction and honorable use, and another for menial or ignoble and dishonorable use?

The potter can make anything he wants to make. He can use the same clay to make one thing for special use and another thing for daily use.

Who in the world do you think you are to second-guess God? Do you for one moment suppose any of us knows enough to call God into question? Clay doesn’t talk back to the fingers that mold it, saying, “Why did you shape me like this?” Isn’t it obvious that a potter has a perfect right to shape one lump of clay into a vase for holding flowers and another into a pot for cooking beans? If God needs one style of pottery especially designed to show his angry displeasure and another style carefully crafted to show his glorious goodness, isn’t that all right? Either or both happens to Jews, but it also happens to the other people. Hosea put it well: I’ll call nobodies and make them somebodies; I’ll call the unloved and make them beloved. In the place where they yelled out, “You’re nobody!” they’re calling you “God’s living children.” Isaiah maintained this same emphasis: If each grain of sand on the seashore were numbered and the sum labeled “chosen of God,” They’d be numbers still, not names; salvation comes by personal selection. God doesn’t count us; he calls us by name. Arithmetic is not his focus. Isaiah had looked ahead and spoken the truth: If our powerful God had not provided us a legacy of living children, We would have ended up like ghost towns, like Sodom and Gomorrah. How can we sum this up? All those people who didn’t seem interested in what God was doing actually embraced what God was doing as he straightened out their lives. And Israel, who seemed so interested in reading and talking about what God was doing, missed it. How could they miss it? Because instead of trusting God, they took over. They were absorbed in what they themselves were doing. They were so absorbed in their “God projects” that they didn’t notice God right in front of them, like a huge rock in the middle of the road. And so they stumbled into him and went sprawling. Isaiah (again!) gives us the metaphor for pulling this together: Careful! I’ve put a huge stone on the road to Mount Zion, a stone you can’t get around. But the stone is me! If you’re looking for me, you’ll find me on the way, not in the way.

Doesn’t the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay one pot for special use and another for ordinary use?

Has the potter no right to make from the same lump of clay some pottery for a special occasion and other for common use?

Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one object for special use and another for ordinary use?

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

After all, the man who makes the pots has the right to use the clay as he wishes, and to make two pots from the same lump of clay, one for special occasions and the other for ordinary use.

Whether a potter of clay hath not power to make of the same gobbet one vessel into honour, another into despite? [Whether a potter of clay hath not power of the same gobbet to make soothly one vessel into honour, another forsooth into despite, or low office?]

Doesn’t the potter have authority over the clay, so that he can make from the same lump one vessel for honor, and another for dishonor?

Doesn't a potter have the right to make a fancy bowl and a plain bowl out of the same lump of clay?”

Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for beauty and another for menial use?

The potter, for instance, is always assumed to have complete control over the clay, making with one part of the lump a lovely vase, and with another a pipe for sewage. Can we not assume that God has the same control over human clay? May it not be that God, though he must sooner or later expose his wrath against sin and show his controlling hand, has yet most patiently endured the presence in his world of things that cry out to be destroyed? Can we not see, in this, his purpose in demonstrating the boundless resources of his glory upon those whom he considers fit to receive his mercy, and whom he long ago planned to raise to glorious life? And by these chosen people I mean you and me, whom he has called out from both Jews and Gentiles. He says in Hosea: ‘I will call them my people, who were not my people, and her beloved, who was not beloved’. ‘And it shall come to pass in the place where it was said to them, You are not my people, there they will be called sons of the living God’.

Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one object for special use and another for ordinary use?

Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one object for special use and another for ordinary use?

Doesn’t the potter have the power over the clay to make one pot for special purposes and another for garbage from the same lump of clay?

Does the potter not have the right over the clay, to make from the same lump [of clay] one object for honorable use [something beautiful or distinctive] and another for common use [something ordinary or menial]?

Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honourable use and another for dishonourable use?

Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for a noble purpose and another for an ignoble one?

Or does the potter not have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one object for honorable use, and another for common use?

·The potter can make anything he wants to make [L Doesn’t the potter have authority over the clay?]. He can use the same ·clay [L lump] to make one ·thing [vessel; pot] for ·special [honorable] use and another thing for ·daily [common; dishonorable] use.

Does the potter have no right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honor and another for common use?

Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for beauty and another for menial use?

Isn’t the potter free to make different kinds of pots out of the same lump of clay? Some are for special purposes. Others are for ordinary use.

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

Or has the potter no right to make from a given lump of clay this pot for honorable use and that one for dishonorable?

God has a right to be very angry if he wants to be. He has the right to show his power. God was very angry with some people who deserved to die. And yet he waited a long time before he did anything to them.

Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one object for special use and another for ordinary use?

Or does the potter not have the right over the clay [YIRMEYAH 18:6] to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?

A potter has the right to do whatever he wants with his clay. He can make something for a special occasion or something for everyday use from the same lump of clay.

Does the potter not have power over the clay to make from the same lump one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?

The one who makes the jar can make anything he wants. He uses the same clay to make different things. He might make one thing for special purposes and another for daily use.

The man who makes a jar can make anything he wants to make. He can use the same clay to make different things. He can make one thing for special use and another thing for daily use.

Or does the potter not have authority over the clay, to make from the same lump a vessel that is for honorable use and one that is for ordinary use?

Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

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