Biblical Order of Salvation

I haven't got the slightest idea, I was just making an example, or say 200, I could have 300 if you like. So someone in the 1800's managed to explain the Calvinist view of foreknowledge, predestination, election, free will, God's sovereignty..etc That doesn't convince me they are right or were right. Bottom line.

Darren

 

I have foreknowledge of what's going to come up in my garden because I planted it.

 

Well, you refuse to see it, but the entire chapter is contrasting those who are saved by faith versus those who try to establish their own righteousness through works, or claim they are chosen by ancestry to Abraham.

If God simply chooses some to be saved, and chooses others to be lost, why would the entire chapter be devoted to this contrast?

Rom 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.
10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;
11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

In vs. 6 it shows that a man is not saved through being the physical ancestor of Abraham. When it says "called" in vs. 7 it is speaking of promise. God had promised that Abraham would have a son and through him the whole world would be blessed. In vs. 8 it makes it absolutely clear it is speaking of those saved through faith in God's promises. And in vs. 11 it again shows that those who are "called" that is, those who believe God's promises are the elect, not those who try to justify themselves through works.

Then it contrasts Moses and Pharaoh. Moses left Egypt, because he regarded the promises of God.

Heb 11:24 By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter;
25 Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;
26 Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward.
27 By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible.

Moses is an example of great faith and submission to God, while Pharaoh was the great example of rebellion and stubborn pride. Pharaoh saw many great acts of God with his own eyes and still would not repent and believe.

Exo 3:19 And I am sure that the king of Egypt will not let you go, no, not by a mighty hand.

Exo 10:3 And Moses and Aaron came in unto Pharaoh, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD God of the Hebrews, How long wilt thou refuse to humble thyself before me? let my people go, that they may serve me.

You see, God knew before Moses even went down to Egypt that Pharaoh would stubbornly resist God even though he would see many mighty works with his own eyes. God did not punish Pharaoh without reason or cause.

You simply do not understand the chapter. The whole chapter is contrasting faith versus works. And God has elected to show mercy on those who come by faith versus those who try to establish their own righteousness and will not submit to the righteousness of God.

Rom 9:31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

You pull scripture out of context to try to prove your false doctrine. The entire chapter is clearly contrasting faith versus works, read it again and see for yourself.

 

Winman,

You wrote:

Of course I refuse to see it because it simply is not there. God chose Jacob over Esau when neither had done nothing good or bad. It is plain; it is simple.

The Archangel

 

And yet God did not choose them for eternal life, otherwise God predetermined Pharaoh for the lake of fire. So God does NOT pass over the non elect but chooses as He did Pharaoh for the non elect to be vessels of dishonor, wrath and destruction. Predestination to either heaven or the lake of fire. It is plain, it is simple.... :wavey:

Darren

 

Once again ... mixing up predestination and election. Two related doctrines (all doctrines are to some extent), but quite different.

Maybe once those who are anti-calvinists "just because", get an understanding of the differences between these two, they will not fall into the same error quite so often. One can always hope so at least.:thumbs:

 

So you can have your cake and eat it, Pharaoh was passed over, yet predestined and yet also non elected, for "eternal life in heaven".. Oh yeah... :tonofbricks:

Darren

 

Can the order be simultanious?

 

Thinkingstuff,

I think it is possible. Many of the Puritans speak of periods of awakening (or quickening, I think is the word they use). They seem to think that regeneration can be a process and I think they are right. However, that is not to say that it cannot be instantaneous. I would argue the Apostle Paul's conversion was an instantaneous conversion where regeneration and salvation happened simultaneously.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

Yes, I think the order is chronologically simultaneous. The debate is really over which is the cause and which is the faith.

Does sinful man summon faith and then God responds with regeneration?
Does God regenerate a sinner, triggering saving faith?

 

Huh? What you mean like to evoke or conjure up "faith"? OMG...

raying:

Darren

 

First you ought to deal with the context on Rom 9:11, that is the boys weren't born at the time and yet God decided whom He will choose for the seed of Abraham's covenant. This was not election to eternal life in that context only election for the reason of God's covenant with Abraham and additionally to God's purposes in the earth regarding His chosen people (to be Israel).

Darren

 

My response was directed at Winman's post and he said this:

 

Hi Seaturtle, I was following the discussion, I'm simply pointing out that Rom 9:11 would not address your objection the way you should like. For a start God chooses the sacrifice of Christ and the New Covenant as the initial cause for man's response, that IS what man is responding to, faith is stirred up by the gospel and is mans response to God; Christ being the object and reason for that faith. So man doesn't just choose God, that is a misnomer. God draws man, responds in faith, simple as that.

Darren

 

So in other words, I can not use that text as my starting point, I understand what you are saying now.

 

All things being equal, why does one believe the Gospel and another does not? What explains the difference between the two?

 

The question is irrelevant and doesn't bother me. Man has qualities within that either are humble/prideful, obey/disobey, hardhearted/receptive, believing/unbelieving, rebellious/submissive, love/hate..etc There is no need to wonder about the most basic of human qualities, they are part of man's responses to God's intervention, no mysteries.

Darren