Calvinism's circular contradictions

You are taking this verse entirely out of context and making it sound as if Paul is issuing an urgent command to preach. That's not at all what this passage is about. Let's look at it in the ENTIRE context.

14 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach unless they are sent?

Notice how God is in control of the entire process -- it is God who sends the preacher.

It is also God who determines who has ears to hear...

16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "LORD, who has believed our report?" 17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Now here's the interesting part. As I've pointed out before, the "word" in "word of God" is not "logos" but "rhema", which means "utterance". Granted, this is only my interpretation, but I interpret that to mean that when God says so, a man will have ears to hear.

If my interpretation is correct or even close to the mark, then the next part makes perfect sense...

18 But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed:

"Their sound has gone out to all the earth,
And their words to the ends of the world."

Paul just got done saying that faith comes by hearing, and hearing [having EARS to REALLY hear] comes by the utterance of God. Now if the latter does not mean "having EARS to REALLY hear", then it is contradictory to say that faith comes by hearing, Israel DID hear (vs. 18) yet they did not have faith.

While I'm in the process of dispelling myths, let me tackle another one with vs. 20.

20 But Isaiah is very bold and says:

"I was found by those who did not seek Me;
I was made manifest to those who did not ask for Me."

That pretty much destroys the claim that the difference between those who are saved and those who are not is that God gives faith to those who (of their own free will) seek Him.

To what passage(s) are you referring?

 

Again, the original analogy was not meant to prove election, it was meant to invalidate the absurd conclusion that receiving a gift REQUIRES action on the part of the receiver. It does not. As I pointed out, I can deposit $100 into your bank account, and you will have received that gift without your knowledge, let alone your will or action. Whether or not you spend that $100 is no longer an issue of whether or not you received the gift -- it is an issue of whether or not you used the gift, or how you used it. But you already received it.

By the way, I assume JC Penneys sent out the discount to every human being on earth, right? Otherwise, JC Penny's is unfair and should be boycotted. (One absurd analogy deserves another.)

By the way, you still haven't told me what passages you're talking about regarding the blood of men.

 

The context you gave is misleading. When Paul says "For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God", the "you" to whom Paul is referring are the elders of the church.

17 From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called for the elders of the church. 18 And when they had come to him, he said to them: "You know, from the first day that I came to Asia, in what manner I always lived among you, 19 serving the Lord with all humility, with many tears and trials which happened to me by the plotting of the Jews; 20 how I kept back nothing that was helpful, but proclaimed it to you, and taught you publicly and from house to house, 21 testifying to Jews, and also to Greeks, repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ. 22 And see, now I go bound in the spirit to Jerusalem, not knowing the things that will happen to me there, 23 except that the Holy Spirit testifies in every city, saying that chains and tribulations await me. 24 But none of these things move me; nor do I count my life dear to myself, so that I may finish my race with joy, and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God.
25 "And indeed, now I know that you all [all you elders], among whom [along with whom] I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, will see my face no more. 26 Therefore I testify to you [elders] this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. 27 For I have not shunned to declare to you [elders] the whole counsel of God. 28 Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.

All he's saying is that he's done his best to do his duty to train the elders to carry on the preaching he started. (Later he warns that false teachers will corrupt the church anyway, which I find interesting, since it implies this has been divinely revealed to him.

Out of curiosity, when Paul says, "I'm innocent of the blood of all men", does he mean "all men" as in "every man who has ever lived, lives, or will live"? Does "all" mean "all" here, or does it mean "all of those men to whom I have preached the Gospel, and/or through whom you elders have also preached the Gospel you received from me?" Or does he mean "all men" as in "both Jews and Greeks"? I'm really curious because Arminians seem to believe that "all" means "all men who ever lived, live and will live" and cannot possibly mean some subset of men.

 

On the off chance that you misunderstood, I told you in another thread that I will not be responding to your posts anymore. That means all threads, not just that one.