Calvinists please help me as I am trying to understand.

Ah, but we must keep things in context. Chapter 8 is not about instances but living a lifestyle and Paul is contrasting to types of lives - saved and unsaved.
We see this is speaking about living a lifestyle more so in verse 8 when it states that those who walk (live) for/after the flesh can not please God.

Now, there is no question that man if left to himself will not ever seek after God for man would never know anything about God much less that he needs saviour.

The question comes what happens when God does intervene or more specifically why is God intervening in the lives of those who will reject Him? Why would He reveal Himself, make known to them sin, righteousness and judgment to come and that they need a saviour (John 16:8; Rom 1:18-32)?

I agree and I disagree. I agree with the first part of your question up to the "without Him". If you know anything about Him, sin, righteousness, the judgment to come it is because of Him. So we aren't speaking Pelagianism (coming to God without the need of His grace or assistance) nor Semi-Pel (still coming to God without the need for His grace or assistance BUT if you do then God will reward you with grace to be saved). But we are needing to ask the question "can we turn to him?" .. and more specifically, can we turn to Him because of the truths He has revealed to us as well as reject them knowing full well the truth?

Keep the context. Who was God calling to?

And at the end it states that of those - whoever/anyone who will listen (synonamous here with believe) will dwell in safety/saved.

This is extremely debatable as both sides agree it is dealing with election but both sides do not agree it is dealing specifically with salvation. One side states that if one takes Rom 9 verse by verse, one will see it is speaking of the election to 'a purpose' and not salvation. Though salvation may be included into that 'purpose' the intent of Rom 9 is dealing specifically with election to a purpose.
Anyway.. as I said it is a very debatable passage

Again, here you add something that is never part of the argument. We do not stop anything nor do determine to do so. Scripture says that we are to believe God and nothing more. Will we believe what God has revealed to us is true or will we reject it. Remember that scripture says faith is not a work nor should it ever be set toward such a catagory.

Notice this person has done nothing except to believe that what God said was truth.

Agreed.

We don't, we can either believe all that God said was true or reject it.

We can't, we can either believe all that God said was true or reject it.

To this you can't on your own, which is why God reveals truth to us (thus we DO understand because God did it) that we might believe or reject it.

I agree. You do know that faith in and of itself is meaningless or has no value. The only way faith can have any value is to attach itself to something that is of value. IOW - the only value my faith has is in that which I placed my faith into -Christ Jesus. Faith is the vehicle of salvation but God is the one who saves.

True enough if God does not reveal it to them. But scritpures state imfatically that God does in fact reveal it to them so they do both see and understand, but that does not mean they will believe. Just because man sees and understands does not necessitate he will accept it as truth. It does not change the truth for the truth can not be change but he will do as Romans 1 states and 'exchange' the truth for a lie.

The first time it was pharoah, and after that God hardened him but pharoahs heart was not changed regarding his intial intent as we see when he let them go. He still went after them.

The context is dealing with Israel, though it can be used to 'illistrate' us as well.

According to Deut 30 yes. But let us again state what this 'do' is. - Believe.
Watch:

Notice it states to 'choose' life and if you do 'choose' life then look at what happens AFTERWARDS:

Remember it said to choose life so that you will love the Lord thy God.
Choose life that you may obey His voice.
Choose life that you may cleave or become one with Him because He is life.
Choose life that you may receive the inheritence promised to your fathers (speaking to Israel)

All of this followed after choosing life.

I don't use the term free-will except when my Cal brothers insist on the term to catagorize me. I speak of our will as being limited which is also known as responsibility of the will. We can only do those things that God allows to be set before us. Free-will (Pelagainism and Semi-Pel) speaks of absolute freedom and bound to or under nothing. This is just to help you understand my position - nothing more.

 

I'm sorry if the above actually happened. Not only was the person wrong in doing but you deserve an appolgy. I do appreciate your open and honest postings. Continue in your search with a glad heart and upright spirit. What I have presented in a nutshell fashion in my previous postings is only what I have found, and only gave them to you per your request. But I hold you in as high esteem as I do those others who agree with me. Not because of who you are but because who is in You :thumbs: Study dear brother and be found faithful to that which God has revealed to you.

 

I believe you are missing Pauls point. He is contrasting two types of lives. This is a contrast of two types who are already IN a particular position and the discription is speaking of those who are 'fixated' upon either the flesh or the Spirit. IOW - they are set or have chosen their way.

Yes, we can read things into this but if we simply keep it in context and take it for what it says - that being Paul is contrasting only two groups of people here and how it relates to their relation to and with God.

This however makes no mention of the Lord dealing with anyone or anything else in between but only gives us the contrast between these two groups of people.

No, belief is not a work as says the scripture and can not be equated as such. (Rom 4:4-6). We do not through faith earn or work for righteousness.
Secondly I believe that scripture imfatically states that we do not receive anything until after we believe as I showed briefly in my previous post regarding Duet 30 but there are 'many' more which say the same like these:

No non-cals disagrees with this. However what Spurgeon didn't acknowledge in the above is that God did not save and indeed would not save until 'they' believed. The choice stood before them and nothing would be done until they believed.

There is no question that we all ascribe our 'change' wholely to God for it is He who saught us, saved us, and changed us. AND YET He would not unless we believed. Spurgeon also said this from his sermon "A Defence of Calvinism":

 

All Scripture From TNIV

The Lord intervenes in the lives of many whom He doed not want to be saved.There is intervention -- but not saving intervention.The Lord has his purposes for blinding some.But glory still goes to God regardless.

"For we are to God the pleasing aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing.to the one we are an aroma that brings death;to the other,an aroma that brings life.And who is equal to such a task?"(2 Cor.2:15,16)

So the Gospel is obnoxious to some --bringing death --and to others that smell is very pleasant --which brings eternal life.So the Gospel is never preached in vain -- it will be a pleasing aroma to Christ regardless.

It is not debatable unless one wants to argue with God :"But who are you,a mere human being,to talk back to God?"(Ro.9:20)

There you go again.In the early chapters of Romans those who never hear of Christ and His Gospel are condemned for what was revealed to them.But what has been revealed can't impart salvation to their souls.

No,you're wrong.The first mention in Scripture of Pharoah's heart is in Exodus 4:21 ..."But I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go."


Allan,your posts are much too long.You need to learn to be brief.Try to tackle just a couple items clearly --not a bunch of things in a scattershot kind of way.

 

And here we see you disagree with scripture/God. (1 Tim 2:4) As well as much if not most of Reformed thought. You are one of the few who beleive that God has absolutely no love for or toward those not elect. And you are in the minority still that the gospel is not a true and sincere invitation to the all men to be saved. So on this issue you disagree with both me and those of your own theological view (and of course the host of others of my view).

There is no other kind of intervention. And yes, the Lord does have a purpose in blinding some but this issue has been discussed many times over. Lastly - who said God doesn't get the glory?

Again who has said the gospel is preached in vain?

No, I do not argue with God but my friend you nor any man is God. I debate with your rendering of Rom 9 being about individual salvation when in context it is about 'purpose'.

Again, who said it does? Yet if they believe those things revealed will not God send someone to proclaim just what that truth is about? Like the Etheopian and evangelist? Or any number of other passages in the NT where the Gospel was given though it was not where the men intended to preach it.

Again, who said anything about the 'first' mention of the phrase "Pharoahs heart". I said the first time his heart was hardened scripture says he did it. and then afterwards we see scripture say God did it.

They haven't made brievity a criteria yet. The rest is your issue not mine.

 

Does God want to save those He has decreed shall be condemned?!

Even Phil Johnson acknowledges that those Calvinists who hold that God does not love the non-elect are not hyper-Calvinists.(By the way,the Monergism.org chart is still a better one --which does in-fact disagree fundamentally with Johnson's.)

"The gospel is not a true and sincere invitation to the all men to be saved."?That is really awkwardly worded.The tender is presented for the hearing of all within earshot.But obviously God does not decree that the ones He has already ordained for condemnation shall be saved.The Lord is not at cross-purposes with Himself.

You are confusing.First you say my view is in the minority among Calvinists.Then you say that I disagree with those of my own theological view.If they were of my "own theological view" then there would be a uniformity of views.

Who says that any man is God?! You come up with some rather unique notions.

You can disagree that Romans 9 is discussing individual salvation until the cows come home.But the force of the chapter weighs against your manmade view.See verses 13,16,22 and 23 in particular to see that it indeed is speaking of individuals and their salvation and damnation.

No.Exodus 4:21 is the very first mention of Pharaoh's heart.It says that the Lord hardened it.You are coming up with your own extra-biblical ideas here.

Being brief is a good attribute.It factors in well with a good discussion on the BB.Learn to focus on key points;otherwise some bunny trails may develop.

 

""If," some will say, "God has chosen a certain number to be saved then it cannot be true that Christ is offered to all, and that God wishes all men to be saved." There are many answers to that objection. At present I shall only give this one: that both are true. It is true that God has chosen a certain number to eternal life, for you will find it so recorded in almost every page of the Bible. It is also true that Christ died that any sinner might look to him, and that God wishes every sinner to come to Jesus and live. This also you will find written in every page of the Bible. Believe both, even if you cannot reconcile them. Wait for a day of fuller light. The day is coming when you will see that both are quite true. Believe, meanwhile, the words of him that cannot lie." ---Robert Murray M'Cheyne, Dec. 24, 1837

 

Indeed

Ecclesiastes 3:11... no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.

​

 

Huh? Are these questions, or are you answering somone elses questions. I don't get it...

 

It seems what John is saying is that in order to believe you must be first born of God.


1Jo 5:1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.

I don't believe he is saying: when you believe you are born of God, but instead: when you are born of God you believe. Belief is a gift given when one is born of God.

It wasn't until God opened Lydia's heart that she was able to believe:

Act 16:14 And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.

So does God open the heart of all men?

 

If you look at what occurred between Jesus/Israel, and attempt to "predestinate" what occurred, on either side, accept/reject Jesus,

you put Jesus in a bad situation.

Let's say for instance that it was "predestine" for Israel to reject Jesus,

Jesus made an "invalid" offer of "I would, you wouldn't" that was against the predestined will of God.

Now let's say it was predestine for Israel to accept Jesus,

Obviously, Jesus didn't and failed.

Either way you attempt to predestine what occurred, you run into a problem.

On the other hand, if what occurred was a choice made by Israel, then neither acceptance/rejection of Jesus was "predestine".

Did God "Foreknow" what would occur, Certainly, and incorporated that foreknowledge into his plan to accomplish his purposes.

By "foreknowledge", God knows the choice each will make, who will chose to be saved, and he can call to preach, and who will not chose to be saved, and he can use for the devils role,

God's will is that none perish, but then God's will is not the one making the choice, but "man's will", just as Israel had a choice.

 

Act 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: