Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Timtoolman, Apr 7, 2006.
Here is a good article on Romans 9. What think ye calvinist?
First, even if Paul were talking about some sort of national election in Romans 9, the principles still apply, and verse 19 still answers the typical Arminian "fairness" objection.
Second, I found this assertion fascinating:
In reply, I would say two things.
1. Either the passage is about individual election to salvation, or it is not. One should decide which and then stick with it.
2. The author asserts that, according to Paul, faith is a condition of election rather than a result of election. This assertion is simply "begging the question", since the question is whether election is conditional or not, and the author makes no attempt (that I could find) to prove that the cart comes before the horse, so to speak.
Thanks Whatever, I do appreciate and read with thought your replies.
I am 100% agree with this article compeletly.
Because, I notice dispensationalism emphasises that there are distinction between Israel and Church in God's program. They emphasis that 'Israel' is speak of physical nation of the Jews. But, notice, Genesis 12 talks about Abraham is the father of many nations by through what? FAITH.
Throughout in the Bible always talk about faith. Also, the most important main subject of the Bible is talk about salvation, not just only talk about second coming. Also, it emphasis about OUR future final destiny where we will go after we die.
Bible does not always emphasis on Jews and physical nation, and also even about millennial. Bible never saying that Jews have better abd more special blessing than Gentiles. In God's sight, both are no difference, all have sinned.
Dispensationalism often emphasis on Romans 11:25 predicts that Israel shall be saved, as they intpreting it is speak of future restoration physical nation at the second coming.
Understand, the context of Romans chapter 11 focus on individual either Jew or Gentile. At the first, Jews were in the Olive tree during Old Testament time. Gentiles were strangers and separated from the commonwealth of Israel. But now, Gentiles are reconciled with Jews become one by through Calvary. So, God grafted Gentiles unto the Olive tree join with believing Jews. God removed individual Jews from the tree, because of their unbelief. Also, God can regraft any person either Jew or Gentile unto the tree again, unless if they repent again. That is individual's decision. God does not control us with decision like as robot. God allows us to make decision to remain faith or reject Him.
Romans 11:25-27 explain, that when the deliver(Christ) comes out of Zion, to forgive all people's sins. It speaks of Jesus Christ who came out of heaven where New Jerusalem is, it is Sion or Zion. He came down to earth, to died on the cross for our sins. That why, Christ made both reconciled together become one -"So ALL Israel shall be saved", that was result from calvary 2000 years ago. But, not only Calvary. Also, Romans 11:26a shall be fulfilled that all both Jews and Gentiles who have continued believing in Christ will be completed at the second coming to fulfilled Matt. 16:18("I will built my church").
The context of Romans chapter 11 say nothing about physical nation("Israel"), it talks about INDIVIDUAL of their salvation.
Obivously, throughout in the book of Romans talk lot about unconditional salvation base upon ourdecision. But, not just for Romans only, also, whole 66 books of the Bible prove of unconditional salvation with warnings. No way that we could ignore or neglect them. We must take heed what God's Word. Obey it with our faith
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
Tim, I glanced at the article you posted and immediately noticed a glaring inconistency and a rush to agenda by the author. He begins his paper by "summarizing" what takes place in the chapters preceeding Romans 9. But he does this from a "preaching to the choir" mentality. He was not critically looking at the first eight chapters of Romans. Instead of taking the local road, he jumped on the expressway. My point? His article is only going to resonant with those who hold his point of view. It truly is "preaching to the choir."
"IF" there is no difference between "Israel-Gentiles", then why does the scripture say "a people who are not a people shall become my people"???
God was married to Israel, then made a wedding for his Son, which Israel refused to marry, therefore the Gospel was taken to the "people who are not a people" and they became the "Bride of Christ". (Gentile/Church)
Israel as the "Firstborn" (first chosen) lost their rights to being the "firstborn" (resurrected to eternal life) when they rejected Jesus, so the "Second born" (Gentiles) became "First". (Pre trib rapture)
Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead;
1Co 12:27 Now ye are the body of Christ,
IN CHRIST, there is no "Jew/Greek", but outside of Christ, there is a big difference.
At the end of Romans 8:39 Paul pauses to offer comments that were heavy on his heart concerning his kinsmen, the Jews. It is a break with what he has been dictating. I can imagine him saying to his scribe, "Ahhh, just a minute.... ahhhh..... write this down while I'm thinking about it. Let's see...: 'I say in truth, in Christ, I lie not.......'". He ends his pause at Romans 11:36, says to the scribe, "OK, where were we....yeah.... OK.... let's go back and pick it up from there." That becomes Romans 12:1, picking up where he left off at 8:39.
When reading these passages, one should skip entirely Romans 9:1 thru Romans 11:36, then pick up the trail again at Romans 12:1. You can go back later to read Paul's parenthetical comments, known as "The Jewish Interlude." If you'll do that you can end Abbott & Costello's "Who's on first" debate.
Ro 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
De 10:12 And now, Israel, (Church) what doth the LORD thy God require of thee, but to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul,
Ps 33:8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him.
Ro 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: (the Lord)
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Isa 10:1 Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that write grievousness which they have prescribed;
2 To turn aside the needy from judgment, and to take away the right from the poor of my people, that widows may be their prey, and that they may rob the fatherless!
3 And what will ye do in the day of visitation, and in the desolation which shall come from far? to whom will ye flee for help? and where will ye leave your glory?
4 Without me they shall bow down under the prisoners, and they shall fall under the slain. For all this his anger is not turned away,
but his hand is stretched out still.
Ec 12:13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
God isn't "obligated" to save anyone, but he is "obligated" to "keep his word", and that is "mercy" to any/all who "fear him".
I've said it before and I will say it again. Romans 9-11 is not a paranthetical section that has nothing to do with the rest of the discussion. At the end of Romans 8, Paul had just told this group of believers that because God elects and predestines, then nothing can separate them from the love of God.
Then Paul, in Romans 9 says, "Now wait a minute, what about Israel? Was not Israel elected by God?" The natural question would be, "If God was not faithful to His promise to Israel, how can we be sure that He is going to be faithful to us?" And, wouldn't you know it, that is exactly the statement Paul deals with in verse 6.
Rather than this being a paranthetical section, it is a continuation in the flow of thought. That is why Paul deals with election in Romans 9 - because He brought it up in Romans 8:29, 33.
Ro 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
But why aren't they all Israel, Jesus invited Israel to the "lamb's marrriage supper", but they refuse to come,
Mt 22:3 And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.
Why is Jesus inviting Israel to the wedding if it's against the "predestined" will of God???
"I would, YOU wouldn't" clearly is not the "Sovereign will of God" being exercised.
2Pe 3:9 not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
This is rightly dividing the Word.
Calvibaptist and Webdog,
I must agree with Calvibaptist that Rom.9-11
is not a "parenthetical" passage; but my
"reason" is different than the fact that Paul's
point deals with the question of Election as
the reason for its continuous development from
Rom.8 to 11.
That "reason" is God's conclusion, once He has demonstrated that Gentiles (and not just Jews) are a disobedient people, "HE WILL SHOW MERCY
to all mankind". Rom.11:30-33.
Paul is reviving the truth of Joel 2:11-14 that God will "relent" and showing the time for fulfilling the Covenant of Isaiah 59:21 and Jer.33 and Ezek.37 and Heb.8 that involves not only the Jews but the knowledge of the Lord given to ALL MANKIND during the Millennium.
Mel Miller www.lastday.net