God's election

I havent posted for awhile and Im not as deep into picking apart language structures, but I think Paul is building a case here in Romans against "ALL" Mankind.

Romans 1: simply all have the sense of God built in and because of their depravity constantly deny and reject Him. This includes myself and even as a church goer like Paul I hated God even though I thought I loved Him... To this day I know how much my inward self is hostile to God as it always was since my birth. So all mankind sees God in creation and does not submit to Him and ultimately is broken off from fellowship eternally.

Romans 2: God shows no partiality whether Jew, Greek, Gentile, American, Asian, etc...

Romans 3: All the world is guilty, All have rejected God and turned from God, none are righteous, no one does good not one, All have sinned and fallen short, thus all "In flesh" have rejected and hated God. This includes myself before the Spirit came and saved me from my deadness and hatred of God.

This clearly is the case being stated here by Paul and it glorifies the grace of God and wickedness of man. While we were yet sinners Christ died for us. While we hated and spit in His face he loved us... thats awesome grace and love that I need for sure

Also when you said they "knew" I personally dont think Paul means like saving faith knew or knew about the Gospel, rather by nature as I said above man's heart is accountible along with his inward conscience. Of course unless the Gospel comes along and God opens the heart of these "knowers" "everyone" then they will remain under judgment that is perfectly going to be awarded to the T

 

And you truly believe your opinion and Biblical truth are the same which is baloney. I would strongly suggest if you are going to argue for the doctrines of sovereignty and grace, that you be more like Old Regular and less like Rippon.

 

I did not leave out verse 13 for any reason other than brevity, it does not affect my argument at all.

And I am not in disagreement with you that God can choose whom he will have mercy on, and on whom he will show wrath. But I believe God chose before time to show mercy on those who answer the call of faith, and show wrath on all others.

In verses 15 through 18 it contrasts Moses with Pharaoh. Now Moses was brought up in Pharaoh's house. He could have had all the power and wealth of a king. But he gave that all up to be accounted a son of Abraham.

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 is notably included in Hebrews chapter 11.

Pharaoh on the other hand is the great example of stubborn contempt for God's word. God gave him many opportunities to repent, but he would not. Yes, the scriptures say God hardened Pharaoh's heart, but the scriptures also say Pharaoh hardened his own heart. Pharaoh was incredibly obstinate, even though he saw the amazing power of God with his own eyes, he simply became angrier and angrier and more and more stubborn. He could have humbled himself if he so chose, but he refused.

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 here, Moses laid the blame entirely on Pharoah. Pharaoh refused to humble himself. Did you know this is the first time the word "humble" is found in the scriptures?

So, Romans 9 is comparing Moses a man of great faith verses Pharaoh a man of incredible rebellion.

God does not just choose willy-nilly whom he will show mercy on, and on whom he will show wrath. God has just reasons for what he does.

And look at Romans 8:29 which you quoted.

Rom 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

This is what I have been saying all along. God through his foreknowledge knows who will believe his words and trust on him through faith. And it is these persons that God has elected.

And this is what Romans 9 is saying about Jacob and Esau. God saw their life before they were born. He saw that Jacob would have faith and desire God's promises to his fathers, while Esau would have no regard for these promises and sell them for a bowl of soup. So God loved Jacob and hated Esau.

 

Jacob was not righteous?

Heb 11:21 By faith Jacob, when he was a dying, blessed both the sons of Joseph; and worshipped, leaning upon the top of his staff.

Jacob is mentioned in Hebrews chapter 11 which is known as the "Hall of Faith". He was a great man of faith. He was righteous because God imputed righteousness to him through faith, the way all righteous men obtain righteousness.

Rom 4:22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

You really do not know the scriptures at all.

 

And believeing is not a work, as shown in scripture.

Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

 

Continuing your winsome ways I see. Why do you invoke my name out of the blue SN?

Perhaps it's because... "on a personal note, I have been extremely irritable of late, between getting ready to retire, and starting another job. Some of my posts have not been my best, and should apologize."

Or maybe it's as you have admitted: "[You] can be a loose cannon at times."

Whatever the cause of your outbursts -- take a chill pill and mind your own business as they say.

 

Faith is not a work, only because it is a gift of God: Scripture says God "assigns" a specific amount.

If, however, faith is something we do, then it is by definition a work.

 

Yes Winman, God foreknows. He foreknows what's going to come up in His garden because He planted it.

 

That is a man-made doctrine. The bible does not say it is a work for a man to believe.

Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Who is the "him" in this verse? It is the person who believes. And this verse shows that believeing is not a work. And notice it says "his faith" is counted for righteousness.

You know, if our faith comes from God, then the scriptures sure are misleading, because even Jesus himself attributed faith as belonging to the person exercising it.

Matt 9:29 Then touched he their eyes, saying, According to your faith be it unto you.

Luke 8:25 And he said unto them, Where is your faith? And they being afraid wondered, saying one to another, What manner of man is this! for he commandeth even the winds and water, and they obey him.

1 Cor 15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.

Boy, 1 Corinthians 15:17 is especially confusing. If "your faith" really means God's faith, does "your sins" actually mean God's sins??

Mark 2:5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.

Luke 5:20 And when he saw their faith, he said unto him, Man, thy sins are forgiven thee.

Matt 9:22 But Jesus turned him about, and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour.

Matt 8:10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.

This is another confusing verse. Why would Jesus marvel at the centurion's great faith if God gave it to him?

So boy, if you are correct, then the scriptures sure do use a lot of misleading words. The scriptures say God will not share his glory with anyone. So why would he tell someone their faith was their's when it was really his? And why would he ever marvel when someone had great faith seeing he was the one who gave it to that person?

Mark 9:23 Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth.

What kind of statement is this Jesus made to the father of the demon possessed boy? Jesus is God, he would already know if the man could believe or not. If he were not regenerated, he could not possibly believe, and if he were, he could not possibly not believe. So why would Jesus say this?

John 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

Again, this makes no sense to me. Why would Jesus ask Martha if she believed? He would already know if her faith came from God.

John 11:40 Jesus saith unto her, Said I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest see the glory of God?

What did Jesus mean by "if"? If she were not regenerated she could not possibly believe, and if she were she could not possibly not believe. So why would Jesus say "if" to her? It is not in her control, it is in God's control if you are correct.

Man, these verses sure are confusing if Calvinism is true.

 

Nowhere is faith said not to be a work because it is a gift. The gift spoken of in the verse you cite is referring to salvation.

 

Again, Scripture states explicitly that God assigns us our faith.

Rom 12:3 For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned.

Perhaps you believe that it is O.K. to deny sections of scripture, to suit your theology. I don't. The scriptures state explicitly that God gives us our faith: deny that if you wish, but your denial goes against scripture.

Also: you cannot redefine the Biblical definition of something, and then try to apply biblical parameters to your new definition. For example, if I say "I think when the Bible says faith, it means chocolate pudding", I cannot then take this untruth and apply it to Ephesians, saying "See, the Bible says I am saved by Chocolate pudding."

Such is the logical fallacy you present.

 

This is not what Romans 8:29 is saying at all.

The Greek verb is προγινώσκω. It means "to choose beforehand." It does not mean to see beforehand, as you've suggested. This word is rare, true, but Paul uses the exact same word in Romans 11:2: "God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew."

This word clearly is an opposite of rejected. Paul is saying that God has not rejected those whom He has chosen.
The background to this is the Old Testament where the verb ִיָדַע meaning "to know" is used as "choose." Genesis 18:19 is a perfect example of this--For I have ​chosen​ him, that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing righteousness and justice, so that the Lord may bring to Abraham what he has promised him.

The Hebrew "to know" is also a euphemism for sexual relations and is clearly what is not intended in the Genesis passage.

So Paul, the "pharisee of pharisees" knows exactly what he wants to convey--God's sovereign choice, not His seeing beforehand.

Unfortunately, your theology is based on a faulty understanding of a difficult word (and that sort of thing happens). It is, perhaps, that which has set your theological understanding on a less-than-accurate trajectory.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

Not at all. Salvation is not even mentioned in the verse I was referring to. It is saying that we should think with correct judgment according to the faith that God has assigned to us.

Rom 12:3 For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned.

 

You stated faith is a gift before that. The only place you could have gotten that from was Eph. 2:8-9. You used that passage as a proof text for Rom 12.

 

You are allowing your theology to interpret your Greek. The phrase literally means to know beforehand, period.

 

Nope. The Greek means what it means--chose. This is confirmed by Paul's own usage in Romans 11. There are many scholars who also agree with this, most notably Thomas R. Schreiner, who is widely regarded as one of the foremost New Testament and Greek scholars in the world. Why don't you tell him he's wrong.

With all due respect, this is the difference between really knowing Greek and having a Strongs.

Many Blessings,

The Archangel

 

When you "assign" something to someone, this means it is something you give to them. That is a gift.

If I assign my friend to a position at my church, I am GIVING them the position.

If I assign a rifle to a soldier in the war, I am GIVING them a rifle (though perhaps only temporarily).

Rom 12:3 For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned.

merizō
mer-id'-zo
From G3313; to part, that is, (literally) to apportion, bestow, share, or (figuratively) to disunite, differ: - deal, be difference between, distribute, divide, give part.

This verse says very clearly that faith is a gift, given in specific measure. To say otherwise, is to completely avoid the meaning of the verse, for the sake of your theology.

This verse is saying faith is given to us by God. period.

 

Strong's is what I have and it states "to know beforehand". I am not sure it makes any difference. God obviously knew whom He was electing unto salvation but that WAS NOT on the basis of foreseen faith.

 

OldRegular,

The understanding is based in the Old Testament usage of yada, the Hebrew for "to know." This is of particular importance when trying to understand what Paul is saying.

They typical Greek usage of γινώσκω is not related to sensory knowledge. Further, the Hebrew yada when used in conjunction with God, always seems to denote the knowledge, not perception, of God. Therefore the Old Testament usage is related to God's sovereignty and His "authoring the end from the beginning" and it is not in the normal usage to suggest a "perception" but a choosing.

Paul did not write in a vacuum. The Old Testament theological usage of word is certainly a worthy context to Paul's theological masterpiece. Even more, the exact same word in the exact same form is used in Romans 11:2 which is clearly used as an antonym of "reject."

So, Paul's own usage is more helpful in this case and his theological background is essential to understanding what he meant.

Blessings,

The Archangel