A Calvinistic contradiction

You need a biblical basis for this type of reasoning. You cast God in a horrible light by anyone's perspective because he is condemning men for not doing something he didn't create the capasity for them to do. You need to at least back that up with scripture. BTW, please use scripture that is actually addressing this issue. The verses you use below are written about totally different issues.

Amen, But what does this have to do with what you have stated. It shows that we are all sinners, it says nothing about our ability or lack there of to respond in faith to the gospel's call.

And? In the context it is clear that Paul uses this passage in Romans 9 as proof God can save dirty rotten Gentiles if he wants and he can harden upstanding clerical Jews if he wants. It says nothing about God granting certain people with the capasity for faith to the neglect of all others.

You are mistaken. Let me give you just a few examples of God's rebuking men for their unbelief and rejection of God's calling:

Mt 11:21
"What horrors await you, Korazin and Bethsaida! For if the miracles I did in you had been done in wicked Tyre and Sidon, their people would have sat in deep repentance long ago, clothed in sackcloth and throwing ashes on their heads to show their remorse.

Notice they are being rebuked for their lack of response.

Matt. 23:37
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones God's messengers! How often I have wanted to gather your children together as a hen protects her chicks beneath her wings, but you wouldn't let me.

Notice they are being rebuked for not responding and not allowing the people they lead to respond to God's call to "gather them beneath his wings."

Romans 10:21 But regarding Israel, God said, "All day long I opened my arms to them, but they kept disobeying me and arguing with me."

Once again you see God calling and patiently holding out his hands to people and they reject him and recieve rebuke. It is not just the fact that they are sinful that they are rebuked and condemned, they are rebuked for their unbelief and lack of response. They are called to repentance for their sins and rebuked for not responding and its that rebuke that causes your contradiction. Why would God rebuke and even condemn a man for not doing something that he wasn't created with the ability to do?

 

Why would God want people to do something he didn't create them to do? The fact the he wants them to respond and calls them to a response and even rebukes them for not responding gives us a strong reason to believe that they have that ability.

You might have a desire for your child to do something beyond his abilities, but you are not going to beg him to do something you know he can't do and then punish him for not doing it. You wouldn't even do that to a stranger. Why would God be less merciful or kind than you?

Matthew 11:21 "Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.

Just because something may be "necessary" to break a persons will doesn't mean God is obligated to do it. I have never claimed that God could'nt change anyone's will he wanted to change. He is God. He could have convinced Hitler if He wanted to by some supernatural appearance or something like that, but that is not his desire. His desire is for us to have faith. To please God one must believe he exists Hebrews teaches us. The story of Thomas shows us that God can and sometimes does interviene to show himself to a doubter, but he also teaches us that he perfers and even blesses those who do not see and still believe. I've never claimed God is obligated to do anything and everything to convince the human will. I don't agree with Arminians who say that God has done everything He could do to save all the lost. That is silly. God has done everything he wanted to do to allow people to respond in faith and love to his provisions of mercy. He wants people to choose who they will follow. If He didn't He would have just made the rocks cry out in the first place.

I see no difficulty with my beliefs so I don't need to resort to this option, I only see the difficulty this verse creates for your beliefs because it directly highlights man's willful response to external stimuli which flies in the face of a dogma that excludes human will in salvation.

What other variable beside their wills is in play here? If it wasn't the signs and wonders that could have convinced Tyre and Sidon to repentance then why did Jesus even bring the signs and wonders up? As Eric pointed out, you make Jesus' words meaningless by suggesting that this passage isn't about man's response to God's revelation.

You are correct that if God withholds the ability to see, hear and understand that it can't be done. But there is no indication that he was withholding that ability for those in Chorazin and Bethsaida, if he was Jesus' point would have been meaningless. Plus, you have to understand that the Exodus is foreshadowing of the events we see recorded in the NT story of redemption. Just as the Israelites were saved in the passover from the wrath of God for Pharoah and the Egyptians, all believers are saved from death and the wrath of God. And just as we see God purposefully withholding abilities from the Israelites while in the dessert, we see him doing the same thing in the NT times as Paul explains in Acts 28:21-28 and Romans 9-11 etc. And the scripture is clear that had not NOT hardened or withheld the ability to see, hear, and understand that they may have repented and believed. Now, if you can show me where it teaches all men are born unable to see, hear and understand and remain in that state until God gives them that ability then we can pursue the next question which is: Is the Holy Spirit wrought gospel message enough to enable a man who is fallen to believe?

This has to be one of the worse cases of proof texting I've seen to date. You conclude from this passage that man doesn't have a choice to love God? Really? Did you read the whole chapter?

Here are just a few verses that you may have missed:

11 "For this commandment which I command you today is not too mysterious for you, nor is it far off... in that I command you today to love the Lord your God

I guess God is lying to some of the people here because according to your doctrine it is too mysterious and far off for the non-elect ones in the group, right?

17 "But if your heart turns away and you will not obey, but are drawn away and worship other gods and serve them, 18 I declare to you today that you shall surely perish...19 I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore CHOOSE life, that both you and your descendants may live

Hmmm, those "elect" people in verse 6 who were "made to love God" may turn away and worship other god's only to perish in the end. How does that fit? And it certainly seems as if man must make some kind of choice from this passage?

Earlier in Deut 13 it says:
1 "If there arises among you a prophet or a dreamer of dreams, and he gives you a sign or a wonder, 2 and the sign or the wonder comes to pass, of which he spoke to you, saying, 'Let us go after other gods'--which you have not known--'and let us serve them,' 3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, for the Lord your God is testing you to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. Please explain to me why God would need to test their love from them if it is He who made them to love Him? Does He think that His effectual call may not take with some of them? Please explain.

[ June 02, 2004, 11:32 PM: Message edited by: Skandelon ]

 

You mean, for example, follow the law? </font>[/QUOTE] But God did create man to glorify him through obedience to the Law and they failed, so God created a solution to that problem by sending his Son to fulfill the Law in our stead which we could have applied to us through faith. Following the Law was not possible but faith is.

The law was given to us as a tutor to show us our need for Him. You see there is a reason for God giving us the Law. Now what is the reason for God calling people who can't repent to repentance?


This is a spectacular verse to illustrate the point:

Now isn't the wording interesting? "I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you." Sounds like God knows in advance what the outcome will be. And He does...[/quote][/qb] No one here is debating whether God knows the outcome of man's choices. Knowing the response is much different than causing it irresistably.

You've got part of it right. God is showing through the law that man is in need of Grace and in need ultimately of Christ's atonement. Repentance and faith is their only hope.

 

In short, God provided the law to help men know they need Grace which comes through faith.

Proof that men can't obey the law is not proof men can't have faith. The law was given to show men they can't measure up. Are you saying now the call to faith was given to show men they can't have faith either?