1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Adam's Fall = Total Depravity? ; Hardened = Non-Elect?

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Skandelon, Feb 12, 2010.

Top Posters
Page 5 of 6
  1. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    Judicially hardened by God, yes. (There is a type of "self hardening" by which we continually rebel in sin and can become calloused to the things of God, but I don't think that is what you are asking about.)


    The scripture is not clear as to an exact time. As explained I believe he is blinding them while Christ is on earth (speaking in parables, keeping things secret etc) because if many believed at that time they wouldn't have crucified him.

    He does say that once he is raised up he will draw all men to himself and that is in the same chapter where he talks about why they can't believe (Jn 12). I believe the gospel is the means he is drawing all men to himself, but according to Paul God desires to bring in the 'fulness of the Gentiles' prior to lifting this hardening of the Jews. What does the 'fulness of the Gentiles' mean exactly? I'm not sure. I think it means that God wants to establish the Gentiles into the church so they are accepted before the Jews try to ban them from not being "jewish enough." But that point is not real clear. The fact that 2000+ came to faith in Acts 2 is a pretty good indicator that something changed. I believe the ripping of the "veil" in the temple was a sign of this blinding at least starting to be lifted. After all, if envy can provoke a Jew to faith, then maybe God's judicial blinding is ending, right?
     
    #81 Skandelon, Feb 15, 2010
  2. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'm sorry, I thought you were a typical Calvinist. What about this quote (which is from Calvinistic sources) do you disagree with: "Total Depravity is the Calvinist doctrine that teaches everyone is born in a state of corruption (as a result of original sin) to such a degree that apart from a prior work of regeneration no man can willingly turn from his sin and have faith in the gospel message of reconciliation. "

    Do you believe a man can willingly turn from his sin and have faith in the gospel apart from the prior work of regeneration? I assumed you were a Calvinist is that regard. (I'll get back to you later...got to run now)
     
    #82 Skandelon, Feb 15, 2010
  3. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    You got it.


    As I told you before, I disagree with you on the parables. But I don't want to get off on that now. Maybe later. Remind me if I forget.

    Ok..your not sure the exact time, but you are sure of what?

    To keep it simple could we say maybe this..?

    1) In the OT God harden non-jews, but does not harden non-jews in the NT

    2) In the OT God did not harden Jews, but he does in the NT.

    Please lets not bring in another point. Save the drawing till later.
     
    #83 Jarthur001, Feb 15, 2010
  4. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am a 5 pointer. But you want to limit my views to your words, because you have a argument for the way you word it.

    I don't disagree with the statement, but I added more to it, to defend it. And I have stated it over and over, but you will never read it.

    now.....thank you for taking the time to understand.

    take your time...I have things to do.
     
    #84 Jarthur001, Feb 15, 2010
  5. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    1. I'm sure the Jews are being judicially hardened by God.
    2. I'm sure that otherwise the Jews might hear, see, understand and repent as Paul explains.
    3. I'm sure God has reserved some of the Jews from this hardening process so as to use them for the noble purpose of taking the message of reconciliation to the world.
    4. I'm sure the Gentiles listened to this message from the Jewish apostles because the message is not being blinded from their eyes, thus many repented and believed.
    5. I'm sure God is patient with all people, both Jews and Gentiles, not wanting any of them to perish but all of them to come to repentance.
    6. I'm sure that when God sent the message of reconciliation to "every creature" that it was a genuine appeal for all to be saved because all might see, hear, understand and believe.
    7. I'm sure that those who are condemned in the end are not condemned for their breaking of God's law, but for their unbelief in these words of reconciliation through Christ.

    If you mean by "harden" that God didn't reveal to them his "special revelation" by which they might enter covenant with him, then yes to both points 1 and 2 (with a caveat regarding the time period of what you might call OT or NT). After all, Paul does teach:

    Rom. 11:30 Just as you [Gentiles] who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their [Jews] disobedience, 31 so they [Jews] too have now become disobedient in order that they [Jews] too may now receive mercy as a result of God's mercy to you [Gentiles]. 32 For God has bound all men [both Jew and Gentiles] over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all [both Jew and Gentiles].

    For clarity, I just want to add the phrase, "God hardening" is never spoken of in regard to the Gentiles as far as I'm aware. Their hardening is simply as a result of what we see explained in Romans 1, where they clearly see and understand the divine attribute and eternal qualities of God, but refuse to acknowledge him as God and as a result their hearts "become defiled" and they are "given over to their lusts." This is the "self hardening" I was speaking about. Only if God were to intervene for some reason and seal them in that rebellious state by "sending them a spirit of stupor" (judicially hardening them) would they be unable to see, hear and understand the gospel truth and repent. It appears to me that God only does this active blinding on special occasions when he has a bigger redemptive purpose to accomplish through the rebellion of men. For example, if the Jews weren't blinded from the obvious truth of Jesus being the Messiah they wouldn't have crucified him, so it makes sense for God to intervene and blind them. Understand?

    Oh, you had asked about the time frame of the Jews hardening and I found this verse that somewhat address this:

    14 But their {Jews} minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. 15 Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. 16 But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.
     
    #85 Skandelon, Feb 15, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 15, 2010
  6. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    No, I have an argument for the view itself, not its wording. I don't care how you word it. If you would like to re-word it, feel free, but it doesn't change the Calvinistic position or my argument against it.

    Then what's the problem? How does my argument not address your views?

    I've read it and I responded to what I thought you meant based upon my understanding of Calvinism. If I misinterpreted what you meant, I sincerely apologize, but I honestly don't see how it would make a difference if you agree with my statement.

    I will take another stab at it however. You wrote: "DT does not mean the heart can't become harden. (I assume you mean TD, as in Total Depravity?)

    I never said I thought that TD meant the heart can't become hardened. I argued that someone who is Totally Depraved is already completely unable to willingly respond in faith to the gospel which would contradict the scripture I presented which explained men's abilities if they had not grown hardened (remember Acts 28 etc?).

    I understand that TD does not mean that a man is as sinful as they can be, but that is not what I'm debating. I'm debating the capacity of a person who has become hardened versus one who has not to "hear, see, understand and repent" when they are presented with the revelation of God.

    You go on to say: "DT means they have no MEANS...are not ABLE to come to God. They can go away from God, fall into the deepest parts of sin. They can and do reject God."

    No offense intended, but this just sounds like poorly worded restatement of the definition of TD I provided. In the Calvinistic system the MEANS by which man becomes ABLE to come to God is through the effectual work of regeneration. I understand this and have been making arguments against this from the beginning. I'm not sure why you think I'm misrepresenting your view. :confused:
     
    #86 Skandelon, Feb 15, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 15, 2010
  7. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you for your reply. Sorry but..well now because of what you said I have two new threads. I want to place aside what I was after and follow this new one.

    I'm not talking about "special revelation" or rather the lack there as in the Law and prophets. I saying a willful act by God to hinder in some way people coming to God....I think you called it..."Judicially hardened by God"....but just not limited to the word hardening, but rather any act that would hinder.

    Thanks again for slowing down and reading
     
    #87 Jarthur001, Feb 15, 2010
  8. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'm not sure what you are asking, but let me try to respond the best way I know how. It is possible that God has, as you put it, "hindered" certain people from coming to faith in Him for whatever sovereign purpose he might have throughout history, but as I've shown these judicial acts of hardening are always for a divine redemptive purpose in scripture.

    Thus, I don't believe God essentially hardens every man from birth because of Adam's sin, as TD would ultimately imply. Why?

    1. I never see that taught in scripture.
    2. There is no redemptive purpose in His doing that. (i.e. passover or crucifixion)
    3. And it makes the process of Hardening seem redundant at best. If a man is born totally blind, what is the point in his becoming blinder still? Plus, as stated, the scripture tells us man's capacity if not hardened. They might see, hear, understand and believe.

    I address how and why God might hardened a man in this post on my blog: http://critiquingcalvinism.blogspot.com/2010/02/is-hardening-man-equal-to-tempting-man.html
     
    #88 Skandelon, Feb 15, 2010
  9. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    Skandelon,

    I want to begin my reply. Now please slow down and read. As I type these words I'm thinking of verses that you may post in reply. I hope to anwser all that I can. But please don't go crazy and type 10 pages just yet. Just wait. Ask "one liners" and if I want you to back your statement, I'll ask for that 1o page report. Till then , I'll just believe that you can indeed support what you say.


    Lets address this 1st.

    "Judicially hardened by God" This is a phrase you have used many times. It didn't slip out, nor can we say it is "bad wording", because it was the center point of your argument.

    We really need to know understand a lot about this phrase before we can begin. After I we agree on the meaning, I want to address your problem just in this area alone. After we look at this, I want to take the time and show you how I have been addressing this all along in this thread. OK...that is my plan. Let me see if I can do it.

    The phrase has two words...by God.

    This means that God was caused it in some way. He was the 1st cause or the 2nd cause. For God to be in control we must admit this. This is what we must answer to atheist in theosophy logic they use. I'm sure you understand 1st cause and 2nd cause, so I'll not go into that right now.

    Verses...
    Dan 4:25 And all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing. And He does according to His will in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth, and none can stay His hand or say to Him, What are You doing?

    Psa 115:3 But our God is in heaven; He does whatever He pleases.

    Psa 22:26 For the kingship and the kingdom are the Lord's, and He is the ruler over the nations.

    1 Chronicles 29:11 Yours, O Lord, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the victory and the majesty, for all that is in the heavens and the earth is Yours; Yours is the kingdom, O Lord, and Yours it is to be exalted as Head over all.

    To sum up...By God means God caused it in some way

    Judicially...(copy and paste from merriam-webster.com)
    of or relating to a judgment, the function of judging, the administration of justice, or the judiciary
    We all must say that God is the true Judge, and in the end is the only judgement that matters.

    Eccl 12
    For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it is good or evil.


    But "judgment day" is not the only judgment.

    Psalm 119:120
    My flesh trembleth for fear of Thee; and I am afraid of Thy judgments"

    Psalm 9:16
    The Lord is known by the judgment which He executeth


    He passes Judgment now and can at any time.

    >>>hardened...the main word we will look at.

    Maybe the best verse to understand this is....

    Ezekiel 36:26 …… I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.

    stony heart...a hard heart....eyes that are blind....ears that cannot hear....and more all mean the same thing.

    That God can do this we all agree..

    Ex 14:4
    I will harden (make stubborn, strong) Pharaoh's heart, that he will pursue them, and I will gain honor and glory over Pharaoh and all his host, and the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord. And they did so.
    *********************


    So..Judicially hardened by God


    Means .........God has the power and is indeed the cause in some way in a act of judgment of passing on to man the blinding, or hardening of the heart that hinders them from knowing the truth.


    Do you agree?
     
    #89 Jarthur001, Feb 16, 2010
  10. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yes, I agree, though I would probably word it a bit differently for clarity and to differentiate between "Judicial Hardening" and "Self Hardening."

    I address this difference in this blog entry if you want more clarity on my view: http://critiquingcalvinism.blogspot.com/2010/02/what-teaching-convinced-you-to-reject.html

    (Thanks again for seeking understanding before moving on. I respect that)
     
    #90 Skandelon, Feb 16, 2010
  11. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    ok...

    Now I took the time to be clear about this, and asked..

    to which you replied...

    So if I were to show that God hardens hearts, both of the Jews....and the non-Jew, in both of your time frames...OT...NT...your whole logic would fall down. Because, this is the main point you try to push on Romans 9,10,11. I want to show you where you are wrong on this....that is...if I can.

    Again..I understand you don't have ONE DATE, because of how you view the parables. But from about the time of Christ, give or take 50 years or so we will divide time into the OT...and NT time frames ....this is where you get the two.

    So again, my task is rather easy, if I can pull it off. Show that God hardens both people groups in both time frames.


    Am I right?


    then....we'll see if I said this from the beginning.

    :) are you with me?
     
    #91 Jarthur001, Feb 16, 2010
  12. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    Did you read my post where I said:

    I think that addresses the point you are attempting to argue.

    So, to be clear. I'm not attempting to argue that God hasn't ever hardened non-Jews during one time period or Jews in another. I'm attempting to argue that God judicially hardens individuals or groups of people any time he wants in order to accomplish His greater redemptive purpose. It just so happens that the scripture reveals that he is in the process of judicially hardening the Jews during the time Jesus is on earth (to accomplish the crucifixion) and while the apostles are first taking the message of Christ to the world (to accomplish the engrafting of the Gentiles).

    Whether or not He chooses to do so at other times throughout history is irrelevant to my point and does nothing to negate the argument I have presented with regard to Total Depravity. Do you understand?
     
    #92 Skandelon, Feb 16, 2010
  13. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    yes I read all your post. I have followed your logic. I slowed down only because you said I did not. You have not changed what I believed you were saying all along.


    part one...yes. :) But it took a while to get there.
    Yes I understand and i still disagree. :)

    Would you care to look at that now?

    It is my guess you will say yes.

    So here again is what you claim in Romans 9...

    Because Paul makes an argument based on the jews being harden, you feel it only applies to the Jews. You follw this logic through 10, and 11.

    Is this right?

    If so..I would like to share how this cannot be the case.

    If I misunderstand you....please tell me what you mean.

    Well....I feel it does damage it. But we will see.
     
    #93 Jarthur001, Feb 16, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 16, 2010
  14. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yes, in Romans 9-11 I believe Paul is addressing the historical context where the Jews (with the exception of the Remnant) have been "cut off" or "hardened" or "blinded" to the gospel truth, while the Gentiles are being "engrafted" (not hardened or blinded) and so they "will listen."

    Does that mean God never hardens others at other times in history? No. It simply means that is what he is doing at that point and time and thus it is the intent of the author (Paul) to communicate this with us, the readers.

    Now, present your argument and I'll address it objectively.
     
    #94 Skandelon, Feb 16, 2010
  15. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks,

    It is where you place the importance of what Paul is speaking of, that matters. I understand your view, as I said before, this is based on classic dispensational, but you have taken it further then most.

    We both agree that Paul is addressing the Jews at the beginning of Chapter nine. You feel this is the beginning of "the Jews HARDENING(with the exception of the Remnant) have been "cut off" " or "blinded" to the gospel truth, while the Gentiles are being "engrafted" ..time frame. (ABOUT...give or take a few years)

    What I see is that Paul is telling the Jews....Look Guys this is how it has always been. Its not just STARTING now. God has had a chosen people from the outset of the nation. Now...the Jews have always thought...the election of blessing of the OT was the election of salvation. So...Paul builds his case...showing its not just the Jewish nation, but the elect of God.

    he says in verse 6..
    6.... For it is not everybody who is a descendant of Jacob (Israel) who belongs to [the true] Israel.

    It never has been that way folks. It didn’t start NOW. God has worked this way from the get go.

    NEXT VERSE...

    7And they are not all the children of Abraham because they are by blood his descendants. No, [the promise was] Your descendants will be called and counted through the line of Isaac [though Abraham had an older son].

    Same idea going on here. right?

    NEXT VERSE..

    8That is to say, it is not the children of the body [of Abraham] who are made God's children, but it is the offspring to whom the promise applies that shall be counted [as Abraham's true] descendants.

    It was like that way back then folks.

    Next verse...

    9For this is what the promise said, About this time [next year] will I return and Sarah shall have a son.(D)

    Not just any Son from the BODY of Abraham (VS 8)...the PROMISED SON ONLY

    Now to prove the point even more, he goes to Isaac where the boys are born at the same time, by the same mother.

    NEXT VERSES...

    10And not only that, but this too: Rebecca conceived [two sons under exactly the same circumstances] by our forefather Isaac,

    11And the children were yet unborn and had so far done nothing either good or evil. Even so, in order further to carry out God's purpose of selection (election, choice), which depends not on works or what men can do, but on Him Who calls [them],

    and now we come to this...


    12It was said to her that the elder [son] should serve the younger [son].(E)

    13As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated (held in [a]relative disregard in comparison with My feeling for Jacob).(F)


    now before we go one we must understand what this means. Some say...LOVELESS.


    Well lets look at the passage this comes from and see if that works.


    Notice Israel asked God how much he loves them...

    Mal 1

    2I have loved you, says the Lord. Yet you say, How and in what way have You loved us?


    Now this is how God replies to SHOW....to PROVE he loves them.



    2b...Was not Esau Jacob's brother? says the Lord; yet I loved Jacob (Israel),

    3But [in comparison with the degree of love I have for Jacob] I have hated Esau [Edom] and have laid waste his mountains, and his heritage I have given to the jackals of the wilderness.(A)



    Choose whatever word you want, but the point is...the greater the gap between your word and love, the greater Gods love.


    Now back to Romans 9


    Paul then shows this in Scripture by quoting verses in the OT..


    Moses and mercy....


    The story of Pharaoh...


    All of this is showing that God has always had an elect to salvation. But it was not as the Jews felt it was. It was not a NATION.


    Paul sums it up



    You can read the rest...you get the idea.


    Now I want to look at a passage in Isa 64....


    Now read verse 21 of Romans 9 again...


    Now why did Paul pick this verse? Well...its true, and it shows the power of God to do as he wills. But please read the last part of Chapter 63..


    Now after setting the record straight about God election OUT of a nation, Paul goes on to open the door to the non-Jews in the next chapter.

    you asked about Chapter 11. One verse...

    32For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.


    So you see this passage applies to ALL MANKIND. Elect of every nation


    I'll be back later...

    Peace...James
     
    #95 Jarthur001, Feb 16, 2010
  16. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    No, I'm not a dispensationalist. Though you and I would both probably agree with some of the claims of dispensationalism, I do not fit that label. Believe it or not Jarthur, I'm arguing from a simple non-Calvinistic ("Arminian") perspective. Do you label Adam Clarke a dispensationalist?

    I think you are looking past the obvious point that God is accomplishing a unique work of redemption in the world at beginning of the 1st century when Christ was here and the apostles first began the church. Even Calvinistic scholars acknowledge the significant uniqueness of this time in history, or at least they should. Don't miss the forrest for the trees.

    So then why would he continually make the distinction between the Jews, who are being blinded and the Gentiles who will listen? If indeed this is all about God's hardening of the non-elect people within every nation and his showing mercy to the elect ones of every nation then why make the whole Jew/Gentile distinction over and over again?

    I've presented the Acts 28 passage several times but you haven't commented on it yet. Can you explain to me how you interpret the clear distinction Paul makes between the Jew who are being hardened and the Gentiles who will listen?

    BTW, just so you know, I do not believe that God saved people through some other method in the old testament. Abraham believed and it was credited to him as righteousness. They were saved by grace through faith, just as we are today.

    Additionally, I also affirm the fact that most Jews were "self hardened" throughout their history, thus affirming the idea that they have been rebellious people despite God's continual long-suffering and "holding out his hand to them all day." (Rm 10:21). That is different from God's active blinding of them at this crucial point of redemptive history.

    As I have already argued, I think the passage where we are told to "hate our father and mother" is very comparative to this passage. If God was telling us to literally "hate" our parents that would be contradicting his command to honor our father and mother. The clear meaning is that we are to choose God's call on our lives over everyone else. His ways are noble and our parents are common. In the same way, Jacob (Israel) is being chosen for a noble purpose while Esau has been passed over and is only for a "common use." Nothing is certain about his individual salvation or the individual salvation of his descendants. The call to "repent and believe" is sent to the Edomites too.

    Correct. It is not about a particular nation being elected. It is about "whosoever will believe." That is the promise. The appeal to be reconciled to God goes to the whole world.

    Actually, Paul addresses both Jews and Gentiles in chapter 9, remember?

    y
    Actually, I asked about verses 15-25 too, but yes I did mention this verse too.

    It doesn't say, "God has bound all the elect of every nation over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on the elect of every nation." You are reading that into the verse.

    It shows that God is showing mercy to every nation, even those he has hardened. The same men who were once "bound over to disobedience" (hardened) are the same men being shown mercy.
     
    #96 Skandelon, Feb 16, 2010
  17. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    My bad..I was wrong. Just a guess.

    There are many Arminian dispy’s...right?

    No, I don't think so. You see as I said before, I do not deny the uniqueness of this time, it is where you place the importance of what Paul is speaking of, that matters. Lets leave Romans nine to see another place, but the same way to view it.

    I think of the time in John when Jesus points to the temple and says… Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days. Jesus is not just his Body although he is speaking of it too, but also he is speaking of the destruction of the old system of worship with the rebuilding… or the “resurrection" of the new..(body) and means to worship.

    One of the reasons why this was done from human standpoint (other than Gods decree), is that the Jews had both in their worship of God, and in their idea of salvation, polluted Gods Law with man-made traditions and didn’t even know what salvation was. the system God had setup way back when....was not what Christ found when he walked on this earth.

    Paul hits hard the Jewish system ...REAL HARD in Romans to show them how far they were off base.

    As I have been saying all along, because they had always heard..THEY…THE JEWS were the choosen, so God world save all of the Jews. They were BETTER than the Gentiles. The Gentiles did stand a chance…or at least they felt they didn’t.

    Paul is saying, salvation is not by being born of the flesh…into a family. Many Jews were not of the elect. And then you have Nineveh…non Jewish…and God went after them and saved them. Do you not see this? It is clear as day. Read Romans 9 again.

    The Kingdom was designed to START in the Jewish nation and go out to the whole world. The Jews KEPT the truth, from the other nations.

    Paul spent most of the time FIXING the Jewish mindset. The Gentiles on the other hand...Paul said...OK salvation has come to you. It should have come years ago, if the Jewish nation had done its job.

    Well…this is a long answer if you do not know “the Kingdom and Covenants” of Biblical theology. So I’ll start by asking if you have taken a class in Old Testament Biblical theology. If so, I’ll not need to post much. However, if you have not, get ready for some reading.

    Yes I read your statement before. It does not wash, in light of the context. You do recall what you said on context...right? This would be a good time to use it.

    The list are exact opposites. Mercy…No mercy….
    Honor…no honor.
    Love….(the opposite of love is what?)

    CONTEXT....Romans 9 says NOTHING about whoever will. It is all about election. Wait…maybe I missed it. Please point it out to me.

    Yes…I said that a few pages back

    This is the verse I posted...

    32For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.


    My last words were a summation of my views on Romans 9...the chapter i had just went over.


    Peace...James
     
    #97 Jarthur001, Feb 16, 2010
  18. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    I think we agree on this point. The Jews viewed themselves as the "chosen people" and they felt like they were guaranteed a place in heaven because of their lineage. Paul is debunking that idea. We both agree with that.

    Where we differ is with regard to the scope of election. God elects prophets, he elects apostles, and he elects who he will send those messengers to. He chose Jonah individually and used the necessary means to convince him to go. He chose the nation of Nineveh. Proving God individually chooses the messengers and tells them what nation to preach to is not proof that he chooses who will and will not believe the message. That is where I believe Calvinists make their mistakes, they take the proof of one as a proof for all.

    Bro, I really was a Calvinist for over 10 years. I see what you believe. I just disagree. BTW, didn't Nineveh end up rebelling again later?

    I know you don't like looking at the context if its not in the same chapter division, but I'll provide it anyway because its good hermeneutics:

    the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith;

    11 As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame." 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile--the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

    23 And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.

    Now, I realize these passages don't use the terms "whosoever" as it does in other passages, but they communicate the same point. Anyone who believes will be saved. Anyone who leaves their unbelief will be saved. Surely you are not denying this, are you?
     
    #98 Skandelon, Feb 16, 2010
  19. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes...we both have said we agree in principle to the subject of Paul at the beginning of Romans 9.

    I can't say that God elected to save a nation. It was the people of a nation. Salvation is a relationship.

    Election goes beyond leaders as you want to limit it. Yes, it includes leaders as well. But in your statement above you said..."He chose the nation of Nineveh". Was this only leaders? I feel it was more.

    Please notice Eph 1...
    THE Saints....He chose. That means all believers, not just leaders.

    Yet Scripture would disagree with you, as Paul speaks of individuals but includes the words.."For He says to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy and I will have compassion (pity) on whom I will have compassion."

    Notice the words..."Whom I will". That is kind of like...Whosoever WILL, but in this case it is GODS will. Right?

    But have you read the passage where this quote comes from? Ex 33..

    But please notice what Moses had asked before....
    All the PEOPLE were not leaders, now were they?

    Context is king. :)

    :)

    Au contraire my dear Arminist. Context is what drives Calvinism as we shall see.

    You quoted these verses....
    These verses come from Chapter 10. Now I wonder if you have taken the time to fully study the flow of the text.

    The main subject of Romans is the righteousness of God. Chapters 9,10, and 11 deal with how God demonstrates his righteousness. This is divided into 3 arguments by Paul. Chapter 9....election seen in history.

    We have looked at this already. Here is Pauls flow. Paul shows that all are sinners in the 1st part of Romans. In Chapter 5 Paul tells of a NEW race...in Christ...a new Adam. In this new Adam, sin is broken. (Chapter 6)...and overcomes the guilt of the law...(chapters7). But how is one saved?

    As I have said many times, election is not salvation. Paul goes to point two of his demonstration of God's righteousness..Justification. (Chapter 10)

    Again the flow....all are sinners that can't come to God....but there is a NEW race...in Christ...who over powers sin(the reason no man can come to God)...and the guilt of the law. How?

    Chapter 9, 10, 11....

    Election....Justification......to both Jews and Gentiles.

    That my friend is good hermeneutics. :)

    I agree. But the context has changed from election. right?

    indeed. And who believes? The elect.

    Right you are. And who leaves their unbelief..(no one seeks after God Romans 3) But there is a new race that will (Chapter 5). God elects...(Chapter 9).....Men now believes....(chapter 10)......both jew and greek....(chapter 11)

    Its rather clear...right?

    :saint:

    Peace...James
     
    #99 Jarthur001, Feb 17, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 17, 2010
  20. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    I meant to reply to this, but forgot.

    Study church history and you will find that evangelism efforts comes after calvinism is tought.

    Again, if you were to READ Calvin, maybe you MAY like him. Those that do not, cannot deny he was one that believed in sharing the gospel to the lost.

    LINK to Calvin the soul winner


    Peace James
     
    #100 Jarthur001, Feb 17, 2010
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 5 of 6
Loading...