"Election"

I love this part...

And the consequence...

 

Romans 9:13 and Hebrews 11:20 do not contradict each other.

Isaac, Jacob and Esau are listed among the heroes of faith or on the roster of those who had faith in the Lord God. [Hebrews 11:20] Sorry, to frustrate your Augustinian/Calvinistic theory about your view of election.

Cain probably did not go to Heaven, but Abel did because he had faith in the Lord. [Hebrews 11:4]

Dr. Berrian

 

So, Esau is a hero of the faith on the basis of Heb.11:20, huh? Flip the page over Ray, and tell us how Heb.12:16 reinforces this fine piece of exegesis. Meanwhile, lets not try to impress each other with our titles - Matt.23:5-8

- Paul

 

You guys surface study the Bible.

Moses killed someone. King David had the husband of Bathsheba killed and probably repeatedly committed adultery and yet I think you will agree that they are listed among the O.T. saints. Moses [Hebrews 11:24] David [11:32]

Take time to study the background of Jephthae in verse thirty-two and yet he is included among the roster of the Lord's people.

Are you trying to bluff us by trying to say that Esau was not listed among the people of God? [vs. 20] Maybe some other Christian in your family can explain to you that Esau really is among the O.T. people of God and was a person of faith.

As to Hebrews 12:16-17 Esau was a foolish person for selling his birthright. Big deal. He did, however, did get Xed from being the lineage by which Jesus was born. Jacob produced the son of promise, meaning our Lord Jesus by way of a pure Jewish lineage.

If you check the context of the word, 'fornicator', you will see that it is referring to the people who the Hebrew author is writing to as the people of God. Even if Esau did sin in this way he was not worse than David or Moses. God calls Esau 'profane' meaning he treated something sacred with abuse. Would you send Esau to Hell for just that?

Esau's repentance and sense of sorrow was because his father would never again reinstate him into the eldest sons materialistic blessings, as the O.T. documents.

The Lord preferred and love Jacob more than He did Esau. The eldest brother, Esau, was relegated to Edom[Malachi 1:1-4] which was a much more inferior place to live than where Jacob lived.

Who was the deceitful one? Jacob or Esau? Jacob had his own sins of 'deception' and yet God included this repeated person of fraud on the listing of the O.T. saints, as He did Esau.

Later in life when Esau returned to Jacob, why do you think that Jacob thought that his elder brother Esau was returning to kill him? The anwer is because it was Jacob who committed the sin of trickery. Jacob deceived Esau, and the younger brother and fraud---felt the guilt.

You said, 'You guys surface study the Bible.

Moses killed someone. King David had the husband of Bathsheba killed and probably repeatedly committed adultery and yet I think you will agree that they are listed among the O.T. saints. Moses [Hebrews 11:24] David [11:32]

Take time to study the background of Jephthae in verse thirty-two and yet he is included among the roster of the Lord's people.

Are you trying to bluff us by trying to say that Esau was not listed among the people of God? [vs. 20]

As to Hebrews 12:16-17 Esau was a worldly and careless person for selling his birthright. Big deal. He did, however, get Xed from being the lineage via Jesus was born. Jacob produced the son of promise, meaning our Lord Jesus.

If you check the context of the word, 'fornicator', you will see that it is referring to the people who the Hebrew author is writing to as the people of God. Even if Esau did sin in this way he was not worse than David or Moses.

Esau's repentance and sense of sorrow was because his father would never again reinstate him into the eldest sons materialistic blessings, as the O.T. documents. Plus Esau lost the greatest of all honor, that being the descendant through which Jesus was born to save the lost sinners.

Who was the deceitful one? Jacob or Esau? Jacob had his own sins and yet God included this repeated person of deception on the listing of the O.T. saints, as is Esau.

I think you are saying that when a Calvinist has a doctorate and acknowledges it, it's o.k. But if a person who is more of an Arminian theologian and writes it down, then it is pride.

I'm expecting you to blow this all off, but I want to see your response, line by line, question by question.

Rev. Berrian, Th.D.

 

20 By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come.

The "hero" of faith in this verse is Isaac, not Jacob or Esau.

21 By faith Jacob, when he was dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, and worshiped, leaning on the top of his staff.

The "hero" of faith in this verse is Jacob. And so on.

Esau is nowhere listed as a hero of faith in Hebrews 11. His name appears in the context of what Isaac did (blessed him) by faith. Just as Cain's name appears in the context of what Abel did by faith. His name appearing in the chapter doesn't make Cain a hero of faith anymore than the appearance of the name Esau makes Esau a hero of the faith.

Context, Th.D, context.

 

npetreley,

You said, 'Esau is nowhere listed as a hero of faith in Hebrews 11. His name appears in
the context of what Isaac did (blessed him) by faith.

Ray: 'While I agree with you that verse 20 starts out with the words, 'By faith Isaac . . . ' yet he is blessing both Jacob and Esau concerning the future life, eternal life. It is right to include these latter two men also as those who will see God in Heaven.'

You said, 'Just as Cain's name appears in the context of what Abel did by faith.'

Ray: Here I agree with you that Cain is not pointed to as attaining everlasting life with the Lord, because in Jude verse 11 tells us that he was an unbeliever and in I John 3:12 clearly tells us that Cain was a child of the 'wicked one' meaning the Devil. Here is the context.'

You said, 'His name appearing in the chapter doesn't make Cain a hero of faith anymore than the appearance of the name Esau makes Esau a hero of the faith.

As noted above Cain was unsaved, but in Hebrews 11:20 Isaac would not be blessing unsaved men who were not fit for Heaven. Jacob was the deceiver and even you think that he will be in Heaven. Esau committed no cardinal sins and yet you hope that he went to Hell, otherwise your Calvinism will come apart at the seams.

Dr. Merrill C. Tenney in his "Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary" says on page 398:

'Jacob and Esau were children of faith, as was their father (Hebrews 11:20).'

Here is a Ph.D. who taught at Wheaton Graduate School saying exactly what I am telling you. And he has a lot more clout than me.

Pastor Berrian

 

What are you Ray? Some kind of legalist? You give us this list of sinning saints, and then try to shoe-horn Esau into Heaven on the basis that he was no worse than them! "Even if Esau did sin in this way he was not worse than David or Moses." I'll bet your doctrinal thesis was not on Grace, Ray!

Please read Heb.12:16 again. It tells you in the plainest language that Esau was a PROFANE man (AV)- look it up in the dictionary. NASB (a translation an Arminian could hardly object to) renders bebaylos "a GODLESS man", as does the NIV. Even your beloved co-Arminian Wuest says in his Word Studies on Heb.12:16 that Bebaylos "has the opposite meaning of Hagios (holy, set apart, concecrated). It speaks of the secular, the non-religious, as contrasted to that which is asociated with the worship of Deity."

To top it all off, as Nick points out, Heb.11:20 is referring to the faith of Isaac, not his sons.
We poor folks might just surface-study the Bible Ray, but at least we try to rightly divide what we find there!

Regarding Th.D's, Jesus' point is that waving our titles about is prideful and inappropriate for a servant of God, no matter whether we got them from Westminster, Bob Jones, or Disneyland.

- Paul

 

Ray -
You must think the other people on this board don't own Bibles! The exact substance of the blessing Isaac bestowed upon his Godless son runs like this:

"And Esau said unto his father, Hast thou but one blessing, my father? bless me, even me also, O my father. And Esau lifted up his voice, and wept.
And Isaac his father answered and said unto him, Behold, thy dwelling shall be the fatness of the earth, and of the dew of heaven from above;
And by thy sword shalt thou live, and shalt serve thy brother; and it shall come to pass when thou shalt have the dominion, that thou shalt break his yoke from off thy neck." (Gen.27:38-40)

So this speaks of eternal life for a profane man, does it?

- Paul

 

Spurgeon makes two very common mistakes which we might expect from someone without any formal education:

1. He misapplies Romans 9 to speak of individuals being chosen to the neglect of others when it is clear from the reading of the text that the apostle is contrasting God's treatment of the Gentiles with his treatment of the Jews. This interpretation is clearly seen in Paul's summary statement in which he writes: 30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law *of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, *by the works of the law.

Jacob and Esau are clearly representatives of God treatment of nations, as they are representatives of nations. Adam Clarke, a lessor known but much more studied contempory of Spurgeon, explains it as such:

2. Spurgeon's second mistake is a misapplication of scriptures speaking of men's boasting in their works to those who believe that salvation is involves man's faith based response. If one of you can tell what makes the difference in Calvinistic believers and non-Calvinistic believers then I will show you what makes the difference in the lost and the saved.

Good day.

 

Tumbleweed,

You said, 'What are you Ray? Some kind of legalist?'

No, I am not a legalist. I believe that if a person becomes a Christian that Christ keeps that soul forever. I believe in Grace and also believe in eternal security. I do not think that brethren fall in and out of grace. I do not know if this answers your question. We will see in your next post.

You said, 'You give us this list of sinning
saints, and then try to shoe-horn Esau into Heaven on the basis that he was
no worse than them! "Even if Esau did sin in this way he was not worse than
David or Moses." I'll bet your doctrinal thesis was not on Grace, Ray!'

Ray: It was written about "Quasi-Augustinian Theology." I basically showed the errors of John Calvin's theology with a few side bars here and there.'

You said, 'Please read Heb.12:16 again. It tells you in the plainest language that Esau
was a PROFANE man (AV)- look it up in the dictionary. NASB (a translation
an Arminian could hardly object to) renders bebaylos "a GODLESS man", as
does the NIV. Even your beloved co-Arminian Wuest says in his Word
Studies on Heb.12:16 that Bebaylos "has the opposite meaning of Hagios
(holy, set apart, concecrated). It speaks of the secular, the non-religious, as
contrasted to that which is asociated with the worship of Deity."

Ray: I think Dr. Wuest is in between theologically speaking. You may be right but I know that he believes in the perfect security of the Christian believer.

You said, 'To top it all off, as Nick points out, Heb.11:20 is referring to the faith of
Isaac, not his sons.'

Ray: According to your view and Nick's when Jacob died he 'blessed both the sons of Joseph' {11:21} suggesting that he blessed unbelievers in Jehovah the Lord. Now back to Isaac. You think that he was saved but Jacob and Esau were lost because it does not say, By faith Jacob and Esau . . . ' No, if the truth be know you still think Jacob was saved but Esau was damned, because of you proclivity toward Calvinism's determinism hookup with Augustinian philosophy coming from Plato and Aristotle.'

You said, 'We poor folks might just surface-study the Bible Ray, but at least we try to
rightly divide what we find there!'

Ray: That's why before we send men to the pulpit we make sure they stop by their choice of Bible Colleges and seminaries. At least there they get to see both sides of theology and not like in a congregation where they only hear the ideas of one side which the pastor presents.

You said, 'Regarding Th.D's, Jesus' point is that waving our titles about is prideful and
inappropriate for a servant of God, no matter whether we got them from Westminster, Bob Jones, or Disneyland.'

Ray: 'In the end in the sight of God we are all servants of the Lord. I have given the Lord all of the glory and praise for allowing me to study at one Bible College and two seminaries. I left one seminary because they taught that God is the Author of sin, plus they believed in the Five Points of Calvinism and would not allow any student to question them as to why they held this position. It was listen to their diatribe or out! I never asked a question I just left of my own free will and accord.

God reads the hearts of men and women and if I get too prideful, He will be sure to remember, for your sake, to knock me down a few pegs.

 

I should have guessed that someone might focus on my insignificant jab to the neglect of the real issues. Just forget I mentioned his education, or lack thereof, and let's deal with his content.

 

Yes, your point was valid and I agree. Please forgive me for implying that uneducated people could make mistakes in regard to their doctrine. I don't know what I was thinking. You are right about that. I concede.

Oh, well that settles it then. If you think he is right that proves it must be true. Its been fun discussing this with you.

Why do you bother?

 

autograph?

No actually when someone loses a debate they typically just stop replying to you, you know like Nick.

 

Or, the other just left the other alone because that one is so dense he doesn't even notice it and it's a waste of time.